RAF dont want command appointments?

#1
I understand that a 2 year ROS is about to come in for 'in-command' appointments at Wing Cdr and Gp Capt level. As a simple sailor - what's the pressure for this? Are people at this level leaving post command,and if so, why? If not, is it just the RAF being precious? I'm told that this is not just what we in the RN would consider Command, ie establishment/squadron, but also thos who are OC of Admin/Eng/etc wings ....
 

Bouillabaisse

LE
Book Reviewer
#2
I suspect its because in their command appointments they come into contact with a lot of commercial organisations who offer them exciting jobs outside on completion. I seem to be encountering quite a lot of ex-crabs of that level these days. Far more than ex-Commander/Captain or ex-Colonel.
 
#3
I get the impression that 'the system' is attempting to treat the symptom rather than the cause again! Too many people have taken their command appointment and then left the Service, so a 2 year ROS has been applied. All this will do is push people out before taking their command and, once established, will encourage more people to leave as soon as they have their Sqn Ldr pension in the bag rather than hang on and then get locked in.

What would be more interesting (and useful) would be to ask why people are leaving after their command, and the answer is that the prospects for the future are no longer what they once were. Why would people want to do a staff tour or 2 as a Wg Cdr, then do their command and then be told that they have another 2 staff tours to do before they can be promoted again (because it is becoming more and more dead-man's shoes these days)?
 
#4
Bouillabaisse said:
I suspect its because in their command appointments they come into contact with a lot of commercial organisations who offer them exciting jobs outside on completion. I seem to be encountering quite a lot of ex-crabs of that level these days. Far more than ex-Commander/Captain or ex-Colonel.
Couldn't agree more. My boss is a crab Wg Cdr, done his two years Comd and leaves next month to work for a commercial organisation earning a bucket full of cash.
 
#5
We've had a few more COs than usual who've now put their cards in, and they're doing very well for themselves in civvy street. No suggestions of time bars yet, but a nice warm feeling for me that Lt Col is more achievable now!
 
#6
RAF Officers don't 'Command' anyway.....they barely lead. If they do they only 'Command' or 'Lead' its only other Officers or SNCO Aircrew.

Apart from Rocks who generally are a bit 'odd' but competant.
 
#7
theloggie said:
RAF Officers don't 'Command' anyway.....they barely lead. If they do they only 'Command' or 'Lead' its only other Officers or SNCO Aircrew.

Apart from Rocks who generally are a bit 'odd' but competant.
First time I've ever seen those two words in the same sentence!
 

Bowmore_Assassin

MIA
Moderator
Book Reviewer
#8
"RAF don't want command appointments?"

Well, thank fcuk for that. In my experience 99% of them could not command their way out of a wet paper bag if their life depended on it, let alone commanding a group of servicemen or women, RAF or not.

You know something is wrong when they call all their senior ranks and Warrent Officers by their first names (the same people who go crying to their local senior RAF officer when they are given a good stiff bollocking in true Army style) as well as their RAF clerks of all ranks. What happened to using someones rank ? And just what is it that makes RAF Flight Sgts think they walk on water and are the equivalent of WO2s - ah yes, they are encouraged to think this way by weak leadership who haven't got the moral courage to put people back in their box.

It does make makes you wonder how the they manage to blag so many of them into so many Joint senior officer posts ? I can only assume its not unit command they want, just the senior posts in MOD... :roll: Perhaps they have extensive int and photo collections on lots of very important people ? :twisted:

No doubt I'll now get some incommmiiing from the blue jobs that frequent the hallowed pages of ARRSE...oh dear now I'm worried :D .
 
#9
Congratulations to theloggie for rejuvinating a thread that had died a natural death - largely because it was a non-story - just for a bit of gratuitous crab-bashing :lol:

Having, as my username suggests, worn pongo khaki as well as crabfat blue, I have no hesitation in saying that the RAF is streets ahead of the Army in man-management terms, and I suspect that is part of the problem. the Army has no wish to join the rest of us in the twenty-first century and so it objects to ideas of 'management' preferring, rather, to talk in terms of 'leadership and command'.

But because you are all striding imperiously around leading and commanding people without bothering with the tedious business of having to manage them as well, many of them end up leaving or, sadly both for them and for me, in my DCMH clinic.

Purist pongos may well feel justified in criticising the RAF approach as not being sufficiently autocratic, direct and 'commanding', but actually the RAF manages people a hell of a lot better. An RAF Regt Wg Cdr of my acquaintance summed it up by saying that the RAF see its people as an asset to be grown and developed, whereas the Army just see their people as an asset to be consumed and expended. Go figure. I know who I'd prefer to work for, which is why I hung up the CS95 and wear light blue to work. :wink:
 
#10
theloggie said:
RAF Officers don't 'Command' anyway.....they barely lead. If they do they only 'Command' or 'Lead' its only other Officers or SNCO Aircrew.

