That new policy in ACP 20 allows wing commanders chance to get rid of the ones who aren’t doing their job. It’s a positive move and should see some changes in a lot of Wing and Region posts given time.
You have a weak Wing Commander or you’re jealous you’re not a WSO. When I’ve held Wing posts the expectations have always been that if it is a whole wing parade or similar then WSO should lead the way and all be there.
If it’s another specialism that is running something that doesn’t explicitly require me or isn’t in the area of not running due to lack of staff then I wouldn’t attend. As was mentioned above, an SME will be expected to attend all of their own stuff through out the year and if they aren’t doing enough in that role to fill up their time then they are probably not delivering and need to move on.
I became an OC super quick from going into uniform;
CI : 5 Years
Sqn Officer : 3 Months
OC : 23 Months & counting (Have just moved to my local Sqn)
18 Months ago the wing advertised for 3 x Sector Commanders, there were a total of 7 applicants interviewed;
5 x Sqn OCs
1 x Sqn Off (Ex OC)
1 x WSO
3 of the Sqn OCs were appointed as WSC, the other 2 & WSO were made dep WSC. Sqn Off took on a seperate WSO role, which has now been dropped as they have become a Sqn OC again.
The 2 OCs made DepWSCs, one is now NEP and the other has dropped the DepWSC (if they ever really picked it up)
All 3 WSCs if rumour is to be believed are looking to drop this role and move on, for a mixture of reasons;
Unable to effect positive change within the Management Team
Work commitments that led to standing down as an OC also impact on WSC
Family commitments / more interesting role which would retain Sqn Ldr now available
Bottom line, I don’t think, in our wing at least these WSC roles have been made engaging & fun enough for people to want to do for an extended period of time, as they are primarily and admin role. Since we introduced WSCs I think I’ve only had 1 good one that really wanted to make the sector idea work.
On a personal note, there is only 1 role on Wing Staff that interests me in the long term and that would be acting as a Training SME for Shooting which is the area I really enjoy. But I suspect that is likely to be at least 5 years away as I enjoy being a Sqn Cdr and will need the incumbent to complete their “tour”.
What I really want to start seeing is people doing their time as an established Flt Lt / Sqn Ldr and then reverting to a Sqn Off role as a Fg Off, rather than either moving upwards/sideways or leaving altogether.
As a Wing we are so understaffed we are struggling to fill an vacant roles that we have as either OC Sqns or Wing Staff Roles.
One of the key words used is “career”.
This word suggests a job something where the progression means something outside the bubble. I’ve never seen the Air Cadets as this sort of environment and only engenders a mind set of “do you know who or what I am”. The sort of people we invariably get are 3 types, people mostly young ex-cadets who are only interested obsessed with rank and title (progression for the sake of progression), which is not a recipe for success, but in our bubble these people ingratiate themselves on those who they think will aid them and run around being “invaluable” doing all the jobs people avoid. Secondly we get people who are mates of someone close to the top and we all know what that means and thirdly those who are in jobs which IMO don’t it for them, so they use the ATC as an almost surrogate to bolster the esteem their job doesn’t give them. There are a very few who progress and are worth their salt, but not very many in my experience.
I don’t think it is right that people are almost forced to do something and then going back or not, as the suggestion of time limiting roles implies. I’ve never seen this around industry and is a not a recipe for anything good. I’ve seen this ‘genetic engineering’ over the years, someone normally a sqn cdr is made the suggestion of going onto Wing, just to get them out of the sqn cdr post. These are thoroughly miserable in the Wing role and never really engage and either bin the ATC or go back to a n other sqn.
Overall as in the real world how far people “progress” is down to them. I know a few people teachers and coppers who have avoided ‘promotion’ and remained at the coalface.
Not everyone wants to climb the greasy pole, just do what they want to do, this is what the ATC should be like than trying to be like a job, no matter how much it feels like it might be. But the people in the ATC seem to place too much kudos on rank/position. I do think however the models suggested are mimicking the Armed Forces where it seems people (mostly officers) “do a job” for a couple of years then move on, but as in many things this line of thought ignores the fact we are not the Armed Forces. I think if they could get away with it, they would have people move around squadrons every couple of years.
In our Wing they advertise wing roles like they are a job with an application and interview, which since they started doing it has been a pointless exercise as the jobs are very specific and applicants come from a very small pond. When we were told about this it was to get away from the perception of ‘jobs for the boys/girls’, but it hasn’t.
