Should the ACF follow the Rank Structure for AIs or not?

#1
Another DC mate of mine and a few others in my Coy think that instead of starting as a Sgt, you should have to work up the ranks. This can be done to show how far you have gone through your trg. Start off as a L/Cpl then once you have completed your PreITC modules your get promoted to Cpl and then after completion of ITC then it is Sgt. Obviously you would have to have something on your rank slide to show that you are a potential instructor but it would be better than wearing that ridiculous red tab.

Discuss.
 
#2
It really doesn’t matter, it’s a youth organisation and if all the AI’s simply had a rank slide with AI (no rank whatsoever) it would not stop them from doing their job of supervising the children.

It might, however, stop some of them from having their ego’s stroked by said children and therefore the appeal for some would be lost.

Rank structure for cadets, fine, it gives them goals to achieve. Rank structure for adult supervisors! Not really very important other than to make them look like part of a military organisation.

But who does that really benefit. :?

Discuss 8)
 
#4
CAARPS said:
It really doesn’t matter, it’s a youth organisation and if all the AI’s simply had a rank slide with AI (no rank whatsoever) it would not stop them from doing their job of supervising the children.

It might, however, stop some of them from having their ego’s stroked by said children and therefore the appeal for some would be lost.

Rank structure for cadets, fine, it gives them goals to achieve. Rank structure for adult supervisors! Not really very important other than to make them look like part of a military organisation.

But who does that really benefit. :?

Discuss 8)
It is simply a youth organsisation. But more importantly it is the youth organisation sponsored by MoD so is structured in a military manner. cadets have enough trouble getting their heads around rank structure and CoC as it is; if AI's were not structured the same it would cause confusion and division.

IMO it doesn't matter what some adults wear on their rank slides, their ego will be stroked ... same as in all walks of life including regular army.


scoobydont said:
If it aint broke, don't fix it.
Your just worried about being busted :D
 
#5
It's about right as it is.

An AI has responsibilities that are roughly equivalent to their rank in the regs or TA and if you have to liaise, or dare I say "pull rank" with a service unit it also fits. There is no role for adult JNCO's (cadet nco's need a role too) so red tabs more accurately represent the status of new adults - Still learning and not to be responsible for the training, safety and well being of the kids.

It also fits in with the provision of accommodation when you use the Army's real estate.
 
#6
Hmmm.

My concern is over the leadership qualities of some of those with "rank". There are some great people out there - but there are some who just completely fail any conventional notion of leadership or personal example. Passing a course on how to instruct does not equal a leadership qualification. Being the only person available to open the hut on a Tuesday does not cut it either.

Perhaps there should be civilian instructors - no rank, no pretense of military qualifications, no need for fitness, no uniforms - and a seperate structure for those willing to abide by the notions the rest of the Army has about what makes a leader ? If Officers need to go to Westbury what about a genuine test for NCOs ?

As for ideas about "pulling rank" - Behave.

Standing by for flak....
 
#7
saladin said:
Hmmm.

My concern is over the leadership qualities of some of those with "rank". There are some great people out there - but there are some who just completely fail any conventional notion of leadership or personal example. Passing a course on how to instruct does not equal a leadership qualification. Being the only person available to open the hut on a Tuesday does not cut it either.

Perhaps there should be civilian instructors - no rank, no pretense of military qualifications, no need for fitness, no uniforms - and a seperate structure for those willing to abide by the notions the rest of the Army has about what makes a leader ? If Officers need to go to Westbury what about a genuine test for NCOs ?

As for ideas about "pulling rank" - Behave.

Standing by for flak....
i agree with this totally! being an ex instrutor (ex because there were to many ego pretending it was real army) feck off and join up ... I did
 
#8
spad said:
i agree with this totally! being an ex instrutor (ex because there were to many ego pretending it was real army) feck off and join up ... I did
Whoopie fcuking do .... I (like many others) did it the other way round. I became an adult instructor after 24 years in the army and then 10 years working in mine clearance.

So you only joined the army because you didn't like your fellow ACF AI's? You weren't planning on joining anyway?

What are you actually agreeing with ... totally?
 
#9
spad said:
saladin said:
Hmmm.