Apart from Rocks who generally are a bit 'odd' but competant.
Praise indeed loggie.

To return the complement may I say that your shelves are stacked really neatly mate, and your POL store is a shining example to the rest of the logistics world. You smell of moth balls though...
 
#11
KhakiCrab said:
Congratulations to theloggie for rejuvinating a thread that had died a natural death - largely because it was a non-story - just for a bit of gratuitous crab-bashing :lol:

Having, as my username suggests, worn pongo khaki as well as crabfat blue, I have no hesitation in saying that the RAF is streets ahead of the Army in man-management terms, and I suspect that is part of the problem. the Army has no wish to join the rest of us in the twenty-first century and so it objects to ideas of 'management' preferring, rather, to talk in terms of 'leadership and command'.

But because you are all striding imperiously around leading and commanding people without bothering with the tedious business of having to manage them as well, many of them end up leaving or, sadly both for them and for me, in my DCMH clinic.

Purist pongos may well feel justified in criticising the RAF approach as not being sufficiently autocratic, direct and 'commanding', but actually the RAF manages people a hell of a lot better. An RAF Regt Wg Cdr of my acquaintance summed it up by saying that the RAF see its people as an asset to be grown and developed, whereas the Army just see their people as an asset to be consumed and expended. Go figure. I know who I'd prefer to work for, which is why I hung up the CS95 and wear light blue to work. :wink:
KC,
Obviously a wah. Otherwise you might have worked out that there is a difference between leading Army soldiers towards people firing at them and getting the mechanics to do their job. No doubt they do require different skills and yours certainly needs more management to make sure that Mike and Steve are made to feel valued members of the team without being shouted at. Calling the soldiers Mike and Steve in the infantry just doesn't work if you want them to do their job - but I guess you will never know. Anyway, obviously one of these RAF wahs that we get on ARRSE from time to time. Nice one.
whf
 
#12
8 yrs a Capt QARANC. 4 yrs before that TA (1yr x Inf - PWO)

Wah yourself, chopper :roll:

No-one in my organisation would recognise the parody you trot out of RAF mgmt/leadership/command, FFS.

I've done 4 yrs in light blue now and they're a fcuk-sight more disciplined, organised and professional than I ever saw with the Army, whether it was medics, RLC, REME, 9th/12th, RGJ or any of the other outfits I served alongside.

The fact that the Army seems to struggle with the concept of making people feel 'valued members of the team' probably accounts in large part for the fact that although the Army only makes up 1/6th of my AOR, you muppets make up 1/4th of my patient throughput.

Go figure!
 
#13
KhakiCrab said:
The fact that the Army seems to struggle with the concept of making people feel 'valued members of the team' probably accounts in large part for the fact that although the Army only makes up 1/6th of my AOR, you muppets make up 1/4th of my patient throughput.

Go figure!
That's easy to explain: The green jobs work twice as hard and therefore, get twice as fcuked up. QED.
 
#15
Did you not just call everybody in the Army muppets...
It seemed to me to be the mildest and most inoffensive of ripostes to the rabid crab-bashing herein, Professor. :wink:

That's easy to explain: The green jobs work twice as hard and therefore, get twice as fcuked up. QED.
Well, LEFTY478, therein lies the problem. Actually, both RAF and RN work every bit as hard as their Army colleagues - they just do so in a different way. And my central point, returning to the OP, is that if they were managed better, instead of just led and commanded, you'd get more out of 'em, they'd hang around longer and be better soldiers.

I've recently seen the most classic case of temperamental unsuitability I've ever seen:

Asked to leave in Phase 1: -Nah, stay in son, it'll get better (it didn't)
Asked to leave in Phase 2: -Nah, stay in son, it'll get better (it didn't)
Asked to leave when he got to his unit: -Nah, stay in son, it'll get better (it didn't)

Went on Ops, came home, went AWOL, did weed etc. Did glasshouse time, told he's be admin discharged, but now they're fcuking him about.

If there are any muppets in the Army, they are the people who've blighted this kid's life for the last 2 years and been more concerned with their retention stats than a teenager's welfare. Let's hope they stand up and admit that it Coroner's court one day - though God forbid it should come to that.

Bottom line? The Army does need a 'fcuk-about factor' to maintain its culture, ethos and discipline, :roll: but it needs to better recognise when people have been fcuked about too much. Open verdicts in Coroner's courts are a shitty epitaph for anyone, let alone a British soldier. :evil:
 
#16
theloggie said:
RAF Officers don't 'Command' anyway.....they barely lead. If they do they only 'Command' or 'Lead' its only other Officers or SNCO Aircrew.
Whereas you demonstrate your complete lack of knowledge of the RAF. I guess our superior Loggies make you feel threatened then - get back to your ledger and the 'Window of No' you dullard.
 
