The numbers dont add up, oris it just me?

#1
The current Director has, on more than one occassion, made it clear that he regards the percentage of Late Entrant Officers in our glorious Corps to be slightly too high.

To that end, he has instigated measures (or soon will), two of which are that commissioning can granted only from WO1, and candidates will face a selection board interview.

Now, The Intelligence Corps has a number of officer LSNs to fill. On the plus/gains side you have these being filled by DE from Sandhurst, and some transferee officers from other capbadges. The remainder need to be filled by LEs. On the minus side you have wastage, which falls into two main categories - those officers who sign off to seek life elsewhere, and those at the end of their contract. Increasingly, sadly, there is a growing third reason of operational losses.

So despite what the Director might wish, and I not correct in saying that the number of vacancies is dicatated by a Glasgow spreadsheet telling the Corps how many officers are needed for the upcoming year, after the gains and losses have been calculated. If this is the case, what influence can the Director bring to bear on the numbers?
 
#2
ChickVonFlick said:
To that end, he has instigated measures (or soon will), two of which are that commissioning can granted only from WO1, and candidates will face a selection board interview.
Already in place :cry:
 
#3
ChickVonFlick said:
The current Director has, on more than one occassion, made it clear that he regards the percentage of Late Entrant Officers in our glorious Corps to be slightly too high.

To that end, he has instigated measures (or soon will), two of which are that commissioning can granted only from WO1, and candidates will face a selection board interview.

Now, The Intelligence Corps has a number of officer LSNs to fill. On the plus/gains side you have these being filled by DE from Sandhurst, and some transferee officers from other capbadges. The remainder need to be filled by LEs. On the minus side you have wastage, which falls into two main categories - those officers who sign off to seek life elsewhere, and those at the end of their contract. Increasingly, sadly, there is a growing third reason of operational losses.

So despite what the Director might wish, and I not correct in saying that the number of vacancies is dicatated by a Glasgow spreadsheet telling the Corps how many officers are needed for the upcoming year, after the gains and losses have been calculated. If this is the case, what influence can the Director bring to bear on the numbers?
Surely it's supply and demand? If more WO1s for example are recommended for elevation to the peerage than net vacancies available on the ossifer plot, whatever the Director wants will contribute to guiding the board's weeding and selection process
 
#4
And then the next Director will state that he loves LEs and will switch the rules back-it seems to change every few years depending on the view of the man in the seat.
 
#6
Since haev the head sheds got it wrong? I take great offence that you would make any kind of disparaging comments about the leadership. After all they were completely correct to get rid of manle ANSIs, and cut the numbers back on Arabic linguists, and there were certainly no mistakes made over the A/Cpls' pay, let alone the lang pay, and hold on I'll get the regt revolver on the way out.
 
#8
The other thing about supply and demand is that we have shed loads of applicants from those at Sandhurst - as a Corps which is quite small we had more applicants than most regiments - bottom line the top man can afford to be choosy...in the long term it won't work we all know that.
 
#9
devexwarrior said:
And then the next Director will state that he loves LEs and will switch the rules back-it seems to change every few years depending on the view of the man in the seat.
And one thing that won't change is the fact that there will always be E2 HUMINTERs commissioned into our Corps taking 1 place off that board to someone who has actually spent their career doing mainstream jobs .................Oh darn thats too emotive comment isnt it? :x
 
#10
Piglet_Files said:
devexwarrior said:
And then the next Director will state that he loves LEs and will switch the rules back-it seems to change every few years depending on the view of the man in the seat.
And one thing that won't change is the fact that there will always be E2 HUMINTERs commissioned into our Corps taking 1 place off that board to someone who has actually spent their career doing mainstream jobs .................Oh darn thats too emotive comment isnt it? :x
I feel your pain - but yeah it is fcuking w@ank that these one trick ponies can nick places over those of us that made the right choice to start with - because in the majority of cases I've seen full screws who are more widely employable.
 
