Special Service Pay (SF, Divers, para, etc)

#1
Be warned, If you receive special service pay, it will be halved should you tender your notice to leave the Armed forces, I know many of divers including myself, that this has happened to some of which have submitted representations.

Apparently SSP, regardless of its nature is now known as retention pay.

This sounds like a money saving good ideas club to me.
Unethical and immoral, how can service personal expect to serve in the same capacity despite being paid less.
Hit you in the pocket and force you to serve 12 months, many people rely on this money to pay their mortgages.

Rant over....
Pissed Off

Is anybody aware of any other trades Naval or otherwise that this has occurred to?

Any body got any info etc.

UXBD :pissedoff: :pissedoff: :pissedoff: :pissedoff: :pissedoff: :pissedoff:
 
#2
This is also true of submarine pay, and is the cause of some dissatisfaction, particularly as to first receive it, one has to qualify, so it cannot be retention pay, but if one submits one's notice, it is reduced, so it cannot all be knowledge pay. Now, it they were to give trainees the retention half as soon as the trainee was streamed S/M, and the knowledge half upon qualification, then it would be reasonable to reduce to half upon submission of notice. There are complaints/representations in the system at the moment, but as these are invariably going to be by people with less than one year to serve, I hold out little hope for a satisfactory conclusion.

If you have signed on 2OE, you can submit to leave at one of the pre-designated points with no reduction in pay.
 

Bawsack

Lantern Swinger
#3
UXBDIVER said:
Be warned, If you receive special service pay, it will be halved should you tender your notice to leave the Armed forces, I know many of divers including myself, that this has happened to some of which have submitted representations.

Apparently SSP, regardless of its nature is now known as retention pay.

This sounds like a money saving good ideas club to me.
Unethical and immoral, how can service personal expect to serve in the same capacity despite being paid less.
Hit you in the pocket and force you to serve 12 months, many people rely on this money to pay their mortgages.

Rant over....
Pissed Off

Is anybody aware of any other trades Naval or otherwise that this has occurred to?

Any body got any info etc.

UXBD :pissedoff: :pissedoff: :pissedoff: :pissedoff: :pissedoff: :pissedoff:
Many people should re-assess their finances then. To get a mortgage based on specialist pay is a school boy error and one that can and clearly has cause pain when you lose it.

You should have also been advised by your DO when you tendered your 12 month notice that you will lose 50% of your specialist pay.

BTW many submariners have tried the representation/complaint route and I dont know of any that have won.
 
#4
Bawsack said:
UXBDIVER said:
Be warned, If you receive special service pay, it will be halved should you tender your notice to leave the Armed forces, I know many of divers including myself, that this has happened to some of which have submitted representations.

Apparently SSP, regardless of its nature is now known as retention pay.

This sounds like a money saving good ideas club to me.
Unethical and immoral, how can service personal expect to serve in the same capacity despite being paid less.
Hit you in the pocket and force you to serve 12 months, many people rely on this money to pay their mortgages.

Rant over....
Pissed Off

Is anybody aware of any other trades Naval or otherwise that this has occurred to?

Any body got any info etc.

UXBD :pissedoff: :pissedoff: :pissedoff: :pissedoff: :pissedoff: :pissedoff:
Many people should re-assess their finances then. To get a mortgage based on specialist pay is a school boy error and one that can and clearly has cause pain when you lose it.

You should have also been advised by your DO when you tendered your 12 month notice that you will lose 50% of your specialist pay.

BTW many submariners have tried the representation/complaint route and I dont know of any that have won.
Special service pay for divers, will be spined next year like it is for the SF It will therefore become pensionable and integral to your Pay. That said you live within your means and often beyond them.

Ridiculous concept retention pay.

