Why would the safeguarding team be involved, unless something was raised during the applications process?
1 Like
Bearing in mind Iāve 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 theyāre usually found out and ridiculed appropriately quickly but real officers they are!
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?
Maybe, which I guess is justified.
1 Like
Yep this is correct
1 Like
Thatās not over reach at all. Itās their job. If the report isnāt correct, then thatās an issue to take up with DBS.
Time to resolution may an issue internally, but SG donāt 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.
āThis process is too slow and I donāt feel valuedā is an understandable sentiment to most of us. What this has now become raises eyebrows.
I smell chips.
7 Likes
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
RAFAC Officers cannot in anyway be classed as the same as a ārealā 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 ārealā 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-1ā¦the ārealā Cpl, SGT, WO or Flt Lt will be having words with the SWO or Station Commander about it!
1 Like
Note that @SecretSquirrel said theyāre real officers, not real RAF officers. Both are true; RAFAC officers are real officers (they hold a monarchās commission) without being RAF officers.
12 Likes
Think similar to the local Lord-Lieutenant.
Theyāre not a ārealā 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 donāt think it erodes the argument.
When it comes to legitimate commissions, theyāre not all identical, but theyāre still valid in terms of what they represent.
3 Likes
It does make you wonder why they even bother to ācommissionā RAFAC now (or VR(T) in the past!) ā¦it is a bit of a faff when essentially it means nothingā¦but I suppose it makes somebody happy somewhere!
I suppose itās 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. Youād have to end up inventing new rank slides to communicate that we werenāt to be saluted, or get rid of officer ranks altogether and just have NCO ranks.
I suppose it would depend on the problem youāre 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 weāre 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 ācaptainā rank. Now Iāve reverted to a basic youth role and Iām just a general bod. Our system canāt really handle that in the same way.
Weāre working with what weāve got, but it could be a little cleaner.
For one, Iād 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, Iād 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 ācareer progression and recognitionā.
The problem with the commissioning line is weāre not used to crossing it both ways, but Iād almost suggest thatās the way it should be done.
If youāre credible to hold command and other senior roles, then depending upon your experience and capability/credibility, Iād give you an appropriate commissioned rank while in that post.
Just my thoughts and definitely not perfect.
1 Like
This has happened & been supported by the chain of command on the station! Annual camps & with service instructors & finally there use to be a bit in JSP535 that a CFAV can over rule any regular or reservist when it came to cadet matters (might have been specific to welfare & safeguarding but it was there.
The key aspect is knowing where the areas of authority lie & what is a lawful order & what is a reasonable instruction.
There are regular officers who fail the CFAV process or are poor CFAVs.
Everyone in the military has their part to play & they play that part. Cooks donāt become Armourers & armourers donāt become Air traffic controllers.
Probably the best comparison with RAFAC officers are the other non-combative specialist branch officer namely medical/nursing, chaplaincy & legal.
RAFAC officer is just another specialist branch & when comparing with specialist reserves the RAFAC training is comparable to the 24 days training that reserve specialists completed (4 weekends with a 14 day residential)
I think you are raising an old argument & seeking division where there is none.
4 Likes
Yep, but I guess my point was you donāt need a piece of paper to get people (Cadets) to salute you.
That is just made clear from the start thatās what we do in preparation if any of you do go into the services.
It just stays the norm!
You can still wear RAF Rank braid with associated RAFAC identifiers (with MOD blessing) as essentially it would not affect everyday Cadet life.
Iām sure Iām making sound way simpler than it would be ā¦but as RAFAC / VR(T) have no powers of authority over regular / reserves ā¦ why commision?
It can but I think the psychology of our volunteers canāt.
This is debated on other threads but Stepping back to Fg Off with change of role will become more common place.
The option to step to & from CI is there itās just itās frowned upon when it really shouldnāt - again a culture thing.
Main issue is that thereās no acting NCO rank which if FS was made the highest substantive rank it would help the culture & although people to step back when needed rather than leave.
I know one who did ā¦
1 Like
If itās not broken leave it alone.
Or we end up with this mess
https://www.scouts.org.uk/volunteers/running-things-locally/tools-to-support-leadership-teams/roles/
(FWIW I agree the reversion to Fg Off but no equivalent for NCOs isnāt helping, but as Iām sure Iāve said before just let people keep Flt Lt Acting Unpaid after a qualifying period of service)
6 Likes
But actually, thatās exactly what you need.
One of the most important aspects of the concept is that itās not the individual, but what the commission represents.
2 Likes
We shall agree to differ 
