I would remind everyone that there is likely to be further media coverage about this topic, and not to post anything that could see themselves bringing anyone into disrepute.
Well, it is worth remembering that the above isn’t actually a crime. Allowing someone who has broken the rules of the organisation (but not the law) to resign seems pretty reasonable.
It’s also, imv, worth considering what levers of power the ACO actually has - it can make people leave, but that’s it - it can’t fine them, or imprison them, or send them to South Georgia for 15 years.
It’s options are go, for which it needs actual evidence, or stay.
If someone was informed by their OC last night that an accusation had been made and that an investigation had been started, what power does the ACO actually have to force them to stay in until the investigation and disciplinary procedures have been carried out - they’d just leave, the ACO can do nothing about that and the investigation, which almost certainly requires input from them to come to any conclusion, will run into the sand.
When you don’t pay people you have little way of making them so things they don’t want to do.
Surely it should be a police matter regardless if they are a member or not?
That’s a very valid point, and well made - but it does seem at odds with our child protection strategy.
From what I’ve seen (a weapons scenario, rather than abuse though), the RAFAC can refuse to accept a resignation, and terminate the individual. I’m assuming that a termination will rule out further involvement in the organisation if the individual tries to reapply later in life. Whether such a record will prevent someone joining the DVD or ACF, I do not know.
Only if the law has been broken.
Worth noting the “Includes historical allegations” note at the bottom - we can’t bin people who have already left.
But when was that? If recently, you need a new WExO because he/she is sending out totally the wrong impression and reaction to an allegation.
If someone does their job then yes (report the sacking to DBS for them to log)
It is interesting to see that the DBS defines children as under-18s; that’s something I didn’t realise and might change things in relation to the example above.
Slight tangent, but there was a phrase used at ATF which went something like, “the primacy of… is with the victim”, stating that priority of action revolves around believing the victim and placing their rights and welfare above that of the alleged abuser.
While I understand the sentiment, I’ve never quite been able to find or remember the full phrase, nor put it quite as succinctly - can anyone here fill in the blanks?
It’s an extension of the rights of the child outweigh all else. Which is the principle of child protection we work to.
Whats the public ACO statement compared to others?
Safety is Paramount in the RAF Air Cadets
03 Jul 2017
Safety is of paramount importance within the RAF Air Cadets.
To that end, all of our adult volunteers undergo enhanced disclosure checks, mandatory background and security checks and regular safeguarding training.
Unlike many youth organisations, our disclosure checks are repeated every 5 years. Our safeguarding policies are also reviewed regularly and independently audited and are always available to cadets, parents, guardians, and adult volunteers.
Safeguarding training is available 24/7 on our Bader information portal and we have a team of Child Protection Officers in each of our 34 Air Training Corps Wings with a plethora of training available to our volunteer staff and senior cadets. This is augmented with a 3-yearly refresher training programme.
The overwhelming majority of young people enjoy cadet activities without experiencing any abuse or bullying, the Royal Air Force Air Cadets has a zero tolerance towards it.
We have clear policies and practices designed to protect our young people, supported by a culture that encourages our uniformed and civilian staff, our volunteers, and our cadets to speak up, confront and disclose any concerns.
You may be aware that the Cadet Forces have been the focus of a BBC Panorama investigation. The documentary was due to be broadcast this week.
One or two cases in the programme may feature former adult volunteers. For clarification, our policy is that once allegations are made, volunteers are immediately suspended (without prejudice) pending the outcome of a court case. In addition, we always fully co-operate with the police when required.
Where an individual feels unable to discuss a concern with a volunteer or member of the Royal Air Force Air Cadet staff they and their parents or guardians are encouraged to contact the NSPCC on 0808 800 5000.
The NSPCC is aware of the Panorama broadcast and can assist at any time of the day or night, whether now or in the future.
Protecting young people will always be our priority and the Royal Air Force Air Cadets seeks to empower and inspire confidence and self-belief in all of its cadets.
And the sea cadets;
The charity cooperated fully with the BBC Panorama investigation.
We are appalled at what happened and unreservedly apologise for any hurt or anger felt in regard to these cases. They are not reflective of our organisation today.
We have instituted wholesale, radical change. We have and continue to put in place substantial measures designed to educate and enforce in order to prevent repetition.
We encourage anyone who is a victim to report it to the Police and anyone with any concerns can speak to our supporter care team (020 7654 7010).
I’ve never been under any illusion what minor (children) means in the modern day.
I wonder if they extend right to vote to 16+ will they lower the age of majority, after all old enough to vote, old enough to do all the other things.
The DBS covers over 18s if they are considered to be vulnerable.
The problem with this children have never been made fully aware that with rights come responsibilities. Our kids tried this on and got put in the place fairly quickly. Speak to anyone who’s been a teacher over the last 30 years. One has said teaching has in many ways become crowd control as they have little in the way of sanctions against those that are disruptive. Sending them out of the class is what they want and I’ve been told there are certain kids that teachers will send out as the class starts to give them any chance of teaching.
I’m sorry to tell you but this has and does still happen in this organisation…
Tend to agree with big_g, too many in this organisation, especially at Wing like to play God, based on whether they like someone or not.