service numbers????

RM2PhD

MIA
For Royal Marines the 'P' denoted Other Ranks; officers were given RM, or at least they did when I was in 7between 4-86. Until today I had not realised that Armed forces personel were now gievn "employee numbers".

Without sounding like 'Disgusted of Tonbridge Wells' when did all that happen? I had not realised that the homogenisation of culture, nay, all life in the UK, had yet extended to the armed forces. Like most other people on here I had kind of gotten used to being described as a customer, rather than a rail passenger, or a heart attack victim, or a rape victim, etc. but I would never have thought some prat would have given service men and women 'employee numbers'. Oh, I can why from the new pay system side of thinsg but as any fule know who reads Private Eye the JPA (is that right?) is one more in a long line of ferking IT disasters in this country. And before they figure out how to work it they **** with years of tradition, that's the kind of tradition that wins wars and copes with losses, mind.

I had just gotten used to being called a customer by overpaid idiots who told me that if my pupils attacked me I should call 'One Stop Customer Care' (it's true). But that's ok. What is not okay is not knowing which suited ******* twat decided that the Armed Forces should have an "employee" number rather than a Service number? Some ****** who has never fired a shot or been shot at in anger, I bet. And where were the General Staff when this happened?

Okay, it's only a number, but being given my Service number PO33754R (who cares who knows it now?!) was and should be an important part of the whole enculturation process of being RM/RN/Army/RAF. I would not like to stretch the point but being given a unique SERVICE number is what initially made me feel like being a member of the family of Royal Marines AND NOT just a ferking number. To the the petty bureaucrat, of course, my moans are simply moans about a silly tradition, and I will get over it eventually. Strange how the ******* who mess with our traditions always seem to ensure that their own public school/oxbridge/civil servant traditions survive though.

P.S. George Orwell came to visit me last night and he had a right old chuckle. Huxley and Kafka tomorrow.
 

dunkers

War Hero
RM2PhD said:
Without sounding like 'Disgusted of Tonbridge Wells' when did all that happen?

October 2006, when the Royal Navy/Royal Marines switched to JPA.

The JPA training package (which is computer based) asks us to select if we wish to view the training material for "employees" or "employers". I was dismayed by that too and sympathise totally with what you're saying.

JPA is an off-the-shelf human resources database; similar systems are used in civvie firms.

Soon, RN training will be sub-contracted to a civvie contractor, "Metrix".

It's a crying shame; almost literally.
 

RM2PhD

MIA
Cheers, Dunkers. I guessed it was an off the shelf HR package but thought some bright spark must have ... er .... challenged ... er ... okayed it!
 

TerryB

Badgeman
I was a D when I joined in 53 signifying Devonport.
Then in 57 I changed my port division to Pompey and became a P.
When I became an SD SLt in 1964 I didn't have a service number cos we all knew each other.
I don't quite remeber when I became a C,when we got service numbers as officers. But it was certainly after 1970 because I can remember doing a course at RAF Catterick with the Rock Apes and the Officers Mess were quite thrown when I informed them that we didn't have service nos as an RNO. :evil: :twisted:
 

Karma

War Hero
Which is more important, spending money on kit for the front line, or spending money to modify a software package just so that we can keep doing things the way they used to be done.

Handler has already highlighted that the service numbers used up until JPA went live are different from those used about 40 years ago. I'm sure when things changed there would have been grumbles and I'm unsurprised about them now, but tbh I'd rather be spending the money on useful things!
 

Karma

War Hero
dunkers said:
we won't have a front line if we can't get our pay system to work.

But is the label actually important to making the pay system work? Note that I mean pay system as more than just the box of tricks in Gosport, although one might wonder how much ''customisation'' of JPA has led to some of the problems that people have experienced?
 
hi
I argree with dunkers, we won't have a front line if the guys and girls on the ground don't get paid. the JPA by the sound of it has been brought in to make it easier for the civil servants to keep a track of us where ever we go. I remember the problems we all had when pay 2000 came in. (but thats another story) it takes time to adjust.
bit anoyed about not getting a unquie service number though, i was looking forward to that.
ship_rat
 
Top