MoD funding 'black hole'


#1

Hope this doesn’t affect us too much as the MoD try to claw back some savings…


#2

chuckles in 60% trade manning levels and equipment shortfalls


#3

The RAFAC is saving money year on year with cut backs so it is affecting us. Expect purse strings to be tight around hire vehicles and large scale camps in particular this year.


#4

Ironically by investing heavily in cadet forces, any recruitment short fall could be reduced to near zero.


#5

Easy pay us all one fixed rate of VA


#6

£0.00


#7

Yes… because your average new Sgt does as much as a full on Sqn CO…

If VA is detached from rank then it becomes meaningless.

Better to save money by weeding out the wasters who do little but claim lots.


#8

In some cases yes they do. But given RAFAC only has a number of substantive anything above they should only be paid an acting up allowance.


#9

“a repeat offender” when it came to “poor financial planning”.

This was exposed in 2010 along with complete and utter lack of project management. Now here we are almost 10 years on and despite repeated warnings the same thing again.
Our very own much vaunted glider recovery programme is a prime example of poor financial awareness and project management.
We have to remember that all those at HQAC have been brought up in a world where there is little or no need for financial awareness and planning as joe mug taxpayer would stump up the readies. Not any more though. So now they are having to work in unknown waters.

This of course makes the very big assumption that the youngsters that join the Air Cadets are interested which isn’t correct. There are a few and for these, the job they want to do is being recruited for when they are ready, not next year or later and this has been a fault for as long as I can remember. Would anyone wait around 2+ years for a job they might not even get to do as they might not pass the medical, basic training or job training.

One of our cadets 16 has recently had an interview and came back full of excitement and when they relayed the content it was purely and simply a buttering up exercise, as they won’t be looking to join for c.5 years. We know they have some medical issues which are likely to affect them, but the bod at the CIO never even asked about them, which given how picky the medicals can be, this is poor and has rasied an expectation that could be dashed at the first hurdle.
I told the cadet the CIOs get a list of jobs to fill and will say almost anything to get people in.


#10

Why? It’s VA for a reason. When we start comparing VA to ranks then that’s why we start getting treated like employees and then everybody complains. If we got rid of the rank structure against the VA It will save money and actually prompt HQAC to treat us as ‘volunteers’ and not full time staff

VA should be used to compensate our time and personal money lost. In some/most cases lower ranks will spend more personal money than a senior officer and possibly volunteer more time than a senior officer. So why is it fair that the senior officer could be “compensated” more just because of their rank? And please don’t say “responsibility” because I will then just refer you to the top of my reply :slight_smile:


#11

While I’m a fan of flat rate VA I think your view above is extremely narrow and only local to you and what you see.

Flat rate VA would benefit the organisation financially and so would not giving us uniform upkeep or back paying us when the MOD finally sort out their yearly percentage increases. People do tend to take on responsibility in the organisation without it really being relevant to their rank and this is becoming more and more common as the average age of the Corps staff is dropping.

Linking VA to responsibility will no doubt be a string that is investigated.


#12

#13

As a Sqn CO, I spend approx 10 to 15 hours a week, yes that’s per week on Sqn activity or admin.

I get VA at a rate I view as appropriate.
If for example CIs were to get a flat rate VA same as me for turning up once a month, I would be pretty miffed.

It is not about the money. But to be honest it is the only thing some days after 6 hours of admin grind to get a shoot organised or a camp or something that makes it worth while.

How about this.
Flat rate for everyone of 50.00 a day except Sqn Commanders where we get 200.00 per day.

Or if you don’t like that how about the MOD pays my civie career day rate for my time.
That would be much more expensive.

Or

Just leave it as it is and accept it works now, it worked before and it will continue to work.


#14

By lost kit… read stolen or not written off appropriately on the correct form.


#15

On this note I saw an ACF unit advertising for 2 x Paddlesport Instructor and a Climbing Instructor last week. They are willing to pay £120 per day plus expenses for 7 days. Given that there are plenty of CFAV qualified in these - and on a much cheaper rate - you’d have thought they would’ve asked “in house” so to speak before inviting unknown quantities in to deliver - it certainly would’ve been cheaper for them!

Whilst this is small fry in the big “funding black hole” - it still shows that even in these days of austerity (sorry, that’s finished hasn’t it? Now it’s just “pre-Brexit financial downturn”) - there’s some parts of the MOD who seem to have cash to burn!


#16

Yeah but who has 7 days to give up from precious holiday…

We don’t all work for the civil service or public sector and get free days off for cadet jollys.

So applying externally seems the only way to secure instructors.

But you’re right.
Yet again, ACF can waste money, ATC can’t even get money for a new roof.


#17

Judging by the number of CFAVs who commented saying “Dude - I’d be willing to do that for VA/PTDs - but if you’re going to pay me that much instead, I’ll gladly do it with a smile on my face!” - it appears quite a number!


#18

The point I’m was trying to make was if different ranks are being paid different rates then surely we should be classed as “employees” rather than volunteers, (which we are) so why do we get treated at such?

I understand you may spend 15hours a week as a squadron CO. I’m the training officer on my squadron (only an NCO) and I spend around the same amount of hours outside the squadron trying to sort out admin and training etc. So why should I get an allowance any less? It should be flat rate based on time spent, not on a rank structure, we then all maybe will start getting treated as volunteers


#19

Just to add to keep on topic, it will also save an incredible amount of money if this was looked into properly. Maybe someone can do a FOI request and work out the figures


#20

As a squadron commander I have no qualms if the VA was a flat rate and apply to all staff. For the last 5/6 years staffing camps has been a nightmare. Uniformed staff not particularly interested and non-uniformed staff equally disinterested. Perhaps some financial recompense may make it more appealing to non-uniformed staff.

However I think we have become far to attached to VA and the notion of PTD and while it’s not probably much in the grand scheme, if they didn’t have to make that allowance it would be a saving. However I see greater savings wrt to FTRS, which I seems to have replaced the old '‘reserves’ and costing a small fortune for little or no return (except for swollen pension pots), especially from the CF perspective. Having them retire and then get proper jobs would help them appreciate CF volunteers. Maybe a small retainer for max 5 years should be all they get.