Degradation of the rank of Cpl.

[T93]

I picked up a young man last week for disobeying SSO's and his reply to me was 'what the ****'s it got to do with you?'. On passing his details to P1 I was asked 'were there any witnesses?' and when I said no was advised that they wouldn't take it any further. Until we actually start getting some top cocer when we try to discipline the JR's it's a waste of time. I should have just battered the little prick!

*****

Thats a wind up.....right?

Not only for the way he spoke to you, but what he actually said (if correct) would make him deserving of some special attention

I left Dec 95, so what is that, 13yrs 11mths....have things changed so much in that short space of time. Genuine question, as I cannot recall it being that way in my day <possible wearing of rose tinted brille>

So you guys tell me, have things eroded so much, so soon?

 

[What's the bloody point?]

Secondly Cpls today, by and large, don't want to be an NCO or leader, they want to be mates with the SACs, and this is made worse by the large number of people who don't get posted on promotion....

As previously said, nail/hammer/head! I had a conversation with someone who is being promoted in post at my unit. I told him that I thought he would be a lesser experienced NCO for staying. He said if he did have to go he wanted to stay in a similar job to the one he did as a SAC! Comfort zone and all that!

Is it me?

 

[Mustang]

Degradation of the rank of Cpl

Degradation of the rank of Cpl

It is not just the rank of Cpl that has been devalued, a quick look at the old defintions of the commisioned ranks reveals that these suffered devaluation a long time ago.

Flight Lieutenant. An officer of sufficient rank to command a flight.
Sqadron Leader. An officer of sufficient rank to command a squadron.
Wing Commander. An officer of sufficient rank to command a wing.
Group Captain. An officer of sufficient rank to command a group.

Even thirty years ago, when I joined that was no longer the case. The terms above refer to a flight/squadron etc of aircraft, not for example MT Squadron or DSF.

Something that was regarded as a joke, was the appointment of an Air Commodore as the last OC RAF Brüggen, he was also given the title of SRAFO Germany. Not that were much left of the former RAFG.

 

[ninjarabbi]

T93, unfortunately this kind of attitude from the junior ranks is the norm, certainly here in Lincolnshire. If you do pick them up for anything you're looked at as if you come from Mars. They honestly do seem to think that, because it's Sunday headress isn't a requirement and that riding a motorcycle without a helmet is perfectly acceptable, especially when doing wheelies down the main drag.

 

[fatbaldchief]

I work in a place where NCOs teach officers.

I have interviewed and employed lots of very very good Cpls who now teach MAE policy to classes of 16 officers.

Cpls know lots. I did when I was one and have never forgotten it, so now I make sure the commissioned brethren know so too.

 

[4everAD]

T93, unfortunately this kind of attitude from the junior ranks is the norm, certainly here in Lincolnshire. If you do pick them up for anything you're looked at as if you come from Mars. They honestly do seem to think that, because it's Sunday headress isn't a requirement and that riding a motorcycle without a helmet is perfectly acceptable, especially when doing wheelies down the main drag.

But who's really to blame here? If we had a blanket approach to these misdemeanours (Spell?) and every one stuck to it life would be simpler. There's too much of a don't do it again/ have a quiet word culture.

I would like to think MAA would help to cure this but I have my doubts. Seems to me MAA is purely for your section not for when you "Catch" people outside your area of responsibility.

 

[R_Squared]

....On passing his details to P1 I was asked 'were there any witnesses?' and when I said no was advised that they wouldn't take it any further.....

That is a tricky one, we had to go round the houses recently to provide a second witness to back up one of our Cpl's who was charging a lad.

Without a second witness, P1 would not go down the "his word against yours" route.

Whilst obviously safer, it does sometimes lead to difficulty.

 

[The Masked Geek]

Without a second witness, P1 would not go down the "his word against yours" route.

In which case, we have a free pass to catch the little fcukers in a dark secluded spot, and batter the sh1t out of them. Obviously we'll get off Scott free as P1 won't go down the "his word against ours" route.

 

[Justacabbie]

I think a valuable point to be raised here is the issue of acting rank. Surely if someone has to cover for an NCO be it junior or senior, then it highlights a shortage of that rank?

Similarly, I've never understood FISP posts, where someone has a job so important that if they get detatched OOA someone has to step in to cover them. For my mind that means 2 people detatched instead of screening the "important" bods post and only detatching one person per OOA slot. Drafters feel free to clarify this if im misguided.

I also think that some trades are less rank orientated than others leading to problems if and when discipline is required.

 

[BJW]

Okay then, I have been described as an old fashioned WO on each of my last 5 SJARs so here's my two-pennorth.

1. The degredation started when JNCOs were put on gate guard alongside OR's in the late 70s/early 80s. This caused huge unrest and dissatisfaction at the time and remains so today.

2. It got worse after 1982 when DWRs to FI became commonplace and acting rank was necessary to back-fill supervisory posts. There is a general tendency now to promote the most senior SAC to acting rank rather than the best, this degrades the rank enormously. In the past I have preferred to run with a gap rather promote an unsuitable individual; I have done this at all ranks up to A/FS.

3. The operational footing we have been on for most of the last 20 years has compounded the problem and not enough people have had the back-bone to say to an individual - no, I am not giving you acting rank because you are not fukcing good enough!

