YWCA Closing in Germany

#3
Announcements on BFBS and SSVC Scene Here, along with front page article in 6th SENSE have confirmed the closing sites as Wegberg, Wildenrath, Celle and Falingbostel. Spokespersons from HQ UKSC(G) quoted in confirmation but with assuarances that the welfare and shop bits will be sourced from other providers. Possibly Sally Army or Red Shield with bits from NAAFI. GOC UKSC(G) and the top bloke in JHQ garrison appear to be onside to making good the gap made by closures.

Seems that YWCA cared more about profit and loss than the community. If those were the sites losing money is it reasonable think the others were not. Have they neatly increased their profits and blamed the PAYD hoods for their problems?
 
#8
But these closures do not appear to have any links to FAS or site category. On the Mansell radio show a woman, think the MD of YWCA, made it clear that these closing sites were losing money due to PAYD. No reference to troop levels or life expectancy in terms of army presence was made. Other threads have discussed the futures of ARRC, Os and Munster but none of those locations have been mentioned in any announcements by YWCA, Sally A or Red Shield.
 
#9
I think the issue centres on the fact that CVWW sites are losing money due to PAYD because the PAYD contractor (in this case, NAAFI), is given a monopoly on all food and drink provision and can therefore prevent others offering any form of catering. YWCA, Red Shield et al all small catering outlets as part of their facilities, so whatever proprtion of their income comes from catering will be lost. Additionally, the premises from which they operate are controlled by MoD - I am aware of one case where an objection to the forced closure of a newish building paid for by a charity was met with a change of ground rent from a peppercorn sum to a full commercial rate.

I would be interested to know if WRVS are affected - they seem to have been spending a lot of money recently on providing internet facilities. I gather that they offer refreshments free of charge, so presumably aren't affected by PAYD.
 
#10
What is most interesting is that Miss Tischner (sp?) who spoke on this failed to make the point that neither Wegberg nor Wildenrath are PAYD operating sites. I am afraid that in this context YWCA are not necessarily always purveyors of the whole truth. Your point on WRVS is well made and indicates that it is possible to maintain pastoral care without recourse to commerce. Then again a look at the YWCA site ( http://www.ywca-gb.org.uk/news.asp ) their declared aims include :

to help young women change the world they live in and become the women they want to be.

In a safe environment, we support young women aged 11 to 30 to challenge violence or abuse, learn new skills, finish their education and improve their health and self-esteem.

Not exactly anything to do with newspapers!
 
#11
ViroBono said:
I think the issue centres on the fact that CVWW sites are losing money due to PAYD because the PAYD contractor (in this case, NAAFI), is given a monopoly on all food and drink provision and can therefore prevent others offering any form of catering.
Absolutely PAYD = NAAFI Monopoly, they want to control everything inside the wire, even down to Troop BBQ’s. Once they take control, they will supply all stock on camp, and they will control all opening hours. On the camp I am currently on, this even affects Sqn Bars.
Competition is healthy, except when it involves NAAFI !!!!!
Just speculation, but how long before prices start to rise due to “Circumstances beyond our control” and "we really regret the increase", however, we have no choice and neither do you because we have the contract, the infrastructure and are your only suppliers.
Oh well, at least some, about to retire person, somewhere will be laughing all the way to the bank
 
#12
ViroBono said:
I would be interested to know if WRVS are affected - they seem to have been spending a lot of money recently on providing internet facilities. I gather that they offer refreshments free of charge, so presumably aren't affected by PAYD.
WRVS are in place only for single service personnel. The refreshment they provide is funded by Regimental, therefore non-public, money - they might even buy the stuff from NAAFI. The facilities they provide are usually supported from a variety of welfare and department funding sources. They are very firmly part of the CO's team for providing support to his/her unit in terms of single and married people.
 
#13
My understanding exactly. I do not know how many WRVS ladies(?) still exist in Germany and what their views are about PAYD or NAAFI generally. There used to be one in JHQ next to the Marly Club?
 
#14
CAARPS said:
ViroBono said:
I think the issue centres on the fact that CVWW sites are losing money due to PAYD because the PAYD contractor (in this case, NAAFI), is given a monopoly on all food and drink provision and can therefore prevent others offering any form of catering.
Absolutely PAYD = NAAFI Monopoly, they want to control everything inside the wire, even down to Troop BBQ’s. Once they take control, they will supply all stock on camp, and they will control all opening hours. On the camp I am currently on, this even affects Sqn Bars.
Competition is healthy, except when it involves NAAFI !!!!!
Just speculation, but how long before prices start to rise due to “Circumstances beyond our control” and "we really regret the increase", however, we have no choice and neither do you because we have the contract, the infrastructure and are your only suppliers.
Oh well, at least some, about to retire person, somewhere will be laughing all the way to the bank
Get real, our camps would not justify a corner shop to Tesco yet we expect NAAFI to provide a MAX store selling everything from TVs to nappies and everything in between with a food supermarket selling everything we’d want to buy in UK. Of course there is a limited market, unlike Tesco who are open all hours and welcome anyone, NAAFI are only allowed to sell to us and we put a wire round them. The economics don’t need an MBA to work out that there is only so much you can expect NAAFI to do in a closed market and return a profit ie dividend to US!! There is no monopoly though some organisations would like to have one on newspapers, interesting that on the one hand monopoly is good if it means newspapers and CVWW/YWCA but bad if it’s NAAFI!! We’d all be quick to whinge if NAAFI didn’t sell us all the home grown stuff we like to see on the shelves yet we don’t acknowledge them when they fund the kids football teams, unit sports, AFF conferences, unit charities etc etc. Instead of continually knocking NAAFI we should maybe start supporting them, after all they give 50% of the profit back to us and the rest goes in re-investment to fund improvements like those at Elmpt.
 
