HQ CCF(RAF) Conference

Adult Staff The Staff Mess
1

Having had problems getting hold of CCFHQ on personnel issues I find they are on a week long conference. What on earth are they covering on it that could take a week?

They don’t do anything as it is. They clearly had no input on the PTS and don’t seem that bothered about pushing it forwards in the CCF, are seemingly not bothered by the dearth of TEST officers or quality of TEST NCOs, ACP 22 went and wasn’t replaced with anything, the RAF annex to JSP 313 is out of date, they can never respond to emails or answer the phone and they have zero ability to protect personal data (I just lost a potential member of staff after HQCCF lost her paperwork for the 5th time, the last three having been sent recorded delivery and signed for - she’s seriously considering a referral to the ICO which I would support). I’m so tempted to hand in my resignation here and transfer back to my old ATC Squadron as the admin problems there were nothing compared to CCF.

Seriously, what is Wg Cdr CCF doing to justify his salary?

Time for him and Dawn to go before the cadets gets shut down, which may well be the MOD aim.

2

Wg Cdr CCF has only been in place appx 18months or so… So not sure he has had much to do with the new CFC…

3

My bad.I’m sure I read that he was involved in it but can’t find it now. Will edit above, though the point about what it is he actually does stands.

4

I have a vague memory that his role prior to taking on Wg Cdr CCF was as part of the CFC Project Team at RF&C.

1 Like
5

Sept 16 for 8 months he was working on the Cadet Forces 2020 strategy - May 2017 he took the CCF post…

6

Evening all, as one of the what seems to be ‘inadequate or incompetent’ TEST SNCO’s, not NCO’s as previously eluded to, (please appreciate rank and recognise it, most of ‘us’ have done more than 25 years in the military as regulars) I would like to know whether Bob the Builder would like to identify themselves to their TEST SNCO and discuss it like a man, or woman, instead of spouting off behind an alias, your choice, I only hope you have a Regt Gnr as a TEST SNCO as I doubt they will be as lenient as I am !!! Happy to discuss further regardless so please do post again !

2 Likes
8

Crikey, someone is tired! :wink:

I’m not CCF, and given your aggressive tone, I’m certainly glad that I don’t have to rely on people like you for help! You might want to tone that down fella - let’s not forget you’re meant to be managing volunteers…

2 Likes
9

To be quite blunt what does making veiled threats like that say about you? My TEST Sgt knows full well what I think of him and if we had a TEST officer the matter would be taken further but our previous one didn’t care. I know that I’m not the only one to take issue with him and other contingents have made complaints to HQ which have been ignored. I’m not saying that all are bad, I’ve seen some excellent ones out there but unfortunately there are others happily taking the money and not doing their job. I don’t know you so don’t know where you fall on the spectrum.
My apologies about the typo on SNCO/NCO, (even if NCO is technically accurate as it covers both S and JNCO)
Frankly whilst I thank you for your service from a cadet perspective I don’t give a damn what experience someone has in Baghdad as it doesn’t particularly indicate whether you would be any good in a cadet forces supporting role. And bear in mind that I have the Civilian Service Medal/Reconstruction medal from both Iraq and Afghanistan, coming under fire in both, but not being armed myself. I volunteered for those roles to be away from my family to support the military and rebuilding efforts.
I’m not going to ID myself or contingent as it would cause problems for the unit as we know how HQ responds to criticism but it would also ID the Sgt who isn’t on here to defend himself so I would prefer to leave it in the abstract.

10

Bobthebuilder lets break down what you have said;

“Having had problems getting hold of CCFHQ on personnel issues I find they are on a week long conference. What on earth are they covering on it that could take a week?”

Conference was not a a week long. Actually it took place over 3 days. Granted everyone arrived on Monday which if you like would have made it 4 days. This year it was a day longer than previous conferences. The extra day was to allow those with range qualifications to get their yearly check done. This is so to provide a better service to CCF sections.

But i can hear you say “why at the beginning of September?” Well that is simple to answer. TEST staff are busy taking leave, after working on summer camps for anything up to 4 weeks straight. I for one take leave whilst schools are on their holidays. HQ staff are busy either attending camps doing courses or on leave themselves. So first couple of weeks in September is first opportunity to get everyone together. This happens only once a year so very little impact on the schools.

This is not something new and you sound like an experienced volunteer. You would be fully aware of that.

“They don’t do anything as it is” Really? You make a comment about not naming TEST SNCO because they can’t defend themselves. But that is exactly what you have done with this this post. Bit pot kettle black aren’t we. TEST SNCO’s come from all different backgrounds in the RAF. Not all are drill kings, weapons instructors.

