Totally agree… under the “current” regs by the time I make SL time served I would of spent 45 years in the RAFAC (ATC and CCF)… of course I will be well and truly out by then…
I’d be quite happy to be whatever rank, paid as Pilot Officer. I’m not here for the money, it’s not a job. The rank recognises the commitment - which is nice - but ultimately unimportant in the grand scheme of things.
We all know great Fg Officers and beyond lousy Wing Cos.
4 Likes
I would have the same for NCO ranks - WOs for Cmd type appointments (OC Sqn, Wing type roles) and revert to FS on return to being a Sqn NCO
Dons Kevlar…
1 Like
Cadets are only around for 18-24 months on average so most won’t know/care. Those that do will probably be able to understand why
2 Likes
Likewise for having 2 or more Flt Lts on a Sqn. It doesn’t impact cadets.
The decision to revert to Fg Off was about managing and ‘incentivising’ officers, not about cadets. I hope the same misinformed approach isn’t taken with NCOs but I won’t hold my breath.
1 Like
No Argument here.
I suspect that is exactly what might happen.
Although, there may be a time-served element as there is within the SCC/RMC. Once their WOs have served 5 years in a WO2/WO1 post they retain that rank.
1 Like
Last I heard it was basically on the cards Sqn OC or Wing Role…
Which would be fair enough, if it was applied to Commissioned Officers as well.
1 Like
The biggest question in all this is why?
What benefit does it actually bring to anyone? If it doesn’t cost as per flt lt unpaid, I’d argue it’s more of an disincentive to those it affects than a bonus to those who can get it.
Same with NCO appointments. If we’ve openly said it doesn’t mean anything, why would we do it? I can see that for NCOs there is a cost attached, so maybe we should do an acting (paid) or acting (unpaid) for their ranks too? Cap both at Fg Off or FS, unless they hold one of these mystical “command positions” everyone seems to flap about.
Anything that shows recognition of volunteering is a good thing. If that’s a small extra line on a shoulder or a slightly different hat then who really cares?
1 Like
Not really. I had been a Flt Lt in the ATC for 9yrs but 2yrs after transferring to the CCF(RAF) I made Sqn Ldr.
Though, if we compare to commissioned promotions…
As an SNCO one has to earn their promotion to FS (with at least 4 years service); and then one has to earn their promotion to WO (also with another 4 years service.
I grant that in the past, even currently in some places, promotions are given out to almost anyone who asks… They’re not supposed to be automatic for all intents and purposes, and those OCs Wing are not helping the situation.
In the future, promotions won’t be automatic. I do not believe that a FS simply stepping in as Sqn OIC, or into a Wing post will get WO… A suitable post will be part of the requirement, but they will also have to demonstrate suitability to hold the rank.
Currently the commissioned side gain automatic promotion to Fg off after 2 years and even promotion to Flt Lt is automatic by holding the post of Sqn OC.
So one might say that a WO who has proven themself over 13 years of service, two earned promotions, and 5 years working at WO level is justified in retaining their rank; versus a Flt Lt who may only have 2 years under their belt before their automatic promotion 2 up. 
I think they’d need to thinking about the criteria for officers retaining their rank if it were going to be “equal” across the cadres.
For SNCOs at least, the point is to make it mean something.
The goal is to have FS and WO in post who are actually in a position of greater knowledge, and with a greater level of responsibility to manage those below them in the structure.
That’s already the case with commissioned officers.
A Flt Lt will either be a Sqn OC and/or hold a wing post - that means they are expected to take greater responsibility than the Plt Off or Fg Off whose only duty is as a subordinate on a Sqn.
I assume you are looking after a large unit then?
I don’t think there would be half as many problems if there was a little bit of consistency… Between SNCO and commissions but also with how it is administered between regions/wings, and even then within the wings themselves.
and between the ATC and CCF…
2 Likes
Yes, consistency is definitely an issue.
Though, the constant sticking point is the precedent set within the RAF for automatic Plt Off-Fg Off.
Within Wings is probably the hardest to smooth over…
If a previous OS Wing has handed out FS and WO like sweeties at a children’s party and the new one wants to apply the proper care and attention it becomes problematic when the inevitable rejection of a candidate is followed up by “But Bloggs was given FS and she only turns up 2 nights a month and never does weekends…”
Surely if a post is deemed to be a WO post then they shouldn’t be giving it to someone unsuitable for the rank. If they do give it to them but without the rank surely that’s just a way of saying “we think you’re unsuitable for the job but no one else wanted it”
I would 100% agree… In an ideal world.
But take, for example, the role of Sqn OIC… That might be picked up by a FS who is not yet WO material, but there is noone else to take it on.
In which case a policy which says “If you are suitable in all other ways for WO AND are taking up a suitable post then you get WO.”. There is nothing to prevent the ‘okay, but not yet a WO’ FS from performing the role just as they would anyway as a FS.
In the same way that an Officer doesn’t HAVE to be a Sqn Ldr to, run Wing Shooting, or First Aid, or STEM…
But why do we only care about the greater level of knowledge when it comes to SNCO’s?
Yes if you step back from your Command role you don’t have the same amount of responsibility, but your sure as hell going to have a lot of knowledge tucked away from your years as an OC or. WSO.
By demoting people for daring to take a step back your are encouraging those people to leave. For most people taking a step back from being OC or Wing X Officer means that their is something going on be it disillusionment with the Organisation or Stress at home, to then add demotion into the mix is for many going to be the straw that breaks the Camels back.
It doesn’t gain the origination anything, it just kicks long serving volunteers right in the knackers.
1 Like
Yeah, I can also see that side of it.
I suppose that a change in mindset would develop. People now might be miffed by a “demotion”, but once the policy has been in place for several years and everyone just knows that it’s an acting rank until you’ve done 5 years the perception will be different.
We could compare to the real world… If someone stepped out of a managerial position at work because they wanted to go back to the simplicity of a lower level job on the floor would they still expect to be called a Manager and be paid as a Manager?
No. They wouldn’t.
1 Like