I wonder how serious that “threat” was…
Perhaps calling their bluff would have resulted in a different experience?
1 Like
Seconded except for the SNCOs…as uniformed CFAV just as likely to be asked yet never fallen under the umbrella of “being given orders”.
I agree I’ve heard less tales of people being asked since CFC though
Or… Showing them how great this organisation is and getting them into uniform now.
And in particular where people join wanting to be a uniformed instructor we need to stop forcing them into the CI role for a year or 2 years ‘holding’.
I’m afraid that I don’t concur at all that we need CIs MORE than we need uniformed staff.
Yes. This is critical if we want to fix things.
Clearly some of the reasons are because people have these fundemental misconceptions about uniformed service, but we do need the full picture.
1 Like
hence my statement:
I wouldn’t consider the relatively small number of people who’ve posted in this thread a representative sample of the entire cohort of RAFAC volunteers
1 Like
@steve679 - I’ve been in and around the ACO as a CI, SI and helpful regular for 27 years (horrifying!) in half a dozen different wings and 3/4 different regions. The situation @ccw34 describes is far more representative of the ACO that I have seen and experienced over all that time and across England and Wales than that which you suggest is the norm.
It’s great that bits of the ACO exist where these behaviours don’t occur, but I’m afraid that either I’m astonishingly unlucky in repeatedly finding myself in the tiny minority where they do, or the problem is a great deal more widespread than you are prepared to accept it is…
3 Likes
This. And more National Service than the Regs!
2 Likes
Yeah. Good luck.
How many of us could easily name 5 Sqn ocs and 5 Sqn Ldrs who should be bumped down!
It’s never happened, never will.
This org is riddled with nepotism and failure throughout the command structure.
There certainly should be a matrix for promotion to Sqn ldr and wing Cdr!
Checking SMS, if I put all the sector commanders in my wing together between them, if you discount climatic injuries, prevent and heart start they have less than 10 quals on SMS.
That’s between 4 of them.
No help or use to man nor beast.
If I need someone to come over and drink tea however, I know who to call.
Bumping down Squadron OC’s could be an issue, as how many of them are doing it through necessity and the fact there is no one else, rather than through pure suitability. And to clarify, I am not wishing to sound negative to any of those OC’s who are in that position, as to be honest, I am one of them. My Squadron is not perfect, and I am far from the perfect OC, but we keep things going, ensure the essentials are done and do the best we can for the Cadets.
3 Likes
If only we had a far greater pool of uniformed staff from which to draw… 
I was aiming more at WSC/WCO than OC, but either way I never said it would be easy or quick. Changing a culture can be a slow process.
I’ll get my flamethrower.
You lot grab the brooms to sweep up the ashes.
We will be done by this time next week.
If all current CIs were uniformed, it wouldn’t necessarily increase the number of CFAVs who are willing to be OCs
1 Like
Perhaps not.
But on the other hand many of the new OCs I’m seeing at the moment have been CI for 2-5 years, brand new into commission and thrust into the role of OC.
Had they been a Commissioned Officer for 2 to 5 years they would now have 2-5 years of Officer experience under the belt before being given command.
If we make a change now to increase our pool of uniformed staff then perhaps in 5-10 years we won’t have to keep throwing baby officers into command positions.
You keep coming back with arguments based around what might happen if all current CIs were forced into uniform… But that’s not what I’ve been saying at all from the beginning.
1 Like
At the moment, I’m not sure there’s much difference between:
3 yrs CI + 2 yrs officer before becoming OC
and
5 yrs officer before becoming OC
As we’ve all agreed, there’s very few things you can’t do as a Uniformed CFAV, and none of those impact on being an OC. CIs can hold all other exec roles on a unit, so does it matter if they’ve done that as a CI or in uniform?
