Hammond - New Terms & Conditions to change

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by EScotia, Nov 22, 2012.

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. From the MoD's own web page:

    The Defence Secretary on delivering value for money and innovation in Defence

    A Defence Policy and Business news article

    21 Nov 12

    Defence Secretary Philip Hammond has outlined the vision for delivering value for money and innovation in Defence at the Reform Defence Conference in London.

    Speaking today, Mr Hammond used his speech to talk about how, over the last two-and-a-half years, the Department has set about reforming the way Defence is managed in order to deliver improved efficiency.
    He began by recapping the scale of the reform challenge faced by Defence:

    "The overheated equipment programme this government inherited was a symptom of a much deeper malaise that was fundamentally about the way in which the Department operated," Mr Hammond said.

    "Without fundamental reform in the way the budget is managed, the way decisions are taken, and how Defence is run, the same problems will rematerialise."

    After two-and-a-half years of the transformation project, the Defence Secretary said we have started to see the benefits of change:

    "But if we want them to be sustained, we need to ensure that the changes we are making in how Defence is managed become engrained in its culture," he said. "So that budgetary discipline becomes the supporting foundation of everything we do."

    Mr Hammond said that while Defence needed a solid financial foundation, it was the people that really mattered and made the difference, and therefore an attractive employment package to attract and keep the best was needed:

    "We have to ensure that we can compete to attract them," he said.

    "And it has been 40 years since the current package of terms and conditions was last fully updated. In the meantime it has been adapted and modified on an ad-hoc basis. So that now, it is costly, complex, impenetrable and inflexible.

    "In many ways, it fails to meet the requirements of today's Service personnel, or to reflect the needs of modern family life. So we need to modernise the offer we make to our people."

    "It has been 40 years since the current package of terms and conditions was last fully updated."Philip Hammond

    He said that a new employment model was needed and this would need to be flexible to meet the varying and individual needs of Service personnel:

    "There is no identikit soldier, sailor or airman. Each one is an individual, with different needs at different points in their careers," Mr Hammond said.

    He added that the package needs to be affordable and sustainable in the long-term and attractive to Service personnel and fair to the taxpayer:

    "When we look at the structure of pay and allowances it will be to make it more flexible and more responsive to individual needs as well as to better reflect the priorities of the Service.
    "But, within an envelope that is broadly cost-neutral overall, designed to deliver better value to the individual at the same broad cost to the taxpayer."

    He stressed that this 'New Employment Model', or NEM, isn't a single project at all but a number of distinct workstrands addressing different challenges, and it is not about overnight transformation but will be a process out to 2020 and beyond:

    "At the heart of the NEM will be a measured shift in the nature of the offer: towards a greater emphasis on individual value, personal choice and responsibility.

    "Ensuring greater value to the individual through more flexible tailoring of the complex package that makes up Armed Forces remuneration.

    "And more stability to Service families through fewer moves, more opportunities for employment of the partners, and greater opportunities for home ownership."

    "There is no identikit soldier, sailor or airman. Each one is an individual, with different needs at different points in their careers."Philip Hammond

    On housing, Mr Hammond said that, in a 22-year career, as currently structured, a typical Service person could expect to be asked to move 10 or more times:

    "We want this to change," he said. "As we bring the British Army back from Germany we want to offer more stability and in doing so make it possible for families to set down roots as civilian families do. Greatly reducing the need for family moves."

    Concluding, the Defence Secretary said we should not underestimate the scale of what is still to be done:

    "The real, long-term challenge is to change behaviours, align incentives and shift the culture.
    "So that the resource discipline that we have imposed feeds through into sustainable, bottom-up efficiency gain, not reduction in output.

    "In other words, the challenge is now to improve the productivity of every part of the Defence organisation. Rejecting the notion that a given percentage cut in the Defence Budget must inevitably mean a similar percentage cut in our military capability. That is the key task for 2013 for the leadership of Defence.

    "None of us is in any doubt about the scale of that task, but neither do we doubt its centrality to everything we are doing."
  2. You don't need to be a genius to read between the lines here.

    "No identikit soldier" = no certain career

    "Each one is an individual" = we will pick and chose who we want

    "So that budgetary discipline becomes the supporting foundation of everything we do." = money dictates policy

    "broadly cost-neutral overall," = over time we pay less in real terms

    "make it possible for families to set down roots" = no more quarters

    "That is the key task for 2013 for the leadership of Defence." = the Generals will do as we tell them

    'imposed feeds through into sustainable, bottom-up efficiency gain, not reduction in output." = errr! anybody's ****ing guess
    • Like Like x 3
  3. So, really short version....

    We're changing things. List of cuts to follow.
  4. This is the same hood who saw the speed of response to the Olympic security cock up and acknowledged that the layering structure of the forces gave resilience and flexibility, unlike the lean structures he had experience of and was predicated to shape the Forces. now, only s few short months on, he has reverted to the business school, economic gobbledegook that characterised his first few months in post. I actually agree that the support package to personnel is complex, convoluted an would make an Ottoman official smile with delight, but to come out with a statement that,as other posters have noted, is designed to save money rather than to provide the support that military personnel need, is a reversion to that which made Hammond so objectionable on his appointment.
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Do more with less?
  6. Needs of the service must come first?

    What he says is great in theory (like everything that comes from Main Building) but it'll not survive contact with reality. If, like he alludes to, he wants to encourage soldiers and their families to 'put down roots' then they'll want to be posted to somewhere where they want to buy. Being a geordie, I'm buying a house in Newcastle, because thats where I want to live, I don't want to settle where I'm currently posted (although I would've in Germany). Many people join the Army to get away from home and see a bit more of the world, the appeal is lost if you're posted 3 miles down the road from your mum's house!
    • Like Like x 1
  7. So it won't happen because it's not what squaddies want?

    Right, stop worrying about it everyone.
  8. in_the_cheapseats

    in_the_cheapseats LE Moderator

    I rather hope than Minister from MoD was listening to Comd 12 Bde at the RMAS back brief a couple of weeks ago. His phrase:

    "less is less"

    appears equally applicable here too.
    • Like Like x 4
  9. CanteenCowboy

    CanteenCowboy LE Book Reviewer

    Less is indeed less:

    Less soldiers, sailors and airmen.

    Less equipment for above.

    Less overseas deployments (Inshallah!).

    Less costly UOR's.

    Less money needed for budget.
  10. 19 ships doing the job of 24, ships are falling to pieces. Refits are every 6 years where you do a 6-8 month deployment and then it will be a year till you next deploy, but inbetween that you can do FRUKUS, SMCC, Joint Warrior, OP Grampus, (and if you're on a T23 with 2087 you can be dicked for Duty TAPS) all in the mean while with a week here or there for maintainence and then Flag Officer Sea Training wonders why both Men and ships look haggard before pre-deployment training has even started! When I get back to the uk I will have 19 days leave to take on-top of Xmas and easter before I go on draft in April: "Plenty of time" I hear you say? Erm well actually the week after xmas we're back at sea for 3 month so nope.
    • Like Like x 1
  11. If there is no identikit soldier perhaps there is no fixed pay scale in respect of rank, trade and experience. Maybe they will want all soldiers be paid a basic and then extras added on as an earned performance bonus.

    If you don't meet your performance target you only get your meagre basic.