RN to Reserve List/RNR to RN

Discussion in 'Royal Naval Reserve (RNR)' started by stumpy, Aug 12, 2007.

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 understand that it is a proposed idea (I believe from 2SL's office) that over their career RN personnel will move from the RN to the Reserve List/RNR and back to the RN etc over the years depending on family situation, wanting to take a break, study etc etc.

    This is a very good idea, but I have recently discovered that the eyesight regulations became harder in 1995. This means that anyone who joined before that date, but who then move to the Reserve List/RNR and then back have to then comply with the new harder rules. These new rules are particularly strict for new joiners, which such a person is then counted as, no matter how many years they previously served.

    Therefore if you then tried this you could then find that you are stuck and can not rejoin, but if you had stayed in then your eyesight would not have been a problem at all.

    Does this make sense???

    I expect that this is an oversight that will be changed. Comments please!
  2. As I understand it, this is still at the discussion stage, so detail of the wort you've identified probably hasn't been worked through as yet. The last I saw of it, several months ago I'll concede, was a strawman paper.

    In principle I do see it as a good idea, but I'm not convinced that in the current employment climate too many will be wanting to jump back over the wall, although the numbers on FTRS might indicate a willingness. Nonetheless it's useful for people to have the option.
  3. I agree that it is a good idea, I just hope they sort out the eyesight issue. Surely if it was good enough for your job when you temporarily leave it should be good enough when you try to return.
  4. Bump.
  5. I think you're looking into it a bit too deeply. I can't even see that being an issue personally, or am i being too sensible?

    Surely the RN must have to take medicals through their career and if so the medicals would be to current standards/regulations.
  6. No, apperently the standards changed in 1995, so anyone in service before that date would always have to comply with the old standard. But, if he, or she, were to leave and rejoin, they would come under the new standard.

    I just hope it is something that 2SL's office have considered when they are looking at the idea of moving easily between the RN/RNR etc and back again.
  7. Have you seen this somewhere in terms of the current proposal?

    In the absence of anything being published it's difficult to determine whether this is an issue or not.
  8. My understanding was that the RNR would become fully integrated into the RN - in effect disband and there'd be a full time/part time RN, and we therefore wouldn't have the problem of pre-95 requirements as they'd never leave and therefore have to re-join the RN.

    I understand the Australians have followed this model and with only mixed success because of poor funding.
  9. At present if you go RNR to RN, as I am doing, you resign RNR and start again.
  10. Good. I was just a bit worried as I thought I saw a loophole. I am glad to see (hopefully) there won't be a problem.
  11. I can see an RNR-RN move working well, but not too sure "Their Lordships" would welcome a shift from RN-RNR and part-time working?

    We're not "Gentlemen of Leisure" (or Gentlewomen either) as most readers of this particular group will atest. Most RNRs are not Part-time workers... they actually hold down two jobs!

    The actual numbers of RNRs on FTRS are a small percentage of the total, who have the opportunity (a phrase that covers a variety of sins) in the civvie career to do some time in the RN...

    I guess (hope) it might remove some of the red-tape?

Share This Page