Submariner pay: Live in black stinking metal tube for months on end. Incentive money

SF pay: Get shot at regularly high rate of death.Get involved in dangerous ops, statistically likely to be killed.
Incentive money

Para Pay: Jump out of a perfectly serviceable plane die/ injure on landing.
Incentive money

EOD pay: Exposed to IEDs CMD Likely to be blown up and die:
Incentive money

Aircrew pay: Fly around in metal boxes that regularly crash.
Incentive money

Diving Pay: Exposed to All of the Above including Inherently dangerous diving High likelihood of death statistically.
Incentive money

This has only come into force recently , it seems the armed forces can change both your TOR's and your pay to suit them accordingly. We are apparently employed on the basis of a fluid contract to which you sign and consent to nothing.

As for representations, I intend to submit one but only so I can further pursue this as a civil case outside the MOB as this is in direct contravention to UK and European employment law.

I need to get rid of this soap box.....

UXBD
 

Bawsack

Lantern Swinger
#5
Submaine pay as all specialist pay was 're-branded' as part of pay 2000, it was highlighted apparently and there were allegedly no objections.

Its here to stay and as far as we submariners have found out, there is nothing we can do about it.
 
#6
Bawsack said:
Submaine pay as all specialist pay was 're-branded' as part of pay 2000, it was highlighted apparently and there were allegedly no objections.

Its here to stay and as far as we submariners have found out, there is nothing we can do about it.
Unreal! How the hell were there no objections?!!!! Who the hell sat at this review board!!? Certainly no-one that receives SSP.
This is a classic good ideas club decision. Decisions made by people completley out of touch with the man on the ground. Furthermore this board was probably totally unrepresented by the people who it affected.

Absolutely incandescent!!!!! AAAArrrrgh. :director: :pissedoff: :pissedoff: :pissedoff: :cussing: :cussing: :cussing: :banghead: :banghead:
 
#7
Oh well, we've all lost out in some way thanks to pay 200(0)(1)(2)(etc)
Thing is, as far as mortgages etc are concerned, people should never use any form of "extra" pay to get them. That's actually deceit.
 

wave_dodger

MIA
Book Reviewer
#8
UXBDIVER said:
Be warned, If you receive special service pay, it will be halved should you tender your notice

Apparently SSP, regardless of its nature is now known as retention pay.

This sounds like a money saving good ideas club to me.
Unethical and immoral, how can service personal expect to serve in the same capacity despite being paid less.
Sorry I fail see how you are entitled to be pissed off in any way shape or form. SP is for recruitment and retention hence once you submit your notice it is clear that it has not worked and is no longer required.

SP is NOT danger or specialist pay. This was all implemented over three years ago.

The initial plan for a reduction of 75% straight off but that was felt to be too harsh and may stop people reconsidering their notice.

At the end of the day its also a form of allowance and no-one should use that as the basis to calculate mortgage payments.
 

wave_dodger

MIA
Book Reviewer
#9
UXBDIVER said:
Bawsack said:
Submaine pay as all specialist pay was 're-branded' as part of pay 2000,

Unreal! How the hell were there no objections?!!!! Who the hell sat at this review board!!? Certainly no-one that receives SSP.

This is a classic good ideas club decision. Decisions made by people completley out of touch with the man on the ground. Furthermore this
It wasn't PAY2000, it was the ability of JPA to make the mechanism reality that made it practical.

The board that agreed this was the SPB - Service Personnel Board (2SL, AG and the Air 2* {can't recall his title}) supported by all three service pay colonels who took advice and direction from all branch managers with personnel receiving SP.

They knew well the implications and impact but it was a sensible move. Why keep on paying good money to someone who is going to leave? It doesn't make financial or moral sense/
 
#10
wave_dodger said:
UXBDIVER said:
Be warned, If you receive special service pay, it will be halved should you tender your notice

Apparently SSP, regardless of its nature is now known as retention pay.

This sounds like a money saving good ideas club to me.
Unethical and immoral, how can service personal expect to serve in the same capacity despite being paid less.
Sorry I fail see how you are entitled to be pissed off in any way shape or form. SP is for recruitment and retention hence once you submit your notice it is clear that it has not worked and is no longer required.

