Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to join our community
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site, connect with other members through your own private inbox and will receive smaller adverts!

City soldiers on 100k a year

Yes but i am still right by conventional wisdom. A typical amry type squadie pleb dress pritty but still an idiot. My post is messying this true. But your post is spelt correct but just meaningless noise.

Common sense is to pay market rate for the added value they bring the marginal benefit, not pay what someone may earn doing a different job.


They may be worth 100k at a bank but if cant shoot or drive or do anything as well as a typical sqaudie a waste of time etc if doing that role.

If they are adding more value like a doctor being a doctor that makes sense. A banker being a driver does not make sense. As there 100k is taking money out of budget for other things that may be more useful
 
Yes but i am still right by conventional wisdom. A typical amry type squadie dress pritty but still an idiot. My post is messying this true. But your post is spelt correct but just meaningless noise.

Common sense is to pay market rate for the added value they bring, not pay what someone may earn doing a different job.

It's a message but from what and where I've no idea.
 
The normal way of things would be to pay someone what there worth. By paying privates at high city rates it may be adding no value better spend the money on things that bring value equpiment doctors body armour whatever.

Even if going to overpay people better to do it through open compitition. For example adversise a squadie role for 100k for 6 months and take the best person that appears. Rather than pay city type a high salery to do something they are not worth a high salery for.


It seems common sense really, may be better to employee the city person to do the percurement for the MOD.

Not sure what a word salad is but problery some insult from some grunt i guess.

Would I be correct in assuming you are a plumber who suffers from dyslexia?

Just be careful you invite Santa to visit tomorrow, and not Satan...
 
Yes but i am still right by conventional wisdom. A typical amry type squadie pleb dress pritty but still an idiot. My post is messying this true. But your post is spelt correct but just meaningless noise.

Common sense is to pay market rate for the added value they bring, not pay what someone may earn doing a different job.

Joe, thanks for pointing out the obvious, it's very much appreciated. Don't listen to the haters mate, I think it's great that the educationally subnormal aren't kept locked up in cages all year, it's only right that they let you out for a bit at Christmas.
 
It's the price you pay for mobilising TA Soldiers with good civilian jobs into wars like Afghanistan. In my last TA Bn there were at least three of us in HQ Company, two were Privates in Signals Pln and one a Corporal MFC, that earned more than our regular Lt Col. We were all IT Contractors that had joined the TA as students and stuck with it. The Adjutant loved to take the piss out of the CO about it.

It was funny on weekends and annual camp. In a conventional war it wouldn't have mattered because we'd have all been fucked anyway.
 
It would be interesting , to add much needed meat, to this story if the figures for salary were noted next to position and regiment.

How many city bankers opt to go on tour away from all their home comforts and the easy life for 6 months to be a private?


Edited: spelling due to Xmas wine being consumed
 
Yes but i am still right by conventional wisdom. A typical amry type squadie pleb dress pritty but still an idiot. My post is messying this true. But your post is spelt correct but just meaningless noise.

Common sense is to pay market rate for the added value they bring the marginal benefit, not pay what someone may earn doing a different job.


They may be worth 100k at a bank but if cant shoot or drive or do anything as well as a typical sqaudie a waste of time etc if doing that role.

If they are adding more value like a doctor being a doctor that makes sense. A banker being a driver does not make sense. As there 100k is taking money out of budget for other things that may be more useful

Got to be a waaaah???? Even so its the funniest shit I've read on here for ages, crack on Joe...
 
I have mobbed a couple of times with members of the HAC. One was a Trooper the other a Sgt, both posher than my CO but really nice blokes.

This has nothing to do with the thread really does it? Merry Christmas!
 
I have mobbed a couple of times with members of the HAC. One was a Trooper the other a Sgt, both posher than my CO but really nice blokes.

This has nothing to do with the thread really does it? Merry Christmas!

Well it links in well with CountryGals question of how many Bankers want to mobilise as Tpr's - answer; plenty. Its all well and good having a laugh at the TAC about how they get paid the same as a full Section but it goes down like a lead ballon in a Platoon House full of Regs in Sangin.

The HAC are an anachronism and indicative of a broader problem in the Reserve.


Posted from the ARRSE Mobile app (iOS or Android)
 
I think the TA (old money) has a lot of problems, the biggest being recruitment and retention. If the HAC has a full compliment then well done them. I acknowledge your point, however that example won't be happening for too much longer if the PM is to be believed. Think the point is, the HAC have what seems like a full compliment and a steady number are willing to volunteer. Fair play to them!

The other side of the coin is, that as a reservist I have listened to regular soldiers (not all) berate me for one thing or another over the last 27 years, if one of the HAC does it back..... fair one!
 
