Does anyone know what the bounty was originally for. Is it a retainer for being available for mobilisation since there is debate about whether if we get pensions the bounty may go (which financially makes us worse off).
The bounty was originally an encouragement and reward for fulfillment of commitment. This commitment includes accepting the possibility of mobilisation in the event of threat to the nation's security.
As issues have subsequently been raised about non-parity with the Regulars, it has subsequently also been attributed as:
a) a means of recognising that the TA work 7 days a week (i.e. a payment in lieu of the overtime that they would have accrued in their civvy job).
b) recognising that the likelihood of mobilisation is high due to the need to supplement the Regular services in operational theatres that don't directly affect the security of the nation.
c) recompense for the lesser availability of benefits that the Regular soldier accrues. Examples are Forces Railcards, Indulgence flights, gym use etc. Forces Discount is a lesser issue now that we keep our MOD 90s.
d) a payment in lieu of pension.
e) any other reaction to claims for higher pay.
It's notable that reasons a) to e) only came forward AFTER claims were made about disparity with the Regulars. Even the massive increase in the value of the bounty from Â£25(?) to Â£250(?) in the late 1970's was not attributed to any of those reasons, but did coincide with an Armed Forces pay rise beyond inflation rates.
As usual, I stand to be corrected on any of the claims made as I haven't been involved in the decision-making process and haven't been privy to any of the paperwork involved.
Interesting. I saw a LM three years ago on MOD 90s, and it was unequivocal (I think it was from LAND definitely NOT a unit LM). If some units dont let TA keep them I think this is a power some-one is arrogating (yet again) either a RAO CO or whatever. I did not think this was something that could be delegated to the chain of command, you get it and that is that.
It was finally given to the TA as a permanent possession in 2004 (I suppose somebody may have got his in 2003, but I won't quibble) when losing one ceased to be a chargeable offence (unless you make a habit of it).
Seems that it took 30-odd years for someone to finally read the small print on the back.
And with that, puttees takes out his MOD 90 to check the exact wording and discovers that the phrase he was looking for disappeared when the MOD 90 changed format in 1993. Bollokcs!
Anyway, the MOD 90 is a means of identification, not an automatic right to gain entry (paraphrased, that's what it said on the old ones), so if it's being treated correctly then it's a fairly pointless piece of plastic.
Thanks for that PIMH explains it. I believe that therefore unless someone is an individual case (eg he keeps losing it so is not allowed to have one permanently) the RAO or whoever has no discretion; he must give it to the soldier or is abusing his power/acting illegally?
Only banging on about this as I have seen some died in the wool regular STAB haters do this in the past.
when i was allowed to keep hold of my mod90 it was due to two things working as a driver for the sqn and so signing it out every day was a pain. secondly and the reason i was told everyone got to keep theirs including me when i finished my driving duties was that it had something to do with CCRF, but i dont remeber what , i'll guess its so if your unit was affected you could turn up to another and have some proof of who you where.
It was orginally started in 1914 and paid to soldiers who attended the full two weeks of annual camp as too few were doing so - and was Â£1. There was an attempt to abolish it in the 1920s which resulted in a big political ruck and the War Offfice backed down.
I would say it is offered as an incentive to complete whatever minimum level of training is laid down at the time. At the moment, for example, I'm not sure I can be bothered to go and do my MATTs for this training year, because I have so much on this month. However, I've done everything else (camp etc) and so it is only a couple of weekends that stand between me and Â£1600 or however much it is this year.
I think it is effectively an attempt to align your attendance with how they want it - e.g. not just coming every Tuesday and weekend but opting out of annual camp because you don't fancy using up your holiday, or making otherwise regular attenders like me ensure they do make time to do the MATTs etc even though they might be busy and would rather not.
We used to have "O days" which were the only weekends which counted towards your bounty. It meant you had to do whatever the CO said were the most important exercises, training etc rather than clock up MTD's on jollys and what my old mate Tel called "Swan courses".