Is the RAFAC in a death spiral?

Adult Staff
358

certainly this was the case when I was a Cadet - of all those I started with after 2 years there was less than half still attending, and by the time i aged out I was one of two remaining.

I think it is “natural wastage” while someone will give something a go, after a year if it isn’t for them they move on.
and with teenagers there are so many other draws to their attention - Less so at my current unit, but certainly see drop offs at 16 when Cadets get into the world of work, be that full time or more likely part time /weekend work.

then of course there is the academic pressures. at 15-16 many choose to concentrate on school, and so see a drop in attendance there - then again at 17 when collage/6th form comes around.

if an individual isn’t questioning what they get from the organisation the chances are they are not an NCO, not attending camps or weekend courses, or simply the events run by Sqn (be these community based fundraisers, or PTS training or otherwise “syllabus stuff”) then it is no wonder they leave

1 Like
359

Had one tell me the other night they were leaving (joined Sep23) as they had ‘done cadets’ and got everything they could. Had not been flying, shooting, done any courses, camps, extra Sqn activities etc. Pointed this out and said ’ you sure?'.
Answer: Yes
so awaiting returned uniform

can lead a horse to water…

1 Like
360

Seems about par for the course, I don’t know what it is now but the average cadet caterer used to be 18 months.

1 Like
361

Sounds about right.

It can take quite a long time to get them through the basics and up to Leading, which is were they should be able to do more interesting stuff.

When I have cadets leave, and it’s not for exams, uni/job or sports, the most common reasons given are they don’t like the classification studies, uniform prep or discipline. Also some do struggle with 2 parade nights a week.

3 Likes
362

We certainly are in a death spiral if we continue on this current path with this leadership team in place. I attended the SW Town Hall on Tuesday and nothing that was said there makes me feel like we are doing anything to save this organisation. We certainly can’t rely on HQAC or Regional Command in the SW.

2 Likes
363

I made an application last autumn to become an adult instructor within RAFAC. I have emailed them today in.March to tell them to cancel my application to join.

From the outset I have felt completely unsupported and totally undervalued. When I chased my application ip I was admonished.The whole organisation seems to comprise of officers who have never actually served a day in their lives but think they are actual real RAF officers. This is fundamentally wrong. From experience young people relate far better to adult SNCO’s.

The worst part is the safeguarding team who stepped far wide of their remit, trying to dig up dirt that simply wasnt there. And no, I have nothing to hide either. And to ask me about my daughter who is joining another squadron. Erm, I dont actually have a daughter. I was actually decorated for services to safeguarding minors and bringing adults to account so maybe the safeguarding team feel intimidated by that?

From what ive read and seen unless there are radical changes recruitment of both adults and cadets RAFAC will continue to deminish with understaffing. under cadet recruitment and squadron closures.

The lesson here for RAFAC is dont treat potential adult instructors like crap. Get your recruiment process tight and in better time. Bring in more adult SNCO’s and get ride of some of the high ranking walter mitty’s who are totally detached from reality.

364

Something about this post doesn’t feel right.

4 Likes
365

There’s much of your story here that isn’t aligning with what the rest of us have experienced in reality, and some of the statements that don’t make sense.

Yes, there are definitely recruitment and retention problems, but some of the other things you’ve mentioned are giving me pause for thought regarding your actual experiences - especially as they seem to talk about things are a) factually incorrect and b) processes that aren’t standard modus operandi.

To be very blunt, I’m personally no longer sure that you’ve actually tried to join and question whether you may just be a journalist bashing stuff together and hoping to create a story that doesn’t exist.

Go through this forum, you’ll see that we all attack senior leadership quite openly when it is required. But, it must be based in reality and also be required for us to do so, having not achieved our objectives through official channels first.

2 Likes
366

Why would the safeguarding team be involved, unless something was raised during the applications process?

1 Like
367

Bearing in mind I’ve not been part of the organistation for a number of years, I take umbridge with this quote. Not least as officers within RAFAC are real officers with a commission from the King. If there are walter mitties they’re usually found out and ridiculed appropriately quickly but real officers they are!