4. I agree that not posting people on promotion has had an affect. Some individuals accept that there must be a different (functional) relationship with workmates when they get promoted but many do not. It only takes one bad apple.

5. As an organisation we must reflect society, to a degree, if we are to survive. However, we remain a military organisation with a hierarchal system that needs to be in place if we are to continue to put people in harm's way in difficult situations. JNCOs and above must have the moral courage to issue orders if necessary and those recieving the orders must have the discipline to carry them out.

6. All of the MLC courses are accepted as being "keep your head down and mouth shut". Until this becomes a mechanism for weeding out people who shouldn't be promoted as long as they have holes in their arsses this training will remain a waste of time. Additionally, a return to RAFET 1 & 2 or some other form of pre-promotion training would go some way to identifying those who will actually make good NCOs rather than well paid SACs.

Enough for now

BJW

 

[Mustang]

I picked up a young man last week for disobeying SSO's and his reply to me was 'what the ****'s it got to do with you?'. On passing his details to P1 I was asked 'were there any witnesses?' and when I said no was advised that they wouldn't take it any further. Until we actually start getting some top cocer when we try to discipline the JR's it's a waste of time. I should have just battered the little prick!

Reminds me of a conversation that allegedly took place during an AOCs at Wildenrath. The "management" was discussing a discipline problem with the AOC, who asked "whatever happened to the quiet chat behind the line hut"? Management informed him that that was definately not an option.
That was about 1989.

 

[Mightierthan]

Quote:
Originally Posted by ninjarabbi
....On passing his details to P1 I was asked 'were there any witnesses?' and when I said no was advised that they wouldn't take it any further.....


__________________

That is a tricky one, we had to go round the houses recently to provide a second witness to back up one of our Cpl's who was charging a lad.

Without a second witness, P1 would not go down the "his word against yours" route.

Whilst obviously safer, it does sometimes lead to difficulty.

Maybe some P1 sections need reminding of the process for charges and MAA. If Ninjarabbi had charged the individual and refused to withdraw it, P1 have an obligation to process the charge, at least to the point of obtaining fomal legal advice. If the legal advice is that the charge would be unsustainable, then Ninjarabbi would be persuaded to drop it. If the legal advice is that the charge is sustainable then it is up to the flt/sqn cdr to determine guilt.
Furthermore, witnesses are not always required, although they are obviously preferred. With charges and MAA there is no requirement to prove guilt, it is determined on the balance of probabilities.

 

[What's the bloody point?]

Okay then, I have been described as an old fashioned WO on each of my last 5 SJARs so here's my two-pennorth.

Yes you are old fashioned. However, fashion goes in cycles, lets hope your style of fashion returns soon!

 

[What's the bloody point?]

Maybe some P1 sections need reminding of the process for charges and MAA.

Who will remind them though? Me? Or someone within the P1 world. And I am talking about an Air Ranking Officer who might be able to do it in such a way that the jelly fish in P1 may actually take it on board!

 

[ninjarabbi]

I've made a decision. I'm going to buy a nice baseball this weekend, God bless these lovely dark evenings, perfect for meting out some instant MAA!DT_Xtremez_30:

 

[Rambling Sid]

I've made a decision. I'm going to buy a nice baseball this weekend, God bless these lovely dark evenings, perfect for meting out some instant MAA!DT_Xtremez_30:

Code Red.............!!!!!! but I think you meant the bat and not the ball..... although if you have a good throw........!!!!!

 

[ninjarabbi]

Damn these club fingers of mine! Yep, a nice aluminium bat, that way the blood washes off so much easier.......apparently.

 

[skevans]

Always thought it funny that in the Army you might as a Cpl have 2 Lance jacks and 4 privates to lead however in my trade (TG 4) the most I have ever had to supervise /lead was 2 ORs.

AP3376 Vol 8 holds the generic terms of reference for each rank within each trade. In a nutshell it states 'A Cpl chef will do abc', 'A sgt gunner will do xyz'. You get the picture I'm sure. It does not say the TOR's for a specific role, such as crew commander, tools supervisor etc.

In the AP it states that a cpl should under normal circumstances command a maximum of four personnel. furthermore a sgt should command up to ten personnel, which will of course include cpl's.

I know that the rank structure at my workplace, under normal circumstances, is one sgt, two Cpl's and seven Airmen, mirroring the AP.

I am unaware as to how the rank structuring works for the RAF Regiment now that they have L/Cpl's, however I imagine it is along similar lines to that of the Army. 1 Cpl, 2 L/Cpl, 5 gunners per fire team. (?)

 

[Geeza]

1. The degredation started when JNCOs were put on gate guard alongside OR's in the late 70s/early 80s. This caused huge unrest and dissatisfaction at the time and remains so today.

Ah, you must mean me! Unfortunatley the legacy of time promotion from JT to Cpl had left the airforce in the position of having more cpls filling JT posts than JTs it seems! Unsurprising then, that cpls were lumped in with JTs for guard duty. What made things worse was the comparison made with the army where it was common for their cpl's to act as guard commanders.

 

[Geeza]

That is a tricky one, we had to go round the houses recently to provide a second witness to back up one of our Cpl's who was charging a lad.

Without a second witness, P1 would not go down the "his word against yours" route.

Whilst obviously safer, it does sometimes lead to difficulty.

What the fcuk is a Cpl doing charging someone! Never heard of it it in 25 years of service! I say that tongue in cheek, however the second statement is true.