Others in this thread have advocated a Cpl / PI rank for new uniformed staff, I fail to see how being a Cpl for 3 yrs then officer for 2 yrs is any different to the status quo
Given that the CI can ‘dip in and out, only teaching once every two weeks…’ I’d say that there’s a world of difference. Especially considering that the 2 years as an Officer before becoming OC doesn’t necessarily exist. I can think of at least 4 brand new officers in command of units who were CIs only a few weeks before hand.
I’m definitely not in favour of Cpl rank. I’d say that the SCC have a good system… CI is an option but uniform is the default. Make them Probationary Sgts until they complete their period of probation and modular induction training.
I’d see Sgt become and introduction / basic position, with no requirements other than modular training at a Wing/Region level that requires 0 overnight and CAN be delivered solely on evenings.
From this point you can complete further training, such as SSIC, which would be a requirement for progression to FS. At any point after 12 months you can visit OASC if you wish.
2 Likes
Ok, I think we’d probably agree that we’d hope that a officer who was given command after 2 yrs in uniform but 3 yrs as a CI would have been a fully active CI, giving as much time as many in uniform do. I wouldn’t agree with the experience of that type of CI time being used as ‘time served’ before deciding who to ask to be a unit OC
I’m not sure that effectively cutting out a level of command in our rank structure would be a good thing.
It’s one thing having inexperienced Sgts fresh from ATF… It would another still to have a plethora of inexperienced FS.
I don’t see that we need to have a single rank dedicated to training.
Probationary followed by acting Sgt during training and substantive Sgt upon completion of SSIC is fine.
Nobody expects too much from the Probationary Sgt or Acting Sgt because we know they’re still in training. The Substantive Sgt is then expected to be able to perform the basic duties befitting their rank.
I can’t see anything changing anytime soon as that requires effort 
Any ideas who has the 
I love all these supposedly self affirmed perfect officers, sncos advocating eugenics.
Good luck on getting lots of ‘perfect’ uniformed staff.
We know that invariably when a sqn cdr post comes up, people will find any excuse not to do it. You can have all the matrices you like and it will not make the slightest difference as sqns are organic entities and do not fit some idealised vision. The people who take over may be the best thing since sliced bread at that time but then something changes and then they aren’t. Do they then become one of the vilified, as they no longer meet some idealised vision?
I don’t see how some probationary period in unform will make any difference to what we have now, except in theory.
Is there a desire for a probationary uniformed set up? People speak of the SCC system and ACF PI system, but locally at least these do not create hordes of people climbing over each other to be staff. We have the easiest option and no one ever says we’ve got people coming out of out ears.
So why is this? What is it in the adult population that makes volunteering in youth orgs so seemingly unattractive?
Lack of interest?
No desire to wear (in our case) a military uniform?
Little spare time? - over the last months I’ve easily filled the gap created by no ATC and I know from talking to people I’m not the only one.
Concerns around the whole kiddy thing?
Do other things that are not, as in the military youth orgs, as institutionally demanding? Have a look at groups that seem to get interest and see what they do, not as in this we need to invent a system to mend something that is going to mean expecting people to do more just to be able to help out.
Fine having all these ideas etc, but they are pointless unless you have an organisation that has a greater appeal, than it currently does. The latter is where it has to start, as you need the current people to say volunteering as staff is bloody good, it’s not onerous and you get a sense that the people running the ATC care about the people doing the donkey work and it’s fun. Currently this is not the case. As soon as you get an “it’s alright, but …” things aren’t and you can’t recover from this. But this level of change happens at HQAC and that’s where the problem would start as they are here today gone tomorrow money grabbers with none of the emotional attachment people on sqns have. This is why volunteer staff put up with the turd fest, because they have an emotional attachment; either, it’s local, they were air cadets or it’s their cadet sqn, people who’ve spent 20-30 yrs in the RAF climbing the greasy pole regardless of anything they say, will not have this essential thing in their being and neither do new people.
I sense it is a lot of perceptions that the majority of us aren’t doing it like a few think they should, but without actually knowing this as fact.