Air Cadet Staff Federation

Over the last few weeks I have been in the process of stating a Air Cadet Staff Federation to look after CFAV members of the RAFAC. Over the last year CFAV, Officers, SNCOs and CIs have been treated unfairly. Examples of this is the removal of VR (T) staff being suspended for long period of times, with just being given a broad reason ie poor behaviour and not what the behaviour has been, lack of appointing AO in line with their own policies, length of time taken to process VA and Mileage claims, I know of cases going back to June still waiting to be paid and now the Vol agreement issue.

I have sent up an email account and a Twitter account #@air_staff for anyone wishing to get in touch. Currently it is early days but I (we) need a committee ie Chair, Sec etc we also need HR staff, Lawyers, Union Reps and yourselves to join so we have a strong footing, In an idea world it be nice if we could have a basic web site and a page or forum for members only.

As this forum is spied on by RAFAC Staff, please contact us by non bader email addresses. Its worthily to note that no sooner had the Twitter account been set up than HQAC Head of PR was in touch looking information, which was sent to her and to the Twitter Queen. Please note Dawns reply below and this is from a person who was involved in the RAF Families Federation to protect families:

“This note has come direct to me as Comdt despite being addressed to our Head of Media and Comms. I will not engage in this discussion other than to say I am disappointed that CFAV feel the need to form such a Federation as I and my senior colleagues have always been open to complaints and concerns arising from any of our members and will always do our best to resolve them as quickly and effectively as we can. Indeed, I regularly receive complaints direct to me and always ensure they are investigated notwithstanding the lack of engagement with the chain of command, which can usually address issues well below my level if given the chance”

Acting Chair


1 Like

I think the danger with something like this is it being perceived as an “us and them” situation rather than us all being in the one gang and helping each other out.

When you hear about unions in negotiations, etc it’s seen as a workers vs management type scenario and there’s the possibility that this may do just the same.

I wonder if other organisations such as the scouts have similar and if not, why should there be a need for us to have one and not them?

I think we should look at the reasons behind staff feeling that such a federation should be created in the first place.

HQAC have an appalling record of providing fair and just treatment to staff who have either raised or been the subject of complaints. Their legal department is third-rate and the Corps has a long history of hanging people out to dry.

I’ve both witnessed and been involved in, staff cases; and the treatment they’ve received would not be tolerated in civilian employment. If such a ‘them and us’ situation exists - and I do feel it does - then it is of HQAC’s own making.


Just to add, that if the Cmdt hasn’t appraised herself of historical cases, if she can’t get out of RAF mode and into volunteer mode and gets a grip 1) of herself and 2) of her staffs, then the resentment emanating from the lower echelons will continue to rise.

Yes, there will always be a churn of staff but the current churn - IMHO - is unnecessary. If I was AOC 22Gp or held a post within MOD responsible for cadet forces, I’d be wanting to know exactly why the attrition rate in staffing levels is rising and what the driving force was behind CFAV’s wanting to create a Federation.


I’ll send an email!



  1. Who are you?

  2. What is your association with the Air Cadets?

  3. What gives you the impression that you have any right to speak for me?

1 Like

I was waiting for something like this

I’ve got a bad feeling about this…


You don’t have to be associated with it. It will no doubt speak only for those who decide to join it.


Why? This could be the wake-up call that HQAC needs.


Good, because I won’t be. I worry that the dirt it will be flinging may spatter the rest of us though.

Regardless, any such organisation needs to be totally open and transparent and with a proper mandate otherwise it will just be a group of butt-hurt individuals making trouble. The people running it cannot be allowed to hide behind anonymity.

Most of the points and concerns are valid (though there may be the usual element of refusing to believe what they are told, even if it happens to be true), but I can see the methods becoming irksome, especially as it will probably attract the sort of belligerent fools who we see constantly spouting off here on their personal crusades.

To be effective, a federation must be entirely accepted by, and integrated with, the organisation itself, representing the coalface and adding needed perspective to the command level. The only possible benefit I can see from this ACSF being created is to rattle some cages and perhaps plant the idea that such a concept, done right, might serve a purpose.


That’s entirely your privilege. Should you feel the need not to be ‘spattered’, then you can always write to HQAC Legal informing them that you are not a member of any ACO ‘Federation’ and that they do not speak for you.

I agree. If individuals are going to do this, I would urge them to form it properly and be professional in their dealings with all concerned. I would argue that they would have to ‘come out in the open’ in any case.

If it’s done properly and professionally, it should be of use to those who need it. I’m not a union member and by and large, I don’t particularly hold with them but the ‘belligerent fools’ that do exist will have a proper mouthpiece through which to voice their concerns in an appropriate manner, as opposed to spouting off on these boards and just shouting at the moon.

HQAC will probably not accept it, therefore it may have to be foisted upon them. If they, over time, see that any such Federation is acting professionally (I use that word again for emphasis) and with integrity, maybe over time they’ll realise that they have to change heir ways and accept the existence of the entity.


Having looked at the Twitter account, I have to agree with @incubus’s ‘butt hurt’ comment.

It simply looks like some grumpy long-in-the-tooth CFAV who probably isn’t in the right place be trying to create this kind of ‘federation’. I would have nothing against a ‘CFAV Council’ given appropriate sanction by the CoC, which is more open and transparent, but a whining twitter account prodding the exec for a response over one individual’s gripe, as they state they represent the masses in their tirade, is not how we go about it.

Not for me thanks…


I’m with Wizzle here.

This tweet says a lot about the grasp that the person has of the organisation:

“Want to shape ACSF? Should we run it along Wing or Regional lines. Secondly should WSO be permitted as members given they toe HQAC lines at all times”

WSO including the Wing Commanders are volunteers as well. I know more Wing Commanders who have shaped policies and helped deal with the wrongs in the organisation than trolls hiding behind twitter accounts.

Until the person running the account identified themselves and is open about their involvement with the RAF AC then I don’t think much support will appear.

1 Like

I see from your tweet your adding Sqn’s as you find them, well I get enough in my twitter feed as it is. Until a I see something official that ratifies a staff federation, I have no intention of following, being spoken for etc.

If done properly I think this could be a good thing, but this doesn’t seem to be it. What I would want is for an organisation to be able to support staff going through disciplinary action and to work with HQAC on improving our experience.


That’s called a Wing Commander. If your wing commanders aren’t following the correct procedures in appointing personnel to the correct roles for investigations etc then you need to get on to your RCs.

A lot of the issues in the organisation are people not knowing or following the processes that are laid out for all to see.

Also… That twitter account hasn’t even got a complete email against it…outlook

Not looking good for the ability to contact the person.

1 Like

Because unless it’s done properly or with a legal backing it will just antagonise the people it’s trying to work with.

A good union needs to be consistent, joined up and impartial. It shouldn’t be run by people who have been wronged by the organisation, and it should have an ability to influence things in a serious manner.

What support is this actually going to provide?


I sense it will be the equivalent of a drunk mate looking to join in with a fight.


But the top brass have made it an us and them with the imposition of the new staffing arrangements and the Staff diktat.

1 Like