What happens when the first CFAV takes the organisation to court over discrimation based upon age or gender? They will be able to argue that they don’t need to prove the annual fitness of a regular serviceman and they will win. (Something similar happened recently with regards to the fitness test for Public Order policing)
Also as Leroy has pointed out being fit doesn’t make you thin, I am a self confessed wok smuggler and I’m still fitter than most of my cadets!
I think there ought to be some sort of basic fitness level but I don’t see it being particularly taxing.
Just something to weed out that un-fitties who can’t manage to walk from the biscuit tin in the office, to the classroom to deliver training without then having to pause speaking every 2 seconds to gasp for air.
[quote=“Gunner” post=1892]Sorry, but all this banging on about ‘I’ve got a full-time job, wife, kids, family, blah, blah, blah, cry, cry, cry’ is just bluff and smokescreen. The RAuxAF manage it so why can’t ACO staff? Auxiliaries don’t get time off work, they fit it in around their job, military training and family life.
There is simply no excuse for the fat knackers in the ACO to duck out of fitness testing and that goes for SNCO AND VR(T).
As for the consequences of not passing? Make it part of the promotion criteria.[/quote]
It’s an integral part of the Auggies training perhaps, and I don’t recall Auggies having to work 5-15 every week, then more at weekends.
[quote=“tango_lima” post=1875]Just put on some trainers, go out of your front door, turn left or right and run around the block until you’re back at your front door. Repeat until tired.
That’s how I got fit for my initial PJFT (plus doing some press ups and sit ups before bed);[/quote]
Even in my madcap school days of playing rugby, football, cricket and swimming 3 times a week I couldn’t do press ups, but then I saw them as completely uneccessary as I couldn’t ever work out in a game of rugby or football or cricket, when I’d need to do them.
As of running it’s for saddos, I did it in training and in games, but as soon as I gave up playing, running as an exercise, jog on. 
There are people who I know who run as a “hobby” and quite a few have lower joint problems across all age ranges, my manager has been off work probably 2 years (3 months for each knee ligament op) over the last 9 years with leg and knee problems - keep fit you’re ‘avin’ a laugh. His wife burnt his running shoes.
I’d sooner get out on my bike and see the world or swim. I never understand why swimming isn’t more widely used for fitness tests.
I tend to agree with Leeroy in as much I’m in my late 40s and overweight according to the statisticians, but there are a huge number of cadets all over 30 years my junior and they don’t do a ¼ of what I did when I was their age, when it comes to activity. So if HQAC think us older chaps and ladies who have a few extra pounds to carry are a problem, I think they ought to look at the cadets, who outnumber us 4/5 to 1. The number of pictures I see of cadets male and female who more than fill out a uniform, far outnumber those of staff. The problems I have seen in the last few years of getting uniform for cadets that fits are numerous. The problem is HQAC wouldn’t dare start down that route, it would be more than their combined pensions are worth to start targeting teenagers. But it’s OK to target or maybe the word is discriminate against adults over something as arbitrary as this. I think they ought to look at equality legislation as they could, if people pursued it, find themselves in an interesting situation.
It might be amusing if they really pushed this, given that many Wings are not even up to establishment for uniformed roles, if us overweight / unfit ones, said stuff it and resigned our uniformed posts. There are a few of us who have said about having an old COs CI Club as we’d be quite happy as CIs, but as to who would fill our shoes as CO, when we’re not over run with willing candidates, is anyone’s guess. Some squadrons in our Wing have been nearly a year without a CO (WSOs having to support SNCOs) until they’ve badgered some poor sod into the job, who is only doing it out of sense of ‘corporate’ need.
Sorry but that just reads so well, or maybe that’s just how my mind works.
Nuts - Daws beat me to it!
Well I’m a large individual and I wear a uniform! I take pride on ensuring it is ironed correctly and shoes are bulled to a high standard! Yes I agree those who are fitter or slimmer than I am look better I find it unfair to suggest I shouldn’t be allowed to be a uniformed member of staff.
I work hard and I am effective in my role! My boss is also a portly chap and I don’t feel it detracts from our effectiveness at all.
Yes I would like to be fitter, yes if I put some effort in I could probably be but it’s not up to the organisation I volunteer in to impose such rules! I feel some of you are blurring the line between a hobby and being in the services.
