Never thought I would post something like this

Seaweed

RIP
Book Reviewer
The pre-req for getting a job (or going for any sort of interview) is about role-playing the interviewer - what does HE want? The interviewee has to train himself to present the skills and experience that the interviewer is looking for, not the skills etc he just happens to have. Plus, most civilians have no knowledge of the armed forces at all, but may well hold a raft of deep seated but entirely erroneous and adverse prejudices. Once in the job, what gets you ahead is being able to USE your leadership and organisational skills, not banging on about them. In particular the Navy will have trained you to hop in and make one, and to see new challenges as opportunities. Nobody will ever know how it was that you managed to pull the rabbit out of the hat.

The other thing to get hold of is that in civilian life everyone is looking after themselves, there is no such thing as teamwork and leadership except as a means to a personal end, let alone any real loyalty to either the employer or subordinates.
 

onions

GCM
Seaweed, I agree with a lot of what you say, but a lot of civvies have an in built fear about working with ex service men I left in the early 80's and eventually got a job with the CS. Staight away I recognised that the workforce I had joined were very inward looking. After about six months of writing ammunition vouchers, (I did that in pusser) I applied for an Ammunition Inspectors post. You won't get that, I was informed, you haven't been here long enough! Well, I did get the job, but for a long time I was considered a pariah. Later, I went to Gib for three years and got promoted on returning to Gosport. I was now considered a manager and so I tried to manage, but the cries of "we've always done it that way", or "don't rock the boat" were constant reminders of that those above me didn't like anyone to come up with new ideas. But what really pissed me off was ideas that I had put down on paper, and were disregarded, were later implemented by senior management who claimed the ideas as their own. Luckily I was given the oppotunity to retire a year early ands I grabbed it with both hands.

So. no matter how good you think you are, there are a lot of back stabbing bastards out there!!
 
It's not, methinks.
Its easy to be cynical, I'm one of the best. Lads I've talked to in recent years returning from tours in Iraq and Afghan have told me the kit is a big improvement from the early days. Of course its never going to be enough, that's never changed.
 
Its easy to be cynical, I'm one of the best. Lads I've talked to in recent years returning from tours in Iraq and Afghan have told me the kit is a big improvement from the early days. Of course its never going to be enough, that's never changed.

This is a reply to my post? Have I missed something? Weren't you referring to the newspaper report when you said, "Me thinks [sic] thats [sic again] a tad out of date"?
Clarity is everything.
 
Last edited:
Sorry mate didn't read the article, the Daily Mail is for lighting my log burner. How the fcuk does one fight a war without risk, we all know it or if you didn't you must be naive or stupid. I knew the risk I knew the kit was often dodgy but I took the queens shilling and trusted the men in charge to do their best and if I was in the shit despite the crap gear they would do their best to protect me whilst at the time trying to achieve their objective. If a commander in the field or at sea was to listen to every drip a servicemen had about kit he would achieve fcuk all. We went South in 82 (after your time) knowing we had fcuk all defence against the exocet threat, I knew it, people who were much cleverer than me knew it but we took the risk. Maybe we should't fight if we believe the opposition has better kit, better leadership or superior tactics.
 
I should imagine it's pretty difficult to flash up a log burner with an online newspaper.
As for the rest, out of sheer mischief, I'd like to shoot it down in flames but, disappointingly, I find myself largely in agreement with you.
 

silverfox

War Hero
Moderator
Book Reviewer
Dear friend, how can CEA be a bad thing? it enabled the children of uneducated peasants like myself obtain a fantastic education at a fraction of the price. Most ratings I encountered on the rare occasions it was discussed on the lower deck was often be along the lines of "I wouldn't send my child away from home" what bollocks. I agree with your statement about coming into line with the civilian sector, however, can you tell me the last time she deployed?? when she last put herself potentially into harms way, maybe it was trying to find a car parking space in the hospital.

Edited for atrocious grammar hence the shite education

I did not say CEA was a bad thing, it has paid for my children's eductaion for a start. The point was that it is a perk that is greatly abused, mainly by the other Services who are happy to break the rules and by so doing attract the attention of those who would wish to cut the budget further. It accounts for something like 20% of the allowances budget, but only benefits a fraction of that number of serving personnel, do the maths.

I am also not comparing jobs , although I imagine that any A&E/Delivery suite nurse/midwife might take exception, I was merely pointing out that the reduction in the pension benefits is being applied equally across the whole Public Sector. Actually not quite equally, as the non deploying members of the NHS have to pay a personal contribution.
 
Top