Reverting To Substantive Rank From Acting Rank

Discussion in 'Army Pay, Claims & JPA' started by Berlin_104s, Apr 2, 2008.

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. What Pay Increment would a soldier move to if that soldier was an A/SSgt on Level 3 and reverted to Sub Sgt? Assume that both the SSgt and Sgt ranks are in the same Pay Band.

    Many Thanks

  2. Does your trade matter?
  3. How long were you acting? Did something happen or was it only ever a temporary step up?
  4. You would drop back to back to what you should have been.
  5. So long as you are voluntarily reverting you will go to the level you would have been on had you not been promoted.

  6. Sgt and SSgt, I thought were not in the same rank band. SSgt and WO is.
  7. Look at what level you were on as a Sgt and what your IDD date was then. Effectively, work it out as if you were never paid as a SSgt but if you get SSgt again (acting or sub) make sure the time you previously spent in the rank counts towards your seniority for pay.

    Failing all that, JSP 754 is the place to look. Read it well as, in my experience, SPVA do not understand it!
  8. Many thanks for the prompt and helpful replies. I apologise for not replying earlier but The Great ARRSE Crash of 2008 made things a bit tricky for a while!

    To put things into context the individual :wink: concerned would not be reverting voluntarily. They would have held the Acting Rank for over 2.5 years and then been posted as a Sub Sgt having been unnsuccessful on three Promotion Boards, despite having been recommended for promotion throughout. But that's a whole new thread in itself!

    The next question is with regard to the pension. The individual concerned is on AFPS 75 which is paid on the basis of Reckonable Service and Final Rank. The definition of Final Rank being 'The highest paid rank held for more than 2 years in the last 5 years of service in the case of other ranks ...' This definition comes from the document 'Your Pension Scheme Explained - AFPS 75', MMP/106, Re-issued Feb 07. The individual concerned meets the requirements for a SSgt's pension under the requirements as defined there. The RAWO rang Glasgow(?) to confirm that this was correct, only to be told that it was incorrect and the document was wrong! Is this document gospel and can far-reaching decisions involving a lot of money be based on it and if it is incorrect then what the hell has it been published for?

    Can any pay/pensions gurus please give the DS Solution as a few decisions are resting on it! Your help is much appreciated and I apologise for the wordy posting!

    Kind Regards

  9. B104,

    Ref pay,

    If the reversion is not for disciplinary reasons the following applies (JSP 754):
    Acting Higher Rank

    03.0709. An individual elevated to a paid Acting Higher Rank (AHR) is to be treated as if they had been substantively promoted for pay purposes, including entitlement to Specialist Pay (SP) and Substitution Pay (SUPA). The effective date for the commencement of the higher rate of pay is the date of taking up the appointment in the higher rank. Such individuals may count paid reckonable time (including the award of accelerated incremental progression (AIP)) in the higher rank towards increments of pay in their substantive rank if an AHR is subsequently relinquished, and towards increments of pay in the same substantive higher rank, if promoted (whether such promotion follows immediately or later).

    If for Disciplinary reasons the following applies (also JSP 754):

    Pay on Reduction in Rank

    03.0903. Individuals who are reduced or reverted to a lower paid rank, or who are reduced in rank to a rank not previously held, will receive the appropriate rate of pay for the new paid rank. However, in all cases an individual’s pay is to be reduced by at least the amount awarded on promotion for that group (so that where a minimum 2% increase applies on promotion, a minimum 2% decrease in pay must apply on reduction in rank). Such decreases, if not equal to an Increment Level (IL) on a pay range, are to be rounded down to the next IL.

    Regarding pension,

    Unusually Glasgow are wrong again, your quote is 100% correct paid rank for a minimum of 2 years within the last 5 years of service for an O/R attracts a pension in that rank, have a look at the new benefits calculator which also has a link to the pension calculator:

    Benefits Calc

    This can also be confirmed using UNICOM and the Pensions Warrant. Feel free to PM if needed.

  10. Cheers PW,

    I managed to get the number for Glasgow after I made my last post so I rang them and this is what happened:

    1. I spoke to a very helpful person who stated that I was correct in my assumption and that an A/SSgt reverting to Sub Sgt after longer than 2 years in Acting Rank would receive a SSgt's pension. As per the publication and confirmed by PW and other posters on other threads.

    2. However, the advisor then went to confirm with their boss and came back with this answer. An A/SSgt reverting to Sub Sgt after longer than 2 years in Acting Rank would not receive a SSgt's pension. Instead they would receive a Sub Sgt's pension with a little bit extra on top to reflect the period in which pay for A/SSgt was received.

    When I queried that this wasn't what the publication said I was told that Answer 2 was the correct one and that the publication was 'misleading'.

    So which is the right answer here? I am smelling something distinctly fishy and it isn't coming from Baldrick's apple crumble!

    Kind Regards

  11. The right answer is as I posted, as laid down in the pensions warrant and varius other publications. This is a fact, and has been for the last 30 years to my knowlege!

  12. PW,

    Many thanks mate. Please check your PMs.

  13. Berlin,

    PM answered - hopefully of some use.

  14. Hi, would someone who held local rank for 2 years count the same?