2 Measures to improve recruitment
and retention
9. Most of the Department's measures to improve recruitment
and retention have been based on financial incentives. These incentives
have been generally successful in the short term but have not
addressed some of the key reasons for leaving, such as Service
personnel's inability to plan ahead in life outside work, and
the impact of operations on family life. The financial incentives
were targeted at particular groups as this approach provided better
value for money than paying increases to everyone. The Department
believes that incentives have made a difference and has ceased
payment after a few years to those trades where manning has improved,
although the Department has not been able to avoid paying out
some money to people who would probably have stayed anyway.[19]
10. In October 2006 the Department introduced a £2,240
tax-free allowance for everyone deployed to Iraq, Afghanistan
and Bosnia in recognition of the challenging circumstances and
pressures they face, and is confident this will have a positive
effect on retention, as well as recruitment. The allowance needs
to be seen alongside other financial measures but many personnel
returning from operations have welcomed the payment. However,
financial incentives alone may not keep people in the Forces given
the strains on personnel and other key reasons for leaving. Measures
to enable people to plan ahead and improve their family life and
work/life balance, such as longer advance notice of deployments,
are needed to improve retention.[20]
11. Although many people were concerned about the
impact of operations on their work/life balance and planning ahead,
deployments are a positive factor for some. 9% of former personnel,
or those who intended to leave, surveyed by the National Audit
Office either left or were thinking of leaving because they were
not deployed enough.[21]
The Department endeavours to take individual preferences on deployments
into account but preferences must be balanced against the needs
of the Service, the requirements for the particular operation
and the need for individuals to complete their specialist training
and gain the required experience to progress in their careers.
Non-commissioned officers, officers and warrant officers undertake
an increasing degree of participation in the management of their
careers.[22]
12. The Department has lacked information about the
cost of incentive schemes when compared to the benefits and has
not always carried out investment appraisals. The Department accepts
that decisions might have been better with improved information,
and that it should have carried out investment appraisals before
the introduction of new financial incentives schemes. It intends
to introduce them from now on.[23]
13. In assessing the costs of incentive schemes the
Department has been hampered by the poor quality of financial
information and inadequate IT systems. Information has not been
easily accessible or disseminated to those people responsible
for managing recruitment and retention. The Department believes
the quality of information will improve with the implementation
of its new Joint Personnel Administration system from 2007 onwards.[24]
14. The Department has not maintained a consistent
long term approach to recruitment and retention activity. Recruitment
drives, for example, have been cut back by pressures to downsize
or to make funding cuts.[25]
Cutbacks can have significant consequences. The Royal Navy is
currently affected by cutbacks to recruitment activity made in
the 1990s because manning shortages which started in the lower
ranks are working their way up to Petty Officer Rank.[26]
The Army cancelled some Infantry training courses as recently
as 2004-05, and consequently deferred recruits, in order to stay
within its funded manpower limit, at a time when the Infantry
were heavily committed to operations in Iraq.[27]
The Department accepts that it made mistakes in the approach that
was taken in the 1990s and is applying the lessons learnt in the
current downsizing of the Royal Air Force, where the fall in strength
of 8,000 personnel is being managed through a mix of reduced recruitment
and voluntary departures. [28]
15. The Department sets annual targets for recruitment
but they do not take account of the need to fill in some of the
gaps resulting from previous recruiting shortfalls. The Department
explained that it had to live within its budget and there were
a limited number of training places available which restricted
the number of new recruits in any one year.[29]
The Department, however, conceded that there was some training
capacity available as a result of the Armed Forces reducing in
size.
16. The Department faces a number of challenges to
meeting its recruitment targets, such as an ageing population,
changing attitudes to careers and increasing levels of obesity
among young people.[30]
The Department has not dropped its overall standards of entry
to the Armed Forces;[31]
the standard of fitness required, for example, has remained unchanged.
However, the Army has increased the maximum Body Mass Index limit
for new male recruits from 28 to 32 and plans to increase the
length of initial training from 12 to 14 weeks, partly to allow
more time for recruits to reach the required fitness levels.[32]
17. Many pinch points are in highly specialised trades
such as medics, linguists and nuclear watchkeepers. The Armed
Forces traditionally "grow their own" recruits which
means that it takes a long time for them to acquire the high degree
of skill, training and experience needed for these trades. If
they leave they are very difficult to replace so the Department
needs a coherent long-term strategy for retaining them. The Department
is looking at ways to encourage junior ranks to progress to the
higher levels and providing incentives to encourage them to train
and ultimately to stay in the Forces for a longer career.[33]
18. In recognition of the strong pull from the external
job market, medical and dental officers and professional aircrew
benefit from separate pay arrangements. The arrangements are outside
the main Armed Forces pay structure which is linked to rank. The
Department's Strategic Service Personnel Plan contains a number
of strands of work,[34]
one of which is examining whether to extend this arrangement to
other types of personnel. Nurses, where there are shortfalls of
up to 70% in some specialisms,[35]
could be one of the first groups to benefit, alongside the financial
incentives which are already in place for this trade. The Department
would consider looking at other groups if their work identified
a need to adopt a more flexible, market-based approach to pay
in order to retain highly skilled staff.[36]
19 Q 11 Back
20
Q 57, Q 11 Back
21
C&AG's Report, para 2.22 Back
22
Qq 58-60 Back
23
Qq 12-23 Back
24
Ibid. Back
25
Q 24 Back
26
Q 10 Back
27
C&AG's Report para 3.13 Back
28
Q 10 Back
29
Qq 105-106, Q 10 Back
30
C&AG's Report, Appendix Five Back
31
Q 34 Back
32
C&AG's Report, Appendix Five Back
33
C&AG's Report, para 1.17, Q 61 Back
34
C&AG's Report, para 2.41-2.42, Appendix Four Back
35
C&AG's Report, Figure 3, Volume 2, Case Study 11 Back
36
Q 61 Back
| 
