Ok…bored now.
Back up your claim or apologise. Your response is totally disrespectful to N_C, this forum and everybody on it.
2 Likes
@109115 works on an AEF. It’s obvious from his/her posts. He/She is ok as they will retain as VRT. They are being rather disrespectful to others by the way they are taking.
Everybody who volunteers for the RAFAC does it because they want to and not because they have to. Whatever the reason is whether it is duty, the greater good, putting something back because they were cadets watching snotty 13 year olds turn into well rounded young people or a million other reasons we all do it because we want.
Almost all of the paid staff of the ACO cant see this, they thing we do it out of kudos, wanting to wear the queens uniform or going to an officers or sqts mess. The only thing that makes us any different from the scouts or guides is flying and full bore shooting. Without these activities then there would be no reason for the ATC. All other activities can be done in any other youth group.
The loss of the VRT commission is illustrative of the contempt that the senior military management show to the volunteers. They couldn’t even fight to keep the CFC a military commission as was promised. They show the same contempt to the TA in the past. they are of the mind-set that if they wanted to be a part of the organisation then they should have joined the regulars.
The loss of the status that the VRT commission is another straw that slowly diluting the link between the RAF and the ATC. Many see the loss as a personal affront to the many years of loyal service given to the ATC and the arbitrary was that the commission is being removed and the lack of clarity and communication on what is replacing it an insult. But the very worst is that many are seeing the Corps dying on its feet and they can’t do nothing about it. We are all really worried that if many senior and very experienced staff walk away there will be even less staff to go around. My wing has 45 officers, take out the 6 WSO that is just over 1.5 per sqn. The most one sqn has is 3 and there are many with 0.
The RAFAC needs to ensure that the staff are looked after, respected and most importantly retained. Joining the cadets as a member of staff is nigh on impossible. Too many forms, too many hoops, to many interviews too any people with fingers in the pie justifying their jobs. Normally a year sometimes 2 for a commission.
3 Likes
Children. Keep it civil or keep it offline.
1 Like
Yes mother, sorry mother, won’t do it again mother
The problem here is egos. I cannot see someone rising to the ranks of some of these people, doing a “hands up, we messed up” to a bunch of volunteers, who you get thr very real impression are thought of knowing nothing about anything and are a hinderance. It would be bad enough doing it to their peers.
How many people on sqns have been in post for 12yrs+?..
I agree with Bob. 12 years in post at the very top of the food chain making the big decisions (or most) for any organisation is too long.
There would be no room for fresh ideas, and things stagnate, people leave etc.
This isn’t just in the RAFAC, but also the Armed Forces, Tesco CEOs etc!
Don’t tell our ultimate ultimate boss, she might not share your opinion.
1 Like
Nice try…way off line!
Wherever you’re from, coming on here with a ‘holier-than-thou’ attitude isn’t likely to win you much agreement with the content of your posts.
You must be very new to the organisation or you would certainly know that there are many volunteers who have submitted their concerns and issues respectfully and through the correct channels. No-one that I know of - including myself - has had any concern taken seriously and had them acted upon.
Not one.
So is it little wonder that people express their concerns through mediums such as ACC? FGS, look at the survey asking us what we wanted to have put on a pair of damn rank slides! The masses voted and when the numbers were crunched, the CoC said something akin to ‘sorry, but we’d already decided what you’re going to have put on them and it ain’t what you want’.
Nice to see they listened and acted on what the volunteers wanted. If they couldn’t have at least done what was asked, then what chance do we have of getting them to listen if we continue asking ‘respectfully’. No more I fear, then being very critical of them on here, so what the hell.
I know a couple of people who work at HQAC and the culture has been described pretty much as being finger-pointing, back-stabbing and point-scoring rather than working together as a team to achieve things. By the sounds of it, each staff member at HQAC has more deflector shields than the Starship Enterprise.
If you feel that CAC is being unfairly criticised on here, you should remember that she is ultimately accountable for the actions - or in a lot of cases - the inaction of her staff. That accountability goes with the rank, appointment, the staff car and driver and the c£100k per annum.
Gunner. I came onto this thread because it appeared a little one sided and wanted to express an alternative view.
It’s a forum and sometimes it appears as a whinge room to some and unless there are balanced views expressed, people with alternative views won’t participate?
My experience with the Air Cadets is extensive, not that that’s important. People with all levels of experience will read this.
I don’t believe that staff at HQAC do anything hoping the outcome will be negative?
Only sometimes?
I’ve been out of cadets for a little while, getting in time in blue suits elsewhere in the RAF family, and have been utterly gobsmacked by the attitudes here. It’s worse than pprune for complaining about how things used to be.
To be fair… there’s been plenty to moan about.
3 Likes
The hierarchy keeps stoking the fire 
[quote=“109115, post:1671, topic:2647”]
I came onto this thread because it appeared a little one sided and wanted to express an alternative view.
It’s a forum and sometimes it appears as a whinge room to some and unless there are balanced views expressed, people with alternative views won’t participate?[/quote]
I can understand why you’ve commented but surely you must agree that with most projects undertaken by HQAC, nearly every single one has been badly planned and badly implemented? I can’t name one useful project that’s been initiated within the last 5 years that has been successfully handled.
[quote=“109115, post:1671, topic:2647”]
I don’t believe that staff at HQAC do anything hoping the outcome will be negative?[/quote]
I’ve always been of the opinion that people don’t go to work to intentionally do a bad job. However, I’d like to know just what the hell is going on at HQAC because there seems to be a distinct lack of competency in almost every area!
[quote=“perrysghost, post:1673, topic:2647, full:true”]
To be fair… there’s been plenty to moan about.[/quote]
Sadly, I agree.
[quote=“OldNewbie, post:1672, topic:2647”]
I’ve been out of cadets for a little while, getting in time in blue suits elsewhere in the RAF facilities, and have been utterly gobsmacked by the attitudes here. It’s worse than pprune for complaining about how things used to be.[/quote]
And your point is?
2 Likes
The problem isn’t people complaining. The problem is things are getting worse.
7 Likes
Have to say I agree. If I plan a camp or another event and it goes wrong I am and will be held to account. If a major change goes wrong then its right that the person in charge is blamed, but sadly it appears that we are not permitted to blame that one. I question why we were asked what we should be called in a survey only to be told we are calling you want we what. I accept legal aspects have delayed this, but folks were mislead in to believing this was a mil commission to find out the wrong way it was not that information dint even come in an all users email but via a QA page. As for rank slides we have a supplier for officers none for SNCO once the title was forced onto us. A house wife could of worked out that X number of staff means X number. of slides and the powers to be have made a mess of that
the 75th Anniversary year celebrations:
the torch relay?
the big bash at Cranwell?