if we have appropriately competent CFAVs (with mandatory training all signed off etc)
and in the cases where required, these CFAVs are qualified (ie AT events)
and the event is listed as an approved activity (eg visit to an airshow, or museum)
the transport is covered using SOV which ticks all the (micro-managed) elements required by HQAC
driven by a suitably qualified (D1, Leconsfield trained) driver, who has suitable hours to conduct the task
the AO, RA and JIs are all completed iaw policy,
the SMS is filled out, with all the required documents, annexes and additional information uploaded and is correct
and that SMS is then signed off as per ACTO 010 by the appropriate persons, with the necessary authority to do so
literally every tick in the box is covered for an event held last month, is now BANNED for next month because some staff in an office 100+ miles away have “too much work” to do???
oh come on…please - what exactly am i missing here?
I know the contributors to ACC have been long time campaigners of the “how do Regions actually benefit the organisation” brigade but i am completely lost at the connection between taking Cadets on a AT walk on Thursday parade night, or to the local Airshow on the weekend is impacted so much by the workload of people who are so far removed from my admin of the event that is has to be cancelled as after ensuring all of the above is done, I am creating too much work for them….i am sorry i can’t see it.
is there thus a suggestion that the backlog is because of other people’s “mess” to date, and that is drowning the Rgn in such workload it cannot cope anymore?
how dangerous is SW region in that case if there is that much “mess”?
I understand the logic, but I don’t agree with it.
The more stuff we do = more things to deal with. More activities means more pay request, expense claims etc. It also leads to an increase in things like safeguarding workloads as it will lead to more things happening that shouldn’t.
Clearly the region is at a point where it doesn’t have enough workforce to even be doing the basic functions.
I don’t like it, but that seems to be what it is. I can’t understand why, when most of the stuff listed above can be remote, that we aren’t sharing the workload. Why are 5 regions carrying on as normal when 1 is dead. Surely other regions should be able to take some pressure off, even if it means we all get effected.
Is it not better to effect is all a little bit instead of effecting 1/6th of us a lot?
Previous to 2024 I would agree with you - but we have a CACE process now and the summarised message is “we have no money” so people are not requesting it anymore.
Like i have said before, if there is a factor of events which are causing the problem create a SW-CACE with a list of events which cause Rgn the additional admin.
and if that includes anything to do with money being paid it is either “banned” or is no longer funded (which is the CACE process anyway!)
but this is 2024 and we have a CACE and CFAVs are accepting there is no money, so not claiming it.
and besides, my 90 minutes AT nav exercise on a Thursday parade night doesn’t attract VA and I have never claimed the mileage for the 4 mile round trip to the common land we conduct the nav ex on as it is not worth raising the paperwork for the £1.57 we’d get back
so why not create the list which says “events which require X funding” are either banned or need to 100% self funding
i have long had a suspicion about this. what is it supposed to be? 10% of all Wing events, or 10% of Squadron events?
if it happens it does so without indication it has been done, and with no follow up “well done on X event, next time I would make sure Y is mentioned in your AO, and Z control measure in the RA is better defined as it is a bit whooll” - or words to that effect.
I think it’s 10% of all self-approved events should be audited by the next level up. So 10% of your Sqn events should, at random, get audited by wing, etc
but taking on board your “etc” i presume the same is done by Region on Wing approved events…
I didn’t realise SW Wings were THAT busy to create such a workload for Rgn Staff - surely as these audits are completed post event - and thus too late to make a difference is something is wrong, the easiest option its to stop audit for a month…?
it won’t stop bad things happening as audits are completed post event anyway, so what difference will it make? adjusting the ratio from 10% to 0.5% still means there is oversight while also reducing workload…right?
(and this is on the basis that SMS audits are completed
Except for the Civil Service Pause on recruitment, that being said for exceptional circumstances they can recruit just have to justify. Since they’ve stopped the majority of activities I would say it’s exceptional circumstances and they should easily be able to justify it!
But for us at the Sqn, we’ve talked about it and it is what it is we aren’t going to let it overly impact the cadets. We’ve explained the reason for the stop based on the email - ultimately regardless of whether or not we agree it’s been done for perceived safety reasons. We’ve offered them to submit activities they would like to do on a parade night and we’ll adjust our summer program around that.
Absolutely we are missing out on some key events, working out whether we can get refunds for them (we’ve had some very positive responses when I’ve provided quotes from the email) or deferred them until after Summer.
I would absolutely of preferred it to be done at a quieter time if it has to be done, but if the perceived safety is the key reason then of course they will do it at the busiest time because that’s where the biggest risk is.
and in addition to this - those tents are serving a purpose and filling a gap which was created (on the assumption you are taking about the accommodation tents at RIAT).
Following the ban of troop shelters (Mk1 and 2) for accommodation it created a gap in the available tenting for RIAT - these tents are not bought for the sake of branding but to fill a gap which was created
Volunteer management is an odd niche especially if you then throw in the safeguarding issues.
The skills & corporate knowledge are not natural skills to many institutions & it takes a good view years to get your head around it, even if you use to be a volunteer!
The paid staff /administrative staff are likely struggling & sapped in confidence being asked to do impossibly things & not being permitted to deliver what they would like to for the volunteer.
They, especially the E1s & E2 along with AOs need a bit of support & help. Drop them a box of biscuits or tub of quality streets just so they know it’s not personal against them.
I do wonder if the reserves are similarly suffering
Oh I agree, there is definitely a gap for all the Mk1 & 2 tents. However these new tents were bought for Corps and I doubt they’ll ever make their way around the regions.
Do you want to know the figure that they spent on those tents…?? Out of the public purse, when so many of our sqn buildings are falling into disrepair, or sqn’s being evicted with nowhere else to go having to fight their case on a temporary building. Or even the fact that they have put in CACE paperwork now because of the original statement that they do not have the money to pay VA and mileage etc.
They did not need to be liveried, they just needed to have some good, safe, fire retardant tents. Not ones that blow up with an air compressor etc.
I was told this morning that they spent just shy of £2million on 70 tents - that is just under £26000 per tent.
Go figure if that is the correct expenditure of public money whilst squeezing every Sqn and Wing to tighten their belts! Utterly shocking and disheartening.
In addition to this, the majority of CS staff across the organisation, how do I put it, approaching potential retirement age at a great rate of knots.
Push them too hard and they will take early retirement, and I don’t blame them. Could be said the same about a good number of WExOs as gone are the days of ex-RAF officers wanting a few years extra on their pensions.
Hearing that in the next 18-24 months, there is above the average number of CS hitting retirement so, if the MOD recruitment ‘pause’ is not removed, the CS element will become a lot tighter, if not untenable.
Pressure is a two way thing; down from outside of RAFAC, through HQAC, but also the expectation from squadrons up to WHQ/RHQ.
There is this constant blaming of the CS recruiting pause. But we have our own GPF, now called the air cadet charity. There is no reason we can’t hire some of our own staff to help relive pressure on other areas.
Look at the ‘cadet related jobs’ thread. Look at what the SCC, CCF and ACF are hiring. Why are we not doing the same?
so were the others that have been banned from use and these replace.
they are a direct replacement to the old “Troop shelters” and in terms of what they have been purchased for, primarily for accommodation at Camps.
They (the troop shelters) were purchased by the RAFAC for RAFAC use (they were not donated by the MOD) and stored at Little Rissington, and although overseen by the RIAT team (as the quartermaster if you will) were very much RAFAC tents, ie for the whole Corps, and were deployed to annual camps as required.