Officer Cadet RAF VR(T) - Salute or not?

Adult Staff The Staff Mess
61

[quote=“Baldrick” post=15489][quote=“Racing Stick” post=15477]Totally disagree.
I came into the ACO after a full military career and was highly respected by many for what I knew, could bring to the ACO and the experience I could offer as guidance to the cadets. I also find your comment that ex-Regular SNCO’s will be less qualified than an ex-cadet laughable. Wake up![/quote]

Without saying this comment is itself laughable in its absolutism I can offer the exception which proves the rule.

We had a chap join our unit, ex-regular Army having served in all sorts of trades from recruit training to the AGC (He lost a leg at some point and was given a non-deployable role.) He was a keen CI, busy, did a lot of good.

The moment he put a uniform on as a Sgt he became an absolute a*se. He made the squadron hell for the cadets, treating them exactly like Phase 1 recruits. Uniform inspections nightly (without [strike]in-depth[/strike] basic knowledge of ATC dress regs,) clear favouritism given to some, shouting at them constantly and in the end verbally abusing them all. We got rid of him.

He was absolute proof that knowledge of the regular forces and how to treat volunteer adult servicemen does not automatically make you the perfect CFAV. He knew a lot less than a CWO would about the organisation and did not like the fact that whenever the OC/WO was away (no officers on the unit before I came back) he would leave the 22 year old ex-CWO in charge of the unit and not him.

I’m not saying that regular experience isn’t advantageous. But your comment is not backed up by the facts.[/quote]

Well as I was the one who first stated getting back on point hopefully the Moderator will allow me this small clause.
All you have stated above is not backed by facts. I was trying to generalise. Always there will be poor ex-Regulars just as there are awful non-service staff in the ATC. It just often strikes me that there is a bit of a chip on the shoulder of those that have never served and that they feel threatened by those of us that have.
That is ridiculous. We are all here in the ACO for one common reason to allow an opportunity for young people to experience something which others do not. We have a wonderful history to maintain and a forward thinking approach which cannot be, for any reason, detracted from. Instead of in-fighting either in Sqn’s or here on this forum we should be working together. If we don’t then it is only to the detriment of the ATC, not to individuals.
I make no attempt to thrust my knowledge on anyone. I do use those experiences and qualifications earned to the best of my ability. Obviously, I can’t speak for every ex-Regular in the ACO. I will stand up and say that I believe a lot of volunteers in this organisation are very poor; ex-Regular, non-service and otherwise, but I would also like to think in so doing, that this silly almost childish insecurity that so many people have of the scary ex-Military volunteer is also eroded. A lack of trust is just as dangerous or seditious in a Sqn.
Moderators, if you allow this fine. If you don’t…well, all I was trying to do is remove some silly misapprehension that many have for the good of the ACO.

62

Right, the question was are Off Cdts VR(T) saluted or not. The answer is yes they are.

Thread locked.

63

New topic created and unlocked via PM request.

This is a bit of a mix of topics, but if we can roughly stick to talking about what rank people should join the ACO as, what training they should get and where and the subsequent progression that would be lovely.

64

I’m going to stick with my position (as posted in other topics) that uniformed staff should start at AC (at 18).

Do some basic training (like BASIC, but with a bit more in there) at wing or region level to get LAC (not sure if we need SAC, although could be included if anyone has a suggestion… maybe just to show some experience on time-served or a check-list?)

After 1 year (maybe two) at LAC, eligible for PNCO or potential officers courses. In the mean-time - and beyond - lots of personal development, which is something I feel is rather lacking in the Corps at the moment. I think that there’s a feeling that staff should never do anything just to better themselves; but can only do things that directly benefit cadets. But I think by having better staff we’d have a better Corps, and that would benefit the cadets in the end.

If passed at local level (wing board) go to Cranwell (OASC for potential officers, equivalent for PNCOs) - probably with a minimum age, maybe 21?

After passing OIC become pilot officer, after passing [strike]SSIC[/strike] JSIC become corporal. Further promotion on a minimum service, superiors’ approval and portfolio basis (so roughly what we theoretically have at the moment).

