Sack Officers at 45

Discussion in 'Officers' started by Bad CO, Oct 2, 2012.

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. Bad CO

    Bad CO LE Admin Reviews Editor Gallery Guru

    I know it is the Daily Hate and nothing is ever official until it appears in the Telegraph but the following seems to have received relatively little comment on the site:

    On first reading this seems like a barking idea and even Bonking Bob has identified the weakness in the plan. It did however prompt me to have a look at the actual document produced by Julian Brazier and, quelle surprise, it would appear the Mail has been highly selective in what they've quoted. The full recommendation is:

    All of a sudden that seems like a much more interesting proposition. For those who will point out that we need hordes of dedicated project managers/procurement experts (not something I necessarily agree with BTW) he does concede:

    I'm now at the stage of my career where I'm rapidly approaching the over 45 demographic and can certainly attest to the 'paralysing bureaucracy' that makes change incredibly painful (especially in the post Defence Reform era). I'd also agree that the top end of the Army (& other services) is over commanded with as much time spent on organisational in-fighting and OJAR enhancement as actually doing anything useful. Time for a radical change perhaps?
    • Like Like x 2
  2. On a related note is it better to shoot MPs with 7.62mm, 5.56mm or 9mm? Should dum-dum or tracer be allowed?
    • Like Like x 6
  3. I see the merit in this. As a former OR, I've left at 42 after a couple of years continuance and am now firmly ensconced in a second career.
  4. Not a bad idea at all.

    With flesh on the skeleton of the Daily Snail's selective reporting intended to stir up the bile of Middle England, this has much merit - it would also help to rid the organisation of those maniacs in their 40-50s that still think they are as fit as they were when they commanding a Pl!

    It is painful sometimes...
    • Like Like x 2
  5. I see the point behind younger officers but the reasoning in the article makes no sense.

    It suggests that younger officers would save money whereas you'd still require the majority of the officer positions currently filled by older officers so you'd still be paying broadly the same wages each month, just to younger (wo)men.

    It does also seem to ignore that the reason we had Brigadiers in their mid 20s in the World Wars was because they were the most senior men left to fill the gaps and not because the Army had suddenly decided that promoting a Captain to Acting Brig (or indeed a Sgt to Acting RSM) was a great idea.
  6. Either/both/sensible blend of structures is certainly called for given the cuts apparently necessary in other public services (but not, it seems, in ensuring that Barbadian waiters are fully trained, or that the Chinese exchequer is relieved of some of its' responsibilities by our own). The bloated numbers of very senior people can simply not be justified by the bleat of 'career', just as it can't in the Civil Service or Police. It makes a great deal of sense to bring the breadth of command responsibility down the age ladder, too. It happens in most fast moving industries and works very well.
  7. It depends (and this comes back to Ledwidge's book I reviewed a couple of days ago): what do you want your Officers to do, how do you assess that and who does the assessing?

    A prime example is ACSC - why do we hold this to be the sine qua non of training for those c38-40 when it is in effect the same MA that a 22 year old can do straight from Uni? Why have we decided that we need an extra 16 years of experience to be able to do it over some spotty sprog civilian? What do those extra 16 years bring to the party and what are we willing to lose to get a SO1 Commander at 30 or 31?

    My Grandfather Commanded his 2nd ship, as a new Cdr, at 32 - he wasn't great, but that's what we did in the 60s: why is warfare so much more complex nowadays that my Career Manager recommends that I don't hold out for a Cdr Command until I'm 40?
  8. So the experience a RN Logistics Officer and an Army SF Officer bring to the course are comparable, and the only reason we are delaying the course is to stop people leaving to early?

    How much experience is enough experience? What is it about the experience that makes it 'experience'? Does it have to include being under fire, managing big teams, leading people or is it solely quantified by time? At the end of the day I think our "HR" process wouldn't know the answers to any of these questions, nor indeed actually function as a HR "in the real world".
  9. Are you talking about civvy street?
  11. Pararegtom

    Pararegtom LE Book Reviewer

    mmmm read the header wrong, shot officers with a .45 seems harsh a 9mm 0r 7.62m works even better in my experience, but back to thread, lets face it,at the age of 45 he,s a brig or major general and has killed more of his own lads by bad leadership than the enemy has.
    • Like Like x 2
  12. Sack Officers at 45?

    What an excellent idea, can we do the same with politicians...????

    Didn't think so.
  13. Schaden

    Schaden LE Book Reviewer

    When you say "sack" do you actually mean "leave with a gold plated pension the likes of which others only dream of?"
  14. Until the last 2 CO Designates Course, the average age of a CO of a FF/DD was 40.3 on assuming Command. A friend of mine was selected at 35 for Command, they then delayed his assignment until 37 because 'they' didn't want him to have it 'too soon'.
  15. A2_Matelot

    A2_Matelot LE Book Reviewer

    • Like Like x 1