Too many words in one go. KISS (Keep It Short & Sweet)
2 Likes
I canāt match your years experience but perhaps my 20 years does cover an equal breadth of variety having been on 8 units in 4 Wings in 3 regions.
Perhaps my experience is unique, and perhaps Iāve been sheltered from those who have been bullied into movingā¦thinking back i canāt think who these people might be, the majority of transfers that i recall have been at the request of the CFAV, with only two coming to mind a result of being asked to move (or at least cnāt understand why theyād move of their own desire). so Iām delighted Iāve been lucky enough to volunteer in Wings where CFAVs are asked and not told.
Its a shame your experience and @ccw34ās has been so negative and have sympathy for what youāve experienced either personally or have seen happen to others. What you see as the ānormā is the opposite for others.
Weāre getting close to going round in circles so shall āagree to disagreeā accepting that there are 34 different ways of achieving the same outcome, i accept that although seen more than many, my experience amounts to only 12% of the Wings out there and this is another example of the differences within them.
Some CIās are simply considered too old for a uniformed role?
Iām physically fitter (and slimmer) than a lot of uniformed staff I come across, but I joined the wrong side of 55. Take a look around, a lot of key civilian staff are simply too old (according to current recruitment and retention regs) for uniformed roles. Painful many if oldies maybe, but a lot of squadron shooting programs depend on us.
Age is indeed more than a number.
Physical fitness and being fat/thin has no impact on an individuals ability to volunteer as a uniformed member of staff. It does impact on their ability to support some activities - AT / FT / Road Marching
This is an organisational issue that with the advent of the CFC is easily in our purview to change the rules on, and arguably they should be changed, my dad would have ben to old to volunteer in uniform when I joined as a cadet, and that is a major issue!
Edit to add
The minimum age for an ATC/VGS/AEF commission is 20 years or 18 years for CCF(RAF), the maximum age is 65 years.
Applicants may be appointed between the ages of 20 and 65 years. (SNCOs)
Maximum age is 65. Get in that uniform 
2 Likes
Iām 68, looks like chinos and polo shirt for me.
Ah, definitely too far the wrong side then!
I happen to agree with you by the way - if capable, why does the age matter?
Arguably? Itās clear discrimination
I think the CFAV attitude survey earlier in the year had something about this in. Iāll look when Iām next on a desktop.
Personally, we are a UNIFORMED youth organisation so I think we should axe the CI role in the majority of cases.
2 Likes
I totally agree. Unfortunately I donāt think volunteers have legal protection against age discrimination.
As another example, my dad is just turning 80, still actively volunteering for various campaign organisations and mentoring people in his professional field (although long retired). Lots of people over 65 would still be hugely valuable in uniform and this arbitrary limit should be removed.
Iām not an expert, but Iām 95% sure they do. In the same way they have protection from racial, disabled etc discrimination.
Issue is uniform standards have to be upheld.
As long as we are still a part of the RAF, we cant have the elderly in uniform.
If we leave the RAF then we can do what we want.
But then it wouldnt be long until the uniform becomes just āscout plusā and one of our key differences with other orgs is gone
Iām no expert either, but thought the discrimination legislation only applied to employment and provision of services. Perhaps one of our forum legal eagles will know.
I donāt agree with that Iām afraid. We have lots of people in uniform who arenāt ātypicalā of RAF serving personnel (including thousands of children!). Just because someoneās over 65 shouldnāt exclude them from uniform roles.
3 Likes
Nonsense. Why does being 66 stop you wearing a uniform? It doesnāt stop the royals.
You seem to be right according to the NCVO
Although, a quick google brings this up:
149 Public sector equality duty
(1) A public authority must, in the exercise of its functions, have due regard to the need toā
(b) advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it;
Regardless of the above, itās ridiculous that a youth organisation of our magnitude (never mind one funded by public money) discriminates against certain people.
2 Likes
I agree it shouldnāt! Didnt you read my post?
But we are where we are as we follow RAF dress regs.
1 Like
Glad we agree, I obviously misread what you meant in your post.
Youāll have to point me to the bit in RAF dress regs that covers age limits. I couldnāt find it. Retired officers can certainly still wear uniform for some occasions.
Because the RAFAC is essentially a ātrading nameā of the MOD it has to comply with the Equality Act, and specifically the Public Sector Equality Duty. The ongoing blanket policy of preventing those over 65 from taking a commission/SNCO appointment is on the face of it a breach of that and needs justifying.
2 Likes
Instead of Corporal, why not just stock up on the currently pointless MTP Civilian Instructor rank slides and put CIās in uniform as CIās?
You get them in uniform, they stay ācivilianā.
2 Likes
Several reasons:
-
What the point of having them in uniform but outside the structure? If youāre going that route there is no point.
-
If itās seen as a feeder for those who ultimately seek to be Sergeants or Officers having an actual rank makes it more fluid, especially if you tie it to a proper training programme for new staff.
-
It makes it easier for the Services to understand who and what you are.
1 Like