Passed over. Tough luck or poor career management?

Discussion in 'Army Pay, Claims & JPA' started by Speedy, Jun 7, 2004.

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. Speaking as one who was involuntarily re-traded at my 5 year point, as a 2 year LCpl, I suffered the pain of being shoved right back to the bottom of the pile in promotion terms, as I had to start again as a class 3. Because of the way my new trade worked I lost all promotional grades as the highest ones went to the class 1 LCpl's. It wasn't until my 9 year point when I was a class 1 lance jack that I was getting promotional grades again, but was told that it was tough luck because I was now being passed over for younger and equally qualified jnco's.
    During my time I (along with probably most here) have encountered and met nco's pulling 'O' and 'A' grades repeatedly passed over until they are told they are to old to be promoted. The question which has always puzzled me is that is this

    A. Bad luck.
    B. A really poor career structure run by the army.

    Any thoughts from anyone else who has encountered the same?
     
  2. Not as many replies as I thought this topic might generate. For many who's caree goes on track it's a case of 'Tough luck matey', particularly as it is one of the few things your friends cannot help you out with. For those bypassed it is a disheartening and soul destroying experience to work so hard and not get recognised as you former collegues dissapere into the distance.
    As I said, I'm quite suprised no one has an opinion on this.
     
  3. i basically got told in my last unit (just after i'd been busted), by my badge that i'd get promoted again over his and his childerens dead bodies , and that any transfer/posting requests i made would never make it past his office (boy did i p*ss him off :oops: ) effectively end of career , so spent my remaining days trying to push him over the edge.
    career wise blokes in the RE were always getting passed over , which led to an exodus of very experienced full screws.
    manning and records even told one bloke he may aswell get out as his career was over,that was nice of them wasn't it.
     
  4. It's a shame that when manning and records give their lovely road shows which tell everybody that promotion is just fine and that everyone can expect a good chance of promotion every 3 years it all goes wrong during the one-to-ones where they actually reveal that for your trade the average time to make full screw is actually 12 - 14 years and not the 6 told to the masses. There is also a growing gulf between officer and 'other ranks' promotion. Indeed, several years ago an officer could well be expected to hit major in about 9 - 10 years (even less in some cases) whilst an enlisted soldier would be struggling to command a section in that time.
     
  5. It's not so much the actual 'O' and 'A' grades, which appear on your ACR, that matter to the promotions board, it's the write up which counts, particularly the last two paras of PArt 1 and what's 'supported' in part 2 by your CO.

    Those who are graded A & O, tend to be overgraded, particularly those with constant O grading. If the are that good they should be considered for early commissioning. Read the green book on soldier reporting. It's well written, states clearly what grades should be and how those grades should be reflected by the write up.

    If soldiers were honestly graded by their officers, the system would be fairer.

    As a side issue, it's a shame that the Army has forgotten just how valuable the older and more experienced JNCO actually is and how it seems more geared towards promoting younger soldiers above them. We lose a lot of experience annually and we can't afford to.

    If industry had this attitude towards its staff, the country would be buggered.

    Shame the defence business has not only adopted it, but actively promotes it.

    In this day and age, where the Services are not the attractive career they convince themselves that they are, it seems counterproductive to push out experienced Toms, but this has been 'the norm' since the last rounds of redundancies and it doesn't seem wrong to most in the management circle as 'this is a young mans game'. Fair enough if you are Inf, but look at AGC (SPS)? How 'young' do they need to be? Does age matter to their employment? How about some of the TEch trades? I'd rather have an older and more experienced JNCO Tech than a 'young Sgt'. The former is cheaper to run, less likely to p*ss off his peers and you get more value for money.

    In this day and age, it's about time we got in line with the Armed services of other countries (or even our own RAF) and looked at what the long term value of the soldier actually is. Recruiting ain't good just now..........it's not going to improve that much over the years either and p*sing off your best toms by constantly promoting others over them, is not the way ahead. There's a lot to be said for the 'young thruster', but he/she is a rare commodity and if they were identified at such an early age as having the 'right stuff', the firm should gently remove them from the mainstream, send then to University and commission them. Investors in People?

    The Army would then retain its older more experienced soldier whilst at the same time, not denying the youngster of a good career. We retain both and send out the right signal to all, not one that when you've only hit Lance Jack at 9 years, your finished.

    I think that part of the problem lies with the middle management not actually 'seeing' the amounts of public money they throw away by such shoddy personnel practices.

    If they were made more accountable for that cost, they'd be more relectant to chuck it away.

    The sad thing is, that the money wasted comes out of your pocket and mine.

    Keep them in longer........pay less pension. Not a bad suggestion, considering the perks that go with the job, free med, free dental. low cost housing etc, etc.

    I think we'd have more than one or two takers if that were the offer on the table.
     
  6. Lots of good points here and I agree with much that has been said above. However.... we can only have so many in the Army and if we retained soldiers for longer, then we would have to reduce the number joining. The important thing is to get the right balance - an influx of young blood and the ability to retain the very best of the more experienced NCOs.
     
  7. But we are undermaned and oversteched,? :? :?
     
  8. Speaking as a 12 yr Sgt, I can't complain realy. I've been bust twice and done 28 days porridge, I think it's down to the individual really, just knuckle down and get on with it.
     
  9. But are MCM listening? We are understrength and overstretched, so why are they letting soldiers go?

    Only the Army could possess such a wasteful approach to staffing.

    It's a novel concept, but not one which would see it's managers survive if we were a civvy organisation.

    Think about it.


    PS. Good drills MB!
     
  10. I was on the phone to a SNCO friend of mine last night who told me that at the moment junior rank retention is non-existant in his unit. Many officers of Maj rank and above simply want them for 3 years and are happy to let them go so they get a young complient workforce.
     
  11. Agree with the right balance bit, but "we can only have so many in the army"? Is this why the REME are understrength by 1600 ish and recruiting has been stopped?

    Why the hell don't the army keep those mentally, organisationally & financially astute people and fill the AGC with them?
     
  12. If they don't plan well soon there will be absolutly zero incentive to join the army. Poor career prospects, enforced redundecy, constant tours and stress, poor accomodation and service conditions. Even now there is very little left of what there was 14 years ago which made it slightly bearable to serve.
     
  13. Many valid points...........Badass spoke of soldiers being overgraded consistently and I agree....yet where does the balance come :?: Say for example I am an OC do i overgrade my soldiers to give them a fair chance in the market so to speak or do i grade them appropriately. As for my mcm......wenkers never even realised i was misemployed for 2 yrs despite my protests and 2 ACR's from entirely the wrong unit.....and even then they still tried to feck me over once it was finally identified. My point......i now see individuals who have difficulty keeping their di cks in their pants and out of recruits or junior soldiers getting A grades meanwhile..i am persona non grata. Could be though because i write letters....he he :lol: :twisted: