Cadet Forces Statistics 2017

For those with an interest in the numbers, the MoD have just published the latest stats at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/mod-sponsored-cadet-forces-statistics-2017

An interesting read. They are quoting longer term (5 year) trends on their graphs, when they talk about overall increases/decreases - but more interesting is the shorter (2 year) stats.

Take a look at Figure 1 in that first document. Looks like 80(?)% of the ATCs decline in cadet numbers over the last five years has happened in the last one year.

Equally, look at Figure 5 (which astounds me!) - the long term trend in ATC staffing is a decline of 15%, but over the last two years the numbers have actually increased (even if they have dropped again since Apr 16).

Your blip coincides with the requirement for Civ Com members to be registered as staff for certain roles and as such a load filled out forms. Otherwise, taking that out of the equation as they aren’t “new staff” it’s a continual decline.

I have noticed that despite the Cadet Expansion Programme delivering more CCF units in schools there has not been an increase in CCF cadet numbers. There are now 2000 less cadets in the CCF than there were in 2013!

There are over 1000 more volunteers in the CCF than there were in 2013 however. This could be due to the increase in new units that have opened up under the CEP.

But if the CCF’s arn’t recruiting cadets is the CEP programme a waste of time and/or money?

Personally I think the money would have been better spent improving facilities/ providing extra activities in Community Cadet units and providing funds for a decent recruitment campain, but that’s for a different topic.

4 Likes

Before you go picking on CCF staff numbers consider that there is 1 member of staff per 3.5 cadets in the community cadet forces, and 1 to 13.5 in CCFs. Which one is better value for money? Not so easy when you look at it like that.

Given that CCF staff are paid and community are volunteers… that makes value for money quite an easy argument :joy:

2 Likes

Not all CCF staff are paid via their teaching salaries. I transferred to the CCF(RAF) as a Volunteer and was paid accordingly but only for days I did at weekends.

Not paid by the public purse, however. So value for money for whom?

I don’t think we can compare CCF and community units as they are chalk and cheese.

While not all CCF staff are paid via salaries, the vast majority are and are (correct if you wish) contracted to do it.

WRT the CEP it is and was just a politically motivated exercise to solve media perceived problems. From what I’ve seen the one CEP unit formed (which struggling due to the originally enthusiastic staff leaving) and the potential CEP units are in ‘good’ / highly selective (11+ or specific entrance test) schools in nice areas, so not really targeting the groups spoken of by politicians.

The main problem with the CEP; staffing CCF units in the state sector. Schools are struggling to pay staff across the board and many are reducing staff numbers to balance budgets. It seems schools are no different in many ways to ATC sqns in needing to get funding from lots of different and in some cases the same places. Also schools need some sort of selling point, which is why you have schools which specialise in subject area(s). Locally we have schools that boast of one or more specialisms; in science, technology, language, sports and performing arts, I can’t see having a CCF unit fitting in with this as a draw, as similar can be accessed in the community and not having the scholastic attraction that subject specialism can. The only parents you can see finding it a draw are those use after school clubs as free child care for 30-60 minutes and which cover the whole gamut of school activities and from what I have seen of these, none or a very few of the kids seem that they would be interested in a CCF after school club.

The school I work in currently, has 2 ATC, 2 ACF and 1 SCC unit, plus ‘scout’ units, football, rugby, netball teams, an athletics club, dance, drama and many other extra-curricular clubs and groups all within a 5 mile radius and at least 2 more ATC and 1 more ACF within relatively easy reach, as I see the signs pointing to them on the drive to and from work. So a school based CCF unit (in any one of the 9 secondary schools) in that area would be a waste of money, time and effort.

The majority of teachers are too busy keeping up with admin and the vast majority of support staff are not contracted for any more than the school day and are term time only. As co-tutor I do parents evenings, but it’s only once a year. The only support staff who are not term time in the school I work in are; site (52 weeks) and the head’s PA, finance, exam officer and the senior technicians for art, DT and science are contracted for an additional 1-2 weeks over the year. Then there is the constantly shifting sands that is school staff. Since I’ve worked in schools I’ve seen departments where the teaching staff have changed bar one or two in a year and similarly support staff, as they either move schools or leave education. So someone employed with staffing a CCF unit as an addition to their contract could well move within a year or two. I would also think any teacher being employed as CCF staff, would have to have a reduced teaching load, which might not go down well in some quarters as someone else would need to pick up the lessons.

What needs to be understood by HQAC from the stats is why numbers are dropping off and address those directly and rectify them. The over riding question is, does the RAF for all it’s rhetoric want a youth organisation attached to it say 35000+ cadets and associated staffs putting that at c.45000+, when it is not exactly growing itself? We have heard that there is an active move to close squadrons, under the misapprehension that cadets and staff will move en masse to the next nearest unit, when in fact they won’t (a few may) as such numbers reduce ever so slightly and may never recover. I don’t really see that the RAF can actively support a cadet base much above 25000 which I think may be its unspoken goal. We have seen cadets leave as the Corps hasn’t been delivering its USPs as per websites and ‘glossies’ and from what we were told last week those of us under 5 AEF are on a non time specific ‘pause’, again.

