[quote=“pEp” post=15533]I say again as no-one has answered - what benefits does this actually bring to the organisation?
I’m sure we’d all agree that change for the sake of it is pointless, so let’s look at it. The document from HQAC was wooly at best at looking at positives, so I’d be keen to hear what others think.[/quote]
None in my view. All the stated positives are transient, temporary or far fetched.
[quote=“glass half empty 2” post=15531]Why are people so strung up about 13 like is some magical point in your life. The only thing is you become a teenager, and this doesn’t instantly bestow you with greater maturity as anyone with children will attest.
I personally feel that the changes in many youngsters are happening earlier as the societal/peer pressure to ‘grow up’ increases. They are forced to be more “mature” and many are unable to cope with this.
Physical ‘maturity’ is purely genetic.[/quote]
Maturity (both physical and mental) is not arbitary in any society. Some childeren will mature faster than others. Some may appear mature but are not. Some may appear immature but are actually quite mature.
The fact is a line has to be drawn somewhere. If we can push it earlier, why not go to 11, why not 10? A line has to be drawn, and it will always be arbitary no matter what age is picked.
The simple fact is that any temporary benefit will be just that, temporary.
As for the peer groups and friends bit - a lot of cadets join the ATC (probably with some pushing on the part of their parents) and find in part that they widen their circle of friends.
Moving the joining time to a year group be it Year 8 (12/13) or Year 9 (13/14) is a good move, as you get more cadets that join together, got to be a good thing, even if they expand their friendship group then fantastic, but the biggest challenge is getting them through the door in the first place and then holding onto them.
Maybe we need to look further at why the average cadet is only around for 18 months, as retaining our current cadets will boost numbers and help push to the target cadet numbers we have for 2020, which this move could also be linked too.
Personally I don’t think we can or should look at or think of it terms of the benefits to the Corps, as these are potentially only numeric. The benefits will be felt at squadron level for the reasons people have already given. Frankly I would cherish only needing to appeal to a single static point ie school year and not the moving birth date. For the higher organisation there will be more problems than benefits as it will need to get its act together. Something we all know is not a strong point.
Speaking to older colleagues there were similar questions 34/35 years ago when membership was opened up to girls. I don’t personally feel there have been any real benefits to the Corps of having girls in the Corps. The GVC existed and still does, so there was and is an avenue for girls. I suppose it avoided grief in relation to equality/diversity legislation. Frankly in the at Sqn level having boys and girls has created more problems in terms of having to deal with the boy/girl relationships forming/breaking up merry-go-round and the particular foible in girls to be best mates one second, greatest of enemies the next and best mates the next. Also I imagine there are instances of inpropriety that would not have happened if the Corps had remained males only.
What evidence do you have to support your theory? Is that evidence local, regional or nationally consistent?
[quote=“Perry Mason” post=15540][quote=“glass half empty 2” post=15531]Why are people so strung up about 13 like is some magical point in your life. The only thing is you become a teenager, and this doesn’t instantly bestow you with greater maturity as anyone with children will attest.
I personally feel that the changes in many youngsters are happening earlier as the societal/peer pressure to ‘grow up’ increases. They are forced to be more “mature” and many are unable to cope with this.
Physical ‘maturity’ is purely genetic.[/quote]
Maturity (both physical and mental) is not arbitary in any society. Some childeren will mature faster than others. Some may appear mature but are not. Some may appear immature but are actually quite mature.[/quote]
Physical and mental maturity is arbitrary as I say physical maturity is arbitrary and genetic. You only have to look at a group of cadets, to see there is no fixed point at which they become ‘mature’, which you have said above. Even looking at siblings you see differences in how they ‘mature’.
What exactly do you mean when you say someone is or isn’t ‘mature’?
For me maturity (in a mental sense) is being level-headed and not prone to outbursts or sulks and able to engage in a sensible conversation. I don’t regard doing silly things or behaving in stupid way as immature, as by that measure some of the antics I’ve seen in a mess would put the participants as extremely immature.
