1. Part-time vs Casual

I am not arguing in favour of either casual or part-time status. What I am saying is that the decision (of sorts) between the two has been made for us as a consequence of the EC directive. Our mandatory training is part-time work, the rest is casual. A judgment of Solomon.

I don't think that the employment heavens will fall if the mandatory component of our training were to be deemed to be part-time employment. Arguably with the modern TA, the mandatory component needs to be truly mandatory. So you do 27 days and earn two days' annual leave: cool - that justifies (at last) R&R in the middle of a two-week exercise.

Oots is right, though, that it might cause conflict with TA members' civvy contracts of employment. And he is also right that this might require tough decisions at the very top about what the TA really is and the extent of change that is needed in order to give members of the TA true employment protection. If we're going to be used more like the National Guard then the legislation protecting us should be closer to that which protects them.

Some hard legislative work concerning the reserve forces is overdue.

I'm not saying I am happy or sad at that outcome - I'm simply telling it as it is.

2. Bounty vs Pension

There is no legal reason which would require bounty to be scrapped if we were awarded pensions. But you can bet your bottom euro that the MoD would seize on the award of pensions as a justification for scrapping the bounty. They would do so with a big fanfare: "One Army Pension"; pictures of TA chefs hang-gliding, and all that.

But I've just done my sums and I reckon I am far better off with bounty than pension. I earn about £2,500 a year gross from the TA at the moment (although if I charged fully for work I did for it, I would get a damn sight more). I get a tax-free bounty of about £1,500. The technical term for that is, I believe, fcking shtloads.

If I stick that £1,500 in a pension fund rather than using it to bribe Mrs Evil then my £1,500 magically becomes a contribution of £1,900 (if I pay no tax or only basic rate tax - it would instantly become more if I pay higher rate tax). In other words, it's a pension contribution almost equal to my pay.

If I decided to go for pension entitlement instead then I would get MoD contributions to my pension worth - what - £200 a year?

3. Daddy vs Chips

All of the above banter leads to two conclusions, I reckon.

First, we're a bit part-time, a bit casual, a bit wooor, a bit waayyyyy, but all really rather wonderful.

Second, we should chill out about pension entitlement and be happy with bounty.

Look at your unit turnover to see how many people will be around for long enough to collect a pension that is worthwhile.

My view is that I'd rather have the money in my pocket now, than in the Governments so that I can be paid it at a steady drip, at some future point.

In cash terms, HMG would actually be better off paying us a pension. They're putting off the day when cash has to leave the Treasury coffers that we may not even be around to collect.

I have seen my unit turnover sufficiently that the numbers who will be around to collect a pension at 65/70 are going to be miniscule, assuming they remember to make a claim. Five years TA service will be a a very small pension payment, as opposed to the real cash benefit that is Bounty.

Bounty is the carrot you dangle in front of the soldier who is struggling on a run. A pension in 40 years?

HMG won't afford both - it's one or the other, or some derisory half hearted attempt at splitting the two.

The 27 days might be mandatory, but they can still be worked as and when I choose to work them. This is the reason starred weekends were withdrawn. To be replaced by "main effort" weekends.

Missing a starred weekend affected Bounty - main effort weekends had no impact.

Bounty is what lets me stay in the ta basically bribe for wife .

Keep the bounty.

Let's face it. The folk who benefit most from a (backdated) pension are the old & bold like me. I'm not the sort of bloke the TA needs in qty and frankly, at my fortunate time of life, £ 1,500 isn't going to make or break me. Furthermore, if there was no bounty, I'd still turn up as it's a hard habit to break after 23 years.

£ 1,500 to an 21 year old on the other hand, is plenty dosh and encourages attendance. It certainly did back when dinosaurs roamed the Earth and I was a young Gunner.

My unit doesn't need many more like me. We have enough. What we do need are the youngsters to turn into old fogeys over a period of time.

Now, if you'll excuse me, it's time for my Sanatogen and afternoon nap.

Or an enchanced Bounty for qualification to , and maintaining MATT 1 level?

Daft question from someone who does not have Dr Evil's legal mind, what is defined as mandatory work. I can understand coming in for MATTS training as mandatory but what about camp. Camp is mandatory for bounty but what about camp prep ??

As an ex yeoman of signals, if a brigade exercise is thrown together, I HAD to come in to prepare the comms plans, sort the kit out, and spoon-feed the officers, is that mandatory or casual, because if some tosser says it is casual, you are demeaning the TA as a whole, and saying we can come in if we please.

Pension-wise, even trying to claim a pension for 28 days a year, even over 15 years, is absolutely F*** ALL.

My brain cell has OD'd reading Dr Evil's ramblings, but I do agree with him / her / it 100% and support the direction you are going in, not that I expect you to be successful as I am sure you will be encouraged to go for a walk in a field and take lots of paracetamol to ease your stress and pain, at the slightest risk of you being succssful.

I'll get my coat !

Originally Posted by bobos

*snip*
if some tosser says it is casual, you are demeaning the TA as a whole, and saying we can come in if we please.

Don't you see, though? You can come and go as you please.

You are not obligated to turn up enough to get bounty. You're not obligated to turn up at all (unless you have mobilisation papers...). No-one's going to send the police after you, the Courts will not serve writs against you for non-attendance, you won't even be AWOL.

"Casual" doesn't (in this sense) mean "laid-back", "nonchalant", or "devoid of purpose", it just means not pre-arranged by contract. So it isn't a slight upon the TA, it's an accident of language.

Originally Posted by DrEvil

First, we're a bit part-time, a bit casual, a bit wooor, a bit waayyyyy, but all really rather wonderful.

Second, we should chill out about pension entitlement and be happy with bounty.

I completely agree. Also, the deal's not changed since we joined. If we don't like it, we can always leave...

Just my 2 cents. I'm a bit new to green, however, so I may hold a minority view. Moreover, my civvy job pays well enough that I don't rely on my TA pay (good thing). But I didn't even know there was a bounty until after I applied. Does anyone actually join up for the money???

FF.

P.S. I haven't even had a bounty yet. I suspect I'll be even more happy with the status quo (not the band!) when I have!

Originally Posted by Dr_Evil

Right. This is really frikkin getting to me now.

SNIPPED

A few consequences of what I have just said, as far as I see things:

1. Under the Part-time Workers (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000, we are entitled to a pension in respect of the part-time work we do.

2. Expenses incurred in order to perform mandatory training (eg, pass the phys MATT) are tax-deductible.

Snipped

Anyone want to go to the House of Lords with me on this?

Ok, so I can claim for my Gym membership and running shoes? Any ideas how?

Originally Posted by Friendly_Fire

But I didn't even know there was a bounty until after I applied. Does anyone actually join up for the money???

I don't think so either but after joining a number begin to rely on TA pay. Some of these get accelerated promotion because of their 'commitment', wrong wrong wrong and results in a poor Sgts Mess

Originally Posted by polar

I don't think so either but after joining a number begin to rely on TA pay.

Their fault, not the system's. It's the same with us and private medical work - once you start, it's easy to rely on that income. Nevertheless, we have no entitlement to it (hence one of my reasons why I suspect I won't take private work on when I am a consultant).

Originally Posted by polar

Some of these get accelerated promotion because of their 'commitment', wrong wrong wrong and results in a poor Sgts Mess

I agree. That's the Peter principle - avid enthusiastic people will always be promoted until they reach a post they are not competent to fill. That's why large corporations and government bodies are populated by people not capable of doing the job they are given. They were just good enough at their last job to get promoted.

FF.