The issue of ranks lower than SNCO remains what it always has, messing on Camp.
Which with things like Direct Entry air traffic controllers (not to mention the long term system of flying sergeant) is less of an issue now than it ever was before.
I don’t really get the need for this? Most of our candidates are pretty certain if they’re going Officer or SNCO. This distinction should be being formalised by the time they’re on pre-uniform courses or putting formal paperwork in.
APO and A/Sgt ranks allow them to dip their toes into the roles from the day they get their appointment letters, PI would be a halfway house where no one really knows what you are or what you’ll end up being.
I am of the mindset though that as long as APO’s and A/Sgt’s have completed AVIP and mandatory training, we should scrap the “not allowed off squadron” rule or add a default blanket waiver to allow the ‘probationers’ access to all activities.
1 Like
At least for me the last 3 camps I’ve been on, staff haven’t stayed in traditional ‘messes’, they’ve stayed in billets. And for the eating element of messing, cadets typically mess in the Junior Ranks so adult Cpls could join them.
DE ATC/Aircrew is still very much the exception not the rule. Outside of these very specialised roles, it’s impossible to get a Sgt aged 20. Hence my suggestion of Cpl for 5 years, meaning a cadet aging out at 18 (scrapping staff cadets in this example), would go up to Sgt at 23. Still young-ish but not entirely impossible for high flyers.
2 Likes
No, I wouldnt want tonnes of Wg Cdr’s walking around because they did the job 10 years ago. WSO should drop back to Flt Lt at the end of their WSO service. But make Flt Lt the default substantive rank for CFC not Fg Off.
The solution to this one seems to be a “points-based” matrix? You need to accrue X points to be eligible, how you do it is up to you. Obviously that would start a great debate about what is worth however many points though…
2 Likes
But you dont give your people any level of training that would make that jump make sense.
And I’ve known lots of various cadet forces have all their staff and cadet dining in the same mess as the SNCO and Officer messes because central dining is frequently in effect on weekends.
So of all the “issues” you may be juggling, not using junior ranks for messing reasons doesn’t seem compelling. There’s so much more to be thinking about when deciding on the ranks you use than whether or not they mess together (and most cadets dine in the JRM if it isn’t combined messing, so then you’re sending SNCOs into the JRM anyway…)
It would also incentivise development or whatever terms you them put on eligibility for SNCO status.
1 Like
Hard disagree.
You should be nudging your people into uniform as the standard route, which is where junior ranks for those without experience would sit.
Civilian status being available and the default means people get comfy and those that want uniform probably spend a very long time not being in uniform.
Once you know someone wants to volunteer with you and you thought they were normal enough to put them through a DBS, why put so many more barriers in their way? Bring them into the fold asap. Let them worry about SNCO or Officer once they’ve spent time learning drill alongside your cadets and learning the syllabus with them/helping teach etc.
How can anyone possibly have a true understanding of what they’re really going to like until they start doing stuff, but why keep them out of uniform until that decision can be made?
I understand cadets still really look forward to getting uniform and some feel like they’re not part of the team until they get through first stages and join the rest of the unit’s training.
Why would adults not be keen to get going asap?
1 Like
Perhaps “hours” is best then?
Quals take hours, camps take hours, weekend stuff takes hours.
And it’s all above and beyond the standard unit nights
1 Like
Blue camp requirement has been removed for both SNCO and CFC
No we shouldn’t. We should be providing volunteers with an attractive variety of volunteering options that fit in with their level of interest and ability to commit. For many people CI is the right fit for them at the time. Others see uniformed roles as having additional challenges and opportunities to influence, so that fits them.
There are some interesting discussions in this thread, but the focus on ranks and who wears what really isn’t a high priority to fix. There are much more important topics like admin burden, CFAV training and the lack of availablity of support from RAF and Defence at the moment.
7 Likes
But that’s not what the discussion is about.
I’d accept that CI is the best fit for some, but it’s a problem if you make uniform look like more of a commitment, rather than just a different way of spending some of your free time.
You have lots of CIs who do just as much as uniformed staff, and often exactly the same stuff. So what’s stopping them going into uniform?
1 Like
That would help, as would removing the ‘you must be a CI for X period and do Y courses before applying for uniform’ that so many wings insist on.
