Any noticed that the figures for this year are just TBC…
Maybe a sign of things to come
Which figures where?
There aren’t any changes to renumeration this year that have been promulgated. There is a review going on but that won’t affect anything this year I wouldn’t think.
I would guess they are just awaiting details of what the RAF will be paying at those rates.
What you are saying is that the RAF doesn’t know what they are paying the regulars or reserves this month. Our daily rate is the same as anybody in the forces at the same rank as the RAFAC.
No, I’m saying they are awaiting to see if there are any changes to the relevant rate considering it is the start of a new financial year this month.
Why would we need to see what the RAF do? Since the removal of the VR(T) commission, HQAC can set the levels to whatever they want. There is no need to link renumeration to the forces anymore!
3 Likes
Absolutely.
You do realise your suggestion would mean people who have spent their lives tugging fetlocks and expecting others to do the same, in respect to them, thinking for themselves.
Frankly I think that now we have lost the precursor of the military prerogative, we should have a flat rate remuneration, that all staff get remunerated. In the Air Cadets having a badge or different badge should mean you get more money. for all doing the same thing.
I have no tolerance for horse abuse!
3 Likes
at a guess because our budget comes from their budget - it is easier to justify “pay” for a Sgt at £60/day when it is in line with the RAF’s £60/day rate
i have heard this discussed various times, by numerous audiences and heard believable rumours that the white towers are considering this.
you’ll notice the change on an SMS event which now indicates a Staff member as either “Director” or “participant” this is the start of the “reward for effort” change to remuneration.
why is it a Flt Lt can claim £96 for a day assisting at an event while the event organiser, a Sgt gets £60?
this is the suggested move forward - if nothing else I expect it to reduce costs
1 Like
It is actually a way to distinguish between people who are needed to run the activity, and those are just there to take part. Participants can easily be changed after approval, but directing staff can only be changed by un-approving and re-approving.
It isn’t necessarily useful for most squadron activities but it is handy on something like an AVIP briefing day
Because as a Flt Lt, even if I’m not running the event you can guarantee who’d be the one hauled in to explain mishap or injury.
1 Like
But anyway. Stop scaremongering. It’s surely just because the finance team haven’t got the numbers confirmed to them yet.
This gets to the crux of our rank based system. Rank isn’t there to do a job per se as there isn’t one role in the Air Cadets that actually needs a specific rank to do it, it is apportion blame or responsibility.
But a flat rate of pay that everyone gets, would remove the “I’m not doing that because I’m not a …”. Plus save money overall.
It would also mean I would do less, as if you’re not going to give me the benefit why would I put up with the crap?
4 Likes
i see your point perfectly
if it is a bucket shaking exercise in November or a town fun run the Cadets marshall at i can see this being run by “generic Squadron Staff” and not necessarily something that needs to be run by the OC/Flt Lt and limited thus has “crap” to deal with.
However the sections where there is no pay, on a unit, twice a week, at the desk (be that at Squadron, home or otherwise) managing and commanding the Squadron there is crap yet no “benefit”.
Although a Flt Lt/OC may not be taking on a responsibility at a weekend community event, they are not recognised for the responsibility they do take on.
Would also mean “I’m not doing that because now pay wise we’re equals”.
This is one of the reasons for different pay - as we’re differently culpable in different circumstances.
yes this is the official line, and i have heard from trusted sources all part of the bigger picture and a good start to “pay” by responsibility which is being considered.
i disagree, whatever the Squadron weekend activity there is someone who is lead, someone raising the paperwork, getting it advertised to the Cadets, liaising with the a 3rd party perhaps, they are putting in as many hours ahead of the event as the event itself in coordination.
it maybe on the day (because of good management) the day runs itself so there is little distinguishing difference between Staff “input” but that isn’t to say everyone offered an equal contribution
It was the actual intention - I was in the room when it was raised and discussed. It may have secondary benefits and it does lend itself to supporting a level of responsibility-based remuneration and I am entirely OK with that.
The SMS activity is to authorise the activity itself, with the overall responsibility for being there and taking charge being assigned to the activity lead.
All other prep is done FoC and those involved in ancillary duties, but not actually present on the activity, have no reason to be listed on the activity itself. For example, when I do all of the prep and management for a team to go to Nijmegen, I send them on their merry way but do not appear on the activity.
Which then brings into question the need for people with specific ranks doing specific jobs. There isn’t one, other than to play some game that is now, since the CFC, defunct.
The whole rank structure is about no more than to control people and exert pressure, which works a bit. But me trying to tell a CI you will do this, doesn’t work.
I know a few people who are in love with their rank and one in particular who does a “do you who/what I am”, when they want to get their way, which they don’t, as no one takes any notice.
1 Like