Senior officer redundancy.

#2
We all know that Captains (lots of those about - not), Majors and Lt Cols are being targeted for redundancy. But why aren't
any officers above OF4 being sacked? Do we really need all 137 Brigadiers (or whatever it is)?

I've not read or heard anything - less the standard line trotted out that we need all these senior staff to maintain parity with foreign Armies, and to provide 'an appropriate level of leadership in procurement' (discuss) - which I don't think outweighs the glaring impression that this is all about jobs for the boys.

Anyway - just interested. I can't be sacked as I an out of tranche - I jet find it odd that some senior officer somewhere thinks the way you make savings in SP costs are by hollowing out the centre.
What makes think OF4s and above won't be hit too?

And what makes you think you are 'out of tranche'? Details like that won't be available until at least April AFAIK.
 
#3
One of the key outcomes of AVANTI will be a significant reduction in the number of 1*s (and a number of Cols) knocking about. From what I understand, when you promote to Brig you change your TACOS and the Army essentially no longer has to find you a job if they don't have any need for you any more.

As B_B states, anything you are hearing is rumour and the details will be out in early May. Unless you are SF (or writing the policy!) then I wouldn't assume any Officer is safe!!
 
#4
I read an article recently that "Military Attaches" are likely to be in the firing line, particularly at 1 star and AD level. That could set a few drinks tumblers rattling in the outer reaches of the old Empire and various other tenuous outposts around the world! I have absolutely no idea how many senior officers across the Services are involved in that line of employment; is it significant, or are the numbers so miniscule that a cull will have no major impact on the overall senior officer wage bill?
 
#5
I read an article recently that "Military Attaches" are likely to be in the firing line, particularly at 1 star and AD level. That could set a few drinks tumblers rattling in the outer reaches of the old Empire and various other tenuous outposts around the world! I have absolutely no idea how many senior officers across the Services are involved in that line of employment; is it significant, or are the numbers so miniscule that a cull will have no major impact on the overall senior officer wage bill?
There's loads:

British Embassies: Military Attaches: 8 Nov 2010: Written answers and statements (TheyWorkForYou.com)
 
#6
I've no doubt we will; and I have every reason to believe we will continue to loose influence, recognition and "ground truth" in lots of areas of the world, for a cost that is peanuts.

But it satisfies those with a chip on their shoulder, so all is well.

Every 1* in the Army and RAF, and every 2*, is on a "blood chit", that is to say that they are only employed for the job they are in, with no promise of further assignment or promotion. If positions are lost, numbers will be reduced, simple as.
 

OldSnowy

LE
Moderator
Book Reviewer
#7
I read an article recently that "Military Attaches" are likely to be in the firing line, particularly at 1 star and AD level. That could set a few drinks tumblers rattling in the outer reaches of the old Empire and various other tenuous outposts around the world! I have absolutely no idea how many senior officers across the Services are involved in that line of employment; is it significant, or are the numbers so miniscule that a cull will have no major impact on the overall senior officer wage bill?
Quite a few still left, from all Services, but nothing like as many as in cold war days though. Still, with the FCO keen as mustard that we be represented in Furrin Parts by EU Embassies, there'll be no place for a UK Military Rep anyway shortly.
 
#8
I have vague recollections that in the past many DAs were on local rank - appearances meaning a lot in that sort of job but in actuality is was a sort of 'thank you, you're got as far as you're going to but have a good couple of years socialising prior to leaving (and you might get noticed by BAe)' job. But then the DA in Athens got topped and his widow wanted a Brigadier’s widow’s pension so from then they had to be substantive.
 
#9
Interesting link, thank you. No surprise to see an increase in places such as China and India and reductions across Western Europe; however, the 3-fold increase in DA's in Vienna is an eye opener.

With almost 60 OF5 (or above) appointments on that list, I can see the logic in the article, but as Alfred_the_great implies, the Politics of envy also appear to involved.
 
#10
Interesting link, thank you. No surprise to see an increase in places such as China and India and reductions across Western Europe; however, the 3-fold increase in DA's in Vienna is an eye opener.
:? Why? :?
 
#11
The bean counters have had their beady eyes on Red tabs for longer than this last SDR. A major cull at Colonel was already planned and I cannot see that changing.
 
#12
I think you need to understand that we are actually undergunned in terms of rank on the attache circuit. Most countries grant access with rank - we are lucky that our army is (currently) held in high esteem and therefore we get access above that which we might expect given our generally lower ranks. Things are being reduced but if anyone seriously believes that a generic countries armed forces will take advice from a captain then they need to think again. Equally, you will probably find that if a Defence Section is being upgunned, it is probably because it is being given extra responsibility for new areas where greater cuts will have taken place.

As for that article by the Daily Wail, I don't think that I have seen a shoddier piece of journalism for a while. Notwithstanding the serious grammatical and syntax carcrash that it was, the facts and quotes were so obviously made up, that I wandered for a moment if I was in some sort of dream sequence rather than reading an online article.

Senior ranks will be cut, across abilities as well as ranks. I'm off to snaffle some Ferrero Rocher before the ents budget is cut

OpsO
 
#13
I think you need to understand that we are actually undergunned in terms of rank on the attache circuit.
So an Army that has a planned impact of one Brigade on sustained operations and possibly another on a short term deployment we need to have hundreds of DAs who are Generals?

Just give local acting to the AGC clerks.
 
#14
No - but if want other armies to take notice of what you do - you need rank.

If not - then don't be there at all.

In fact we could all pull back to the UK and build a big wall and talk to no one at all
 
#15
No - but if want other armies to take notice of what you do - you need rank.

If not - then don't be there at all.

In fact we could all pull back to the UK and build a big wall and talk to no one at all
I think you will find that is pretty much the plan (It's all in a pdf on the MOD web site, home defence with a small expeditionary capability)

We need to face up to the fact that the British Army is a small force with limited capabilities and stop manning the upper end of the Officer establishment as if we still rule a quarter of the world.

The die was set when the whole LE farce came in to being just to man the slots that justified the inverse pyramid.
 
#16
Something I have no problem with.
But, if we want to be taken seriously, and at certain levels we do, we need to have these "trappings" that allow us to do a bit more than just physically move a unit from one location to another. We can no longer do anything on our own. This means we have to talk to other armies. The DA circuit is one way that we do it and is probably the most cost efficient.
 
#18
Western - you talk about hundreds of DAs. Just exactly how many do you think there are? (to the nearest 50?)
The actual number is on the previously quoted link, you implied this should be increased.
 
#19
I never implied that it should be increased - I said that, where we are pulling out of certain areas (lets say we pull out of 5 countries in Europe) then one particular area will be given responsability for all those countries we have pulled out from and it will be increased in size accordingly (although not to the numbers cut by the drawdown but lets say by 3 countries worth). I believe that it is a concept called streamlining and has worked at cutting costs in business.
I leave you to draw you own conclusions based upon what our peceived level of ambition is.
 
#20
Interestingly - just checked the figures and, for the country that I am in at the moment, the rank figures are incorrect (too high). Slightly worrying given the reviews currently underway.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top