#16
The WMCA have stated that the reason that there are closures in places that aren't actually PAYD is that the locations that make a profit subsidise the locations that don't. If PAYD make locations that were proitable unprofitable they also force the closure of locations that were being subsidised by them.

But it's still a case that the soldier's choice is being reduced not improved. In most garrisons the 'choice' you get is the same whether you get your food from the Canteen, Services shop or the NAAFI Max. The monopoly held and that will be held by NAAFI is not healthy. Without competition there is no insentive to keep standards high or to keep prices low. Added to that in locations like Fally and Hohne they have a more or less captive market.

PAYD is all bad news as far as the customer is conserned. The men at the top aren't going to say it's sh1t are they. The decision has already been made, it's going to happen and besides they have burnt their bridges already. More to the point, they aren't going to have to eat there are they?

Don't forget that NAAFI or should that be Spar aren't the Services friendly 'non-profit' organization they used to be in the 60s, 70's and 80's. They have shareholders to keep happy, and that doesn't bode well for their captive customers.
 
#17
Chindit said:
WRVS are in place only for single service personnel.

They are very firmly part of the CO's team for providing support to his/her unit in terms of single and married people.
For these reasons I suspect that it would prove difficult to dislodge WRVS under a PAYD contract - not that they should go.


OS:

YWCA took over the old Malcolm Clubs at Wegberg and Wildenrath. Wegberg is probably unique in that it is largely now an admin centre for the BFGHS with relatively few military personnel. One ward remains within the Psychiatric Centre, and the hospital kitchen provides meals for the patients - this would never be PAYD. If I recall, the YWCA was the only place to get a meal - military personnel have to go to JHQ if they wanted to eat in a Mess.

Not sure about Wildenrath - I thought it had closed!

I have no connection or particular sympathy for YWCA - my only experience was they always served incredibly nasty, greasy food at their caff at JHQ. Since I walked sideways I invariably patronised the Malcolm Club, until it closed. However, I think the enforced loss of choice is not a good thing.
 
#18
I thought that NAAFI was completely owned by MOD and provided 50% of profit to Dividends back to troops - rest went into operating costs - is this wrong?
 
#19
I remember the days when NAAFI had a stated obligation to have a service where ever there are British soldiers,and they did.
Then profis took over and the smaller camps started to lose the facilities.
Ho well only tome will tell if they are truly dedicated to soldiers welfare with PAYD (Monopoly) or not
 
#20
Chindit said:
CAARPS said:
ViroBono said:
I think the issue centres on the fact that CVWW sites are losing money due to PAYD because the PAYD contractor (in this case, NAAFI), is given a monopoly on all food and drink provision and can therefore prevent others offering any form of catering.
Absolutely PAYD = NAAFI Monopoly, they want to control everything inside the wire, even down to Troop BBQ’s. Once they take control, they will supply all stock on camp, and they will control all opening hours. On the camp I am currently on, this even affects Sqn Bars.
Competition is healthy, except when it involves NAAFI !!!!!
Just speculation, but how long before prices start to rise due to “Circumstances beyond our control” and "we really regret the increase", however, we have no choice and neither do you because we have the contract, the infrastructure and are your only suppliers.
Oh well, at least some, about to retire person, somewhere will be laughing all the way to the bank
Get real, our camps would not justify a corner shop to Tesco yet we expect NAAFI to provide a MAX store selling everything from TVs to nappies and everything in between with a food supermarket selling everything we’d want to buy in UK. Of course there is a limited market, unlike Tesco who are open all hours and welcome anyone, NAAFI are only allowed to sell to us and we put a wire round them. The economics don’t need an MBA to work out that there is only so much you can expect NAAFI to do in a closed market and return a profit ie dividend to US!! There is no monopoly though some organisations would like to have one on newspapers, interesting that on the one hand monopoly is good if it means newspapers and CVWW/YWCA but bad if it’s NAAFI!! We’d all be quick to whinge if NAAFI didn’t sell us all the home grown stuff we like to see on the shelves yet we don’t acknowledge them when they fund the kids football teams, unit sports, AFF conferences, unit charities etc etc. Instead of continually knocking NAAFI we should maybe start supporting them, after all they give 50% of the profit back to us and the rest goes in re-investment to fund improvements like those at Elmpt.
Well are there any really good reasons to stop civies, especially ex serving bods from using the Naafi?

Tax reduced goods could still be on a ration card only basis but why not open the rest of the goods to anyone who wants to purchase?
 

Latest Threads