• ARRSE have partnered with Armadillo Merino to bring you an ARRSE exclusive, generous discount offer on their full price range.
    To keep you warm with the best of Merino gear, visit www.armadillomerino.co.uk and use the code: NEWARRSE40 at the checkout to get 40% off!
    This superb deal has been generously offered to us by Armadillo Merino and is valid until midnight on the the 28th of February.

PAYD again - "Troops wages docked for food"

#1
Troops’ wages docked for food
IAN BRUCE, Defence Correspondent October 13 2008

The commanders of Britain's infantry battalions, naval establishments and RAF bases have begun to dock young servicemen's wages to ensure they can afford to eat under the controversial Pay As You Dine system being introduced across the armed forces.

The scheme was first trialled with the RAF in 2006. It replaced set monthly food charges with a scheme where service personnel paid only for the meals they ate, but had to hand over cash on the spot to contractors running the catering.

Prior to that, junior ranks complained they were being charged automatically for "three squares a day" from the cookhouse which they often did not have the chance to enjoy if they were off-camp on exercise or on leave.

But senior officers are now concerned some of the youngest and lowest-paid squaddies and airmen are going hungry because they fail to budget properly and end up spending their meagre pay on beer and entertainment instead of keeping some back for food.

Orders have gone out for sergeants and corporals in direct control of teenage troops to watch for tell-tale signs of physical weakness or weight loss and to report immediately up the chain of command if they are approached with a plea for help...

The Ministry of Defence said that research before the introduction of PAYD showed that only 50% of cookhouse meals were being eaten. The Armed Forces Pay Review Body then identified strong support among junior ranks for a replacement system that would enable personnel to pay only for food they ate.

In 2005, the MoD gave approval for each of the services to implement PAYD "in a manner appropriate to meet their individual needs".
...
FULL ARTICLE - THE HERALD
 
#4
I was going to say that it beats me why on earth they ever did away with

the Camp cookhouse and the ACC. Money of course.

How much can they have saved? We had six or seven cooks. If we

were in camp they cooked in the cookhouse, if we we were on ex or

ops, they cooked in the field. All found, no money changing hands.

The only bug in the system was the Orderly Officer coming around and

saying "Any complaints'? and if you tried to answer, the Orderly Sgt.

shouted "Shut up, shut up" Apart from that, good system.
 
#5
Would have made sense to me to have had a 'swipe card' system where you were swiped for each meal you ate and billed the following month direct from source - no-one would have been in a position where they could not afford food then.

Too easy? Not in NAAFI interests? Hmmmmm
 
#6
This is, as usual, a bit of a non story from the gentlemen of the press. Soldiers having their wages 'docked' does, I suggest, refer to the 'hungry soldier' scheme whereby Tom can have the cost of his food deducted from source after he's spunked all his cash in millionaires weekend. Nothing new and has always been part of the scheme.

But, WTF? Hungry Soldier scheme? The portion control that goes on? All ranks restaurants at the weekends because it's too expensive for the contarctors to keep three messes open? And this is just the thin end of the wedge.

It's all very well saying that we now only pay for what we eat but we also now pay for a contactors profit. So how can that be as good a deal as loading your plate at the one or two meals you did make it to?

But the Senior Officer who gets wheeled out in the letters pages of Soldier mag every time there's a complaint, usually from a SNCO, about PAYD says there is no problem and Tom loves it. Why? Because when the ROO/ROS gives it the "Everything Alright?" spiel every mealtime the boys are too busy filling their heads to want to give an opinion. So it's "Yes sir, fcuk off sir" and the management think everything's sunshine.


And breathe.
 
