Discussion in 'Army Reserve' started by Yaris, Apr 5, 2006.

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. OK, so FAS has been announced, the troops are happy (or not as the case may be), but who is going to tell the NRPS that will be made redundant what is happening to them? Terrible way to do business in such a large organisation, there are PSAO's and SQMS' out there that have served in uniform for many years (30 plus) who are being told NOTHING! "Just wait and see" is not a good enough answer, they have families to support and so on.

    Come on those in power, do the right thing, tell the NRPS what is happening to them and let them get on with their lives.
  2. msr

    msr LE

    How many NRPS will be made redundant? Surely they will be swept up with the new NRPS posts (Recruiting/Retention/Welfare) that are being created?

  3. Do not forget about the support staff.

    We are losing a Clerk And Storeman, Do'nt know about our mechanic yet.
  4. As a rough guess one or two per NC Signal Regiment, although I would have expected other NRPS jobs would have appeared in other new Sqns/Coys and these NRPS should have been given first shout.
  5. Wish they would swap our NRPS, thinks he owns the f*****g place, there are some good ones out there and it will all be down to geography in the end, but at the end of the day they have Army pensions aswell, so get a job like the rest of us and welcome to civvy strausser
  6. Have to agree with da grey man, after all if their income is a bit low they could always join the TA !
  7. Yes Greyman your right SOME NRPS do have Army pensions but that is for previous service just the same as every other 22 year soldier that is now working in civvy street. And do you know what, I bet that his new workmates don't have such a problem with his pension as you seem to have!!! But back to the main point, this is still peoples lives we are talking about, and they have the right to be looked after, Duty of Care and all that. It does seem that all that anyone has been botherd about is the TA soldier and not all the other people affected by this, and yes this does include NRPS but also Clerks, Storeman, and Fitters. Oh yes greyman some NRPS are ex TA so do not have a pension to fall back on.
  8. They seem to be trying to get rid of us by stealth - the sneaky way the stoppage of RILOR/HDT was announced (not) is a good indication of the value placed on NRPS, I get the feeling that the squeeze is on - first the new CONtract now the stoppage of RILOR, I wonder what will be next to go - making us pay for dental/medical care would make the system a couple of bob, how about charging NRPS to park in camp - another nice little earner! They could always introduce a Y factor i.e. a %age deducted from pay for the easy life we all have!

    Yes the majority of us do have, hard earned, pensions but that along with the rest of the package is taken into account when applying for the job - any job that is, NRPS or Civilian. To lose any of this is a degredation of the terms of service signed up to! Would be nice to know what the future holds then at least plans can be made!!

    As an aside are you aware that any NRPS made redundant MUST be given priority over any other applicant for a future post so long as they are suitably qualified!! a good one to bear in mind should the need arise - this may be inadvertantly overlooked by the board unless they are made aware! If required I can dig this bit out of TA Regs hopefully this will not be a taken out as part of amendment 30 currently being drafted!

    Rant over (for now)
  9. paywog, you are correct in part, about those being made redundant. However, if they apply for another NRPS post the have to sit on a suitability board, there is NO automatic right to a new NRPS post. TA regs is "grey" on this matter. Check it out, I have in detail. I would suggest that the G1 bloke/girl at Bde may have their own take on the subject, and that may be where a problem/concern may arise.
  10. Yaris - I never said you had an automatic right to a new NRPS post just that redundees must be given priority over other applicants:

    Extracted from TA Regs:

    6.012 b: If NRPS potential redundees apply to be considered for a new or vacant appointment, if they are suitably qualified and have received satisfactory reports in their previous appointments (OJAR grade B) they are to be considered in competition with other NRPS potential redundees before any consideration is given to external applicants. External applicants are only to be considered if no suitably qualified NRPS potential redundee is availabe (see para 3.503d and Annex B/6).

    Annex B/6:

    8. NRPS Potential Redundees. When NRPS potential redundees apply to be considered for a post, if they are suitably qualified and have received satisfactory reports in their previous appointments (OJAR grade B) they are to be considered before any other applicants. Another applicant may only be appointed to an NRPS appointment if no suitably (sic) NRPS potential redundee is available to fill the post.

    This all looks black and white to me - sorry mate but I see no grey area??
  11. What a nasty vindictive post. That bloke would probably be the first to agree that there is scope for a TA pension. Your attitude just about sums up what I have always suspected of some of you people. Self centred to the bitter end. You're nothing but a jealous little man.

    PS. What's a strausser? Did you mean Strasse?
  12. My old man was NRPS until he was made redundant in Options for Change (I think it was that round?). Yes he freely admits that he was very lucky to have a 2nd career with the army once he had finished his 22 year regular career. But to suggest that NRPS regular pensions should be taken into account when you look at thier remuneration package is nonsense. If this was the case then every squaddie on a pension would be in high demand by employers as they could pay them less than anybody else as they would be subsidised by the pension they have already earned.
    Greyman you obviously have bad experiences of some NRPS.
    I never met a bad one during my TA career. You need to remember that for most NRPS is a job not a career path, therefore they may not appear to be / be as keen as young men pushing to get as far as they can.
  13. Greyman -

    who is this man you speak of, surely he is well versed in the role of the unit he works at/in??

    surely he can operate and understand the technical aspects of the equipment in his store, and i take
    it it is his store and his white fleet and his rations etc.

    Am i correct in thinking that when this NRPS took over he came from a purely TA background with no Regular
    Army service behind him and that he may well find himself in a more demanding role with no more idea
    than a 1 year recruit?

    I understand he has managed with others to reduce the strength of the unit from 60 plus to around 25 to 30 now, and all in 18 months, makes accounting a lot easier if less kit is signed out!!

    if any of this is of course bolox then please let me know, and in response to Biscuits, it may appear vindictive
    but some of those NRPS are arrseholes and would struggle to find a job out of green and with no little man
    to tell them what to do. some even need telling when to shave on exercise!!
  14. On what evidence? Maybe put all the blame in one place, instead of looking at other faults within the unit.

    Maybe the TA chain of command kicks into action after many years of slumber and the G1/G4/SPSI fail to fit into it (and then blaming G2/G3 seniors for their failure).
  15. Oh dear what a bag of worms, like i said there are good nrps and bad nrps and at the end of the day the Army will do what it will do, duty of care is just lip service, and will not unfortunately stop the big cog from turning. The Army will make these people redundant purely on the geography of their master plan. It is not being handled very well at all, but when has something like this ever been handled well by the service, i can only comment on how one of our nrps types is being treated regarding this issue.