CEA...

Discussion in 'Finance & Pensions' started by stumpy, Jan 2, 2011.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. I saw this about restricting access to CEA:

    "The most significant of these changes therefore involves withdrawing eligibility for CEA from personnel who serve unaccompanied by their families in some locations (principally but not exclusively MOD London) and in sea-going assignments."

    http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wms/?id=2010-12-16a.116WS.0

    But what does this mean? Does this really mean noone who is sea going can claim CEA? But surely I must have the wrong end of the stick as when drafted, for instance, from Pompey to a Guzz ship while claiming CEA you move quarter... Is this really different from a soldier moving bases?

    Anyone have a better clue than me?

    Cheers!
     
  2. The full brief is here.

    In short, sea-going and Central London postings are no longer INVOLSEP.
     
  3. Thanks for the link! The way I read it is that if, for instance, you are drafted from Pompey to Guzz, then you will still be eligible for CEA as long as you move your family to Guzz. To be honest this I what I believed the rules to be anyway, so should not make a great difference.

    However a mate is about to do just that to be eligible and if I read the full link correctly then he should be able to keep his family in Pompey under the transitional rules. I will show him the link when we return from leave. Many thanks!

    "The claiming of CEA without accompanied service on the basis of historic RN regulations for previously designated seagoing billets will also cease. This will mean that, in future, Naval Service personnel permanently assigned to a previously designated seagoing billet who are ineligible for the transitional arrangements described below will be required to demonstrate their commitment to family mobility and accompanied service by moving their family home to the Base Port in order to retain continued entitlement to CEA, provided that all other eligibility criteria are met."
     
  4. I dont think it changes that much to be honest.

    I have put my daughter through school utilising CEA knowing that I am Faslane based and the chances of being drafted out of the area are pretty slim, It would appear that they are now going to enforce the rules.

    They should review the rule about the first year being spent as a boarder, some kids I know goto Lomond School in Helensburgh and their parents live up Churchill estate but under the rules of CEA they must live in the boarding house for the first year. A silly rule IMO.
     
  5. WAFUs at Culdrose and Yeovilton have been doing this for years, taking advantage of the fact that once you are "typed" by aircraft your chances of being drafted away from the Air Station are minimal.
     
  6. Thank you for the link. It's great the way all of this stuff was put out just before Christmas leave isn't it.

    As a seagoer in receipt of CEA (I am the only one onboard my ship so perhaps that gives an idea of the impact of that particular clause) it is good to have been updated. I live in Devonport on a Devonport ship so am lucky at the moment, and will be moving my family to Portsmouth in the summer for new assignment so am pleased to be well inside the rules.

    The question I have though is how they think this particular change will save money? Clearly it may discourage people from taking CEA at all (I suspect that is the real reason - never mind the spirit of helping with children's education), but if you move your family to a Quarter you are receiving the cost benefit of the Quarter plus the CEA. Then of course there is the 'moving your family to Portsmouth while you do 2 months of BOST in Guz and a 7 month deployment' angle - I wont go there.

    Apart from ships, don't forget that there are other assignments with (SEA) suffixes, such as FOST, that, in the past, people have been able to leave their families at home for while claiming. This probably wasn't in the 'spirit' of the old rules, and now isn't in the letter either.

    I suspect that the writing is on the wall for the stability of our children's education.

    Oh but it does. The Advisory Service (not you) reviewing entitlement after 2 assignments not moving makes a big difference and I suspect will hit the SM / Av community hardest. When all of the SMs are based in Faslane, I would suggest that it will be more difficult to to demonstrate a likelihood of being assigned away in the next 4 years. Ditto, for aviators with homes near Culdrose / Yeovilton.

    The choice between continuity of children's education and continuity of spouses' employment is likely to become the issue in many families now, I suspect.

    Remember, that this is only the first revision of the rules too ...

    PS: For the person mentioned above who was about to move and wasn't fully aware of the rules, I strongly recommend printing out the relevant chapter of JSP 752, inwardly digesting and taking with when going to the UPO to apply - it isn't an allowance many UPO staff are particularly familiar with and it helps if you know the rules properly yourself.
     
  7. wave_dodger

    wave_dodger War Hero Book Reviewer

    Lets be a little honest here. We're not like the Army where under the Regiment system people are encouraged from moving families where ever the Regiment is moved/Rouled.

    We've had the concept of Base Ports/Typed airstations for eons and even before that you could pretty determine if you were going to be largely Guzz, Pompey or Faslane based and hence should, in the overwhelming majority of cases, have been able to settle and create a decent family base.

    We're the Service that is most widely know for living away during the week and getting weekend travel in and hence our "infamous" early Friday chops. I'd be interested to know how many RN service families choose to live well away from Guzz, Pompey and Faslane.

    I don't know of that many RN families that routinely bounce backwards and forwards between Guzz and Pompey appointments/drafts.