“They clearly had no input on the PTS and don’t seem that bothered about pushing it forwards in the CCF”

Information and handout have been sent to all CCF sections regarding the Blue Badge syllabus. Also it has been pushed out on Bader. With regards to no CCF input, but again you are wrong. This is syllabus has had input from CCF hence ATC and CCF booklets. So CCF have pushed it forward. So if you are not doing it then i would say that is a issue you need to address yourself.

"are seemingly not bothered by the dearth of TEST officers or quality of TEST NCOs, "

Unfair and persons concerned are unable to defend themselves. Even if you had put in complaints this is still derogatory. Your response "technically I am correct ". Technically is not being correct. Calling a Sgt or above is not called an NCO. Some TEST Sgt’s have not been called NCO in over 10 years. You did that for effect and to get the response you did.

"ACP 22 went and wasn’t replaced with anything, the RAF annex to JSP 313 is out of date, "

If jsp 313 is latest publication you have then that is what you go by. If information is incorrect then that is issue for HQ to address. You are following current policy even if you think it is out of date.

Personal data. As i have no idea the details of that, so can’t possibly comment. Maybe you should put a complaint in to ICO. They can investigate fully including your process.

" I’m so tempted to hand in my resignation here and transfer back to my old ATC Squadron as the admin problems there were nothing compared to CCF."

If you are that un-hapy and aggrieved, maybe you should. Sounds like that you need all that extra support that the ATC can provide.

“Seriously, what is Wg Cdr CCF doing to justify his salary?”

His salary is a issue for the RAF. The Wg Cdr is a really busy man. Constantly on the road at meetings. If there is a problem with his ability to do his job, i am sure someone a lot higher than us will have something to say about it.

“Time for him and Dawn to go before the cadets gets shut down, which may well be the MOD aim.”

Answer is same as above really. But is the Comm RAFAC not head of the org that you wish to go to from CCF? Strange!

Seems to me that if anyone’s ability’s that needs to be questioned, is yours. You seem to be heavily dependent on TEST support. This is either because of lack of confidence in your ability, lack of qualifications you hold. Basically you decided to have a faceless rant accusing everyone else to deflect attention away from your own abilities.

Now it has been mentioned many times about how we need to understand volunteers. As a volunteer myself and when i say volunteer. I don’t get paid for anything I do or even a rank to put myself on a platform and brag about!

Even volunteers have commitments they need to adhere to, this could be time and being correctly trained to carry out duties for that organisation. Biggest advantage about volunteering is you can leave easily and find something else you can do which you can enjoy.

ThomastheTankengine is name I chose in jest. But more than happy to pass on my contact details so we can discuss further.

11

can I ask quickly, as there are some TEST SNCOs on this thread

why are you called TEST???
does it stand for anything?

12

Training Evaluation Support Team. Or something like that.

2 Likes
13

Also worthy of note I believe ThomastheTankengine is the support staff ratios the CCF gets by on. Bob the Builder should be more aware of the following than most being that he has experience of both the ATC and the CCF. Bringing into question the day to day working pattern of the Wg Cdr and questioning his salary is downright disrespectful. The CCF makes up 20% of the RAFAC organisation, the willing volunteers who support the CCF at grass roots level I’m fairly certain are far outweighed as a % against cadet numbers than those in the ATC world; this observation also extends to the HQ staff. I neither have the time nor inclination to begin working out the exact figures here but perhaps BobtheBuilder merely gives a little more thought to his observations and comments regarding individuals roles/responsibilities and indeed output v’s their salary before publicly berating them.

14

Thanks

15

[quote=“ThomastheTankengine, post:10, topic:4793”]
Having had problems getting hold of CCFHQ on personnel issues I find they are on a week long conference. What on earth are they covering on it that could take a week?”

Conference was not a a week long. Actually it took place over 3 days. Granted everyone arrived on Monday which if you like would have made it 4 days. This year it was a day longer than previous conferences. The extra day was to allow those with range qualifications to get their yearly check done. This is so to provide a better service to CCF sections.
[\quote]
I have no problem with them doing training to help us. My problem is that there is no help. I’m more than happy to run things myself but when we are part of a national organisation that expects consistency then you don’t just leave contingents on their own. I said a week because the sharepoint announcement said the conference was 10-14 Sept which is a working week

[\quote] “They don’t do anything as it is” Really? You make a comment about not naming TEST SNCO because they can’t defend themselves. But that is exactly what you have done with this this post. Bit pot kettle black aren’t we. TEST SNCO’s come from all different backgrounds in the RAF. Not all are drill kings, weapons instructors.[\quote]
I accept they have different backgrounds, but when they are paid to be part of a Training Evaluation and Support Team it is disapointing when our TEST Sgt does none of those three things. In any kind of organisation you expect people to do what they are paid for.

