Thanks Thanks:  44
Likes Likes:  105
Dislikes Dislikes:  7
Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456
Results 126 to 140 of 140

Thread: PDF retention

  1. #126
    Sergeant
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    94
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Fantasia View Post
    No Dev you are not correct.

    You apply for promotion, stating what units / locations you are willing to serve.

    You can only be promoted into an appointment that you are qualified to fill. The list of appointments & qualifications is listed in Annex XYZ to Admin Instr Part 10.

    In the example you cited, the Sqn Sgt appointment would have the Cavalry Standard Course listed and you can only do that as a cav NCO.

    The problem is with line vacancies in Inf Bns, HQs and in a lot of cases the Air Corps where everyone seems to run to given half a chance
    Army unit commanders are very generous when it comes to approving a transfer for some of the dregs which have transferred into the AC. That goes for officers and enlisted.

    They don't call it a retirement home for nothing.

    The problem is when the said dreg goes for promotion, they generally have overseas service and multiple courses which are not available to AC members by virtue of the fact that they are AC line. So they end up being shafted in the promotion competition while army guys come in and put the feet up.
    Last edited by Chuck; 24th May 2018 at 20:18.

  2. Thanks Spark23, Tempest thanked for this post
    Likes Spark23 liked this post
  3. #127
    CQMS spider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,596
    Post Thanks / Like
    What does any young man or woman want out of a career in the Forces?

    In my opinion...

    1. Adventure...the opportunity to prove themselves.

    2. Travel.

    3. A sense of being part of something they and their country can be proud of.

    4. Reasonably good pay and conditions.

    5. A decent pension.

    6. Knowing that they and their family will be looked after.

    7. Not being fcuked around.

    8. Learning life skills which will be useful when they leave.

    9. Within the rank system a mutual respect which goes down as well as up.

    10. Being able to walk into a bar to admiring looks from the local Ladies...and jealous glares from their unworthy boyfriends.

    I've kind of been following this thread...the problem you are discussing is also prevalent in the British Army...lots leaving and we're struggling to recruit.

    Friend of mine was in recruiting 2008-2010...he tells me he literally had queues of people looking to join as Op Herrick was in full swing...see my first point.
    'History is a vast early warning system'. Norman Cousins

  4. Thanks sofa thanked for this post
    Likes apod liked this post
  5. #128
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    20,853
    Post Thanks / Like

  6. #129
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    869
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Fantasia View Post
    Not sure what having a Minister or Minister for State has to do with PDF retention though.
    The Minister directs the DoD based on courses of action proposed by staff.

    All the policies of the DoD over the past 20 years have served to erode pay and conditions of the DF.

    Pay has been slashed, any worthwhile retirement for post 2013 contracts is gone. Allowances have been shredded. Housing support is non existent. Yet tasks and roles have expanded with continued cuts to overall establishment. Yet the DoD see fit to hire another Assistant Sec Gen appointment for HR!

    DOD have pulled AC out of participation for Hotblade Ex (I know of two pilots who left because of that decision alone).
    DOD refuse to open participation in EU Joint Units / EDA.
    DOD pulled participation in EU Battlegroup Exercises in Germany.

    All the while the Military Authorities swing up the arms onto retirement on pre 2004 pensions and lump sum bonuses for good behavior!

  7. Thanks apod, Spark23 thanked for this post
    Likes apod liked this post
  8. #130
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    20,853
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Fantasia View Post
    No Dev you are not correct.

    You apply for promotion, stating what units / locations you are willing to serve.

    You can only be promoted into an appointment that you are qualified to fill. The list of appointments & qualifications is listed in Annex XYZ to Admin Instr Part 10.

    In the example you cited, the Sqn Sgt appointment would have the Cavalry Standard Course listed and you can only do that as a cav NCO.

    The problem is with line vacancies in Inf Bns, HQs and in a lot of cases the Air Corps where everyone seems to run to given half a chance
    Thanks

    Do you interview for the rank as opposed to the vacancy (ie if you want Pln Sgt 7 Inf, Sgt Instr Mil Col and Clerk Sgt Tpt Gp you only go to 1 interview board)?


    With regard to courses, would a fairer way be just to give points for courses that as essential and desirable for the vacancy (I know my unit have these in standing orders and you would see them sometimes for vacancies in ROs)?

