Now Ofsted's having a pop at MOD

[Oldstacker]

Accommodation & uniforms...

Ofsted: Ill-fitting female soldiers uniforms less smart than males

Watchdog inspectors also found that poorly-fitted equipment increased the risk of injury for women.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Deltaitem]

Reads as though they make fair points. Best the MoD sort their shit out, Health and Safety Executive will be next.

 

[Spearmint]

Accommodation & uniforms...

Ofsted: Ill-fitting female soldiers uniforms less smart than males

Watchdog inspectors also found that poorly-fitted equipment increased the risk of injury for women.

www.bbc.co.uk

Not because of the females massive arses that get sewn on then?

 

[Deltaitem]

Still comes down to shit tailoring. As I recall, the blokes weren't exactly bronzed Adonii.

 

[Oldstacker]

I don't have a problem with the complaints about the buldiings etc, on past form they're probably an understatement.

With the uniforms, I'd like to know which uniforms they have objections to.

No1's are meant to be fitted and smart so, if they aren't, then that is likely a combination of design and tailoring standards at kitting but, as we all know, the period of initial training tends to do all sorts of things to your body shape so anything tailored at the start of that probably won't fit at the end.

No 2s should fit as well but don't get the same levels of tailoring so design standards may be the issue and, let's be honest, nobody i know has tailored workwear - we all pick stuff 'off the peg' at Matalan, Tesco's or wherever we can get cheap shirts and trousers so why expect No2 s to be of any different standards?

As for combats, be they MTP or DPM, they have never looked smart on anyone - but they are intended to be practical rough workwear not parade wear so the focus on them should be do they achieve that object with comfort for the wearer, what they look like is a secondary consideration.

 

[Barch]

My son told me of an 'Aviator' at Marham who officially complained that the maternity uniform made it look fat !!

Note the use of non-gender specific pronouns because I am embracing the new way of thinking.

If bints have a problem with their uniform either get a body that suits them or change to the same uniform as the blokes.

 

[Late & Tired]

My son told me of an 'Aviator' at Marham who officially complained that the maternity uniform made it look fat !!

Note the use of non-gender specific pronouns because I am embracing the new way of thinking.

If bints have a problem with their uniform either get a body that suits them or change to the same uniform as the blokes.

I think the term 'son' is individually gender specific, indicating a male line. Perhaps your offspring may prefer to be identified as 'toaster' in today's climate...?

 

[Tin basher]

I think the term 'son' is individually gender specific, indicating a male line. Perhaps your offspring may prefer to be identified as 'toaster' in today's climate...?

The descriptor "Scaly brat" worked for years as a non gender specific moniker for RAF folks offspring.

 

[Rocket_Ronster]

Still comes down to shit tailoring. As I recall, the blokes weren't exactly bronzed Adonii.

Adonii ???

Would three Trevor's be a Trevii ?

Top work Delta. Keep it up.

 

[Deltaitem]

Adonii ???

Would three Trevor's be a Trevii ?

Top work Delta. Keep it up.

My bad, for Adonii, should read Adonises.

 

[Deltaitem]

My son told me of an 'Aviator' at Marham who officially complained that the maternity uniform made it look fat !!

Note the use of non-gender specific pronouns because I am embracing the new way of thinking.

If bints have a problem with their uniform either get a body that suits them or change to the same uniform as the blokes.

Meanwhile, back in the twenty-first century...

 

[UlsterExile]

Made by the cheapest bidder, you get what you pay for!!!!!!

 

[Oldstacker]

I see Ofsted have reported on training establishments again, and again the standard of infra and fit of uniforms is high on the hit list... Mould and rot being reported at Dartmouth & Cranwell, female personnel not having clothing & equipment that fits them. On past form the state f the infra is probably a good call - DIO need to get their act together soon. I' not sure where the boundary lies between DE&S and the services on uniform design but procurement quality is in the DE&S world.

One question comes to my mind though - if smaller, differently shaped personnel can't manage to wear/carry safely things like PLCE & bergens of a size big enough to contain the necessary personal equipment then what happens next? Can we revert to justifiable 'indirect discrimination' and reintroduce a minimum size requirement for service personnel?

 

[ady eflog]

When you buy the cheapest shit uniform from China which is badly made and isn't a great fit your going to have issues. Blue shirts used to last years. If you get 6 months out of one now your doing well. Trousers fall apart at the seams, shoes cause heat spots, chafing and blisters as they are made out of crap products.

 

[Oldstacker]

When you buy the cheapest shit uniform from China which is badly made and isn't a great fit your going to have issues. Blue shirts used to last years. If you get 6 months out of one now your doing well. Trousers fall apart at the seams, shoes cause heat spots, chafing and blisters as they are made out of crap products.

I can easily believe that penny pinching by DE&S is a factor, I wonder if the services will (or even can) take DE&S to task over their part in the failures?

 

[Spearmint]

I can easily believe that penny pinching by DE&S is a factor, I wonder if the services will (or even can) take DE&S to task over their part in the failures?

There's much more too it than simply failing to deliver in accordance with the CASP, URD or SRD data sets. Not only do you have the budgetary constraints across all departments coupled with greater asks by the three services, you have the poison that are Contractors. They cost a bloody fortune (the total spend on them is horrific - I kid you not) and I've employed a couple of fresh L2 Engineers recently in order to grow our own talent and jettison the more expensive externally sourced expertise.

Now if DE&S actually paid its regular staff (the ones actually worth being paid more) properly to stop them jumping ship, going private and then coming back in as a Contractor, we might have a better story overall.

 

[Oldstacker]

There's much more too it than simply failing to deliver in accordance with the CASP, URD or SRD data sets. Not only do you have the budgetary constraints across all departments coupled with greater asks by the three services, you have the poison that are Contractors. They cost a bloody fortune (the total spend on them is horrific - I kid you not) and I've employed a couple of fresh L2 Engineers recently in order to grow our own talent and jettison the more expensive externally sourced expertise.

Now if DE&S actually paid its regular staff (the ones actually worth being paid more) properly to stop them jumping ship, going private and then coming back in as a Contractor, we might have a better story overall.

You are spot on Spearmint, I see the same issues in my part of that ship too, repeated charges of temporary staff, targets related to bureaucracy rather than end user satisfaction and a reluctance or inability to address the haemorrhaging of knowledgeable experienced staff whilst growing and developing the experts of the future.

 

[busby1971]

Theres always a % of carried workforce in any organisation and a much smaller % of real doers,

On my couple of forays into the public sector I just couldnt cope with the acceptable ratio, and petty politics, nothing to do with Ofsted inspections mind.