Redundancy 2012 Rumours

#1
So Ive heard from "the bloke in the office" that all 3 tranches are to be converged into one massive one, anyone else got anything on this, also wondering what the dates are for the Initial Choose or be picked and the Date of the 6 or 12 months til you leave ?
 

This Tribe

Sponsor
Sponsor
#2
That matches some gossip I picked up as well. A 'good source' reports that approx 4500 will go in the next round.
No details on timelines, ranks, cap badges, etc though.

General intent seems to be to get the cuts over and done with so that whoever is left can get on with figuring out what the Army is for post Afghanistan. Also heard a vague sniff that there are options on the table to bring withdrawal forward as well.
 
#3
Could the powers that be actually support such a venture?

4500 going through resettlement at the same time?
 
#4
If you take a basic look at the Army's projected drawdown to 2015 - down by 17000 uniforms - 2011 @900, 2012 @2000 which leaves 14000 to spread over 2013/14/15. That's a fairly big swathe, which is just depressing.
 
#7
Capability v cost cutting...
 

Bowmore_Assassin

MIA
Moderator
Book Reviewer
#8
So Ive heard from "the bloke in the office" that all 3 tranches are to be converged into one massive one, anyone else got anything on this, also wondering what the dates are for the Initial Choose or be picked and the Date of the 6 or 12 months til you leave ?
Not sure about the 3 into 1 tranche thing but, as far as I am aware:

Jan 12 - DIN released giving Tranche 2 Redundancy criteria
Feb 12 - Applications for voluntary redundancy to be submitted
End May 12 - Redundancy annoucements
End Nov 12 - Voluntary redundancy personnel out of the Army
May 13 - Non-voluntary redundancy personnel out of the Army.

Tranche 3 and 4 (last I heard), as above but change dates to '13, '14, '15 as necessary.

Don't quote me if this changes (again !) !
 

Bowmore_Assassin

MIA
Moderator
Book Reviewer
#9
Would it not be better to figure out what the Army is for BEFORE getting the cuts over and done with?
Agreed but irrelevent. It's not about capability,it's about saving cash.
 
#10
That matches some gossip I picked up as well. A 'good source' reports that approx 4500 will go in the next round.
No details on timelines, ranks, cap badges, etc though.

General intent seems to be to get the cuts over and done with so that whoever is left can get on with figuring out what the Army is for post Afghanistan. Also heard a vague sniff that there are options on the table to bring withdrawal forward as well.
Strangely tying together with other office talk, which in my place sems to indicate that thought is being given to a single announcement of individuals who will go, but the timing of their departure will be staged (if they so choose, with a potential financial incentive to leave earlier). This will allow the Pyramid planners the chance to restructure the manning and promotion plots in line with the (yet to be announced) New Model Army. Do you suppose Oliver Cromwell had these problems?
 
#11
Strangely tying together with other office talk, which in my place sems to indicate that thought is being given to a single announcement of individuals who will go, but the timing of their departure will be staged (if they so choose, with a potential financial incentive to leave earlier). This will allow the Pyramid planners the chance to restructure the manning and promotion plots in line with the (yet to be announced) New Model Army. Do you suppose Oliver Cromwell had these problems?
Sounds like a load of made up trash. the Tranches as planned and announced will almost certainly remain as they have been briefed.
 
#12
The idea of just announcing who they want to go is appealing (ie get it done wit).

But that would be a fcuking nightmare. You'd have blokes sat on their arrse for up to 36 months.

That said,I would probably take advantage of that scheme and time my departure date to my timescale rather than there. Maybe others would also volunteer leading to an increase in voluntary departures. So it does have its plus points.
 

Bowmore_Assassin

MIA
Moderator
Book Reviewer
#13
Sounds like a load of made up trash. the Tranches as planned and announced will almost certainly remain as they have been briefed.
Agreed.

However, there is a view (and I am told, this is supported by some at senior levels) that cutting everyone ASAP is a good option to get to circa 82k so the new Army can get on with the brave new world. Perhaps this is why rumourville is spreading the news that the next Tranche will be a big hitter or it will all be done in one go.

Whilst this may be a good idea (especially if you've had enough and are looking/hoping for redundancy), I have heard that the pay-outs for such an option in such a short space of time are simply not affordable and, more importantly, whilst we are still engaged in Afghanistan, we still need people to be doing what they are doing. I guess, referring to the latter, that is why, when they made a bunch of Colonels redundant on Tranche 1, without reducing the corresponding manpower liability, they promoted a bunch of Lt Cols outside of the Blue List to make up the shortfall...is this feckin rocket science ?

Having said that, the firm needs to chop a load of people by 2015 leading to 2020 so Tranche 2 and the following tranches will have to be in the thousands. A statement of the bleeding obvious I know, but I would suggest (IMHO), if you are not in the top 10% (and even if you are), you should be looking at starting resettlement type planning/courses now without declaring your intent. The bonus is if you don't go, you are better qualified/educated which is always a good thing or if you do go, at least you will be better prepared or ready to transition to civdiv.

May I just say if it all changes (and I would not be surprised if it does), I am not guilty !
 
#14
Pretty certain (from inside APC Glasgow) that there will not be any changes to the timings of redundancy tranches as the work so far has all been built around and predicated on those dates. Apparently it may be acceptable to alter the "presentational aspects" of the sacking of perfectly decent, hardworking and valuable service personnel in order to e a better impression of caring employer/serf relationship. Sadly the net effect will be the same..
 
#15
It may be that there will be a further Tranche of redundancy post ISAF 2014 to reduce the Field Army to 82,000 and better match the avialable UK infrastructure. Most likely targets are to be unused specialist functions and those that can be most easily outsourced or replaced by civil industry.
 
#16
Interesting to see that OS got this out so early. The paper was written by a major but signed and approved at Department level before release. Funny how Brig N is now backing away from it.
 
#17
Interesting to see that OS got this out so early. The paper was written by a major but signed and approved at Department level before release. Funny how Brig N is now backing away from it.
From the Telegraph

A classified document, seen by The Daily Telegraph, says 2,500 wounded soldiers, including 350 who have lost limbs, will not be exempt from the extensive cuts.

The internal memo, sent to senior commanders in Afghanistan, also discloses that 16,500 personnel will be made redundant by April 2015 – more than double the number originally proposed. Any decision to sack wounded soldiers is likely to prove highly controversial.
Wounded soldiers face sack under new Army redundancy plans - Telegraph
 
#18
The Army is being cut back to a very lean structure... When the VEng really kicks in you'll see lads departing at the 12 year point too, (MCP prior to the Full Career).

It's a brave new world out there, and we haven't got the spaces to keep wounded blokes in anymore...

Doesn't mean I find it anymore appetising.. but I can se the logic alas.
 
#20
So long as the wounded continue to receive whatever help they need, whether that be from the Army, the Social Services, the NHS or whoever, then I don't really have a problem with them being given redundancy. There's only so many slots in the Army and only a very small number of them that a VSI soldier can fill. Once those slots are full you're taking up slots that should have a deployable soldier in them.

It's a sad fact that you can't get away from, but the Army can't afford to keep thousands of soldiers who can't fulfil their role anymore.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top