I find the whole list of wing establishment ranks quite random to be honest. Like how does sports carry more responsibility than fieldcraft or the same equivalent responsibility to AT or Shooting?The actual work delivered will differ from wing to wing too based on the role holders’ time/effectiveness.
I’d suggest bumping all Wing SME roles down to Flt Lt by default except for those who have line management responsibility e.g. Sect Cdrs, and still let Wg Cdrs appoint a handful of generic Sqn Ldrs for who they consider should be on their leadership team based on requirement.
As for promotions, why do we get promotions for time served anyway when not accepting more responsibility? There’s a place for progression (recognising experience) but still within the permitted establishment and affordability. Acp20 has establishment scales for Sqns as well but it could go a step further and detail how many Fg Off/Plt Off/WO/FS/Sgt positions are available. Currently a C class Sqn can have 4 WOs/SNCOs so you could end up with 4 WOs or 4 Sgts or a mix. Again, let a Sqn Cdr promote to WO/FS but allow them to decide how to use them. I still think there’s justification for WO rank on larger units where there is overall a larger responsibility to oversee/deliver. You already have Fg Offs as OIC DFs and Flt Lt as OC Sqns so why not the same for WO/SNCO?
I also don’t necessary see the Sgt/Plt Off as training rank vs FS/Fg Off established; we now have Acting Sgt/APO for that with somewhat sensible development criteria.
I’d rather see a forward looking role description of what responsibilities an FS or Fg Off will be expected to do using previous experience as evidence rather than the attendance checklist we have now. Stop using promotion for forcing staff to go to camp who don’t want to, preventing those who genuinely want to being prioritised. Find a better way to encourage staff to partake in external sqn activities instead.
Recognising the volunteering aspect, we all go through phases where work/family/cadet balance changes occur. I would think it not unreasonable to allow staff to keep their existing rank unpaid (suggest paid FS/Fg Off) to value/recognise the previous roles held, if they’ve held them for a minimum length of service (say 5 or more years). I did agree with getting rid of 9-year time served Flt Lt unpaid. I do feel strongly it is unacceptable using demotion in rank for both a change in circumstance as well as punishment. That’s quite a mixed message we send to our volunteers.
But it is not a demotion - it is a stepping back from the responsibility that goes with it
Keep it on your 1s and 5s for ceremonial if you like (its expensive to change) but recognise that the rank goes with the responsibility
Just a side bar point - the Acting Sgt & Acting Plt Off (&evrn acting Fg Off) are probation ranks rather than training development ranks focusing on basic military training such as drill & uniform rather than anything more substantive. This is similar to the other cadet forces where for example the SCC use the rank of PPO (use to be APO) as their equivalent of acting Sgt.
You do the formal training course and then the training wheels come off & then in theory’s it’s more substantive proper development for the next step which the matrix is meant to act as a guide to evidence. (& to be fair, it does take a couple of years to get your head round the role).
As you rightly say demotion/relinquishment in rank due to a change of personal is a kick in the teeth but at what point do you say to someone “I know you were doing the role of a Flt Lt & doing hundreds of hours inc at wing events but that was 6/12/18months ago and since then you’ve only been doing every other squadron parade nights”
The thorny issue is how the organisation manages people going down without to many leaving as well as coming up to avoid rank congestion & keep some sort of form of hierarchical balance.
That might be a solution (or at least part of it) - have a distinction between ceremonial rank worn when wearing No1s & No5s and operational rank worn on No2,3s & 7s.
Means you can’t use your old higher rank on a day-to-day basis but you can still use it recognising your prior achievements (& you’re right to point out that any reduction in rank then works out expensive with all the resowing).
Silly question but how would this tie in with the new Cadet Forces Warrant? You get warranted by the SoS so surely any reduction in rank would be acting or would you be required to resign the warrant and then get a new one when you take up a new post?
I’d bump everyone to Flt Lt except Sector Commanders who line management responsibilities and those who authorise high risk to life events, (So Fieldcraft, Shooting & AT). Then I’d let Wing Commander’s have 4 more Sqn Ldr’s to use as they see fit. (Probably the Training Officer who will have Command authority over a lot of the Wing SME’s and Deputy Wing CO etc).
Pretty sure the change of WO promotions and making it “harder” / more justified is purely based in the feeling of the current Comdt and his predecessor had no such concerns.
Thanks…I thought someone would know might offer the correct answer.
It’s so long ago and other changes made since I can’t remember what what happen and because of who
Ahh well whatever the reason its not solved.
We’re ~20 years on and have the likes of early 30-something WO now at the very top of their game within the Wing (ie @AlexCorbin as WWO) with any progression which is them “out of area” to fill the potential next 30 years of volunteering…