#17
Mr_C_Hinecap said:
theloggie said:
RAF Officers don't 'Command' anyway.....they barely lead. If they do they only 'Command' or 'Lead' its only other Officers or SNCO Aircrew.
Whereas you demonstrate your complete lack of knowledge of the RAF. I guess our superior Loggies make you feel threatened then - get back to your ledger and the 'Window of No' you dullard.
Insert the words "Flying Branch" between "RAF" and "Officers" and he isn't completely wrong.

Fifth Columnist sums it up best - in most ground branches once you have done a command tour as a Sqn Ldr (if you're lucky enough to get one) then what do you have to look forward to? Wg Cdr Command Tours are few and far between across the ground branches and are fallen into more by luck than judgement. The sort of young thrusters who (ought to) get command tours as a Sqn Ldr are faced with a bleak future without further command and the prospect of a much better range of higher paid desk jobs outside of the Service.

Until we accept that the higher echelons of the RAF are not appealing to the ambitious outside of the Flying Branches then we will never solve the problem.
 
#18
KhakiCrab said:
8 yrs a Capt QARANC. 4 yrs before that TA (1yr x Inf - PWO)

Wah yourself, chopper :roll:

No-one in my organisation would recognise the parody you trot out of RAF mgmt/leadership/command, FFS.

I've done 4 yrs in light blue now and they're a fcuk-sight more disciplined, organised and professional than I ever saw with the Army, whether it was medics, RLC, REME, 9th/12th, RGJ or any of the other outfits I served alongside.

The fact that the Army seems to struggle with the concept of making people feel 'valued members of the team' probably accounts in large part for the fact that although the Army only makes up 1/6th of my AOR, you muppets make up 1/4th of my patient throughput.
Go figure!
I still think this is a wah - but I will bite for the moment. Firstly, I don't know whether you being on an Army website and calling people in the Army muppets is the sharpest move - if you don't like it why not f*ck off to the RAF site. Secondly you are deliberately missing the point. You managed to suggest in your previous thread that being in the Army and the RAF are much of a muchness and therefore the Army should be more like the RAF in focusing more on management than on leadership (there is a difference and you may have learned that in the couple of weeks that you spent at Cranwell or RMAS). I pointed out that the role of the Army is, in most cases for current ops, more demanding than for the RAF counterparts. In your ivory tower in your FOB then you have the luxury to sit back and listen to the sob stories before making a judgement about how badly the Army is looking after its own in terms of managing its most important resource. Sadly for the soldiers they do their job to the best of their ability and leading those soldiers is not - as you seem to think - done in a way to f*ck people around for the sake of it. Anyway, fobbit, you may not recognise these distinctions between the bulk of soldiers and the bulk of airmen but feel free to send me details of how many airmen in your medical ward are working 18-24 hours a day for 7 days a week for months on end (some elements of the RAF Regt excepted). Finally, your analogy of a higher pro rata rate of soldiers with problems is exactly what some one else pointed out - it is because they are being placed under greater stress and this is the consequence. Not because they are not being man managed effectively. You chopper.
whf
 

seaweed

LE
Book Reviewer
#19
Seaweed's short course in leadership (tongue stuck in cheek):

HOW TO BE THE BOSS BABOON
1. Display the trappings, postures and gestures of dominance
2. If challenged, threaten your subordinates aggressively
3. Use your superior information to outwit them
4. If that fails, do not shrink from forcibly overpowering them
5. Stamp out their silly squabbles
6. Buy off your immediate subordinates with status symbols
7. Do not let anybody else persecute the weak
8. Direct group choice of social activities
9. Occasionally jolly the bottom ones along
10. Be seen to defend the Empire
Liberally paraphrased from the 'Ten Commandments of Dominance'
(Desmond Morris, 'The Human Zoo')

I used to keep this pinned up over my desk in the afterlife. All too often it was too good a fit on those 'above' me in the management. Try using it to measure your boss, points out of 10 on each one.
 
#20
In my opinion it's like this, those of the two winged master race in the RAF join to fly, anything that takes them away from that is something to be avoided like the plague- therefore as far as many of the brightest and best are concerned you can keep your staff appointments - unless the individual wants to worm their way to the top. Unfortunately this isn't great for the service as a whole

Finally, your analogy of a higher pro rata rate of soldiers with problems is exactly what some one else pointed out - it is because they are being placed under greater stress and this is the consequence. Not because they are not being man managed effectively. You chopper
er, no, when I was Crab pond scum in Berlin the Inf guys were always causing their SNCOs problems, our lot were by and large quite sorted, where was the stress then? Danger of an exploding bratty at the Imbus? It's down to the maturity of the people you group together and what the recruiting staff are looking for which is why there are fewer problems with Corps soldiers (or so a Greenslime chum said) Inf need to be aggressive, tough, etc but the side effect is a greater admin burden.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
BanjoBill The NAAFI Bar 21
PartTimePongo The Intelligence Cell 16
bullshit The Intelligence Cell 6

Similar threads

Latest Threads