How many AV cpls eligible?

[CodeMonkey]

Appologies if i have come across all mardy but when i asked a simple question i didnt expect people to point out the bleedin obvious. I have read the DIN and am fully aware of what numbers they are looking for and the criteria for selection.

I was maybe hoping that someone may have possibly contacted the trade desk or even their chief clerk/HR person to ask a similar question. Personally i think that based on what they want, my score is pretty good and so i am not particularly sweating loads.

Sorry all, but stupid answers will get stupid replies hence my slightly rude (in your eyes) responses. And yes, if it were necessary to talk to someone like that "offline" to get the correct required response to said question, then so be it and no i havent been punched!!!

I would have thought that a life changing occasion like T2, somebody would have checked out what their basic odds for job loss would be.

Or is that me panicking for no reason??

Yes your stressed, and as for the Q's thing i've said on other threads that they did not publish the list of all the TG1/2 Q's and there weighting( i can't even remember how many points the phoon Q's got).

I do understand percentages and odds and if they do it the same in T2 as T1 people lacking 1st line Q's are more than likely odd's on for the chop. 2 Guys in my place have now applies (1 Cpl + 1 Snec) so the odds are improved again.

Work out the figures from the info given but remember OOA(exempt), certain Q's exempt so it skews the actual figures.

 

[raflad67]

Being one of those Chf Clk types I can confirm that we have access to all the info - names and numbers in the fields but we are under strict instructions not to divulge and only answer questions relating to that individual ie am I in the field? (of which you should all have been informed anyway). DT_Xtremez_25:

You can debate the rights and wrongs of this and it is frustrating but that's it I'm afraid.

 

[Joe_90]

raflad, I understand not divulging names but why are you not allowed to divulge numbers? To me that's just causing suffering for the sake of it.

 

[raflad67]

raflad, I understand not divulging names but why are you not allowed to divulge numbers? To me that's just causing suffering for the sake of it.

I know mate. Apparently it's all to do with not causing undue worry or undue expectations.....and yes I know it is a crock of poo!DT_Xtremez_34:

IMHO we should be giving this info so people can make an informed decision but hey I'm sure the numbers will come from someone......but then again can the source be trusted? DT_Xtremez_42:

 

[Joe_90]

Sounds to me like a decision made by someone who isn't the frame so doesn't care about the well being of those that are.

 

[CodeMonkey]

I know mate. Apparently it's all to do with not causing undue worry or undue expectations.....and yes I know it is a crock of poo!DT_Xtremez_34:

IMHO we should be giving this info so people can make an informed decision but hey I'm sure the numbers will come from someone......but then again can the source be trusted? DT_Xtremez_42:

I wish i had know about the list of Q's(not just the exemptions) for Trache 1 as i would have started planning just in case. As it happens i have got myself another job and have submitted the paperwork to leave prior to the Tranche 1 Compulsary Date. I do feel for people this time, previously the field was a lot narrower 12-17 years Av Cpl and they wanted 35.

 

[muttywhitedog]

I can completely understand protecting the list, because it would open up arguments as to whether X was more deserving of saving/binning than Y - not just by X and Y, but by their managers.

However, not giving people an idea of what % chance they have of being binned/not binned is just plain fecking stupid.

 

[grumpyoldb]

It's the mushroom syndrome at work. It's always been like that.

 

[monobrow]

However, not giving people an idea of what % chance they have of being binned/not binned is just plain fecking stupid.

Because the way it is scored means it's no where near a percentages game. That could also lead to a feeling of security when there should not be. There is, of course, the straight percentages of approx 10% will be **** canned going on A+B grades and the quota, but then dig deeper and you get those that are in the last 3 years, those on A/C get an advantage, etc, etc... Narrow the field to what you want but unless you are bullet-proof exempt...

 

[ady eflog]

Lets say the numbers for 2010 were A,87 B,482 and C,274 and total in field 845 then get shot of C grades gives 569. but its not that easy as has been mentioned above.

 

[bitter123]

RIGHT THEN.....REWORD TIME.

Does anyone have an idea as to HOW MANY AV CPLS THERE ARE, IN THE RAF, RIGHT NOW, THAT FALL INTO THE REDUNDANCY BRACKET FOR TRACE 2 AND SO, BECOME ELIGIBLE FOR REDUNDANCY?????????????????

Adding all A, B and C candidates together you get an approximate figure of 800 AV corporals. This was the boarding for july last year, since then approximately 90 have been given their third.

The figure of 800 hundred does not include those who had less than three assessments at the time of boarding. Think back to how many they picked up 3 years ago was approximately 30 peeps (they definately didn't make to fifty i.e. you can now add that to the figure of 800.

So, then 800 -90 +30 =740

Further subtraction of guessing 30 for the excluded licensed boys and difficult to say but lets say another 50 for those whos early departure date is before april 2015 and you get.

740 - 30 -50 = 660

(75/660)*100 = 11.2% chance of redundancy discounting applicants.

Obviously if you consider applicants the odds of redundancy gets altered depending if your an applicant or non applicant i.e. you could speculate and say an applicants chance would be 14% and a non-applicants would be 8%.

This is all speculatiopn hope it helps.

 

[Max]

It'll all depend which lottery machine they use to make the draw. I know a Fairy Cpl who got compulsory last time so the best way to think about it is that you will be the unlucky recipient of a letter thanking you for your efforts so far. But at the end of the day you are hogging a TG1 post really as a TG2 so I'd sack you.

 

[muttywhitedog]

Adding all A, B and C candidates together you get an approximate figure of 800 AV corporals. This was the boarding for july last year, since then approximately 90 have been given their third

The figure of 800 does not include those who had less than three assessments at the time of boarding.

Yes it does - they are generally the C Grades.

You also need to remember however many AV Cpls are leaving as a result of the last round of redundancies.

I would suggest that if there are currently 800. Then subtract:

however many left on redundancy in tranche 1
those with less than 3 years seniority (You can work this out from the previous promotion boards)
those who have been promoted this year (90)
those who have a planned exit date before Apr 2015.
those who are excluded from the criteria for "Q" reasons

I would say the number in the frame is closer to 400, possibly lower.

You say 75 out of 660. I say 75 out of 400. Hell of a difference.

And this is why ACOS should be transparent!

 

[Pikey735]

Eh up spick, Youll get to stay, and a posting back to 29!!!!! You facking larve it!!

 

[LucyQuipment]

Love it, good work fella!