Redundancy Shock!

[Happy_Techie]

Its probably quite easy to guess how many are in the field..

If you guessed from the manning website. You could take the A + B grades as being eligible, C grades as not. That could give you a rough estimate.

 

[Noidea]

It is not rubbish

Yes it is. Even those at Manning think it is a daft thing to do. Release the list of those who are eligible and that way you provide more information and empower those that are in the field. It increases transparency in the first part of the process and, even a little bit, encourages our personnel to trust in what is going to happen, will occur fairly and openly.

When you start to hide information for no good reason then people begin to mistrust.

 

[duffman]

They can't due to the Data Protection Act

You mean because of DPA they can't even put eg 95 out of 500?

 

[Treehugger]

Let's just calm down a little, the field for ATM Cpls (which was the field being referred to above, hence my continuing to use it as an example) is up to 95 persons. This means that the RAF is prepared to offload a maximum of 95 ATM Cpls, that's 95 people from a pretty large rank group in a massive trade. This does not mean that 95 WILL DEFINITELY be made redundant. Natural wastage will account for some of that number, eg guys who are in by the skin of their teeth, having perhaps been in talks with a civvy employer and ready to do one the second a job offer is made. There are also so many people who WANT to leave, that the chances of an unwilling candidate actually being made redundant against their will, has to be pretty small. Recent deteriorations in the quality of Service life have undoubtedly convinced quite enough willing volunteers, so those who really do want to stay in; don't get your knickers in a twist, I'd say you are probably 90% safe. DT_Xtremez_26:

 

[Max]

I'm not overly bothered this time unlike last time as Thanks to the chaos they created I have lucked in with time done as I will have passed 18 years by the time any compulsory redundancy would get me.......

 

[MrMasher]

the chances of an unwilling candidate actually being made redundant against their will, has to be pretty small.

Look back at the last Tranche.
How many of the ATM Sgt's got the boot?
How many applied?

Nothing is guaranteed.......regardless of common sense.

 

[Happy_Techie]

I guess you will have a few applications for those who are of the rank of Sgt and above. These will be signed onto LOS 30, and if they are above 22 yrs service they have nothing to lose.


The losers of Tranche 2 are those who are less than 22yrs, but hold the rank of Cpl & Above. They would of signed onto 22yrs, but now may not complete it to get that pension. I cannot see anyone in this group applying for redundancy.

 

[MrMasher]

I've got a question.

How can someone be told that they're safe, that they won't be made redundant?
To me that sounds like they have already identified who will get compulsory. Otherwise how could you know if someone was safe?

 

[Noidea]

I've got a question.

How can someone be told that they're safe, that they won't be made redundant?
To me that sounds like they have already identified who will get compulsory. Otherwise how could you know if someone was safe?

Can you explain more. Sounds like what you have heard could be bollox!

 

[Treehugger]

The losers of Tranche 2 are those who are less than 22yrs, but hold the rank of Cpl & Above. They would of signed onto 22yrs, but now may not complete it to get that pension. I cannot see anyone in this group applying for redundancy.

Prepare to be surprised. In my workplace alone there is a healthy group falling within this category who are determined to take any chance they can to move on, especially with a bag of cash to sweeten the deal. I and all my colleagues are Techies though, (major shortage of TS eng personnel outside right now - not degree qualified engineers, eng tech spanner artists) so maybe no surprises there.

PS: Mr Masher, every ATM SNCO that I know who was made redundant under tranche 1 was a very willing volunteer, pukka gen.

 

[enginesuck]

Im an ATM NCO 14 years in, 4 in rank - good assesments but no current a/c Qs 18 months on type (been too busy on Ops to get my arse down to Marhell for six weeks of powerpoint) The way i see it is that its an opportunity to get just shy of 75k in the bank before starting my second career 8 years earlier than i would be if i had completed my 22, so if i stayed in id probably retire as a SNCO or might be a chief if i was lucky with 40 k and a pension of about 800 quid a month. Now im saying goodbye to that pension until im 60, BUT i will have an eight year head start on my new career and there are lots of jobs out there paying a damn sight more than an ATM sgt , chief or WO for that matter. I still enjoy this job but this redundancy lark is a good opportunity.

