Rubbish. The main argument is about the additional training which would be necessary unless people were streamed, and if they were streamed then it wouldn't be a merger.All this thread has showed me is that a merger will never happen, as it’s compiled of people arguing over the past. Instead of looking to the future. Much like Darth Carter with his Mafia.
A long time ago now (2004-6) but I recall unpleasant working allowance was increased as were many others whilst some dropped to the lowest between three Services. I'd have to go back and see if I still have notes. LSSA and LSSB, became LSA, and you can get higher amounts. Interestingly LSAP was to be vastly increased but Army blocked it.What were the gains?
Im sure UWA was for the few.A long time ago now (2004-6) but I recall unpleasant working allowance was increased as were many others whilst some dropped to the lowest between three Services. I'd have to go back and see if I still have notes. LSSA and LSSB, became LSA, and you can get higher amounts. Interestingly LSAP was to be vastly increased but Army blocked it.
MoD Efficiency Programme was running at the time, it saw JPA as a means to be more effective and create lower running costs for delivering military HR, but the allowances themselves were not a vehicle to create the savings. The deal was very much harmonise and drive out stupid inequalities, remove idiotic allowances (tights allowance) and re-invest where it was possible.
He went on mine a long time ago. Spouts a non stop stream of effluence.My last response to you
Does that cost include the dead weight of the civvie in uniform being paid twice as much to count it as an actual civvie?
Just asking for a friend. And congratulations. In a dozen years on here you are the first to go on my ignore list
And to every one else I apologise once again for allowing this little spat to continue a moment longer than it should have.
If you go back to my first post on this thread, which entered the @Truxx / @stacker1 debate about shoes and cam cream, I agreed with Truxx’s view that the big stuff that saves big money has already been done. I also agreed with Stacker’s point that there is no doubt a lot of low level waste. My point was that driving out waste top down never works; organisations that drive out low level waste do so by engaging and incentivising people to cut out waste at every level.I said if you were OF4/5 you'd be exposed all the time, didn't say they were the only people and if you go into DE&S a lot of the commodity managers are SR and CS. NMS created waves of people who have to be interested in the figures. There are plenty of Army SNCOs in DE&S and LAND HQ, I bump into them all the time on my travels.
At unit level, say a T23, or an Inf Bn, they should be less interested in costs and more interested in effectiveness as neither CO has the delegations nor commercial levers to make a significant difference against a cost base. I'd hope they were more interested in effectiveness and efficiency in how they achieve their tasking.
Examples like that make me very angry. That was a shit reply (the RMP, not yours in this thread!) and speaking as an ex-RMP, embarrassing. No RMP is ever taught that, and if the person concerned had been in my section they'd have got the good news.We had RMP on the Galahad on the way to a UN tour. They were as ******* incompetent at sea as they were on land.
The response to a theft being reported was "we'll never catch whoever it was"
No - it's the trade between an efficient system (which functions to a designed output very well) and a system with sufficient redundancy/flex to expand and adapt to a different desired output.Non sequiturs are GO
Not just that but often what looks like waste, or inefficiency from one perspective is less so from another.Waste, or flexibility and resilience?
We tried to buy some laptops last year, but couldn’t find a company that could install an OS that outdated. Gen.Yup - at one point we were seriously considering sending people to Chandlers across the south coast to buy binos in the last two weeks of the financial year.
This bit about IT in the MoD world utterly baffled me. It made no sense to keep buying Mircosoft when the hardware MoD buys is retained in use about 10 times the normal length of use in the private sector. MoD screwed itself when it would have made far more sense to just pick a Linux package and write software that it required for itself. No need to pay Microsoft repeatedly to keep supporting software that Microsoft have dumped. No need to end up trying to bodge software to run on hardware that it's only just capable of.We tried to buy some laptops last year, but couldn’t find a company that could install an OS that outdated. Gen.
See my previous about anuality. Much easier to procure a complete (if outdated and inefficient) service than to own it yourself. Even better if you procure it via a lease arrangement.I'd go one further and suggest that it probably would make more long-term financial sense to employ some competent and thoroughly vetted coders to maintain the MOD's own slightly bespoke OS!
I think @Truxx has answered that one and he’s right. Across government there is huge waste arising from managing finances to comply with Treasury rules. There’s also huge waste arising from the basic doctrine of cost lying where they fall. In other words, dump costs on those who can accept them.Waste, or flexibility and resilience?