MATTS Levels

#1
Ok so who decides what MATTS level we train at? Is it the CO? Is it a JSP? Is it TA Regs?

Totally hyperthetical senario:
Not warned off for ops, CO says everyone must achive MATTS level 1. Is this legal?

Who to speak to if its not?

Cheers
 
#2
IMOO it's the COs trainset, if he wants you to level 1 then level 1 you must achieve......we do as we're told to it's an army thing.
 
#3
He'll be bloody lucky. The gap between MATT 2 and 1 is pretty big. I'd love to know where he intends to find the additional MTDs and range time to bring people up to scratch..
Expect to be in doing a lot of unpaid training!
 
#4
That's his headache though if he wants to achieve level 1...he'll soon realise why there are 3 levels and that generally we are on level 3, Outlaw is he new in post?
 
#5
No he's not new in post.
His training directive states he wants ALL pers trained to MATT Level 1. To be fair most have achived this. Im more interested in the legal side. For instance if Soldier X has passed LF3 (MATT1) all that is required for level 2 but fails to get bounty as not passed ACMT (required for Level 1). Has he a case against the CO?
 
#6
It is the CO's decision. TA Regulations para 2.058a.

In your example above soldier X would have no legal recourse against the CO or vicariously against the MOD.
 
#7
I say fair play to your CO, hes making you work hard for your bounty.
Are you upset because you have to do a couple of boring MATTS lectures and an 8 miles CFT. Or is it the fact you can't pass 2 pft's.

If you want that good old tax free sum then im sure you will go out of your way to take training as C1.
 
#9
I say fair play to your CO, hes making you work hard for your bounty.
Are you upset because you have to do a couple of boring MATTS lectures and an 8 miles CFT. Or is it the fact you can't pass 2 pft's.

If you want that good old tax free sum then im sure you will go out of your way to take training as C1.
Not at all. I have no problem in principle doing MATT level 1. To be honest most people who have been in even a short lenght of time should be able to achive level 1, after all the difference betweeen level 1 and 2 isnt much. As I said before I am more interested in the legal side. Soldier X who is 50+ and excused CFT due to age wont get bounty. Even though soldier X is only required to pass CFT when mobilising for ops. What is the point of stating the level of MATTS and the criteria if they can be ignored by the headshead. I can see a lot of 'enablers' voting with thier feet and I dont blame them. Not that I advocate paper passed just sticking to whats put onto paper and displayed around the TAC.
 
#11
It is the CO's decision. TA Regulations para 2.058a.

In your example above soldier X would have no legal recourse against the CO or vicariously against the MOD.

Then said CO can expect a smaller battalion as the number of people who can turn up for free shrinks. Also said CO can expect some hard questions on why his unit is spending so much time and MONEY on training that it's not manadated or budgeted to do.

Love it or loathe it GCM kinda puts a cap on a CO's freedom to do what he feels like.
 
#12
Not at all. I have no problem in principle doing MATT level 1. To be honest most people who have been in even a short lenght of time should be able to achive level 1, after all the difference betweeen level 1 and 2 isnt much. As I said before I am more interested in the legal side. Soldier X who is 50+ and excused CFT due to age wont get bounty. Even though soldier X is only required to pass CFT when mobilising for ops. What is the point of stating the level of MATTS and the criteria if they can be ignored by the headshead. I can see a lot of 'enablers' voting with thier feet and I dont blame them. Not that I advocate paper passed just sticking to whats put onto paper and displayed around the TAC.
I understand where your coming from but what use is a 50+ year old to the army if he can't pass MATT level 1.
I find most of what the old fellas do is drive the vehicles around on weekends or in the stores folding blankets.
some people just need a little hint when to hang the boots up.

Those enablers you speak off I find out of touch with the rest of the blokes when on weekend exercise not training recruits. Most of those enablers failed the 8 mile cft that my battalion done 2 weeks ago, within the first 3 miles.
Looking on the MATT sheet list they are the first ones to have all ticks in boxes aswell. Its like they paper pass themselves.
How are they aloud to train recruits
 
#13
I understand where your coming from but what use is a 50+ year old to the army if he can't pass MATT level 1.
I find most of what the old fellas do is drive the vehicles around on weekends or in the stores folding blankets.
some people just need a little hint when to hang the boots up.

Those enablers you speak off I find out of touch with the rest of the blokes when on weekend exercise not training recruits. Most of those enablers failed the 8 mile cft that my battalion done 2 weeks ago, within the first 3 miles.
Looking on the MATT sheet list they are the first ones to have all ticks in boxes aswell. Its like they paper pass themselves.
How are they aloud to train recruits
If they're the only bodies available to train recruits then their unit needs to have a good hard look in the mirror...;-)

As to the value of enablers......

Not so long again you could spend all weekend awake tabbing up and down Mount Catterick and then drive the 4 tonner home at Sunday on a Mars bar and a ropey sandwich. Then the rules of civi street started creeping in. Drivers started having to drop out of any training that took place over Saturday night to get 8 hours rest, the drivers hours during the week had to be factored in to make sure people who drove for a living didn't get fucked about.

We're now in the position that we end up needing people who can drive to hang on a bit longer so that the unit can get out of the front gates in a oner.
 
#14
I understand where your coming from but what use is a 50+ year old to the army if he can't pass MATT level 1.
I find most of what the old fellas do is drive the vehicles around on weekends or in the stores folding blankets.
some people just need a little hint when to hang the boots up.

