Service standards and attention to detail

pompeyexpat

War Hero
sgtpepperband said:
I know I'm generalising but it's about time that every superior officer, from the junior Killick to the highest Admiral, is prepared to earn their shilling and start dishing out orders and clamping down on slack attitude and bearing. And that starts with some personal admin of their own. I was always taught: "Beyond reproach"; how can you give a lad/lass grief if you look like a scranbag yourself?

As for me? I like doing it 'cos I'm a nasty bastard... :wink:

No you're not generalising it is everyones responsibility. (I hate to agree with a snake). It strikes me that too many people are scared of confrontation. I'm no reggie (made Chief in my own branch!), but I am a CPO. The ET(WESM) bit that follows is just my speciality. Too many of my fellow SRs seem to forget that.

Not wishing to sound like a grumpy old man, but the problem starts with society. Young'uns are joining up undisciplined and not enough is being done to change that. This has been going on for a while now and some of those young'uns are in positions of authority themselves. Added to that is the increasing lack of moral courage seen nowadays. Peolple too scared to say when they see something wrong. Just walk on by, take the easy way out. Now that is generalising, not everyone's like that, but it does seem to becoming the norm.

As for me? I don't like doing it 'cos I'm not a nasty bastard, but I will when I have to.

Apart from this one time, when I managed to pick up a Killick reg who, in his haste to take someones name for being in mixed rig, had left his cap on the dashboard of his van. "Beyond reproach" and all that. I might not be nasty but I can be petty and small-minded at times.
 
Nutty said:
Naval Gazer

I am full agreement with you, but you must ask the question if you have noticed this drop of in less than six years, how much has the drop off been in 16 years, 26 years, 36 years or 56 years. Yet you had a chance to do some thing about it if only in small way as an Officer or SR but clearly did not see it as a problem in your watch or were not prepared to raise your head above the parapet very much....

I'm no paragon of virtue but I enforced standards whenever and wherever I was in a position to do so. During the final years of my career, I found myself working away from the fray in increasingly isolated locations with like-minded officers, WOs and SRs of similarly advancing years. Even so, I often raised such issues verbally and in print. Quite understandably, people resented 'outside' criticism of those in their own branch, unit, ship, division, etc., and regarded it as unwanted interference; thus the onus placed today on the Reggies or those in higher authority to put their boot down. I can also appreciate that priorities are placed elsewhere now that courses and other periods of training have been shortened so drastically.

The problem does seem endemic from the top down and appears to have much to do with the intrusion of the popularity cult into the Services. Strict disciplinarians are now labelled as 'bullies' or charged with other forms of harrassment. I don't think such characters as 'The Terror of Tobermory' (Vice-Admiral Sir Gilbert 'Monkey' Stephenson KBE, CB, CMG) would survive past sub-lieutenant in today's climate. Of course, there should always be some compromise. 'Firm but fair' always worked well enough in the past but the 'firm' bit seems to have become a little too soft (also pink and fluffy according to some people). Even my own children objected to standing evening rounds in their bedrooms and mustering for a liberty boat inspection before proceeding ashore. I ask you.
 
NG So what happened to the days when you reach the point that you decided you wish to discipline the miscreant and its "Get yer at son" march him off to the Joss's Office and say please charge him with x....x for report at the OOD Table I am both the complainant and witness. Don't want to hear about PACE cos that only applies to Criminal Offences not breaches of QR's and AI's.

Nutty
 

sgtpepperband

War Hero
Book Reviewer
Nutty: The Service Police have been subject to PACE since the late '80s. Any investigation into an offence against the NDA that is taken to Summary Trial (OOD Tables are no longer used as a summary procedure) has to be conducted in accordance with PACE/CPIA, same as Home Office/other constabularies.

The alternative administrative sanctions (Minor Administrative Action introduced in 2006, similar to Army AGAIs) are not subject to the same procedures...
 
sgtpepperband said:
Nutty: The Service Police have been subject to PACE since the late '80s. Any investigation into an offence against the NDA that is taken to Summary Trial (OOD Tables are no longer used as a summary procedure) has to be conducted in accordance with PACE/CPIA, same as Home Office/other constabularies.

The alternative administrative sanctions (Minor Administrative Action introduced in 2006, similar to Army AGAIs) are not subject to the same procedures...

SPB

Why do you think it is called the Police and Criminal Evidence Act. First off any person who investigates a Criminal Offence or allegation is subject to PACE and was from the first day the Act was passed in Parliament and came into force in 1984.This can include a Private Investigator, HR Department Manager, Tax Inspector or Shop keeper or Military Police Officer/Man(take your choice). It is that most did not think so hence the collapse of the RAF Cyprus spy trial in 1985.The Judge can rule that the person would have insufficient knowledge of PACE and procedures lets say the shop keeper, but a Private Investigator self employed or working for a Major Credit Card company will have to.

