(personal fitness) Training is classified as duty...

#1
Was just looking up MATTS standards as the old link is broken and came across this:
http://www.army.mod.uk/documents/general/ta_taq_ed1.pdf
It's from 2007.

It states amongst other things that:

TA Physical Fitness
Policy

Greater TA participation in Regular
Army collective training and deployment
on operations demands a fitness policy
that delivers TA soldiers who are at the
required levels of fitness.
The key points of the TA Physical Fitness
Policy are:
Military Annual Training Tests
(MATTs) for both Regulars and
TA now have to be passed,
rather than simply attempted.
These replace the old Individual
Training Directives (ITDs).
The new policy will be
introduced in stages,
allowing time to achieve
the new standards. By 1st
April 2008, the TA will fully
adhere to MATT 2, including
the Level 1 Combat Fitness
Test of eight miles for
operational deployment.
Training is classified as duty;
personnel undertaking
unsupervised personal
development will be
classed as on duty, provided
they are undertaking a
training programme that
is Service-recognised.

There will be more qualified
TA PTIs within units. TA
Rebalancing allows for an
increase in full time staff who
will give advice and support
to units, while each Regional
Training Centre will have a full
time Army Physical Training
Corps Warrant Officer.
My bold. What does this mean in practice?
 
H

Hedphelym

Guest
#2
Intersting find..

So should we all be getting paid when we go out for a run or tab? 8)

Seriously though, that policy has probably been re-written anyway since 2007.
 
#3
Nothing.

msr
 
#4
I'd rather the MTDs get put towards something productive like quality exercises, range time, OTXs and even some AT - not for phys conducted in your own time. Personal pride should be motivation enough!
 
#7
Your quote comes from TA Quarterly, which is Yet Another Useless MOD Publication.

msr
 
#8
msr said:
Your quote comes from TA Quarterly, which is Yet Another Useless MOD Publication.

msr
Did they make more than one of them? I thought it died on its arrse right away. Sure Ive got a copy knocking about somewhere.
 
#11
msr said:
Whiskey_60 said:
msr said:
Your quote comes from TA Quarterly, which is Yet Another Useless MOD Publication.

msr
Did it ever get past issue 2?
Yes, but I still have no idea what its purpose is: http://www.army.mod.uk/infantry/regiments/143.aspx

msr
Wow, that was fcuking gash and I only read the titles of the articles and looked at the pictures (que infantry joke).

Issue 2 was used as a beer mat in our Juniors bar. All we need is some chuckle with chips spin off and the magazine will be complete to wipe my arse with.
 

Latest Threads

Top