    So the Clerk Sgt gets 5 points for Ord Rm Sgtís Cse, 5 for Ord Rm Cplís Cse, 5 for PMS Cse, but 0 for Sniper Instrs Cse

  9. #131
    CQMS
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    160
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    Thanks

    Do you interview for the rank as opposed to the vacancy (ie if you want Pln Sgt 7 Inf, Sgt Instr Mil Col and Clerk Sgt Tpt Gp you only go to 1 interview board)?


    With regard to courses, would a fairer way be just to give points for courses that as essential and desirable for the vacancy (I know my unit have these in standing orders and you would see them sometimes for vacancies in ROs)?

    So the Clerk Sgt gets 5 points for Ord Rm Sgtís Cse, 5 for Ord Rm Cplís Cse, 5 for PMS Cse, but 0 for Sniper Instrs Cse
    You sit 1 interview for all appointments qualified for a period of 18 months. Your proposal is unworkable. What you are proposing was the old way, where you spend half your life sitting on interview boards
    Last edited by Fantasia; 25th May 2018 at 07:17.

  10. Likes na grohmitŪ, hptmurphy liked this post
  11. #132
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    20,853
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Fantasia View Post
    You sit 1 interview for all appointments qualified for a period of 18 months. Your proposal is unworkable. What you are proposing was the old way, where you spend half your life sitting on interview boards
    .
    No no not proposing a board for each

    Iím proposing that courses points would only be counted for relevant courses and/or weighted.
    .

  12. #133
    CQMS
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    160
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    .
    No no not proposing a board for each

    Iím proposing that courses points would only be counted for relevant courses and/or weighted.
    .
    Still unworkable. That would have a huge admin burden on EPMO

  13. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
    Likes hptmurphy liked this post
  14. #134
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,529
    Post Thanks / Like
    well, the AC's version of retention is bonding techs for the cost of aircraft Type courses and in the case of joining contracts, you owe them money if you leave early. Anyone joining or seeking to join should ask about bonding before you sign any paper.

  15. #135
    CQMS
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    160
    Post Thanks / Like
    Service Committments for trainee tech schemes or external education have been around for decades and have actually come down in payback periods quite a lot. It has gone from 4 years per 1 year of instruction to 1:1 in some categories

  16. #136
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    869
    Post Thanks / Like
    The cost of technical training as part of your appointment enabling tyou to do your job should not be used as a threat to indenture personnel to continued service.

    Technical officers trained under Level 9 Masters with Carlow Institute of Technology are not required to sign an undertaking. Why should it be different for enlisted personnel

  17. #137
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,529
    Post Thanks / Like
    @fantasia, that's true, of course, but for a six week course, techs were being bonded for four years. Also, the DF has a very spotted history of not pursuing those who left or changing their tune and then aggressively chasing people. I'll bet some of the "bonding " practices wouldn't stand up to a legal challenge.

  18. #138
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    20,853
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Fantasia View Post
    Service Committments for trainee tech schemes or external education have been around for decades and have actually come down in payback periods quite a lot. It has gone from 4 years per 1 year of instruction to 1:1 in some categories
    I wonder is that part of the problem with retention?

    Quote Originally Posted by TangoSierra View Post
    The cost of technical training as part of your appointment enabling tyou to do your job should not be used as a threat to indenture personnel to continued service.

    Technical officers trained under Level 9 Masters with Carlow Institute of Technology are not required to sign an undertaking. Why should it be different for enlisted personnel
    It also make you more employable outside, if the DF is paying for your wages and your course, itís only fair there should be return on investment.

    That isnít right..... everyone should have to provide return on the investment

  19. Likes sofa liked this post
  20. #139
    CQMS
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    160
    Post Thanks / Like
    Of course you have the old addage

    "what if we train all our troops and they leave?"
    "What if we don't train them and they stay?"

  21. Likes Flamingo liked this post
  22. #140
    CQMS
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    160
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
    @fantasia, that's true, of course, but for a six week course, techs were being bonded for four years. Also, the DF has a very spotted history of not pursuing those who left or changing their tune and then aggressively chasing people. I'll bet some of the "bonding " practices wouldn't stand up to a legal challenge.
    4 years for a 6 week course seems to be a bit excessive. Any idea of the cost of the course?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •