Iāve worked it out.
We canāt park cars because then there would be nowhere for us to designate the HLZ that we were told needs to be in our admin instructions.
Too many cars = no HLZ!
7 Likes
also bear in mind it was unit CAFV that had to contact organisations/clubs etc and advised some at less than a weeks notice that we are no longer able to assist there organisation/club in car parking traffic direction. followed on shortly afterwards with SW Region banning doing any external activities etc corps ones during end of July/Aug.
1 Like
We had the unenviable position of informing one organisation with 1 months notice, spent a week rearranging other duties for as they didnāt want us to miss out. And then told them with a week to go that we canāt do it at all now. Strained the relationship somewhat.
2 Likes
This should probably ssy enough on its own. Yes Iām CCF, but that doesnāt mean it was different. I saw pictures and posts from SCCs going and doing flying, and gettingn all their cadets experiences (back of Merlins, etc etc.) I got one sortie in. In 5 years. I will be entirely fair, 2 of those were Covid. But it is, quite frankly, gutting to watch other cadets going through the system and seeing them getting no sorties in 2 to 3 years.
I must admit, when I saw the ACPS video announcement on the Air Cadets Instagram, I thought it was a whole pile of rubbish. You can barely get cadets in the air once every 2/3 years, how the heck are you thinking you can manage to get people to solo standard? Are they going to take flying slots away from the rest of the ATC/CCF? How are they able to evaluate who deserves spots on ACPS or not? (because unless youāre doing time with civvie pilots or youāve games the system, I cannot see how many if any cadets have more than 2 or 3 sorties in the bag)
As for the carparking shabang, while iāve never done it with Air Cadets, itās not as if youāre getting unqualified cadets to drive the cars themselves? Every car park known to man states in clear signage āany damage to your car while parking is your liability (etc etc.)ā - surely itās a job of cadets pointing vaguely where thereās a reasonable space, being out the way, and job jobbed? I do not understand how weāve managed to make that needlessly complex and ādangerousā?
4 Likes
I am not inclined to talk ārubbishā and ask that we collectively adhere to ACP1 here please. We can disagree (or agree!!) without lowering the tone or quality of the engagement. I am happy to engage on this platform but it comes with an expectation of civility please.
15 Likes
Quite right, but it should be our AUP people stick to. Not everyone here is involved with the RAFAC and so ACP1 isnāt relevant. However, our AUP will cover how members interact with each other and use the forum, and posts can be reported by anyone where they see any issues and a moderator will respond.
11 Likes
Iām relatively new to modern RAFAC, yes I was a cadet in the 1980ās and looking back those were far from the āgood old daysā that many long for on here. That aside I loved my time in the organisation and thatās why I have returned as a CFAV to āpay forwardsā the foundation that it gave me for success in my work and personal life.
Throughout my entire adult life I have led volunteer organisations with national scale similar to RAFAC through periods of significant change. This is never easy for individuals or the organisation and is often perceived as negative or disruptive. This is often not because of the change itself but how that is communicated and managed. From what Iāve seen over the past 24-months one of RAFACās challenges is communicationā¦ but I believe itās a little deeper than that.
The perceived relationship between the headquarters and CFAVās is one that can be described as āparent - childā. This is evident in the communication and lack of meaningful engagement with the volunteer community on not only key decisions but day to day management. Many might say thatās how the military functions, but itās not. Itās also not the way to nurture and value RAFACās greatest assets, itās people. This kind of change isnāt easy and requires a cultural shift across the organisation to improve the trust that has been slowly eroded over many years. This shift comes when both sides recognise they all have the same goal but theyāve been working against each other.
Iāve noticed some toxic behaviours on both sides of the fence that have become normalised and need to stop. An example on the CFAV side is this incessant abuse of the FOI system. I understand that this may stem from frustration, but the consequence is that HQ staff spend a disproportionate amount of time addressing these, rather than doing their jobs which in turn frustrates them and progress we all yearn for. I understand the paaaion but channel that into fixing the issues that cause the frustrations, not making them worse. If people doing this cannot see that they are part of the problem then perhaps itās time they reevaluated what they are contributing to the organisation. Harsh I know, but it needs to be said. Continual negativity will not improve our lot.
On the HQ side the relationship with CFAVās needs to change. The volunteers need to be heard and feel they are invested in the future of the organisation. At the moment this is a perceived one way street with HQ imposing change, often with zero context. Volunteers arenāt paid staff and need to be treated differently, IMHO the HQ doesnāt fully understand that need. Valuing volunteers is important and the volunteers āvoiceā in the HQ is the Senior CFAV. They are so valued that they donāt appear on any of the HQ hierarchy diagrams. A little thing, but it demonstrates externally the regard in which the post is valued.
Iām positive that RAFAC can be a better place to volunteer and be a cadet but to stop the decline in numbers we need a cultural shift. Openess engenders trust, which in turn will allow the organisation to harness the latent potential of its members and staff. We need to all be invested in the organisation and start afresh.
To get there we all need to know the plan. Something simple and tangible. 5 key things that will be the focus of our new leader. Tangible objectives that can be regularly updated on, and staff on both sides be held to account for progress. Culture, communications, engagement, attraction, recruitment, retention, identity (brand), organisation, personal development, all things that could easily be part of that relationship rebuild.
The silo mentality needs to be confined to the past and both sides need to be open to a new way of working together. The opportunity that a new Commandant brings is the catalyst for change and I for one, hope that their focus is rebuilding the relationship between volunteers and paid staff so the organisation can deliver world class opportunities for the young adults. Happy and well supported CFAVās are key to the success of the organisation and development of anything else will be for nought if the declining numbers continue unabated.
