I wasn’t going to make a thread about this based on the email, as I thought it was the kind of thing they’d want to keep internal. But I’ve just seen the below on Facebook, so here we are:
Who the hell thought it was a good idea making a post accusing some squadrons of breaking the law, publicly, on Facebook? We have an internal comms system. Use it.
Can they as they’re not directly RAFAC?
There’s literally already been an announcement internally about it, which is why I don’t understand the use of SM for something like this.
Is it to get the message out to Sqn committees as they are the ones most likely to be making this breach.
& most of those willfully ignore using RAFAc systems.
There’s definitely an issue with the Air Cadet Charity publicly shaming squadrons, even where this is done anonymously. It harms the image of the organisation overall and may actually reduce the likelihood of grant applications being successful, based upon the perception of the air cadet ecosystem. Whoever signed this post off has not thought through the consequences of doing so.
Where squadrons (or, most likely, CivComs) have been incorrectly applying using the charity’s registration number, this is most probably due to a poor system of training that exists for CivComs. I’m fairly sure the name itself is an issue; CivCom members are really a board of trustees from what I understand. Given the lack of unified training given across the country, it’s inevitable that some members wouldn’t understand that the ACC & their squadron are 2 separate entities.
So perhaps to target the root cause of this issue, HQAC should look at what changes are needed in the CivCom system to make events like this less likely to happen.
So from what I understand you have the civilian committee of whom a smaller number are the primary trustees.
The solution I think would perhaps be to create some online learning packages that all civcom can complete.
It doesn’t need to be onerous but it would standardise an area quickly with expectations & policy & avoids some of the clashes that have been over the years due to misunderstandings & role creep.
Anyone fancy creating a kahoot quiz as a starter for ten?
Yes. And, as they’ve done, they can email OCs etc to let them know too.
Unfortunately it popped up in my inbox as the headline of “Illegal use of ACC”.
Wondered if I had been discovered…
Once I realised I got the wrong ACC, I switched off.
I think they have a new social media person who is keen to impress so everything is social media worthy for them.
Don’t agree with the public shaming, not great to air dirty laundry and they do risk some jobsworth investigator from the charity commission piping up and kicking off an investigation.
Its an internal issue, dealt with through the internal communication channel.
You wouldnt find the Royal Air Force main media channel sending a message out, asking people to not block the entrance to the Sgts mess at Northolt with their push bikes…would you.
Nope… internal issue, internal comms. Joe Public doesnt see dirty laundry.
What’s most surprising is that the CAC Facebook page has liked it so HQRAFAC presumably doesn’t see an issue with the post…?
Pretty sure your cover is blown already, isn’t it?
Scouts has this (albeit I don’t know if it is online), most charities will have trustee training and there’s the umbrella group (NCVO) runs it - not free but a low cost:
https://www.ncvo.org.uk/about-us/our-services/training/elearning-roles-duties-trustees/
Just musing, but isn’t it incorrect to view the ACC as needing to use internal comms?
I hear the point about damaging rep etc, but…
Arguably, it could well need to publicly distance itself from / call out ANY illegal use of its charity number.
It isn’t a part of our organisation (right?)
But there has been internal communication. There’s an announcement with the letter from the chairperson!
They might be a seperate entity legally, but they are still very intertwined with us.
We’re still mandated to pay them subs, for example.
