Common Terms of Service.

Discussion in 'Professionally Qualified, RAMC and QARANC' started by Toerag, Apr 11, 2003.

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. Have they got it wrong again or what.

    It would appear that as of the 01 Apr 03 all nursing services within the armed services now have a common terms of service.

    i.e. no time promotion for the PMRAFNS & minimum time in each rank before going to board.

    In principle not a bad idea, so where have they gone wrong.

    Answer they have made it retrospective to all those currently serving.

    So those that are due promotion now, have the recommendations but no longer fit the criteria are not being promoted.

    So how’s that affecting the current serving QA, on their return today from the total cock up & waste of time & effort they call the Gulf War (for those that don’t know they set 33 Fld Hosp up handed it over to 202 then moved to Camp Coyote & sat around for 3 weeks doing nothing, so they are all slightly pis**d to say the least). A number of them went straight into military admin signed off then went to British Legion solicitors, their case being career foul in that under contractual law it is illegal to change a contract/terms of service, without first consulting the individuals & two them agreeing to the change.

    Me thinks there will be some quite wealth Ex QA’s around in the next year or so.
  2. Ventress

    Ventress LE Moderator

    Glad I am not a nurse- the Grey Mafia are even said to plotting bringing in very few commissioned officers from the ranks- if any!

    Now they are trying to merge three different services TOS, that have been different for a century- also they want to put Army RGN's into Field Units and Battalions whilst the RN and RAF RGN's get the cushi Cyprus and Gib postings in  the Hospitals.

    Couldn't be a better time to be a QA!
  3. I’m very aware of these new terms of service, but with 18 months to my 22 yrs they will have little to no effect on me. On paper they appear to be quite good with individuals being able to map out their career, knowing when they are due promotion & when they need to pull their socks up.

    However I can confirm at of least one young lady who’s in the above situation.

    She’s in the unlucky situation of being caught out twice by changes to attract new recruits to the QA's.

    First time was she promoted to ACpl when you earned the rank, 2 or 3 months latter new recruits pitched up straight out of training as ACpls. She was unhappy but lived with it.

    Now she’s up for her third, but under the new system she needs her sub rank for 4 yrs before being considered. She has only 2 yrs, due to some mix up over her JMQC. So at 13 yrs service she’s a Cpl in 2 yrs she may be eligible but chances are she will have LSGC by then.

    She to has just got back from the Gulf full of stories of woe. Her immediate action was to sign off. On chatting to her she had an appointment for today with a solicitor & claims she was aware of others in a similar situation to her that would be doing the same.

    Shame really, as she’s one of the highest qualified nurse in her speciality.
  4. Of course, Common Terms of Service (CTOS) has also been brought in for doctors.
  5. deleted
  6. Does that mean they are going to give them their third early so as to avoid the trap? If so how many are actually worthy of the promotion!!!
  7. No these people were entitled to go to board, but due to a retrospective decision they became unentitled over night, despite earning the right to be considered for promotion.

    Needless to say a few legal cases are pending & a few PVRs have been withdrawn.
  8. Surely if they do it for these few they are going to have to do it for all promotion boards otherwise the others are going to dip out those due Staffy WO and so on. Or surely they are being penalised in the same way!!
  9. Good point Pompey, however the new terms aren’t to bad for seniors & will benefit some & those that it doesn’t are to close to their pensions to rock the boat. It does seem lopsided & gives the impression that they are more concerned with retention of the juniors than their seniors, or maybe MCM Div have realised that any threatened legal action would be a no contest & would cost them more in the long run.

    One example I can think of is a colleague of mine, she’s been in 12 years. Earned her promotion to Cpl the old fashioned way i.e. not given it day 1 just for turning up. A few months after getting her ACPL the new entry Cpl's began turning up.

    She was delayed in getting her JMQC due to deployments & a big personal issue, was eligible for promotion but was missed over for some reason, then the new TOS came in making her not eligible for another 2 years. She put her notice in, since then they have made her aware if she withdraws her notice she would have gone forward to this board. But in the intervening time she found a civilian job, which she starts in the New Year as an H grade in charge of her own department. Not bad for a Cpl that it appears wasn’t wanted.

    I think in her case it shows up an error in the way we are promoted. She is one of the highest qualified nurses in my CEG with the experience to match all funded by the DMS & great cost. However junior less experienced & qualified personnel have left her behind in the promotion stakes, for reasons outside her control. I think the last kick in the teeth for her was the last 2 Cpls she trained in my speciality both received their third late last year.

    I personally don’t believe that the hierarchy at my unit are to blame for situations like these, they are the ones receiving the flack & have tried allsorts to resolve it to everyone’s satisfaction. But they can only do so much, as their hands are tied by the TOS as well (SNO if your reading this & I know some from mil admin do, can I do as the recently departed RSM has done & go on a 4 day week in my final 6 months, after all the above is a nice comment.)

    Needless to say she hasn’t withdrawn her notice & I'm nagging her to create a nurse Practitioner/Consultant post for when I come out.
  10. deleted
  11. What about those senior ranks eligable for promotion now then? A mate of my would of been eligable for promotion next year has been told the due to new TOS that has now changed and he has to have the 4 years sub rank rather than 2. If your statement is true once again they are favouring the JR's and not the senior's. MCM div comedy road show is in Blockhouse today, I have some Q's being asked on my behalf and will also get an update on the brief to see how much has changed.
  12. I'm not sure you have clarified things Karabiner. I’m reading directly from the triple fold leaflet sent direct to all nurse, entitled Common Terms of Service for Nurses. I'm unsure what JSP you are referring to or if we are talking about the same CEG.

    It clearly states & I quote

    LNN/Cpl - on success completion of one years post reg experience in the rank of A/LNN, A/CPL with appropriate recommendations. Must have completed single service promotion/advancement courses.

    PO/Sgt - By selection to established vacancies after a minimum of 4 yrs in the rank of LNN/Cpl with appropriate recommendations.

    CPO/SSgt/FS - By selection to established vacancies after a 4 yrs in the rank of PO/Sgt with appropriate recommendations.

    WO2/WO/WO1 - By selection to established vacancies after a 4 yrs in the rank of CPO/FS. Army WO2 will be by selection to established posts after a minimum of 2 yrs in the rank of SSgt & promotion to WO1 will be by selection to established posts after 2 yrs in the rank of WO2.
  13. I have seen the same leaflet pox_Dr not sure wher the other info has come from. Asked our FAO for the DCI they did not know what I was talking about. No change there really.
  14. Have just heard that 20 have selected for promotion to Sergeant.
  15. Good luck to them, hope some are from my unit. Could do with someone ringing the bell in the mess, as Im thirsty.