It’s a shambles.
Total lack of centralised Comms.
AGAIN.
1 Like
Just seen this on Face of Book: Redirecting... They didn’t mess about with their after lockdown first parade back 
1 Like
Fair play to them.
I disagree, the concrete guidance was clear that applied for the national lockdown only, back to how we were before that now.
I nwlieve as per guidance yesterday/ today from OC Wg…
Interesting bit on how the ACF are dealing with it:
2 Likes
Very much inline with the NYA guidance. They can attend if they are there as a leader/instructor in a bubble but can only participate virtually. 
1 Like
I noticed the NYA guidance has also had the wording strengthened around how persistent bubbles should be, which is good.
This mirrors what we’ve been told.
It makes sense but no such detail down my way.
1 Like
CAC letter has come to me via email, the route was
Comdt SO @ 1649 Wed 3 Dec to RCs
RC SW @ 1721 Wed 3 Dec to OC Wgs & WEXOs
WEXO @ 1836 Wed 3 Dec to All Wing
Quote from the SO
The document will be going onto BADER for wider release tomorrow morning.
Quote from RC SW
Amended V9 sqn parades guide and V4 ftf trg guide to be issued tomorrow.
2 Likes
Still nothing here. Guessing it’s being held up at wing as RC L&SER is normally pretty quick with these.
I know it isn’t following the chain of command but would it make sense for these updates to go directly from Region to OCs, Wg SMEs etc? The TSAs could do this, they are already doing it for other safety updates and they are full time staff.
Got rid of that 1:5 ratio suggestion from AT. Good.
Don’t understand the climbing wall restriction though, given this piece of research:
3 Likes
Does the NYA define what is a “leader”?
Our line: “they must not receive training” seems to be a bit of a strong interpretation at first glance.
It appears that we could have 15 cadets and, say, 4 CFAV “leaders” present; with 1 CFAV out the front instructing. I’ve seen no policy which says “CFAVs can only be present if instructing and they are not permitted to receive any training.”
Why doesn’t the same follow for staff cadets? If you had 1 CFAV instructing and 3 CFAV were present (and also learning the subject) they would still be acting in their undeniable capacity of “a leader”. Why is it different if it were 1 CFAV and 3 Staff Cadets in the exactly the same capacity?
I suppose I’m saying that the definition of a “leader” need not be tied to: “is actively instructing”.
We are apparently also permitted for CFAVs to meet in their own group for the purposes of planning and “preparing” (which has always involved ensuring that the staff are suitably trained to deliver their session), but we are expressly forbidden from letting staff cadets join such preparation.
Seems a bit odd to me.
2 Likes
During the NYA seminar, the NYA CEO really stressed to “not overthink that [the registering of o18’s as volunteers/leaders]”
The RAFAC “They must not receive training” is just another way of saying “the training must be aimed at the <18’s”. We need to be able to justify every adult who is attending, be that a CFAV or Staff Cadet, and so long as you can say “We need X & Y Staff cadets to assist in the running or supervision of this session” then carry on.
I feel this is worth challenging, if we are recognising our staff cadets as leaders/volunteers then we should be able to invite them along to training/planning sessions along with other CFAV. Where exactly does it state staff cadets are forbidden?
2 Likes
I’m taking the line from the latest “COVID-19 Directive - Update”
“This restriction also means that groups of staff cadets are not permitted to form bubbles of their own for the purpose of being taught.”
On second read I suspect that he probably means 'they can’t group together to receive cadet training separate from the under 18s", though “the purpose of being taught” would rather still prohibit us from teach staff cadets for the purpose of them passing that on in their own lessons.
Ahh right, well with the new position recognising them as leaders/volunteers I’d like to think we could challenge that.
It’s all about who benefits from the activity I suppose. If you can claim that the training/activity is to help deliver activities for the <18’s then staff cadets should be able to join in (running this on a separate night etc).
If however, the activity is just for >18’s who won’t then be that skill/experience whatever to run activities for <18’s then that’s an NYA RED level activity and only “vulnerable adults” should be invited after a “triage”.
I’m glad this is all panning out to be as simple as quoting lines from ACP 20 to define people as leaders or not 
What happened to: