Tranche 3 Redundancy Fields No Longer Required

Discussion in 'Armed Forces Redundancy Scheme 2010' started by Chris_2oo6, Apr 19, 2013.

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. following fields are no longer required

    REME, LE Major 8-9 years , LE Major 14+ years, Lt Col DE 1st April 16
    RLC , DE Major 16 - 21 years, DE Major 21+ years
    INFANTRY - LCPL 6-8 years
    R SIGNALS - CPL 15+ years, CPL Inst Tech 13-14 years, CPL Inst Tech 15+ years, CPL RSE 13-14 years, CPL RSE 15+ years
    REME - SGT Tech AV 9-10 years, SGT Tech AV 11-12 years , WO2 Art Veh & VM (includes: VM (A), VM (B), and VE) 18+ yrs
    RGR - Gurkhas - LCPL 9-10 years

    im gutted as i fall into one of them brackets!! ah well roll on T4
  2. personally i think its a bit shit, that they can suddenly turn around after 4 months and say nah sorry not needed now

    when myself and others have been looking at and prepping for 4 months at getting out... i personally wont sign off right away im gonna wait for tranche 4, but i know a lot of people once they hear the news first thing they will do is sign off....
  3. Just a quick question, i am a VM Lance Jack in the REME and my field didnt even appear on this DIN. Does this mean there is no change? i assume that the field is still required as those who aren't have "field no longer required" in the adjascent box.
  4. I wouldn't hold my breath or bet my mortgage on a Tranche 4 ^~
    • Like Like x 1
  5. I was in scope and had volunteered. To then be told that my field had been taken out of scope, three months after the initial briefing, has pissed me off more than anything in the last decade, and there have been some very low points. How they can have a group of us praying either way for a happy ending, only to suddenly realise that the geniuses running things can't actually count. It just leaves me speechless, nay, incandescent with fury, on my own personal outrage moped. FFS.

    I'm soldiering on, for the time being, but am still actively planning for my second career.
  6. Logic, don't you think it might be because enough people out of the zone have PVR'd, thus obviating the need to ditch people? I know of four Majs RLC who have gone this year already - I have no doubt there will be many more out there.

    Posted from the ARRSE Mobile app (iOS or Android)
  7. It doesn't work like that although I understand the sentiment. While I am no expert, my understanding is that you can only make someone redundant when a job for them no longer exists, so in the Army 2020 structure, the pids have been removed and looking against predicted actual manning figures, it gives a surplus of X, who need to be made redundant. This is regardless of those pvr'ing because as long as the pids exist, personnel can be recruited or promoted into them.
  8. Daxx. You are no expert. Unlike civilian employment law we cut liability, not posts as we do not know in detail what posts we need. Although we do know the numbers. So a PVR in a field can affect how many are made redundant.

    Posted from the ARRSE Mobile app (iOS or Android)
  9. I know, I said that :)
  10. No we have not identified PIDs (roles) that will go. As you identify in real life jobs are cut, incumbents lose that job.

    We have said 'we will be 82000' made up (roughly) as follows. Who wants to go?

    So we are non compliant with employment law (rightly) otherwise we would have to sack all of 19x regardless of how good they are as 19x is going.

    Posted from the ARRSE Mobile app (iOS or Android)