I say this as, we get qualified and get things checked when we want to do expeditions or another activity say, then they are checked by a Wing staff member who knows what they are doing and then checked by someone further up who doesn’t know anything about that activity and says its not good enough. What’s the point of doing, Lel or Bela if they don’t trust us to look after other peoples children? Start listening to the staff, Investors in people? What about value your volunteers? They dont value us at all!
2 Likes
I think what you’ve said is a very sweeping statement and not true in all cases. There are some very risk averse senior staff in this org who don’t seen to trust us at all, and there are some who believe we should be given a lot more freedom/responsibility to work, and do trust us. I think the ex RC SW and current RC North are examples at both ends of that spectrum.
I think your example of lel Bela is an interesting one. I’ll use LLA as an example as it’s what I know. Me having LLA means very little on its own. The reason we have to do an SMS application is to check everything is in order, and having qualified staff is only one part of that. HQAC have a legal duty to make sure everything is covered too. So, CPD, first aid, ratios, safeguarding, emergency planning etc etc
2 Likes
They never did
1 Like
I find it’s the middle have more trouble trusting us than the seniors and the seniors aren’t always aware of the additional barriers being put in place under “HQAC States”
The lack of trust isn’t helped by some CFAVs who are very open (certainly on here) about the fact they don’t both following the rules because what are they going to do - fire them since they are in desperate need of volunteers.
Trust is two way so in asking this question you are also asking
“Have the volunteers lost the ability to trust the people at HQ?”
and
“Have the volunteers lost the ability to trust other volunteers?”
And to all is unfortunately yes & is the unfortunate mindset we are all collectively in.
Nobody is trusting anyone.
HQ have been let down by volunteers going rogue, doing the most stupid stuff or giving assurances that then turned out not to be there.
Volunteers have been let down by HQ making top down decisions & removing responsibility from the volunteers & at the same time other volunteers have either looked to do one another’s legs in, pulling each other back into the same crab bucket & being intolerant of different ways of doing things.
I don’t know if anyone else is finding this but I’m getting very demoralised by constant debate & questioning over the interpretation of small minor rules & regulations, in effect strangling ourselves in red tape. This is coming from fellow volunteers & not HQs who are reasonably pragmatic when asked.
This lack of trust now seems to be endemic & imbedded within the organisation & it’s going to be very hard to break that mindset.
To restore trust people need reassurance, we need followship as well leadership, we need to have constructive & positive dissent. We need to manage upwards (& sideways & occasionally corkscrews & loops).
The longer I am in the organisation the more it feels that the paid staff at HQ are trying the best and even when doing the wrong thing they are doing it for the right reason.
The paid staff at HQ have their faults, but too often they are pointed at as the cause of a failure when the actual reason lies with the volunteers who don’t want to admit when they’ve made a mistake.
13 Likes
The people at HQ don’t check stuff, it’s usually checked at RHQ and WHQ level where there is a lack of trust for CFAVs.
Most issues in this org are CFAV on CFAV.
I will say the current crop of senior leadership don’t trust CFAVs and that is permeating through the organisation.
5 Likes
I’d tend to agree.
Those doing a day job just do things the way the job stipulates. There are exceptions.
The majority of volunteers are great but there are a few sad sacks that like to empire building or find a reason to say no. They tend to be more at local level and cause 90% of the headaches.
1 Like
Depending on where you are in the country the TSA’s can be of differing quality (fortunately ours is really good).
1 Like
This.
And we do seem to have a particularly inept and useless crop of CFAV OF3s and OF4s across the Corps at present.
1 Like
Hearing some of the horror stories they are faced with and accountable for both career wise and legally, based on behaviours and actions of CFAVs…i wouldnt trust CFAVs either but it shouldnt be this difficult at the same time.
I think if there was more transparency people would get some of it atleast but it definitly its the minority ruining it for the majority.
4 Likes
OC Squadron allowing more cadets to travel in a minibus than available seats 
Now no longer in organisation I hope.
It is stupidity like this that means HQAC don’t/can’t/won’t trust CFAVs. One individual causing issues for the rest of us!!
5 Likes
The BSB, SRA and CILEX regulation all publish regular reports of disciplinary action taken and I’m sure it’s the same in most other professions.
I genuinely believe if we had publication of screw ups (even if they were anonymised) with an explanation of what went wrong, what punishment was handed out and whether any policy changes are happening as a result then people would be more accepting of these restrictive policies and also less likely to risk having their rule breaking published across the organisation.
10 Likes
I thought this was what the total safety news letters were about but i havent seen one of them in years.
4 Likes
Unfortunately, this is partly driven by Squadron staff. Those who don’t read the regs, copy old admin orders and RAs and then, worse still, don’t get other staff on the activity to read what was copied. Major errors in what is produced causes trust issues.
Sounds extreme but it is reality and happens a lot.
Personally I’m happy to have paperwork checked. There are always exceptions but talk to any Wing and Region Adventure Training Officer and they will have plenty if horror stories Im sure.
3 Likes
A lot of this, though, is caused by the piss poor comms practise throughout the org and our inability to rid ourselves of old documents.
People are using old regs because they think they’re current and we’ve made it far too hard to check what the newest rules are.
6 Likes
And people in senior roles ie Sector OC or OC Wings not keeping up to date. Many times they’ve said something to me that’s flat out wrong according to policy, and are amazed when I show them current policy.
Again though, this can’t be fully blamed on them. If the changes aren’t properly communicated, how would they know? But then I question that if I know as a lowly CI, then they surely should know better.
Most organisations ive worked in have always provided a one pageer of what, how, and the impact…i dont know why we dont nationally.
1 Like
This is what IBNs/announcements should be. But instead they issue them for the most random things, and then don’t issue then for big policy changes.
4 Likes
In my experience this is mainly an issue between Sqn/Wg/RHQ especially at event planning/approval stages
I believe too many SMEs are double hatting and therefore don’t have the time/ability to do the job they should. They should be working with you to enable you to plan and get approved your activity, but a lot only look at your paperwork x days before, and if it needs amendment, you are running out of time to fix.
So, at the end of the day, it comes down to manpower. If we had more volunteers, CFAV would not have to double hat and the ability to help would improve
2 Likes
Bang on
1 Like