Rank Structure between Cadet Forces

Cadets Ask the Staff
61

I think that is still correct and taught on (regular) officer training

62

I think they went through a phase of matching RN then SCC then back again. I remember them using Rn ranks with a cdt Coxswain for head of section but that was 25 years ago.

I think the initial rationale was to avoid the confusion between adult staff & cadets

It’s a shame but not sure if theMSSC have the appetite to pivot to a more aligned rank system.

63

Yes still a thing - on Camp the SWO was ‘Warrant Officer X’ on first meeting, and ‘Mr.X’ from then on

64

When I talk to a WO it’s Mr/s Bloggs. When referring to them I use WO.

2 Likes
65

The correct etiquette used to be:
NCOs - Addressed by their Rank when talking to, or about them.
WOs - Addressed as Sir by ORs, Addressed as Mr by OFs, and as WO Bloggs when talking about them.
Plt Off / Fg Off - Addressed as Sir by ORs, addressed as Mr X by seniors and as Mr X when talking about them.
Flt Lt and above - addressed as Sir by ORs and junior OFs, and as Flt Lt X etc as when talking about them.

1 Like
66

Nope. Flt Lts are jnr offs as well, so don’t get addressed as sir by other jnr offs - parades and aircraft captaincy may be different.

Yet another ‘RAFAC myth’?

1 Like
67

It maybe different if they are Officers Commanding.

68

I think the etiquette described by @juliet_mike (& as used to be) seams very Army like which are a lot more stricter on ranks & captain is held to be significantly higher regards than the Lts.

Re commanding Officers one convention I’ve notice creep in is that if the OC is a Plt off or Fg off, only they are called by their rank & any other Sqn officer that is senior in rank to them are referred to as “Mr/Miss/Mrs” in conversation. I think it’s one of those odd unwritten quirks that has crept in and reduces the confusion to the cadets.

69

That’s because Lts and 2Lts are Subalterns and are lower in status to Captains, but all are still jnr offs (@talon?). We don’t have such a distinction in jnr off ranks.

Regarding whether to use sir/ma’am to an OC (or CO as we use the term interchangeably), I guess if you want to use it as a respectful term in front of cadets and are junior to them, ok, but if you’re senior to them it’s not correct. I think the Mr, Mrs, Miss Whoever would be good where OC may be junior to some of their staff

70

Well yes, 2Lt to Capt are all considered junior officers. I can’t speak for the Army, but in the ACF Captains may be held in slightly higher regard as our ranks are appointment based, and if you are a Captain it means you hold a role in a Coy HQ or County. 2Lts and Lts are usually detachment commanders. Some detachments may warrant the rank of Captain, but it is rare.

It is not normal, outside of a formal parade or perhaps your first ever meeting, for a subbie to salute a captain or address them as sir/ma’am. First names is the norm.

71

As the saying goes, “Don’t confuse your rank with my authority”. Said WO has no authority over the Sgt. If the WO has a problem with something the Sgt is doing and a polite word doesn’t work (pulling rank != a polite word) then the issue should be addressed with the ACF county.

Even someone of a higher rank within the ACF but outside the county has no or very limited authority over the Sgt. If a Colonel from county next door rocked up at the detachment and tried throwing their weight (rank) around, they can be told (politely) to jog on.

72

I didn’t think RAFAC officers were actually commissioned any more - perhaps only ex-RAFVR(T).

Been out of it for too long…

73

RAFAC Officers hold a Cadet Forces Commission, its not a forces commission, but it’s still a real commission.

2 Likes
74

Thanks

1 Like
75

Rafac, acf, scc, officers all now hold Cadet Forces Commisions.
This is a new type of Kings Commision created specifically for us.

It is a ‘real’ Kings Commision. As a CFC.

Just a different type like the other types that exist.

This is not a walty statement, just a statement of facts.

6 Likes
76

London Gazette - The Cadet Forces Commission

1 Like
77

Woahhhhhhhhhh what does this part on the next page mean anyone?

"The Schedule to Our Warrant dated 19th February 1990, which made provision with respect to commissioning of officers appointed to the Air Training Corps and the tenure of such commissions, is amended as follows— “8. From the 1st November 2017, regulations 4 and 5 shall cease to have effect, save that— (a) an officer appointed to the Corps before that date shall continue to hold a commission as an officer in the Training Branch of Our Air Force Volunteer Reserves and be governed by the regulations prescribed under regulation 4; and (b) regulation 5 shall continue to apply to officers appointed to the Corps before that date. 9. The power to make Defence Council regulations may, subject to any direction of the Defence Council, be discharged by the Air Force Board.”

78

Wasn’t that supposed to be temporary so that we would hold both Commissions until such a time as they got the paperwork in line to remove us from the VR?

79

Yes - it was then followed by the Air Force Board (?) lett er which removed all of our VR(T) commissions.

80

Anyone got their letter handy? I remember the letter appointing to CFC commission but not the cessation of the VR(T) (to be fair I only skimmed read it)

Have they forget to tell us the VRT removal bit? Wouldn’t be the first time only half job has been done.