Changes in Tiffy world?

#1
I heard a rumour that the Tiffy course has been reduced recently and that those completing the course are no longer promoted to SSgt automatically.

Is the rumour true?

Cheers.
 
#4
Why is it good Nige? Change isnt always bad, they could stop giving everyone the same assignments course after course for a start
 
#5
I'm not suggesting change is inherently bad. I'm suggesting that this particular change would be bad.

If the assignments were changed every course, then marking would become a bit more difficult.

Down here, we all do the same assignments, course after course. All assignments are run through plagiarism software though, any copying is spotted and dealt with - a couple of people have fallen foul of this recently...
 
#7
Is it too early for popcorn?
 
#9
I'm not suggesting change is inherently bad. I'm suggesting that this particular change would be bad.

If the assignments were changed every course, then marking would become a bit more difficult.

Down here, we all do the same assignments, course after course. All assignments are run through plagiarism software though, any copying is spotted and dealt with - a couple of people have fallen foul of this recently...
Bordon does indeed use the said software, however after speaking to some guys currently doing the Tiffy course it seems the software is as much use as a B Mech :).

Imagine of you will (Twighlight zone music please) 16 students completing an assignment on say tyre structure, ALL of them will use the same words i.e tyre or structure or tread pattern, sidewall etc etc. Well the good old software spouts out every single 'copied' word. It even picks up referenced material, but the biggest ball ache is that it cannot be used on anything classified so if your assignment has referenced material that is Restricted or above its useless and cannot be used. Now the cynic in me would wonder if everyone references at least one sentence of restricted material each assignment....I think i would have done!

Oh and as for changes to the course, this is currently on hold. Content/course length has been looked at but nothing was discussed with reference to a change in the Rank output.
 
#10
Thanks BD, the software down here is used to look for phrases rather than individual words, and it's used on all assignments, restricted included.
There have been people removed from course here for copying, but it's rare, more common is for work to be resubmitted with correct referencing, as the software checks known 'useful' websites too!

Glad to hear the output rank hasn't changed - down here you do the Artificer course, then (maybe) get promoted to WO2 the next year(no SSgt here now).
 
#11
It's about time it had a shake up, especially in light of the changes made in about '05/'06 (I think), whereby you were automatically put on Tiffy selection at the end of the class 1 course. It cannot be justified to take someone who is essentially inexperienced in both rank and trade skills and elevate them to lofty heights on the grounds of academic prowess. That's why officers were invented. Allow them to keep their Sgt, but prove that they are worthy in the field army of being promoted to SSgt.

Besides that, who cares about Tiffy spankers anyway.
 
#12
It's about time it had a shake up, especially in light of the changes made in about '05/'06 (I think), whereby you were automatically put on Tiffy selection at the end of the class 1 course. It cannot be justified to take someone who is essentially inexperienced in both rank and trade skills and elevate them to lofty heights on the grounds of academic prowess. That's why officers were invented. Allow them to keep their Sgt, but prove that they are worthy in the field army of being promoted to SSgt.
Don't take this as a bite but you're talking cack. I'm not the greatest fan of the end of class one PAAB (jealous because of the hoops I had to jump through) but even after a PAAB pass there's a minimum period required in the field force and you still need a solid recommendation in your SJAR (from officers what were invented for it). And you're proposing an 18 month academic course for no financial reward? In the words of a generic American mobster "What are you, nuts?"

And I think you are getting your labels mixed. It's Tech Spankers, Spineless Tiffies, Bitter and Twisted Artisans. Have I missed any?
 
#13
Don't take this as a bite but you're talking cack. I'm not the greatest fan of the end of class one PAAB (jealous because of the hoops I had to jump through) but even after a PAAB pass there's a minimum period required in the field force and you still need a solid recommendation in your SJAR (from officers what were invented for it). And you're proposing an 18 month academic course for no financial reward? In the words of a generic American mobster "What are you, nuts?"

And I think you are getting your labels mixed. It's Tech Spankers, Spineless Tiffies, Bitter and Twisted Artisans. Have I missed any?
There is already scope for a financial reward in the form of the two tier incremental pay system. What I'm saying is that the standards of Artificers can only have been impuned by taking away the onus of the individual to put themselves forward for the PAAB. Also, irrispective of the mandatory time in the field force after PAAB, this in no way makes up for the experience needed to be what is in effect a senior senior rank.

