generals perks!!

Nice to see all the top Generals getting all these butlers,housemades,gardeneres etc free gratis whilst servicemen/women live in squalor,in some cases they are serving squaddies.
If you couple these 6 or 7 Generals with all the Admirals and Air force Brass each at about 150K then there a lot of cash being swallowed up that should be transferred to front line.
No wonder the father of a killed soldier is furious that his son couldn't get a radio,body armour or a emergency flare gun and so was slaughtered.
Seems our services are top heavy with Prescotts!
Pisses me off when I hear this,everyone trying to defeat the Affies and getting killed doing it whilst Brass ape the first World War donkeys.
I would make all top brass move aside after 2 years out of the comfort zone and let new blood in.
If any of the 6 Generals are reading this[or have some-one read it for them]
you should hang your head in shame and go pick up a rifle,head east and help out.


War Hero
seafarer, I think you'll find generals and the like have actually worked up to there positions, not just arrived there as generals. Whats the point of having a position of power without abusing it?
seafarer1939 said:
Seems our services are top heavy with Prescotts!
Erm, thankfully NO!
There is only one Prescott and it seems that politics is the only "profession" that appeals to that type anyway.
WB has it right on the button, you don't join as a General, you join as a scrote no matter if thats a Rating scrote or young Officer scrote.
And anyway, why shouldn't those that have earned it have some perks, compared with the likes of the real Prescott?
One - work hard and progress and gain the perks. Otherwise no one would want to make it to the top.
Two - the perks are not what they used to be. Only the very senior people have personal staff's these days. This has been the situation for well over a decade since we cannot afford to give it to them all. This is old news and well publicised and any real service person would know this already.
Three - those few at the very top who do have teams looking after them often share the staff they do have and are necessarily required to host ViPs, foreign and domestic, in order to fly the flag for British industry. This is an expense which is more than justified. In addition they are busy people so I would think that their experience and general abilities would be better utilised in making policy rather than making their own breakfast or ironing their shirts.
Four - In reality seafarer, which I suspect you are not, if you are interested in discussing a story which will out problems with the RN and Forces generally, why not pick something a little more useful.

Christ I hate Journos.

Totally in agreement with wet_blobby & Lamri, everyone works there way up the ladder and the further up you go the more perks you get. Senior rates get more perks than Junior rate & rightly so. They've done their time as a Junior rate living down the mess etc. Admirals & Generals are highly paid but I think their income reflects their responsibilities that they have - I for one wouldn't fancy their responsibilities and possible grief should it all go wrong without a payslip to reflect it.
OK I'll accept quite a bit of the replies but I am still a touch sceptical.
Fighting generals like Big Bad Mike Jackson [as he claimed to be] never stood up for the issue of modern equipment as General Rose pointed out.
Admiral in charge of terrorist actions is now shuffled sideways as he is not up to the job[according to the press]
People like Peter de Billierre and Rose can have as many bloody servants as they want ,they got the job done from the front,but if troops were short of stuff and personnel were being blown away because they had to ride in Landrovers when even a Challenger tank can't withstand an IED then the Government and the top brass are responsible for it.
I still don't blame Reg Keys for being furious at his son lack of equipment that lead to his death.
The stories of top brass allowances must make him despair,it would me if my sons suffered the same through lack of basic equip.
We always just seem to wallow along with as little expenditure as we can,
I'll admit being over the top on this but I'm still pretty pissed when I read it.
PS Most Generals didn't come up the hard way,they came thu.Sandhurst,nightclubs,horses,gels,batmen Polo Pimms etc.
just a bit diff from Catterick.Regards
Surely the lack of equipment suffered by ALL of the armed forces is the fault of the MOD/Government purse holders and NOT the fault of those serving at the top of the armed forces? This lack of equipment (be that WMIK's down to fuses onboard ships) is not in any way a state secret, its the Ministers that are blatantly lying about it.
Senior Officers are in a position of real responsibilty, implementation of policies they might not agree with, responsible for the many men and budgets under their charge. Basically look at their salaries and compare that with their civilian equivalent.
The lack of equipment, sub standard MQs are not their fault but a Treasury and inevitably our political masters. The politicos are loving this kind of headline because its their version of Chaff.
Maybe their serving adjutants and ratings are happy for the respite from another bullet dodging tour in Iraq, Afghanistan.
Senior Officers deserve the perks, to get to at least a 1 star shows you must be good at your job and therefore requires reward, this reward is hardly anywhere near what their civvy equivalents get.
Im not a real fan of our Officer Corp, but to get to that level shows that you are not some weak chinned public schoolboy toff who is just in the armed forces because papa was These guys deserve respect and not public castigation by a media with its own agenda.


Lantern Swinger
Currently there are less than 40 Admirals - roughly 0.01% of the total service manpower. The reason they have staff is primarily because of the level of official hosting they do, plus frequent different uniform shifts. Its not to let them sit there and demand that another rating be tossed onto the bonfire to keep them warm.
seafarer wrote: Most Generals didn't come up the hard way,they came thu.Sandhurst,nightclubs,horses,gels,batmen Polo Pimms etc.
just a bit diff from Catterick.

This isn't the 18th century mate when officers purchased their way up to Colonel and then marked their time to automatic promotion to General officer. They have to prove themselves over and over to get there and whilst I admit not all are perfect examples of fighting generals, the way in which the Government - Treasury Tag Team has got the Armed Forces on the ropes these days necessitates a few business and politically minded persons at the top to fight them at their own game.

... and since you mention it, whilst I feel enormously sorry for Mr Keys over the death of his son, I seriously doubt that the cost of all the so called perks of senior officers put together would make even the slightest dent in the quantity and quality of people and equipment that we need to bring things back up to full capability.

Mate - if you have a gripe over this issue it's fine with me but you could at least give a serious opinion based on current fact rather than idle speculation from what it was like in years past.

Ok I've been outgunned but I do have a gripe about using serving personnel as cooks,waiters,gardeners,butlers etc.
There is enough of the above swanning around MOD establishments that are not,we frequently have used non-personnel for other duties.
My last shore base had Indian waiters and Chinese cooks.
My other gripe is about the cost.In the paper it 6 or 7 Generals had allowances of average £90k top that up with 6 Admirals,6 AirForce,6 others attached to the MOD and you have a least a million quid just on that.
Thats enough to fireproof a an Air Transport and it's well enough to prevent that poor bloody squaddie being forced to give up body armour and then was killed.
I made my point too forcibly perhaps but why does Canada,Australia and ALL other countries make sure their troops have the best but we don't.
I spent long enough in the Andrew to know cheapest is always the preferred option.Same for the rest of the Forces I guess.
By the way I'm not political just angry when I hear of another casualty in Iraq,I was for the war but the peace is too costly.
Subject closed for me,thanks for the replies.
Actually, I would rather that the butlers, gardeners, cooks and etc were servicemen, because its cheaper to use soldiers, sailors and airmen to do these duties then to outsource them to civilian sub-contractors. The only problem is that it ties up the manpower available to fight the enemy.


Lantern Swinger
So lets assume each person above the rank of 2* has a cook, steward and maybe one assistant - and its the case that most of them don't unless living in a service residence. Thats still only roughly 400 people out of 190,000 tied up in these posts.

Similar threads

New Posts