GHE2 - You have a life outside the ACO? How verily dare you! 
A year ago I was actually told by a Sqn OC within my Wing that I should cut down on my non-ACO activities so that I could partake in a BEL course (which incidentally never happened). Cut down on my other activities? Did I heck.
[quote=“papa november” post=16095]GHE2 - You have a life outside the ACO? How verily dare you!
A year ago I was actually told by a Sqn OC within my Wing that I should cut down on my non-ACO activities so that I could partake in a BEL course (which incidentally never happened). Cut down on my other activities? Did I heck.[/quote]
BEL takes so bloody long that I would have to cut down on pretty much everything to get it done.
I’d be surprised if we keep BEL anymore with the introduction of the Lowland Leader award by Mountain Leader Training UK.
But is that the case for the majority of staff on your sqn? [/quote]
Probably not, myself and another are the only two who come close, we are out at least two days a month on events where we can claim pay due to our involvement in weekend training we provide.
[quote=“glass half empty 2” post=16085]
It is at times difficult to get people helping at fetes etc so to have the option of claiming pay would help with staffing. I turn up as a matter of course as I like to see the cadets getting involved doing these things and the plaudits they get from joe public are extremely gratifying. Not something you get from a day of training.[/quote]
I completely agree with your reasons for attending such events, and in contrast to your difficulty in getting people to attend, it is often only the uniformed members who we can rely on for such events, despite not being able to claim for “pay”
Trying to work out why that might be and conclude it is simply because it is often the uniformed staff who organise our involvement at such events, liaise with event organisers, perhaps PiPE paperwork and other associated factors…
[quote=“kfd” post=16086]Just to clarify.
As the person in charge of discipline on a sports event they are allowed to claim for a days pay if appropriate. But only 1 person per event.[/quote]
Excellent for that 1 person, but at a rugby or netball trials what about the rest of the staff?
Out Wg Sports Officer over sees everything, but has in his team other staff who are “Coaches” for Wings team, rugby and netball being examples. Those staff, who perform their Sqn roles do this additional support to Wing but are not formally recognised as WSO or assistance WSOs…
With regard to “Discipline” at the large wing events, athletics and swimming, the Sports Officer delegates the various roles one of those being discipline so does that mean on the two larger Wing Sports events the Sports Officer isnt permitted to claim?
That isn’t fair.
I am not saying I agree/disagree with the system, it is what it is but questioning the thoughts of others who indicate pay matches rank which matches responsibility which in the example above is the not case…and that is just one example
There are AT qualified Staff who will attend a Llandbedr or Windermere camp, or simply a weekend camp or even a day walk who will get the same pay as non-qualified staff attending, or even the situation where with qualified CIs and un-qualified uniformed staff….the one eligible for pay bringing nothing but the an added headcount to the party…while the other making the event possible!
The same could be said for shooting, with a CI who is an RCO against uniformed safety supervisor or coach
What about CIs in executive positions? Our Wing Webmaster, H&S Officer and Aviation and Graphics (Air Rec and Art/photography etc) are all CIs
All of these roles are done in addition to expectations of “Squadron life” and the roles and responsibility that entails in each case requiring further commitment and added responsibility but their pay doesn’t reflect this
Those aren’t executive positions they’re reps.
[quote=“steve679” post=16106][quote=“kfd” post=16086]Just to clarify.
As the person in charge of discipline on a sports event they are allowed to claim for a days pay if appropriate. But only 1 person per event.[/quote]
Excellent for that 1 person, but at a rugby or netball trials what about the rest of the staff?
Out Wg Sports Officer over sees everything, but has in his team other staff who are “Coaches” for Wings team, rugby and netball being examples. Those staff, who perform their Sqn roles do this additional support to Wing but are not formally recognised as WSO or assistance WSOs…
With regard to “Discipline” at the large wing events, athletics and swimming, the Sports Officer delegates the various roles one of those being discipline so does that mean on the two larger Wing Sports events the Sports Officer isnt permitted to claim?
That isn’t fair.
I am not saying I agree/disagree with the system, it is what it is but questioning the thoughts of others who indicate pay matches rank which matches responsibility which in the example above is the not case…and that is just one example
There are AT qualified Staff who will attend a Llandbedr or Windermere camp, or simply a weekend camp or even a day walk who will get the same pay as non-qualified staff attending, or even the situation where with qualified CIs and un-qualified uniformed staff….the one eligible for pay bringing nothing but the an added headcount to the party…while the other making the event possible!
The same could be said for shooting, with a CI who is an RCO against uniformed safety supervisor or coach
What about CIs in executive positions? Our Wing Webmaster, H&S Officer and Aviation and Graphics (Air Rec and Art/photography etc) are all CIs
All of these roles are done in addition to expectations of “Squadron life” and the roles and responsibility that entails in each case requiring further commitment and added responsibility but their pay doesn’t reflect this[/quote]
Generally, they have a choice. It’s not mandatory to take up a wing role, people tend to do it for the kudos it brings. The opposite happens on a sqn - you must have an OC, and it will usually fall to the only person who can do it (certainly the case on our squadron).
You could argue they don’t HAVE to do that either, but in reality they do (especially if they’re an officer). No one HAS to be the wing sports officer (and as you’ll have seen recently no one seems to want to be it!), it’s a nicety because they like sports. They don’t generally have to deal with all the standard crap (and as it’s a co-opted post they aren’t running a squadron as well).
I can honestly say I wouldnt do a wing position for the cudos, as knowing the filtering and B/S moving that goes on at wing level, there is no benefit.