Believe me the last thing I ever am is jealous, be that job, hobby, money or possessions. This is a slippery path that leads to nowhere good. If more people were happy with their lot, I feel the world would be a better place.
I just feel that in the ATC the playing field should be level, as Sqn Cdr I turn to things out of a sense of duty and expectation and IMO WSOs should do the same. We all have real world things that get in the way of the ATC which I accept, but “I’ve been doing umpteen ATC things and need a break”, nah. Stop doing those things.
That is also my experience. My wing will advertise some roles, but not others. It’s very much like a cabinet reshuffle.
We have a WSO who, in fairly short order, has been the Development Officer, the First Aid Officer, the Media Communications officer, and VQ Officer. We had a Sports Officer moved to be the Aviation Officer (despite having no aviation experience and the depAvO working in aviation), the Music Officer who was made the special projects officer, despite there being no projects… I could go on.
The net result is that we have, and have had, some very mediocre post holders.
Unfortunately, the Wing Commander is in a bit of a bind. There is very little spare capacity in the wing staff wise (thanks to their policy of treating people like dirt), so taking experience staff from a Sqn may result in a closure.
Special projects = gofer someone desperate to be on Wing.
As for people not having subject knowledge, not too sure if this is a problem. 30-20 yrrs ago we had a succession of PEdOs as was, who had no real interest in sport, but they were ‘extreme organisers’. They appointed 2 people to be ‘in charge’ of each sport and the PEdOs did all the admin and chasing. The previous PEdOs all seemed to do a sport as well as the main job. A mate of mine had been doing Rugby and Football and I remember him saying it took a load off the people in charge of the sports.
How many Region and Corps CFAV filled roles have people in them who don’t have a background in the subject.
I honestly had to walk away from this when I originally posted it. Not only has most of this not really answered my original question, there’s a lot of judgement in the responses, and a lot of negativity towards people who want to move into a wing staff roles. Where does this come from and why is it there?
From my perspective, part of the motivation for wanting to move “up” (I use quotes because it’s not about the status, it’s about the specifics of the role) is that as a new OC when I first took the role, a supportive and effective wing staff member was absolutely key in helping my development (and the consequential development of my squadron) – my enjoyment of the OC role has reached a natural end after a number of years (intransigence is not my style: I’ll never be the type of person to do the same thing for decades on end), but I still have a lot to give to the organisation and would like to move into something that I’ve not yet tried, as well as give back to the staff some of the support that I had in the early days of running a squadron. I am constantly thinking up new ideas for how things could be done, and the frustration of not being able to do anything about these ideas is burning me out.
My frustration comes from the fact that the opportunities to do this have been so limited (“cabinet reshuffle” is an apt term for my wing, too) - and so the choice becomes that I either stay in a role I no longer enjoy (and that, to be honest, is also no longer remotely compatible with my life circumstances, which is why an additional secondary role isn’t the one for me) and do it well enough but become increasingly frustrated/unhappy, or I call it a day and leave the organisation for pastures new (which I don’t want to do, because I know I have more to offer that will benefit the cadets, if less directly than before). At the end of the day, if this were my day job, no one would bat an eyelid if I left one job for progression: it’s just that the opportunities here are so limited - we, too, get told it’s because there aren’t enough staff but that seems like a catch 22 because if OC Wing tries to hold people in roles they don’t like, they’ll leave anyway and exacerbate the problem.
I think the following is the opposite of what the vast majority of WSO are:
it would seem you have been in the minority by having a supportive and useful WSO on your side.
In my experience they are not always like this - and stories from around the Sectors in the Wing show that “ours is no better than the rest” with often one exception (in our Wing at least)
We have one WSO who people would happily have as the Wg OC, they have ideas, put them into place, bring their Sector Units along on the ride and make a great day/weekend/training course out of the event - whatever that might be.
others however are either not seen (either because they have no time, or have only time for a “favourite” or struggling Squadron) or only seen when it suits them when it creates work for the OC or the Sqn Team.
This may be a visit to complete an audit check or some other aspect which ties up the OC and/or another CFAV that evening for a paper-exercise tick box. and is often an inconvenience to the training programme - not directly but by tying up that CFAV for the evening.
if the experience of a WSO is more the latter than the former that is why many have a negativity towards them!