SP is NOT danger or specialist pay.
It used to be and has only changed recently with pay 2000.
Needless to say I can can see you are an advocate of the later policy and you are entitled to your opinion, as am I.
The fact that I'm down Half my SSP D pay every month is cause for me being pissed off. Regardless of whether you think Im entitled.
The fact that I have no option for early release also pisses me off. I therefore have to moonlight to supplement my pay. And I dont need the money for my mortgage, I need it for more essential things such as mirrors....How will I survive.

I pretty certain there are not many recipients of SSPD that would share your point of view.

UXBD
 

Bawsack

Lantern Swinger
#11
UXBDIVER said:
wave_dodger said:
UXBDIVER said:
Be warned, If you receive special service pay, it will be halved should you tender your notice

Apparently SSP, regardless of its nature is now known as retention pay.

This sounds like a money saving good ideas club to me.
Unethical and immoral, how can service personal expect to serve in the same capacity despite being paid less.
Sorry I fail see how you are entitled to be pissed off in any way shape or form. SP is for recruitment and retention hence once you submit your notice it is clear that it has not worked and is no longer required.

SP is NOT danger or specialist pay.
It used to be and has only changed recently with pay 2000.
Needless to say I can can see you are an advocate of the later policy and you are entitled to your opinion, as am I.
The fact that I'm down Half my SSP D pay every month is cause for me being pissed off. Regardless of whether you think Im entitled.
The fact that I have no option for early release also pisses me off. I therefore have to moonlight to supplement my pay. And I dont need the money for my mortgage, I need it for more essential things such as mirrors....How will I survive.

I pretty certain there are not many recipients of SSPD that would share your point of view.

UXBD
You do have an option for early release, you can request it on JPA, as always it depends if they can spare you. I know of someone who went outside 3 months after submitting their notice.

I am a recipient of SM pay and dont agree with the way they have done things but as I said earlier a lot of guys have challenged it and have been told to wind their tits in.

IMO if you are still in the Navy doing the job that entitles you to SSP then you should still get it. Unfortunatly I dont write pussers policy.
 
#12
wave_dodger said:
UXBDIVER said:
Bawsack said:
Submaine pay as all specialist pay was 're-branded' as part of pay 2000,

Unreal! How the hell were there no objections?!!!! Who the hell sat at this review board!!? Certainly no-one that receives SSP.

This is a classic good ideas club decision. Decisions made by people completley out of touch with the man on the ground. Furthermore this
It wasn't PAY2000, it was the ability of JPA to make the mechanism reality that made it practical.

The board that agreed this was the SPB - Service Personnel Board (2SL, AG and the Air 2* {can't recall his title}) supported by all three service pay colonels who took advice and direction from all branch managers with personnel receiving SP.

They knew well the implications and impact but it was a sensible move. Why keep on paying good money to someone who is going to leave? It doesn't make financial or moral sense/
It certainly makes financial sense, but moral sense. I hope you are reading your remarks.
Therefore personnel are tied into the service on the bases that they will lose money should they ever have family, moral , or financial reasons for leaving.So to dissuade them from leaving you threaten them with a pay cut, regardless of the consequences that that condition might impose. Unethical.
Astonishing that you can see moral reason in this. It is discrimination against personnel who choose a particular career that attracts SSP.

Invariably you are not fully informed of the ramifications of your decisions before you join a particular Branch I know. I wasn't and very few of my colleagues have been able to make an informed decision either. It is always just considered that thats how it is,Life in a blue 1.

The Navy is an employer like any other and is subject to the same employment law.

UXBD
 

wave_dodger

MIA
Book Reviewer
#13
UXBDIVER said:
Needless to say I can can see you are an advocate of the later policy and you are entitled to your opinion, as am I.
The fact that I'm down Half my SSP D pay every month is cause for me being pissed off. Regardless of whether you think Im entitled.
The fact that I have no option for early release also pisses me off. I therefore have to moonlight to supplement my pay. And I dont need the money for my mortgage, I need it for more essential things such as mirrors....How will I survive.

I pretty certain there are not many recipients of SSPD that would share your point of view.

UXBD
I'm not sure I'd label myself an advocate but I equally don't think there will be many MCDs, SM or WAFUs who share my viewpoint but in this day and age there are some stark choices to be made. As fas as I can see it is common sense to cease SSP once someone has PVRd.

