Loss of RnR for 6 month detachments

[Radartech]

I've just been having a look at the information published about the Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR). Cunningly placed half way down is the little gem about the loss of any RnR entitlement during 6 month detachments.

It says RnR 'will only be provisioned for tour lengths of more than 6 months’ duration'

It does say the introduction date is yet to be announced.

Well, in a force that already has a massive recruitment and retention problem, I can imagine that will be yet another nudge towards the exit door for those of us who are already slightly disillusioned with what is happening to our service. It's hard enough on families when we do not see them for a few months, but trying to explain to my kids that they will not see their dad at all for half a year is not really a conversation I want to have.

 

[4everAD]

No doubt a decision made by someone who has never spent 6 months away from their family! Complete arse.

 

[MattBombHead]

Assuming this is true, (and I don't believe it wouldn't be), this is an awful decision.

Anyone got AOCs visits soon? Might be worth mentioning...

 

[Shinyscot]

It's true although no mention made of when and how it will be managed. Either amend the 6 months to 6 months and 1 day or go back to 4. IMHO very hard to expect people to work 6 months with very little break

 

[Oldstacker]

Mid-tour R&R is a relatively recent thing anyway, they are just going back to where we were in the '80's when even 6 months on ASI didn't attract any breaks even though we were almost as austere (albeit a lot warmer) than the guys in Stanley. OK, we weren't under fire etc as some locations may be now, but we didn't have the benefit of phones (apart from pre-booked satellite calls to landlines) or e-mail or Skype etc, just good ol' snail mail blueys....

 

[Billy Whizz]

Mid-tour R&R is a relatively recent thing anyway, they are just going back to where we were in the '80's when even 6 months on ASI didn't attract any breaks even though we were almost as austere (albeit a lot warmer) than the guys in Stanley. OK, we weren't under fire etc as some locations may be now, but we didn't have the benefit of phones (apart from pre-booked satellite calls to landlines) or e-mail or Skype etc, just good ol' snail mail blueys....

And a 6 month det meant a posting after - now if they re-introduced that I'm sure they'd get a few more volunteers!

 

[GrumpyTech]

I have also heard a RUMOUR that LSA will be a flat rate. so unlucky anyone who has spent many 100's/ 1000s of days away from family the bonus of a nice bit of cash for a holiday etc will also be gone!! it will be the same rate as an LAC!

Honestly if they want to do away with the RAF just do it, dont force the troops in to misery. stand by for more twist scoks!!

 

[4everAD]

I have also heard a RUMOUR that LSA will be a flat rate. so unlucky anyone who has spent many 100's/ 1000s of days away from family the bonus of a nice bit of cash for a holiday etc will also be gone!! it will be the same rate as an LAC!

Honestly if they want to do away with the RAF just do it, dont force the troops in to misery. stand by for more twist scoks!!

Now that would be interesting as it would put them head to head with the so called independent AFPRB! Who are supposed to recommend the LSA rates and levels.

 

[muttywhitedog]

Now that would be interesting as it would put them head to head with the so called independent AFPRB! Who are supposed to recommend the LSA rates and levels.

...and pay rises. Don't forget about the pay rises that they've recommended on their jaunts over the past few years!

 

[Witty_Banter]

The AFPRB can only make recommendations, it can't enforce anything it recommends. Ergo it's down to the Powers That Be to accept the recommendations - or reject them.

 

[metimmee]

Of all of the changes they've brought in over the years, this change is the one thing that makes me question whether I want to stay in the RAF. I had a couple of weeks on R&R recently and boy did I need it. Being down here for 6mo without seeing loved ones is a bitter pill with inevitable pastoral consequences. Arbitrary changes with little consideration of the consequences to peoples lives. If there is a big op on, with deep operational considerations then not many would argue against it. Continuity in a theatre such as the FI is only a problem because manning was balanced assuming 4mo tours with no R&R. For some reason, they extended to 6mo and suddenly your leaned manpower plot is out of balance. Solution? Take R&R away rather than revert to 4mo tours...priceless.

Twisted sock syndrome will undoubtedly reach epidemic levels, so the same folks will get hammered.

Of course they may get around this by giving folks 6mo+next airbridge tour lengths. If they do that for a big manpower plot such as the FI, it calls into question the policy and its impact.

I see a lot of equipment good news, but not a scrap of good news for personnel. It is easy to see where the priorities are.

 

[muttywhitedog]

The reason given by the powers that be for increasing them to 6 month was the strain on the airbridge. Well, with a fleet of voyagers, 9,000 personnel no longer in Afghan, and the major focus on Ops centred around Akrotiri (half the distance from Afghan), then there is surely scope to bringing them back to 4 months.

As others say, the number of downgrades will increase quite dramatically if they are expecting personnel to stag on 24/7 for 6 months.

As for the FI - personally, I think its time we left them to it.

 

[Collective Friction]

Just a suggestion - could this be a way of preparing for the embarkation of RAF Squadrons on the new carriers? Embarked Naval Squadron personnel usually stay embarked for the full duration of the trip, be it four months or nine months.

Thoughts?

 

[4everAD]

Just a suggestion - could this be a way of preparing for the embarkation of RAF Squadrons on the new carriers? Embarked Naval Squadron personnel usually stay embarked for the full duration of the trip, be it four months or nine months.

Thoughts?

My thoughts? I didn't join the Navy so won't be spending nine months at sea thank you very much.

 

[Collective Friction]

I suspect that is what a lot of people will (wrongly?) be thinking.

Given the numbers of personnel currently, could manning cope with a complete Squadron handover abroad?

 

[E E E E E E E E AR]

My thoughts? I didn't join the Navy so won't be spending nine months at sea thank you very much.

It's already been briefed that if you want to work on a certain new and shiny aircraft, you are signing up to going away on ships.

 

[4everAD]

It's already been briefed that if you want to work on a certain new and shiny aircraft, you are signing up to going away on ships.

Well good luck to the RAF trying to find the personnel to do that, surely aircraft flying off a carrier should be manned and maintained by the Fleet Air Arm (the clue's in the title after all)? Why don't they just make us one defence force and be done with it!

 

[Stevienics]

As previously stated. It was briefedto us as well - and you can forget this squadron stuff. It's a long old kill chain these days and no-one is immune

 

[Tin basher]

My thoughts? I didn't join the Navy so won't be spending nine months at sea thank you very much.

Way back in the day the same thing was said by many a Harrier Sqn bod.

But as we all now know it came to pass that "a Harrier mans a carrier man". There's plenty of time to get used to bobbin on the oggin

 

[4everAD]

So where will we end up, will the carriers literally be a floating airfield? With maybe a Navy Captain to steer her and the rest will be RAF? Chefs,Clerks,RAFP et al? Why call it HMS Queen Elizabeth and not RAF Queen Elizabeth? My point stands though where will they get the manpower from? Morale is on a knife edge and pvrs are massively on the up this would be the final straw for alot of people I reckon. Best I get used to 8 hours on 8 hours off and hot bunking, might find me a good looking Navy bod and practice now!