Dire ATC CFAV decline, recruitment, and retention

There is still NEP

NEP - I’m probably going to leave but can I take some time? Formal process & way to keep or retrieve volunteers who are leaving with max 12 months.

The Non-Effective Pool is a formal transfer process so you loose all your system access etc.

LOA/Leave of Absence - I need to take some time out/away but I want to come back - informal process for welfare max 3 months & mainly do the 12 hr rule doesn’t apply.

What needs to happen:-

NEP- automated email once a month to those on NEP cc-ing WExO & OCWg. Should be followed up both a phone call just to check in on people.

LOA - email from Wg once a month keep said person in the loop and critically also a phonecall (or email) from designated SPOC once every two weeks checking on Welfare.

Suspensions - should be like NEP but it should also included the RC who confirms the necessity of the suspension each month.

1 Like

This is just not true anymore. It all changed in March. NEP was removed, and replaced with ELA.

You now have “Voluntary Absence” which is an semi-informal thing that OC Wing can sign off for up to 3 months:

Wg COs/HQ 2FTS may grant a CFC officer voluntary absence from RAFAC duties for sickness, maternity/paternity leave or any other personal reason, however, individuals wishing to take a voluntary absence exceeding 3 months in duration should apply for an Extended Leave of Absence (ELA) via the volunteer portal.

And then you have ELA, which is for between 3 and 12 months off and signed off at a regional level:

It is acknowledged that balancing work, life and volunteering commitments can be challenging and, at times, extremely difficult. To help safeguard volunteers at times when balancing these commitments becomes detrimental to their welfare, CFAVs may apply to take an Extended Leave of Absence (ELA) from their role(s) in the RAFAC.

(and in the spirit of naming sources, that’s ACP 20!)

3 Likes

Ok fab - sorry didn’t twig as it was still showing NEP on sms!

Probably will indefinitely. I assume once we finally (one day?!) move completely over to Units etc it’ll be sorted

2 Likes

Optimistically fixed that for you :joy:

1 Like

6 Likes

I feel like the protection of military-related data alone should be enough to pique @Cab 's interest, let alone the not making any attempt to retain CFAVs - as far as I’m concerned, that is a breach of core Corps duties.

It was well over a month, IIRC, after my formal resignation before my systems access was revoked. As I said at the time, it’s a good job I’m not a malicious actor because there’s a lot of very juicy information stored in SharePoint that could cause some significant headaches should such an individual retain access beyond the time they need it.

@Farmerdan -I know you had a bit of a fun time late last year, earlier this year. I hope that everything is settling for you now in spite of the lack of caring from RAFAC about your mental wellbeing.

2 Likes

Never seen that published, mushrooms, darkness comes to mind

Are you still talking, you are like a petulant child who always wants the last word, we are not employed, you haven’t proved any different and not adding any value to the discussion so happy trolling

2 Likes

Only thing ive learnt is someone is upset that they are upset they arent a pretend officer anymore

1 Like

To be fair VR(T) /CFC commissioned officers are real officers.

It’s just in the same way that miniature/model railways are real railways….

Just because you’re a narrow gauge steam train doesn’t make you an intercity 125

6 Likes

It needs to be at least 3x that big

To be fair, we’re much more pretend now than we were.

6 Likes

Similar to this, why go to the effort of bringing civilian committee members into the organisation to only give them a lesser DBS that prevents them offering any support to the unit in terms of staff numbers?

Because they’re responsible for fundraising, not for supervising cadets.

Just ignore the occasions where the cadets are assisting with fundraising, because that shouldn’t count and it makes total sense to take up CFAV time additional to committee member time.

And don’t consider that a prospective CFAV needs their level of DBS before even being in the building, but CWC can be in the building with cadets for their duties despite not having the same level of check.

10 years in for me and I feel exactly the same. I have now decided to stick to only sqn activities and things that I like. An attitude that I know some will disagree with, but my wing is so poorly led with a Wing Commander who is just a mirror of TK, I find it incredibly hard to engage outside of my unit. I hope that change at the top will mean positive change filters down, I have a small amount of optimism left, so lets see…

4 Likes

why would people disagree with it??

I am 20 years in and this has been my mantra from the start.
I support the events of the unit i am on, i attend the camps which interest me, and support the wing events i like and enjoy, which has included teaching at a “Wing level”

we are volunteers and not duty bound to do anything we don’t want to - of course some of those things like mandatory training (ACTO099) is not negotiable but the rest is up to the individual to consider.

4 Likes

30 years for me and i’ve always covered my Sqn activities, and others that interest me. With activities dropping faster than the SU-34 attrition rate, life was becoming quite peaceful, but now FC is back on table I’m being invited to things left, right, and centre…

This is really valid.

The organisation needs to appeal to its volunteer staff just as it needs to appeal to potential cadets.

Don’t do anything you don’t enjoy, or you’ll come to hate it and leave.

1 Like