Those enablers you speak off I find out of touch with the rest of the blokes when on weekend exercise not training recruits. Most of those enablers failed the 8 mile cft that my battalion done 2 weeks ago, within the first 3 miles.
Looking on the MATT sheet list they are the first ones to have all ticks in boxes aswell. Its like they paper pass themselves.
How are they aloud to train recruits
They certainly shouldn'd be training recruits and in my bn they wouldnt be. The enablers Im on about are the clerks and storemen who without which the bn wouldnt run. Case in point, our bn sacked a bloke because he was 'to old' actully it was face fit thing but he wasnt the only one to go. The next weekend suddenly the bn cant move because all the minibus drivers have been sacked. The MATT level thing is designed to take into account these requirements. MATT Level 1= fighting fit bayonett who is going to deploy or is able to deploy. MATT level 2= Recovered from ops/not going on ops any time soon MATT level 3= fat knacker in stores/office never going on ops but unit wont work without (or will work but its a lot harder). This is a very simplistic view but what the mATT level thing was disigned for IMO.
 
#15
Is this the same sketch with the current trend of "Key Weekends" that seems to be developing in the TA? CO's decision?

Basically with-holding bounty for not attending certain weekends, which rather than being used to boost training weekends are generally used to boost numbers on the shit weekends that nobody goes to?
 
#16
Is this the same sketch with the current trend of "Key Weekends" that seems to be developing in the TA? CO's decision?

Basically with-holding bounty for not attending certain weekends, which rather than being used to boost training weekends are generally used to boost numbers on the shit weekends that nobody goes to?
I know that the Bde Comd where I am specified this, so Brig wants, Brig gets! Your CO may be using them in this manner to up the critical mass for those weekends you specified. I am also labouring along with this but thankfully have missed them all, I still get the ticks however as I was training outside the unit or on courses. Key weekends was 'training on them' not physically having to be there. Sweet.
 
#17
Then said CO can expect a smaller battalion as the number of people who can turn up for free shrinks. Also said CO can expect some hard questions on why his unit is spending so much time and MONEY on training that it's not manadated or budgeted to do.

Love it or loathe it GCM kinda puts a cap on a CO's freedom to do what he feels like.
I'm sure it could be argued that the money saved by the CO funding bounties for soldiers who can only just pass at Level 2 would offset the cost of training those who require only build-up training to achieve Level 1.
 
#18
Not at all. I have no problem in principle doing MATT level 1. To be honest most people who have been in even a short lenght of time should be able to achive level 1, after all the difference betweeen level 1 and 2 isnt much. As I said before I am more interested in the legal side. Soldier X who is 50+ and excused CFT due to age wont get bounty. Even though soldier X is only required to pass CFT when mobilising for ops. What is the point of stating the level of MATTS and the criteria if they can be ignored by the headshead. I can see a lot of 'enablers' voting with thier feet and I dont blame them. Not that I advocate paper passed just sticking to whats put onto paper and displayed around the TAC.
Yes he would, provided he can pass the other MATTs at Level 1. If he exempted he is exempted therefore there is no requirement for him to pass, contrast this with someone who is not exempted but is unable to achieve the Level 1 standard.
 
#19
If they're the only bodies available to train recruits then their unit needs to have a good hard look in the mirror...;-)

As to the value of enablers......

Not so long again you could spend all weekend awake tabbing up and down Mount Catterick and then drive the 4 tonner home at Sunday on a Mars bar and a ropey sandwich. Then the rules of civi street started creeping in. Drivers started having to drop out of any training that took place over Saturday night to get 8 hours rest, the drivers hours during the week had to be factored in to make sure people who drove for a living didn't get fucked about.

We're now in the position that we end up needing people who can drive to hang on a bit longer so that the unit can get out of the front gates in a oner.
Or rather than using a 50+ SNCO who can't pass his MATTs to drive the lads to and from the weekend, you could use Pte Bloggs in the same role and ensure when the next MATTs weekend rolls around ensure it is Pte Jones doing the driving so Pte Bloggs can get his MATTs done. Having said that the driving hours regs are a pain in the arse...
 
#20
They certainly shouldn'd be training recruits and in my bn they wouldnt be. The enablers Im on about are the clerks and storemen who without which the bn wouldnt run. Case in point, our bn sacked a bloke because he was 'to old' actully it was face fit thing but he wasnt the only one to go. The next weekend suddenly the bn cant move because all the minibus drivers have been sacked. The MATT level thing is designed to take into account these requirements. MATT Level 1= fighting fit bayonett who is going to deploy or is able to deploy. MATT level 2= Recovered from ops/not going on ops any time soon MATT level 3= fat knacker in stores/office never going on ops but unit wont work without (or will work but its a lot harder). This is a very simplistic view but what the mATT level thing was disigned for IMO.
A bit of a sweeping generalisation that all clerks and storeman are fat knackers; I'd argue actually it is poor man management that results in units being in this situation as most COs would rather post someone to the stores than go through the admin nightmare of refusing his re-engagement when the time rolls around. There's no reason that those working in the stores and in the admin office can't achieve the same fitness levels as everyone else (certainly at our place the AGC bods give everyone else a run for their money...they're the ex-airborne ones however).

It is within the COs remit however to mandate that those who have just returned from ops (say in the last training year) train to level 2/3 whereas everyone else trains to level 1, it remains his call though.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
msr Army Reserve 10
SWEATY_MONG Army Reserve 20
W The Training Wing 30

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top