Is this a Retention deal for you?

Fang_Farrier

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
I had no idea that RADC officers in the '90s were posted by the same person who did Int Corps ORs in 1973. My first three choices on imminent escape from Ashford were Far East. Middle East, Near East. Where was I sent? Barnard Castle. Oh well.

And RAPC

My father spent years asking for sunshine postings, Hong Kong, Cyprus, etc

I was 17 last year in school, about to head off to university so he decided to ask for a UK posting to make it easier.

And that's how he ended up in Hong Kong
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
Yes.

The Royal Signals is not the British Army.

Nobody ever leave the RS as a Pte or Lcpl ? Or did the Corps have a never ending stream of 22 year Ptes and Lcpl's ?

Did the RS not have Manning Control Points - Where people could be hoofed for not achieving certain objectives ?

Perhaps I did not make myself clear. Even the Infantry had a career structure. It went from Pte to WO1 and some even went on to become LE Officers. Not many made the grade to go from Pte to WO 1, some could not make that bracket, some were never in that bracket. Long term sick got managed out the door, and Ptes in the 5 - 8 year bracket new they had reached their limit and left ( hence the retention issue )

To put it simply, not everyone in the British Army gets on the career ladder / structure. They are just not good enough, or don't put the effort in.

I'm fully aware that the RS might operate in a different manner from the Infantry, but both parts go towards making up the British Army.
Note to Portree Kid -

RS ain't R Sigs.

RS = Royal Scots

Auld Yin
Ex RS
 
Technical Corps do not make up the whole of the British Army, another point I made.

Most of the British Army will have a sewn up structure.

That does not mean that every member of the British Army has the drive, determination or capability to utilize that structure.
Why’s that an issue? I don’t see it any different from sidelining someone that doesn’t hit sales targets.
 
Why’s that an issue?

I never said it was an issue.

It was something that you had an issue in comprehending.

You could not / would not see past the R. Sigs and appeared to think that the R. Sigs was homogenous with the entire world of OR's within the British Army.

Sorry to burst your little bubble, but it ain't.
 
I never said it was an issue.

It was something that you had an issue in comprehending.

You could not / would not see past the R. Sigs and appeared to think that the R. Sigs was homogenous with the entire world of OR's within the British Army.

Sorry to burst your little bubble, but it ain't.
Entirely your assumption. My bubble was burst years ago, though after working with pretty much every other capbadge at on time or another, there aren’t really any bubbles anyway after doing what you’ve trained to do. Basically you’ve said nothing.
 
Was it ?
You are either, absolutely clueless or a waffling troll.
You're the one that got the bag on my friend. I was only wondering why @bob231 view that the Services are there to offer a career structure for Officers was a problem. I suppose it's because people in Command positions could are sorting themselves out not there subordinates.
 

bob231

War Hero
You're the one that got the bag on my friend. I was only wondering why @bob231 view that the Services are there to offer a career structure for Officers was a problem. I suppose it's because people in Command positions could are sorting themselves out not there subordinates.
In simplistic terms, as the purpose of the three Services are not to provide gainful employment for the right sort of chap (or chapess). When we keep bouncing off problems based on the short length of officers' postings, the design of the system looks like it may be at fault.

This is perhaps something I've met more in the RN, but there's the logical - if insane - proposition that the "real" RN is that which is ashore in Flotilla, NCHQ, etc... since all seagoing postings are first time jobs for which the incumbents are not fully trained.
 
In simplistic terms, as the purpose of the three Services are not to provide gainful employment for the right sort of chap (or chapess). When we keep bouncing off problems based on the short length of officers' postings, the design of the system looks like it may be at fault.
I've seen quite a few problems with WO1s who are either resettling, focussing on Commission or had the offer of Commission. To be fair, we also get a similar issue with decent WO2s who who bounce up at first look.
 
And RAPC

My father spent years asking for sunshine postings, Hong Kong, Cyprus, etc

I was 17 last year in school, about to head off to university so he decided to ask for a UK posting to make it easier.