If a cadet was in trouble I would be able to get them the help they needed. As someone said earlier some fitter members of staff can’t be bothered to iron uniform or shine their shoes to the required standard, would that be more acceptable to you than a larger person who does?
We’re not talking about discrimination based on age and\or gender, we’re talking about introducing annual fitness tests for all age groups.
So long as everyone is treated the same (ie: having to undertake the testing) and there are staged fitness tests (ie: to accommodate age ranges), then any discrimination would be very hard to prove. If the appropriate changes were made to the TCOS of ACO staff, then how could they take the Corps to a tribunal?
Im not sure TA/Aux service is directly comparable. I don’t intend on getting into a willy waving contest, but I put in significantly more hours per week than most TA types I know locally. They also do just 1 “parade” night per week, I do 2. My Unit is 50 odd miles away from home, on parade nights I’m lucky to get home much before 11. Work usually keeps me busy past 6p.m. most nights, (and mornings are out thanks!)
But… I’m a racing snake type and relatively fit. I’m content that I could pass the fitness test for my age, but could see why many in a similar position could struggle.
I think there is also an issue (at least with my legal hat on) about changing terms of service post appointment - our terms are effectively a contract and I doubt HQAC legal would want to get into the faff of changing terms.
Of course if they decide to introduce it I’ll be alright jack, and I trust they’ll also be introducing a lovaly tax free bounty?
This I do agree with, but see above re changing TCOS for CFAVs - I’m sure they could screw over (I mean change TCOS of) VRT… but NCOs don’t come under the “military” umbrella that VRT do.
Not sure what you mean by ‘working 5-15’ every week. Fitness is a personal thing and Auxiliaries have to do a lot of fitness training in their own time and as I say, fit it in around everything else.
Sorry, there are just too many fatties in the ACO who give it a bad name and try to use every excuse under the sun whenever a subject like this is mentioned.
Some of them need an operation to prise the cheeseburgers out of their hands…
[quote=“glass half empty 2” post=1899][quote=“tango_lima” post=1875]Just put on some trainers, go out of your front door, turn left or right and run around the block until you’re back at your front door. Repeat until tired.
That’s how I got fit for my initial PJFT (plus doing some press ups and sit ups before bed);[/quote]
Even in my madcap school days of playing rugby, football, cricket and swimming 3 times a week I couldn’t do press ups, but then I saw them as completely uneccessary as I couldn’t ever work out in a game of rugby or football or cricket, when I’d need to do them.
As of running it’s for saddos, I did it in training and in games, but as soon as I gave up playing, running as an exercise, jog on. There are people who I know who run as a “hobby” and quite a few have lower joint problems across all age ranges, my manager has been off work probably 2 years (3 months for each knee ligament op) over the last 9 years with leg and knee problems - keep fit you’re ‘avin’ a laugh. His wife burnt his running shoes.
I’d sooner get out on my bike and see the world or swim. I never understand why swimming isn’t more widely used for fitness tests.
I tend to agree with Leeroy in as much I’m in my late 40s and overweight according to the statisticians, but there are a huge number of cadets all over 30 years my junior and they don’t do a ¼ of what I did when I was their age, when it comes to activity. So if HQAC think us older chaps and ladies who have a few extra pounds to carry are a problem, I think they ought to look at the cadets, who outnumber us 4/5 to 1. The number of pictures I see of cadets male and female who more than fill out a uniform, far outnumber those of staff. The problems I have seen in the last few years of getting uniform for cadets that fits are numerous. The problem is HQAC wouldn’t dare start down that route, it would be more than their combined pensions are worth to start targeting teenagers. But it’s OK to target or maybe the word is discriminate against adults over something as arbitrary as this. I think they ought to look at equality legislation as they could, if people pursued it, find themselves in an interesting situation.
It might be amusing if they really pushed this, given that many Wings are not even up to establishment for uniformed roles, if us overweight / unfit ones, said stuff it and resigned our uniformed posts. There are a few of us who have said about having an old COs CI Club as we’d be quite happy as CIs, but as to who would fill our shoes as CO, when we’re not over run with willing candidates, is anyone’s guess. Some squadrons in our Wing have been nearly a year without a CO (WSOs having to support SNCOs) until they’ve badgered some poor sod into the job, who is only doing it out of sense of ‘corporate’ need.
