Infantry Officer Redundancies

#1
Anyone else think this is not being managed too well?

The Infantry intends to sack 140 officers next June. These will be from years of birth 1960 to 1974 (why does the Army still work on years of birth, when all new contracts are based on length of service?). However, 1970 - 74 is heavily over strength, so this will be where the axe falls heaviest. Conveniently, this is also the area that offers the best financial saving (under the rules, a 1970 major made redundant will get approximately £110,000 lump sum and an immediate pension of around £10,000 per year. A 1974 major will receive a lump sum of approximately £35,000.)

At the same time, officers on short service commissions in 1970 - 74 are being told they will not be extended (so will leave in the next few years) and those on Intermediate Regular Commissions are being told they will not be converted (so will also leave).

On top of all that, Officers in the brackets are being encouraged to look at alternative employment just in case. I wonder how many will look and suddenly realise that life outside the Army is not so bad and will leave with their pensions regardless of redundancy?

The Infantry produces many of the best officers in the Army, head and shoulders above the corps, yet they are facing the biggest chop. Less capable officers will remain and fill important jobs.

So, in outline:

Who was responsible for allowing officer manning to get in such a mess? (some years are 30% over manned!).

Would it not be more sensible to look at officer manning as a whole, not just Infantry?

Is this not just a badly managed knee jerk reaction in a similar vein to Options for Change - cuts from which the Army never recovered?

Just to really cheer me up, the whole thing shifts to soldiers next year - I perish to think how many we will lose then!
 
#2
Yorkie said:
The Infantry produces many of the best officers in the Army, head and shoulders above the corps, yet they are facing the biggest chop. Less capable officers will remain and fill important jobs.
You are absolutely right - the Infantry does produce the best officers in the army - I speak as one of them!!!

In the same way as they come out tops whilst 'a wearing o'the green', the same can be said when they join 2 UK Civ Div. Again I speak as one who has made the transition.

Do not fear the unknown - there are alot of us out here and, by and large we tend to help each other if we can (unless of course you happen to be Green Slime or something similarly unpalatable). It's amazing who you come across in the real world and where. The saying 'there's a soldier under every stone' is one I heard a few years ago. It's true.

I'm not a freemason, but I imagine that the bond 'we' have is similar to their set up, without having to roll up a trouser leg and cut about in a natty little apron, and is a good introduction. If one doesn't know the chap in question, then you're bound to know someone in common so you can do a quick credentials check. Where two of us meet, it usually involves an ale or twain and much lamp swinging hilarity.

Beat the rush - jump before you are pushed and good luck!!
 
#3
Speaking as one who is for the cull myself (Reg C Inf Offr) I have had the logic explained to me and sort of understand and agree with it.

The bottom line is the Inf is reducing in size by 4 Bns and therefore needs less Officers. We punch above our weight on E2 postings and this will help I believe.

As mentioned SSCs and IRCs can be allowed to run out with quotas being reduced but you can't get rid of a Reg C without making him or her reduntant (unless they are a complete mong :( ). We end up 120 Reg Cs over our allowance and need to get rid somehow, a very healthy redundancy package seems the best plan to me.

From what I am led to believe it will all be properly managed with the ability to contest the decision if you feel hard done by...
 

chimera

LE
Moderator
#4
Yorkie said:
The Infantry produces many of the best officers in the Army, head and shoulders above the corps, yet they are facing the biggest chop. Less capable officers will remain and fill important jobs.
Might I disagree? The infantry produces officers that are good at being in the infantry, with some doing well at E2. Considering how many of you there are this is not surprising. E2 posts are filled by competition, so if you are not getting them now, you wont be getting any more. On that basis what would you propose to do with all of these spare infantry officers? While you may look down your noses at those of us who have to serve in combat support (CinC LAND a Gunner, last GOC 1 Div now DCJO Ops a Sapper, GOC UKSCG a Sapper, GOC Th Tps RLC etc etc), I am afraid we are unlikely to want you as you don't have the skills we need for that age range.

Rant over
 
#5
Yorkie said:
...a 1970 major made redundant will get approximately £110,000 lump sum and an immediate pension of around £10,000 per year. A 1974 major will receive a lump sum of approximately £35,000.)

At the same time, officers on short service commissions in 1970 - 74 are being told they will not be extended (so will leave in the next few years) and those on Intermediate Regular Commissions are being told they will not be converted (so will also leave).
Same thing happened in 1992. Only then the victims were year of birth 1964-69. Prior to 91 any SSC officer who was worth his salt could convert to RegC after a year or so in the Bn, and join the 30% or so of his peers who had been RegC from Day 1 (generally at the whim of the Regimental Secretary of the day).

With the need to slim down the infantry officer pool a cheaply as possible all that ended overnight and a lot of very capable SSC officers, who reasonably expected to be able to convert to a full career in the army were unable to stay in the army. Of course being SSC they got sweet FA by way of redundancy. Not that most wanted redundancy, they simply wanted to have the opportunity to do the job they were good at.

There were no redundancies for Reg C officers in the YOB 1964 and younger range. Funny that...

Be in no doubt - if the MoD can shaft you in order to save a few bob then they will.
 
