The public struggle to see beyond us as security guards when in the public gaze, so ATC and VRT and CCF could be abbreviations of security companies for all they know or care.
I know this, as we used to collect in a shopping centre where the security wore blue-grey jumpers with epaulette slides with a printed company name abbreviation and grey trousers and all staff were asked directions and other things people bother security staff for. This has also been experienced at various things we have done over the years.
This rebadging exercise is purely and simply CACs pet project to get in with her bosses, it brings nothing to the people at the sharp end, serves absolutely no purpose and just costs money, which is in keeping with all rebranding exercises. Although none of the rebranding exercises I’ve seen at work have been organised and executed quite so appallingly as this one. Which actually shouldn’t surprise anyone who has been in the Corps for more than 6 months.
On a slight side note would the introduction of SNCOs to the CCF allow HQAC to introduce OASC without putting units at risk? Staff can be appointed to SNCOs or go through officer selection?
Hadn’t considered that; possibly, but the concern was that the SNCO role in CCFs has always been taken by the senior cadets and adult SNCOs would dilute that. My (admittedly limited) experience of ATC suggests you don’t struggle with that problem but I’ve spent little time on average parade nights - I’ve been to AFIs and the like.
We could justify it by pointing out that we have functioned for the past 76 years with 2 different sets of pins without anyone’s brains melting? All this rebrand has managed to do is undermine confidence in HQAC, spend money which could be better spent elsewhere and further damage the already fragile morale of staff members.
If they were insistent that we needed to stop wearing VRT, an argument which doesn’t hold any real weight then we should have gone to ATC or CCF as applied the same as our cadets. (What’s the point of a rebranding which leaves the staff and cadets diffferent?!)
Correct me if I’m wrong, CCF(RAF) wear the Gold RAF cap badge?
All Air Cadets could wear a silver RAF cap badge, clearly showing that they are different to RAF Other Ranks.
CCF (RAF) could wear the CCF shoulder titles and still have lance corporals, whilst the ATC gets rebadged at the RAFAC and wear that on their brazzards.
CCF (RAF) Officers wear CCF on their rank, coming in line with the other CCF services.
The ATC Officers, Adult SNCOs and the cadets all wear the same titles.
Is that too radical?
FWIW I did vote for officers under the CFC to wear ‘ATC’ or ‘CCF’ so we are the same as CCF(Army); but that wasn’t the proposal that was adopted…
NB that the CCF RN adults don’t wear ‘CCF’ titles, just the wavy navy braid; and CCF RN and SCC cadets have just had their old fabric cap badges withdrawn and now wear the regular RN metal beret badge instead.
RAF Air Cadets (RAFAC) is replacing Air Cadet Organisation (ACO) as the umbrella term for the ATC and the RAF(CCF). The ATC is still a thing; the CCF(RAF) is still a thing.
In the CCF(RAF), we wear the RAF cap badge, and have our Contingent Identifier, instead of the Squadron number and ATC Identifier.
People often ignore the CCF(RAF), and assume that RAFAC is replacing ATC - IT IS NOT.
And, just to clarify, the Commandant’s title is still Commandant Air Cadets, NOT Commandant Royal Air Force Air Cadets.
Why do you want the ATC to give up their cap badge and rebrand as RAFAC? No need, and not what is intended at all.
In fact, the whole business of squadrons thinking they are now 1234Sqn RAFAC instead of ATC is just another manifestation of the fact that many people in the ATC are unable to distinguish ATC and RAFAC - just like they couldnt’ distinguish ATC and ACO. So many documents are drafted using the wrong term.
It makes little sense to rebrand all of the staff as being 1 thing and not do the same with the cadets.
As you know I didn’t see the point to the rebrand in the first place (and was firmly in the if we are rebranding let’s rebrand us as ATC & CCF respectively), but now it’s happened in the way it has the logical step it rebrand all of the cadets as RAFAC too so that we truly are 1 organisation.
We may have become RAFAC, we may have new rank slides indicating as such, we may accept we are but the latest version of ACP020 shows it is only those VRTs who have transitioned.
Non reference of SNCO(ATC) have been replaced with RAFAC……opportunity missed?
It is higher than he thinks - a proper statement (a non-gibberish IBN, perhaps?) needs to be made sooner rather than later so we have a consistent approach from now.
Tidying up all of the associated forms and documents can follow as the opportunity arises. Hell, did we every completely get rid of “AWO” in the canon of literature?