Iād even like to see a CFAV board who has the opportunity to speak with the candidates for Comdt as part of their appointment process. Demonstrating that the relationship with the volunteers is important to the appointment. Not sure what @Cab would think of that. But it could be the start of the reset and demonstrating that the opinions of those who make the organisation what it is are valued.
I could write an essay on how we could move forward positively and if anyone is interested Iām happy to do so. Itās probably obvious that my passion is improving volunteer organisations and Iād be only to happy to assist in any way I can, to be part of the solution, transforming the organisation for the better, which I believe is what the majority yearn for.
22 Likes
When the organisation isnāt transparent with information / communication, then inevitably, CFAVs (& others) will use the FoI system to gather information.
The hard āstopā on cadet car parking is a very good case in point - no previous issues within the last 2 yrs, but directed to do so by AOC 22 Gp as a result of (seemingly) ignoring inputs made at previous safety meetings. Had this been put out in the original communication, well, the end result would have been the the same, but CFAVs would have understood the background & said āBlimey, nothing we can do.ā
Perhaps itās quite telling that you refer to it as an abuse of the FoI system, rather than look at things the other way (as you have maybe implied) - fix the diabolically bad (selective?) information flow from the Ivory Towers.
12 Likes
Is it actually abuse, though? Or is it a failure of the organisation to recognise that there is substantial public interest in an organisation that spends millions of pounds of public money, and has also failed create a system to deal with requests in a timely manner, and ensure that our ābusinessā continues as it should?
There are provisions in the act to deal with malicious applications - which I would argue does not include most of the requests submitted by CFAV and other members of the public.
I think the bottom line for me is that if anyone, and I include CFAV at Sqn level in that, doesnāt like the idea of our emails, WhatsApp, or paper records, being subject to the act, then they need to rethink their connection with the organisation.
I think the narrative that CFAV exercising a right, as defined by an act of parliament, to make a FOI request is āabuseā or āpart of the problemā risks damaging all of the positive points you make.
10 Likes
Its not just HQ, Regions are the same which further compounds the issue for those below. Especially when each RC thinks they have their own little empire.
5 Likes
Perhaps āabuseā is the incorrect word. āMischievousā use of the system is perhaps a better description.
I would love for you to tell me what positive effect any FOI you have made has had on the organisation? You may get some more information but what positive impact does that information have on making the organisation better? I can tell you right now that the hours spent on these requests have a huge impact on the availability of paid staff to do their primary roles, there is also an additional admin burden which impacts the organisation. All of which is negative.
Perhaps consider writing an email and asking for clarity. Simple and Iāll wager gets a reply.
The fact that all youāve picked out of my post is the FOI elements indicates how you view the organisation and your own level of trust in those leaders. As Iāve indicated above, if you personally feel this is the only way you can trust the organisation, then perhaps another organisation could benefit more from your valued time.
Be part of the solution. Not the problem.
shows the seniors that we wonāt just take things they throw at us. As has been stated itās not parent and child like in the normal RAF - outside of the RAFAC some of us have jobs/positions/experience which rank far above that of our positions inside RAFAC, so we donāt like to be treated like mushrooms.
3 Likes
Apologies for the thread drift, huge amounts of good in the post but as someone form the outside looking in, there does seem to very much be large level of mistrust in the leaders - as youāve stated quite clearly weāre not wholly beholden to the military way and so open and clear comms at all stages would probably stop FOIās sharpish!
4 Likes
Abuse is the incorrect word. Mischievous is a better word.
I donāt think anyone, myself included, would not wish to be held accountable and FOI is a mechanism for this, granted.
But this is a symptom of wider mistrust and not the correct mechanism if we wish to change our culture. The FOI system is being used to get information that should be readily transparent already, or accessible through the CofC. Itās a vicious circle. We need to break the cycle to move forward.
Even batting off those clearly mischievous FOIās takes time that is already in huge demand.
2 Likes
Totally agree. Thatās why cultural change is needed.
FOI isnāt going to solve that problem just put a little plaster on the current boil.
Why do you believe this is CFAVs?
Could be cadets. Parents. Members of the wider Sqn Communityā¦
I would be warey having CFAVs lumped in like that.
5 Likes
Youāre right, but it is interesting that your viewpoint is that itās the people making the requests that are the issue not the people who instead of learning from them and just giving us the information first time repeatedly hide information.
The circle does need breaking but Iād argue that it needs to start from the people responding to the requests before it does the people making them.
14 Likes
Direct that to the highly paid help, not those on the coal face who try their hardest to provide the best cadet experience.
You really need to take off those rosy tinted glassesā¦
Yep - & in many cases, you will get a polite (but dismissive) reply). I raised the issue of providing an alternative route / option for cadets who would age out from their ACPS award as Dundee has gone bust. Nope, not doing anything. Went a lot higher. Solution found.
Thatās just one factor - & clearly a very important one. When & if I get the chance to look at the other areas, I might deign to add further inputs.
3 Likes
Not at all. I think the deeper issue is as Iāve described. The FOI issues Iām highlighting are definitely a symptom of a parent-child culture. I hope thatās clear. But it also achieves nothing towards solving the underlying problem but expends huge amounts of time and energy to raise and resolve. Nobody wins.
All Iām trying to express, perhaps not that well. Iād that not all of the problems in the organisation stem from HQ. As volunteers we can often be our own worst enemy and by doing something we perceive as in the organisational interest, we can sometimes produce unintended consequences.
2 Likes
Yay - someone who else in the org who understands transactional analysis & ego states!
Although I think whilst parent-child is what is perceived to be the relationship what actually is happening is parent-parent cross connections with each side trying to be in charge.
2 Likes