Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

RDFRA & "Working Relationships" with Military Authorities

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    DPMs - Yes there is a scale of issue, if people aren't getting the entitlements they should be letting RDFRA know

    Gratuity - Not RDFRAs fault! They negotiated in good faith (as all unions/representation associations have to), others had other ideas

    Pay increase for Lieutenants - did happen
    Driving courses - has & continues to happen
    Course availability - access to PDF courses & more mandays
    Pay arrears - has happened
    Points 14-18 - all happened
    Increased mandays - hasn't been reversed, yet?!
    Funerals - I've been to 1, unfortually
    Para Wings - Did happen, if you have the required pre-requisites

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by johnny no stars View Post
      Will someone also tell me where I can find a break down of spending within RDFRA, or does that not have to be made public?
      Not available online, contact the National Office.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Docman
        Actually, What I have found is that they generally ARE articulating their own personal views and those of their drinking buddies. Most members don't know & don't care.
        Never a truer word said.

        Originally posted by colonel decker View Post
        Can we light up a spotlight with big al etched into it just like when we need Batman
        I, else were gave an answer to that but please tell us how you know big Al so well to be able to call on his services???

        Originally posted by Docman View Post
        Officially ......
        9. Provision of driving courses for RDF Corps personnel other than S&T and Cavalry. (Not sure)
        Originally posted by DeV View Post
        Driving courses - has & continues to happen
        It didn't need to happen because it was always there.

        You forgot to mention recognition of Civvi driving licences. (see 2008 jan news letter) Alledgedly agreement was reached. DTpt was supposedly awaiting anxiously for all the members of the RDF with HGV and Bus licences to come forwart to be assessed.
        The reality
        • a 1 week conversion course has been made available.
          All theory that is covered in mod 1&2 except rotr is covered.
          The students is made familiar with the Nissan Patrol.
        • RDF personnel must do the full HGV/Bus course to drive those vehicles nothing has changed.
        So at the end of the day its a nearly achievement!!!

        Also in that news letter, under RDRA making progress, is the the introduction of the Mod 3C, 3B and 3C courses. For me this is were RDFRA integrity is being brused.
        Why?
        Because anyone involved in tpt knows that TVMS were working on the sylllabi for these courses for the DF and the completion and introduction of them had nothing to do with the RDFRA.
        So why did RDFRA claim it as one of their achievements?

        Originally posted by DeV View Post
        DPMs - Yes there is a scale of issue, if people aren't getting the entitlements they should be letting RDFRA know
        But you can't be issued what physically is not in the store!!!!!!
        Without supplies no army is brave.

        —Frederick the Great,

        Instructions to his Generals, 1747

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by luchi View Post
          It didn't need to happen because it was always there.
          Yes but RDFRA went looking for them to be run and they have been

          But you can't be issued what physically is not in the store!!!!!!
          Yes but you will definitely not get them if you aren't entitled to them!

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by DeV View Post
            Yes but RDFRA went looking for them to be run and they have been
            As I said, they were always being run. Members of various units have got their 154 through the old S&Ts for as long as I have been in the unit.
            What has changed is the re-organisation of courses since 2001. Again this is to do with TVMS changing to suit the PDF training aims in line with the driving licence categories.
            By default it gave the RDF the ability to run defined course modules over weekends and a 2 week FTT instead of the never ending beginner to HGV course that used to be there.

            What has this to do with RDFRA?

            Is RDFRA going to lay claim to organising PNCO, Std, PO and YO courses too?

            BTW I notice in the recent RDFRA news letter a driving course is not listed under courses for 2009 in any Bde. Yet AFIK this year same as last the courses are being run in all Bdes.

            Yes but you will definitely not get them if you aren't entitled to them!
            True. BUt before you couldn't look for stuff because you were not entitled. Now you can lok for and demand lots of stuff but its not there so you still can't have it!!!

            So what exactly has changed for the man on the ground?
            Without supplies no army is brave.