The act does not apply to internal breaches of Service/Company discipline/rule/regulation code where the various Employment and Human Rights Acts apply. In fact in an Industrial Tribunal situation to Caution person who is being interviewed with lets say, being adrift, would be classed as oppressive behavior and the company would lose the case. Because the Forces have adopted PACE to cover all its ills would not happen if the various employment acts applied to the Forces it is just a choice they have made but it is not LAW.

In the outside world to question a person about late time keeping with a view to any sort of official discipline you would have to give him 24 hours notice in writing of the interview and provide him with any notes or evidence you may rely on and possible exhibits, CCTV footage of him coming in late to work, at least 24 hours before the interview, plus allow him to be accompanied by a person of his choice if he so wishes to take notes or even record the interview.

Investigation is to start asking questions of a possible suspected criminal offence. Only the Judge can decided if the evidence is admissable. He would of course use the yard stick of what working knowledge of PACE would a shopkeeper have. It would be different to his views on that expected of a store detective paid to enforce criminal laws.

What happens in the nasty outside world is very different to the Forces, lets keep it in house attitude.

Nutty
 

sgtpepperband

War Hero
Book Reviewer
Nutty: Another argument for another day, but thanks for the lesson in sucking eggs with regards to PACE and how to do my job! If I was to investigate an offence without complying with the Act's provisions then I would be reported.

As I said previously, ANY investigation that I conduct into a contravention of any section of the NDA is subject to the Service Police Codes of Practice, which is derived from and forms part of the Act; this includes contravening SOs, QRRNs, DINs, etc. Other internal investigations (as conducted by non-Service Police personnel) are not subject to PACE.

Maintaining good order and discipline (iaw TORs for all LHs, SRs and Officers) has nothing to do with PACE; as far the Armed Forces are concerned only the Service Police are subject to the Act. The rest can use their better judgement and power of command... :roll:
 
Nutty said:
NG So what happened to the days when you reach the point that you decided you wish to discipline the miscreant and its "Get yer at son" march him off to the Joss's Office and say please charge him with x....x for report at the OOD Table I am both the complainant and witness. Don't want to hear about PACE cos that only applies to Criminal Offences not breaches of QR's and AI's.

Nutty

I expect SPB can answer your question but doesn't this situation arise in civilian life too, e.g. where a breach of company regulations has arisen?
 

chockhead819

War Hero
Some times I wish for the days of "being taken round the back of the Island" If we Fu cked up on the flight deck that was how we learned, in my 10 years (77-87) I can't recall a Snr Rate Chockhead trooping a Naval Airman because even though they were run ashore oppos they had the respect of even the most Jr Naval Airman.

We didn't see it as bullying because once it was done it was forgotten by both sides.
 

sgtpepperband

War Hero
Book Reviewer
chockhead819 said:
Some times I wish for the days of "being taken round the back of the Island" If we Fu cked up on the flight deck that was how we learned, in my 10 years (77-87) I can't recall a Snr Rate Chockhead trooping a Naval Airman because even though they were run ashore oppos they had the respect of even the most Jr Naval Airman.

We didn't see it as bullying because once it was done it was forgotten by both sides.

As a matelot, I agree. However as a Regulator, I cannot condone violence... :twisted:
 

Nostrinian

Badgeman
The way everyone on here is going on you would think we were running a mob like St Trinians crossed with the cast of "Scum" (what a thought!).
Most (99%) of the men and women JRs Ive worked with (how far do we go back, 1 to 25 years in my case?) are the salt of the earth. I've said this before many trainees Ive spoken to actually say they wish discipline and standards were higher than they are, and actually expected them to be tougher. The raw material hasnt changed, we have. We allow things to be easier on our subordinates than were allowed on us. Why this is, I dont know.Correspondingly, you may now get a slightly scruffier looking AB.Numbers of supervisors and the level of supervision available is a massive factor. Consider this; I joined Culdrose on a Winter afternoon after a draft on a ship in 1987. I was picked up by a service bus at Redruth station and driven to the camp. On the gate is at least two matelots (one of whom I know, a friendly face who points me in the right direction). Available about the camp were an actual real duty watch of a killick and six, theres a proper CPOOOW and at least 3 duty officers (DLC, OOD and a subby. Going into the Galley to have my tea I had my head ripped off by the duty PO Chef ( for still wearing my overcoat) A totally different and higher level of supervisionn than is avaialbe now.
I dont believe braying people on the Alaskan Highway was ever the answer, and it very rarely happened anyway in my experience. I remember getting a slapping once of somebody but it didnt make me a better person, quite the reverse.
 
When I was in the RNXS back in the 1990s the rules were strictly enforced. Though in peacetime we were technically civvies (in war be would have been subject to the NDA) the rules governing the handling and processing of signals was detailed and strict, being enforced by the Watch Chief (CNX) whose barbed tongue could be savage indeed :oops: :oops: :oops: :cry:

I remember reading the Articles of War during training and feeling physically sick! Eek! My main fear was being hung from a nearby lamp post should I fall asleep on watch after being on watch due to undermanning for a very long day. :yawn:

Perhaps the RN should recruit ex-RNXS Chiefs? :lol: ;)
 
Top