Ive just had a member of my staff sit a Sgts Board. They happily passed it.Thing is they ve been informed that it will be a minimum of six months before the appointment is confirmed.Therefore last night when I discussed it with them they were somewhat down in the dumps.Only in the RAFAC could someone achieve something be keen to progress after jumping through lots of hoops and then be dealt such a blow.Its pathetic and to my mind very amateurish indeed.When I was appointed I was on my initial course within three months(I could have done it quicker but there were no vacancies on an earlier course).
1 Like
not the same but similiar situation on our unit.
we have a keen CI recently (last 12 months) left as a CWO and now heading for the Commissioned route.
he is jumping through all the hoops but struggling to get on a OASC date.
He is making the most of his youth and freedom and some “travelling” in the Spring and can’t make the next available May date…the next OASC is September.
a selection course he is told he must attend, and is done so in the working week by full time regulars (so not as if he is waiting for volunteer availability), yet because he is unavailable for the next course (which is still 2 months away) he has to wait over 6 months…
why is a “must” so delayed???
on the assumption he gets on the September course its 6-8 weeks before he knows if he was successful (December), and can then consider an ATF week. he is realistically a minimum 12 months away from being a “trained” Officer (passed OASC and attended ATF) despite working on the process the last 3-4 months and ready to do it now…
In our region it’s all done from interview to appointment in 6 weeks
1 Like
Course dates are what they are at OASC - somehow they give priority to the RAF and Navy (pilots) - weird that!
I never really understood why you had, even back in the day, to do courses within a set period. I did mine OK but a few years on and I had a teacher go through the motions and because they are a teacher they could only do things in holiday periods, there was one course in a school holiday, duly applied and the course was binned. It took the best part of two years before they went and the amount of crap threatening things like you’ll have to reapply if you don’t do it, I’m surprised they stuck it out.
which i completely understand - the RAFAC is at the bottom of every priority.
but makes me question the justification for OASC - why make it mandatory if the availability of courses is so few and far between that it brings into questions someone’s personal interest in making the commitment.
Does this just happen with the RAFAC?
is there a ACF similar OASC process? Do they have the same selection criteria?
1 Like
The solution is do away with OASC, it’s a step that we don’t need and never needed, except in the eyes of some in the ATC who think they are in the RAF and after the drawdown of the RAF, picking on air cadet officers was an easy way to prevent some OASC bods losing a cushy job.
2 Likes
The set time is for initial courses rather than Officer and Aircrew selection here.
It’s not every priority and in the moment understandably you’re annoyed at the timescale but we are at the bottom of this pile because our youth organisation isn’t looking for officers to lead the country in times of war or man fighter jets… we’re teaching kids (but still want to be in their club when we do it - hence why we’ve joined this organisation and in this role rather than chief scout leader).
Disagree there unfortunately. We’re wearing their uniform therefore they need to know that we’re not a bunch of throbbers.
And it helps avoid any wing-wide nepotism with going into uniform - have someone higher make the call!
So for the vast majority of the Corps history where we didn’t have this, not quite sure how we survived.
I’ve not had anyone go for a commission since this, but I thought they wanted people to do OASC within a specified period, which requires a decent service and if they have to abandon a golf weekend or whatever like we are expected to, yah boo sucks.
We are the customer and but unfortunately there is no place to complain to … that would listen or cares.
You have to feel sorry for the OP subject and begs the question who the bloody hell do these people think they are. They are not worthy to lick the sole of our boots.
1 Like
I think a hybrid system could work:
Can we use the OASC facilities but run the course regularly with RAFAC personnel at weekends, perhaps with a co-opted regular assisting (or visiting occasionally to ensure quality of the process)?
This sets a level of centralised standards, sorts out the timing issues and ensures we can focus on what is important for THIS organisation.
4 Likes
i could accept this answer if it was applied to SNCOs also.
but it isn’t.
Either CFAVs are good enough or they are not. Given RAF direct entry aircrew Sgts go to OASC then why not “direct entry” RAFAC Sgts?
given there are units out there (and some in our Wing) commanded by WOs and in one case I know a Sgt (so presume there must be FS) what makes OASC a suitable filter that doesn’t need to be applied to SNCO?
4 Likes
This is how it works for the ACF, which means our courses run pretty much every month unless they are under subscribed. Since the regular boards are midweek, we don’t have the problem with the higher priority users stopping our courses from running. Do your courses run midweek then?
yes arrive Sunday for a Monday morning start - finish Tuesday leaving late afternoon.
it sucks indeed however OASC is Monday and Tuesday, travelling there Sunday night.
so it sucks harder in that it isn’t a compromise on whatever other hobbies you might do that weekend, but on the annual leave you take from work permitting the two days off
this sounds like a much better system and far more inline with that of a Volunteer
2 Likes
Could easily be done in a weekend then.
you’d think so right…
arrive Friday leave Sunday.
except the RAF OASC is run by full time regulars who work Mon-Fri so those are the days the courses run…
OASC certainly used to run weekend courses for regular selection anyway, although not sure if that’s still the case.
Get rid of the regulars and have it done by CFAVs in exchange for a couple of days VA.
1 Like
That won’t happen as the fact that CFAVs were involved in the old process is one of the gripes of the old system and as long as you passed the RC chat. Hence some in the ATC love the notion of OASC to give a faux respectability and notion of quality.
However this isn’t how it’s turning out. There are still the same sorts and some much, much worse as previously.