I still vehemently object to the use of the “sh ! te hawk” for those who haven’t completed the RAF NCO Aircrew course / trg / qualification.
1 Like
Is this a case of no one being brave enough to challenge a massive CapEx and increase in OpEx during a period of operational cost-cutting?
For this to get all the way to the top, signed off at each level, presented as “we have to save money on our core delivery, but we’re going to spend money on something shiny that doesn’t benefit our members” either means everyone was blind to the optics (incompetent) or unwilling to stand their ground (cowardly).
I don’t think that’s fair. The impression I get is that even if people did say something, Tony was going to do it anyway as he was never wrong.
When we are being told that we don’t have VA to pay the most senior exereicned CFAVs, but we then waste another £200K on ANOTHER badge re-brand (not that long since we brought in Instructor Cadets rank slides, wasted money on them, then Staff Cadets and wasted money on them, then changing the staff rank slides. NONE of that had any benefit to the cadets, and in fact has lead to hugely increased costs of the very same staff we have reduced VA for (a full set of Sqn Ldr rank tapes for example is upwards of £60) - that more than a day’s pay after tax.
£100k a year on rank slides would permit another 3 or 4 E1s to help with admin & event assurance.
Unless the funding for this is coming from the Air Cadet charity rather than RAF funding.
But that would mean that the CCF wouldn’t be scaled for these as they don’t pay into the ACA* so would have to wear the standard RAF ones 
* CCF cadets pay into the CCF association which is its own separate charity.
They seem to get other access to the charity stuff.
I’ve questioned it before. Why is it now a RAFAC charity, if only ATC cadets are paying in.
But that’s for another thread…
Because people thought ATC = RAFAC & did not understand how the cadets corps are authorised & funded
2 Likes
So honest answers here…
Who actually agrees with this?
…anyone?
They’ve fixed part of that, they don’t issue CFAV rank slides any more, you have to buy your own before you attend CIC 
Anything would be a better use of money than more civil servants, but your figures include NCO rank slides that would have to be bought for promotions anyway.
I agree with cadet rank slides in principle, but believe this is being badly implemented. The word CADET in exactly the same style as STAFF CADET and RAF AIR CADETS would have sufficed.
1 Like
As a principle, yes. In how it’s been executed, no.
2 Likes
This 100%.
This has been completely over engineered. We already get custom tapes made, we just need the same ones made but with the word staff removed for under 18s.
Im aligned to this, but im not biting as ill get in a world of trouble
1 Like
There’s so many questions that need answering before a change in policy such as this is released.
Firstly, and most importantly, should there even be O18 cadets? It has to be seen as a valid question, given that the other cadet forces don’t have them.
If the answer to the above is to bring RAFAC into alignment with the other CFs, much of the cost of this project has just been saved - nevermind the other operational benefits to only having U18s in service.
I think we’d all agree that it is necessary to identify cadets as cadets, rather than regular or reserve forces, so some kind of cadet identifier is necessary that works in both greens and blues. With this in mind, why not just create a band that can be worn on the epilates that says “CADET”? This way they can be worn with any existing rank slides, thus we have savings through economies of scales both for the cadet bands and for the rank slides.
But the key thing that’s missing throughout this change, as far as I have seen, is communicating the why. Civilians in general, not just CFAVs, need the why and not just the what to be brought on board with the change. Failing, as RAFAC so often does, to adequately explain the why behind decisions leads to resistance to change and questioning of decisions. That senior personnel in RAFAC still don’t appear to have understood this key aspect of leadership is concerning.
Alex - feel free to tell me if there’s anything you’d disagree with.
2 Likes
Dont disagree.
I think its summarises the real need to communicate the WHY well and as detailed as possible with every change, its the paramount aspect of delivering change.
3 Likes
Exactly something like this. The solution already exists, so why are we reinventing the wheel?
Picturing the end results of “cadet sewing” now tho 
Agree with the idea, but please don’t use RAFP tapes as the example 
2 Likes
utter waste of time and money. I’ll leave it there.