#11
combatintman said:
these one trick ponies can nick places over those of us that made the right choice to start with - because in the majority of cases I've seen full screws who are more widely employable.
Please leave the Radio Supervisors out of this
 
#12
combatintman said:
Piglet_Files said:
devexwarrior said:
And then the next Director will state that he loves LEs and will switch the rules back-it seems to change every few years depending on the view of the man in the seat.
And one thing that won't change is the fact that there will always be E2 HUMINTERs commissioned into our Corps taking 1 place off that board to someone who has actually spent their career doing mainstream jobs .................Oh darn thats too emotive comment isnt it? :x
I feel your pain - but yeah it is fcuking w@ank that these one trick ponies can nick places over those of us that made the right choice to start with - because in the majority of cases I've seen full screws who are more widely employable.
Combat - my 11 year old daughter knows more about PS & OPINTEL
than some of the recent E2s that have been commissioned in the Corps.
My fault I guess for leaving my Trade Trg Manuals in the bookcase. Still am I right in asking that DINT still states that while he is in the seat that an E2 will be commissioned into the Corps every year ??
 
#13
Piglet_Files said:
combatintman said:
Piglet_Files said:
devexwarrior said:
And then the next Director will state that he loves LEs and will switch the rules back-it seems to change every few years depending on the view of the man in the seat.
And one thing that won't change is the fact that there will always be E2 HUMINTERs commissioned into our Corps taking 1 place off that board to someone who has actually spent their career doing mainstream jobs .................Oh darn thats too emotive comment isnt it? :x
I feel your pain - but yeah it is fcuking w@ank that these one trick ponies can nick places over those of us that made the right choice to start with - because in the majority of cases I've seen full screws who are more widely employable.
Combat - my 11 year old daughter knows more about PS & OPINTEL
than some of the recent E2s that have been commissioned in the Corps.
My fault I guess for leaving my Trade Trg Manuals in the bookcase. Still am I right in asking that DINT still states that while he is in the seat that an E2 will be commissioned into the Corps every year ??
Hmmm, lets be honest, he's a an E2 transferee himself!
 
#14
Op_Int_and_Spy said:
Piglet_Files said:
combatintman said:
Piglet_Files said:
devexwarrior said:
And then the next Director will state that he loves LEs and will switch the rules back-it seems to change every few years depending on the view of the man in the seat.
And one thing that won't change is the fact that there will always be E2 HUMINTERs commissioned into our Corps taking 1 place off that board to someone who has actually spent their career doing mainstream jobs .................Oh darn thats too emotive comment isnt it? :x
I feel your pain - but yeah it is fcuking w@ank that these one trick ponies can nick places over those of us that made the right choice to start with - because in the majority of cases I've seen full screws who are more widely employable.
Combat - my 11 year old daughter knows more about PS & OPINTEL
than some of the recent E2s that have been commissioned in the Corps.
My fault I guess for leaving my Trade Trg Manuals in the bookcase. Still am I right in asking that DINT still states that while he is in the seat that an E2 will be commissioned into the Corps every year ??
Hmmm, lets be honest, he's a an E2 transferee himself!
So that's how he got commissioned then!!!
 
#15
combatintman said:
The other thing about supply and demand is that we have shed loads of applicants from those at Sandhurst - as a Corps which is quite small we had more applicants than most regiments - bottom line the top man can afford to be choosy...in the long term it won't work we all know that.
I presume the Int Corps has the same problem as all the other Corps and Regiments-recruiting is fine, it is retention that is the problem-the mid range captain, 30 years old give or take. A couple of op tours under the belt, a medal and a few war stories-great stuff for the CV and the pals from uni are pulling down metabucks in the City. "So Captain Corpsman-next posting is SO3 Drains at 888 (Out in the middle of nowhere) Bde where 90% of your time will be spent doing naff all." Suddenly you've lost loads of those people who do the kind of jobs that are best done anyway by either a very experienced WO or an LE. LEs provide stability, good role models and do a bloody good job.

