Perhaps there is a simple desire for us not to look like a shambles in the increased media spotlight of RAF100 and embarrass the ATC and the RAF. A simple letter to bring it back to mind is a reasonable response. They are standards we all accepted when we joined.
Get your kit in good nick now, or don’t wear it until you do.
Getting new kit. Thats a laugh.Last time I was at my parent unit a few months ago they couldnt even supply me with any short sleeved shirts.Apparently the RAF havnt got any and theres no contract in place either.How pathetic is that.
I’ve bought my own (Double Two) as waiting for stores is like waiting snowstorm on the sun, especially needing a proper man’s size. Not overly expensive and head and shoulders in terms of quality over the sweat shop fodder from stores.
it would be entirely reasonable, and would be treated as such, if the sender had any credibility on pretty much any subject, or the resources were available to actually do anything about it.
or, indeed, if every single uniformed member of staff didn’t know with absolute certainty that were they to attend parade nights in civvies for 6 months because uniform of the appropriate standard or size simply wasn’t available, the senders very own attack dogs (for that is how they are seen) would be roaring all over that member of staff like the slathering hounds of hell.
the debacle of the last decade means there is simply no good will left. everything is seen as either bungling incompetance, a personal attack, mendacity or deluded aggrandisement - and nothing as legitmate or well intentioned. in that morale climate, the letter was a mistake - which, given the senders record of achievement, should surprise no one.
There is plenty of good will left, though it is typically frayed at the edge.
We aren’t all a bunch of whiney beatches!
HQAC is very much aware of this - the uniformed front at least; I can’t speak for the den of civil servants in the machinery. Whether awareness can make much difference or wh3ether it extends up to DRFC, CAS or even the AOC is debatable as we are small fish in their larger ponds.
"I am acutely aware that uniform entitlements and allowances for upkeep are limited and that the great majority of RAFAC members are volunteers who may not be able to afford replacement uniform if their original issue becomes unfit for public duties. Public funding of RAFAC uniforms is necessarily limited in a time of economic austerity and whilst we will endeavour to enhance entitlements as part of our efforts to support our uniformed volunteers, we must be realistic and acknowledge that part of volunteering in uniform includes a commitment to maintain uniforms to the highest standards.
I seek all RAFAC members’ adherence to this guidance and direction, which is endorsed by the AOC on CAS’ behalf. An inability to wear uniform in public does not prevent volunteers from continuing to contribute to all the normal activities associated with RAFAC. This policy simply limits the wearing of uniform to those individuals not considered to be at risk of damaging the public reputation of the Service and its cadet organisation."
I think there is also the aspect that for the last 15-20 years, every couple of years we get a new strategy with effectively the same objectives. Some of these haven’t changed in 20+ years as they are still unresolved or more correctly outside the scope of the people we have running the organisation to effect any change, which has to beg the questions, do they have a place at the table and able to get things at that table, if not, do we need them?
These things are difficult and get put on the back burner, while something like uniform which is increasingly something we are losing access to in terms of replacement.
But there wouldn’t be ‘economic austerity’ if the MOD procurement bods were given a swift and powerful kick in the slats for the wasteful excesses that are currently going on and which have been going on for years.
The leadership at the very top of the Armed Services appear to lack balls when it comes to tackling politicians over the meagre budgets allocated to them but which they allow to be frittered away uneccessarily. No wonder morale - at all levels and branches of the services - is at an all time low.
The problem is those at the top of the Armed Forces waste the money. How long does it take to get from back of fag packet to something that works? How many times does something get done that doesn’t work then needs to go back for ‘amendment’?
Take the complete mess that has been made in the ATC in terms of IT, gliding and flying.
While politicians may change tack on things, it’s still incompetence at the top of the armed forces that wastes the money.
Project management is poor and this is where the money gets wasted. Change something mid-project and the cost goes up and something I imagine is rife in the armed forces changing the people running it, which means bringing people up to speed and then the fact the new bod needs to put their own stamp on it to ensure they look good. All this adds to the cost. I accept this isn’t restricted to the armed forces, but when public money is involved it is shameful and should be challenged.
As for procurement, I doubt they could procure their backside with two hands and a mirror.
I tell you what I want some respect for the effort and time I put in to this organisation. THATS what I want and not to be spoken to like im an inconvenience to someones pension plan. Im sick and tired of being lectured to by someone who isnt fit to hold their appointment.Wherever I look I see people leaving.Good honest hard working people who have given many years of unstinting service to this organisation.Oh yes if where talking about uniform standards can someone tell CAC that even she has to polish her shoes.Last time I saw a pic of her and Vorderman they didnt look good enough for a standard parade night let alone a major event at Westminster.
There is nothing wrong with the sentiment of the letter. Look your best and make sure your uniform is up to scratch clean and fits in all of the right places and look smart on parade.
The problem is then to say if it is old, worn out to tight, to loose or was issued the same time as Douglas Bader then tough don’t parade is just crass and insensitive. Then to say you should use your UUA to get it sorted is not even living in the real world. UUA will not even buy you a pair of shoes.
The letter should have offered some sort of remedy. If our parent service wants us to be the light blue footprint and the face of the RAF in the community then they should not do it on the cheap. Either pay a decent UUA or like the SNCOs free exchange (wasn’t the point of the CFC all about making the terms and conditions of the officers and NCOs the same?) and give our No1 uniform a life and change it every 15 years. Perhaps then we will look the part.
To be fair, I think that thus far in my RAFAC career I’ve received a lot more in UUA than I’ve spent on uniform. Obviously at some point I’ll likely have to buy new shoes or a hat so it’ll all balance out in the end.
As has been mentioned earlier they just want everything on the cheap.Uniforms should be lifed. When I was serving a No.1 was lifed for 4 years.A jumper was 30 months.You had to get your boss to sign a chit to get new kit under fair wear and tear.If you didnt have that chit you had to pay.Unless of course the item was stolen which happened with my no.1 hat.That was stolen in trade training so I had to arrive on my first posting in no.1 wearing a beret which went down very well with the SWO(until he saw my crime chit from RAFP).