Unless you turn up at your parent station with the same cash you took off cadets, you are effectively charging them for something which the crown issues and owns. The crown doesn’t allow Sqns to pocket the money into non public funds.
But wouldn’t the deposit’s primary aim be to act as incentive to give clothes back…to that end, a deposit doesn’t have to be monetary.
The ultimate goal is to ensure that as much uniform as possible is returned to the parent, not to profiteer.
[quote=“landingsquare” post=9334]But wouldn’t the deposit’s primary aim be to act as incentive to give clothes back…to that end, a deposit doesn’t have to be monetary.
The ultimate goal is to ensure that as much uniform as possible is returned to the parent, not to profiteer.[/quote]
We all know that the aim if a deposit is, but in the circumstances where the aim fails…
Monetary of not. Goods in lieu of cash is the same thing.
…you could always just lock up a relative for the duration the cadet has the uniform…
Wilf: we still get billed for lost kit or kit that gets damaged and needs replacing unless you can plead some sort of special circumstances, ie: iron your shirt so hard it melts = buy a new one, get set on fire at work by careless colleagues = new kit for free.
…you could always just lock up a relative for the duration the cadet has the uniform…
[/quote]
Nice idea!
…you could always just lock up a relative for the duration the cadet has the uniform…
Wilf: we still get billed for lost kit or kit that gets damaged and needs replacing unless you can plead some sort of special circumstances, ie: iron your shirt so hard it melts = buy a new one, get set on fire at work by careless colleagues = new kit for free.[/quote]
Must admit never had to pay for anything just go to stores armed with biscuits then help yourself!
…you could always just lock up a relative for the duration the cadet has the uniform…
Wilf: we still get billed for lost kit or kit that gets damaged and needs replacing unless you can plead some sort of special circumstances, ie: iron your shirt so hard it melts = buy a new one, get set on fire at work by careless colleagues = new kit for free.[/quote]
Must admit never had to pay for anything just go to stores armed with biscuits then help yourself![/quote]
Yeah. I should really have said ‘in theory’.
I suppose I am paying for it just not in cash…
It’s not really misappropriation is it? After all, we are not being dishonest or unfair as we are completely upfront with parents from the outset that it is a REFUNDABLE deposit and not a payment; we also do not say that the RAF require us to take a deposit.
Uniforms issued by Clothing Stores to named cadets are written off; similarly, when we issue Backing Stock to a named cadet, we should send a voucher to Clothing Stores to have the items removed from inventory, I don’t know whether we could in theory say that the items are no longer owned by the Service? In a similar vein, could we also argue that Sqns not bringing returned uniforms onto Backing Stock are dishonest?
For the amount of kit actually lost, I would say administering a deposit scheme is more hassle than it’s worth. How many cadets do you all have to chase to get kit back?
If it’s that many, maybe you haven’t got the right cadets 
You have uniform on your inventory?
My inventory has furniture and a few other odds and sods, but no unform.
Could you really see clothing stores having the time and or inclination to go through all this?
It’s not really misappropriation is it? After all, we are not being dishonest or unfair as we are completely upfront with parents from the outset that it is a REFUNDABLE deposit and not a payment; we also do not say that the RAF require us to take a deposit.
Uniforms issued by Clothing Stores to named cadets are written off; similarly, when we issue Backing Stock to a named cadet, we should send a voucher to Clothing Stores to have the items removed from inventory, I don’t know whether we could in theory say that the items are no longer owned by the Service? In a similar vein, could we also argue that Sqns not bringing returned uniforms onto Backing Stock are dishonest?[/quote]
If uniform is on your inventroy you can scrap it yourslef by uising a F1066C? maybe thats wrong I have been out 2 years kind of forget form numbers but there is one thats a little scrap tag and as an officer I imagine they should be able to sign for it a scrap wich will then be taken off inventory.
You have uniform on your inventory?
My inventory has furniture and a few other odds and sods, but no unform.
Could you really see clothing stores having the time and or inclination to go through all this?[/quote]
Depends which clothing stores it is some can be a right pain in the bum but saying that most are pretty good once you get to know them
Ever since I had any offical dealings with stores c.25 years and I’ve gone through 4/5 different parentings, I’ve never known one want any sort of inventory record for clothing and I’ve had a couple of anal SCAF types who went by every last letter for doing things.
