Are the army laying pax off?

Discussion in 'Army Reserve' started by squigeypie, Apr 13, 2010.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Just read a small article in Soldier mag that the army is gonna get rid of small numbers of personnel with 12to 15 years service. ( page 8). Bummer if you had plans to do your 22 years colour service.
  2. If you plan on doing a 22yr career it is in your best interests to at least get promoted to SNCO in that time.
  3. msr

    msr LE

    Not currently a TA issue.

  4. The Army has to get rid of 15-20% of it's number by 2020 in accordance with present budget plans.
  5. why would it, the TA never has been or ever will be over manned
  6. Soldier magazine?

    Get real - read the paper!!

    This is old news - see three weeks ago - Manning Control Points?

    Christ, you'll be using TAQ as a reference document next.

    PS: TAQ7 is on the Army intranet but not on the site - conspiracy or laziness? Where is TAQ 8??? I demand to know.
  7. The_Duke

    The_Duke LE Moderator

    TAQ? The TA soldier's farourite journal? Soft, strong and thoroughly absorbent!
  8. And i thought this thread was going to be about insurance :?
  9. msr

    msr LE

    If you could wipe your arrse with it, it would be useful...
  10. I dont read the papers Mr T sorry
  11. RP578

    RP578 LE Book Reviewer

    In all fairness, TAQ issue 4 was the only place that I saw chapter and verse about the Additional Periods of Mobilisation (see copy & paste below.). That was timely, relevant and informative. If only we could get that sort of thing more often. As an aside, I've come across some old copies of the TAVR magazine from 1970. The letters page are, well - interesting. Much heat generated by name changes/loss of identity etc.

  12. That is a pretty impressive budget forecast you have got your hands on.
  13. msr

    msr LE

    The entire public sector has to shrink by at least this....
  14. In terms of manpower or costs? There is a difference, I think.