Civvy firm to be paid £1bn to recruit soldiers?

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by vvaannmmaann, Oct 11, 2011.

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. the_boy_syrup

    the_boy_syrup LE Book Reviewer

    Has this come from the MoD's "you couldn't make it up" files?
  2. 'The MoD believes that civilians will help it improve the quality of recruits'

    How? I very much doubt they can influence the type of peole who will come through the door. It sounds as if someone has fallen for the mistaken idea that the private sector is somehow better at this than the public sector.
  3. Surely this can't be for real ?

    How much were the Govt hoping to save by cutting jobs in the Armed Forces ?

    Some stupid but well connected HR company is going to make a mint, fail totally and then head into the sunset with our cash and a hell of a mess left behind them,. Then there'll be a Govt inquiry, nobody will be blamed and we'll go back to the old system.

    How can people be so fukcing stupid ????
  4. Probably result in a nice post retirement job for some lads!
    • Like Like x 1
  5. I doubt it as well.

    Really why would you be more likely to sign up to a private sector recruiter as opposed to a military one?
  6. Been the case here for some years. Abject failure.
  7. Is that the end of TRHJ then? Personally I thought it was about the one "piece of kit" that was any good.
  8. 20% savings over 10 years doesn't seem to be a very exacting target for such a high-risk scheme.

    Or am I reading this completely wrong and the reality is "we will save £250m from the uniformed pay budget by spending £1b on out-sourcing."? Which would be classic MoD thinking.
    • Like Like x 2
  9. If the standard of recruits in the middle of a massive recession with an exciting television war ongoing isn't high enough for the MOD now then it never will be. Once we're back to marching up and down the square and the economy's recovered then interest in the Army's only going to go one way. Whoever made this decision should be first in line to offer up savings to the pay budget.
  10. Its a billion over 10 years, so I assume the military thinks it will save 1.25 billion. Its bound to work just look at the success of Annington homes...
  11. Who made that decision probably wont be in the same position when it all goes pear shaped, so will never be held accountable
  12. I think it's to free up 2 out of 3 SNCO recruiters to get off their arrses and stop lying to people that "you can be a mechanic in the PWRR!" and get back to fighting wars while civvies do the paperwork (that said SNCO recruiters hate) involved in getting little Johnny off his Uniformed Public Service course and into the Army.

    Incidentally, if you think this is a waste of money you should have a closer look at the money wasted every day in paying for ART teams to go into schools to provide free entertainment and inter-house competitions in schools full of people (pupils and staff) who aren't interested one bit in 'The Offer'...not to mention how much we plough into EM recruitment. Or the fact look-at-life courses are routinely filled with the rat bag kids schools want to get rid of during OFSTED week.
  13. I don't think that's even the obvious on-the-face-of-it reading - I assumed the claim was a £250m saving from what would have been a £1.25b budget. Over the 10 years, of course.

    But I've been at this a long time. Hence the sarcastic alternative.

    Edited to add: do we really spend £125m per year on recruiting? Just for the Army?