Exactly. All of those high level courses definitely have a place in this organisation, I think there just needs to be a more pre-agreed return on investment. Having an MCI in the region would be great if they were out delivering LLA/ML/CWAI etc! Winter ML would be great in those areas that get snow on the hills as you could take cadets out year-round. I could go on.
But as said, I think if region were going to pay for it there would need to be an agreed upon plan of what they will give back.
Forgive me, as I could be wrong, but arenāt we lacking a policy on this?
Any business would have a policy covering eligibility and the mechanics of who, how and where for such courses / quals. Why donāt we have this? It should then remove any infighting/ tit for tat over funding and costs, and ultimately provide us with more, better qualified staff to offer more activities.
I donāt think Iāve seen a policy on this, no. That said, this is potentially at a high enough level that it would be very much case-by-case decision from Andy/Budget holder. I doubt there would be more than 1 staff member a year looking to do anything at the level weāre talking about. (MCI/ML(W) etc)
Since the funds used would likely be non-public money would it not be for the individual, Squadron, Wing, Region or Corps Committee to decide upon rather than HQAC having a policy?
The thing is once you get to that level you are in most cases doing it for a living, you need to be just to get the amount of time in to attain and maintain the skills. With that being the case is it really for the organisation to effectively buy someone a skill which will become their occupation if it isnāt already?
I actually donāt see it as a problem but I do think some form of black and white agreement explaining how the organisation is going to get its monies worth is definitely in order. (If the Squadron funds an LLA who promptly leaves without giving anything back itās annoying but most Squadrons will be able to swallow it, but if we have paid for someone to become a Winter ML however thatās a big chunk of change for a Squadron, Wing or Region to have thrown away.
Hmm, Iām not sure I agree - e.g. there are a few Wings that have 4* WW paddlers, if itās your main sport / hobby, itās a relatively straightforward path to 4*. I actually know an MIC (now renamed WMCI) who still has a full time office job and just does MIC-stuff on the side
There will alway be exceptions, but holding down a full time job and keeping up with a hobby to that standard doesnāt leave much time for Cadets (unless you hate your partner).
Iām not opposed to helping people at that level, we need some people who can do that, I just would want a very clear agreement as to what we would get out of it.
This!
Time to get my 4* 
I think something like Iāve had when work pay for courses. If you leave within 1 year you repay it all, and then a sliding scale where less gets repaid as time passes, with the ability to speed that up by using it
Sorry, I should have been more explicit - Iād think of 4* being more like ML-equivalent, but yes, getting (and actively using) WMCI, while holding down a full time office job, and having 2 children under 10 is not something I think Iād want to do (Iāve met his wife too, and she seems pleasant enough!! 
)
I agree with something like that, although it might be harder with volunteers than with employees.
What if it was an internal grant scheme with its own fund, application process, and Ts & Cs? We could apply something like that to a lot more than top-tier AT quals, too. Anyone up for bushcraft?
Whereās our financial gurus at?
Let anyone else in and the Silver Winged Master Race would find a way to make it about aviation rubbish.
Ts and Cs + Exclusions then. No ROI or training requirement for PPL, so tough.
I have an agreement with my staff and civcom that if a staff member canāt access an in house course, we can apply for funding for another civvie course.
This is normally subject to getting a couple of quotes, and a gentlemanās agreement that if the CFAV leaves within a year they pay the full cost back, within 2 years 50% then we write it off.
We also ask for them to commit to a certain number of events to run once they have the qualification.
All totally unenforceable of course, but itās the principle. We have a low turnover and I have high trust of my team. I wonāt support someone who hasnāt got a sound case, and who I donāt think will use it.
Very reasonable and grown up approach. Shows trust and empowering them will only deliver a better cadet experience. I wish more were like this.
This is almost word for word what I have in place on my Sqn.
Wonder how common this approach is?
Heaven forbid there be people keen to keep the AIR Training Corps, part of the Royal AIR Force AIR Cadets aviation minded.
But no I agree - I think we need a rethink on this sort of thingā¦ Why not have the AT pot of money distributed between regions; wing AT officers can then be allocated a budget from region for getting as many staff as possible onto different LLA style awards from across the spectrum. Region hold back a few bob for more advanced courses which staff can put a case forward forā¦
Iād argue the same should happen for Flying. Give region a budget, region to organise powered flying with suitable flying clubs and allocate spacesā¦ Distribute a smaller budget to wings who can organise their own gliding or spend the money on other aviation however they feel fit.
A bit of trust and flexibility so that coal face volunteers are actually involved in the decision on how we spendā¦ Some things will be sourced cheaper, some things may be a little more expensiveā¦ But it will be swings and roundabouts; and a little more local control would = more qualified and interested staff doing more thingsā¦
It would then become essential for wing and region to appoint suitably organised post holders who have a bit of financial acumenā¦ But it could work really well???
Itās a lovely idea, and I agree, it could work - however the accountancy requirements if it were public money would probably be onerous. If itās non-public money then itās not our bag to manage, as thatās on the trustees (and weād have to make cases for spending it as we do now from the relevant purse-holder).
Unfortunately budgets donāt seem to be delegated any lower than HQAC - even WExOs donāt have a budget to manage as I understand it.
Letās just do paragliding & parachuting. Just use those big expensive winged taxis to get to the top. Sell the little naff ones, buy some Grand Caravans and there we have it - mass aviation participation 
I know youāre joking. But actually not the worst idea.