The Brown letter is comming back

#1
Chaps heard on the grape vine that Manning Control Points are being brought back in after a lengthy rest in the APC vaults.

Watch this space and if anyone is effected, please contact BAFF for information and help on the subject.
 
#3
12 to 15 years in - job section of papers are usually Thursday, brace yourself to be anally invaded...!
 
#4
It's not a straight booting, if you're in an over-manned trade and not cutting the mustard either transfer or get out. CO's have ultimate influence. Makes sense to me.
 
#5
Just read that.

I thought there were quite a few more than 3,000 affected by MCP? Esp over 25 years.

While Manning Control Points give the Army the opportunity of terminating the service of soldiers at the end of three, six, nine, 12 or 15 years service, the current intention is to focus on the 12 and 15 year groups only.
So if you have done over 15 years you are safe?

Soes it cover EVERYONE between 12 and 15 or just those at 12 or 15?
 
#6
There are plenty of ways of getting rid of the chaff. If Manning Control is used correctly fair one. It should not be used to discharge soldiers who are downgraded or abused by the C of C when there is a personality clash and looking for a way to punish. It happened before, and that was when it went horribly wrong last time and the reason it was stopped.

Yep it was much more than the figures on the press release. G Buffoon admitted it in a letter to Paul Keetch.

This is a cull and like before its going to hit the guys close to the magic number. Save a hell of lot in the pension pot

Any how, feel free to get educated

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Manning-Control

BAFF will be setting a page dedicated to Manning Control for those who are effected.
 
#7
kennys-go-nad said:
It should not be used to discharge soldiers who are downgraded
.
Why not? If you can't do the job you are paid to do due to injury what use are you?
 
#8
stacker1 said:
kennys-go-nad said:
It should not be used to discharge soldiers who are downgraded
.
Why not? If you can't do the job you are paid to do due to injury what use are you?
I imagine there's a good argument that if the army breaks you, it wouldn't be fair for them to just discard you when you signed up for a full career, especially if they are able to employ you in another area.

The counter argument could be that it happens in civvie street, but you would get a better financial deal outside, and civilian firms don't tend to break very many of their employees.
 
#9
amazing__lobster said:
I imagine there's a good argument that if the army breaks you, it wouldn't be fair for them to just discard you when you signed up for a full career, especially if they are able to employ you in another area.
If the army break you, you are usually able to get compensation.
If you are injured whether its losing a leg to a mine or falling over in the NAFFI drunk at the age of 18, should the army then keep you for the next 22 years even though you are unable to do your job?
 
#10
There are plenty of fair and effective ways to Discharge soldiers who are injured and unable to perform at any level due to those injurys. In most cases that requires giving a pension. Wonga.
The MOD do not want to make redundancies as again it costs Wonga
 
#11
stacker1 said:
amazing__lobster said:
I imagine there's a good argument that if the army breaks you, it wouldn't be fair for them to just discard you when you signed up for a full career, especially if they are able to employ you in another area.
If the army break you, you are usually able to get compensation.
If you are injured whether its losing a leg to a mine or falling over in the NAFFI drunk at the age of 18, should the army then keep you for the next 22 years even though you are unable to do your job?
Dunno, and don't really care as it doesn't effect me anymore (just thought I'd throw in a point, without getting drawn into the tedious, verbatim argument you have on a weekly basis with different posters around this issue).

Although I remember lots of people who were downgraded with injuries that were the fault of the army, and they were still capable of doing of fulfilling certain roles.
 
#12
amazing__lobster said:
Although I remember lots of people who were downgraded with injuries that were the fault of the army, and they were still capable of doing of fulfilling certain roles.
I'm sure an decent CO is going to recognise a soldier at his 15 year point who has been on tours, volunteered for all sport, been on exercise and is now broken to a fat useless tosser at his 15 year point who's been getting money for old rope until now.
 

BuggerAll

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
#13
Lets hope we don't have any repetition of the sort of nonsense that lead to guys being slung out and immediately reemployed on FTRS.
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
#14
I take that this only refers to non-commissioned personnel?
 
#15
stacker1 said:
amazing__lobster said:
Although I remember lots of people who were downgraded with injuries that were the fault of the army, and they were still capable of doing of fulfilling certain roles.
I'm sure an decent CO is going to recognise a soldier at his 15 year point who has been on tours, volunteered for all sport, been on exercise and is now broken to a fat useless tosser at his 15 year point who's been getting money for old rope until now.
Sorry to come in like a cúnt: have you ever served? Were you around when the last round of MCPs came about? Do you remember (or have you bothered to find out) what they were used for?


I'll give you a clue as my Regiment got rid of quite a few soldiers under MCP: it was a cynical excuse to get rid of average/ok soldiers before their pension points. It was a cynical excuse to get rid of soldiers injured in the line of duty (e.g. breaking a leg on exercise to such an extent that the soldier will never be fit again) without paying them a medical discharge. Why? Because MDing a soldier is expensive (almost 7-8% of what an average MP claims each year in expenses).

MCP were shut down as the Courts rightly showed the the CoC placed immense pressure on soldiers to accept the change in terms of service, at tremendous personal cost to the soldiers concerned (loss of pension, loss war pension, loss of gratuity, loss of income support, loss of medical support, etc.

That you even think that the CoC will apply them fairly across the board shows that you are either an ignorant cűnt or a gullible cúnt. I was a Captain in the Royal Artillery when the last round was being pushed through; I was, and remain, disgusted at the various Bty commanders and COs who abused the system (and destroyed loyal soldiers' lives in the process).

