VR(T) Offrs - exemption from call-out & training liabilities

Many ACCers will already know my (and others - Wilf, WE177 <img src=""{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_wink.gif"" alt="":wink:"" title="“Wink”" /> ) interest in this topic, and I know it is not everyones cup of tea - but, for the information of those who are interested…

I think I have finally got to the bottom of the legal "mystery" of how VR(T) Offrs can be serving members of the RAFR, but exempt from any call-out and annual training liability.

The Reserve Forces Act 1996 (RFA96) is divided into 12 Parts. The Parts which apply to the above are:

Part 1 - The Reserve Forces

Part 3 - Training & other duties

[b:15eh1fx7]In simple terms[/b:15eh1fx7], RFA96 allows the RAF (through the Defence Council) to make regulations "governing" the reserve forces of the service. This allows the RAF to:

a. Exempt VR(T) Offrs from their call-out liability under RFA96 (AP1919, Chapter 3, para 352).
b. Exempt VR(T) Offrs from their annual training liability under RFA96 (no reference as yet, but I’m working on it!)

[b:15eh1fx7]In detail[/b:15eh1fx7]

[u:15eh1fx7]Part 1, Section 4, of RFA96:[/u:15eh1fx7]

[u:15eh1fx7][i:15eh1fx7]Regulation and organisation[/i:15eh1fx7][/u:15eh1fx7]

[i:15eh1fx7]4.—(1) Her Majesty may, by order signified under the hand of the
regulations Secretary of State, make orders with respect to—
(a) the government and discipline of any reserve force; and
(b) all other matters and things relating to that force,
and including any matter authorised to be prescribed by any provision of
this Act or expressed to be subject to orders or regulations under this
color=#FF0000:15eh1fx7 Subject to the provisions of any order under subsection (1), the
Defence Council may make regulations with respect to any matters
relating to any reserve force, being matters with respect to which Her
Majesty may make orders under that subsection.[/color:15eh1fx7]
color=#FF0000:15eh1fx7 Orders or regulations under this section may make different
provision for different cases (including different forces), and may include
such supplementary, consequential, incidental and transitional
provisions as appear to Her Majesty or the Defence Council (as the case
may be) to be necessary or expedient.[/color:15eh1fx7]
(4) Regulations under this section may be amended or revoked by an
order or further regulations under this section; and an order under this
section may be amended or revoked by another order under this section.
color=#4080FF:15eh1fx7 Any order or regulations under this section shall be laid before each
House of Parliament after being made.[/i:15eh1fx7][/color:15eh1fx7]

Sub-Sections 2 & 3 (red) are the important bits, as this authorises the Defence Council (and thus the RAF, through the chain of command) to make the necessary regulations. This is how VR(T) Offrs are exempted from their call-out liability under RFA96 by virtue of AP1919, Chapter 3, para 352.

Sub-Section 5 (Blue) is the interesting bit, and may explain the "…it would take an Act of Parliament to change VR(T) Terms & Conditions of Service (TACOS)…" My interpretation of this is that Parliament has to [u:15eh1fx7]approve[/u:15eh1fx7] the orders and/or regulations produced by the RAF (and indeed each single-Service) and the Defence Council in relation to the Reserve Forces; rather than the commonly held belief that an Act of Parliament is required to change VR(T) TACOS.

Does this explain the delay in the new edition of AP1919, and why it has not been revised since 1992? Does it also explain pervious statements by Comdt AC that nothing else could be done about re-mustering ATC SNCOs & WOs as VR(T) until 20** (because the new Edn of AP1919 has already / is being / approved by Parliament)?

[u:15eh1fx7]Part 3, Sections 22 & 23, of RFA96:[/u:15eh1fx7]

[u:15eh1fx7][i:15eh1fx7]Obligatory training[/i:15eh1fx7][/u:15eh1fx7]

22[color=#FF0000:15eh1fx7].—(1) A member of a reserve force may, in accordance with orders Training
or regulations under section 4, be required by virtue of this section, in any obligations of
year, to train in the United Kingdom or elsewhere for:[/color:15eh1fx7]
(a) one or more periods not exceeding 16 days in aggregate; and
(b) such other periods as may be prescribed, none of which shall
exceed 36 hours without the consent of the person concerned;
and such a person may, while undergoing a period of training under this
section, be attached to and trained with any body of Her Majesty’s forces.
(2) Such orders or regulations may, in particular, prescribe different
periods under subsection (1)(b) for different forces or parts of a force.
color=#FF0000:15eh1fx7 This section has effect subject to section 23.[/color:15eh1fx7]

23.—([color=#FF0000:15eh1fx7]1) Orders or regulations under section 4 may provide for securing that persons of such descriptions as may be prescribed shall be exempted persons from or
from liability to be required to undergo training under section 22.
(2) Such orders or regulations may also provide for relaxing, in such
cases as may be prescribed, the liability to be required to undergo training
under section 22.[/color:15eh1fx7]
color=#FF0000:15eh1fx7 Officers authorised for the purposes of this subsection by or in
accordance with directions of the Defence Council may, in accordance
with such orders or regulations—
(a) exempt any unit or other group of members of a reserve force
from liability to be required to undergo training under section
22; or
(b) relax that liability in the case of the unit or group.[/color:15eh1fx7]
(4) A commanding officer may, in accordance with orders or
regulations under section 4—
(a) exempt any member of a reserve force who is under his command
from liability to be required to undergo training under section
22; or
(b) relax that liability in the case of such a person.

The Sub-Sections highlighted in red are the important bits! Essentially, what this does is permit the exemption of VR(T) from their annual training liability under RFA96.


Hope that makes sense, and possibly puts the whole she-bang to bed…


Well done BTI. Obviously a well researched topic. 131 views and not one reply. Maybe this should be put as a sticky or slotted into the reference section. Perhaps an update on [url=http&#58;//en&#46;wikipedia&#46;org/wiki/Rafvrt:3pu420fg]Wiki[/url:3pu420fg]?

Thanks mate.

As promised above, in relation to Section 23 of the Reserve Forces Bill (later to become the Reserve Forces Act 1996):


Further to Sgt Bilko’s post, I assume all that would be required to “activate” the VR(T) would be a rewrite of AP1919.

[b:106qb2wz]Sgt Bilko & Marksman,[/b:106qb2wz]

Very interesting, and thank you for the research and analysis that has gone into it.

no, you’d have to join the RAFAux and go through it like everyone else.

[b:1bioad38]Juliet Mike,[/b:1bioad38]

I’m just catching up with this very interesting and astonishingly well researched discussion.

I’ll volunteer to do exactly the same thing I used to when I was in the regulars…namely:

My interest in this topic goes back to the "can VR(T) be mobilised" thread which started last year when someone found a quote from Hansard, appearing to state that VR(T) and TA List B (ACF/CCF) Offrs had a call-out liability.


[quote:2dd33ybh][b:2dd33ybh]Jellybean wrote:[/b:2dd33ybh]

A further thought in relation to changing VR(T) TACOS …I don’t think that it is even as complicated a matter as re-writing regulations or remustering VR(T) as Auxilliaries!

Walt alert :OMG:

Splashdown, i think you need to stop right now.


[quote=“splashdown”:122exd9i]Walt alert :OMG: