RN Transfers

Jim30

Lantern Swinger
Re: Choosing an RNR branch.

So in other words you'll join the RNR to take up sopmeones billet in order to give you the advantage when you join the RN?

Personally people like you really p*ss me off. You'll be occupying a branch slot and likely doing exercises that people want to do, or getting a place on popular courses knowing full well that you'll have run away by the time you're trained to do anything useful.

Why not just leave now and let someone who wants to do the job long term take your place. Alternatively go join an URNU where you can travel and play around to your hearts content prior to joining.
 

Wacka

Midshipman
Re: Choosing an RNR branch.

You could be right about GSSR, its still quite new and the goal posts keep shifting. That said, there are interesting possibilities appearing.

If MTO sounds good to you then I'd say go for it! Personally I'd ignore what Jim30 said .... don't really want to get into a slanging match, but I can't see what possible value his opinion has.
 
Re: Choosing an RNR branch.

Jim, the recruitment and retention figures for the RNR now formally accept that we lose people to the RN. This means the RN get people that are more switched on to what will happen when they're in.

Let's face it Jim, we're not in the position where we have no spare billets are we? If only.
 

Chunky_Monkey

Midshipman
Re: Choosing an RNR branch.

Jim30 said:
So in other words you'll join the RNR to take up sopmeones billet in order to give you the advantage when you join the RN?

Personally people like you really p*ss me off. You'll be occupying a branch slot and likely doing exercises that people want to do, or getting a place on popular courses knowing full well that you'll have run away by the time you're trained to do anything useful.

Why not just leave now and let someone who wants to do the job long term take your place. Alternatively go join an URNU where you can travel and play around to your hearts content prior to joining.

Jim30 - what an incredibly short-sighted statement to make. You may not have noticed but we do also recruit people FROM the RN, many of whom have very useful skills and experience. It does work both ways you know.

If we stopped taking people who were intending joining the RN in a few years time, recruitment would be even worse and in any event not all of them do join up and some stay RNR.

As far as branches go, MTO (NCAGS) is getting its act together and if you want a bit of travel I can recommend it. I have e-mail contact details for the branch WO1 if you want them - PM me if so.
 

Jim30

Lantern Swinger
Re: Choosing an RNR branch.

I firmly stand by my views. We're trying to develop a long term RNR, and by encouraging people to come in for a couple of years then letting them go, all we do is create manpower bubbles which take ages to work through the system.

Then we have situations where people want places on course which can be fully booked, why should we penalise someone comitted to the RNR long haul by letting people who have no intention of staying get a place? Same with exercises, foreign exercises should be a reward and a retention tool. there are plenty of UK based exercises, and I really think place allocation should be firmly for those who show long term commtiment to the branch and the RNR. By taking someone on who we know is going, we waste good money training them, then they will probably take someone elses place who we could lose when they quit out of frustration that they don't get good exercise places.

Sorry but I really think that those part time part timers are a waste of our resources. Given how long it will take to train we'll lose them before they are actually of any value to us. That to me is a scandalous waste of limited resources. I've seen lots of people come in, use the training system and then go onto the RN, without ever having contributed anything meaningful to the operational side of the RNR. Frankly this is something we should crack down on, not tacitly encourage.
 

Chunky_Monkey

Midshipman
Re: Choosing an RNR branch.

Jim30 said:
I firmly stand by my views. We're trying to develop a long term RNR, and by encouraging people to come in for a couple of years then letting them go, all we do is create manpower bubbles which take ages to work through the system.

Then we have situations where people want places on course which can be fully booked, why should we penalise someone comitted to the RNR long haul by letting people who have no intention of staying get a place? Same with exercises, foreign exercises should be a reward and a retention tool. there are plenty of UK based exercises, and I really think place allocation should be firmly for those who show long term commtiment to the branch and the RNR. By taking someone on who we know is going, we waste good money training them, then they will probably take someone elses place who we could lose when they quit out of frustration that they don't get good exercise places.

Sorry but I really think that those part time part timers are a waste of our resources. Given how long it will take to train we'll lose them before they are actually of any value to us. That to me is a scandalous waste of limited resources. I've seen lots of people come in, use the training system and then go onto the RN, without ever having contributed anything meaningful to the operational side of the RNR. Frankly this is something we should crack down on, not tacitly encourage.

Okay Jim30, assuming your idea ever gains any support from further up the food chain, how do you propose to actually administer this? Are you going to discharge those already in who have stated they are "interested in joining the RN"? (and if so on what grounds?). Are you going to discriminate against them in terms of what training they receive (not quite sure on what basis we'd actually be able to do this without getting in serious hot water). Are you going to put it on the recruiting literature and website that we don't take those who are planning on joining full-time, so don't bother applying? I don't see how it could possibly work, as all that would happen is if it became public knowledge that we did not recruit those planning on leaving in a few years then they'd not bother telling us this was their intention when they joined ! How are we supposed to know any different? And then they'd just resign in a few years time for no apparent reason and go and join full time anyway !
 
Re: Choosing an RNR branch.

Jim,

If we are to have true OC linked in with the RN, I think your idea will seriously detract from the naval service cohesion.

Would you rather we returned to the days, and mindset, of the MSFs.

Some of the best support and advertising we have in the fleet and those who left to join them from our ranks.

M(R)
 

PartTimer

War Hero
I think that more than a few join up as a "suck it and see" exercise. If they find they like service life, they transfer to the RN! It's a plus for both the RNR and the RN I think.

The main intake for most units *stand fast RUs like Vivid and KA with large numbers of ex-regulars) remains I think those that wanted to join when they were younger but for various reasons did not.
 

FlagWagger

GCM
Book Reviewer
Re: Choosing an RNR branch.

Reservist-Monkey said:
If we are to have true OC linked in with the RN, I think your idea will seriously detract from the naval service cohesion.

Too true

Reservist-Monkey said:
Would you rather we returned to the days, and mindset, of the MSFs.

You make this sound a bad thing. In today's world it would be, however at the time, the RNR excelled at meanswiping and the parallel universe that then existed had more positive aspects than it would today.

Reservist-Monkey said:
Some of the best support and advertising we have in the fleet and those who left to join them from our ranks.

As a comms rate, I feel duty bound to say we need better communication between the RN and RNR and a better understanding of each others strengths, weaknesses and capabilities.
 

Jim30

Lantern Swinger
Nope, I'm saying that when young members walk through the door we should ascertain very quickly whether they are planning a career in the RN. If so then they should politely but firmly be sent the URNU's way, which is far better equipped to look after them.

I've seen a lot of potential recruits and YO's join, then not even clear basic because they see it as a prelude to going to BRNC. I can think of a lot of OPUS officers who having passed then went and joined up. At the end of it the RNR's wasted a lot of time and money training people who will never use that training.

I accept that sometimes people join and only later want to transfer, but we should not be doing business with those who see us as a stepping stone to a real navy job. Let them in, but make sure that those who are committed get first priority on course application etc.
 

BeerBad

Lantern Swinger
Jim30, how many course have been canceled because there are not enough people attending? I would bet more individual training opportunities are lost because of this reason than because of over booking.

I would like to see if "missed opportunities" to train will still be an issue with a shift to regional training at week-ends.
 

dunkers

War Hero
Out of interest how much does it cost to train an RNR recruit anyway? Victualling costs for a training weekend and travelling expenses? What else?
 

Latest Threads

New Posts

Top