65

[quote=“Racing Stick” post=15466]What a shame if this is the case. Smacks of Big Boys wanting their own little club.
Personally I think it should be brought in for SNCO’s. All those who have Regular Service in the SNCO rank can go in as Sgt. If they held higher rank then this should be dealt with accordingly.
Those that have not had Regular SNCO service but have had service of some type should be brought in as Sgt’s but with a caveat that they have to complete the SSIC (which should be more strict and longer) within the 12 months now stipulated but still be wearing those white tabs for at least 2 years.
Anyone coming off the streets with no service experience or worst, those that go straight to adult uniform staff from cadets should be stipulated as SAC’s and earn their way up. This way you get the better quality of SNCO. They have had to earn it.[/quote]

My bold.

Why do you consider cadets going straight into uniform as the “worst”? This is something that I hear a lot and as someone to whom this applies, I find it slightly irritating. Your post seems to suggest myself and those like me are in some way inferior which to be honest is a bit insulting.

66

To be fair, I think it’s fair to say that often the worst new staff have gone straight from cadet to adult staff, rather than saying everyone who does it is bad at it.

There are plenty of good ones, hopefully myself included!

67

[quote=“MattB” post=15528]I’m going to stick with my position (as posted in other topics) that uniformed staff should start at AC (at 18).

Do some basic training (like BASIC, but with a bit more in there) at wing or region level to get LAC (not sure if we need SAC, although could be included if anyone has a suggestion… maybe just to show some experience on time-served or a check-list?)

After 1 year (maybe two) at LAC, eligible for PNCO or potential officers courses. In the mean-time - and beyond - lots of personal development, which is something I feel is rather lacking in the Corps at the moment. I think that there’s a feeling that staff should never do anything just to better themselves; but can only do things that directly benefit cadets. But I think by having better staff we’d have a better Corps, and that would benefit the cadets in the end.

If passed at local level (wing board) go to Cranwell (OASC for potential officers, equivalent for PNCOs) - probably with a minimum age, maybe 21?

After passing OIC become pilot officer, after passing [strike]SSIC[/strike] JSIC become corporal. Further promotion on a minimum service, superiors’ approval and portfolio basis (so roughly what we theoretically have at the moment).[/quote]

I think I broadly agree with this stance.

I was thinking about it last night and came to the conclusion that the ranks for adult staff could probably go: AC - SAC - Sgt

I also agree with BTI about the ‘ACF model’ of training with ATF as a ‘finishing school’.

68

[quote=“MattB” post=15532]To be fair, I think it’s fair to say that often the worst new staff have gone straight from cadet to adult staff, rather than saying everyone who does it is bad at it.

There are plenty of good ones, hopefully myself included![/quote]

I don’t think its fair to say at all. You have to look at the figures and proportionality/ratio.

Q: how many go from cdt to uniformed staff? What ratio are useless?
Q: how many go civvie to uniformed staff (much much more)? What ratio are useless?

This post has been brought to you from the anti-daily mail statistics dept.

1 Like
69

Would the introduction of PI/SAC rank not just going to add another layer of hassle and complexity over what is already a fairly convoluted system? Is it really needed and what would it add? I have yet to be convinced.

Also, the civvy/ex-cadet vs ex military types argument…

The biggest problem I have noted with ex-mil types is the ability to seperate past service with current, and treating cadets (as stated above) like phase 1 recruits. Fortunately this is rare, and I have had the pleasure of working with a number of excellent ex service personnell. I’ve also known a few “firm handshakers” who caused a massive pain in the backside.

What those coming from civvy steet/ex-cadet service do have a little better understanding of, is that cadets are kids, not recruits. But they sometimes lack the finer points of service knowledge and deportment. Likewise some of the most inspiring staff I knew as a cadet were not necessarily those from a service background. There have also been the clots who shouldnt be allowed their own kids let alone supervision of other peoples.

It shouldnt be an us vs them debate, but each flavour of staff should appreciate where their knowledge is perhaps lacking or not quite aimed in the right direction, and look to resolve any deficiences for their own and their units benefit.

70

Off the top of my head, how about:

18yrs - cadet service ends.

18-19yrs - Leading Aircraftsman(ATC). This 12 month period spent completing BASIC, Adult MOI, Foot Drill, First Aid at Work and gaining a general insight into what being a staff member is all about. No supervisory responsibilities and cannot be added to staff ratios for activities. Promoted to SAC(ATC) at end of 12 months and upon completion of all courses.

19-20yrs - Senior Aircraftsman(ATC). A further period utilised for perhaps gaining instructor qualifications in AT, fieldcraft, DoE and\or specialist subjects pertaining to the aviation syllabus. Limited supervisory responsibilities until relevant qualifications gained. Promotion to Corporal(ATC) upon completion of all courses and at end of time-served.