Particularly if they approach things like they have forgotten what it was like being an Sqn OC, yet in short all they are is a messenger for the Wg OC who can’t see everyone.
the above is centred around a Sector Office, but if you take a specialist role, be that Shooting, AT, First Aid, Radio or an-other, as a primary or secondary role, if that person isn’t passionate about the topic that subject area within the Wing becomes a real struggle, and for those units who can’t be self-sufficient in that topic almost and impossibility.
In my opinion SME WSOs should be visiting a Squadron once a year to show their face, and see the Sqn faces and make the connections. It may not be required on some units, who perhaps run their own canoeing expedition and so a visit from the WATTO would be of little benefit, but that unit may be stuck in the 70s when it comes to radios and could well appreciate a visit from their Radio Officer.
I may be unique/in the minority in this regard, but is perhaps another reason why SME WSOs are seen in a negative light. “all they do” is put together a training weekend 3-4 times a year…
Whilst I wouldn’t say my outlook is negative exactly, I would say that my view is fairly cynical. The problem is, if you have a couple of poorly performing WSOs, the resultant crud tends to overshadow the good work of the rest. No-one tends to notice the staff officer who just keeps plugging away in the background, planning and executing great training - until they leave, that is.
I once had the Wing Radio Officer tell me that “…of course, I’m a wing staff officer now, I have the power to shut your station down.” about 10 times in 1 conversation, whilst managing to avoid answering the 1 question I called him up to discuss. That glut of self importance, coupled with the lack of any help put me off trying to organise silver level courses. And completely overshadowed his predecessors good work in trying to make radio more accessible for all.
It doesn’t help if you have a weak Wing Commander who refuses to chop the dead wood out, and replace it, for whatever reason. Or who thinks that being a SME at wing level also qualifies you to carry out investigations and inspections, and you have to watch, lets say, the DofE officer bungle up a cadet complaint to the point where initial interviews still hadn’t taken place six months after it was reported…
cynical is a good word - far more meaningful than negative.
and all because of this…
i think a “bad”/poor performing OC is easier to handle as there is often a team behind them putting right what the OC isn’t doing (or doing poorly) as a result the negativity of the OC doesn’t shine so bright.
once at WSO level - there is no team to knock off the rough edges of negativity and all the “poor” elements that they had at OC (or Sqn Officer/Staff member) are exposed without the filter that was present at the Squadron level
Sort of. Everything you describe happens in my wing, too – and also are, honestly (and often frustratingly), the majority. Occasionally it is genuine nastiness or narcissism, but most of the time it seems as though it’s the sort of incompetence that results from people being in out of their depth and not being given the support they need to do the job well.
That doesn’t mean I should assume poor intent for everyone in those roles, though: aren’t we at risk of burning out the good ones (or turning them to uncaring passivity) by making broad generalisations, or operating on a ‘evil until proven good’ mentality?
The benefit of seeing the effectiveness of one good ones is precisely what motivates me to want to move into that kind of role – because the difference made to the wider cadet (and staff) experience can be hugely positive and way more far-reaching than being on a single unit.
I would, however, rather that if people were going to bad mouth me if I were in such a role they picked on me for my actual personality flaws than assumptions about the ‘position’
… As an OC if a WSO turns up to my unit uninvited or with less than one parade-night notice, I expect them to work around our pre-existing plans for the night. If a WSO officer books themselves in in advance, agreed with the OC and the OC subsequently fail to organise their staff/programme around it (short-notice staffing emergencies notwithstanding: that reverts to making the WSO work around you), that’s an issue with the way the squadron is run. No one likes an audit check (and my opinions on the bulky, outdated nature of our admin processes are pretty strong), but if you’re doing all your admin properly, they don’t take long (and if you’re not doing it right, you shouldn’t be taking that out on the person checking it).
Does it? Doesn’t that say more about your outlook on the world than it does about them?
Perhaps it does, perhaps it doesn’t. Once bitten, twice shy and that sort of thing.
1 incompetent or malicious officer can disproportionately affect the training we deliver, and make life on a squadron seem more trouble than it’s worth. I’m not saying all WSOs are bad, far from it. However, in the decade plus years I’ve been an OC, it’s the bad apples that stick in my mind, and it’s those experiences that guide my cynicism. Believe it or not, when I was commissioned, I was very supportive of the WSOs. Unfortunately, years of bad management, abuse of rank, bullying and incompetence from a small proportion of staff officers has left me somewhat disillusioned with a structure that I originally understood to be there to support squadron commanders.
