The Admin Burden Reduction Team has been created by Comdt AC and headed by RC(N).
Definitely worth a read if you haven’t spotted it already:
TORs for ABRT - written by Comdt AC
Call to Action
We have been advised locally to use the Chain to send ideas through this team…
Thoughts? Are they missing things?
[quote]OVERUSE OF EMAIL
• Replication and meaningless admin
• Storage Limits
• Lack of verbal comms
• Covering backs – Audit trail
• In human
• If only phones had of [sic] been developed after email, we would all be excited about technology that allowed us to ‘SPEAK’ to each other through a box. Instead we text, mail, blog etc
• Culture change – Too dependent on Email
• Huge admin reduction
• Relationship building not breaking
[/quote]
Now, I’m not sure if this is WRT permanent, full time staff communications with each other; but outside of that email seems ideal to me. I have a day job - I deal with ACO stuff when I get the chance.
This suggestion is particularly interesting.
[quote=“jacques” post=9737]This suggestion is particularly interesting.
Utterly useless idea. What happens when your staff use public transport, cycle or live locally? As soon as they start to say, “well it can also be done on ultilearn” then there is no need to have a CTF.
Pft.
Looks very much like the system the ACF have just got rid of!
12 weeks though. What are they going to be taught in 24 45min lesson periods?
[quote=“jacques” post=9737]I find this suggestion particularly interesting.
Obviously suggested by someone who is clueless about the Corps.
How many new CIs at anyone time? Where are they in the Wing?
The term central training faciliity is a wonderful piece of HQAC vagueness. Central to whom?
On the point about JIs a one/two sheet with all the relevant where, when, how much, how long etc etc etc, with a sign and return slip, rather than sifting through the mighty tomes that come out.
Looks very much like the system the ACF have just got rid of!
12 weeks though. What are they going to be taught in 24 45min lesson periods?[/quote]A reasonable amount - probably quite a lot more than you can fit into a weekend’s BASIC course.
But I agree with those above that the logistics aren’t really workable.
[quote=“Plt Off Prune” post=9739][quote=“jacques” post=9737]This suggestion is particularly interesting.
Utterly useless idea. What happens when your staff use public transport, cycle or live locally? As soon as they start to say, “well it can also be done on ultilearn” then there is no need to have a CTF.
Pft.[/quote]
Agree 100% stupid idea I wouldn’t have time to travel to the CTF once a week with work
The “one night a week at a central training facility” does have a number of merits:
There are of course drawbacks as have already been mentioned, including
Some sort of half-way house may be achievable - I am pretty sure my own wing would have no hope whatsoever of providing the training as suggested.
And so you know, the list wasn’t written by HQAC in any way. The team that came up with the list you are discussing included an OC Wing, 2 squadron commanders and a VGS OC.
Well that makes it worse in so many ways as they should be fully aware of the constraints people work to.
The whole new CI thing should be done over a weekend that is residential and have a much greater social and networking element. A lot of CIs get entrenched on sqns and don’t venture outside much initially, so having the chance to meet similarly placed people would I feel integrate them into the Corps much better. Cover off CP, organisation/structure, do topline on the activities, all go for a meal at an eatery on the Saturday night, crack on on the Sunday morning and go home mid afternoon. It would be intensive but better than drip feeding over a period of several weeks which because of real life might mean missing sessions.
As for forms why we can’t have them sent or just pull them off Sharepoint to be filled in electronically baffles me. But it does mean someone would have to make them more user friendly, as currently many forms are IMO only designed to be printed. Which does seem extremely antiquated.
My favourite thing about the Admin Burden Reduction Team is this quote from the SharePoint announcement…
Note the lack of actual hyperlink to the ABRT… just some vague directions on where you can find it. #AdminBurdenReductionFail
If I get chance, I would like to submit something about Bread and Butter.
There could be a much reduced admin burden by simply stating what activities are the core activities that every qualified person should be doing. An example might be BELA - their bread and butter should be Navigation training (1 day expeditions), orienteering and 2-day expeditions, hence they should be able to self-authorise such activities, just as SAAI can self-auth the running of SAAI sessions. For more advanced work, say 3 days expeditions plus, the WATTO should be involved. MLs, who hold a higher qual should be able to run 4-day expeditions and self-auth.
This would show more faith in the qualified staff and significantly cut the admin burden at WATTO level, leaving them more able to deal with training of staff, authroisation of high level activities, such as expeditions abroad, and also mean that cadets can have more grass routes (pardon the pun 
) activities.
I would welcome other comments by private message.
i have to say i like this idea.
it does give a greater level of responsibility to the qualification.
however i think there should still be a level of WATTO involvement. just as my CO likes to know what is going on with his Cadets, i would expect the WATTO would like to know what is going on under his domain, if only to keep him in the loop.
a single day event could be self-authorising, however is still documented on SMS, the WATTO has chance to check it over to veto but doesnt need his authorisation. if nothing has been received from the WATTO say 2 weeks prior to the event then its got the green light, saves any worry about “oooh we still havent got approval”
ie the WATTO is there to stop what shouldnt be happening, rather than approve what should…qualified staff should be able to plan and conduct standard training.
Why 2 weeks? If you have a properly qualified staff member and operate within remit and within ratio, why shouldn’t an appropriately qualified person be able to gather together a group of cadets on a Friday parade and take them up a hill on Saturday, or go paddling or climbing.?
All details could be on SMS prior to the event as this forces a structure and makes it easier to check that everything is actually in place. The OC (or some other competent person) should be able to sign off on it having checked the prerequisites and assured themselves that everything is being done in accordance with the rules. WATTO can carry out spot-checks.
Land clearance can be a problem though and that does need time to sort out.
In Scotland it is a bit of a waste of effort: Joe Public has no such requirement as everyone has the statutory right to access the land and inshore waters (with a few exceptions)
It was always mooted when the furore over NGB tickets being required to do things came about, the qualified person could do whatever as long as they stayed within the remit of the qualification, without recourse to a higher authority. It never got that far.
I have tended to find that unless you give cadets 2/3 weeks (at least) notice take up is poor, combinations of family and job committments. We’d get told on the Monday we’re doing this/that at the weekend be here on Wednesday and there was always at least a dozen of us. I’d go home say to mum/dad btw I’m going x at the weekend and that was that.
Personally I think we tend to over plan everything now due to H&S/insurance and this means a loss of vibrancy.
why two weeks? well offers enough time to correct any missing docs or answer questions the WATTO may have before the event happens
although i see your point with regard to going out the following morning it comes across on paper at least as a rushed, unprepared event.
as you say if everyting on a SMS it encourages all the boxes to be ticked and thus no stone unturned, as a event which has been thought out it is more likely to be successful proper prior plannin…etc
my comment above allows for the WATTO spot checks as you say. a "front page/suumary on the application indicates the basics, qualified person, number in party, land/area being covered and duration.
for example the recieves such a summary via email and can determine his actions.
CI Smith from 123 Sqn is very competant BEL qualified and will read that and not need to check any more.
Sgt Jones of 321 Sqn however has been over optimistic is what they aim to achieve with regard to distance and the groups ability in the past and the WATTO can dig deeper and look at the specific route, the party members and other details.
Well it would appear from Sharepoint they’ve had two meetings and so far nothing in the way of reducing the admin burden.
It would appear from the minutes it will be a talking shop and will do nothing to actually reduce the admin burden in ways as discussed.
There is a lot of admin involved in reducing the admin burden!
I’ve already been asked for my comments on a list of topics - have Sqn Cdrs not been?
Pretty sure they have been in my wing.