#6
exXIX said:
Yorkie said:
.
Not that most wanted redundancy, they simply wanted to have the opportunity to do the job they were good at.
Now they can go out and get another job they can be good at. Burser or somesuch. Soldiers are being slung out on their ear with far less consideration
 
#7
chimera said:
Yorkie said:
The Infantry produces many of the best officers in the Army, head and shoulders above the corps, yet they are facing the biggest chop. Less capable officers will remain and fill important jobs.
Might I disagree? The infantry produces officers that are good at being in the infantry, with some doing well at E2. Considering how many of you there are this is not surprising. E2 posts are filled by competition, so if you are not getting them now, you wont be getting any more. On that basis what would you propose to do with all of these spare infantry officers? While you may look down your noses at those of us who have to serve in combat support (CinC LAND a Gunner, last GOC 1 Div now DCJO Ops a Sapper, GOC UKSCG a Sapper, GOC Th Tps RLC etc etc), I am afraid we are unlikely to want you as you don't have the skills we need for that age range.

Rant over
I'm glad this is a rant and not an attempt at coherent argument.

The infantry provide more E2 officers than their size would dictate and this is purely because they tend to be the more capable officer and therefore tend to succed when these jobs are boarded.

There may be examples of non combat arms Generals (UKSCG, Th Tps etc.) but when you look at commanders of Armd / Mech / Air Asslt Bdes and GOCs 1 and 3 Div they are almost always Inf or RAC. C in C Land is shortly to be an infanteer and when was the last non Inf CGS let alome Army CDS???
 

chimera

LE
Moderator
#8
Big_Al said:
The infantry provide more E2 officers than their size would dictate and this is purely because they tend to be the more capable officer
Big Al, your arrogance is astounding.

"more capable" - more capable of what?

SO3 or SO3 G3 Ops in a combined arms formation? Maybe; but then that is unsurprising because it is your core business.

SO1 in Central Staff Plans or Prog? mmm - starting to get a bit shaky now because those depend on original thought not schematic reasoning.

AD level in Def Pol, J5, or COS of a Division? Why aren't those always filled by the wunderkinder from the infantry?

Hang around the Army for a little while longer my friend (unless redundancy gets you first), and find out what the rest of us actually do for a living before you classify everyone that doesn't fix bayonets as complete f*ckwits.
 
#11
You are being disingenuous. I am not by any stretch of the imagination implying that the sun shines out of every Inf Officer's arrse but that, at SO2 and SO3 level in particular, the inf gets proportionally more E2 posts than it's size would dictate. There has to be a reason for this and I am stating a point of view.

I am not enough of a red arrse to think that combat arms officers are more capable at all things, particularly when you look at other career fields when, as you rightly state, the playing field is levelled.

I may not have been around this Army as long as some but I have been around long enough to have a fair idea of what most of it does....

I really do not want this to descend into an inf / non inf pissing contest and I apologise if I came across as arrogant. I have a view and am simply after a bit of lively debate.
 

chimera

LE
Moderator
#12
Inf/non-inf debates do tend to get a bit pointless. But take my point. About 6 months ago you had a similar exchange with a contributor that said that the Guards were better than Line Inf - except that time the boot was on the other foot.

Oh - and since you are an adjutant I am sure you will be able to tell us who the last non combat arm 5* officer was!!
 
#13
Prior to 1991 typically REME transferred 20 to 25 Late Entry SSC to Reg C late entry per year. When the redundancies were anounced that dropped to 2 per year and those not selected wasted out after five years with no redundancy payments, just normal pension rights. A cheap way to get rid of Officers.
 
#14
chimera said:
Oh - and since you are an adjutant I am sure you will be able to tell us who the last non combat arm 5* officer was!!
Absolutely no idea and as an adjutant am clearly far too busy to find out....! :D

Not quite sure how this got dragged off thread and into an inf debate in the first place.

I fully understand and appreciate the reaosns why PBI is bearing the brunt of the redundancies. It was briefed to me that the fact that we tend to get more E2 posts was actually lessening the blow (only 120 redundancies... :( ) to us.
 
#15
That's a shame I was starting to enjoy the inf v's non-inf banter! Big Al you can not be surprised that this got dragged of thread with your initial comments!!! Once you have done a few SO3/SO2 jobs you may be in a better position to comment on inf capabilities. In my experience you have to ignore the capbadge and take each staff officer as he/she comes.
 
#18
Fine. Just to keep you happy:

Ok, I may have been in the Army for 4 1/2 mins but as an Infantry officer I clearly know more than most non inf SO1s. I am fcuking great at everything I do and only an act of god will stop me being CGS in due course!

Happy? :D :D :D
 
#20
OldRedCap said:
exXIX said:
Yorkie said:
.
Not that most wanted redundancy, they simply wanted to have the opportunity to do the job they were good at.
Now they can go out and get another job they can be good at. Burser or somesuch. Soldiers are being slung out on their ear with far less consideration
Maybe, but not much call for 150x 27 year old bursars. But this thread is about infantry officer redundancy and the debate was about the MoDs poor handling of it viz the changing of goalposts at zero notice.

If you want to start a thread about the poor treatment of infantry soldiers then have at it.
 

Latest Threads

Top