Veteran's 'rights' - Your view

Veterans should be entitled to:

  • Priority NHS treatment for life.

    Votes: 18 14.9%
  • Priority NHS treatment for service related injuries.

    Votes: 104 86.0%
  • Free private medical treatment for service related injuries.

    Votes: 42 34.7%
  • Priority access for children's school places.

    Votes: 27 22.3%
  • Discounted mortgage rates for life.

    Votes: 15 12.4%
  • Tax free pensions.

    Votes: 40 33.1%
  • Priority access to Local Authority housing.

    Votes: 59 48.8%
  • Discounted rent on Local Authority housing.

    Votes: 21 17.4%
  • Free annual private medical exams for physical and mental health.

    Votes: 33 27.3%
  • Guaranteed job interviews when applying for roles within the public sector.

    Votes: 41 33.9%

  • Total voters
    121
The only difference would be, a contractor in civvie street usually looks for another job in the same field, a squaddie can't do that.
Apart from the fact loads of soldiers can transfer their skills across. A contractor might not be able to find work in the same sector, he will be aware of this and make plans. Nothing stops a squaddie from doing the same.
When I said contract, I meant anyone who is in a job that is not guaranteed for life (Ignoring bankruptcy, redundancies, relocation). Millions of people out there that work for short periods (weeks, months, years) and move on.
 
There are thousands of civvies who are spastics with their money, on here they are call chav scum, for some reason serving in the army exempts you for being called the same.

The vast majority of soldiers get on fine so I doubt there is any evidence, if there was, all the MOD should do is tell people to act like a ******* prick when it comes to money.
Which is exactly what I wrote, in a slightly more eloquent manner?
 
We can't recruit anybody as it is, let alone financially astute sociopaths. The key question is "is there a higher percentage of ex-service personnel in financial strife than in the general population?" If so, MoD should do something to balance that percentage. There's lots of reasons for it that I can think of.
Why should it come from the MoD's budget? Why not the wider elements of society - after all, that's where they originated.

Schools and parents must surely bear the prime responsibility for the education (financial and otherwise) of the population, military and civilian.

If the MoD has a responsibility, perhaps it should be that entrants be required to have GCSE PHSE.
 
Why should it come from the MoD's budget? Why not the wider elements of society - after all, that's where they originated.

Schools and parents must surely bear the prime responsibility for the education (financial and otherwise) of the population, military and civilian.

If the MoD has a responsibility, perhaps it should be that entrants be required to have GCSE PHSE.
If there’s evidence that time in the Services relates to poor financial management why shouldn’t MoD pay. If there’s correlation something should be done to identify the cause. If there’s no correlation **** them.
 
Which is exactly what I wrote, in a slightly more eloquent manner?
No, what you said was

Wether or not civvies can manage their money, IF theres's evidence that a disproportionate amount of ex-service personnel are failing to manage their finances, the MoD should do something about it.
Nowhere did you say only if it was attributable to service.
 
if there’s a disproportionate amount that equates to correlation and the potential of causation. Anyway it’s hardly a good advertisement meant for recruiting is it.
No it doesnt, a lot of our recruits are from the poorer areas of the UK with limited education, of course on average (Compared to the rest of the UK) we will have more people making stupid decisions.
 
Not relevant, there’s only one output, ex-service personnel.
Of course it relevant, if you recruit from a certain demographic, you can expect higher/lower averages against the general population for a wide variety of reasons.
If its not the MOD fault why should they pay to fix it?
 
Not relevant, there’s only one output, ex-service personnel.
You get out what you put in. I doubt that there are any employers in the country whose reason for training their workforce is so that they will get better pay and conditions with another company or who would be expected to assist an ex-employee in any way after he has jumped ship.
 
Of course it relevant, if you recruit from a certain demographic, you can expect higher/lower averages against the general population for a wide variety of reasons.
If its not the MOD fault why should they pay to fix it?
You are saying these people would have been a f*ck up had they joined the forces or not,
to that end I agree with you
 
You are saying these people would have been a f*ck up had they joined the forces or not,
to that end I agree with you
They may change for the better while in the army, but if they came in a fuckwit, the MOD is under no obligation to pay for them to change. If a civvie joins the workforce of Mickey Ds and 10 years later is up to his eyeballs in debt, Ronald McDonald doesnt shell out for the melonhead.
 
They may change for the better while in the army, but if they came in a fuckwit, the MOD is under no obligation to pay for them to change. If a civvie joins the workforce of Mickey Ds and 10 years later is up to his eyeballs in debt, Ronald McDonald doesnt shell out for the melonhead.
Anything negative attributed to serving in the armed forces needs to have a mitigation. If there's evidence that the services push out a disproportionate amount of financial songs compared to the general public, less people will want to join, less peoples parents will say "go for it son". If there's no evidence then there's no problem. The Forces isn't Macdonalds. Don't forget, all officers will be exposed to some sort of financial management tasks at some time, and all officers drive computers and can run a spreadsheet. It's the lads that 'might' need looking after.
 