It’s not really misappropriation is it? After all, we are not being dishonest or unfair as we are completely upfront with parents from the outset that it is a REFUNDABLE deposit and not a payment; we also do not say that the RAF require us to take a deposit.
Uniforms issued by Clothing Stores to named cadets are written off; similarly, when we issue Backing Stock to a named cadet, we should send a voucher to Clothing Stores to have the items removed from inventory, I don’t know whether we could in theory say that the items are no longer owned by the Service? In a similar vein, could we also argue that Sqns not bringing returned uniforms onto Backing Stock are dishonest?[/quote]
Just listen to yourself for a second. It makes jack-all difference which parent you tell, or how you tell them, or if it’s a C (is it “C”?) class store. It’s crown property until it becomes U/S. At that point it [should] be sent back to the supplying unit for write-off. Clearly we know most can’t be bothered but that’s another story. You have no authority to do so. At all.
It’s almost like getting ration packs and flogging them for a £5 each.
I can now appreciate why you have commented that you like your Karma low.
[quote=“cygnus maximus” post=9375][quote=“Operation Nimrod” post=9372]
Just listen to yourself for a second. It makes jack-all difference which parent you tell, or how you tell them, or if it’s a C (is it “C”?) class store. It’s crown property until it becomes U/S. At that point it [should] be sent back to the supplying unit for write-off. Clearly we know most can’t be bothered but that’s another story. You have no authority to do so. At all.
[/quote]
I can now appreciate why you have commented that you like your Karma low.[/quote]
Some people just don’t like being told they are wrong I suppose.
[confidential]This is getting off topic. - Op Archway[/confidential]
Op Nimrod,
I understand where you are coming from and to be honest I have always found this as one of those areas where everyone is adamant on what the situation is but when challenged no one can actually prove where the authorisation is from, be it legislation, regulation or policy. Differing terminology also causes confusion.
I believe our squadron policy is that we take a deposit when a cadet joins which is to be offset against any outstanding unpaid subs when the cadet leaves with the balance being returned.
However we also define the fact that the cadet is deemed to have left WHEN their uniform is returned.
So what is effectively a subs deposit, becomes an “Uniform” deposit as its only when the uniform is returned the deposit is returned.
Charging for replacement uniform items (belts, brassards, beret etc) gets even murkier as does charging for replacement 3822s. Although thinking about it, could you charge a set “admin fee” for offset of costs (internet connection, Ink, paper etc) to arrange the replacement of the uniform? Not sure how the legal argument would work with this but one to muse on.
The only other method of getting the uniform back, I can think of at the moment would be report the matter to the police stating that the uniform has been stolen. How the police would deal with this I don’t know and I imagine that matters could get very complicated very quickly. However it would give Sqn Commanders / inventory holders a crime number they can give when writing the uniform off and accounting for discrepancies.
[quote=“Operation Nimrod” post=9372]
Just listen to yourself for a second. It makes jack-all difference which parent you tell, or how you tell them, or if it’s a C (is it “C”?) class store. It’s crown property until it becomes U/S. At that point it [should] be sent back to the supplying unit for write-off. Clearly we know most can’t be bothered but that’s another story. You have no authority to do so. At all.[/quote]
Now that’s a strange thing. My post commenting on the above yesterday has been removed and my Karma has gone from +5 to -10 in a day! How childish!
I thought that this was a discussion site on which the whole idea was to add your opinions, even if they did not necessarily agree with the official line or other site members.
Perhaps I am mistaken?
[quote=“cygnus maximus” post=9392]My post commenting on the above yesterday has been removed and my Karma has gone from +5 to -10 in a day! How childish!
I thought that this was a discussion site on which the whole idea was to add your opinions, even if they did not necessarily agree with the official line or other site members.
Perhaps I am mistaken?[/quote]
Don’t worry yourself over it … keep on trucking and let those with a need click away. I’ve never been one to necessarily follow the herd or tow the line generally in life. My “good dog” reports at work lay testament to this, but they can’t touch me because I do my job and do it very well. Colleagues in the Corps are aware I’m not one to change my view just to appease and I have a lot of agree to disagree understandings.