No, Iāmsorry, but in an evidence-based world, āitās never been a problem beforeā¦ā is exactly the point. There is the evidence. āI donāt like it and my dadās (barcode) bigger than your dad (barcode)ā
1 Like
Under the Kingās authority! (although Iām being a tad disingenuous and causing a thread drift, I remember being told whilst in command that if something happened /went wrong then it would be me facing the full force of the law not those above me and now everyone is being told itās all AOC22 Group so who really holds the risk if everyone up and down the chain thinks itās them?)
So where is the evidence is safe, it works both ways, the there hasnāt been any major incidents so far doesnt add up either, and no one said we had to like it
Well i think we now know the answer , aa it isnt us at the coalface
2 Likes
Not only no major incidents but also no near misses.
While the absence of accidents isnāt in itself proof that the activity is safe if you are going to make such a fundamental change it should require more than a gut feeling.
6 Likes
So you wait for an accident say stop?, that would be the case many years ago. But agree the atop would have been before car oarking season
Whatās the alternative? Just donāt do anything?
We do far more dangerous activities, should we stop those too?
1 Like
I think its a rusk over reward choice, it was seen as car parking not worth the risk as the overall reward is not within the key activities, as well as for orher activities different mitigations in place. No doubt there will be other activities on chopping board, whether we agree or not wont really make a difference but at least give more notice so alternative activities can be arranged
Which demonstrates how removed from the actual units the senior leaders are, as demonstrated above this decision has done untold damage to dozens of not hundreds of units both financial and reputation with no form of impact assessment or engagement having taken place.
Now if there were concerns mitigation couldāve been put in place, make it a RTL activity and move approval to Wing for example. Instead with got a blanket stop and itās volunteers who have had to pick up the pieces.
2 Likes
Nothing to do with being removed, it was lnown there would be an impact, but agree with your last paragraph. National civ comms will need to look how costs can be replaced in future, with staff as wellbof course
None of which makes up for the reputational damage done at a local level or the damage to already fragile staff morale.
7 Likes
From our level can see your point, from top level repuraionql damage is easier to fix than injury etc,. The best thing would be for 22 grp imcl hqac to redefine what we are authoriaed to do asap so that we can manage expwctations, we wont necessarily like or agree with it but would give us better way forward and people can assess how what their future would be
On this point, youāre not wrong; but more generally, if we donāt make our feelings and the consequences known, there is no opportunity for reflection by decision makers.
If theyāre interested in reflection, that is. The AOC has ignored responses attempting to discuss and abruptly dismissed differing views and experience, which is juxtaposed against his claims to āwelcome debate and discussionā which is itself mixed in with what comes across as petty point-scoring and a petulant defence of ego.
āDiversity is having a seat at the table, inclusion is having a voice, and belonging is having that voice be heard.ā. We clearly have no seat, we have no voice, and we donāt belong; mere peons to be snubbed and ignored, concerns and counter arguments hand-waved away while lip service and platitudes are offered to concepts such as disruptive thinking and open conversation, it seems.
12 Likes
and the HQ team are working on this, with comms to- explaining that policy currently permits the activity and it is a source of income generation, which is valuable to some units given the challenges of bag-packing etc.
There are already a number of pre-approved events on SMS, so the question was about a graduated response or a maybe adjusting to 016 underpinned by a HQ-led risk assessment.
It appears the opportunity to discus before ceasing this activity has passed, so will direct as requested ASAP.
Regards, TK
Adjusting to O16 with proper risk assessing from HQAC would have been a perfect solution to this problem.
4 Likes
Good to see there was an attempt at pragmatism.
Shows that itās been a long time since I was on a Squadron!
I use a pencil every day. There is the potential Iāll slip and stab myself with it. Granted in 40 years it hasnāt happened, but I canāt take that as evidence that it wonāt ever happen, so Iām stopping using them and Iāll go back to crayons.
We have a risk assessment process. That doesnāt rely on evidence, it relies on likelyhood vs outcome. I could slip and stab a pencil through my eye and into my brain, which would be a severe outcome, but the likelyhood isso low I can discount it.
Car parking - yes if something happened it could be severe, but the likelyhood is evidenced to be low, therefore ALARP
AEF flying on the otherhand - outcome would be severe from an accident. Likelyhood is also much higher (based on hours complted against accidents, compared to carparking hours complted with no accidents) therefore ban cadets flying. Job done.
How do we acceot high risk in some cases, and low risk is not accepted in others.
2 Likes
can we appeal your decision to your boss?
1 Like
AEF is undertaken by highly skilled trained people who have undergone rigorous testing and maintain currency, this therefore reduces the risk to ALARP. It is therefore āmoreā defendable in Court (of course lessons will always be learnt).
Car Parking in the RAFAC is supervised by people who āthinkā they know what to do and undertaken by kids who had a briefing from someone who āthinksā they know what to do. What formal training have any of them had? so the risk is far from ALARP.
Then add the public who donāt always do what they are toldā¦
If the personnel involved (Staff and Cadets) had all attended a formally recognised āHow to Marshall Carsā delivered by a Certified provider then the risk maybe ALARP, but the if the AVM says noā¦it still means no.
1 Like