The old days of a Tiffy being the cream of the crop, so to speak, are gone. Now we are faced with what has become nothing more than a sausage factory whose sole concern seems to be numbers and quotas. Get rid of this outdated system we have of focusing efforts on those who can pass a one day course and do some maths and lets start to nuture and reward our REME soldiers across the whole spectrum. Too long we have neglected and written off those who chose or are forced to go down the artisan route.
 
#14
I cannot agree with all you write EMM. No-one is forced down the Artisan route, it is the default setting for those who do not pass or can't be arsed trying. I am not a fan of 1 Day PAAB but it is here to stay. There is still a massive amount to offer from those who wear a set of hammer and pincers above their chevrons at SSgt Rank. They must grow into those shoes though, some (and i'm sure it happened years ago too) are still immature and they walk around giving it the big un. If they can't hack it there are plenty of ways of slowing them up 'til they can.
A fitter section is not a one man show and everyone must pull together to best serve their Sqn/Coy/Bty. As a Sgt (or below) within that section i would argue its all about steering and nurturing. Some won't listen. some will be better for our help.
Lets pull together.
 
#15
Catchy - have you observed a 1 day PAAB? I got the chance to last year and was pleasently suprised with how much pressure the candidates were put through. In my opinion I believe that as a group, the PAAB DS saw enough of them to make a full and balanced decision towards their suitability. Just my opinion though of course.
E_m_m - do you think that the modern Artificer isn't up to it now? What makes you say that?
 
#16
Hi Sparky. I'm not one to tar everyone with the same brush and in no way do I want to debase nor indeed defame the modern Artificer. They are, after all, just a product of the system. What I think needs a shake up and what I don't think is up to standard is the process that has been instigated by those that are less interested in quality and standards and more interested in numbers and scores. OC's are pushed to to run 'Tiffy training days, sprogs attend a compulsory PAAB, etc, etc. The standards of old are being eroded by the need of the Corp to attain certain levels as set by out an out of touch office situated in Arborfield, as opposed to retaining those standards because they mean something.

Too many times, even back as a full screw myself, I have had to guide more than one of the new tiffies in the right direction. This must surely be wrong. A 'tiffy should be the paragon of all that is great about the Corps. What we have produced as a result of the new system is a shadow of what it should be. The 'tiffy beast is now dead. We need to revive it or move on.
 
#17
E-M-M, How long ago were you a full screw? Was it before the 1 day PAAB? if not, then the old system must not have worked.
I was the product of the old system, and when I led a fitter section I relied heaviliy on my VM Sgt and the full screws too. I relied on them because I knew who the experts were in each area. I had skills in areas they didn't and they had skills in areas I didn't.

There is not a Tiffy on the planet who is an expert at everything, the good ones are experts at knowing their limitations and relying on the strengths of others to get the job done.
 
#18
Hi Nige.

I agree, there will always be that team work element with different people of differing ranks bringing their own expertise to the party. But where do Artisans fit in? What is the real point of the Artificer? Is it truly necessary to spend all of the time and money training them up when a decent senior Cpl, Sgt or Arty SSgt can do the job just as well. New tiffies in units are heavily reliant on those around them and indeed, spend most of their time organising Wksp/LAD functions in order to prove their worth.
 
#19
E_m_m - I'm really unsure what your arguement is. You seem to appreciate that someone needs to run the section yet isn't sure what an Artificer does. Then you ask why can't a good Sgt or Cpl run it? Well thats what happens except after they have been chosen they do a course and come back as SSgts. Simples.
 
#20
...The standards of old are being eroded by the need of the Corp to attain certain levels as set by out an out of touch office situated in Arborfield, as opposed to retaining those standards because they mean something...
The standards of old resulted in several people being loaded onto Tiffy courses to fill spaces because of a lack of competition (and who would turn it down if offered?). At the risk of spinning a DEME(A) line, the pass rate on the one day PAAB is roughly that of the old system but the numbers attending (and thus passing) have increased. This leads to greater competition at ACSLB. I would argue that to get loaded now you have to be that bit better than in my day. Or we fall back on the old "it was better/harder/tougher in my day" argument and blame falling standards of recruits coming through for any difference.

Going back to Nige's original question; there's a lot of pressure being applied to reduce the length of time spent in training and at 18 odd months the Tiffy course is a prime target. Who knows what will fall out of the SDSR?
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads