ACP20 Pers Form 1-19


Yes, IBN 011 - The Volunteer Agreement has been published, the deadline for signing is the end of May 2018.

This is the new communication protocol for change it would seem, and while I like the IBN, it still requires alerts on the IBN folder in Key Documents or on SharePoint Announcements to be aware of the release.

The FTEs in RAFAC will argue that email shouldn’t be used to disseminate policy, particularly to all users, however there has been no communication about the change/improvement of communication and requires users to log on and wait for the announcements to scroll - and then decide if worth reading based on the title.

Some CFAVs are not as technically engaged as others and have limited abilities to use SharePoint, unless they need too, in which case they aren’t looking for the annoucments.


But that’s because they are idiots.
We get “all address emails” at work about changes etc etc and you look at it and decide to delete or keep. These come as attached documents. Which seems to be pretty consistent across all work places.

I would love to know what parts of any policy / documentation affecting staff and or cadets, needs to have a restricted mailing. The current ATC policy is out of kilter with what happens in the real world and exactly mimics the old weekly posting where as OC you’d open and look and pass to the Adj and or concerned individuals, which in a day and age when we have an electronic communication system, is a nonsense. Except now it’s the OC of Adj that looks at the document and then downloads and prints or attaches (what I do) and send to staff.

Even more interesting in that I cannot access cadet systems from work, so I have to spend my own time looking at things or what I do which is wait until I get to the squadron. However the biggest problem is you have spend ages looking for it or have alerts, all of which I disabled as I was getting alerts for more things that weren’t changes than were, which just clogged up the inbox with crap.

They should be done with it and just attach documents when they are properly checked and ready to all address emails. That way more people will see them and ask questions.


The major. Totally agree with your sentiments, and those of Teflon in this case, but the IBNs or Announcements are not always the first port of call for EVERY member of this organisation every time they log onto the system; that’s even if they log into Bader.

There should be an instruction, by email, down through CoC at least highlighting the existence of the IBN and covering the consequences. Not just an expectation that reads everything uploaded on Sharepoint.


Somebody a while ago assumed that simply placing something on sharepoint constituted it being in force. that was always a daft idea. I do think they are getting better.

I like the IBN concept as a means of officially enforcing change pending a proper regulation update. It is certainly way better than an anonymous, unsigned word document dumped in the sharepoint announcements.

I do not want all this stuff sent out as attachments though. Make a proper document, upload it to sharepoint then email out an announcement with a link to the document. For good measure, give it a sensible subject and include a brief description or summary. Better still, try to do it on a schedule unless it is urgent then have a regular policy update email with lots of links.


This is exactly my point, there is an assumption from on high that we all have alerts configured - Admin Burden, and that when we connect we have the time to have a general nose and see if anything has appeared that could be important, 99% of the time if you login SharePoint you do so for a reason which is never to check the scrolling announcements.

An old OC of mine said if it’s important enough there’ll email me


The idea of sharepoint is fine in theory, but in practice it’s a farce and has been since day 1 and through all of its updates and changes.

As has been said on numerous occasions we need proper document control like we used have with updates and amendments. It wasn’t perfect as they mostly came out much later than they were dated, but you knew about it and because it was on paper you were inclined to read it. Back in the day I was completely aware of changes etc as I had held a bit of paper and read it.


like what CRO could be??


It would make it worth reading…


Don’t make me get my moderating hat on and remind people to stay on topic :wink:


I guess by your ACC activity you don’t spend much time at work? :smile:


I have a question.

When they talk about “lawful instructions” which law are they using to give us instructions?
To force anyone to do something, or not do something, requires an Act of Parliament, hence the Air Force Act. As they now state we are no longer subject to the Air Force Act, not being Military personnel, that law no longer applies. Has there been an Air Cadet Act slipped through in all this Brexit confusion?


I’m pretty sure that a lawful instruction is any instruction that is not illegal.

Ie “go and teach principles of flight” or “fetch me the first aid kit”.

In the cadet context, lawful may also imply within the rules of the organisation.


I have also just seen the bit about “Superior Officers”. They do not exist!! There are Senior Officers, but they are not superior to me or anyone else!:face_with_symbols_over_mouth:


Careful with that joke, it’s an antique…


I’m not saying it as a joke!!


I understand your point, but that would be just an instruction, which is what your examples are. Lawful instructions are ones that are backed by law, allowing or stopping your from doing things.
The rules of the RAF are written in law (the Air Force Act). Where are the rules of the RAFAC laid down? Have they been published?
I have an example, which may get the discussion going! Drinking on duty, where is the rule written down saying when and where you can do this? Obviously the laws around Drink Drive and being Drunk in charge of a child would be enforced. But who could stop a member of staff from drinking on duty, when not driving or in charge of cadets?


They’re really not - “lawful (and reasonable) instruction” is a fairly fundamental principle in employment law; it applies to any job whether or not there is a legal obligation to obey.


What about shave that beard off sir, they are not allowed. Is that a "lawful " instruction?


ACP20 personell instruction 114

for those with access - Sharepoint link

but specifically:


no intention on the side of either party that this agreement should create an employment relationship or worker arrangement either now or at any time in the future.

Hmm this reads for all the world like a employment contract, except there is nothing where it says that HQAC / HQRAFAC will do anything for us or give us anything.

It is just a list of “I agree” , “i accept” , “I undertake” etc statements for us to sign, drawn up in isolation by SLT.

What do we get out of the organisation, that benefits us for giving up OUR free time?

What is the organisation giving to us, to give us a benefit for giving up OUR free time?

It makes you wonder what are they so worried about that this has to be signed by a certain date?

What is coming next? That by signing this we won’t have any recourse over, except stopping doing it.