Inevitable story really. My view is that in the case of specialists both medical and some others, the costs are justified. But for non-specialists we should severely limit the top up pay and if we lose some reservists who we cannot afford to mobilise then so be it. The reserves are supposed to be a cheap option. If we could afford an expensive/better option we would just have lots of regulars.

BC, I have to point a few things out here.

Firstly, only around 30% of reservists claim the Reservist Award, and the actual number of reservists on £100k plus is less than 1% of the ~850 or so who have deployed this year; the absolute cost is tiny.

Secondly, a TA soldier claiming RA, even at £100k, which is unlikely in the extreme, is still likely to be much cheaper over both a three and five year period and a full career. For example, according to my fag packet estimates, based on a capitation factor of 2.5x salary (in use in my staff position in 2008), a regular captain deploying on ops as part of a three year cycle would cost £300k, and a reservist Captain on a 'very rare' £100k salary would cost £170k. So I ask you, if you are measuring purely financial efficiency, which one do you hire? Note also that the reason this salary is rare in the TA is because such jobs don't usually allow one enough time to join the TA (or in fact do much else), and that people on those sorts of salaries are often very good at what they do-given the vast range in talent in the Army, perhaps we could try and tap into this pool for the Army's benefit?

Thirdly, contractors on short term contracts for any employer cost a significant amount more than regular staff; in my business, for example, it is perhaps 300% more. This reflects two things. Namely that demand from the employer exceeds supply from the labour market, and so the 'price' of labour has to increase to attract new candidates, and that contractors have zero job security and can be hired and fired at will. Perhaps the Army likes to think it is a special case, and the fact that the MoD tries to avoid paying the full price for labour by hiding behind legislation probably indicates this. But it isn't, and if it tries to avoid paying the full rate, potential recruits will make a rational economic choice about how to spend their time, and not join. It's very simple economics, and if more restrictive terms and conditions were introduced which effectively depressed the wage on offer significantly below both what civilian employment offers, and the value that people place on their spare time, you can watch the potential recruits walk out the door, tearing up FR2020 as they go-and whether you agree with it or not, it's here to stay so the Army has to make it work.


Posted from the ARRSE Mobile app (iOS or Android)
 
General lack of missing the point that these cases are all "voluntary compulsory" mobilisation. Nobody has to go if they don't want to and the Army doesn't have to take these people if it doesn't want to. Don't have the figures to hand but I suspect that the capitation rate for a senior Regular major on ops - including Op bonus, typical rates of LSSA etc - is going to be nudging towards 100k.

Somebody in the Telegraph (for which = some v. senior Army officers (one of whom may or may not be balding) with close links to the paper) really has got it in for the TA, haven't they. I wonder why ?

Dergeneral, I understand your point about voluntary compulsory mobilisation; but the reality is that all mobilisations are compulsory in the eyes of the law. This means that the individual needs certain protection to prevent the Army abusing it's power - which I have personal experience of, so I know it happens (there's another thread on this). If the Army calls someone up then it shouldn't just discard them and send them home in their first week after they have made significant sacrifices to answer the call of duty, about which they have no choice anyway: because of the way the Army's call up policy is structured, there can be huge penalties for the reservist but no cost to the Army and thus no incentive to act in a fair manner. In my instance I had to leave my job and give up my home, which was provided by my employer. On my first day at Chilwell, literally hours after moving out and moving my girlfriend into a flat share, I was told the Army didn't want to pay my RA and I was going to be sent home. My employers didn't expect/want me back until the agreed date a year hence but the Army's attitude was that it was the same as RTUing a soldier to their TA unit; I will also most likely lose future earnings as a result of slower promotion for being in the TA and thus away for certain periods, but thought this was a price worth paying for an organisation I believed in and was loyal to; had I been sent home this would all have been in vain. This could all have been sorted out months in advance before my call up papers were issued.


Posted from the ARRSE Mobile app (iOS or Android)
 
Well it links in well with CountryGals question of how many Bankers want to mobilise as Tpr's - answer; plenty. Its all well and good having a laugh at the TAC about how they get paid the same as a full Section but it goes down like a lead ballon in a Platoon House full of Regs in Sangin.

The HAC are an anachronism and indicative of a broader problem in the Reserve.


Posted from the ARRSE Mobile app (iOS or Android)

I agree that the HAC are an anachronism and they need to find a solid core role to justify their expense, but what exact wider problem are they representative of?


Posted from the ARRSE Mobile app (iOS or Android)
 
Well it links in well with CountryGals question of how many Bankers want to mobilise as Tpr's - answer; plenty. Its all well and good having a laugh at the TAC about how they get paid the same as a full Section but it goes down like a lead ballon in a Platoon House full of Regs in Sangin.

The HAC are an anachronism and indicative of a broader problem in the Reserve.


Posted from the ARRSE Mobile app (iOS or Android)

Like what?
 
Top