Not sure I agree with that. There are plenty of good volunteers who have not attended a camp because there is so much more available.
I am also not saying that they will never attend a camp but this is after the 2 year period by which point they should have plenty of experience of RAFAC and how to behave on stations etc.
Considering there is very little difference between what a CI can do & what’s needed for uniform staff why would two years be needed?
This would also take us out of alignment with the other cadet forces & I don’t think it will solve the issues we have. The organisation is already with a top complex hierarchy - adding a rank of another status with just add to this rather than flattering the pyramid.
Now I know it’s used by techs & musicians but could an idea be to add the chief tech rank in?
Above a Sgt, below flight & slims down the pyramid. However I’m not a fan of adding additional ranks in for the uniform staff as I don’t think it would work. .
We are already out of alignment with other cadet forces through a number of actions taken by the CoC. 
I’ve been in uniform 4 years. OIC aside, I’ve not been on a camp to an actual station where this would be an issue. The opportunities to do so are much less now than in any previous generation of air cadet volunteer, we simply don’t interact with the real RAF like that anymore.
I think some of them bin off / never got their white tabs…
PI rank?
admins can I have my own warning code for that comment
PI rank gets my vote.
Its outside the military constuct.
Denonstrated as works by the ACF.
Rank slides exisit already.
Easy.
In MTP
And…
We all wear mtp slides now anyway.
Blues ones could be made ffs!
Indeed they could, iirc there are some plain green ones in use by the ACF too.
In any case would a PI be issued blues or would they need to wait until they are boarded for their substantive rank?
So what about the former-CI with 5 years experience who’s done loads of camps, now they can’t go on camp because they are in uniform?
The new member of staff with qualifications/skills but they can’t come on camp because they haven’t been in uniform for 2 years yet?
What do they actually learn by spending 2 years not going on Camp as a Corporal?
I don’t have an issue with the idea of Corporal, but it should replace Acting Sergeant and you should get promoted once you have done your course.
Not sure whether it does or not - speaking locally there’s concerned it takes too long & not everyone wants to go into uniform straight away.
However SCC seem to have an interesting one where Civilian Instructors can wear full working uniform instead of a polo top. Perhaps this might be a route for us?
CI - Non uniformed
CI - uniformed (after basic drill & uniform training)
Probationary Uniform ranks (A/Plt Off & A/Sgt or Perhaps P/Plt Off & P/Sgt would be more appropriate )
Training rank (Plt off & Sgt)
Substantive rank (Fg Off & FS)
Operational rank (Flt Lt & WO)
Tactical Rank (Sqn Ldr)
Strategic Rank (Wg Cdr)
Thats fine and to my 2nd point in my original post, should a CPL attend a camp etc they can use the same accomodation as a CI would currently. It is just that many people have complained about them not being able to mess in the Sgt’s mess etc and that this would cause a wedge. I personally dont think this would be a problem.
I would then remove the acting Sgt rank as Cpl would be the training rank. You do the normal course within 12 months.
To become a SNCO, you may need to do a specifically designed course (if there was a need?) Along with whatever HQAC felt was needed as part of the promotion matrix.
By adding in another layer, people who are either not suitable to become a WO or who are never chosen for a key role within the org that entitles them to wearing T&L’s still have progression.
But CI’s on Camp stay in the Sergeants Mess, hence the issue.
I’m not sure an adult JNCO rank would solve the issue. If the issue is a training rank before SNCO then PI (ACF) or allowing CIs in uniform (SCC) is the way to go.
I have also heard from ACF folk that their system is too slow especially for those wanting to commission however.
could it be because they don’t have CIs/CIs who can remain as Cis for a lifetime of volunteering?
I can speak for the SCC as I don’t know enough about it, but the ACF has a far better post recruitment training scheme for their walk through the door newbie CFAVs.
there is a structured training and in X months/years they’ll have ticked off A, B and C elements and after which time a fully fledged uniformed CFAV.
the RAFAC doesn’t do that.
a recuited CI walks through the door and handed a small bush worth of woodwork, converted into admin (forms) to fill out, they visit Wing for an induction of some sort/get a chat with a WSO and then appointed - the progression and CPD ends there.
it is only then up to the individual if they progress into uniform and what flavour that might be.
I believe others do better as once they take on a new CFAV there is a structure 12-24 months training program.
the RAFAC accepts CFAV through the door, appoints them as CIs and forgets about them leaving it up to the individual to decide if they want more.
I can see the above being a seed to tangent the discussion and take it off topic becoming a “do we need/should we have CIs” but I hope it doesn’t go down that route (and sorry to @pEp and other admins who call “topic”) but to answer the question what do others do differently I think this is the answer
it is how we treat/react to newly recruited Staff walking through the door and their opinion on what rank is
I think this is the nub of the issue - there is no “progression pathway” that is easy to follow & deliverable at unit.
A flow chart of “new staff member starts” what do you do next would be helpful to help on board & progress then. It would need to be specific enough so you can measure progress but flexible enough to allow for variations at Sqn & with the individual.
For us, anything more than what we currently have isn’t deliverable at unit.
With the best will in the world, we don’t have staff spare to be able to deliver staff training.
That’s kinda precisely why I’m thinking we need a pathway.
It’s like on squadron modules which can be delivered by anyone to take the pressure off so
In short blue PTS exc Classification but could be other modules? Open to Thoughts 
the aim is to integrate the new staff into the unit so it’s a case of where they slot into the carousel
As an organisation we absolutely must refocus on staff training.
We cannot expect to deliver a high quality output for the cadets if we don’t train our staff properly; and we are not currently delivering the best for the cadets that we could.
Not only that, but if we want to retain staff and encourage more into the necessary uniform role then we have to give them a sense of purpose and direction too.