From what I can ascertain, it seem that TG6 has moved elswwhere - dunno the background. I haven’t had emails answered since Apr & don’t recall any notification from HQACO about this “gap” - I can’t find anything on Sharepoint.
This would seem to have left a very significant gap in a position that is critical to ACO fshooting - especially with respect to range inspections. I am aware that one such range near to our sqn applied 3 months in advance for their inspection…
Nothing happened, their range licence has expired, so they cannot shoot at present. I’m trying to plan ahead with 6 months to go, even to considering a request for an extension if necessary.
Does anyone please have insight into this situation, especially with regard to a backup plan for carrying out range inspections - even if actioned by say an equivalent authority, such as from the ACF?
The post is vacant. The range inspection element of the job has been carried out by various suitably qualified HQAC staff since then, with other elements being looked after by other TG branch staff.
Promulgation of this & associated changes to procedures (if necessary) Is essential, not finding out via a forum.
What timescales for inspections? Three month’s notice obviously wasn’t enough in one case! Who is the point of contact now? Why were emails to TG6 not directed to another post or given an auto-reply. Business communication, basic rules…
only if by ‘very demanding’ you mean meeting the norms that every other defence HQ/village shop manages every day, and has done since email became a standard mode of communication the best part of 20 years ago, then yes…
HQAC - and the people in it - not even reaching the definition of sub-par since its inception. its almost endearing really, well - almost.
I hope that there was meant to have a smilie at the end of the sentence, otherwise it comes across as exceptionally condescending. I consider the questions that I outlined to be the very bare minimum that a pro-active management system should have provided the answers to months ago.
It’s a separate issue but there also seems to have been a resounding silence on Sharepoint relating to the No8 rifle OSD & extension of the safety case. Obviously not important enough.
It is very difficult to remain polite & objective when considering the poor standard of communication from HQACO. THis particular example is yet another case of failure to notify the ACO organisation about an important gap in post with the associated ramifications that affect a key activity within the ACO.
This is not an isolated example - in a commercial organisation, there would have been scathing annual appraisals for individuals…
Talking of communications, I wonder when we will get the next “jolly hockey sticks” message about another glider becoming serviceable??
The irony is that if we as volunteers don’t communicate in this way you can get snotty remarks. If I go on holiday I put an auto reply on my Bader email.
At work if you are away from the office for more than 3 days, you have to put an auto reply on email with alternative contacts, as MJ suggests when you get back someone has a word and you get a black mark. If someone leaves a job the IT bods put an auto reply and forwarding address on the account. It’s not difficult.
Resources?? How does this affect someone leaving a post without their providing the relevant promulgation of the fact (with interim planning information) or the ability to set up an auto-reply fro their email account:
“Sorry, XXXX has left this position; if you want to have even the faintest chance of an answer, don’t hold your beeath, but contact YYYY on HQACO-poor-COMMS, exit 12345.”
if anyone at HQAC wants to move out of the resource dynamic working environment of HQAC, then i’m sure they could walk into any entry level position within Lincolns bustling fried chicken retail sector…
its more than a little amusing to watch the ‘JFDI’ brigade whine like a 5yo without any sweets when given more work to do sans pay in the example rich manner they are all so happy to give to others. i think i will raise a glass of something peaty and expensive to the gnashing of teeth and printing of CV’s to be heard in Sleafords principle moralé - and talent - vacuum.
There should be more use of volunteers to carry out these principle roles IMHO. It works for other areas of charitable organisations so why not ours. I’d be happy being legally responsible signing things off if it meant getting things done, and if I stuffed up then I’d be gripping the brass rail in the dock.
Would you?
Bit of e learning or an old manual to cover the training aspect (keeps cost down) bobs your uncle.
the ACO of 20 years ago relied far more on the judgement and agency of CO’s, HQAC was responsible for the corps wide stuff and weedling resources out of the MOD - it is HQAC that moved away from managing the corps wide stuff (flying, gliding, shooting and camps) with the obvious results that we (don’t) see every weekend, and into the micro-management of stuff at Sqn and Wing level that they don’t need to deal with, but want to cement their control over.
personally, i’d have no interest at all in digging them out of a problem entirely of their own making, particularly given the less than considerate response that everyone else in the ACO gets from HQAC when HQAC foists yet another ill-conceived procedure on people who are supposed to doing ACO stuff after they’ve done work, family, friends.
if i thought that the ACO was entering a new era in the relationship between the volunteer and the full-timers where the full timer supported, trained, protected and nurtured the volunteer, and in return the volunteer brought their outside skills and abilities and took work from the full-timers ‘in’ tray in the way you propose, then yes. that, however, is not on the cards - its merely transfering work, and accountability but not authority.
if you want to, good luck to you - but don’t pretend to be surprised when some venal no-mark hangs you out to dry, and your cries of ‘but you were supposed to train/look after me’ go unheeded…
Impossible without delegated authority &/or budgetary control.
Likewise, I don’t ever see HQACO allowing volunteers to take a scythe through the morass of irrelevant administration in order to simplify matters immensely, or fire salvos up the chain to neutralise impediments or ineffective staff…
We could start the “HQACO Apprentice Scheme” - you’re fired…
Returning to the original issue, if a commercial company had a need to “gap” a position, the CEO would be down on the accountable manager like a ton of bricks if the relevant responsibilities were not covered, & the business case considerations had been excluded. There would have been coordination in advance with HR to minimise the gapping problem (plan ahead, recruit/select/train the replacement in best possible time) & coordinate an effective handover. - even if not face to face & after the event. Suitable company-wide communication would have been promulgated.
[quote=“Plt_Off_Prune, post:17, topic:1878, full:true”]So essentially you don’t want to fix the problem, you just want to whinge about it? So typical of staff these days.
[/quote]
Would we be allowed to fix the problem? Can’t see it myself.
Not too sure why “it is typical of staff these days” as we’ve never been considered as potential for help. Would a CFAV be allowed by their employer to have the time to do this given they have a job already?
In this case, the post is vacant. (& has been for a while - this is not a “last week” event). No notification, no changes to email account, no promulgation of any alternative planning to ensure that the relevant responsibilities have been covered - or alternative provisions set in place (Army Cadet counter-part to action range inspections, etc). One range closed as a result, I guess there are other users similsrly affected or will be in the near future. Management effectiveness = zero - you could probably state less than zero wth respect to the knock on effect & continued lack of notification.
Define “problem” - this individual case or the other issues that seem to crop up from within HQACO.?
Give me the authority, financial control & other relevant project delegation & I will do my best to move mountains. In the past, I was tasked to work on a project with an Air Chief Marsahll & within one hour of starting in post, I had to make priority decisions that should have been actioned by 3 - 4 rank levels above me, & certainly months before. Would the ACO let me do anything remotely close to this? No chance. Maybe I could purchase a tea bar order - given a few month’s lead time to get the “permission” administration out of the way.
Alternative planning would require people talking to each other and or actually understanding or even caring about the potential problems if nothing is done.
This requires a basic level of communication which seems to be at the root of the problem overall.
