The End Of The IS Roster?

Discussion in 'Royal Signals' started by PoisonDwarf, Dec 5, 2004.

?
  1. Yes - merge it with the YofS roster.

    23.1%
  2. Yes - merge it with the FofS roster.

    15.4%
  3. No - there's room for all three

    61.5%

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. Heard a nasty rumour that Supvr IS is to be phased out next year and brought into the FofS fold. Not exactly sure how it will be executed but I heard some say it was a name-only change to FofS(IS).

    Perhaps it's only chinese whispers, but I'm sure that some may have heard the same.

    Any thoughts?
     
  2. Hi PD.

    Heard the same whispers myself at the bar one night. To be honest, it came across as just rumour, but had the pleasent result of getting the backs up of several Foreman/Potential Foreman who were present :D Bless em.

    As i understand it from your post, this would be a name change only. The role would be the same, there would still be the 3 distinct supervisory rosters, but with the Supvr moniker replaced by Foreman for the IS.

    I suppose a potential problem would be that staff are used to hollaring for the Foreman, it'll take some time for them to get used to the reply "Which one?".

    I think its just rumour mate. You know what the Corps is like for jungle drums.

    Boney
     
  3. Why not just have FoS(IS) and delete the trade FOS :D
     
  4. Em, i expect that'll be a hugely popular solution gp3b :?

    Boney
     
  5. Don't you mean FoS(CIS)? and if you have that, surely a YoS(CIS) would follow.
     
  6. The "C" was dropped as that is in the domain of other trades :roll:
     
  7. Not to sure if there are two changes going on or just a bit of crossed wires, I think the later,

    Apparantly they are looking at combining all common elements of the Supervisory courses to common modules as they contain all the same types of things, then you will split off to relevant areas that are specific to your roster. So YofS, FofS, Sup Rad and Sup IS will do the same managments etc stuff and then each specalise in their trade groups.

    At face value it seems to make sense, but then I havent been there or done it.
     
  8. Apparently title change for Supvr IS to FofS(IS) and Supvr(R) to YofS(R) by 2006. Then eventual amalgamation between the trades by 2010.

    That's from the horse's mouth i.e. the big man at the top. However nothing's been decided - it's all at discussion level just now.

    Also Inst Tech and Dvr Elec to possibly re-role to more centralised CIS Infra trade and opportunity to stay in trade to WO2. That sounds quite an interesting move, which could prompt a lot of grumblings.

    Drivers and storemen to stay as main RD feeder trades. By the way - does anyone else find it ironic that they get called "combat trades", even though driving and stacking shelves is as far from combat as you can get - they're bloody G4 trades, hardly soldiers!! :twisted: Discuss.
     
  9. Hardly Soldiers??? People in glass houses PD :wink: :wink:

    Boney
     
  10. someone looking for a bite? :wink:
     
  11. Yeah...I was looking for a bite, though I'd be interested to know how everyone else feels about how those trades are treated. It seems a shame to recruit thse guys and train them as DDIs or eqpt accountants then say "you need to leave or train to go RD". Daft really.