368

I think if a DBS comes back as anything other than completely clean it gets referred to HQ Safeguarding for a decision. Might be that?

369

Maybe, which I guess is justified.

1 Like
370

Yep this is correct

1 Like
371

That’s not over reach at all. It’s their job. If the report isn’t correct, then that’s an issue to take up with DBS.

Time to resolution may an issue internally, but SG don’t get involved without a trigger of some sort.

Interesting to have dug up this thread to complain further following a standalone thread on the same topic.

Regardless, just as there is no compulsion to join a voluntary organisation, there is no obligation for them to accept an applicant.

“This process is too slow and I don’t feel valued” is an understandable sentiment to most of us. What this has now become raises eyebrows.

I smell chips.

7 Likes
372

I am currently in the application process, Whilst I assume it is area specific I have chased my application up probably out of pure enthusiasm and have found those involved have been nothing but supportive. The safeguarding teams remit is to protect the kids. To be blunt if they have the slightest concern query or niggle I would rather them raise it and put it to bed. Given your decoration for services to safeguarding I am surprised you are shocked by that.

10 Likes
373

RAFAC Officers cannot in anyway be classed as the same as a ‘real’ RAF officer who have undertaken a rigorous selection process, months of intense training at RAFC Cranwell and then years of trade training and leadership.

On the other-hand the ‘real’ RAF officer have a completely different responsibility compared to RAFAC who are essential youth leaders managing individual of all backgrounds, inteligence and opinions with the unique challenges that all brings.

Any RAFAC Officer who frumps about on an RAF station may wear the uniform but has absolutely no authority to exert a command upon regular RAF personnel.

Respect for RAFAC rank is often and thankfully given by regulars but imagin an RAFAC Officer giving an order to an AS-1…the ‘real’ Cpl, SGT, WO or Flt Lt will be having words with the SWO or Station Commander about it!

1 Like
374

Note that @SecretSquirrel said they’re real officers, not real RAF officers. Both are true; RAFAC officers are real officers (they hold a monarch’s commission) without being RAF officers.

12 Likes
375

Think similar to the local Lord-Lieutenant.

They’re not a “real” military officer (unless they also happen to be), but they have a very valid military commission (of whatever class).

I may be mis-using terminology here, but I don’t think it erodes the argument.

When it comes to legitimate commissions, they’re not all identical, but they’re still valid in terms of what they represent.

3 Likes
376

It does make you wonder why they even bother to ‘commission’ RAFAC now (or VR(T) in the past!) …it is a bit of a faff when essentially it means nothing…but I suppose it makes somebody happy somewhere!

377

I suppose it’s a question of what marks our organisation out as different from others, just like wearing an RAF-style uniform generally.

In our generalised culture, it would be even weirder having someone of officer rank (and the responsibilities that brings) but without a commission. You’d have to end up inventing new rank slides to communicate that we weren’t to be saluted, or get rid of officer ranks altogether and just have NCO ranks.

I suppose it would depend on the problem you’re trying to solve.

I personally think our NCO / commissioned officer divide is a little unhelpful and frustrates a free flow between all the ranks depending on what we’re doing. We have people with years of experience who could be downgraded to the training rank of flying officer while WOs retain the most significant rank many service personnel will never reach.

For example I used to run a St John Ambulance unit but had to step back at the end of last year. A unit boss used to wear “captain” rank. Now I’ve reverted to a basic youth role and I’m just a general bod. Our system can’t really handle that in the same way.

We’re working with what we’ve got, but it could be a little cleaner.

For one, I’d start staff ranks at the bottom of the NCO tree (as a reservist would) and if they support a camp and we need to solve the accommodation problem, give them probationary sergeant for a week.

Outside of that, I’d restrict SNCO status to those with significant experience and expertise befitting that rank, with those above being appointment-based. That would significantly improve the options for “career progression and recognition”.

The problem with the commissioning line is we’re not used to crossing it both ways, but I’d almost suggest that’s the way it should be done.

If you’re credible to hold command and other senior roles, then depending upon your experience and capability/credibility, I’d give you an appropriate commissioned rank while in that post.

Just my thoughts and definitely not perfect.

1 Like