I would suggest that speculating about what the issue DTS is alluding to based on the scant information they wish to reveal is going to cause more issues than it will solve. We risk causing a fall out while we hunt for a problem.
Either DTS can explain what the issue they’re on about specifically, (without reference to names or locations) or we can ignore the point.
Anywho, none of this has anything to do with the defence review.
Aye, fair point.
I suppose the second question in my mind to come out of DTS earlier comment is to wonder what the heck a ‘hybrid uniform’ is, and why a defence review would be recommending one for us.
Back to the good old days. Working blue shirt, OG trousers, DPM smock
This…
The culture simply isn’t there, certainly as a dep seeing 400 or 500 kids on parade who have made an effort to be there looking the part, makes me happy
Ah yes those were the days.
58 Pattern webbing all round!
My experience says other wise…
Definitely that culture was there but I feel its certainly shifting away from that
I’ve not been in uniform that long, but I have been around for a while now, and I don’t really recognise the uniform complaints/bullying complaint.
There is a very fine line, and someone being matter of fact about why your uniform isn’t being worn correctly could be taken personally if you have done your best - so it could be very easy to accuse an enthusiastic NCO of being a uniform bully when they really are just trying to maintain standards (and ultimately stop you from embarrassing yourself if you are wearing it wrong).
Also, I can’t see how a “hub” that then has satellites is any different to having a sector HQ with squadrons dotted around. Although, if “sector HQ” is responsible for all RA’s etc etc then great stuff. Anything that takes pressure off of squadron… But if not then what’s the difference to now anyway, whatever you want to call it?
Just have one sqn. Sod the smaller units in all but the most rural areas.
If you really are someone “in the know” like you try your hardest to pretend, then you know the real problem. And the solution to that is not create more units, but to consolidate the existing ones.
Having numerous units doesn’t solve the real problem; not enough volunteers.
Or we could:
Let’s be realistic though, this is never going to happen.
Too much ■■■■ covering has to go on. Unless we no longer deliver any activities, in which case, yes, we can reduce the admin.
I know we all bang on about wanting an admin burden reduction, but it only ever gets worse. I’ve given up even thinking about asking for it. It’s simply not realistic given the culture.
Not feasible in the short to medium term. We recruit new people, send them off to their own units and then… Burn them out, they leave, and we’re back to square one.
Nope, let’s make fewer bigger units with lots of staff. Serve more cadets and deliver more of a cadet experience to each of them.
What’s going to be better, 1000 sqns of 20 cadets, or 500 sqns of 40?
We have an issue with growth. The Corps is not incentivised for it.
Although politicians and senior MOD folk talk up the benefits of Cadets, we are managed as a cost.
Partially because of the funding and support in kind (think uniforms)
In most membership organisations they work out the base cost of servicing the member add a margin or contingency on top and calculate a fee.
So more members brings in more revenue to support more investment.
That won’t be news to anyone on here but I’m not sure our higher ups really get it.
If say it costs £8/m to support a Cadet and we charge £10 or £12 or whatever the maths is we are winning and would be able to grow.
Instead we have a pot of funding and the more who draw on it the less per unit. I’m sure that drives the desire to merge and cut units. Which going back to government objectives is the opposite of what we should be doing.
well ok, I’ll rephrase to “rationalise the admin & processes and make them less time intensive”, something which the Volunteer Portal, and the move away from Universe, should make a big impact on.
So we need to be looking at the retention and reasons for burn out, alongside the recruitment (or prehaps ahead of)
Except we have two pots of funding, public and non-public. One of which our CWC at ivory towers could be doing a lot more to grow (and spend) I suspect.
That is true, but it is the MOD funding which doesn’t respond to growth as far as I can tell.
Otherwise why the pressure to close / consolidate units?
it does seem odd to think the MOD/RAF would be behind spending more money on the RAFAC due to MORE units when in their primary responsibility we are seeing fewer personnel, fewer (/reduced) aircraft numbers and less airfields, Stations and bases.
All of which in comparison are of enormous cost - and don’t fit in with the future plans or remote piloted aircraft, cyber etc etc etc.
Whereas investing in young people, in a platform that in comparison is peanuts, would still be sensible. Especially when the bulk of the organisation is worked out on a volunteer and charity basis.
I think we should go back to battledress - it was much, much smarter in my cadet days. Battledress and boots.
“BY THEE 'EFT, QUEEK MARCH!!! crunch, crunch, crunch, crunch…AAAAAAABOOOOOUUUTTTT TARN!! CRUNCH, CRUNCH, CRUNCH, crunch, crunch, crunch, crunch…”
Happy days!
yeah I see that counter argument - just odd to think on one side there are reductions and the other desires to expand
Think I still have some khaki short sleeve shirts + OGs - might try them on a sunny outdoor range day. 
I still have my OGs in the loft. But I was 15 last time I wore them. More chance of Aleister Crowley becoming Pope than me fitting in them.