That is why I’d collapse the whole probationary mess into a single PI rank. New joiners in my local ACF Coy seem to be useful more quickly and face fewer frustrations. Not withstanding that they don’t have the same sort of CIs that we do, and I don’t want to reopen the whole CI v uniform debate here!
3 Likes
You don’t get 18 year old Corporals anymore than you get 20 year old Sergeants.
Our SNCO’s have very clearly different rankslides indicating who akd what they are.
This is all a solution looking for a problem.
4 Likes
Granted, but you do get 18 year olds in the JR mess, so they’d look less out of place/walt-y than 20 year old SNCOs.
Having a top heavy NCO cadre in my view is a problem, in the same way as it would be if the officer cadre all got Sqn Ldr on time served and could be promoted to Gp Capt on merit (excepting Gp Capt Pass ofc).
I take your point, but the rank structure should be vaguely reminiscent of the parent service. Having officers only reach Fg Off (without taking on OC or other roles), implying they have only a couple years experience, whilst granting Sgt fresh out the door to the NCOs feels incompatible to me.
2 Likes
I will add though, obviously this is all an academic exercise and nothing is likely to change in the foreseeable. But if something was to change, I’d argue the focus should be on the role structure at sector and above rather than rank itself.
As adult staff we rely more on the role structure than the rank structure, at least away from the cadets. Of the 3 wings I’ve spent time in, 2 have felt horrendously paralysed structurally. That won’t be fixed by giving people new tapes, it needs a broader minded structural review.
1 Like
The current NCO structure isn’t top heavy (it’s certainly less too heavy than the Commissioned structure) , it’s a hierarchy and we have more of our bottom rank NCO than any other and less of our top NCO rank than any other. It’s perfectly balanced. Most Squadrons have Sergeants, some have FS and a handful have WO’s
Maybe and only because no one can actually get on one, but ACP20 still upholds this for FS and WO (CCF(RAF)).
That doesn’t negate the historical and ongoing inequity of the system overall; it’s still skewed towards easier, more rapid promotion as an officer regardless of experience and skill. Fg Off is “time-served” after 2 years, consideration for accelerated promotion upon taking command applies to both but is still skewed in favour of officers. Except in the unlikely event a Sgt is promoted 2 steps upon taking a unit, they might get their crown but will then still have to jump through the hoops and potentially serve another 4 before T&Ls come their way.
Heck, I could have continued my little hypothetical scenario to Sqn Ldr in only another 6 months, while the NCO still has another 4 years before eligibility for WO. It was inaccurate anyway, because the Flt Lt could have already been so for 2 years by the time the Sgt was eligible for their crown.
Accelerated, role-based rank (coupled with rank based VA) for Officers but not equally applied to NCOs is a farce.
Time served promotions for officers, but a shopping list of “must-have” and “preferably has” plus interviews for NCOs is completely imbalanced.
1 Like
Just gonna drop this suggestion/thread in here…
Obviously adjust titles to AS2/AS1 rather than LAC/SAC…
2 Likes
Non-NCO’s can’t be RCO’s or DI’s not sure if they can Skill at Arms Instructors?
I think shooting was just an example. The idea for aged out cadets or new joiners to get a flavour of both streams as AS2/1 RAFAC is fairly admirable.
I doubt many people find themselves as RCO’s in the space of a year from going into uniform. From the looks of this suggestion, after AS1 you’d have the option to go for Cpl or apply to commission as Plt Off. I presume exceptions would apply as ever for ex-regs, or potentially skipping AS2 for ex-cadets.
But ultimately AS2/1 would effectively be the “apprentice CFAV” that staff cadets should have been, and for which CI is sometimes used by new joiners. It would also act similarly to the PI suggestions.
Pretty sure they can be Skillies, seen at least one out in the wild, but could be an exception potentially.
My existing concerns with the PI role, even if reformulated as AS2/1, remain though.
1 Like
In my first 6 months as a CFAV (CI) I had completed SAAI and SA(SR)07 courses. This is an ex cadet problem rather than for an off the street starter.
4.5 years later I then went into uniform (local delays not choice) with a lower entry rank I would then have been unable to exercise those qualifications.
That said the Min Rank requirement has since changed to CFAV I think so no longer LCpl or equivalent.
2 Likes