Think I'm exaggerating? We all know QMs who refused to turn on the heating, stripped a regiment of all buckshees in order to get an OBE. MCP was exactly the same for the direct entry officer corps of certain ranks: the more soldiers a CO could get rid of, the better he thought he looked at the next Bde O group.

Kenny has it bang-to-rights: this is all about saving money.
 
#16
From what i remember of MCP in late 80's they basically got rid of anyone who was a L/Cpl or below by the 11 year point in my Corps, who the CO/OC units didn't think would basically come off any promotion board within the next 2 years at their 11 year point.

Or due to the Option for change going on as well a lot of people were binned as they restructured trades so in reality there was no hope of promotion for more than a few, as trade change or leave was the only option anyway, they saved a major amount of dosh by giving out the one year notice for SNLR, and not making them redundant to some that had served over 12 years but less than 15.

but as I am now old and feeble i may have remembered it wrong...
 
#17
Dread said:
stacker1 said:
amazing__lobster said:
Although I remember lots of people who were downgraded with injuries that were the fault of the army, and they were still capable of doing of fulfilling certain roles.
I'm sure an decent CO is going to recognise a soldier at his 15 year point who has been on tours, volunteered for all sport, been on exercise and is now broken to a fat useless tosser at his 15 year point who's been getting money for old rope until now.
Sorry to come in like a cúnt: have you ever served? Were you around when the last round of MCPs came about? Do you remember (or have you bothered to find out) what they were used for?


I'll give you a clue as my Regiment got rid of quite a few soldiers under MCP: it was a cynical excuse to get rid of average/ok soldiers before their pension points. It was a cynical excuse to get rid of soldiers injured in the line of duty (e.g. breaking a leg on exercise to such an extent that the soldier will never be fit again) without paying them a medical discharge. Why? Because MDing a soldier is expensive (almost 7-8% of what an average MP claims each year in expenses).

MCP were shut down as the Courts rightly showed the the CoC placed immense pressure on soldiers to accept the change in terms of service, at tremendous personal cost to the soldiers concerned (loss of pension, loss war pension, loss of gratuity, loss of income support, loss of medical support, etc.

That you even think that the CoC will apply them fairly across the board shows that you are either an ignorant cűnt or a gullible cúnt. I was a Captain in the Royal Artillery when the last round was being pushed through; I was, and remain, disgusted at the various Bty commanders and COs who abused the system (and destroyed loyal soldiers' lives in the process).

Think I'm exaggerating? We all know QMs who refused to turn on the heating, stripped a regiment of all buckshees in order to get an OBE. MCP was exactly the same for the direct entry officer corps of certain ranks: the more soldiers a CO could get rid of, the better he thought he looked at the next Bde O group.

Kenny has it bang-to-rights: this is all about saving money.
At least this time the information and subject matter experts are out there to help and prevent from such cases happening again :police:
 
#18
Dread said:
stacker1 said:
amazing__lobster said:
Although I remember lots of people who were downgraded with injuries that were the fault of the army, and they were still capable of doing of fulfilling certain roles.
I'm sure an decent CO is going to recognise a soldier at his 15 year point who has been on tours, volunteered for all sport, been on exercise and is now broken to a fat useless tosser at his 15 year point who's been getting money for old rope until now.
Sorry to come in like a cúnt: have you ever served? Were you around when the last round of MCPs came about? Do you remember (or have you bothered to find out) what they were used for?
.
Before my time I'm afraid
As they were such a fuck up last time maybe it will be an improvement, For year the Biffs have plagued the army and now something is finally being done about it everyone is complaining. The COs I know won't have to chop any good lads to make themselves look better notwhen they have such a wide choice of fat lazy gits to choose from.
What do you suggest the army do? Contiune as it does with the amount of fat gits? Do you think a CO is going to boot out someone injured in combat over some fat porker? That will look good in the media.
 
#19
stacker1 said:
Before my time I'm afraid
As they were such a fuck up last time maybe it will be an improvement, For year the Biffs have plagued the army and now something is finally being done about it everyone is complaining. The COs I know won't have to chop any good lads to make themselves look better notwhen they have such a wide choice of fat lazy gits to choose from.
What do you suggest the army do? Contiune as it does with the amount of fat gits? Do you think a CO is going to boot out someone injured in combat over some fat porker? That will look good in the media.
Fair enough! You'll learn to be a true cynical bástard in a couple of years...

There is already (and always has been) a system in place for getting rid of mongs and biffs. The problem is that takes a bit of leadership by the CoC to use it: interviews, remedial PT, action plan, 3 month warnings, etc, etc.

I have no trouble with the Army getting rid of knackers. I have no problem with them getting rid of wounded lads who will never be combat fit again: however the soldiers must be paid their dues. If wounded then they must get a medical discharge (and the associated monies): not put under massive pressure to sign documents that will cost them tens of thousands of pounds, all because the RSM and CO are bullying and threatening him.
 
#20
Some examples

http://www.voidstar.com/ukpoliblog/index.php/fid/56

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-185884/Army-pension-scam.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...forced-out-to-save-pension-money-sue-MoD.html

One of those involved in the group action against the ministry is Darren Barraclough, 32, a former member of the Parachute Regiment, from Pontefract, W Yorks.

He injured his shoulder while parachuting in 1994 and was told that he was to be discharged with 30 per cent disabilities, receiving a monthly medical pension of £400.

Later his commanding officer told him that the ministry had said he must not be medically discharged and should be dealt with under manning control instead.

He was put on light administrative duties and given a three-year contract, after which he was discharged with no pension.

One document dated Nov 29, 1997, dealing with Mr Barraclough's discharge, talks of "a change to medical board guidelines which effectively reduces the number of personnel discharged on medical grounds, opting instead for administrative discharges to reduce the budget requirements to the MoD".
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads