Yes. I can most definitely think of a few Fg Off/Flt Lt/Sqn Ldr who aren’t suitable either!
As I say, it’d be lovely to think that we could just chin off all the dross, but it’s not going to happen :([/quote]
Be careful what you wish for, some may consider you to be dross.
WOW!!
It seems people confuse command with discipline…
When I gave my example, I meant their safety and well being.
For example…
For the night ex did you read the RA
If you ordered soup for afterwards from the mess, did you include the Aclo team or
Only the cadets
If the helpers fall and injure themselves it is your responsible as OIC to ensure correct medical help,
And then the aftermath
Command is not just about discipline.
[quote=“bti” post=17728][quote]SVS wrote:
What is the status of ACF adult snecs? [/quote]
Same as our SNCOs/WOs - i.e. legally - civilians in uniform. They are ACF (like ours are ATC) rather than TA (sorry! Army Reserve…) General List B for the Offrs (like we are RAFVR(T))
The arrangements in the ATC and ACF are, at the moment, effectively identical status-wise.
Cheers
BTI[/quote]
So have they got the same “issue”? Are they looking to move their Adult Snecs around?
[quote=“bti” post=17757]Actually, in my experience, rather than seeing distinguishing badges, the majority of Airmen focus on the braid and don’t treat you any differently to a regular Offr. The only issue I have ever had is with those with chips on shoulders, and after a quiet word and quick re-education that problem normally goes away too.
[/quote]
agreed!!
and I apologise for rearing this ugly head of this subject, but…
looking the part helps, a VRT pin is a little distinguishing identifier that can either be acknowledge or ignored either way often it is just the braid that is seen and respected
but when that VRT pin is attached to someone who doesn’t look the part, either because they are at the top end of the age bracket, overweight, have a poor state/poorly sized uniform then I can understand why the RAF look down on the VRT as “not real Officers”
as much as I agree with the standard of Staff needs addressing, improvements to the manner, bearing and attitude and dare I say it self pride would help go along way.
yes for many they throw (literally) their uniform on in the hour they have to turn themselves around after returning from work twice a week with little ramifications if they look a bit “off par” so when they get off Squadron/in front of the RAF with this same attitude we (CFAVs) get a bad image and repuation
[quote]SVS wrote:
[quote]bti wrote:
[quote]SVS wrote:
What is the status of ACF adult snecs?
[/quote]
Same as our SNCOs/WOs - i.e. legally - civilians in uniform. They are ACF (like ours are ATC) rather than TA (sorry! Army Reserve…) General List B for the Offrs (like we are RAFVR(T))
The arrangements in the ATC and ACF are, at the moment, effectively identical status-wise.
Cheers
BTI
[/quote]
So have they got the same “issue”? Are they looking to move their Adult Snecs around? [/quote]
Not that I’m aware …I’m not even sure what the “issue” is, other than it may have been a recommendation of the recent ACO CFAV T&COS review.
Any ACF types on here that can illuminate?
Cheers
BTI
It would certainly seem a bit silly to move all SNCOs to VR(T), then start issuing a cadet commission.
Of course that means that’s the exact plan that will happen…
The turn that this thread has taken is quite alarming. Somehow some people are in the realms of considering ‘charging’ Regulars when actually, as pointed out, VR(T) Officers have had this ‘right’ since day one and no occasions of use have been provided. It’s all about working practically within the framework in which we operate.
It’s this enjoyment of theoretical nonsence (which no doubt a ‘character’ will use one day) which gives Cadet Force Adult Volunteers the Walter Mitty image it has in some quarters. :ohmy:
As said earlier, I am all for the ‘re-branding’ of the ACO Adult Staff. If that means that some people don’t or won’t cut the Mustard then that’s the way it is. The facts are (as pointed out) there are individuals both ATC and VR(T) who for one reason or another should not be wearing the Uniform. This will probably mean a smaller ACO, but I think it’s worth the short term pain for the long term gain.
In fact I would be all for a 2 tier Cadet Force - those who meet a minimum standard are VR(T) (Officer & SNCO) and those who don’t stay/go ATC (Officer and SNCO).
Standing by.
