You know when morale is at rock when people stop complaining; humour stops some way before that stage!
Please don’t give the impression that they have the leeway to turn the screw some more.
It’s a bit like triage - it’s the silent casualty you have to worry about first.
Please submit a cace 3 months ahead of using hunour and sarcasm, as the laughter at public expense may last more than 3 nights and involve more than 70 people.
1 Like
Looks like as the guidance direction states “RAF bases,” our proposed visit to an RNAS station doesn’t fit that defined requirement = no public expense - we would have to pay for our own coach. All getting very difficult! 
Think I will have to challenge that definition - that would mean no public funding for visits to bases of the other Services.
1 Like
A few years ago I had an application for travel to RIAT at public expense turned down on the basis that it was not an RAF air show. We successfully challenged it.
1 Like
I’ve heard someone from Cosford on one of the official channels claiming it’s the last RAF airshow, based on the same dubious logic. Just because a show becomes so big it forms its own charity, and that charity forms an operating company, doesn’t mean it ceases to be RAF (any more than a Sqn with a CivCom ceases to be part of the ATC).
TBH I had a visit to Brize recently denied transport and VA, no reason given except ‘it’s a nice to have not core business’ - the opposite of what the matrix says. I should challenge it really but I don’t know what would be gained by it. But if others have the same experience do PM me and we can compare notes in case there’s a pattern.
3 Likes
To BZN? Our biggest RAF base? 
That has to be challenged - isn’t there an Aviation Focus that is currently being put forward?
1 Like
I can possibly understand not giving VA. But not giving transport costs is ridiculous.
2 Likes
The issue with any policies of this sort - by no means unique to RAFAC - is inconsistent application of rules and / or creation of loopholes.
I worked for a client a while back who had a policy of economy only flights to the US if the journey was under 8 hours or some such.
So staff based in their head office near London had to go economy but those from the Manchester office went business because the extra leg put it over the limit.
(Clever people booked a meeting in Manc the day before big company shindigs in the States).
2 Likes
Ah, my previous company had 'leg duration" not the overall flight times… Go via Istanbul to Dubai for example, so both flights would be in eco. Soon nipped that in the bud - stupid waste of duty time (especially if getting to final destination later than a direct flight), delayed ability to operate after rest & risk of missing connection, bags going elsewhere, etc.
You need to have biz when going to the USA - just to stress down for the inevitable hassle in US Immigration!
1 Like
Happy to discuss, if you’re applying the same way we are.
Okay, so I’ve finally had a chance to have a proper read through of the ‘CACE Interim Direction’ document, and it’s interesting. Using my earlier examples:
It would actually seem that for this, transport costs might be okay, as none of these examples would hit the CACE criteria:
- a. All overseas activity.
- b. Activities of 3 nights duration or more.
- c. 70 cadets or more in attendance.
- d. Requiring publicly funded transport that in turn requires a professional driver (including MT).
- e. Requiring a total VA to be claimed that exceeds 10 days (not per CFAV attending).
- f. Or when directed to do so.
(My italics)
Although the activities may be listed as ‘N’ for transport, CACE only makes mention of transport that in turn requires a professional driver. So would imply to me that normal 1771 is unaffected?
@tmmorris your example of being denied transport costs (I assume personal 1771?) for going to an RAF base now seems even more bizarre.
It’s sadly clear as mud. I’ll carry on claiming 1771 as normal and see what happens, but it appears these changes really should just be for larger events, that meet one of the criteria above.
1 Like
Let’s face it, ‘or when directed to do so’ is HQ’s get out of jail free. The moment wing or region perm staff decides to request a CACE whether legitimately or through misapplication of the policy, lines will be drawn, trenches dug and rather than accept any challenge they will stonewall behind that criteria.
That’s a good point. It would at least be better if that line at least said Or when directed to do so by X where X is the Region SSO/RC, or similar. It would at least help avoid any silliness at Wing level.
Wouldn’t have been a 1771 job - this was an organised visit for a smallish cadet group (20) with a VI from the ACLO, so 2 minibuses from school claiming on a mileage basis. Not a lot of money. We don’t usually claim for use of school minibuses anyway - not worth the hassle. And the school was providing a packed meal so the only claim would have been for VA for 3 staff. Could even have made it 2 staff if they insisted.
1 Like
None of that goes into the CACE criteria still. So should still be fine imo? They really need to be a bit more specific on these rules!
All seems pretty reasonable too. 3 staff for 20 cadets. Better than running right at the 1:10 limit in case there’s a problem. Self driving minibuses reduces the cost also as you’re not needing proper MT with a driver.
20 cadets get a day out at an active RAF base for a reasonable cost 
3 Likes
I did a little mental adding up this morning whilst walking el doggo.
I’ll be spending well over £1000 in Paddle UK fees this year to develop and maintain providerships which are used exclusively for the benefit of the organisation. This is what VA is used to offset - so anything affecting how much I can claim will almost certainly result in the suggestion I’m bought in as freelance instead.
Performance Coach Registration - £145
Community of Learning Event - £365
Performance Coach Assessment - £350
3 Year Standardisation - £156
Coach Award Tutor Orientation Fee - TBC
For anyone interested, Performance Coach is expected for Coach Award Tutor / Assessor role so we can started delivering Coach Award courses within the organisation.
This doesn’t account for courses mainly for my own entertainment (SUP WW Leader) but which will support tech advice to areas of organisation.
3 Likes
Can you not ask Wing/Region committee nicely to help cover these costs? It would certainly be of benefit to the organisation!
2 Likes