[quote] “They clearly had no input on the PTS and don’t seem that bothered about pushing it forwards in the CCF”

Information and handout have been sent to all CCF sections regarding the Blue Badge syllabus. Also it has been pushed out on Bader. With regards to no CCF input, but again you are wrong. This is syllabus has had input from CCF hence ATC and CCF booklets. So CCF have pushed it forward. So if you are not doing it then i would say that is a issue you need to address yourself.[\quote]
The CCF specific PTS guide poster is wrong as it refers to the need to study the ATC as a subject rather than the CCF. It also refers to needing 3 subjects for senior cadet when we only need 1 and refers to master air cadet which HQ have confirmed is not available to CCF. Which is why the CCF can’t get the BTEC even if they take the exams.

ACTO73 for example is written in terms that only apply to the ATC leaving guess work as to who can sign off the awards for us. I gave up several months ago in finding out that information and we’re just doing it ourselves.

"are seemingly not bothered by the dearth of TEST officers or quality of TEST NCOs, "

[quote] Unfair and persons concerned are unable to defend themselves. Even if you had put in complaints this is still derogatory. Your response "technically I am correct ". Technically is not being correct. Calling a Sgt or above is not called an NCO. Some TEST Sgt’s have not been called NCO in over 10 years. You did that for effect and to get the response you did.
[\quote]
No, it was originally a typo not done on purpose to get a response. The other comment was tongue in cheek due to veiled threats. Maybe you want to have a word with whoever designs the RAF website as they don’t use Senior when talking about Sgts Raf.mod.uk/aircadets/who-we-are/ranks

[quote] "ACP 22 went and wasn’t replaced with anything, the RAF annex to JSP 313 is out of date, "

If jsp 313 is latest publication you have then that is what you go by. If information is incorrect then that is issue for HQ to address. You are following current policy even if you think it is out of date.
[\quote]
Agree, we follow it as best we can but it doesn’t alter the fact it’s out of date and hence causing confusion due to conflict with other documents. Updating it should be an HQ job.

[quote] " I’m so tempted to hand in my resignation here and transfer back to my old ATC Squadron as the admin problems there were nothing compared to CCF."

If you are that un-hapy and aggrieved, maybe you should. Sounds like that you need all that extra support that the ATC can provide. [\quote]

If it didn’t mean that the RAF Section would fold leaving 30 cadets disappointed (as the head has confirmed to me) I would go. This was only ever meant to be a temporary transfer to help out whilst they got new staff, but 18 months later we are still waiting despite losing many interested people either to the Army or giving up due to the application process and lack of assistance. If I could appoint them in the RAF Section without HQAC I would, but I can’t.
I’m getting cadets a good experience despite HQ, but it just feels that we, and other local schools, are on our own and not considered part of the RAFAC. We may be a minority in the organisation but that doesn’t alter the situation.

[quote] “Seriously, what is Wg Cdr CCF doing to justify his salary?”

His salary is a issue for the RAF. The Wg Cdr is a really busy man. Constantly on the road at meetings. If there is a problem with his ability to do his job, i am sure someone a lot higher than us will have something to say about it.[\quote]
He’s paid out of the public purse so it is of interest to more than just the RAF. He may be going to lots of meetings but on the ground round here nothing is changing. I’ve worked in the public sector long enough to know that when you reach a high enough position you’re safe unless you do something spectacularly illegal or embarrassing to a minister.

[quote]
Seems to me that if anyone’s ability’s that needs to be questioned, is yours. You seem to be heavily dependent on TEST support. This is either because of lack of confidence in your ability, lack of qualifications you hold. Basically you decided to have a faceless rant accusing everyone else to deflect attention away from your own abilities.

[\quote]

My cadets get a good experience and in fact I’ve had to turn people away when their friend recommend they join due to staff ratios. My issue is that HQ Admin make it difficult to get staff in and so there are occasions when we need the TEST staff to assist and we don’t have an officer for whatever reason we can’t go into here and the Sgt doesn’t help. I’ve got as many qualifications as I physically have time for but only getting 25 days a year leave and having a small family and a teacher for a wife I can’t use up all my leave going on training courses when I’m the only RAF Section staff. This should be shared out amongst staff and if they are not there why shouldn’t we expect a bit of help from those who are paid to do just that.

Anyway, it’s clear we’re never going to agree when it comes to how Cranwell runs things and all we’ll do is keep going round in circles.

