Another nail in the coffin of the ACO.
Being a Sqn cdr is no longer a Flt Lt post.
Being a squadron commander hasn’t required the rank of Flt Lt for ages.
At least now we formally cease throwing rank at inexperienced officers simply because they’ve been stuck with the OC role.
What is unclear is, with time-served Flt Lt consigned to history, whether Flt Lt will come and go with the post. If you step down as Flt Lt do you revert to Fg Off?
The “ACO” is gone. Didn’t you get the memo?"
Don’t you mean tweet​:smiling_imp:
not sure if folks got the increase in VA but it looks like a way to cut costs by back door. If the RAFC sub ranks are pilot and FO then why do we need so many other higher ranks
No; that wouldn’t have been a quote from Lucius Fox!
For more opinions, see the pay post from a few weeks back. Inexperienced Flt Lt may be bad but why should one Sqn Cdr be paid less than another simply because of the braid on their shoulders?
1 Like
I hope it means we no longer put inexperienced officers, full stop, into the OC role. There are many SNCOs and CIs out there who can do the job better than some 22 yo ex-cadet who happened to be commissioned. After all staff are all on the same footing now.
Couple of years ago one of these young officers came down to pick up some uniform and I asked how it was going (she’d been in an OC for 2 months or so) and the comment was, in front of all the staff, “how have you managed to do it for so long”, they stood down by going NEP 3 months later and never came back. About 3½ years as staff, after being a much lauded cadet, destroyed IMO by an idiotic system. That sqn had a string of people some older some younger and got someone whose been there for 9 months and might stick it out.
Not that it worries be (being an old timer, ex OC and time served flt lt)…
But linky?
(Edited to add) Or do I need to trawl through Twitter?
1 Like
Surely it’s simple now. You get commissioned and don’t take command for 4 years minimum.
So… does that mean all Flt Lt’s are paid (sorry renumerated at the same level) or will you have (old) time served Flt Lts who are laid as Fg Off, and new Flt Lts who are paid more.
Or are well really just all F’d O?
My head hurts I think I’m going to have a beer.
You have that now. Time served Flt Lts are paid as Fg Offs and ones in Flt Lt posts aren’t… .
[quote=“pEp, post:11, topic:3663”]
You have that now.[/quote]
What Beer?
Or difference in pay! Gotcha. Indeed, but will it be different in this brave new world we’re entering…?
Be awesome if CI’s weren’t having to take command.
Lack of uniformed staff - heading towards closing down squadrons I think!
Reduced strategic footprint via the backdoor!!
Yep, there and the remuneration discussion and the VR(T) change - anyone would think they’re all linked…
1 Like
And those already commissioned for less than 4 years and in command?
Don’t worry, I’m affected by this too, but there’s not a lot I can do about it.
Sorry to tell you but this is nothing new…
It’s confirming the regulations.
It was always 4 years between getting commissioned and getting Flt Lt
Where it went wrong was that some regions/wings kept to the rules but others promoted to acting Flt Lt right away and they then waited until the 4 year period was up before being paid at Flt Lt rank
[quote=“big_g, post:19, topic:3663, full:true”]Sorry to tell you but this is nothing new…
It’s confirming the regulations.
It was always 4 years between getting commissioned and getting Flt Lt
Where it went wrong was that some regions/wings kept to the rules but others promoted to acting Flt Lt right away and they then waited until the 4 year period was up before being paid at Flt Lt rank[/quote]
So how do you account for 22 and 23 year olds put in as OC and then getting Flt Lt (paid) after 5 days at ATF?