Ok imagine this, you are a SNCO on a squadron and you’ve witnessed some cadets really progress over the past few months, so you go to your CO and recommend them for promotion.
But then, he decides to promote a different cadet because “He is getting old”, right I’ve got a few issues with this:
If he joined cadets at the age of 17, that’s his fault
Promotions should never ever be given to a cadet because of their age
I don’t think he actually wants to be an NCO and their are other cadets much more worthy.
Blame the system not your CO. Eleven years ago a group who IMO didn’t understand, decided that to stay over the age of 18 you had to be of worth to the Corps and unless you have a rank, leading cadet or above and ticked a couple of other boxes, many won’t get signed on. Your CO is doing what they should do, which is look at all 17 year olds and start thinking about them as potential staff, maybe this is why he’s been promoted.
I’ve promoted many since the LASER Review, which spawned this notion, who a few years before it I wouldn’t have, because I saw them as potential staff. They would have still been potential staff just not promoted. Of these 6 are in the Armed Forces, 3 are staff on other squadrons, 3 are staff with me, one is a CGI and a few left. If I hadn’t done what I did, I reckon the ATC would be down 7 staff. Of course you can always rant about your CO, but as all those ex-cadets who’ve crossed into staffdom have said, as a cadet you just don’t understand it properly.
If he joined cadets at the age of 17, that’s his fault[/quote]
If that’s the case he should not have been allowed to join anyway - the upper age limit for joining is 17th birthday, ACP20 PI501 refers.
[quote]GHE2 wrote:
Blame the system not your CO. Eleven years ago a group who IMO didn’t understand, decided that to stay over the age of 18 you had to be of worth to the Corps and unless you have a rank, leading cadet or above and ticked a couple of other boxes, many won’t get signed on[/quote]
…just wait until the leaving age drops to 18 then! Its coming.
Can’t come soon enough IMO, as we might start treating adults like adults and not this monumental balls up we got landed with of 18 year olds being treated like 18 year olds in terms of needing a CRB and at all other times being regarded the same as a 13 year old.
Not any more, but under the initial “LASER Review” they had to be SNCO. That criterion was dropped and the timescales were adjusted after a few years.[/quote]
Maybe not, but I’ve found it bloody hard justifying those who didn’t have a rank. So it is IMO best practice to promote them.
in the old, old days, we had a girl who joined at 17 ( i think - she may have been a bit older - i remember her leaping from Cpl to CWO…), CWO at 19 and 11months and stayed on until she was 22. she still couldn’t march on the day she left…
i like the simplicity of ‘under 18 is a cadet, over 18 is staff’.
It is easy to understand and everyone knows where they stand … can’t have that in the ATC/ACO.
BUT I can’t help but think if this comes to pass HQAC will fiddle and tinker and make from being a 17 years and 365 day old cadet to an 18 year old adult member of staff an horrendously, convoluted administrative exercise, with all manner of caveats and so on, like the Corps’ doing them a favour by letting them make the transition. Lord knows people coming off the street are treated shabbily enough, so why these cadets wouldn’t be made to suffer eludes me. My wife has often commented; how do we ever manage to get staff, let alone keep them. She sees the frustration in me as I’ve contacted WIng or a WSO for the umpteenth time and got no response, when I have people going through the process and then my annoyance when I’m told it’s my fault it’s taking so long.
Why? Because I have become increasingly frustrated by self-serving administrative processes that do not benefit the volunteer staff and highlight it. I cannot believe that, other than yourself, seemngly, volunteer staff aren’t equally frustrated and annoyed.
We were told at the COs Conf and has been alluded here that there are staffing problems at HQAC. Frankly why they don’t move admin processes to local offices, it what they did with us when our head office was ‘downsized’ 11 years ago and through various staff leaving we now do practically all of the admin work for the dept and it does seem to work a lot better as we aren’t waiting for someone to rubber-stamp paperwork or do things that we could.