The only potential advantage I see with aligning the joining age with the school year is that of allowing peer groups to join together, but I must ask whether that will result in a better situation and an effective squadron. I would have thought that it would bring the turnover of younger cadets up but not have a huge effect on the number staying for a number of years. If we want to be a mechanism for teaching basic RAF history and heartstart to the widest possible audience that will be a winner.
They may all come in as a year group but their experience through cadets and through life will always meet age-based boundaries; is there really a benefit to removing just one of those?
Where the benefits are only numeric, we need to be careful that we can actually handle the additional increase in numbers across the Corps. Where Sqn’s have intakes this won’t be an issue, but I can see Sqn’s who have the inability to handle intakes struggling to meet the ‘surge’ in demand.
This would also need to include ‘infrastructure’, ‘logistics’ and ‘backup’ from HQAC to Wing to implement this successfully.
As stated, the ACO needs to look at why the average service is only 18 months - perhaps there isn’t enough variety to keep young people interested for longer?
Personally I can’t see any reason to align the eligibility to “joining up” with school years…the ACF, SCC nor Scouts (and various denominations) don’t follow that scheme so why should we?
As mentioned it could cause a “surge” intake, as all eligible recruits start at once which will cause problems
20 recruits all at once will break the “average size” Squadron (~25-35 Cadets).
We had a very successful recruitment campaign after a period without any effort made, and had recruitment numbers in the 20s. the Sqn nearly doubled overnight and we simply did not have the infrastructure or resources to deal with it. subsequently our dropout rate was higher than ever
currently intakes are favoured by HQAC and particularly out Wing, and permits a 3-4month training cycle. On the assumption large intakes could be accommodated, this 3-4 month cycle would be bound to slip to 4/5-6 month cycle to ensure everyone can be seen, aspects like sizing for/ordering/trying on uniform, drill and radio aspects of first class training all require one-to-one time/individual assessment which by definition of a larger group would take longer.
This would have a knock on effect on the number of intakes dropping by potentially half from 4 to only 2 a year
However to counter that
how many times does the average recruitment campaign/intake raise more than 10 potentials? On average I would say we see no more than 8 per intake.
recruits tend to join in groups of friends anyway, and if not drag their mates along for the next recruitment so I don’t see the argument that those <13 can’t join with their mates…if they want to join in they will at a later date.
If we encourage recruitment in September/October at the start of the academic year and do get a big surge then apart from the aspects raised above, it is the worse time of year for maintaining interest on a Squadron night due to entering into the Winter months and the weather it brings , which for our Sqn at least is the quietest time of year both on the weekends and for getting out of the classroom on a Parade night, even drill is a challenge given the lack of adequate lighting.
with large intakes you won’t be able to engage with everyone and so bound to lose some you might not have done should they have joined in a smaller, more involving intake.
however that is concentrating on the “intakes” side of reducing the joining age.
As I see it this is about the numbers game but as stated above HQAC could (should) improve/increase numbers by dealing with retention rates, and correct why the average Cadet sticks around for 18-24 months.
It is a bit “closing the gate after the horse has bolted”
Yes we do.
I’ll be honest, there is no appreciable difference in size between the average 12 year old and the average 13 year old. They are both small and both get given 160/88 PCS. 
I don’t know if it’s lack variety, academic pressure, inability of youngsters to focus or combination of these and other factors, that creates the average length of service. Although I do think the way we were encouraged to get new cadets doing things hasn’t helped matters.
I do think that many do not take full advantage of the activities the Corps offers, which engenders ‘boredom’ and much of that is due to parental disinterest. Those that have parents that have an interest and are willing to take them here and there, get involved and generally stay longer. You see this in school. Parents who show an interest invariably have children that get on a do better. I know for a fact that had it not been for my dad and two other dads who shared hauling their sons and their mates to things, I wouldn’t have got ½ as much from the Corps as a cadet as I did. I don’t see it as a function of sqn staff to act as a taxi service, unless they themselves are attending. I know some sqns with SOVs that end up with staff out most weekends, dragging the little Johnnies and Janes everywhere, when it should really be parents. It’s the major thing that puts me off having an SOV.