:evil: :whistle:
A smaller ACO? There are few enough staff to run activities for the cadets we have, or are you suggesting we shrink the WHOLE aco? Because I for one am all for less cadets and more weekends free for me because that’s why I really joined.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
its a difficult one - its true to say that the ACO has such a staff shortage it could barely turn away Gary Glitter, but conversely, does the perception that some, a small minority of ACO staff create in the public and service eye about the ACO prevent greater numbers from joining as adult staff?
do the fatties, weirdo’s, incompetants, walts and basket cases so poision the perception of the services and wider society that significant numbers who might otherwise consider giving their time think ‘err, no, i don’t think i’ll bother…’?
a statistically impossible question to answer perhaps, but one it might be worth looking at.
(i know the answer is at least one…)
I’m now on what will be my last stint as uniformed staff and the potential outcome of these changes (real and conjectured) will mean that my uniformed successors will have a more difficult time in the future. As the changes in the Officer process begin to bite and there are less Officers around and if some of the ideas suggested on here around processes for SNCOs come to pass, eventually potentially less SNCOs. Make the processes too daunting and people will not bother, and remain as CIs or leave. Who does this benefit? I just wonder where the gain is coming from as all I can see is pain? If it means that cadets potentially achieve less, is that a good thing? As unless the rules around needing uniformed staff for some areas are relaxed, that is what could happen.
As an organisation we have always had people who in some people’s eyes don’t quite fit the bill or regarded as walts/geeks, but has that detracted from what the organisation has delivered? Not really, because if it did we would have not and get the plaudits we do. We need people that are willing to take on uniformed role, because unless there is a seismic shift in how the Corps operates, with less and less uniformed adults, it will struggle. How many people in the Corps actually are in uniform just because they are “good enough” and weren’t willing. I also think a large number fail to see their own faults when decrying others and may themselves fall foul of someone elses measure.
Something that we can’t ignore, is that our parent organisation is going through probably the most difficult period in it’s history and trying to maintain a purpose, as a result one of the effects of this is, it appears that ACO staff (or new applicants at least) seem to be becoming under greater scrutiny, for, IMO, no other reason than people needing to keep a job.
However in 30 years as staff I’ve only ever known one officer get under anyone’s skin in the regulars (only on those brief days of being on camp) and he retired 12 years ago. I have no doubt that there are and have been others around, but I would lay money that other than a bit of scrounging most ATC staff are seen for what they are and why they are there, and not many regulars give a stuff one way or the other. I’ve found more regulars who were cadets get ‘upset’ by ATC staff, in what I regard as a childish way, without any real substance. I bumped into an ex-cadet from our sqn who based his entire dislike for ACO staff on the chap who was CO at the time, blaming him for this/that/the other that went wrong in his ATC life, not sure what this was as he was a CWO (when CWO meant something), got his GS and was VGS staff cadet plus many other things, that he said at the time helped him getting into the RAF.
Thanks for all your considerable contributions to this thread GHE2, but I think a reality reply is perhaps in order.
To the point, do Regulars in general think VR(T)s and ATC SNCOs/WOs a bunch of unprofessional, scruffy, ill-disciplined wannabes? I’m sorry to say it but, yes, they do. I spent the 28 years of my Regular RAF career defending the adult uniformed staff of this organisation, because I was a VR(T) officer once and am now one again. But unfortunately I know how the VR(T) and ATC come across in Messes and Stations across the Service, because I’ve seen what they do and heard what my colleagues say. It’s true that it’s the bad apples that spoil things, but there are an awful lot of bad apples.
I’ll repeat what I have said before; we now have a higher-level Command that is for once taking a keen interest in what the ACO is doing rather than letting the geriatrics at all levels do what they think is best, why is that wrong? The adoption of OASC is earning some excellent plaudits from those who have done it and it is increasing the credibility of our officer corps, why is that wrong? Air Cmd are advising HQAC on the correct disposal of disciplinary matters, why is that wrong? For the future, we are looking at all our uniformed staff coming under one body, the VR(T), as a unified, cohesive and disciplined team, why is that wrong? Part of that may be that our SNCOs and WOs will become accountable under Military Law for their actions, why is that wrong? Those who wear Her Majesty’s uniform - in whatever guise - should do so correctly and set an example, why is that wrong?
I make no apologies for coming across as ‘cheesy’, but for the first time in years, perhaps ever, we have a top-level desire to make us what we should always have been and that’s a proper part of the RAF, not just a bunch of play actors.