            —Frederick the Great,

            Instructions to his Generals, 1747

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by DeV View Post
              DPMs - Yes there is a scale of issue, if people aren't getting the entitlements they should be letting RDFRA know

              Gratuity - Not RDFRAs fault! They negotiated in good faith (as all unions/representation associations have to), others had other ideas

              Pay increase for Lieutenants - did happen
              Driving courses - has & continues to happen
              Course availability - access to PDF courses & more mandays
              Pay arrears - has happened
              Points 14-18 - all happened
              Increased mandays - hasn't been reversed, yet?!
              Funerals - I've been to 1, unfortually
              Para Wings - Did happen, if you have the required pre-requisites
              DPMs - Do you want a list - start with just about every unit in Ebde and then add every unit in S & W Bde. This is brought up EVERY year from EVERY unit. Lists have been submitted EVERY year. Don't tell me RDFRA doesn't know.

              Para Wings - Directive from PCM to the opposite - Didn't happen..... and really don't care any more.

              And certain people having the ATD does not count. When I mean early notification of courses, I mean a Pte being able to read it off a notice board in his/her unit.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by luchi View Post
                Why do we need him?

                When asked directly what is RDFRA not doing that he thought it should he had no answer.

                In fact the only answer he gives is that people should not be in RDFRA.
                IMHO That and he is as much use as a bull in a milking parlour.

                I wont lower the tone to Luchi's level by engaging in personal remarks.

                I have always said that RDFRA didn't not really represent the lower ranks of the reserve and that those ranks should leave, I haven't change my position on that.

                I am surprised that it was Docman who opened this thread, he has always been a strong advocate of RDFRA and we have bumped heads on the issue more than once. It is disappointing to see people disillusioned with the organisation at the level that he is at.

                I dont visit these boards as often as before, and I see from it that the lower ranks, this time recruits, the very future of the reserve have been done over on the grat. RDFRA should write to each one of their recruit members and apologise for this fiasco and as a gesture return their subscription for 2008. I understand that they didn't intentionally allow this to happen but I would seriously doubt that any NE or Bde Committee member has gone without their grat for this year.

                I always felt that RDFRA were never willing to get very vocal on issues, they have got no coverage on the grat issue that I can see. I sometimes wonder does RDFRA rely on the DOD & MA for funding, offices etc that it is unwilling to rock this boat? If the majority of funding comes via them then the conversation is always going to be very one sided.

                RDFRA need someone in their organisation with the contacts within the media and government circles to help them raise their game. I believe the General Secretary must be a member of the reserve, however could this not be a figure head post and replace this full time position with an administrator and ask someone like David Begg to be a consultant to the organisation? I hope that might go some way to answering your question Luchi about what I think RDFRA should do.
                Last edited by Big Al; 20 December 2008, 13:30.
                You're even dumber than I tell people

                You might have been infected but you never were a bore

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Big Al View Post
                  I dont visit these boards as often as before, and I see from it that the lower ranks, this time recruits, the very future of the reserve have been done over on the grat. RDFRA should write to each one of their recruit members and apologise for this fiasco and as a gesture return their subscription for 2008. I understand that they didn't intentionally allow this to happen but I would seriously doubt that any NE or Bde Committee member has gone without their grat for this year.
                  It should be DOD & the MA who are apologising not RDFRA, RDFRA agreed to those with less than 2 years service getting only the 1 week rate of gratuity (which is still the case) not those with less than 1 years service getting nothing. DOD & MA went back on the agreement!

                  Members of the NE / Bde Committees would commonly be the people who are always there (within their units) and would in most cases be in service medal terrority and so most would probably have qualified.


                  I always felt that RDFRA were never willing to get very vocal on issues, they have got no coverage on the grat issue that I can see. I sometimes wonder does RDFRA rely on the DOD & MA for funding, offices etc that it is unwilling to rock this boat? If the majority of funding comes via them then the conversation is always going to be very one sided.
                  RDFRA get a subvention (€s) from DOD by I very much doubt it effects there judgement.

                  ask someone like David Begg to be a consultant to the organisation?
                  The income for a year wouldn't cover his wages.



                  I agree RDFRA needs to get A LOT more vocal.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Nothing personal in it AL.

