Thread: Civil Serpants £300M bonuses

Its a common theme with Liam Fox, he needs to wind his neck in because he is likely the next SoS Defence.

Day 1, right you bunch of lazy pen pushing wan_kers
Day 2, oh I see, ah, yes
Day 3, the CS are supporting our brave boys

Originally Posted by whyohwhy

Originally Posted by Oil_Slick

How much did the actual Army of 103,000 men and women earn in bonuses during the same period? £0.……"

Thought the military still paid operational bonus? Which isn't even performance related...

More seriously, if you want to improve support to the front line, you can't remove every last incentive from those who work in the MoD. Sounds like a bit of a non-story to me. I'm a bit disappointed the Tory's brought this up - would cutting this money improve the MoD?

I also had the idea there was now a performance related element in the salaries of 2*s and above? Happy to be told I'm talking merde.

C_C

Originally Posted by BPS666

Average Tom on the ground doesn't care for you or recognise a need for you, all he sees is his kit turning up late, beaurocracy he doesn't need and enforcement of legislation that hinders his ability to do his job

Maybe the CoC should explain what would happen if we all fucked off home then? Kit wouldn't turn up at all.

Not to mention that

Originally Posted by BPS666

most of the issues that concern him have a CS somewhere in the grand scheme of things.

also have senior military ranks who don't have a good enough understanding of the procurement process and so end up making bad decisions and/or rushing things in the early stages which result in delays (not the sole offenders - there are senior CS who are just as bad, well worse actually because they SHOULD know the processes!)

Originally Posted by Charm_City

I also had the idea there was now a performance related element in the salaries of 2*s and above? Happy to be told I'm talking merde.C_C

No, its true but I'm not wholly familiar with how it works. I am sitting exceptionally close to a whole raft of 2*/3* outer offices. I may wander across when its time to get a brew and see if I can get a short answer.

Why is this thread full of CS dribbling on about how little they are paid? Were you not switched on enough to ask the recruiter how much the pay was before you signed the dotted line?

I am not trying to de-cry the CS but come on, everyone knows its a low paid job so trying to justify a cash bonus with excuses of low pay kinds of falls upon deaf ears.

And I will not even go into those on here who try to use CS deployments in support of combat troops as an excuse for the bonus. This bonus is not designed to compensate for operational deployments, there are many different allowances and cash incentives for that. This one is meant to be 'performance related'.

I won't go into the reasons for the bonus, numerous CS have quite clearly explained on here why they get it rather than a pay rise. However, rightly or wrongly, in the current climate of cash shortages this is not, and never will be what people on here claim to be a 'non-story'. As you can see on the TV and papers, and hear on the radio, it very much is a story.

BPS – you do raise some good points. I don’t expect the average Tom to understand what the CS does, or why it does it. If Pte Bloggs could tell me that sort of thing, then, frankly, I’d be very worried!

The problem is two-fold – firstly it’s a lack of education for the Armed Forces about what the MOD CS does. There is no point that I know until reasonably far up the staff college world that we actually sit down and explain to Officers what it is that the random MOD CS is there to do. Secondly, I think it is wrong that ICSC(L) will not allow any places to serving MOD CS – the best way for the army to understand why CS think the way they do, and more importantly for MOD CS to get the army way of thinking, is to work together at the junior staff level.

Despite what people think, the MOD is focused on delivering to the front line – its just that sometimes this message isn’t sold very well. For instance, UORs are a great example of that sort of work, but so is the unsung work done by all the admin guys in ammo depots, or storage areas ensuring that spares are loaded on and got out to theatre. Having worked in this world, I can assure you that things go wrong, not because a CS can’t be arrsed, but usually for major reasons far beyond the ability of a CS to influence. The problem is, that its easier to sit there and blame the CS for all the worlds failings, rather than look deeper into the problem (thinking here about the classic case of UOR vehicle spares, when delays in getting spares, attributed in the press to “pen pushers� were actually a result of pressures on the manufacturers in the USA).

I think deploying MOD CS on Ops has been absolutely brilliant – I’ve done a tour as a deployed CS and loved it. Its helped many CS understand the pressures that the forces are under, and more importantly for the future, because completing an Op Tour is now seen as a pre-requisite for promotion to senior levels, we are slowly ensuring that future MOD decision makers are likely to have got real, and often multiple periods, of operational experience. Of course being in Theatre isn’t the same as being on the pointy end facing Terry down a bayonet, but every CS I know who has deployed has been through their fair share of mortaring and other unpleasant experiences. This means that we’re not sitting here in an ivory tower of ignorance – we’ve been out there, we know (to a point) what life is like, and believe it or not, we’re on your side. It may seem hard to believe at times, but trust me when I say that the average CS (stand fast the genuine PITAs) wants to do all they can to support the front line, but we find it just as frustrating to deal with shortages and budget cuts as you do. Ultimately though, we are all bound by the decisions of our political masters.

Originally Posted by AFA06

And I will not even go into those on here who try to use CS deployments in support of combat troops as an excuse for the bonus. This bonus is not designed to compensate for operational deployments, there are many different allowances and cash incentives for that. This one is meant to be 'performance related'.

Two very different things.

The bonus being discussed on here is for either a) doing your job (the basic bonus) b) doing your job brilliantly and doing over and above your job (enhanced bonus - of which only a small percentage are allowed to be given by the award managers, not sure of the exact amount)

The allowance for deployment is totally seperate.

Originally Posted by Skynet

Not sure I can get hugely over excited about this but already it seems the reporting is one sided - 21 years old Privates gets £16-20K, most CS I suspect are on less than £25k, but the Privates salary isn't the real figure - cheap housing, cheap schooling, free medical care etc.

