VR(T) Commission Change

Technically, I didn’t say never :wink:

[quote=“celticmentor, post:1576, topic:2647”]
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]

As I’ve mentioned before, constraints are one thing but it’s how those constraints are dealt with that matters to us, the volunteers. The appropriate responses to these constraints start with planning and preparation and effective communication through the official channels, not social media platforms. Both contingency planning and effective communication appear to be sadly lacking in our organisation but I have to ask myself, does the CoC actually care about them?

I agree that we are low down on the list of AOC22Gp’s priorities (and quite rightly so) but we’ve just got to look at the inability of HQRAFAC staff to smoothly implement the progressive training syllabus as one example of inefficiency. It was all done in a rush and without badging being made available in time for the launch.

Huge number of tweets, huge fanfare on FB, lots of staff not fully briefed through official channels and then the volunteers having to deal with the fallout of cadets asking for the badge they qualified for and having nothing to give them. Simply put, HQRAFAC didn’t have their ducks in a row before it was implemented. That had nothing to do with constraints imposed by 22Gp and personally, didn’t fill me with confidence.

[quote=“celticmentor, post:1576, topic:2647”]
Many seem to fear that the change in commissioned status will mean there will be even more direction from the top and less chance to be heard and contribute. If we, as experienced volunteers, wish to be taken seriously then I suggest we need to use the correct tools for the job which include the development of thought-out proposals for change which, if presented correctly, should generate an appropriate response. Sniping from the sidelines will get no response other than a defensive circling of the waggons.[/quote]

I’ve always felt that part of the problem is the CoC inability or reluctance to actually listen to the volunteers and take whatever issues they have seriously, even when those same issues have been put in a civil and respectful manner during courses like OIC\OSC etc. I’ve only ever seen lip-service being paid to issues that matter to those delivering the cadet experience.

Those of us who have been in the Armed Forces are aware that when the boss said ‘no’ he was under no obligation to explain himself and that was universally (well, almost!) accepted by the rank and file. However, this is the volunteer world where the organisation relies largely on the goodwill of those volunteers. Something that I feel is overlooked by senior management is that many of our volunteers hold senior positions in medium and large-scale organisations and are used to asking questions when something happens which affects the running of their organisation. The CoC clearly doesnt accept questioning or criticism and therefore appear to not act on it no matter how it’s presented to them. We’ve already heard on here that staff are leaving for various reasons, some of which are no doubt tied-up in the way that matters are handled at Cmd level. Personally, my retirement date looms ever closer and I will be joining their ranks very soon.

A point I definitely agree with. WHY do we need so many RC’s and their staffs plus HQ buildings? If the budget is being cut, so should our cloth and by that, i mean the uneccessary layers of management which add no - apparent - value to the organisation.

I would suggest that a RC(North) and a RC(South) would be sufficient as opposed to what we have now. If the CCF(RAF) can exist with only one Wg Cdr running it assisted by TEST Officers (equivalent of WSO’s\WExO’s), then I’m sure the ATC could survive with only two Gp Capts. Strangely enough, I had the same conversation with a SWSO in my (former) Wg a few years ago about having WHQ’s staffed from the afternoons through to the evenings so that Sqn staffs had access to decision-makers during parade nights. I doubt that would go down well with the CS bods though.

All-in-all, my personal feeling at the moment (and which has been for quite a while now especially with the flying and gliding fiasco) is that the current situation is one of CRAFAC fiddling while the RAFAC burns. This makes me feel extremely sad that the organisation which provided me with so many wonderful experiences in the 1970’s and an organisation I was desperate to return to after RAF service, is now at this stage.

7 Likes

NC : I accept many of your points and fully understand that all organisations are under pressure. However, many parts of the public sector were not well configured or robust before the random cuts began to bite. Many with get up and go, got up and went. As a result rearguard holding actions by those who remain are seen as successes and the RAF (and the RAFAC) are no exceptions. The capacity for strategic development is, I suspect , limited and if those who deliver the organisation don’t engage then those who run it (who according to many who contribute to this forum know little or nothing about delivering it) then we will continue to go around in circles.
In terms of “Turkeys voting for Christmas” most FTRS posts are for an initial engagement of 4 years and I suspect it would take that long to plan and deliver sensible change (to say nothing of the convoluted Civil Service mechanisms for redundancy/relocation). I suspect that many of the pressures on the MOD to close the £20Bn hole will force them to look at cutting non-core activity…perhaps as some have suggested the move to more school based CCFs will provide the opportunity to pare back on the community based cadet forces (despite their proven worth).
Gunner: Fully understand where you are coming from and we share (I suspect) many similar experiences. I once went to a conference where the then COS (long departed) said something along the following lines.

