There is lots of other fundraising that can happen - a lot of Sqn donāt use Car Parking. So whilst it is a blow to those who have used it speak to other Squadrons, find out what they are doing. And No1 on that list if you havenāt already got a solid one is a Civillian Comittee who works with (and not battles) the Squadron.
In a previous squadron we used to do car parking at our towns biggest annual event but as staff we made the decision to stop because although the vast amount of interactions were positive we always had a handful that werenāt - where the cadet who was just making sure cars didnāt go through a gate (on example) got the blame. We spoke to the organisers and said we do still really want to help out, but unfortunately car parking is out - I did blame a change in policy albeit it was Sqn policy. But it eased the discussion and we now help in a few different ways - meaning we get the community work, and we get a donation. We did things such as running the winning element to the announcers, walk inside vendors to their spots and help set up where needed, issue meal tokens to volunteers. It actually ended up being much more enjoyable and we would rotate the cadets around the activities.
Grants will always be a big one (finally not weāll know local ones!) - but a lot of them can be a lot of work so this is really where your Civ Com comes in.
Itās why No1 thing is manage/sort your Civ Com out - they are a vital part of the Squadron. It is the Civ Com role to do/organise the fundraising so that we can then focus on the activities.
Thereās a lot of discussion here about how much work we do, but we create extra as potentially we arenāt utilising/ setting up /managing problems within the Civ Com.
And yet at every level below you, the risk had been deemed ALARP. To the extent that the GRA available through the Safety Centre Hub identifies both driving to/from the event and the ācrowdā being higher risk than the risk of contact with traffic/moving vehicles.
It does seem odd on the one hand to say āIām not risk averseā and on the other hand to say ābut I will not allow you to even mitigate the risks for a specific activity and Iām banning it and you will never change my mindā. I thought we were taught that good leadership is taking on board lots of view points and not having a fixed permanent view on things and accepting things can change.
Saying āfind other fundraisingā is all well and good but you need diverse funding streams. If you remove one of those options you force the same number of people to fight for the fewer resources meaning itās more competitive, and fewer people will get funding.
More to the point. What about all the little activities we do each year that arent really in the syllabus directly but can be linked indirectly.
What training is there for those?
Yet the cadets enjoy these activities the most.
What happened to Venture Adventure?
ā¦
Separately i would like to challenge the assumption that other fund raising activities have less risk.
Bag packing, a favoured activity of the Corps, even having National focus in the recent past, holds a significant risk of cash theft with possible physical intimitation or violence.
Cadets are of course told to simply surrender their bucket if challenged, but in todays age of shop bourne violence who knows.
I would guess more bag packs happen then car parking and would like to see the stats for both for incidents.
Saving grace is that any RAF bod at the top will move on soon enough, inevitably to be replaced by someone else with high minded ideas but no grounding in the reality of a youth volunteering group.
Itās not really a stop, but a pause as long as the current 'leadershipāb is in position.
I wish but Iāve got a feeling that we only ever move in one direction. Never going to see it back. Really just loosing options to earn money. Supermarket in my town wonāt allow bag packing. If we donāt get activities back in SW at the start of September we are going to loose another of our fund raisers. Perhaps if 22 Group had to pay out for lost revenue directly to Sqns it would make up for the loss. HQAC or even Wings donāt seem to spend it well.
Therein lies the problem. In this modern day and age, no new in post AOC will have the balls to reverse any ban/stop order put in place by a predecessor. They will do what is easy - stick with the status quo - not what is right. There are promotions, pensions and MBEās to think about dear boy!
For your awareness, AOCs do not need to have āballsā and I ask that you adjust your language and find a different way of trying to articulate your point without taking an unnecessarily gendered tone.
If you are asking a question about judgement, it is natural that I will see things differently from my predecessor as our backgrounds are different. Our intent, however, in achieving the best outcomes for RAFAC are 100% aligned.
Come and follow me for a day. This is a genuine offer.
Out of all the comments on here and especially the ones with the most engagement, youāve picked the one that says balls and want someone to adjust their tone as the one to reply to.
Makes me glad I hung up my boots if the person at the top appears (and appears, I appreciate it may not be the truth) to be more concerned about a personal attack than the hundreds of comments about the general state of the organisation under their umbrella.