And that's how he ended up in Hong Kong
What a surprise :)

Seems the Army hasn't changed that much !!
 
I was only wondering why @bob231 view that the Services are there to offer a career structure for Officers was a problem.

Of course you were wondering. In that little bubble you inhabit, no officer ( of the useless variety ) has ever been posted sideways into one desk job after another until they reach the 16 year ( pension ) point, and then quietly disappear. ( There is certainly scope for civilianising those desk jobs )

Does the same thing happen ( with useless ) OR's ?

If the answer is no. Then @bob231's assertion is absolutely correct. There is a major issue with a career structure that holds onto ( until pensionable ) useless officers.

I've seen quite a few problems with WO1s

we also get a similar issue with decent WO2s

The difference between useless officers and WO1's & WO2's, is that while some are absolute c**k's, very few of them can be regarded as useless, or they would never have reached the rank of WO1 or WO2.

** With the caveat that the R.Sigs might be totally different from the rest of the British Army.
 
I had no idea that RADC officers in the '90s were posted by the same person who did Int Corps ORs in 1973. My first three choices on imminent escape from Ashford were Far East. Middle East, Near East. Where was I sent? Barnard Castle. Oh well.
You should have said 'anywhere but the Far East'.
 
Of course you were wondering. In that little bubble you inhabit, no officer ( of the useless variety ) has ever been posted sideways into one desk job after another until they reach the 16 year ( pension ) point, and then quietly disappear. ( There is certainly scope for civilianising those desk jobs )
Isn't that more related to Majors being essentially unfireable?
 
IS NTT what we used to call PVR or signing off in old money?
Yes, it is and colloquially known as the 'seven [mouse] clicks to freedom'. PVR disappeared in the late 00s when the old Notice and Open Engagements were binned and replaced by the Versatile Engagement (VEng)*. I lost my right to PVR once I transferred to VEng (Full) in 2007. Enacting a NTT gives you a year in which to do your Resettlement, as opposed to the normal two if you complete your full engagement.

*VEng (Short) = 12 yrs
VEng (Full) = 24 yrs
VEng (Long) = 30 yrs

ETA: Notice To Terminate (NTT).

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk
 
Yes, it is and colloquially known as the 'seven [mouse] clicks to freedom'. PVR disappeared in the late 00s when the old Notice and Open Engagements were binned and replaced by the Versatile Engagement (VEng)*. I lost my right to PVR once I transferred to VEng (Full) in 2007. Enacting a NTT gives you a year in which to do your Resettlement, as opposed to the normal two if you complete your full engagement.

*VEng (Short) = 12 yrs
VEng (Full) = 24 yrs
VEng (Long) = 30 yrs

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk
PVR was only a thing on notification engagement wasn't it?

I don't recall it being an option on O Type and I was on that for pretty much my whole career.
 
Yes, it is and colloquially known as the 'seven [mouse] clicks to freedom'. PVR disappeared in the late 00s when the old Notice and Open Engagements were binned and replaced by the Versatile Engagement (VEng)*. I lost my right to PVR once I transferred to VEng (Full) in 2007. Enacting a NTT gives you a year in which to do your Resettlement, as opposed to the normal two if you complete your full engagement.

*VEng (Short) = 12 yrs
VEng (Full) = 24 yrs
VEng (Long) = 30 yrs

ETA: Notice To Terminate (NTT).

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

I think PVR changed in 92 or 93 so technically someone could have been on it until 2014/15.

The change to Veng doesn't seem to have made much of a difference, it was touted as a tool to bin belters at their 12 year point, but manning is so shit that its generally been forgotten about.
 
Last edited:
PVR was only a thing on notification engagement wasn't it?

I don't recall it being an option on O Type and I was on that for pretty much my whole career.
Correct, I was on NOTENG before VEng.

ETA: I quite liked the old REN Leave at my 12 / 15 year points too!!

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk
 
Top