You are not alone in this. The call for the change in the management structure has been almost universal. Even the Dyer report call for the cull of regions. The only people who think that the structure is fine is HQAC and the management board (look at the membership). Much of what the layers of management do is impose their own spin on the rules, 6 DDH six trainsets then 34 wings and a further 34 interoperations if what is or is not allowed.
If the CAC was the DDH for the corps then the reason for RHQ would cease.
Or add a few staff to RHQ say 3 full time and get rid of WHQs altogether, with the movement to computer based communications this should be feasible.
The only reason for the convoluted management system is its what the RAF probably did in the 1960s. Now is one of the largest fixed costs of the ATC apart from VA.
I agree that there is one too many layers. Whether this is Wg or Region is debatable but surely it isnât beyond the with of man to come-up with something more efficient?
Meanwhile, âDear WHQ, where are my RAFAC badges?â
I was on a âworks councilâ for 7 years and rude things were said and there was negativity on both sides, but we were all adults and resolutions were reached.
If the CoC think itâs rude, itâs because they surround themselves with people who are unlikely to be controversial and I would suggest have a background of anyone being negative towards them would be afforded summary justice.
I wish we volunteers were taken seriously and not treated like schoolchildren needing to ask to do everything.
The old chestnut about defence budgets. Name one company / business that hasnât had budgetary constraints, recruitment bans, natural wastage, redundancies in the last 10 years? The problem is the MOD (like many public sector) bodies are profligate with money and on top of this create eye-watering admin systems and ill-affordable management structures behind these. As soon as there is any mention of reducing this, it seems to mean crumpling into a heap and sobbing, as they donât know how they will / can cope. Suggesting a consolidation of admin personnel would create hysteria. Ignoring the fact that if someone leaves an ATC squadron someone has to pick up the pieces, just like at work.
Youâd be surprised. Mine has banned all travel - domestic and global for the next 18 months and made other changes to reduce as much cost as possible.
If the CFC was about saving money then that has been a failure wing and regions is for another thread
I have nust had a thought, if the TRFs and the dress regs for No 3 uniforn stay the same i have a question?
DPM dress regulations stated that a force identifier had to be fixed to the smock and jacket lighy weight. If we are still wearing RAF TRF shouldnât we still have to wear our Royal Air Force force identifier?
Answers on a postcard to The Silverback, Wales.
I would expect every one to move to the current SNCO TRF, as it does not indicate SNCO but rather ATC - the CCF have their own TRF so this makes sense given we are all the same nowâŚ
Without looking I canât recall what FI SNCOs where, but whatâs wrong with âAir Cadetsâ like the cadets wore?
They are meant to be moving across too
So that they loose the ATC pins and change to RAFAC on their tapes.
However cranwell are yet to order these I believe,
I think itâs being rolled out as officers first then SNCOs
Wasnât the plan for us all to be badged the same as we would all be in the same organisation.
As officers are either be in the ATC or CCF as a part of the RAFAC. Would it have been easier a cheaper, quicker and something easily achievable as the pins already exist to replace VRT pins with either ATC or CCF pins depending on where you are in the RAFAC. None of this faffing with new rank slides, new pins, lack of funding streamâŚ#OrWouldântThatHaveBeenToSimple
Oh, come on, simple? Why do anything simple when you can create a complete convoluted mess.
Making us all âATCâ would have been the common sense approach, pins etc already exist so just needed sending out, but then common sense is not a quality I would associate with our management and ATC wouldnât have fitted in with RAFâs grand scheme for the âRAF Familyâ to bolster itâs flagging status.
I wanted to vote for ATC the second time in that survey, but denied the opportunity, as the decision as to what we would be called had already been made.
I would have also voted for ATC also as I have ALWAYS be in the ATC.
ATC as a cadet.
ATC as a CI.
ATC as a WO (me is to old for SNCO).
ATC as a commissioned officer.
Making us all ATC wouldnât have worked for the CCF, but make them CCF instead and jobs a good un.
I cannot agree with the line about retaining the ATC gilt pins though - we should have moved away from those and onto embroidered rank insignia years ago and that, at least, is the right move.
