Nobody going to pick up on this 75% attendance as a minimum nonsense!
Are you in uniform. In which case 12 hours a month is nominal minimum.
Are you ci? In which case there is no minimum. Just attend enough to justify having you on the books.
Erm… cadet portal… so cadet?
7 Likes
I certainly always did, if you had less than 70% attendance you didn’t meet the essential criteria for my promotion process when it came to Sergeant or above.
1 Like
Same…but Covid has put paid to that requirement!
I only looked at the last 3 months so won’t take long to get back up.
In terms of attendance, after some research I found that 75% is seen as the slandered, “good” attendance when it came to things like promotion and being selected for activities.
I know this thread is due to close, but maybe a split into attendance expectations?
I think there’s a difference between expectations and desired.
We’d like all cadets to be as high as possible, but we know that won’t happen.
However, if a cadet aspires to a higher position of responsibility, they need to demonstrate that they’re worthy of that, and part of that demonstration is that they attend regularly.
75% is a good benchmark for us for that measure.
4 Likes
I used to run amongst many other benchmarks at 60% for Corporals and 70% for SNCO’s.
1 Like
Worth pointing out there’s a policy for study leave at GCSE/A Level time which says you shouldn’t be disadvantaged for taking said leave.
True. But I would treat someone differently depending on whether they tell me they are taking study leave, or if they just didn’t attend
3 Likes
There is a difference between being AWOL and booking leave.
AWOL suggests a dissatisfaction with the RAFAC offering that needs discussion or a welfare issue that needs understanding.
Leave is of course acceptable, however if absence falls below the 75% level I’m very careful in agreeing to off squadron activities (camps, shooting weekends, AEF) etc to the detriment of those that are committed.
Study Leave around exam times is the exception.
1 Like
How can you be in the days of Cadet Portal, where cadets pick and choose for themselves what activities to be involved in and sqn staff have no ability to affect who gets accepted?
1 Like
I may not know much about how cadets get selected. But if a cadet was so undeserving of going on such activity, couldn’t the OC remove the cadet from the activity or at least email the Activity IC and say they should not be on it. Because I know my OC can add us to events so surley he can remove us as well.
That presumes the OC has the time to police every single activity on CP for as long as the event is live. That’s a considerable and unrealistic demand on their time.
1 Like
An OC has to release the activity to cadets - if you don’t want a cadet to attend then tell them before doing so. If they still bid then they can be removed and there’s then a separate conversation to be had with that cadet.
3 Likes
In my Wing if you have multiple people bidding for places you tend to get an email from the Organiser saying “you have 4 spaces and 6 bidding pick which ones are going to get them” and we then go in and manage our own bids.
When I was an OC I used to keep quite a close eye on events that I had advertised so that I could see who was actively bidding to go and do stuff.
Interesting, I’m pretty certain this level of proactivity isn’t seen on my Wing.
1 Like
I was always very keen on keeping an eye on my Casey bids and I would also use the notes function to show there priority so 1st 2nd etc
I get that, but when we have 20+ events on SMS, some of which with sub-apps (which can add another 10 per event), monitoring them all becomes a full time job when you’ve got a sqn of 50-odd.
Anyway, topic, etc.