Too many Army Officers,not enough soldiers!

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by vvaannmmaann, Aug 28, 2008.

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. So then why are there gapped Officer posts?
  2. Well as far as I can see, the moral of this tale is you f*ck you're boys around at your peril if you want to retain them.
  3. Bouillabaisse

    Bouillabaisse LE Book Reviewer

    Planted story by MOD to shut up senior officer complaints about manning? Countering the recent stories about officers leaving? What kind and specialisation are these officers?
  4. Maybe its all the Major's at Shrivenham doing arrse courses?
  5. Quite likely: note the piece has been 'written'by the political corr, so a lobby job, and not 'entrusted' to the defence correspondent.
  6. So that's all right, then.
    As long as the bottom line total adds up, there isn't a problem. Quality analysis, Mr Kirkup — you sure earned your pay with that one.

  7. Biped

    Biped LE Book Reviewer

    Do you think the politicians are saying: Listen up officers, there's too many of you, and if you brief against us, we simply get rid of you and call it a cull of the surplus.
  8. A quick cull of LEs should straighten that one out.
  9. Fail to see how official figures can be a planted story? I have a feeling that the annual defence statistics piece is due out anytime now, so likely that they saw that. Also worth noting that the drop in manpower vis a vis 2005 is almost certainly due to planned reductions in the size of the RAF announced in 2004 (the value of such cuts is a different matter entirely though!). You can spin these figures anyway you chose.
  10. Nothing personal 'jim30', and not on the thread subject, but I can believe anything disreputable or dubious emanating from this disgraced and dishonest government.
  11. I agree with jim30. The Telegraph article was a straight write-up of TSP04 - UK Armed Forces Quarterly Manning Report. The Telegraph often carries defence-related stories by staff members other than their excellent defence correspondent, who wrote the recent "Army suffering from officer shortfall" story. James Kirkup, who wrote today's piece, might well have been criticised here if he had failed to mention the Sandhurst shortfall at the same time as the reported excess of officers overall.
  12. Parsing the article I get the impression that the army does not have too many officers. Rather, there is a greater shortfall in ORs than commissioned ranks and both are undermanned.

    IMO the problem lies in retention. You can recruit as many people as you like but new recruits =/= to seasoned experienced men.

    Make the forces attractive to stay in and they will be attractive to join. That means military hospitals, good terms and conditions and rewarding people with experience.

    Military service makes large demands (especially now), it should return large rewards. Example: My job ATM is far easier than my army job, yet it pays a damned sight more.
  13. Peturbed, go to the link in Hackle's post it shows clearly a surplus of 900 officers a figure that is fairly stable over the last two years.
  14. I have been and looked. I see nothing written clearly on that link. Can you explain in simple words how and why we have too many officers? Damned if I can see it. IMO the army is undermanned both in ORs and officers, it is just that the % shortage of O-Ranks is more desperate than commissioned ranks.

    Correct me if I am wrong, but please don't do so by linking to vague (probably deliberately so) written sites.