Which doesn’t include a barred list check!
“we don’t need RCivCom because they’re now all DBS cleared” is an incredibly short sighted argument if it was part of the justification.
HQAC is removing a valuable pool of available resource for activities and adding pressure back onto CFAV.
This.
The whole purpose was to use CivCom members as staff to solve our staff crisis without decimating the Civ Com.
Locally they had to add value with a qualification or the like and it was to be a temporary measure pending a full staff member gaining the missing qualification.
Nationally it felt like it would allow CivCom to act as CIs when they wanted and as CivCom when the wanted. You may as well have allowed CIs to be elected to serve as officers on the committee.
Not a fan then…
Lol
Sorry what now?
I always understood the role of RCWC was as a second staff member to bump up ratios and/or act as the D1 driver where the event lead was missing that capability/shortage of available D1 staff available.
It was as a secondary role in every sense. They offered nothing to the event other than attendance to satisfy adult:cadet ratio or used to make the event happen as a driver.
I have never known RCWC as event leads and does bring onto question a two tier system to act in such a role given the minimal hoops a RCWC jumps through in comparison to CFAV
You mean BPSS, DBS, AVIP, ACTO99, Pers 1-04 instead of BPSS, DBS, AVIP, ACTO99, Pers 1-04?
eerr…yes exactly - if that is the difference then that is exactly what I mean 
How do we know civcom are who they say they are if we don’t do a BPSS on them!?!?!?!?!
[/sarcasm]
Those with Bader access needed to anyway.
RCWC have certainly put themselves forward as Adult IC and event leads before. I’ve known it happen several times in a Wing where RCWC have led on planning and delivering of activity.
They were always used around our way to run fundraising activities. That way Cadets could assist and no need for Staff to turn up.
In much the same way that Staff Cadets can run local activities.
as indicated above - this is news to me. the role was described to me as a “ghost” staff member. an adult attending but with minimal input to the event
I can understand this more readily, as an event IC given the event is a CWC event - but still never knew that was a possibility for RCWC
I suspect someone in your Wing/Region has been making up their own rules.
I always found it interesting as in my mind there were three very separate tiers between Uniformed Staff and CIs, who were involved with day to day running of activities and then the CWC who looked after the charity/finance/welfare aspects. Having RCWC running events felt like it blurred those lines but perhaps they were never intended to be stepped back from Squadrons.
i suspect it is either my lack of understanding of the role - never known or met a RCWC so have no first hand knowledge, or lack of adequate briefing from Wing…
or maybe both.
i am now more confused by the role now though - why by a RCWC member when they are CIs in all but name…I can’t see what the advantage is, particularly as the hoops to jump through are the same as @Giminion identified to me (I previously believed it was bare minimum - today is a school day!)
Read acp20
The role was sepcifically brought out to support a limited number of sqns who had plenry of civ com but no cis.
Thereby allowing civ com to support events.
It was a bums on seat fix, created in a panic by dawn.
To me, the problem was never that they are CIs in all but name - it would have been very fair and understandable (considering the increased nature of their involvement and proximity to cadets) to train them the same.
While the intention was minor support to CFAV, some may have gone beyond the scope anticipated; however, this is a fault of HQAC not explicitly defining restrictions and (therefore or additionally) geographic HQs not policing it.
How hard would it have been to police:
Involvement is limited to:
- activities requiring a specialist qualification, whereby RCivCom bods are supporting and not in the majority and the event would otherwise not be viable
- activities requiring additional personnel support to meet safeguarding and SST ratios, whereby RCivCom bods are supporting and not in the majority and the event would otherwise not be viable
- civcom organised fundraising activities, registered on SMS, where cadets are present
- providing gender-specific cover for events which require it, where cadets would otherwise be forced to miss out on the basis of their gender.
- the ratio of Civcom to Rcivcom must not be lower than 1.1:1, with a majority of non registered trustees holding voting rights, no votes or decisions may be passed where this minimum ratio is not met among those present.
These feel like acceptable boundaries with reasonable enough overlap to be of benefit. In the first couple, it provides readily (internally) vetted “external” instructors, the third gives them greater ownership of their own remit and CFAV a break, and the fourth - like the first two - prevents restrictions on activities that deliver on providing the cadet experience. The last one is your safeguard of the funds.
With that said, if sqn committees are being binned or at the very least have banking control removed, what purpose does this move serve as they surely wouldn’t be trustees any more?
Not this rumour again.
Isnt going to happen.
There is no other mechanism in place to allow sqns to function, financially.
Making this edict would be the fastest way to kill off a significsnt number of units.
Hmm - a bit like the “stop” on promotion for adult SNCOs. No announcement about that either. Glad to say now resolved