Every little opportunity that I am made aware of is posted on the sqn noticeboard and I’ve long got past the disappointment of not getting any names go up. If the cadets don’t want to do it, so be it. If a cadet says I’m bored, then I ask what they have done and why they haven’t done some things, and that being bored is all part of life and at times you have to get stuck in and create your own interest and not wait for it to come to you.
Whether or not parents of potentially younger cadets will be more willing to do the taxiing, I don’t know.
Getting cadets starting in September should mean that by the time you hit the summer period they are ready to go. But as has been mentioned, much of what they may be able to do requires HQAC and all points between getting their finger out.
I suppose it rather depends on the Sqn staff, and any direction they are given on implementing such a policy. It could possibly be beneficial to have a larger group joining at the beginning of the school year, particularly if the Sqn is based on or near a school premises. However, there are a few potential drawbacks.
Recruiting in September, particularly when quite a few who may join “en masse” may not stay for too long, would mean their first few months may be when the units activities are at their most restrictive due to the time of year and the weather (particularly for the younger ones perhaps); the flip side to this is that, age permitting, all these recruits should be fully spammed up ready for any activities the following summer. Sqns may also go along the route of “you join now or not at all”, restricting the passing cadets who hear about them and just drop in to the next cadet night; a situation where they are told to go away and come back at a later date would be unsatisfactory (unless they are too young). The other disadvantage is that opening yourself to a large number of new cadets at one time will present a bit of a logistical headache (stores etc), particularly if some don’t stay the course.
If you’re not too careful you end up with a “recruiting” system (in the loosest sense of the word, as to be fair we shouldn’t be recruiting as such!) which is as inefficient as that to join the regular forces! 
:lol:
Yes we do.
I’ll be honest, there is no appreciable difference in size between the average 12 year old and the average 13 year old. They are both small and both get given 160/88 PCS. :D[/quote]
i stand corrected…but the Scouts dont, that still follows a age rather than academic year cutoff
how does ACF recruitment/intakes managed? approach the school ofr an assembly at the beginning of the School year and expect a mass of interest?
Just because they can join in September of year 8, doesn’t mean you have to run your intake then!
You could do Jan (of the following year) intake to get them through 1st class in the spring, then onto camps and other activities in the summer.
Yes we do.
I’ll be honest, there is no appreciable difference in size between the average 12 year old and the average 13 year old. They are both small and both get given 160/88 PCS. :D[/quote]
i stand corrected…but the Scouts dont, that still follows a age rather than academic year cutoff
how does ACF recruitment/intakes managed? approach the school ofr an assembly at the beginning of the School year and expect a mass of interest?[/quote]
The just sort of turn up really. Few detachments that I know of run specific “intakes”. The problem with recruiting assemblies is that 40 tend to turn up at once.
[quote=“MattB” post=15636]Just because they can join in September of year 8, doesn’t mean you have to run your intake then!
You could do Jan (of the following year) intake to get them through 1st class in the spring, then onto camps and other activities in the summer.[/quote]
Ahhh, Matt, you can guarantee someone would try and enforce a single intake in September, however bad a plan it was!
January would be sensible… or just leave it as it is now! :lol:
On the first point my experience of intakes is that you accept them for a couple of weeks or so after the main night, as this allows those that don’t turn up for whatever reason or a chance. One of the biggest headaches when arranging an evening is conflict with school events, given we fix a date several months in advance to ensure we can advertise it and schools, in my experience, don’t seem to do things much more than a couple of weeks.
As for the second, even relatively small numbers (8-10) cause a problem logistically and in all honesty you might see a slight increase in intakes, but I would be astounded if you got hordes as some are suggesting.
My bold - makes sense - you’ll go far with this sort of thinking.
Just not in the ACO though!
;)[/quote]
That’s good because I am a Service Instructor from another Service
Can they make it clear in the dress regs to either not have to iron in creases into MTP-PCS or to have to, its getting annoying the number of cadets who either have them ironed in or not, this is something i think needs to be addressed and added into AP1358C on bader, maybe into V1.05, maybe someone from HQAC who can amend the regs would like to discuss i??
Again the same question in another thread try posting it in the correct area…