Anything negative attributed to serving in the armed forces needs to have a mitigation. If there's evidence that the services push out a disproportionate amount of financial songs compared to the general public, less people will want to join, less peoples parents will say "go for it son". If there's no evidence then there's no problem. The Forces isn't Macdonalds. Don't forget, all officers will be exposed to some sort of financial management tasks at some time, and all officers drive computers and can run a spreadsheet. It's the lads that 'might' need looking after.
So what you are saying (now) is that the MOD should pay for the fuckwits even though the MOD is not at fault?
 
Apart from the fact loads of soldiers can transfer their skills across. A contractor might not be able to find work in the same sector, he will be aware of this and make plans. Nothing stops a squaddie from doing the same.
When I said contract, I meant anyone who is in a job that is not guaranteed for life (Ignoring bankruptcy, redundancies, relocation). Millions of people out there that work for short periods (weeks, months, years) and move on.
The transfer of skills bit is interesting. Yes they can, but the reality is that civilian business doesn't necessarily recognise or value many of those skills. It's mainly about hard experience or the potential to grow within the business. Please don't believe all the hype you hear about transferable skills, it isn't the job offer generator that you think it is.

I've spent the last week interviewing for a supervisory role in my operation. I interviewed an ex-army guy with a post Mil degree. He tried to fall back a lot on his Mil experience to make himself fit the job spec. What he thought were skills that I was looking for were a million miles way from I needed. He did have a great future, but it wasn't with my company, yet he was convinced (from the post rejection feedback chat with my HR colleague) that is was.

I've also today declined without interview another ex-Mil with a degree because nothing in their CV led me to believe that they would have skills I would need. Interestingly, both were Ex RLC in the same trade as myself, so I knew pretty much what their limitations were.

You're right, nothing stops a squaddie making plans and if they don't their foolish, however I'll stand by my original comment that a Sales Manager, Builder, IT specialist or Telecommunications Engineer can always fall back on experience in their field to find another role doing the same. An Ex Squaddie will be untested and have no or limited experience that a business is willing to risk and so will have a disadvantage in the job market.
 
The transfer of skills bit is interesting. Yes they can, but the reality is that civilian business doesn't necessarily recognise or value many of those skills. It's mainly about hard experience or the potential to grow within the business. Please don't believe all the hype you hear about transferable skills, it isn't the job offer generator that you think it is.

I've spent the last week interviewing for a supervisory role in my operation. I interviewed an ex-army guy with a post Mil degree. He tried to fall back a lot on his Mil experience to make himself fit the job spec. What he thought were skills that I was looking for were a million miles way from I needed. He did have a great future, but it wasn't with my company, yet he was convinced (from the post rejection feedback chat with my HR colleague) that is was.

I've also today declined without interview another ex-Mil with a degree because nothing in their CV led me to believe that they would have skills I would need. Interestingly, both were Ex RLC in the same trade as myself, so I knew pretty much what their limitations were.

You're right, nothing stops a squaddie making plans and if they don't their foolish, however I'll stand by my original comment that a Sales Manager, Builder, IT specialist or Telecommunications Engineer can always fall back on experience in their field to find another role doing the same. An Ex Squaddie will be untested and have no or limited experience that a business is willing to risk and so will have a disadvantage in the job market.
Thousands of soldiers leave every year and manage to find a job, a small minority were bellends in the army and bellends in civvie street, they just have the luxury of complaining to the Sun/Mail.

When I was in Afghanistan, I was chatting to some ex-WOs & SNCOs working for KBR, they had some job applications from people serving out there, and like your example there were individuals who thought their drill course and CBRN instructor qual was exactly what KBR needed to work in their storehouse however the majority of people wanting a job were what they were after.

I'm going through resettlement at the moment, if they have nothing on their CV that is relevant then they have either not bothered going to the resettlement interviews or paid no attention to them. Because the help is there to prep your CV before you leave.

As many soldier leave and find a job, I'd suggest most ex squaddies are doing just fine.
 
Plenty can. I know admin staff who became admin staff.

I know comms blokes who became comms blokes.

And I know one RMP bloke who became...guess what?

Deeply unliked by his coworkers.
My point was that a soldier has his contract ended as a soldier, he cannot find employment elsehwere a soldier.

From a trade point of view, of course, although it often requires a level of retraining.
Did the Ex-Monkey walk straight into the Plod job or did he have to got through Police college with all the other joe's who weren't ex-Mil? What did his RMP experience gain him?

Did the comms guys get straight hands on with the equipment as he was familiar with it or did he have to go through a training/familiarisation course with the company as the other blokes off the street did?
 
If the evidence is there, yes. I don't know if it there, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was.

Can you be a bit clearer on the evidence, the MOD doesnt turn people thick,
if the MOD is not at fault they should they have to pay? Yes or no?
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Condor Charities and Welfare 4
D The NAAFI Bar 3
Zero_Over The NAAFI Bar 13

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top