My concern is over the leadership qualities" of some of those with "rank". There are some great people out there - but there are some who just completely fail any conventional notion of leadership or personal example. Passing a course on how to instruct does not equal a leadership qualification. Being the only person available to open the hut on a Tuesday does not cut it either.
Perhaps there should be civilian instructors - no rank, no pretense of military qualifications, no need for fitness, no uniforms - and a seperate structure for those willing to abide by the notions the rest of the Army has about what makes a leader ? If Officers need to go to Westbury what about a genuine test for NCOs ?
As for ideas about "pulling rank" - Behave.

Standing by for flak....
i agree with this totally! being an ex instrutor (ex because there were to many ego pretending it was real army) feck off and join up ... I did
all the above in Bold i agree with k12eod!
I spent my youth in the cadet and even did my 4 star master and came 3 in the claire shore trophy and some so called "adult leaders" couldnt do anything military to save there lives and the worse in my eyes where the old reg walts that back in there day they used to do something some where some how but couldnt get off that fat arse now to save them selves but will quiet happily shout at kids to remeber the good old days
thats why there should be a non uniformed part for thoes walts who cant or wont any more!
 
#10
k13eod said:
spad said:
i agree with this totally! being an ex instrutor (ex because there were to many ego pretending it was real army) feck off and join up ... I did
Whoopie fcuking do .... I (like many others) did it the other way round. I became an adult instructor after 24 years in the army and then 10 years working in mine clearance.

?
So I have no doubt you know what I mean by leadership qualities.

Why should an overweight 19 yo ex Cadet who whinges like a stuck record and wimps out of all difficult tasks expect to come off a course with Sgt stripes ?

Where/when does the leadership and good example bit come into play ?
 
#11
spad said:
spad said:
saladin said:
Hmmm.

My concern is over the leadership qualities" of some of those with "rank". There are some great people out there - but there are some who just completely fail any conventional notion of leadership or personal example. Passing a course on how to instruct does not equal a leadership qualification. Being the only person available to open the hut on a Tuesday does not cut it either.
Perhaps there should be civilian instructors - no rank, no pretense of military qualifications, no need for fitness, no uniforms - and a seperate structure for those willing to abide by the notions the rest of the Army has about what makes a leader ? If Officers need to go to Westbury what about a genuine test for NCOs ?
As for ideas about "pulling rank" - Behave.

Standing by for flak....
i agree with this totally! being an ex instrutor (ex because there were to many ego pretending it was real army) feck off and join up ... I did
all the above in Bold i agree with k12eod!
I spent my youth in the cadet and even did my 4 star master and came 3 in the claire shore trophy and some so called "adult leaders" couldnt do anything military to save there lives and the worse in my eyes where the old reg walts that back in there day they used to do something some where some how but couldnt get off that fat arse now to save them selves but will quiet happily shout at kids to remeber the good old days
thats why there should be a non uniformed part for thoes walts who cant or wont any more!
Its k13eod (unless that was some form of demotion?

I don't see it that way here in Kent ... there's an equal proprtion of ex servicemen and civvy entry instructors who might be like that. There are those who are not fit (I for one can't run well) and those who have limited knowledge; people are utilised for their strengths and not their weaknesses. Some of the worst I've seen are the ex cadets who progress to instructor; they are the ones more likely to be doing the shouting rather than ex regs.

And you will find exactly the same in the army ... particularly the TA!
 
#12
i saw a very classic example of cadets shouting and doing stupid things,
3 cadet seniors where with a 3 star group on an annual camp, went in at 06:00 to wake them up,
no problems there yet .... but they did it by tipping beds and physically throwing kids out there beds and all half hour before they were meant to "wake them",
they were trying to make sure there group were the best in that camp.
why did they throw them out of bed shout in there faces etc etc because its what happened to them when they were 3 stars by "adults"

they were all duely demoted, but whos fault was it ?!?!? theres or the adults before them?

that was 2001 so it might of changed by now i dont know

but even i as a cadet remember stupid adults doing stupid thing all whilst there mates thought it was funny!!
getting people on assult course perpously wet before a 3 day exercise and pushed them in at the end if they werent wet.
and you are correct the ex regs did see the stupidity in it (recent ex) but still did not step in and stop it at the time and the long gone ex regs said it was carater building!

as a cadet i took it all in the stride but as an adult i saw the sniping and back biting .... i was going to say as if it was a real career but my time in the regs i've never seen so much back biting!

and i did join up because i wanted to but had to wait due to asthma so thought i would do the cadet adult thing till i waited but saw the ugly side and went TA instead at least that was kinda real with less ego boosting and shouting and just lots of drinking instead.

excuse the typo's
 
#13
WO2.Ghandi said:
It's about right as it is.