1 Like

I remember CAC visiting one of our Wing Training Days, I seem to remember part of her “100 days in office” speech, so early days for her, indicating her goal was to see the ACO grow to 50,000 Cadets

now if this included the CCF i can’t remember but for the ATC alone based on these numbers - 31k is a big effort to make
(i seem to remember the figure was 35K at the time) either way an increase of ~50% a big ask!

this is the first I have heard of reducing the size of the organisation although I do follow the logic. why would a junior force be larger than its parent unit?
Are there more RAF Reserves than full time RAF? what about for the Army and Navy Reserves?

Closing Squadrons would be the simply route to reduce numbers but i doubt it would dramatically change the Staff picture, other than increase the Staff:Cadet ratio.

at our unit of the 4 uniformed members of Staff only one lives in the town the Squadron is in. two of us live in towns which has a ATC Squadron yet travel to the next town across, one of the previous two and the other remaining travel in passing by at least one Squadron to get to ours.

Similar numbers were true at the previous two units I have been at, ~50% of uniformed Staff are not “local” to their Squadron.

Of course Cadets and CIs moving is a different question…

When the current CAC took over there was all the usual white noise that a new manager makes. Anyone who has been at work and seen a few managers, chairman or equivalent etc come and go, will have heard her words before as all new senior managers have to come in with a lot of bluff and bluster aka a vision, and have known they were little more than empty words.

In order to get the numbers like she suggested would have required a herculean effort from her and the ACMB to ensure that the Corps delivered above anything previously, using their immense knowledge and contacts within the MoD and wider world. Given what has happened in the Corps’ world, squadrons have had to find more things to do to fill gaps and the increasing requirement for staff to be “qualified” to even the most mundane of activities.

But that would require them doing something in the face of what was happening in the wider world to draw in more people to be staff.
I struggle to find ways to make it seem interesting to be staff when I speak to people, as it’s invariably you can do this or that, but you need to do this, this and this, and, but that might take 2-3 years and require several weekends potentially spread over a couple of months with last minute cancellations, however there isn’t anything running for say 3 or 4 months, which when people wanting to join with an enthusiasm to help and do things from the off, isn’t encouraging. But while you’re waiting how do you feel about doing H&S or DofE or whichever job needs doing.

Could you imagine being at work in the modern era and having someone sitting there doing not a lot until they’ve done courses, but then say there isn’t anything available for several months. It wouldn’t be allowed to happen. My dad did a proper apprenticeship and he said that after a couple of days, the two blokes he was attached to let him do things and he was only just 15 at the time. When we get new people start a work they are doing things effectively from day one, OK you check what they do, but that’s for a couple of weeks and then they are let loose on those and then something else, until in 2-3 months they are effectively doing the job. We know they are coming and the first half a day or so is an induction (personnel bits, H&S, pass card, IT set up etc) and then on to on the job training, we will have looked out for potential courses for them and get them booked.

Imagine that if we did DBS the modern way in the ATC new staff could, come in, get a CIN on the first night (generated like the cadet ones), get the proper induction BASIC etc within their first couple of nights and things like MOI within the next couple of weeks, while waiting for paperwork to drag it’s sorry backside through the quagmire of administrators, by which time they will have worked out if they want to stay on and it is their decision to stay or not. As opposed to the current system of fill out the forms and then wait for the paperwork to drag its sorry backside through the same sorry quagmire of administrators.

As for staff and cadets moving if a sqn was closed, not much chance of either in reality. The supposition that uniformed staff would, is based around the notion that uniformed staff are in some way employees and go where our masters dictate. But we are not employees, we are volunteers who are not tied by payments or contracts, so if you didn’t want to there is little they could do and a loss of staff has a far more dramatic effect than losing cadets. The fact that people volunteer on sqns when there are ones that are closer is all due to the fact they volunteer to choose to do so.

3 Likes

You cannot in one breath argue why don’t have a process closer to the employed world, and then in the next breath argue Staff won’t move to the next town along because we are all volunteers…!

Firstly; stop trying to apply employment style expectations on Squadrons. The situation you describe would be fantastic but how many units have the manpower to offer such a programme? Indeed how many units have adequate man power to adequately run a Squadron with the current pressures?
Yes in the employed world it is known when new starters begin and yes they get on with the work almost straightaway but that is not a fair comparison for the organisation.
Our new starters walk off the street, sometimes as parents to recruits, or just randomers, or through the inbred route of ex-Cadets – there is no “intake” for staff (as we do with recruits and have a set out programme to get them through the first 6 weeks) nor any “job spec” to apply which they match to.
In our Wing at least there are monthly inductions which cover all “new starters” from across the Wing. There may only be a few newbies each session but it gets the ball rolling – I am sure most OCs would like it to move quicker but don’t have the time on Squadron, and are not obliged to do so outside of their usual two nights a week, to make the special effort to do so.