Why? Because I have become increasingly frustrated by self-serving administrative processes that do not benefit the volunteer staff and highlight it. I cannot believe that, other than yourself, seemngly, volunteer staff aren’t equally frustrated and annoyed.
We were told at the COs Conf and has been alluded here that there are staffing problems at HQAC. Frankly why they don’t move admin processes to local offices, it what they did with us when our head office was ‘downsized’ 11 years ago and through various staff leaving we now do practically all of the admin work for the dept and it does seem to work a lot better as we aren’t waiting for someone to rubber-stamp paperwork or do things that we could.[/quote]
Probably because you bring nothing new to this forum. Your arguments are always anti-establishment. You seem so annoyed yet can’t live without the ATC. You want the moon on a stick. Nothing that is brought in meets your approval (despite others being happy). You are ignorant of the challenges faced by a reducing workforce at all levels of the chain of command. You are ignorant of the political drivers which mould the organisation. You are annoyed that you haven’t personally been consulted or asked for your approval despite being 1 of 10,000 yet your peers and colleagues who represents you in focus groups have and you think their input isn’t worth the paper it’s written on. Your must walk with such a limp given the size of the chip you carry.
Part of me thinks you are no longer in the organisation after being sacked for something and you only come on here to whinge about it to make you feel better.
Why? Because I have become increasingly frustrated by self-serving administrative processes that do not benefit the volunteer staff and highlight it. I cannot believe that, other than yourself, seemngly, volunteer staff aren’t equally frustrated and annoyed.
We were told at the COs Conf and has been alluded here that there are staffing problems at HQAC. Frankly why they don’t move admin processes to local offices, it what they did with us when our head office was ‘downsized’ 11 years ago and through various staff leaving we now do practically all of the admin work for the dept and it does seem to work a lot better as we aren’t waiting for someone to rubber-stamp paperwork or do things that we could.[/quote]
Probably because you bring nothing new to this forum. Your arguments are always anti-establishment. You seem so annoyed yet can’t live without the ATC. You want the moon on a stick. Nothing that is brought in meets your approval (despite others being happy). You are ignorant of the challenges faced by a reducing workforce at all levels of the chain of command. You are ignorant of the political drivers which mould the organisation. You are annoyed that you haven’t personally been consulted or asked for your approval despite being 1 of 10,000 yet your peers and colleagues who represents you in focus groups have and you think their input isn’t worth the paper it’s written on. Your must walk with such a limp given the size of the chip you carry.
Part of me thinks you are no longer in the organisation after being sacked for something and you only come on here to whinge about it to make you feel better.
There. I said it.
[dons flame suit][/quote]
I can assure you that I am very much still in the organisation.
I am more than aware of the effects of reducing workforces, but it isn’t an excuse for not doing things. If the ACO was a business the attitudes expressed though the CoC as to why things aren’t being done, would have seen it go out of business. It seems that it lives in the public sector bubble and therefore it’s OK.
As a sqn cdr it is me who has to be piggy in the middle when staff paperwork especially for applications and extensions. I’ve had to encourage CIs going through the system and people applying for uniform posts not to give up after you send it off and when you dare to ask why it’s taking so long, get your knuckles rapped, To the best of my knowledge there are a dozen staff waiting for promotions and transfers to happen on Bader becuase apparently Wings can’t do anything until its been rubber stamped at HQAC. My own extension went in in February for thiis Sumer and a clasp application in April. I don’t expect to hear anything until the autumn. I’m not going to bother chasing it, if Im told my extension hasn’t gone through and I’m suspended, I get a few weeks off. Not a real loss to me.
Take a look at the CI to SNCO thread to get a flavour. Reading them I do get a warm feeling that it’s not just us and everyone is affected.
There have been many discussions about staff recruitment and retebtion on here and face to face and time and again the admin process is very much at the centre of the problem.
Someone somewhere is either agreeing to and or inventing these admin processes, that they are not able to service expediently. I would suggest the line managers at HQAC are not protecting their staff enough from this and allowing chaos to reign.