i am sure when it comes to shooting our CO has little, if any, understanding. as a Sqn without weapons it isnt in his immediate personal interest on a Sqn level to know what is required. he can sit back knowing anything we do will be with another Sqn which is geared up for training/shooting and if things go wrong are more likely to be the fault of that OC than his
i would say this is true for DofE, Comms and classifications for our Sqn. everyone has their little empire with the CO doesnt need to know about just make sure the obvious bits are doneâŚ
[quote=âsteve679â]⌠he can sit back knowing anything we do will be with another Sqn which is geared up for training/shooting and if things go wrong are more likely to be the fault of that OC than his
i would say this is true for DofE, Comms and classifications for our Sqn. everyone has their little empire with the CO doesnt need to know about just make sure the obvious bits are doneâŚ[/quote]
I agree steve679, but the OC still retains a degree of responsibility and accountability for his own cadets and staff, even if someone else organises the detail of activity.
and that can simply be by ensuring the Sqn Shooting officer/AT/other Officer is over seeing the shooting/AT/other event and that the OC would step in if someone inappropriate started stepping out of line/on someones toes
Ah, but do they really? They may be cadets and staff allocated to the squadron the OC currently runs but they are accountable to the chain of command in the same way that the OC is. They can watch what happens under the control of their subordinates at their unit, but less easily control things which happen at other units or levels of the organisation.
Around here it is not unknown for cadets taking part in inter-region sports to do so without the squadron being made aware - they are contacted directly by the regional sports officer and everything is arranged with them directly. While a bit rude it is probably quite legitimate. The advent of Bader SMS activity entries should make the anonymity less likely if the squadron is keeping a close eye on things but it can still be missed. This isnât unique to sports either.
There will certainly be an expectation by parents that the OC will be in the loop for any cadet activity that little Johnny or Jenny may be involved in; after all, they joined a specific squadron. Expectations aside though, is that genuinely how things should be dealt with?
On the staff side, although I serve on one particular squadron (Iâll ignore my wing role for the purpose of argument), I do not seek the approval of my OC when I choose to attend camps, courses, ranges or any other activity, nor would I expect them to start trying to dictate what it is I spend my time on. Potential clashes and subsequent staffing shortfalls are de-conflicted as you would expect in any good team but the decision is mine.
Very similar situation to Incubus. Whilst I donât expect my staff to seek my approval for things, I ask that they tell me theyâre on them. That way at least I know that theyâre âon dutyâ should something go wrong, I donât want to sound like a total muppet when I get the phone call saying theyâve been hurt!
I think congratulations should be sent to any Squadron that is having to endure the way some of you have mentioned.
But I would counter with my support for Cygnus Maximus here.
We are the ACO. We shouldnât let this situation arise. There are probably thousands of excuses as to how this happens around the entire organisation and they are probably all valid pr Sqn. But again, I say this shouldnât have to happen.
Clearly, there isnât the manpower out there to fill the slots so, someone, somewhere has to see that something needs to be done.
We can happily moan and have a laugh about it. We can happily just get on with it which is what Officers, SNCOâs CIâs and Cadets have done since time immemorial, but that doesnât make it OK; it shouldnât make it acceptable.
I again send my heartfelt well doneâs to the Sqnâs that endure this but for their staffâs sakes and most importantly the Cadetâs sakes, we must recruit adult staff. Otherwise, these members of staff will eventually get to the âenoughâs enoughâ ethos and jack it all in. Then we are back to square one again.
although i need not ask permission to do things on a Sqn level which the Sqn is known to be involved in my OC has in the past put his foot down
any courses a Staff member goes on needs OC approval, from BASIC and first aid to RCO and ML level we cannot put our names forward to Wing for consideration without his approval, same goes for annual Camps
in the past he and told staff âyour not going on that eventâ although in their defence it has typically been a decision based on welfare where the staff member has simply been doing so much that the OC has basically given forced âleaveâ to avoid burning the staff out
one such staff member on our Sqn is like this. an active member of the Wg Road Marching team, and on weekend events with the Sqn they have been told on more than one occasion they did not have OCs approval to attend a weekend event
i work fairly closely with another local Sqn due to links with their staff who happily accept an extra pair of (competent) hands. i dont take any of my cadets along, simply because of the logistics and PITA it would become but have to ask âpermissionâ to attend - in truth i am informing OC i am on duty, but it is definately an ask and expect a yes, rather than tell the OC what is happening.
[quote=âtango_limaâ post=14414]I donât have a dog in this fight really, but I think itâs odd people rocking up to events without it going through their CO.
What happened to the chain of command?[/quote]
My view on this one⌠squadron comes first, I have no issue staff attending courses/activities as long as they consider the squadron in their plans and dont have the attitude of âothers will deal with itâ (for example, volunteering to be directing staff at an event but not considering how the squadronâs cadets will get there).
Otherwise people are more than welcome to fill their boots, but its nice to get a nod that theyre doing something âoff pisteâ.
I donât care what people do as long as they let me know and as said doesnât conflict with anything weâre doing.
I think itâs a good thing to encourage, as it gives them an interest, chance to develop/learn/pass on skills and knowledge, network with others and also show there is more to the Corps than our sqn.
[quote=âddr61â post=14434][color=#ff0000][b]GOING BACK ON TOPIC >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
[/color]
[/b]Does anyone else have an unusual Sqn Set up?
'tis a simple question
;)[/quote]
My last unit had a WO as Acting OC (Still does in fact.) Me (Pilot Officer) as Adjutant, another Pilot Officer as Training Officer and a Flight Lieutenant attached to the unit, but on a primarily wing role. Then 2 Sergeants in their normal roles.
There were never any issues, the WO and myself took parades as and when, he saluted me when he walked into the office we shared. We did all the jobs effectively. No dramas. The main reason was that it made much more sense to put the squadron in the hands of an experienced WO, than a brand new Pilot Officer 4 days out of OIC who may get a job and disappear imminently. (As I did in fact.)
[quote=âddr61â]Does anyone else have an unusual Sqn Set up?
'tis a simple question[/quote]
Indeed it is; however, whatâs the intent of your OP? You said yourself :
So where do you want to go? A list of whoâs got what loony set up? Or maybe just a simple Yes or No would suffice? Or as GHE2 said is it just a âplaygroundâ comment?
As you effectively stifled the debate straight away on why the Sqn set up you have is wrong, people have ended up discussing other aspects around it, such as issues of ultimate command and responsibility, and the chain of command itself, which are all very relevant to your OP.
Maybe DDR61 simply wants to know if anybody else has a non-standard setup. It might be a gauge to how prevalent they are or a lead-on to discussions on whether they have experienced problems. It could even be purely out of interest.
I saw the âstiflingâ comment as a means to steer the conversation as they wished it; a means which appears to have been largely ignored
The problem as I see it Incubus is that because of ddr61âs comment, there is no conversation about the OP itself. As a result, people have discussed parallel or related issues.
I donât think we should second guess what ddr61 wants out of this, hence my comment. But people want to discuss things, thatâs surely one of the aims of this site.