Edited to add: If you’re looking for practical advice on how to move on, then I would suggest starting to organise camps (if that’s your thing) for the sector, building up relationships with other staff in the wing, and keep a record of your success (or if you’ve already done that, list them retrospectively). Approach the Wing Commander and make them aware that you feel you are ready for a new challenge. Also, make sure you succession plan, and have someone ready to fill your shoes on the squadron - make your promotion an attractive and easy option, not one that effort from the Wing Commander to achieve.
well there you go then - if you have those examples in the wing - are those OCs under those WSOs positive or negative about their experience?
no - not at all - the good ones shine through before that. The ones who were great/exceptional OCs and become WSOs are known entities. they have built their name and reputation as an OC and so preceeds any time as a WSO.
The better WSOs in our Wing are without doubt also the better OCs, and the ones who are at the opposite end of the scale were also the least successful OCs.
the distaste for WSOs comes from their past failures in previous roles and, perhaps through confirmation-bias, they live up to expectation.
and that is a very good reason to be considering the role and change in direction. i can’t disagree with it.
It would appear you are not a failing OC so unlikely to have the same negative approaches or reactions as perhaps others might
I agree with what you say about good admin = easy audit, and that prior planning on both sides it shouldn’t cause an issue.
but it is still a visit for the sake of a box ticking exercise - ie it isn’t a courtesy visit, in anyway supportive or an aid, just a tick box to report back to the Wg OC.
it may only need 20 minutes, but the WSO may know that and wish to rush off to another unit, making the most of their time and so the value of the WSO visit is limited with no direct Sqn benefit.
absolutely - see my point above re successes as a OC
the more i think about it - the section quoted above could be easily applied (without much tweaking to make relevant) not to WSOs as it is in this case but to HQAC - yet no one questions why we (CFAVs) have a distaste for HQAC and has such names as “handbrake house”, “Crandtiz” or the “Ivory Tower”
Believe me, I know all about that. If you’re female in the organisation you can probably add sexism and sexual harassment to that list. But I’m often told to ‘let it go’ when I challenge negative behaviour (including being told to ‘let it go’ that I still have to deal regularly with someone who groped me, and asked why I have ‘seem to have a problem with him’).
When I write that and look at it in black and white, I’m not actually sure I should have stayed, apart from that I think the good we can offer outweighs the bad, and that by leaving we let the toxic behaviour win.
Not enough people challenge the poor behaviour, though. I do wish more people would stick their heads up and say when something isn’t acceptable. Too many people seem to say ‘no point, nothing will change’.
Oh, I’ve already done all this already - and then some. I don’t think being unqualified is the issue (I think possibly my calling out bull**** from up the CoC might be, but that would be proving nepotism, wouldn’t it?).
First of all, I’m sorry that you’ve had to go through what you have. It is absolute sickens me that those types of things go on in our organisation. How such people manage to progress in an organisation that is supposed to provide our cadets with role models is beyond me. I only hope that you, or any one else they have done that to, reports them to the police, and the incident is investigated professionally.
Secondly, It sounds like your wing (like mine) is very much relies on your face fitting. If your Wing Commander has decided he doesn’t wan’t you on the team, then you will struggle to make progress. Have you considered moving away from your wing structure, and looking at national or regional teams? SATTs, JLs, QAIC, AEFs, VGSs all have CFAV in roles. I’m unsure of the process for joining, but is it worth emailing your “Cadet CV” out, and enquiring about the potential for joining them?
Every single Wing is about 'faces fitting and cliques, like in the workplace want to get on you have to cosy up to management and in both streams of my life that ain’t happening. This engenders a behavioural pattern of look at me, look what I’m doing, rather than cracking on regardless of getting recognition or not.
I don’t understand why within the ATC some people are all consumed about ‘progression’, it’s not like it makes any difference in the real world. I’ve commanded units for over 25 yrs and as yet it hasn’t added a penny to my pay packet, so having a Wing role wouldn’t make one scintilla of difference.
I don’t know people’s personal circumstances but a fair few of our Wing staff have been what would have been called confirmed bachelors and spinsters (not sure if these phrases are allowed anymore) or married and childless, so they only really have the ATC. There are those who are married with kiddies and hats off to them, maybe not having a sqn commitment suits them.