Tell me about this cheap housing schooling and medical care? Housing is the average of all council house rents in UK. (see AFPRB report) Medical care is the same as civilians get and they pay the same NI for it. Cheap schooling really? Please explain?

Your MQ must be quite posh then, as my slum is only £100 a month and am quite happy to pay that for a roof over my head, i was offered a move to some much posher houses £400 a month, i told them to poke it!

Er, many of these bonuses are recommended by line managers who are military, performances are then scrutinised by a Colonel or such like somewhere who decides if they're worth it are they not? It's not exactly CS signing off bonuses for CS is it...at least for the lower levels (who make up the majority?). If a Line Manager hasn't got the moral courage to tell his staff they aren't working hard enough for a bonus that's his problem. Or perhaps these people are working hard enough? Some of them at least.

Originally Posted by Count.Dracule

Your MQ must be quite posh then, as my slum is only £100 a month and am quite happy to pay that for a roof over my head, i was offered a move to some much posher houses £400 a month, i told them to poke it!

Far from posh, trust me, the Pongo and Crab's who are on the same patch are in a dazed state of shock . Apparently its far below the standard they're used to! Its just nice, in a relatively nice location. I think I pay about £340 but a civvy equivalent would be £700-950 in the same area.

Originally Posted by jim30

Having worked in this world, I can assure you that things go wrong, not because a CS can’t be arrsed, but usually for major reasons far beyond the ability of a CS to influence. The problem is, that its easier to sit there and blame the CS for all the worlds failings, rather than look deeper into the problem (thinking here about the classic case of UOR vehicle spares, when delays in getting spares, attributed in the press to “pen pushers� were actually a result of pressures on the manufacturers in the USA).

So that wasnt anything to do with a very poorly drafted contract then, that denied the MoD the ability to source components on the open market.

The same contract that drafted by someone whose job it is to push pens

Not disagreeing with the general thrust of what you say Jim but c0ck ups do get originated in the CS as well as the mil side

Originally Posted by kes1

The bonus being discussed on here is for either a) doing your job (the basic bonus) b) doing your job brilliantly and doing over and above your job (enhanced bonus - of which only a small percentage are allowed to be given by the award managers, not sure of the exact amount)

This says everything and is indicative of the problems in the public sector, why should you get a bonus for doing your job?

Surely your salary is what you get for doing your job.

if you do it over and above then get a promotion or even a discretionary bonus but the whole bonus system seems to be an assumed award linked to dubious targets and performance management systems.

Who sets the targets and can they ever be applicable to a public sector organisation without distorting and perverted the output of that organisation?

Originally Posted by AFA06

Why is this thread full of CS dribbling on about how little they are paid? Were you not switched on enough to ask the recruiter how much the pay was before you signed the dotted line?

I don't think it is. It is, however, full of soldiers/pseudo-soldiers/walts et al dribbling on about how hard done by and misunderstood they are - not one of them are you?

Meridian – fair point there- its probably not the best example, but one that I’m familiar with. I’m not claiming MOD isn’t exempt from bad performance – I can think of lots of dreadful examples, but that said, there is often another reason, which is externally driven (although the ensuing problems are our own fault).

As for bonus objective setting - as I understand it, the original idea was that you would set your objectives for the year, based on a discussion with Line Manager. Then at the end of the year, you write a self justifying piece of writing saying how you thought you had met AND exceeded said objectives. Management then wrote their own assessment based on what you wrote, and then an independent panel would look at your evidence, compare it to everyone elses in your area (unfortunately known as a cluster) and see who had exceeded their objectives the most (and thus improved performance). Those lucky people got the award.

The system became more challenging when it was realised that many areas of the MOD involve repetitive process based work for which there is little scope for people to exceed objectives. I’ve heard tales of offices of 40 people where half got bonuses and half didn’t – all for doing the same job. Currently the system is revised every year, and has yet to get to the point where it inspires people to exceed performance – many people just see it as yet another game that has to be played.

I have no problems with the concepts of bonuses – the GEMS scheme is a great example of this. I also like the US version where if you do an amazingly great job, then they have one off payments of up to $20k for someone – in this case though 99.9% of staff dip out, but boy do they have a good motivator to excel. Our bonus system is slightly more embracing, as initially 50% of staff would get one each year, which then went up to 65% (can you imagine how bad it would be to be one of the 35%). Nowadays pretty much everyone gets a basic award if you prove you’ve met your objectives.

In other words, the system has gone from being a genuine pay award where you were given real pay rises for performance linked pay, to a statistical box filling nightmare, which is 8 or 9 times more complicated than it ought to be, and which has not really improved performance, and has managed to do more to demotivate staff than anything else I can think of. I wonder who was responsible for forcing it on the MOD? …

Originally Posted by meridian

This says everything and is indicative of the problems in the public sector, why should you get a bonus for doing your job?

Because it was, rightly or wrongly, a government-driven initiative to introduce some of the efficiencies and practices of the private sector into the public sector. This theme of public v private sector practice, and efficiency, is a recurring theme on ARRSE, with the usual outcome falling in favour of private sector practice. Perhaps we can't have our cake and eat it.

Originally Posted by meridian

This says everything and is indicative of the problems in the public sector, why should you get a bonus for doing your job?

Surely your salary is what you get for doing your job.

Because, as has already been pointed out, we get fuck all else

Originally Posted by meridian

if you do it over and above then get a promotion or even a discretionary bonus but the whole bonus system seems to be an assumed award linked to dubious targets and performance management systems.

I agree, the bonus system sucks. Sadly we got stuck with it. There is the special bonus award system which, I think, can be anywhere between £50-£200 which managers can award staff for doing something over and above.

Promotion? Hahahaha with all the cuts in manpower?