Redundancy/PVR

[Dan391]

Does anybody know did the number crunchers take in to account when they calculated the numbers for tranches 1 & 2 the amount of people that would PVR after they didn't get it? Surely they knew morale wasn't great and that guys who had dropped a line in but not been selected would bang out en masse?! Up north we are feeling the pinch as replacing the Early Terminators seems an even bigger challenge than replacing the redundees.

 

[XVR RA RA RA]

Does anybody know did the number crunchers take in to account when they calculated the numbers for tranches 1 & 2 the amount of people that would PVR after they didn't get it? Surely they knew morale wasn't great and that guys who had dropped a line in but not been selected would bang out en masse?! Up north we are feeling the pinch as replacing the Early Terminators seems an even bigger challenge than replacing the redundees.

I recently asked manning 'Do the number crunchers realise the problem up north, with the lack of manpower? And what are they going to do about it?"

The reply I got back is "The number crunchers look at the number of young SAC's / AMM's and when the number crunchers see they are overborne, they think there isn't a problem."

Pity the number crunchers can't differentiate between a brand new AMM straight out of school and a dual q'd CPL with 15 years experience.

 

[Brackens]

At the moment anyone graduating from Cosford that was on tonkas as an AMM is being posted to Lossie, so you'll soon have loads of shiny new SAC (T)'s to stick back down the line and not get any trade experience. Brilliant can't wait.

 

[Ghandi's Flip-Flop]

Well if recent courses are anything to go by the young fairy's that are getting posted to Lossie are PVR'ing so the problem isn't getting reduced that way either.

 

[muttywhitedog]

Well if recent courses are anything to go by the young fairy's that are getting posted to Lossie are PVR'ing so the problem isn't getting reduced that way either.

Dont they have a 3 year Return of Service when they sign up for their SAC(T) course?

 

[Ghandi's Flip-Flop]

Dont they have a 3 year Return of Service when they sign up for their SAC(T) course?

That only kicks in after successful completion of the course I believe, I also think the overmanning at that level is playing a part too.

Been a few gone in the last few months

 

[Brackens]

Dont they have a 3 year Return of Service when they sign up for their SAC(T) course?

I think thats meant to be the case but we have also been told that A Tech AV is something around the 175% manned level so it doesn't seem to matter that they've just spent a year training us. Most people i know at Cosford (i'm halfway through my course) are so f*cked off with the way they are treated during our time here that they will be trying to escape as soon as they can when they graduate. I know it might sound like just a bunch of whinging SAC's but i've never seen a place suck moral out of people like Cosford can!

 

[Joe_90]

You should get yourself to Leconfield mate.

 

[sulky]

i saw the manning levels last week while scouring the new manning site for something else i was after

SAC's/JT's, Cpls and Sgts are all in the 110% to 120% range. But i personally think that there is a possibility that the numbers are high as they have to plan for the manning of new aircraft coming into service in the next couple of years, ie rivot joint, voyager, a400 etc

 

[Brackens]

Oh right, must have dropped then since i checked it when i got here. To be honest if I get posted back to Lossie purely on the basis that i can do a one week line refresher course rather than someone with no experience doing a 5 or 6 week course then i'll be looking for ways out. I wanted to go there as an AMM but i joined the Air Force to move around and do different things and don't want to spend my career at Lossie then Marham because of being line trained on a particular A/C type.

 

[XVR RA RA RA]

If they reckon TG1 NCO's are 110% to 120% manned. Then they must be one thousand cpls working in some bay in RAF Sleepy Hollow. Because they certainly aren't up here, if the airships went to Lossie they'd see a different story.

 

[Ghandi's Flip-Flop]

I'd love to know where these extra guys are as everywhere in the RAF seems to be running light.

I know they expected people to be freed up by VC10 and Tristar going which has been delayed, but equally their replacements aren't here and being fully manned yet either.

I think someone somewhere has got their sums massively wrong.

 

[Downsizer]

Or maybe your scaling isn't as big as you think it is? Have you actually seen the LUEs for your sections? Just asking...

My section is fully manned bar people ooa.

 

[Ghandi's Flip-Flop]

I've had the Sqn management explain to us exactly why we're running at about 70% manned. Apparently the situation isn't going to ease until May at the earliest.

So yes I am aware of what our scaling is, and knowing what the effect to the frontline would be if we can't push through the right number of trained technicians, it is concerning. If Cosford can't get the right manpower bearing in mind the potential impact, what hope has the wider RAF got of getting its correct scaling? Bar those actively engaged on Ops, where I'd imagine additional priority is afforded.

Yes, I know things have been scaled back as a result of LEAN and CI etc, but there are definite gapped posts all over the place. The current trawls for volunteers for Lossie and Marham being a case in point.

Something needs to be done before there are a few smoking holes.

 

[Heatseeker]

There is a strategic manpower placement plan that tells you who is 100%, who will be 70% manned and so on. May be worth a look to see where you are. Link on Manning site.