Sorry but that just reads so well, or maybe that’s just how my mind works.
Nuts - Daws beat me to it![/quote]
GHE2 - you come across as one of the most militant people I’ve ever heard. You sound just like Peter Seller’s character in the film: ‘I’m alright Jack’!
As for people throwing their 1250’s\MOD90’s into Wg HQ? Bring it on.
Merge Squadrons and up the cadet numbers of each unit establishment, recruit a new breed of officer and NCO who have the desire to represent the parent service AND the ACO in the best possible light. No more shop stewards who whinge at every little thing.
Get them all into the VR(T) under revised TCOS relating to fitness requirements and they won’t have a leg to stand on…
How’s the oxygen on your planet? :whistle:
We’re not talking about discrimination based on age and\or gender, we’re talking about introducing annual fitness tests for all age groups.
So long as everyone is treated the same (ie: having to undertake the testing) and there are staged fitness tests (ie: to accommodate age ranges), then any discrimination would be very hard to prove. If the appropriate changes were made to the TCOS of ACO staff, then how could they take the Corps to a tribunal?[/quote]
Ok, ok. Lets play this scenario out.
We have a graduated standard which takes into account of age. Fine. Someone doesn’t pass, what then?
Once upon a time in a galaxy far, far away, the TA and RAuxAF were considered to be a hobby but they still had to meet certain fitness requirements…
We’re not talking about discrimination based on age and\or gender, we’re talking about introducing annual fitness tests for all age groups.
So long as everyone is treated the same (ie: having to undertake the testing) and there are staged fitness tests (ie: to accommodate age ranges), then any discrimination would be very hard to prove. If the appropriate changes were made to the TCOS of ACO staff, then how could they take the Corps to a tribunal?[/quote]
Ok, ok. Lets play this scenario out.
We have a graduated standard which takes into account of age. Fine. Someone doesn’t pass, what then?[/quote]
The Cmdt’s letter is invoked and they a) don’t wear uniform, b) lose seniority and c) get put on a remedial fitness programme to give them the best possible chance of passing the test.
Purer than yours.
Bounties aren’t paid purely because of fitness standards but as part of achieving an annual ‘certificate of efficiency’.
[Edited to add] The bounty also represents the fact that Reserves don’t get a pension (unless things have changed) and that they don’t get the same allowances as a regular (unless they’re in theatre).
[quote=“glass half empty 2” post=1899]I never understand why swimming isn’t more widely used for fitness tests.[/quote]Because it’s a learned skill, where one’s skill level has an enormous effect on performance. Everybody knows how to run - human beings have evolved specifically for that purpose - and save for injuries or disability, everyone can run.
The over-riding fault in this is that it is arbitrary, it does not affect us as volunteers in a youth organisation doing our basic job, which is going 2 nights a week to a meeting place to babysit teenagers and do some things with them. When it boils down to it, that’s all we’re required to do, it’s not even a contract. If we were contracted in the same way as the “TA”, where there’s a call up requirement, then that’s a whole different game.
As for giving the organisation a bad name, you could say that for anyone in any job. Does being overweight and unable to do some meaningless fitness test, mean they can’t do their job? No, some of the experts and renowned individuals in my line of work, couldn’t be arsed to run anywhere and if they worked with HQAC on something they’re word would be respected.
We ought to remember we have a new boss and all new bosses like nothing other than to come in with their ideas etc and push them into policy so as to prove themselves worthy of the appointment. If we look back I don’t think one AOC (as once was) and now CAC hasn’t come in and done something, to make a mark on the organisation, good, bad or indifferent. This even comes down to squadron level, the majority of us are all guilty of it to some extent.
[quote=“Gunner” post=1912]Bounties aren’t paid purely because of fitness standards but as part of achieving an annual ‘certificate of efficiency’.
[Edited to add] The bounty also represents the fact that Reserves don’t get a pension (unless things have changed) and that they don’t get the same allowances as a regular (unless they’re in theatre).[/quote]
Neither do we… and some of us are awfully efficient dontha know.