There is no formal “job application” process to join the ACO, as simple as walking into the unit and making the right noises. There is no “musts” or even “desirables” (other than passing a DBS) as minimum criteria to fill posts. At no point have I heard of a DofE officer leave a Squadron (for whatever reason) and the next Staff member through the door being perfectly qualified for the vacant role, and that is true be it for sports, radio, shooting, even basic instructional techniques. An expert in a topic, or a lifetime in an industry does not make someone able to teach on that subject.

We have to deal with whoever walks through the door, and other than a drive to get involved and an interest in the organisation, they often arrive with little to help so we have to work with what we have got. We have to mould them into something useful for the Squadron, encourage them to take advantage of what we can offer while remember what it is they have an interest and/or skill in.

The process of “inducting” new Staff is not perfect, everyone would agree, but neither is the recruitment process. The procedure is only as capable as the weakest link. If we don’t recruit correctly (eg recruiting trained, qualified adults with relevant skills and experience and with clear DBS status) we have to work with what we get walk through the door.

With regards to Staff moving units.
Personally I would not have an issue. I have been a CFAV for 13 years and in that time been on 7 different Squadrons. OK so 4 of those were down to my personal situation moving around the country every 12 months, but even then 1 of those was the 4th closest Squadron to “home”. Arriving in the Wing I asked where would I be best placed (fortunate enough to have a selection of Squadrons in a commuting radius) and was asked to attend one of the furthest.

The shortest period was for 3 months, the longest 7 years with moves typically lasting 12 months at a time. Yes the 7 years terms was my closest Squadron at the time of starting but having moved home it ended up my third closest Squadron. I am at the second closest Squadron to me and wouldn’t have any issue to move any if required, my only expectation would be less than 30 minutes one way travel, which for me at least gives me 4 other options. Our CO travels 45 minutes each way to Squadron and I am sure he’d happily move to a neighbouring unit or indeed a closer one if ours closed.
My point? In my experience at least 1, typically 2 Staff travel into Squadron from out of town. If their unit closed I would be surprised if they didn’t move to their next closet, which in some cases could be closer than their current commute.
(at our unit 3 out 4 uniformed Staff and 1 CI live “out of town”, my previous unit 2x uniform Staff, the one prior 1 uniformed and 3x Cis were all “out of town”)

I am not implying or indicating all, or even most would move if their unit closed, but I wouldn’t expect by closing a Squadron the numbers associated could be wiped off the board as a few Staff would be likely to move.

While I, and most of the other CFAV’s I know, pick a Sqn based on personalities, interests, vibe etc… rather than working out which one is 2 minutes closer to home, I’d personally think that given the current, and longstanding, morale vacuum within the staff, it would be a very foolish idea to present us with yet another reason to say ‘sod it’…

As with most things people don’t just walk over one thing, but there has been a surfit of things to walk over in the last few years, and one more may end up being the final straw on the camels back.

If my Sqn closed the next nearest wouldn’t interest me in the slightest - the nearest one after that is simply too far to do on a regular basis, so I’d bin it…

2 Likes

Why shouldn’t we have a process for staff similar to that we have for cadets? Outside of a DBS the admin is essentially the same, you could lose the application forms and have no detraction. The process to become a member of staff is much too long winded.

Why shouldn’t we have a process that mimics those of most workplaces? Just because we volunteer, doesn’t mean things should be as different as we find in the workplace.

We have become dulled into expecting cadets to go from cadet to staff and having been cadets accept the crappy systems. As such those coming ‘off the street’ are forced into accepting these ways.

What I suggest is an aspirational position. I don’t see sqn staff doing it, it could easily be achieved by having any Wing Staff (ideally the Wing TO) coming out to a sqn and doing it one to one ad hoc basis; so new staff member, WSO peels up and does all the BS stuff and at the same time tries to beat them into a uniform position. But it does mean we need to have a far more efficient administrative process, but we’ve needed that for years. It will be interesting to see what comes out when they’ve worked out how to “value our volunteers”. For an organisation that is meant to be aspirational for cadets, seems exceptionally non aspirational with respect to its processes etc regarding staff.

Staff moving and potentially travelling further just seems to be expected by the CoC. I’m not saying that people wouldn’t but it shouldn’t just be expected. If people choose to travel further than they need to, then that’s their prerogative as it’s their hobby, but it shouldn’t just be an expectation and eject teddies when people refuse, as I have witnessed over the years, with the respective Wing Staff acting like petulant teenagers towards the members of staff. It’s the ‘offending staff’ that seem nonplussed and Wing etc that seem put out.

2 Likes