16

Actually, ACP22 was replaced by ‘follow the same ACTOs as the ATC’, which is a good deal more comprehensive, although I share your frustration when these were not adapted to accommodate the CCF. The PTS does need some work to make it better meet the needs of CCF but Wg Cdr CCF is hardly unaware; as others have said, he is incredibly busy, not helped by the shortage of TEST officers. To suggest he, or anyone, ‘doesn’t care’ about the latter is extraordinary!

17

Being ATC and unaware of much more than the basics. What are TEST officers and NCOs Sorry SNCO :roll_eyes: . What are there Ts and Cs employment status (it it a 3 year tour or is it FTRS) and what is their cain of command?

1 Like
18

I don’t completely disagree with some of the points you are making.

You completely done it the wrong way.

You over stepped the line but singling out individuals and being derogatory to members of staff that don’t have sight of this post or the opportunity to reply. Quite simply some of the remarks you have made are faceless personal attacks. I have also seen you have attacked the TEST SNCO again on another thread.

This also creates a sense of confrontation between the volunteers and full time members of staff. That benefits no one. There is more people in this organisation that are doing really good stuff including the Wg Cdr and this sort of post ruins it.

19

I apologise if I’ve gone too far. I’m just really frustrated with how I feel I, my unit and my potential staff have been treated on multiple occasions since I moved to this role. It’s felt like I’ve been banging my head against a brick wall for so long that it’s really beginning to annoy me. This last instance of lost paperwork was the final straw after a tough day at work cracking the days work into a morning and then another afternoon at the Contingent having to deal with other people’s admin errors rather than getting out with the kids.
I don’t think I’ll ever change my opinion of our TEST Sgt and make no apologies for that but I didn’t mean to offend other TEST staff who do work hard.

20

My own version not the official one… should be close enough.

CCFs are divided into five areas (SW, SE, W, E, and a horrible concept called ScotNINE which is Scotland, Northern Ireland and Northern England). Very roughly the boundaries equate to the equivalent ATC regions.

Each has a TEST officer - Sqn Ldr - who is roughly equivalent to a WExO in that they are a civil servant on a RAFAC commission and their job is primarily administrative. Like WExOs, the ‘old guard’ were RAFR but these have all gone now. Each has a team of 4 or so TEST SNCOs who are FTRS Sgts (used to be regulars on 3 year contract). These provide administrative support, assistance with training, mentoring (especially for new CEP units and inexperienced staff), and a level of monitoring and assurance to HQAC, primarily via the Annual Assurance Reporting process which is now conducted on WESTMINSTER. Each TEST SNCO is assigned a group of CCF units and would typically visit them in rotation on a parade day: depending on need and parade days you might see your TEST SNCO anything from every week (struggling/failing/new unit) to a couple of times a term (established well resourced unit with no major issues).

TEST SNCOs come from a wide variety of trades - off the top of my head I can think of a chef, a Regt gunner with SF experience, a PTI, several technical trades (not sure if there’s still a fairy), and the odd bluntie - the latter not common, though, because schools tend to need support on the more technical areas. Most though not all are SAAInst and RCO trained; many are DIs and are the only source of qualified drill instruction for CCFs, hence one of the reasons for poor drill standards in some CCFs. (Remember we have no adult SNCO cadre to speak of, and no 18+ cadets.)

TEST Officers do also have a support and mentoring role and also conduct filter interviews for CCF commissions - a head’s recommendation is crucial but the TEST officer effectively has a right of veto for unsuitable candidates.

OC TEST is 1RO for the TEST SNCOs; 2RO has always been Wg Cdr CCF. However the latest reorg at HQAC (CCF) has introduced a new post (can’t remember the title) and he has the TEST organisation in his area of responsibility. However I suspect Wg Cdr CCF is still 1RO for the TEST officers.

As far as I know TORs, and certainly the org chart, are on Sharepoint somewhere.

(edited to add - TEST SNCOs are also assigned to camps; TEST officers run the Cyprus camps; many are involved with ACLC; TEST teams also run the area Air Squadron Trophy heats and many MOI cadres etc. It’s not just the core job.)

4 Likes
21

Wow

CCF HQ and the TEST teams is suffering from being understaffed and over worked. They are doing a good job with what they have. Reducing the admin burden would help them as well as us. Is it frustrating how long things take (I say whilst still waiting for my commission to be confirmed)? Yes. But it would seem they are focusing on the important things like getting the kids on courses rather than getting staff a suit to waltz around in. If CIs are leaving because they can’t get a uniform quick enough then they are in the wrong hobby anyway.