PAAB and the sorry state of our Corps

Discussion in 'REME' started by catchyerselfon, Jul 19, 2005.

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. So the first PAABers on end of Class 1 get a two year learning period before they can start their course right. They started doing them April 04 so even the best have to wait 'til 06 before loading.
    My question is this, have the Corps painted themselves into a corner? Have we enough good grade folk passing old skool PAABs? Is this not the best time to go Tiffy as an non Class 1 PAABer?
    Looking at the last ASCLB results there were definately some mince Cat B candidates ones that failed exams on class 1 so didnt get Pot Art Trade passes for sure but are being allowed thru for 'bums on seats' reasons perhaps? Do they not need Pot Art Trade now the way Maths has been let go if you could pass the basic numeracy phase of Class 1?
    What a crock of sh1t, plenty of better tradesmen before them were brown lettered etc when we weren't so short.
    If any of you on a course/ASCLB results know you slipped thru, be a man and add to this forum too. I have my eye on a few names on the ASCLB that shouldn't be there!
    I leave it up to you ARRSErs to discuss, they are your future leaders after all.
  2. How I understand it,
    you dont have to be fully qualified to be loaded, you must however be FQ before starting the course.

  3. i think that the 'retro loading' of non-class one 'paabers' is soon to end(septemberish) although i cant confirm this.
  4. Here what your sayin Catchyerselfon, but from what position do you come from in making your assumptions of the fair folk who managed to get on the list, and who were able to make what you infer to be a lower grade? Is your question really about...

    "have the Corps painted themselves into a corner? Have we enough good grade folk passing old skool PAABs? Is this not the best time to go Tiffy as an non Class 1 PAABer?"

    ...or is it really a whinge on behalf of all those that failed ten years ago who might possibly have had a chance under the new system?

    When you get on the bus you should want to be the driver, not just a passenger along for the ride.
  5. All applicants deserve a fair crack at the whip surely
  6. I have a niggling feeling that the new E4 system (as it is referred to else where) has the potential to completely undermine the artificer system, as we know it.


  7. JB68
  8. Thanks for the input Change-Trades, an apt pen name! Did you change to go Tiffy?
    I have served under/alongside brown lettered folk and have been on two PAABs myself so have some idea where im at.
    I just dont want us to dilute this system thats all. All the hard work (Pot Art maths/trade, interviews Beme and Comd ES etc, organizing the world cos your a Pot Tiffy) that others have put in and now what Feck all.
    I have seen a name on ASCLB who i know failed exams on Class1, a Pot Tiffy he aint!
    But cos he passed PAAB he will have to be loaded on the fourth board with the rules these days, a travesty even if a little bitter i know. If there were better people on the PAAB they would have passed too. Even after two myself i still do not buy the 'it aint a numbers game'
    There will not be enough people to fill the courses that are to be run (due to the two year wait/not enough quality non class 1 PAABers) Something has to give, the two years is set in stone therefore there is only one variable. Did we pass enough of the new style PAAB candidates in time?
    We have a 60% average on Class one course person as a tiffy very soon. If there is one there are others of that im sure.
    Its your Corps too!
  9. Of course it is a numbers game, many of the benefits of going tiffy were knocked on the head by pay 2000, the new structure allowing Artisan WOs and doing away with the RS. After PAY 2000 they were struggling to get enough people on a PAAB to make it worth running them.

    That in my view is the only reason the PAAB has been thrown open the way it has been.

  11. Must get hang of this quote stuff!
  12. No offence taken Change-Trades, its an emotive subject for me. Like i posted earlier after two PAABs nearly four years apart i still passed and was loaded. To see the hard work of so many go for a ball of chalk tho' was hard.
    As Devilish Dave put it yes a numbers game it is!
    If it wasn't a numbers game why did we have to bolt it on to Class 1? No-one was interested in Tiffy thats why!
    So no-one going Tiffy meant less 'numbers' hence the bolt on! Pure Tiffy maths, more (forced) in the Sausage machine more out.
    Cant gauge where in your career you are CT but good luck if you have it to look forward to.
    Tally ho the Reme!
  13. A very interesting thread opening up here fellas. Having been around one of the trade schools for the last few years and seeing the new system, i have to say i think we as a Corps are heading for trouble. The standards are dropping, not only in Pot Art candidates but across the Corps as a whole.

    Guys just want to concentrate on passing the class 1 cse without having the nause of attending a PAAB towards the end. I would have thought that making the PAAB the first bit of the new JCLM (SMC) Cse would have been better. Most people fail the PAAB for lack of leadership and an inability to command under stress. If a guy is marked as weak on his leadership and command skills on a PAAB at the beginning of the JCLM he then has the rest of the JCLM to show improvement under pressure.

    There are also plenty of places available on PAAB's even under the new system, i know this because we were always getting requests from Glasgow for more names. We even managed to slip a couple of retraders under the radar.
    For those with guys who need to get on a PAAB soonish why not get in touch with the PAAB ASM who is forever having people drop out on him at very short notice.

    Having said all that, everyone in the Corps knows the system - either use it or own up and admit that you don't have any ambition or want to get to the dizzy heights of ASM.
  14. And that, TM, is a classic load of smug bollox. You can't advocate using 'the system' in one breath and then with your second breath attack those that did not choose that career path as if they were inadequate (no ambition). Your motives for passing PAAB are clearly suspect and better kept to yourself.....
  15. Dear fellow i am not attacking those who did not or do not want to use the system, only those who have used the system and failed and then go on to put younger members of the Corps off having a go. My only concern is that those who do not want to use the system then call the system unfair on promotion prospects, when in reality we all know the system from our first years in the army even with all its faults.

    I know some very good Artisans who are more than capable of matching and in most cases doing a better job than some Artificers, however they choose not to be Artificers and then went on to be very good leaders anyway. The majority of people moaning about the system either crash and burn on PAAB or don't even make it that far. Having watched several PAABs i was shocked at the low level of leadership and ability to react under pressure in most candidates. The stronger guys shone against these guys, but maybe in days gone when the majority of REME Pot Arts were forced to attend leadership training and the field was stronger even these would not have performed so well.

    As i said before the system has been there for many a year and us moaning about it is not going to change a thing. If you still disagree with the system put a DEME(A) challenge in and get it changed.