Rationale: Allows a 2yr transitory period from cadet to staff. Allows insight into role & responsibilities of a staff member together with the opportunity to obtain a wide-range of qualifications and experience prior to being able to exercise staff authority.

20-24yrs - Corporal(ATC). Eligible to undertake training as SAAI and RCO. Completes JSIC at ATF. Four years in rank prior to promotion to Sgt(ATC) and eligibility for OASC. Entry point for all ex-regular\reserve personnel with previous experience at SAC\Cpl or equivalent.

Rationale Provides opportunity to obtain higher-level qualifications and hold the appropriate rank to exercise them. At this level, the individual is able to apply for commissioning and has had 6 years experience in a uniformed environment. Appropriate entry rank for ex-regular\reserves who have previous experience at SAC\Cpl level as they may already hold (depending on trade group) a number of the required qualifications.

24yrs - Sgt(ATC). Completes SSIC prior to confirmation of rank. Eligible for SSDIC. Entry point for all ex-regular\reserve SNCO’s or equivalent.

30yrs - FS(ATC). As per current promotion requirements. Entry point for all ex-regular\reserve WO’s or equivalent until completion of SSIC. Thereafter, promoted to WO(ATC).

36yrs - WO(ATC). As per current promotion requirements. Brings a closer correlation to RAF\Army WO’s in terms of age and time served.

Of course, the above is for those who join straight from cadet service and for adults ‘off the street’ the rank structure would remain the same, only the ages would vary. I admit that I haven’t fully thought through my suggestions but does the learned membership feel that any part of it may have merit?

71

And where do these 18-24 Year olds new rank persons stay whilst on a base?

72

Most annual camps I’ve been associated with have had tented accommodation, even for staff. I appreciate that most stations these days are full to bursting (Brize for one) but even Sgts Mess accommodation will be limited. I don’t have a foolproof answer to the question but as with most ACO activities, one may have to seek a workaround to the problem.

73

That’s camps. What about courses?

74

OK. We’ve got 6 Sgt(ATC) booked on a SAAI course. The Sgts Mess is full, so where do we put them?

We’ve got 6 18-24yr old Cpl(ATC) who aren’t eligible to stay in the mess. Where do we put them?

Same place as the Sgt(ATC) - wherever we can get them in.

75

In their respective messes? Most places these days are SLAM and if there is no space they will be accommodated as appropriate with the rest of the staff. Its not beyond logistics.

76

You are aware that JR messing is way under resourced for the current figures. There’s a DLO report on DII which makes interesting reading.

77

Well, you as a WExO have access to DII but not many of us mortals have.

However, you’re missing the point and I’ll reverse the question. If you had a number of SGT(ATC) to accommodate on a camp\base\military installation and the mess was full, where would you accommodate them?

78

I’m not a WExO but I am a crown servant :slight_smile:

Depends on the event. If it was a course then they’d be entitled to a hotel accommodation which is expensive. If they were supervising cadets, I’d have to consider the cadet accommodation as a possible, if safe (separate ablutions) and reducing cadet head count. Otherwise binning the course.

79

Why does there always have to be objections. Gunner is suggesting some ideas. Ideas, that’s all. Why do you have to shoot him down with just negatives. No one has the text book answer, but then again, not everyone lives their life through a text book!!
I think it’s a great suggestion and it might just be that we have to be radical to make this work.
Additionally, in my humble opinion, the process of instantaneous promotion to Sgt is ridiculous and an insult to those members of both RAF staff and ex-regular ATC staff, who have spent a lot of time to get to that rank, then see a 20 year old “SNCO” saunter into their mess.
There is, as far as I can see, no reason why a uniformed member of staff can not start at a more suitable rank. Even if it’s as a Cpl for example.
And don’t say it would be too difficult. The Corps did it when they brought in the rank change from AWO to ASgt when starting. It’s not difficult to do, it’s just too difficult to try.

80

It is the accommodation bit that will always be the sticking point (as it is at the moment) as far as I see.

I have been on few camps where accommodation was tented, and fewer still where the staff were under canvas. I have been dumped in transit when the mess was “full” (which suits me fine actually) but the derelict H-block on Cranwell with a 50s pattern camp bed was taking the mick.