You "thin out" the ranks of the LE cohort at your peril
 
#17
I work in a 'tri-service' Unit/environment and I had an interesting arguement/conversation with a Maitlow comrade of mine about how 'Int Corps promote too fast...yada yada yada'.

I explained that Many people in the Int Corps actually plan for a 35 year odd career and have aspirations of attaining an LE Commision some time in the future (if up to the quality line of course).

The high number of LE Officers gives us mid career SNCO's something to aim for other than 'just' leaving at WO rank at the ripe old age of 40! The REAL problems of this directive will be the people like me who at their 12 year point have to make some very tough and shrewd decisions. If capable of doing the job, but simply no slots - you will see SNCO's leaving in droves, not just the top end WO experience. With having families etc.. it is not worth a true 'gamble' as opposed to a fair risk based upon capability and ability.

Ref LE E2 Officers in the Corps - About as much use as tits on fish.
 
#18
Alaarm! said:
I work in a 'tri-service' Unit/environment and I had an interesting arguement/conversation with a Maitlow comrade of mine about how 'Int Corps promote too fast...yada yada yada'.

I explained that Many people in the Int Corps actually plan for a 35 year odd career and have aspirations of attaining an LE Commision some time in the future (if up to the quality line of course).

The high number of LE Officers gives us mid career SNCO's something to aim for other than 'just' leaving at WO rank at the ripe old age of 40! The REAL problems of this directive will be the people like me who at their 12 year point have to make some very tough and shrewd decisions. If capable of doing the job, but simply no slots - you will see SNCO's leaving in droves, not just the top end WO experience. With having families etc.. it is not worth a true 'gamble' as opposed to a fair risk based upon capability and ability.

Ref LE E2 Officers in the Corps - About as much use as tits on fish.
I hope that wasn't a RN CT that you were talking to. Their promotion system is comical, to say the least.
 
#19
I explained that Many people in the Int Corps actually plan for a 35 year odd career and have aspirations of attaining an LE Commision some time in the future (if up to the quality line of course).

Maybe this is the problem – planning on a MAYBE. A NRAE is 22 years – no promises, just a maybe that you might get some form of continuation or SSC/SRC or whatever IF the floating variables of operational requirements, posting plots, wastage, recruitment and establishment vacancies all contrive to collide when your name comes up and provide sufficient vacancies to see you through to an age when you, again, MAYBE do not need a full time job to pay the bills. 18 years old on enlistment plus 22 years with the colours (great phrase) equals a 40 year old teetering on the edge of transition into life and work as a civilian. You can plan, train, impress, elbow the competition and stand on your head as you get into the zone for consideration but if the spaces aren’t there, that’s it. Fact is for all of the army, although in reality it only applies in practical terms to those that are actually likely to engage with the enemy, 40 years old is considered OLD and 40 plus too old to be serving. That’s the reality for most of the army and has been for many a moon.
 
#20
Fraser said:
Alaarm! said:
I work in a 'tri-service' Unit/environment and I had an interesting arguement/conversation with a Maitlow comrade of mine about how 'Int Corps promote too fast...yada yada yada'.

I explained that Many people in the Int Corps actually plan for a 35 year odd career and have aspirations of attaining an LE Commision some time in the future (if up to the quality line of course).

The high number of LE Officers gives us mid career SNCO's something to aim for other than 'just' leaving at WO rank at the ripe old age of 40! The REAL problems of this directive will be the people like me who at their 12 year point have to make some very tough and shrewd decisions. If capable of doing the job, but simply no slots - you will see SNCO's leaving in droves, not just the top end WO experience. With having families etc.. it is not worth a true 'gamble' as opposed to a fair risk based upon capability and ability.

Ref LE E2 Officers in the Corps - About as much use as tits on fish.
I hope that wasn't a RN CT that you were talking to. Their promotion system is comical, to say the least.
I doubt it, that would have been a Matelot
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top