The query is in the title do I use an AT application or a PIPE? I am told AT, but then strangely a doc on the ABRT site clearly shows it being classified as a PIPE but that’s part of the policy changes with regards to SMS and automatic pay claims…
Also staff/cadet ratio 1-10: understandable but would you get away with only one BELA (walk is off road on a trailway)plenty off staff and first aiders I might add.
If I don’t respond its cos I am otherwise engaged…
Is it an event arranged by a third party (eg. “walk for life”)? If not, doesn’t require a PIPE
Define a trailway? Are we talking canal path/bridleway?
No arranged by ourselves for our benefit. The trailway is an old railway line that has been used as a path for a few decades now but was recently upgraded and tarmaced along the full route and renamed a trailway - so access to walkers, cyclists and horse riders.
Sounds like an AT application to me.
Also, I thought PIPEs were required for any event off squadron - third party or not.
an SMS application is required for anything off Sqn or outside of the normal Sqn parade nights
what you describe is a AT application
we take part in a Sponsored walk organised by the RBL and that is a PiPE, the route is marshalled and directed throughout, any “risks” from the AT can be adequately dealt with by the organisers and so do not need to follow the usual BEL (or higher) ratios
[quote=“steve679” post=14701]an SMS application is required for anything off Sqn or outside of the normal Sqn parade nights
[/quote]
Hate to say this, but policy please.
You’ll find there is none nationally and is largely down to Wings to invent their own.
[quote=“Plt Off Prune” post=14703][quote=“steve679” post=14701]an SMS application is required for anything off Sqn or outside of the normal Sqn parade nights
[/quote]
Hate to say this, but policy please.[/quote]
When it was instigated this is the line that was spun.
Us and the majority of sqns would technically have to do one just to do drill on a parade night, as we don’t have sufficient space to do drill in/around the hut.
However in the real world …
There is a bit of me that would love to overload Wing Staff just to show the nonsense of the suggested approach.
[quote=“Plt Off Prune” post=14703][quote=“steve679” post=14701]an SMS application is required for anything off Sqn or outside of the normal Sqn parade nights
[/quote]
Hate to say this, but policy please.
You’ll find there is none nationally and is largely down to Wings to invent their own.[/quote]
Email from ACO-HQAC-CST-PolicyPlans-SO1 to All Sqn OCs on 21 September 2011.
[quote]At the last Air Cadet Management Board Meeting it was decided to make the use of the activity management tools on BADER SMS compulsory for PIPE, Adventure Training and Fieldcraft activity, where that activity requires authorisation or requires transport away from Sqn HQ. This will come into effect on 1 Jan 2012.
[/quote]
There was a loose minute attached which elaborated.
[quote=“Plt Off Prune” post=14703][quote=“steve679” post=14701]an SMS application is required for anything off Sqn or outside of the normal Sqn parade nights
[/quote]
Hate to say this, but policy please.
You’ll find there is none nationally and is largely down to Wings to invent their own.[/quote]
policy or not…how can you accurately maintain the Cadet SMS records if the events that should be recorded do not have an SMS entry?
i admit most events may well be “other activities” in a 3822 but if we (Staff) are charged with maintaining their online records then surely we need to be producing a “event” for the car parking, sponsored walk, manning water stations at fun run events that they do?
(it is however frustrating that Wing organised events such a Camps, training/development courses and the like do not have such an event which requires Sqn staff to pick up their slack)
Policy does exist - quoted in my post above.
Also, and more relevant, it’s in ACTO 10!
[quote=“redowling” post=14708]Policy does exist - quoted in my post above.
Also, and more relevant, it’s in ACTO 10!
The definition of transport would be interesting, given cadets could walk 2/3 miles to do something, do it and then walk back, therefore not being transported.
If you started and finished a navex (could well be sponsored) at the sqn, would you need to gain approval?
If you do a parades in your town, as the cadets are not transported, do we need approval?
[quote=“steve679” post=14706]policy or not…how can you accurately maintain the Cadet SMS records if the events that should be recorded do not have an SMS entry?
i admit most events may well be “other activities” in a 3822 but if we (Staff) are charged with maintaining their online records then surely we need to be producing a “event” for the car parking, sponsored walk, manning water stations at fun run events that they do?
(it is however frustrating that Wing organised events such a Camps, training/development courses and the like do not have such an event which requires Sqn staff to pick up their slack)[/quote]
Does it really matter if we do this or not?
It doesn’t seem to matter for Wing and higher activities and they all require cadets being transported away from the sqn, see RD’s reference. I’ll be stuffed if I’m doing some WSO or RSOs job, given that they effectively have sod all to do anyway, when compared to sqn staff.
I’ve got cadets who have represented Wing, Region and Corps and there is no record on our marvellous system and staff that have been on courses/activities at Wing and Region level and likewise nothing.
Just like everything else Bader related, it is primarily for sqn staff to do and a tool for others (many of whom have never used it in anger) to whinge at you when you may have missed something.
if you spoke to our Sector commander then it is critical
my point exactly.
to counter this “non event” record the Adj will set up a “local” event (which requires no approval) just to there is a valid record on the system that a Staff member or Cadet attended the event
Not really sure I agree with this. It seems to making more work at the sqn, while someone else is getting a free ride … ABR and all that.
^^^^ i havent said i agree with it…
but as Wing (Sector commander at least) want the Cadet SMS records accurate, how else can we maintain the accuracy?
a recent example being a Cadet was known to have gone to Wing Swimming, said Sector Commander checked the Cadet’s 3822 to find there was no record in the book, then turned to SMS and found that was also blank…but as there was no Wing SMS record for the event how else would that blank be filled?
I tend to agree with steve679 on this - I’ve recently challenged the lack of SMS events for Wing-level events here. Not had a response yet, mind you.
There was some correspondence at Regional level a long time ago whereby the point was made that someone organising a multi-squadron event could not properly certify that all cadets/staff have been properly briefed before attending (or some other similar argument), however the statements on the authorisation tab which you certify don’t require you to certify anything of the sort. The upshot was that they wanted each squadron to put in a PIPE for a multi sqn event (e.g. Wing Parade, Sports event etc.) which is daft. Where the person responsible for the event hasn’t created a PIPE I normally do a local event as well just in order to record the event against that cadets SMS record and to ensure JCCC have visibility should something go wrong.
One key issue with PIPE, AT and I think Fieldcraft is that once they are approved you can no longer modify the staff attendees, though you can modify the cadets. Reasons of approval being based on ratios and qualifications is normally cited and accompay a total lack of trust in the activity commander to manage these things themselves, while jeopardising the activity or at least the veracity of the nominal roll.
The underlying concepts of the various activity types are understood differently by different sections of the organisation and I think we still lack useful, unambiguous guidance on their use.
^^^agreed and makes a joke of maintaining “accuracy” for the Cadets while the Staff profiles are a pack of lies. having looked through my own profile i know there is a significant (25%+) events i have “attended” which i know i havent but i was listed on the pre-authorised manaifest and then could not be later removed.