I was particularly taken with the idea that it was brought in to save on our volunteer admin burden 
.
Taken from the Tory school of “if I say it, regardless of real world evidence, it might somehow be true”.
5 Likes
War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery
Admin is Liberation
I wouldn’t even assign to any political party or philosophy. Bureaucratic inertia & culture is a constant of the universe.
I think we should start refering to the CACE form as a ”27B/6” 
1 Like
I can add one point - even if you have to work through the CACE faff, if you expect to need a coach for transport to / from an event, then get that transport booking in even before your CACE; if necessary, you can always cancel transport subsequently - just having a local issue (self-inflicted, not MT or Wg HQ’s fault) concerning a coach booking.
As a sqn, we haven’t had to book a coach for yonks - check in good time via your MT contact what you need to do with Clarity booking system . I think that 10 working days is the minium - don’t forget public holidays… 
,
There’s something about that third one that feels controversially familiar…
Shooting - air rifle / L144 events do not attract VA. So, no more sector shooting then.
At least they have revised “RAF units” to “Stn / Unit Visits” under Service Engagement - I can claim that change! 
2 Likes
There’s no indemnity for Bowling and Ice Skating, which I assume means personal liability for the Activity I/C if anything happens? No more bowling on camps then.
No, you must need the centres PLI. That should cover it AFAIK
Surely they would be the responsibility of the activity provider, if you get hurt bowling on Camp that’s Hollywood Bowls problem
6 Likes
What about if you get hurt going to and from?
This isn’t new; last year on station camp we were told by the ACLO that while we were free to go bowling on our own responsibility, we were not allowed to use MT as it wasn’t a camp activity and we were responsible for transport. We used school vehicles but that didn’t stop the ACLO from doing a double take when he saw us coming back, because our school minibus is absolutely identical to the MT ones…
1 Like
That is the nail on the head, RAFAC are responsible for transportation and general behavior, however the activity venue is accountable for their venue and the activity they provide, i.e if you go bowling and for e.g ya cadet was to trip over poorly maintained flooring then the venue operator would be responsible.
As for cost if its not a core activity then cadets pay themselves and cannot use public funded transportation.
Another thing you naybwant to check as it may be different, when we had a Squadron Owned Vehilcle the policy distinctively stated SOVs cannot be used for national camps.
Yes, good point, another reason the ACLO didn’t want us using MT.
I did confirm (some years ago) with our school that this was covered on our school vehicle insurance; and verbally with the other schools on camp. (They also confirmed it was OK to transport cadets from other schools.) But yes, worth checking.
That’s a weary ACLO
To be fair, I think that this is the advice given out by the MT WO when they did the MT updates over teams.
Surely on a Camp the Camp itself is the core activity, the fact that some bits of the programme are or aren’t listed in ACP300 strikes me as splitting hairs.
2 Likes
Maybe splitting hairs but them is the rules, sorry i didn’t right them.
Is this actually written in policy or what we think/what makes sense?
It was what was stated by the MT WO when we had the national teams meetings about the introduction to my drive
1 Like
I mean doing an activity we aren’t insured for as long as the provider has PLI
The same MT WO who said that before we could use an MT vehicle we had to get a signed declaration from our (day job!) employers that we hadn’t exceeded the driving hours in that week.
2 Likes