An AI has responsibilities that are roughly equivalent to their rank in the regs or TA and if you have to liaise, or dare I say "pull rank" with a service unit it also fits. There is no role for adult JNCO's (cadet nco's need a role too) so red tabs more accurately represent the status of new adults - Still learning and not to be responsible for the training, safety and well being of the kids.

It also fits in with the provision of accommodation when you use the Army's real estate.
Sort of proves my point above (re egos).
Its a youth organisation sponsored by the army.
Pull Rank. Do behave :roll:

Oh and if you think an AI Sgt has similar responsibilities to a Platoon Sgt and the same to every rank up the chain you need shake your head a little bit 8O
 
#14
I knew the pull rank bit would get some sort of response:

It's entirely appropriate for an ACF adult to lay the law down where the welfare of the kids they are responsible for is jeopardised - if you were being driven by a TA MT Cpl who thinks he's Jenson Button for example.

Of course, the care of the kids is the real authority and 9 times out of 10 you don't need any rank to make that point tactfully. The rank badge can help, it acknowledges where the responsibility lies.

You also can't duck that responsibility, even if you are the only fat knacker available to put the key in the cadet hut door. There may be an argument about making sure whoever does is up to the job, but that has nothing to do with their knowledge or level of fitness being up to leading a section attack.
 
#15
WO2.Ghandi said:
Of course, the care of the kids is the real authority and 9 times out of 10 you don't need any rank to make that point tactfully. The rank badge can help, it acknowledges where the responsibility lies.
My bold. Ultimately it lies with the ruperts, hence the commission.
 
#16
WO2.Ghandi said:
You also can't duck that responsibility, even if you are the only fat knacker available to put the key in the cadet hut door. There may be an argument about making sure whoever does is up to the job, but that has nothing to do with their knowledge or level of fitness being up to leading a section attack.
It also has nothing to do with wearing an assortment of stripes and crowns. I can see beyond physical fitness - to a degree - but the folk who really get my goat are the ones who show no leadership, no personal moral example. They are quite simply unfit to wear "rank" in any sense.
 
#17
spad said:
i did join up because i wanted to but had to wait due to asthma so thought i would do the cadet adult thing till i waited but saw the ugly side and went TA instead at least that was kinda real with less ego boosting and shouting and just lots of drinking instead.

excuse the typo's
My bold.

I was sure TA and regs had the same medical standards.... :?
 
#18
Commission or no, if you're the "responsible adult" who was there in person supervising the kids when it all went tits up, it will be your door the police come knocking on.

If there's no leadership, sense of responsibility and, perhaps, morality then the first question is are they fit to be looking after kids. If the answer is they are up to the job then I think snco "rank" is appropriate recognition.

The accountability and management skills are comparable, at least on the G1 level.
 
#19
CAARPS said:
It really doesn’t matter, it’s a youth organisation and if all the AI’s simply had a rank slide with AI (no rank whatsoever) it would not stop them from doing their job of supervising the children.

It might, however, stop some of them from having their ego’s stroked by said children and therefore the appeal for some would be lost.

Rank structure for cadets, fine, it gives them goals to achieve. Rank structure for adult supervisors! Not really very important other than to make them look like part of a military organisation.

But who does that really benefit. :?

Discuss 8)
I follow the same belief. I'd happily scrap my stripes for a 'CFAV' or 'AI' slide any time.

It's good in front of the kids, but AI my experience of the AI rank structure is that it gives too many people a cause to jerk off over themselves, and is seldom used in a responsible manner.

In 4 years as a TA soldier I never once felt the need to punch a higher rank. In less than a year in the ACF I've enjoyed it every one of the 3 times. All 3 as a result of people acting like dicks because their rank lets them.
 
#20
Then I would suggest you are the knob and should resign from the organisation immediately for the bad example you set to cadets. I have always been able to resist that sort of impulse.
I would be disappointed to find you still a CFAV in any county with that attitude.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
junior_RLC The Intelligence Cell 46
ging-gwar The Intelligence Cell 0
Nige The Training Wing 2

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top