Difficult and unpopular choices need to be made to keep the mob affordable. And yes....I don't get SSP but I'd like to think even if I did I'd see the broader picture - which I accept is a pill that is a tad difficult to swallow.

Keep staring into those mirrors!
 
#14
UXBDIVER said:
The Navy is an employer like any other and is subject to the same employment law.

UXBD
I think the RN and MOD as a whole is exempt from many of those employment laws mate.
I agree its utter bollox, but its been this way for a while now, surely its one of the things that you think about before putting in your notice? If you are at the stage of putting in your notice, then you must be ready and willing to take a relatively small cut in pay to get what you want, ie outside?
 

wave_dodger

MIA
Book Reviewer
#15
UXBDIVER said:
It certainly makes financial sense
Glad we agree

UXBDIVER said:
but moral sense. I hope you are reading your remarks.
Therefore personnel are tied into the service on the bases that they will lose money should they ever have family, moral , or financial reasons for leaving.So to dissuade them from leaving you threaten them with a pay cut, regardless of the consequences that that condition might impose. Unethical.
Astonishing that you can see moral reason in this. It is discrimination against personnel who choose a particular career that attracts SSP. UXBD
How could "they" ignore the fact that we are paying £xxM of pounds in SSP and a large portion of that to a community who had submitted their notice? Thats the moral component having the balls to take what all concerned knew would be a universally unpopular decision!

The whole point of SP is
UXBDIVER said:
to dissuade them from leaving you threaten them with a pay cut
We recruit adults who should be able to deduce that their actions may have a consequence financially
UXBDIVER said:
regardless of the consequences that that condition might impose
UXBDIVER said:
Unethical.
Hardly
 

wave_dodger

MIA
Book Reviewer
#17
UXBDIVER said:
Ps A signal From a certain CO stated that no early release would be approved for any CD's
I'm guessing that you are a shortage category...makes sense in a way.

Actually this has gotten me thinking when did I accept that my annual warrants were going...

These changes happen all the time, some just aren't so visible or have such a financial impact.
 
#18
Some would argue that when a request for premature release via submission of 12 months notice is received, that person should be removed from their unit and placed in a pool of manpower at the release unit on basic pay, so as not to influence others unduly.
;)
 
#19
It is a hard pill to swallow, but unfortunately the Navy have approached this issue in the completely wrong manner as always.
As far as whether the Navy is subject to the same UK employment Law: they are exempt from many aspects but are an equal opportunities employer like so many others. They are still subject to some laws governing money.

The Navy is a job like any other. It's not what it used to be, all the penny pinching policy makers have ensured that.

UXBD
 
#20
wave_dodger said:
UXBDIVER said:
It certainly makes financial sense
Glad we agree

UXBDIVER said:
but moral sense. I hope you are reading your remarks.
Therefore personnel are tied into the service on the bases that they will lose money should they ever have family, moral , or financial reasons for leaving.So to dissuade them from leaving you threaten them with a pay cut, regardless of the consequences that that condition might impose. Unethical.
Astonishing that you can see moral reason in this. It is discrimination against personnel who choose a particular career that attracts SSP. UXBD
How could "they" ignore the fact that we are paying £xxM of pounds in SSP and a large portion of that to a community who had submitted their notice? Thats the moral component having the balls to take what all concerned knew would be a universally unpopular decision!

The whole point of SP is
UXBDIVER said:
to dissuade them from leaving you threaten them with a pay cut
We recruit adults who should be able to deduce that their actions may have a consequence financially
UXBDIVER said:
regardless of the consequences that that condition might impose
UXBDIVER said:
Unethical.
Hardly


If you can show me a representative UK employer that can change policy on your pay, without your consent and impose new regulations on your pay without informing you, I will agree unequivocally with you.
I have a very pragmatic approach to most arguments but you cannot seriously believe in what you are saying, not unless you have totally bought into the whole life in a blue one ideal.

UXBD
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

New Posts

Top