So the comment about alternative accommodation leads one to think this is not a quick fix scenario
and as the number of sqns increase the local share options decrease
I detect a difficult summer ahead because i think we are looking at that long
As locally Iâve heard nothing, as a summary is this fair?:
The organisation that the MOD pays to maintain the majority of our facilities, has been taking the money but not doing basic electrical safety checks.
As a result, an unknown number of squadrons (and presumably acf units) are now not allowed to parade, until an unspecified time whilst the same organisation that failed in the first place is now going to attempt to fix the problem theyâve caused.
Is that correct?
Thatâs certainly my understanding from the announcement and what people have said on here! 5 yearly electrical and gas safety checks have just not happened.
Either this is a failure by RFAC to keep records or a failure to keep check on records and organise testing or a failure by the contractors if it is their responsibility to keep the records and perform the checks in a timely manner.
Clearly someone has a case to answer and compensate squadrons for lost use of their facilities!
Yeah that will never happen
If itâs the contractor at fault they should be made to pay for failing to honour their contractual responsibilities- that would certainly happen in the private sector.
If itâs down to RFAC then I imagine you are right but even then someone has failed to do their job properly.
They might get some kind of fine or something for not meeting their contractual obligations, but it would go to the MOD, not the ATC/ACF.
I contacted County for my shared Sqn to see if they had more detailed news than I got Wed from our CoC - not heard anything so not sure if this is RAFAC pulling the plug for us only - Alâs note did seem to imply was a RAFAC decision so may be us only
Welcome to the MOD sponsored cadet forces, where the ACF can do things that weâre not allowed to do because itâs supposedly too dangerous.
Just look at flying, gliding and parachuting at private sitesâŚ
An EICR out of its validity period (ie, expired) may not be unsafe*, but it may invalidate any insurance policy.
*EICR faults are categorised as C1, C2 and C3. C1 is âisolate the power until rectifiedâ, and most firmly sits in the category of unsafe. However it was unsafe as soon as the fault occurred, not at the point of the inspection.
Like MOTs and DBS checks - only true for the day they were conducted!
What insurance?
Most buildings I presume are MOD Indemnity rather than insurance?
Weâve been told to report that up the chain.
Apologies - my comment was a generalisation, not specifically aimed at RFCA maintained facilities.
I know that our Public Liability Insurance for our non-RFCA maintained buildings would be invalid without an in-date EICR.
Our CCFA insurance may not be valid if we were using facilities that were not âsafeâ and insured.
From what I understand this actually affects less than 100 RAFAC Units.
Further it appears that these 65 units are âlodgersâ such that the building is not owned by a RFCA, so my interpretation here is that this maintenance & servicing has fallen between the contractual cracks.
RFCA assume the building owner is completing and therefore itâs excluded from the agreed maintenance contract. While the building owner assumes the lodger is completing these 5 yearly checks.
The âroute to greenâ is for RFCAs to immediately fund and schedule Five-Yearly Electrical Installation Condition Reports (EICR), Electrical Distribution Boards, Mains Switch checks and Annual Gas Safety Checks, regardless of the contractual position.
The real challenge will come if any of these reports or checks highlight any issues that require remedial works to be completed.
Based on the Comdtâs Comms this is a MOD Wide issue, and I know at least 1 SCC unit that has also been effected. My view here is the ACF clearly shouldnât be attending the unit, maybe the message / comms has been less effective and not yet reached them, or devils advocate they are just unsafe - I had a DC try and tell me that it was fine to have an AR range outside with some MDF behind and not worry about the PROW that would be behind the MDF!
Thereâs is a third option - when the contracts changed I was getting inundated re electrical lighting checks etc which I passed to our CAA.
Turns out that even though we were in the same building using the same facilities. The contractor was double visiting treating ATC separately to the ACF as they werent linking paperwork.
Took a little admin but managed to get copies from our CAA to evidence our building was safe.
In your situation, speak to your CAA & ask if they have the documents. If so ping a copy to region & that should provide the assurance you need.
There should be a RFCA portal for your units building that you can log on & download all the documents so try taking a look.
YesâŚ.apart from you missing the bit about them all getting bonuses and being included on the honours list.
Hardly anyone is getting included on the honours list these days - it brings too much scrutiny making it harder to work in the shadowsâŚ.
RAFAC has had siginficant budget cuts as well
and all this under a climate of 30/30 and doing more with less - completely farcical
the management of RFCA should be sweating on this sort of cock up
i just donât get it!!!
They did cut the budget by millions what do you expect!