#7
RogerOut! said:
And so it begins to unravel and fall apart.........
It wont be allowed to unravel and fall apart, it HAS to work. This is a widely held view, from what i can gather. The thing is, troops, especially ones in their teenage years, have used cookhouses before because, with regards to paying for meals, it was out of sight-out of mind. They didnt "physically" pay for the meals,so the cookhouse was used as normal. Now that they have a choice of whether to tip up to scoff at teatime or go to Mcdonalds or the Pizza shop, they choose the fast food option, even though they probably spend about a fiver more by having fast food. :? Teen logic more than anything else. I agree with the other poster, swipe cards should have been looked at, but then they would still forget to top'em up :roll:
 
B

Biscuits_AB

Guest
#8
Plant-Pilot said:
I think when it does fall apart there will be an awful lot of "I told you so" flying about.
And in certain quarters deservedly so. How many people on this site, only a few years ago, were shouting about why they shouldn't be forced to pay for meals when they didn't eat them under the old scheme and were demanding that they be allowed a form of what is now known as 'PAYD'? Of course, 'listening to the serviceman', the Labour Party saw an ideal opportunity to save a buck.

There were quite a few posters of old, who predicted the outcome and if they are now telling Joe Squaddie "I told you so", I think that for once, that it's warranted. It's nobody else's fault but 'your' own. You got what you asked for, and for once, the MoD were only too happy to give it to you.

You were far better off under the old system.
 
B

Biscuits_AB

Guest
#10
Daytona955 said:
Would have made sense to me to have had a 'swipe card' system where you were swiped for each meal you ate and billed the following month direct from source - no-one would have been in a position where they could not afford food then.

Too easy? Not in NAAFI interests? Hmmmmm
Who else benefitted from those interests though? That same firm also went as far as to ensure that it held the monopoly inside barracks, by 'convincing' Senior Officers, that there was no room for the 'competition'. Hence, the demise of those little shops who served the Army for decades and provided a far better service than NAAFI will ever be capabe of.

The whole issue of PAYD had 'Money Grabbing B*stards' written all over it.
 
B

Biscuits_AB

Guest
#11
RABC said:
What would it actually cost to eat three square meals a day with PAYD ??
More than it did under the old scheme, but you'll need a Master Chef to give you the figures.
 
#12
RABC said:
What would it actually cost to eat three square meals a day with PAYD ??
In theory, if you were to eat three PAYD meals a day it would cost the same as the old daily food charge. Of course this takes no account of portion size. So the days when you could take as many veg or as much bread as you like to fill up are long gone.
 
#14
I keep getting deja vue over this...

Anybody remember NAAFI getting the chogie shops shut down in NI...

The really stupid thing about PAYD and contracterisation of the support services, it that effectively you loose this capability from the "real" Army...

No cooks in barracks, no cooks in the field..

When will someone realise that Armys are about capablity - in particularly the capability to operate when everything else has gone to ratsh1t...

Grr
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
#15
With a swipe card there should be no need to top it up, it could be deducted at source but then again we could have the old system back, I cant see sodexho in Sangin rustling up proper pasties as our Sloppie would in Macrory Park!
 
B

Biscuits_AB

Guest
#17
codename1157 said:
But we can never have the old system back because that would involve admitting that someone in main building MADE A MISTAKE. :roll:
Yes, but the identity of those who made from this initiative, is more valuable a commodity than any loss of contractual trade or admission to having got it wrong. That's more a reason NOT to revert.
 
#18
Biscuits_AB said:
codename1157 said:
But we can never have the old system back because that would involve admitting that someone in main building MADE A MISTAKE. :roll:
Yes, but the identity of those who made from this initiative, is more valuable a commodity than any loss of contractual trade or admission to having got it wrong. That's more a reason NOT to revert.
Surely you're not suggesting that some retired senior officers have made it into lucrative positions at Sodexho, Aramark and the Thieving Cnuts, sorry NAAFI, are you?
 
#20
I remember visiting an RCT barracks in Munster for rugby. The CO did away with breakfast and told the cooks to produce brunch from 10.00 to 10.30 and 12.00 to 12.30 every day. The cookhouse was allways rammed so no one need complain about missed meals.
 

Latest Threads

New Posts