The further up the chain the more issues are seen and P issues are stressful to deal with (and they do exist).
Wing Sports Officer is a coordination and cajoling position highly reliatent on assistance from units and people who know there own sport. We have a great team but I cant say its easy for any of them.
If the Sports Officer isnt at the activity I would ensure someone is appointed IC and as a deputy should be able to claim if they are able to.
Those aren’t executive positions they’re reps.[/quote]
irrespective what you call it my point still stands…there are people with levels of responsibility who arent not in “paid posts”
Those aren’t executive positions they’re reps.[/quote]
irrespective what you call it my point still stands…there are people with levels of responsibility who arent not in “paid posts”[/quote]
My point also stands - if pay is so important to these people why don’t they go into uniform? We are afterall a uniformed organisation.
Or is this a hypothetical situation, where the individuals aren’t personally concerned at all, but others are on their behalf?
I would suggest looking at the vast majorty of Wing posts, very few get ‘paid’ for their actual role. How would those mentioned and others actually do anything that would attract pay? It would have to be a dull day in Dullsville for anyone to run a course of some description on Air Rec, H&S (heinous to suggest it’s dull I know) or webmastery. You’d need Pro Plus to go with the coffee.
There aren’t many roles on Wing that would actually attract pay in their own right, Sports, FA, FMS and maybe Shooting, outside of these not many. The only reason we have uniformed staff in many of these is accountability and because we are heirarchical. There are CIs around who are far more knowledgable, experienced etc, but because they are CIs they can’t have a Wing post as if it goes wrong, there’s no one who can have their soft bits put in the grinder.
[quote=“pEp” post=16110]
Generally, they have a choice. It’s not mandatory to take up a wing role, people tend to do it for the kudos it brings. The opposite happens on a sqn - you must have an OC, and it will usually fall to the only person who can do it (certainly the case on our squadron).
You could argue they don’t HAVE to do that either, but in reality they do (especially if they’re an officer). No one HAS to be the wing sports officer (and as you’ll have seen recently no one seems to want to be it!), it’s a nicety because they like sports. They don’t generally have to deal with all the standard crap (and as it’s a co-opted post they aren’t running a squadron as well).[/quote]
In an attempt to keep this on topic:
yes those Sports Officers, Webmasters, Bandmasters, Media and Radio Officers aren’t running a Squadron but their responsibility level is above and beyond others at the same rank be it SNCOs or Officers yet they do not get more financial recognition (pay) for those roles, at best more days permitted to claim…which requires further effort to do the days eligible to claim.
as such I disagree with the point that was made: responsibility and “pay” are mutually exclusive and proportional.
I very much doubt the increasing number of SNCOs that are running Squadrons are getting Flt Lt pay so what incentive is there for them other than the “had” to do
Those aren’t executive positions they’re reps.[/quote]
irrespective what you call it my point still stands…there are people with levels of responsibility who arent not in “paid posts”[/quote]
My point also stands - if pay is so important to these people why don’t they go into uniform? We are afterall a uniformed organisation.
Or is this a hypothetical situation, where the individuals aren’t personally concerned at all, but others are on their behalf?[/quote]
I am not stating these CIs are claiming pay is important, nor am I indicating an hypothetical…
I am simply reacting to pEp’s comment that
although I agree in principle, there is no pay scale for a Flt Lt OC and a Flt Lt “Sqn Officer” the variation in roles and responsibility is vastly different yet they are “recognised” through “pay” equally so where is the incentive to put up with that “crap” when they could carry on without all the downsides but maintain the same “pay”?
Actually not quite right - There is Flt Lt (Paid) and Flt Lt (Unpaid) - with the “unpaid” types drawing Fg Off pay.
For Flt Lt (Paid) you have to be filling an established post (full time WSO, Sqn OC etc).
Yep, time-served Flt Lts get paid at their substantive rank of Fg Off.
RE: NCOs not getting Flt Lt pay for being OC sqn - I agree with you. It is wrong, and it shouldn’t happen. Unfortunately, more often than not now becoming an OC is something people feel forced to do, either for the good of the sqn or because they feel they have little choice.
In an ideal world this would never happen, but it’s one of the anomalies we currently have. The only way that person will get more money at the moment is to get a commission.
It’s not easy to do, but as an NCO they have slightly more leeway in refusing command. As an officer it’s been hammered in to me from day one that one day I will command a sqn so I don’t feel I could turn it down, if I’m approached.
[quote=“pEp” post=16122]Yep, time-served Flt Lts get paid at their substantive rank of Fg Off.
[/quote]
ah right…i didnt realize that
[quote=“steve679” post=16135][quote=“pEp” post=16122]Yep, time-served Flt Lts get paid at their substantive rank of Fg Off.
[/quote]
ah right…i didnt realize that[/quote]
Plt Off - paid as Plt Off
Fg Off - paid as Fg Off
FLt Lt (unpaid) - Paid as Fg Off (someone with +12 years service)
Flt Lt (paid) - Paid as Flt Lt (someone in an established post, OC, WSO, RSO etc)
Sqn Ldr (unpaid) - Paid as Flt Lt
Sqn Ldr (paid) - Paid as Sqn Ldr (only a few posts per Wing and Region)
Sqn OC’s are also Flt Lt (Unpaid) until they complete their Senior Course
Or it would seem not Flt Lts at all, depending on local policy!
In the CCF at least, some Sqn Ldrs are paid Fg Off, too.