If the idea was no pins, these could have been phased out, but keep the pins in the meantime, then build up sufficient stocks of new slides over say two years; issuing to all new bods and then issue to everyone. Not the total BS that has been foist upon us by the rank incompetence of senior ranks.
Whilst I agree with your sentiment, there is an element of you âreap what you sowâ by the CoC:-
[quote=âcelticmentor, post:1576, topic:2647, full:trueâ]
The senior officers within the RAFAC live in a world that is shaped by the realtime financial constraints of an overstretched defence budget, a defence estate that is ill-fitted to support future requirements and responsibilities for an organisation that are not the first concern of AOC 22Gp and those above him, to list a few.[/quote]
We do of course as the Volunteer operate in that (very real time) space at the âtactical prosecutionâ end of the stick, so perhaps a moot point?
3 points here -
People are concerned that nothing they have been told about the wholesale arbitrary changes have been true. All âchoicesâ thus far have been false dichotomies from pre-determined outcomes - ala the Vote. The only real engagement has been the âAsk the teamâ forum - other than this it would appear that FaceBook or Twitter is the conduit of choice to the top - provided everything is dandy of course.
With self policing comes a degree of fear as in those with genuine cases against the CoC up to and including CAC will not be heard.
- If those who are paid to develop well thought out proposals (and contingency plans!!!) canât or wonât do it - why should we? People need to look at the criticism made and take a good introspective and seek to change genuine issues.
Agree with the sentiment and like the idea, but never going to happen. There would have to be a number of Turkeys voting for Christmas along with wholesale rank change from CAC down - if you donât have regions with Group Captains, then you donât need an Air Cdre in the chair. If you remove Wings, then you also donât need Group Captains.
"Turkeyâs voting for Christmasâ has been a real block on the ATC progressing over the last few years.
Flying : we (under 5 AEFâs auspice and now others) could have quite easily sourced experience flights at flying clubs, but no, because it would have seen a weakening of the dependence on a very iffy resource
Gliding : same as flying
Shooting : The ACF do shooting and the weapons and qualifications are exactly the same but the ATC puts not insurmountable but never the less awkwardness in the way for us to join in with local ACF for shooting
Jointery : there are lots of areas that we could do things in collaboration (especially) with the ACF for staff and cadet training, but it urinates on a few precious soulâs fires, so again made awkward.
All of these present threats to people drawing a nice salary within the ATC world or those supplying the âserviceâ and not to mention the Wing and Region egotists.
Iâm wondering what happens in a couple of years when they start to wind the RAF down and divvy out the RAFâs responsibilities to the Army and Navy, which is already happening.
Except it isnât. The RAF is still far bigger than both the flying arms of the other two services combined, not to mention more broadly experienced.
The Army wouldnât countenance the movement of ~35,000 personnel into their structure because the RAF/ whatever followed capbadge would then be the biggest regiment and would carry significant power over the rest of the structure.
The FAA, aside from a couple of helicopter sqns, is basically non-existent. The RN is going to rely on the RAF to man the carriers HMS White Elephant and HMS Soon-to-be-Mothballed, along with the USMC.
Neither the Army nor the RN could take on the RAFâs responsibilities, nor would either want to.
All of that is largely irrelevant anyway as the knock on to cadets is minimal. As everybody on here seemingly takes glee in pointing out, the RAF arenât involved with cadets in any meaningful way any more, they donât get flying, they donât get camps⌠So you canât miss what you donât have.
I have found it is unwise to never say never. Nothing stays the same.
Who would have thought say 20 years ago the Air Forceâs strength would ever be as low as 35000 and â â â â â â all aircraft and by the same token the Army and Navy being where they are. Take into account those on leave, deployment, getting ready for deployment etc and I would imagine there are plenty of gaps. Donât think if it was to happen that theyâd all move across to the Army or RN. There would be VR and early pensions offered on all sides. The only drawback to that is some with the years in would cut their losses and go.
Defence budgets due to idiots running the organisation / projects are now under more scrutiny than they may have once been. Although not enough in my opinion.
However lose the RAF regardless of minimal involvement in Air Cadets day to day and the Air Cadets wouldnât have a reason to exist.