 

[MrMasher]

Can you explain more. Sounds like what you have heard could be bollox!

I've seen it in writing. Like I said someone has been told they're safe. An officer.

PS: Mr Masher, every ATM SNCO that I know who was made redundant under tranche 1 was a very willing volunteer, pukka gen.

Here's some pukka gen for you then. I personally know several ATM Sgt's that were MADE redundant who didn't volunteer!

I recall seeing figures somewhere that over half of the ATM Sgt's from Tranche 1 were compulsary.

 

[Max]

Im an ATM NCO 14 years in, 4 in rank - good assesments but no current a/c Qs 18 months on type (been too busy on Ops to get my arse down to Marhell for six weeks of powerpoint) The way i see it is that its an opportunity to get just shy of 75k in the bank before starting my second career 8 years earlier than i would be if i had completed my 22, so if i stayed in id probably retire as a SNCO or might be a chief if i was lucky with 40 k and a pension of about 800 quid a month. Now im saying goodbye to that pension until im 60, BUT i will have an eight year head start on my new career and there are lots of jobs out there paying a damn sight more than an ATM sgt , chief or WO for that matter. I still enjoy this job but this redundancy lark is a good opportunity.

Good luck with your selection and thanks for hopefully filling my slot It's definitely the Air Farces loss. You'll have no problem gettin a job.

 

[Weebl]

Here's some pukka gen for you then. I personally know several ATM Sgt's that were MADE redundant who didn't volunteer!

Definitely.

I applied but did not get it, an oppo on my Sqn has just bought a house and did not want to go, he got the letter.

Considering the numbers of volunteers and the numbers of people who went, added to the fact that not everyone who applied got it, Quite a few ATM Snecs got a redundancy they did not apply for and did not want.

 

[muttywhitedog]

I would suggest that if you spent all your life working on a now defunct aircraft, and have not yet got your "Q" on another aircraft, you are firmly in the firing line.

There's quite a few people who took the tossford option of a posting following the Harrier's withdrawal who are absolutely bricking themselves now as they are, in effect, unqualified on any current aircraft.

 

[CodeMonkey]

There's quite a few people who took the tossford option of a posting following the Harrier's withdrawal who are absolutely bricking themselves now as they are, in effect, unqualified on any current aircraft.

Only if the Q's have expired! Going on the list i was sent by manning in sep last year(after getting pinged) they even weighted MR4 Q's and harrier Q's then. I have a feeling they will pull the same crap this time(publish some of the criteria but not all bar a few GE ~Q's).

 

[Realist78]

I would suggest that if you spent all your life working on a now defunct aircraft, and have not yet got your "Q" on another aircraft, you are firmly in the firing line.

There's quite a few people who took the tossford option of a posting following the Harrier's withdrawal who are absolutely bricking themselves now as they are, in effect, unqualified on any current aircraft.

Being 'Q'd' on a particular aircraft isn't a great deal IMO. The RAF are/were keen to post people to different locations/aircraft quite regularly and firstly, being non Q'd doesn't mean you can't do the majority of jobs on that Sqn/workplace and secondly, Service provided Q courses don't cost that much in the bigger scheme of things.DT_Xtremez_19:

 

[feckinG RANT]

Aircraft Q's don't really mean a thing. And they shouldn't be used as a yard stick to how good or bad someone is. After all, most are no more than a few weeks long, so even without a Q it would be easy to get. I know of several lads without them who are hands down better than others with.

 

[muttywhitedog]

The ones I'm thinking of have either moved from Jags to Harriers, avoiding Tonkas like the plague, or have spent their entire career along two bases 16 miles apart along the A1, before moving to an instructor job (again rather than going GR4, which seemed to be akin to selling their soul to the devil for a harrier mate - after all it was a straight choice between GR4 and GR9 for the chop.

 

[MrMasher]

If you have 2 people on a shift in the frame for redundancy, one Q'd the other not.
Which one gets the boot?
Does a third person with an old Q now working elsewhere come into the equation?