I’m with cygnus maximus here. I have worked on RAF stations for the past nearly 19 years, and in that time I have seen some very good staff come through on camps through the year. Sadly I have also seen some complete throbbers, and it is they who are generally remembered. Last year, one summer camp CFAV was almost as bad as the baby pilots! 
You’re absolutely right PN, and I hope that I didn’t give the impression that every CFAV, uniformed or CI, is poor. We do have some outstanding staff whose leadership and other personal qualities would not put them out of place in the Regular Service, but they are all too easily overshadowed by the cretins.
[quote=“juliet mike” post=17829]A smaller ACO? There are few enough staff to run activities for the cadets we have, or are you suggesting we shrink the WHOLE aco? Because I for one am all for less cadets and more weekends free for me because that’s why I really joined.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/quote]
As I say - a smaller ACO - as in the whole of it.
[quote=“noah claypole” post=17851][quote=“juliet mike” post=17829]A smaller ACO? There are few enough staff to run activities for the cadets we have, or are you suggesting we shrink the WHOLE aco? Because I for one am all for less cadets and more weekends free for me because that’s why I really joined.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/quote]
As I say - a smaller ACO - as in the whole of it.[/quote]
Then feel free to get out now and don’t let the door hit you on the way out. As soon as people like you think the ACO should be elite and restricted, the whole point of it is lost.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I think all staff should be ATC. But that’s only because over the years I’ve developed a bit of a moral objection to the RAF connection being used to funnel the ‘The Air Force is awesome and super fun and you should all come and work for us it’s just a bit of a laugh really’ AFCO view into people at a very impressionable age, so I don’t think the RAF should have any real authority over the Air Cadets. Go back to the ADCC badges, etc and use make the Air Cadets more Air and Aviation related and less RAF related.
However, I do think it should be one or the other. So if you’re not going to do the above, then yes, make everyone properly ‘RAF’ for all the reasons Cygnus Maximus lists. But at the same time, please stop telling me the Air Cadets isn’t part of the RAF or wider defence recruiting effort, because we all know that’s just fudging the truth.
Noah Claypole, why are you even in the ACO? What do YOU bring to the corps? Why on earth do you want to shrink the ACO? As Juliet Mike said, the ACO hasn’t got enough staff as it is and we all struggle to get enough staff to run activities for larger groups of cadets and often end up limited on the numbers that we can run activities for. Do the cadets a favour, go and find something else to do where you can waste oxygen.
I think that’s unduly harsh and uncalled for. It’s only an opinion!
The guy wants to get rid of cadets and staff?! Yes, an opinion it may be, and so was my reply.
Prior to moving onto Wing Staff I, like others on here, commanded a Sqn for a number of years. One of the things I found was that there are perhaps TOO many events\opportunities\suchlike being organized for cadets that have two direct impacts.
The first is on staff. We often hear on these boards that Units don’t often have sufficient staff to go around and those that do put a lot of time in, are maybe spreading themselves pretty thin. As a result their personal and family lives suffer to some extant. I recall my father-in-law telling me that he resigned his commission after a number of years as he realised that he was neglecting his own child in favour of other peoples.
Secondly, we also often hear about staff who organize events and then find that only small numbers of cadets turn up and occasionally, this renders the activity unviable and causes frustration for everyone involved.
So are we offering too much with too few staff, too often? Would a smaller ATC with something akin to ‘Super-Squadrons’ with a full complement of professionally selected and trained staff, be the way forward? Tango_Lima has mooted that we should all go back to being ADCC and virtually sever our links with the RAF. Great but what will the organization do if the RAF decide that that is it’s get-out-of-jail-card and stops (or significantly reduces) the funding allocation? We’d end up little better than the scouts.
If the SNCO cadre ARE brought into the VR(T) and if ALL VR(T) personnel are properly recruited, selected and trained to make it a more professional and capable formation, then I also agree with t_l that the RAF should take the political bull by the horns and own up to what the ACO really are - a recruiting tool for the Armed Forces AS WELL AS fostering the spirit of adventure and encouraging an interest in aviation.
My opinion - which will no doubt be decried in some quarters - is one of getting rid of the existing commissioned and non-commissioned biffs, making the organization more professional; and making it smaller and more effective. However, we know that won’t happen and we’ll continue lurching from one week to the next with Air Cmd wondering where the next allegation. major incident or general screw-up will come from.