" All military or military sponsored organisations talk about command and control, if you think I think that I can be in control of what you do on a day to day basis then I must be dafter than I look. This organisation can only go forward on the basis of command and enable". If only this had come to pass.

2 Likes

You do realise that the RAF has more than twice as many aircraft as the FAA and AAC put together?

1 Like

Is the Wing Commander VRT/RAFAC or are they FTRS?

FTRS/CS post

Twice (or even more than twice if it’s between 2 and 3) as many doesn’t mean very much when you are dealing with relatively small numbers, plus the multiplier would have been greater not so many years ago, ie the RAF had 3/4/5… times as many aircraft.
Remember, unless they are still counting them, the gliders we used were part of the RAF’s inventory, hardly what the vast majority of the population would regard as “RAF aircraft”, I think they include historic aircraft as well to bolster the numbers.

I’ve always been proud of the RAF’s place in history, but that doesn’t mean it can, should or will exist into perpetuity. To be honest if it hadn’t been for those few weeks in the summer of 1940, the RAF may well have been subsumed years ago.

1 Like

Thanks

Seeing a lot of the new rank slides on social media. Any news yet on whether the new royal warrant has been signed yet?

Nothing regarding the warrant it would be headline news

As for new rankslides they haven’t decided on the design and when to issue them yet according to CAC…so why are they out wearing them??

Nothing to do with the mess HQAC made of communicating the change.

Well they must have. She’s sent a letter to station commanders with the designs in.

Our RC has said we are free to wear once we receive, be that private purchase of issue (not expected until last week Oct) and no issue with overrun I’ve VRT pins.

Really good comms, but he’s only been an RC 6 months …

3 Likes

yes I have heard and they sent out the design to wings,
yet last week on twitter she said they hadn’t received the final design to confirm it
and that they were still to decided a date for the change…

so who knows…

I STILL haven’t received my letter from the CAC\CRAFAC (bearing in mind this is the day we have to contact HQAC if we haven’t) let alone any rank slides.

I intend to continue wearing VRT rank slides (as I haven’t yet been directed to relinquish my RAFVR commission) until I receive issued RAFAC slides paid for by the RAF.

It might make for a few interesting chats with the badge police…

We have been briefed by local CoC to the effect that…

  1. We are to wear the BG (Jumper) rank slides on our GPJ, the correct colour ones from combatlogos are not allowed.

  2. We are permitted to wear the BG (Jumper) rank slides with MTP/CS95 if we are not scaled for MTP slides and don’t want to private purchase.

This will look absolutely gopping IMHO!

MB

Gopping yes…

…something I intend to ignore. Other colours on order ready for the change.

I’ve ordered my other colour ones, but won’t be wearing any new slides until I’m issued some, then I’ll break out the private purchase. (I will not be wearing jumper ones on my GPJ and if the badge police don’t like it tough, what are they gonna do court-martial me? nope can’t do that anymore, refuse my extension? nope can’t do that anymore either!)

6 Likes

Private purchase is a very, very, very steep slippery slope and plays into the hands of the incompetents.

Let’s not ignore the fact this change was announced last October (2016) with much hype and fanfare to be implemented in March (2017) and for reasons not explained put back another 6 months AND still they haven’t decided on rank slides and or got them made in sufficient quantities. You couldn’t make it up.

They should have had the stocks of these for issue in February for the initial implementation and when it got put back got more in, but send out sufficient between times. So suggesting we make private purchases to make for their PPP is an insult to us and should not be countenanced by anyone.

This whole fiasco is symptomatic of problems IMO in ACOs ability to manage things. So no wonder the organisation is where it is…

Actually, it was a good decision to delay implementation. Otherwise they could’ve removed VRT commissions from individuals that needed to retain them to continue their role.