Discharge error

Discussion in 'Army Pay, Claims & JPA' started by reebrov, Feb 17, 2004.

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. I received a letter from my RAO today telling me i am due to be discharged from the Army in April and that someone should complete a testimonial for me.

    Funny thing is......I haven't signed off, don't intend to, and have 10 yrs left till my 22!!

    Are they trying to tell me something?

    Anybody else had a similar experience :?: ?
  2. I had a mate in a mate in a "similar" situation. He had signed off, and a month later, while on an extended tour down the Falklands, decided to withdraw his termination. His OC agreed it, and as far as he was concerned, everything was honkey dory. When he eventually got back to the Unit, he was called into the RAO who apologised that he hadnt been called back from tour earlier, but he was due to be on termination leave in a few weeks, and would he mind clearing and de-kiting.

    Errors do happen mate, so best get yourself in the RAO's intray!!! Either that or you have pi&&ed a clerk off, and they have signed you off on your behalf 8O
  3. Soldier_Why

    Soldier_Why LE Moderator

    Get to your docs supervisor ASP and ascertain what type of engagement you are on.

    I had a similar circumstance in one of my previous units when I, as the docs supervisor, received discharge notification for one of the LCpls in the unit. When I called him in to book his de-kit and such he looked stunned and told me that he hadn't given notice to terminate.

    On investigation it transpired that he was a 'late entry' soldier (over 25 at enlistment I think) and that he was actually on a 9 year 'S' type engagement that was due to run out in the very, very near future.

    Cue much panicking from said soldier, who was married with 3 kids and hadn't even considered what he was going to do on discharge.

    Bottom line was that I managed to get his 'S' type extended for another 3 years and a huge sigh of relief from aforementioned LCpl.

    As I have said, find out what engagement you are on and don't assume that just because you haven't signed off doesn't mean you ain't going!!!

    P.S. I do hope it is just a fcuk up, please let us know how it goes.
  4. since you indicate that you have completed 12 yrs service, it is possible that you are being reviewed at a MCP. however you should have been given 12 months notice. if you are being shafted this way, read QR's 9.413f and g. if you have not been given 12 months notice kick up a stink as it is mandatory that you get 12 months notice, and get back to me if necessary by message for further advice. :(
  5. Manning Control has not been used for well over 2 years now only 3 in 02, and has been further suspended for ut to 18 months.........well that's what HOON and his monkey spankers said:roll: .
    However go here for further advice and don't sign any paperwork until you know all the facts.

  6. told you :wink:

    The Army's manning position
    YOUR report, Army to shed 900 troops to save cash (January 26), gave a seriously misleading impression of the Army's manning position and the control measures currently being introduced. It is true that we are taking steps to control Regular Army strength so that numbers remain within the planned and funded levels for this financial year. But the background lies in the success we have had in recent years with various measures aimed at improving recruitment and retention. As a result, in-year targets have been exceeded, so measures are being taken to control whole Army strength.
    One of these measures, on which instructions have recently been relayed to commanding officers, concerns Army personnel who have already given notice to terminate their service before September 30, 2004. The instructions give commanding officers the discretion to permit earlier departure of such personnel, where this is acceptable to both the individ-ual and the unit.
    It is not the case that "individuals regarded as surplus to requirements" more generally are being identified by commanding officers, merely that those who have already expressed an intention to depart may be permitted to leave within the normal 12-month notice period. This is a significantly different proposition, so your article may have seriously misled Army personnel in Scotland.
    Other completely erroneous assertions include reference to a recruitment freeze and the suggestion that either Manpower Control Points procedures, or current manning control measures, are being implemented to save money on Army pensions.
    There has not been, nor is there any intention of imposing, a recruitment freeze in the Army. What we have done, because Regular Army strength has been increasing faster than we had planned, is restrict the numbers of new entrants to full-time reserve service posts. Your article alleges that this has resulted in 72 commanding officers submitting written complaints, which is also untrue. In the normal course of business we receive a significant number of letters of representation, on behalf of individuals or appointments – and these are considered individually on their merits – but the Directorate of Manning has received no specific complaints from commanding officers.
    Manpower Control Points procedures, enshrined in Queen's Regulations, are only ever used for sensible management reasons, and not to avoid pension commitments. In fact they have not been used since 2002.
    Adam Ingram, MP, minister of state for the Armed Forces, Ministry of Defence, Whitehall, London.