My concern is about complacency. I haven’t met one person who has worked with the HQAC crew over the last 15 years who has said there is any urgency to do things and general understanding of the volunteer / general life on squadrons, because the retirees don’t have that experience, which is not the general experience of us lot in our day jobs wrt our workplace SLTs. They pump out edicts and diktats that don’t have any thought for how they will work at the coalface. It’s just a case of push it out and get shirty if it doesn’t happen. Do this in the business world … be prepared to not be in business for very long.
I think MW makes some very sound points. Nothing is perfect and is unlikely ever to be so.
My thought would be that we are an organisation of approaching 60 thousand ( cadets, adult volunteers and sqn cttes) supported by very few (mostly poorly paid ) full time staff. In an ever more complex and litigious operating environment we have less full time support than ever. Over the last few years the encouagemeny for civil servants to retire/ leave and the ban on recruitment has led to a large number of gapped posts. While we should always follow Trenchard’s maxim of seeking to do more with less we actually have a full time support staff that could probably only effectively support an organisation half the current size.
I , for one, would rather take the rough with the smooth to provide the opportunities for as many young people as possible.
[quote=“celticmentor” post=22331]I think MW makes some very sound points. Nothing is perfect and is unlikely ever to be so.
My thought would be that we are an organisation of approaching 60 thousand ( cadets, adult volunteers and sqn cttes) supported by very few (mostly poorly paid ) full time staff. In an ever more complex and litigious operating environment we have less full time support than ever. Over the last few years the encouagemeny for civil servants to retire/ leave and the ban on recruitment has led to a large number of gapped posts. While we should always follow Trenchard’s maxim of seeking to do more with less we actually have a full time support staff that could probably only effectively support an organisation half the current size.
I , for one, would rather take the rough with the smooth to provide the opportunities for as many young people as possible.[/quote]
Let’s do the maths. Say approx 100 people working at HQAC? Max. Then on a good day, three per wing Hq and region Hq. 120. 220 in total supporting 55,000 volunteers and cadets. Not bad ratio really.
Depends if they get on with it and not come up with old chestnuts like “whoever deals with that isn’t in today” which I have had a lot of at Wing level when requesting “forms” and non-technical assistance over the years OR the person doing that job has left and not been replaced. This mentaility comes IMO from an ostensibly public sector obsession with demarcation and generally poor management. I think this happened the other year in the payroll section, where someone had left or something and things were let go to our detriment because no one was doing it.
In our department we cover a multitude of roles/responsibilities over and above what we do, due to “natural wastage” and people leaving and not getting replaced, because they have to be done to ensure the dept runs relatively smoothly. Also I personally find it interesting to do other things as I can do my job with relative ease and should the need arise adds to the old CV.
This is one of the most interesting threads I have read in some time and certainly raises a lot of valid points. I do wonder who these ‘retired’ people are though as the old days of crusty Retired Officers seeing out their days making life as awkward as possible for the volunteers are (thankfully) all but gone. It is true however that the majority of permanent staff in the ACO are in the relatively poorly paid lower grades, many barely above minimum wage, and the breadth of responsibilty across a Corps of this size does leave most areas woefully thin in terms of depth in staffing, e.g, permanent staff solely employed to oversee shooting = 1. Add to the the normal mix post gapping and pressures from Air Command and above (total safety - functional safety) and I would say it’s fair to say the same frustrations exist across all levels.
But there is light at the end of the tunnel, albeit it may be a fairly long tunnel that may take some time to navigate. There are currently workstrands in progress that are intended to remove un-neccessary levels of form filling and wherever possible replace the paper based systems with fool-proof electronic form versions that every volunteer will be able to access direct via BADER. The PIPE system is also under review and is to be replaced in the not too distant future by a far better on-line activity approval process that will ultimately link to remuneration.
The interface and delivery aspects of these initiatives aren’t really the most important part though; the fact that responsibilty for approvals will be delegated to the appropriate level and those qualified and empowered will have far greater ownership at the ‘sharp end’ is the real end game. This should mean that the volunteer organising an activity will have far greater control.
It won’t be overnight though. It takes time to develop these things and it may be a year or more before the first tangible improvements are seen where they count most, but they are coming. Commandant has made these a key element of her 2020 strategy and they will be delivered - to those who can bear to wait long enough to see them?