Navy contract

Ninja_Stoker

War Hero
Moderator
#4
Rest assured, if ever the contract is changed, it won't be to pay you more either during your term of employment or in retirement despite the dodgy spin put upon it.

Most likely, the government has clicked that a single pay-tier is probably less devisive and that upper age parameters need to be revised so that pension will be paid later in life after a longer term of employment to reflect the increase in life expectancy.
 
#5
The New Employment Model (date of introduction tbc) will likely change engagement to reflect a) modern working practices and b) how long people actually stay in the Forces. I suspect there will be a break point at 5 - 6 years, one to earn a 'pension' and a third to take you to 65/66 etc.

Or given that information about the NEM is about as forthcoming as a Chief Stoker's manning forecast, try using chicken bones instead.
 

Ninja_Stoker

War Hero
Moderator
#13
As Alf alludes, the average matelot only serves around six years in anycase. Those that usually wish to serve longer seldom have an issue serving longer. My guess is the service maximum retirement age will probably extend too.

The full introduction of the NEM will probably be formally announced late on a friday afternoon on the first day of a main leave period, after the first full moon following the Spring solstice, same as Pay 2000 (/1) and AFPS 05. Ish. :)
 
#14
As Alf alludes, the average matelot only serves around six years in anycase. Those that usually wish to serve longer seldom have an issue serving longer. My guess is the service maximum retirement age will probably extend too.

The full introduction of the NEM will probably be formally announced late on a friday afternoon on the first day of a main leave period, after the first full moon following the Spring solstice, same as Pay 2000 (/1) and AFPS 05. Ish. :)
Is that even with the cuts? Also has the age for joining as a technician recently gone down to 30? Any reason why?
 

Ninja_Stoker

War Hero
Moderator
#15
It hasn't recently been reduced. It's been age 30 for a couple of years.

The reason, so we're told, is so that those joining can reach senior rate and serve a couple of sea drafts before reaching the maximum retirement age.

There are many, myself included, that think it makes zero sense. We are currently turning-away many viable & experienced engineers over age 30 at a time when we are supposedly struggling to recruit & retain Engineering Technicians - to the extent we are borrowing them from the French Navy & US Coastguard.

Sooner or later some genius will change the upper age limit when the penny finally drops.
 

Purple_twiglet

War Hero
Moderator
#16
Ns - are you pushing the engineers the way of the RNR yet, or does it's engineering branch not take 'outsiders' yet?

It is utter lunacy that we base our entire recruitment model on a tiny number of joiners making it the whole way through, rather than assuming that as mature adults, they accept they won't get the same pension but could offer a lot more.

Perhaps part of the problem is that I think many RN would struggle with 40 year old ABs who've seen the real world and realise just how poor the RN manpower policies are by contrast, and that this would undermine the service.
 
#17
A happier sailor is one that the Andrew has 'grown' itself. Loads of 40 year old lower deck lawyers- even if they had many valid gripes and points- would cause more problems than they solved.
 

Ninja_Stoker

War Hero
Moderator
#18
A happier sailor is one that the Andrew has 'grown' itself. Loads of 40 year old lower deck lawyers- even if they had many valid gripes and points- would cause more problems than they solved.
Fair point but importing foreign labour makes a complete mockery of recruitment when neither a French nor American national can join the Royal Navy but seemingly can be employed if they have a required skill. Similarly, there's nothing worse than "messdeck lawyers" at all ranks and whether they are ABs or become Warrant Officers, we are turning away skilled personnel at age 30 but still recruiting unskilled personnel up until age 36 which defies logic, whichever way it's put.
 

Ninja_Stoker

War Hero
Moderator
#19
Ns - are you pushing the engineers the way of the RNR yet, or does it's engineering branch not take 'outsiders' yet?

It is utter lunacy that we base our entire recruitment model on a tiny number of joiners making it the whole way through, rather than assuming that as mature adults, they accept they won't get the same pension but could offer a lot more.

Perhaps part of the problem is that I think many RN would struggle with 40 year old ABs who've seen the real world and realise just how poor the RN manpower policies are by contrast, and that this would undermine the service.
Yep, we've had a few & fully agree that employment models are based on a minority who reach Senior Rate or Senior Officer when we are on our knees at AB/LH and Lt/Lt Cdr level in some branches.

Funnily enough if we get loan ratings at an AFCO who are thinking of leaving (often due to families/kids etc) we always suggest they consider a seamless transfer to the RNR/RMR as it's a lot less hassle than leaving then jumping through endless hoops. As they appreciate, it's a quick win if the civilian jobs market isn't all it was hoped at the point of departure.

Obviously, this applies equally to clankies & other branches, but of late, we are seeing a fair few ET's choosing to leave.

With regard the manning policies, experienced/mature engineers have the ability for fast-track in any case, so the 30 year age cap just doesn't hold water.
 

Latest Threads

New Posts

Top