    Taking the above into account plus our size I suspect the RN uptake of CEA is fairly low in comparison with the other two services and the majority of those who do probably didn't fall within "the spirit" (and I personally know a few of those..) so these changes shouldn't have too much impact.

    What is odd, from a cursory skim of the new regs, is that London jobs no longer count? I don't get that - what happens if you do say live in Bristol in a MQ or SSSA and have children in BS then get appointed to London. You go and get SSSA in London or a MQ up there but no longer are entitled to CEA? So what happens then?
     
  8. The way that I see things going is this a possible outcome:
    Once 23s move to Pompey and the 22s are scrapped tis will leave just the Ocean and Bulwark in Guzz and as a base for RFAs? So why not move H Sqdn to Pompey as well which would mean that except for a few minehunters in Faslane the entire surface fleet would be Pompey based? If you then move the RMs from Arbroath to the West Country then apart from FPGRM they would all be based in the West Country.

    Surface Fleet: Pompey (almost all except Albion, Bulwark and a few MH)
    Submarines: Faslane.
    WAFUs: Culdrose / VL depending on type.
    Training: This would just leave BRNC and Raleigh in the Plymouth area but I guess that is the subject of another thread!

    But wouldn't it be an odd move if we were to base our military infrastructure on the rules governing boarding school allowances which are subject to change?

    But this would dramastically cut down on CEA need, but I always thought that it was there to provide continuity of education, so that even if you are drafted out of base port just once this would still disrupt your children's education. By moving from being eligible and then not eligible and then back again then you will not be providing continuity, surely? Even submariners and WAFUs do drafts at Sultan, Collingwood, BRNC, Leach Building, Northwood etc which would disrupt their children's education unless they weekend. I am happy to but not everyone is. I am just a bit confused about what the C in CEA will stand for...?
     
  9. Have you considered that they may be in Abroath for a reason beyond keeping the scottish drinks industry in business?
     
  10. wave_dodger

    wave_dodger War Hero Book Reviewer

    Ultimately, as someone has already added, as there is a current move to reduce the MoD allowance package by 40% in this savings round and there is still a cross Government review of allowances that could easily affect the MoD (especially CEA rates), I think this is the thin edge of the wedge - but I suspect we all know that really.

    GYH, LOA et all could easily be things of the past in the short/medium term and perhaps this is the driver; For all 3 services: less bases, more centralisation, significantly longer appointments/drafts (perhaps unless you're a fast streamer?). Less need for MQ and SFA, less need for GYH, disturbance packages etc.
     
  11. I think you've missed a bit here. The change to London jobs is similar to that for personnel in seagoing units. You can no longer be classed as INVOLSEP and maintain eligiblilty for CEA when in one of these jobs.

    Therefore to maintain eligibility for CEA you must be accompanied and move to SFA/SSFA in the London area. If you serve accompanied you are eligible to claim CEA, if you elect to serve unaccompanied then you are VOLSEP and therfore ineligible for CEA.
     
  12. wave_dodger

    wave_dodger War Hero Book Reviewer

    Good point well made (In defence Guv I did say I skimmed the brief). Thats an interesting ploy in itself, there are very few MQ up in town, the majority being nearer PJHQ and in hideous areas which are 60-90 minutes away which means most matelots would be better off in Portsmouth, and with rumours of London weighting (and hence SFA) going soon, you can see whats being done
     
  13. Lots of good points.

    2 comments - I did say that I had inwardly digested the Chapter of 762:

    London. The entitlement isn't going, it is the status of some jobs at MOD/PJHQ that were titled as INVOLSEP and so meant that you could leave your family where they were (in, say, Bristol) and then be in Single Accom in London without moving your family with you. I think these were 'mainly high readiness deployable' posts such as JFHQ.

    SMs/AVs doing jobs in Portsmouth ets. CEA runs in 'stages of Education', ie, 5-10, 11-16, Sixth form. So each stage is roughly 2 assignments long. I suspect this is the basis on which they have shortened the review period.

    I do echo the points above though re CONTINUITY and also the thin end of the wedge - I'll wager Get You Home will be next under the microscope.
     
  14. On a personal basis it doesnt. My daughter is taking her highers in June, I have 1 more term to pay for and then they can scrap it as far as I am concerned :twisted: :twisted:
     
  15. Gents

    This appears to be the most appropriate place to raise my question.

    I am currently in receipt of CEA and due to leave the service in Jun 2012. On return from an overseas posting in Jan 11 I will have less than six months to serve and therefore will be ineligible for a Married Quarter.

    Since we own our own house my spouse is more than happy to move back home and I will serve unaccompanied at my new unit for 5 months, whilst doing my resettlement, etc. The question is will I be classed as INVOLSEP and still be able to claim CEA for the remaining months of my service. This will allow my eldest to complete her GCSEs and my youngest to change school on completion of the current academic year.
     

Share This Page