                    Colonel Decker seems to be suggesting that you are a beacon of light. The savior of the common ranks.

                    But like you when asked a direct question he doesn't answer.

                    Once again you have just repeated the same old line. Its all RDFRA's fault, leave, shut down the only voice you have"

                    Dev has said all theat can be said in answer to your post.
                    Without supplies no army is brave.

                    —Frederick the Great,

                    Instructions to his Generals, 1747

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      I am being consistent in my message, RDFRA doesnt represent the lower ranks very well and they should leave.

                      I also said "RDFRA need someone in their organisation with the contacts within the media and government circles to help them raise their game. I believe the General Secretary must be a member of the reserve, however could this not be a figure head post and replace this full time position with an administrator and ask someone like David Begg to be a consultant to the organisation?" Is not not a direct answer, I cant speak for the other poster, however seeing as he has only recently registered I dont know what he knows about me.

                      You wouldnt be looking at someone like Begg on a full time basis, you might use him once a month or in discussions with MA & DOD, nor does it have to be Begg but someone with that sort of profile & experience. I dont know how much this would cost, but it does no harm to ask the question.

                      Overall what is ICTU's attitude to RDFRA?

                      I dont know about the effect of the subvention, however have you ever asked given your boss a list of improvements or demands and got extremely bolshoi about it? Its generally not the most effective approach.

                      Anyway back to the title of the thread, RDFRA seem happy with their working relationship with the MA & DOD, who am I to question that? The recruits got shafted this year because the DOD & MA moved the goal posts, that to me doesnt sound like a good working relationship or a relationship of mutual respect.
                      You're even dumber than I tell people

                      You might have been infected but you never were a bore

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Big Al View Post
                        ....I believe the General Secretary must be a member of the reserve....
                        Always has been the case....
                        "Well, stone me! We've had cocaine, bribery and Arsenal scoring two goals at home. But just when you thought there were truly no surprises left in football, Vinnie Jones turns out to be an international player!" (Jimmy Greaves)!"

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          RDFRA would have to be recognised as a trade union as opposed to a representitive association.

                          This would cause major problems as under trade union rules you can only be a member of of one union at any time.

                          So if RDFRA was recognised as a union it would be at odds with some members civvy employment.

                          Not that its going to happen.
                          Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by luchi View Post
                            Nothing personal in it AL.

                            Colonel Decker seems to be suggesting that you are a beacon of light. The savior of the common ranks.

                            But like you when asked a direct question he doesn't answer.

                            Once again you have just repeated the same old line. Its all RDFRA's fault, leave, shut down the only voice you have"

                            Dev has said all theat can be said in answer to your post.
                            Colonel Decker is back from a work trip abroad [lease do not put words on my mouth. I am a believer in Democracy and felt Al had always ensured the issues that require discussion are discussed. How can we move on and leave our recruits without their gratuity how can the RDFRA are not taking action these questions require answering,
                            OK Smith it’s Colonel Decker. I hate it when a plan comes together. You’re surrounded. I want you and Peck and Baracus, to throw out your weapons, all the ration packs you stole and come out with your hands up. You have fifteen seconds.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by Big Al View Post
                              I am being consistent in my message, .
                              That you have and I did acknowledge it.

                              RDFRA doesnt represent the lower ranks very well and they should leave.
                              And again I find I must ask in what way - specifically.

                              Grat - they were ard are being represented. Discussions are still on going and may lead somewhere. I suppose equally they may not but if all the recruits and other junior ranks were to quit RDFRA then who represents them?
                              Even if being represented badly its better than not being represented at all.

                              Overall what is ICTU's attitude to RDFRA?
                              ICTU does not approve of representative associations in general but recognises the need for DF personnel to have a voice.

                              Anyway back to the title of the thread, RDFRA seem happy with their working relationship with the MA & DOD, who am I to question that? The recruits got shafted this year because the DOD & MA moved the goal posts, that to me doesnt sound like a good working relationship or a relationship of mutual respect
                              On this point I actually agree.
                              Without supplies no army is brave.

                              —Frederick the Great,

                              Instructions to his Generals, 1747

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X