Glad you like it!
1 Like
Can I ask what sort of stick people in a voluntary organisation think should be employed, if we’re suggesting something as simple as RCs perhaps instructing wing OCs and WWOs to instruct sqn OCs to obey a future direction to use an authorised badge or nothing shouldn’t be enough?
It’s fundamentally like any of our other branding rules. If there’s a will to have people observe simple branding rules, then people who enjoy being leaders in this organisation should buy-in and observe those rules. We can obviously do messaging to accompany it and discuss why it’s important.
I’ve been given instructions that I’ve needed to follow to preserve the integrity of the organisation in the past. No stick required — team player!
Just interested as this point about sticks has come up several times, yet no examples of sticks have been mentioned. I haven’t seen need for a stick yet in the organisation, apart from activities not being authorised if mandatory training and process aren’t being followed, perhaps.
1 Like
Honestly, I don’t know.
If you punish a unit because its badge is “unauthorised,” and stop the cadets engaging in activities as a result, then that would just be a ridiculous overreaction, and punishing the wrong people, for something that fundamentally isn’t wrong.
Military units have had “unauthorised” badges for centuries, the headshed have tried numerous times to crack down on them, and in the end, the units usually manage to work their badges back in somehow. When battledress was introduced in 1937, the Army saw it as an opportunity to remove the plethora of individual unit badges which had appeared during WW1 and after.
By the end of WW2, almost all of the previous badges were back, plus a few new ones.
That’s because, rebelling over things which are practically inconsequential is actually good for a units esprit de corps. Yes the unit may have a bad badge, but it’s their bad badge, and the act of sticking two fingers up to the chain of command helps create a sense of belonging to the unit, the idea that military units are all uniform is largely nonsense.
That’s why, despite all the efforts of WWOs over the decades, units still have flight markers, still have their own TRFs for greens and all manner of other nonsense deemed verboten by AP1358C, (or whatever it’s called now.) because, fundamentally, it’s fun.
You’re new to this game, but your aim and this particular task isn’t new. I’ve seen people try and do exactly this several times over the years, and it didn’t work.
That’s not so say I don’t think it’s laudable, and there are plenty of units who don’t have badges at all, or want new ones approved who will engage with an official process that’s easier and, importantly, cheaper. But my advice to you is pick your battles. You won’t make any friends by throwing weight around and telling units they can’t have their badges anymore, you’re more likely to achieve success by isolating the unit badges that don’t look the same as the rest.
Start with the Regions and the Wings, they’re the worst offenders really, because if they can’t set a consistent example in at least styling, let alone college of arms authorisation, what hope do you have with the Squadrons?
1 Like
All makes sense. And to be clear again, the idea of sticks isn’t one I’m proposing — positive engagement and promotion is my goal, although I do think it’s required that the rules are clearer and say no to the unauthorised stuff outright.
Giving any sort of guidance on unauthorised stuff does two things:
-
Blurs the lines so you can’t really do anything about it and gives far too much leeway for incontestable interpretation by people looking to justify whatever they want
-
Technically gives permission, thus compounding the issue of people thinking they have something legit and investing in it.
I’m pleased to say I’ve had wing / region proactive outreach already, so this positive engagement angle is working amazingly considering I haven’t specifically targeted anyone for new work!
1 Like
Is there a simple option of an ‘interim’ badge (ATC badge with Sqn number somehow) which could be pre approved? So Sqns can move to that for t shirts or whatever whilst they go through the process of a new authorised badge.
See here:
1 Like
The GAI (for RAF badges) says something about being able to use a higher formation’s badge with the number plate and text changed accordingly. The problem with applying that principle to RAFAC is that many of the wing and region badges are unauthorised (and never would be authorised in their current state).
Maybe a simple document going out to all squadrons highlighting what should happen, the process of getting a ‘new’ crest, costs, etc.
At the moment, I’ve heard or seen nothing through the official route. We can’t have ACC generating a process when HQAC just sit back and do nothing 
2 Likes
I was under the impression that a number of the Sqn crests in my wing had already been through some sort of approval, including the Wing crest. Unfortunately for my Sqn, this was under a previous OC, with no hard copy paperwork to show either way; I suspect that we are not the only ones in this situation. This is where I can see the most pushback, where people believed that crests were already ‘approved’.
There will no doubt be OCs looking at how spending £650 will actually benefit the cadet experience where a pattern has been used for decades. I can see that it would be a nice to have a College of Arms authorised version, but see that many would baulk at £650 though. I also thought that JTofL was previously supposed to be providing some sort of liason on that front with the College - I’d be interested to hear what happened there.
1 Like
And a big part of building that positive engagement that @OC.1324 wants will (at least in my mind) require leading from the top, why should a Sqn engage if the wing or region isn’t?
2 Likes
But considering you can’t enforce the rules, than your two options are clearly better than nothing.
You’re approaching this with too much of an absolutist mindset, and it won’t work, and all that will happen is you’ll get frustrated and burn out.
I’ve seen it happen plenty of times, in plenty of contexts in the RAFAC
1 Like
Except he’s got enough engagement to keep him going, and as more engage its likely others will follow.
4 Likes
Yes, I said that earlier. You basically need to make it uncool to have a bad badge.
But, if you send out emails to all of the units that don’t comply and tell them “your badge is ‘unauthorised’ desist using it immediately, destroy all products and items of clothing that bear it and use this generic template instead” you’re going to become a figure of ridicule, entrench resistance and find that you have no power or ability to achieve the aim.
Here’s an idea for positive reinforcement:
No.3A dress could be the ideal vehicle here. If you convinced the head shed to increase the use of 3A dress, rewrote the regs to make them actually make sense, but required Squadron Polo Shirts to be approved by the WWO before a unit could wear 3A, and such approval contingent upon the badge being approved by the College, then allowed 3A to be worn at suitable wing events in lieu of 3, such as Wing Activities Day, you would create a scenario where the haves and have nots would interact, and there would be a clear and pressing incentive for OCs to engage in the process, because their cadets would be saying, why can’t we wear Unit Polo shirts?
Couple that with a much cheaper approval process, and maybe a contract for providing Squadron Polos and the ball would start rolling much more quickly.
4 Likes
Another positive enforcement idea:
Squadrons can order new signs for their buildings. Each sign has to be unique to the unit, because it bears the unit name, but it isn’t hand painted, so presumably whoever makes them could easily use any suitable approved graphic.
Negotiate with whoever makes the signs to use approved Squadron Badges instead of the ATC badge, then, offer it for free when a new sign is needed because it needs replacing, or a paid for upgrade.
This is individually organised by Sqn committees locally - when we needed new one we used a local firm & RFCA CAA put it up.
I doubt my unit did that when we needed a new one?
But still, make it an option to have an approved badge on, and there’s a good visible incentive to have an approved badge.
That’s very true, there certainly were Region if not Corps rules that any new or amended badges needed to be signed off at that level for those who didn’t want to spend £650 getting it done officially.
Certainly back when I was an OC I would’ve been strongly opposed to spending such a large amount of money in that way.
1 Like
This is another issue with arbitrarily decreeing a load of badges as “unauthorised” when they arguably were by reference to the myriad of local policies that were and are in force.
Idea No.3: set up, or convince an existing air cadet meme page to relentlessly take the Mickey out of the gash badges in the ATC.
I am exploring this to see if something may be possible.
1 Like