Memorandum from the Army Families Federation
AFF SURVEY MARCH
2008—RETENTION ISSUES
FROM THE
FAMILY'S
PERSPECTIVE
This survey was conducted between 6 and 14 March
2008 to establish to the current mood of families with regard
to soldiers' decisions to stay in or leave the Army. During this
period all AFF staff and volunteers in the UK, Germany, Cyprus
and Northern Ireland asked families the questions below. The questions
were also sent to members of AFF's Facebook group. A total of
468 responses were received. The results therefore provide a representative
sample of the views of spouses, ie the married community. However,
there is no representation from the significant unmarried section
of the community (girlfriends and boyfriends), nor from parents,
who would also have an influence over a soldier's career decisions.
1. How long have you been an Army spouse?
This question was asked to determine whether
there was an association between the length of time someone had
been married and their attitudes towards Army life. Responses
ranged from 25 years through to one year, with an average of four
years.
Analysis of the relationship between number
of years as an Army spouse and attitudes towards Army life (all
respondents):
| Years as Army Spouse
| Better | Worse
| | As expected
| |
| 1-5 | | 31% |
| 42% | | 27%
|
| 6-10 | | 29% |
| 35% | | 35%
|
| 11-15 | | 33%
| | 20% | |
47% |
| 16-25 | 39% |
| 14% | | 46%
| |
Length of marriage counts for how you feel—you don't
necessarily get used to it.
AFF believes that the higher rate of dissatisfaction within
those spouses who have been married between one to 10 years is
down to three main factors: the first is that those married for
the shortest length of time have joined the Services when they
are at an unprecedented level of operational commitments. Secondly,
we believe that the higher rate reflects an alteration in the
expectations of Army spouses and changes in Army culture. Spouses
have come to expect more for themselves and their families, a
career, a nice home, stability while changes in Army culture (PAYD,
erosion of patch life, poor quality SFA) have compounded to increase
dissatisfaction.
2. Is Army life better or worse than you expected?
Of all respondents 50% of spouses said that Army life was
better than they expected; 37% said that it was worse, and the
remainder said it was just as they expected.
The 46 responses received via Facebook were analysed together
and included in the statistics above. However, separate analysis
shows that 15% said that Army life was better than expected, 50%
said that it was worse, and 30% said that it was just as they
expected.
However, comments given indicate that attitudes change due
to individual circumstances or the tempo of the Army's commitments:
has got harder the older I get—I want to settle and
put down roots;
my outlook on army life has changed since I had the children—it's
not family orientated;
the army isn't how it used to be—there is a disagreement
politically with how I feel about the current operations;
it was better to start with, but when faced with a late posting
and all the uncertainty that goes with moving to somewhere where
there is no army housing and all the nonsense that brings with
it, much worse also being posted to a TA unit where there is no
support;
I am fed up of having so little consideration for me and also
for my husband who is continually worked to the point of exhaustion;
I hate the fact that the Army is incapable of planning properly.
They give you a date for them going off on exercise/tour but it
is never kept to;
One did say she thought it was worse to begin with but now
she has been married for almost five years it is better as she
is now aware of the help she can get
3. Would you feel happier if your spouse chose to leave
the Army?
52% of spouses answered "no" to this question,
and they commented that they were happy to support their soldier
in his chosen career. They also stated that they valued the financial
security offered by the Army, and some had left the Army and then
signed back up. However, 46% said they would be happier if their
spouse was not in the Army. The less satisfied respondents made
comments such as:
I would love my husband to leave if I was confident of his
future job prospects;
I don't want him to leave, but I'm not going to accompany
him.
Only 2% of respondents said they didn't mind either way.
AFF believes that most Army spouses are independent and resourceful
with a "can do" attitude. It is rare to meet a spouse
who will freely admit to badgering their spouse to leave the Army.
4. Which aspect of Army life would make you want your
spouse to leave the Army?
We asked respondents to indicate which of the following aspects
would influence their decision. These categories were based on
responses given in previous research (December 2007 to February
2008). However, respondents commented that increasing deployment
frequency and length would be a deciding factor as well.
| housing | 20% |
| children's education | 26% |
| your education | 4% |
| your career/employment | 19%
|
| your relationship with your spouse | 31%
|
Comments pertinent to this question included:
Bad housing may not be the one factor that drives us out of
the Army—but good housing would go a long way to keeping
us in.
No aspect of army life would make me want him to leave the
army. I have enjoyed my time as a wife and other than monetary
problems have never had any concerns. Have always managed to get
the school I want and even have a daughter at boarding school.
We have now settled into our own house and are looking forward
to the next chapter.
I think the frequency and duration of tours puts undue pressure
on relationships and family life.
The highest scoring section included many spouses who commented
that frequent and lengthy operational tours were having a detrimental
affect on their relationship and this was the factor that would
influence their decision to encourage their spouse to leave the
Army.
CONCLUSION
AFF believe that families often have a key role to play in
the decision of a soldier (or officer) to remain in the service
of the Army. It is unfortunate that this study could not include
an audience of spouses whose service person had already left the
Army. An area of particular interest to AFF is those partners
of young soldiers whose reluctance to marry and "follow the
drum" speeds the soldiers exit from the Army. This audience
is unfortunately very difficult for us to monitor or survey and
so we can only speculate on their effect.
From our recent research and experience of operating within
the service community for 25 years we would suggest that there
is no one factor which causes a spouse to ask their partner to
leave the Army. It will invariably be a combination of key factors
that prompt the decision. Although many Army families cannot survive
on a single wage and certainly are not in a position to become
home owners on one, interestingly few cited money as a reason
for leaving the Army in our research.
It is our belief that without addressing a number of key
welfare issues and by investing immediately and substantially
in Defence Estates families will continue to be a major influence
in a Service persons decision to leave the Army.
BACKGROUND
As background information for the committee, attached is
the evidence prepared for the AFPRB X factor study in 2007. All
points remain valid and provide useful background as to the pressures
experienced daily by Army families.
This evidence will be organised in line with the report to
the AFPRB for consideration of the X factor:—features of
the job, impact of the job and social aspects of the job. This
report will be based on judgement rather than any mechanistic
formulae.[7] All evidence
in this paper will be from the viewpoint of Army families as a
whole rather than the serving family member.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The greatest influence of a military career is the impact
of the job on family life—separation and turbulence are
both at higher levels now than in 2002 due to high operational
tempo and reorganisation of the Army. Danger levels, media interest,
and high rate of churn make being an Army family today more anxious
and challenging than previously. Home ownership is inaccessible
for the majority of Army families due to turbulence and its impact
on feasible second incomes. Accommodation issues remain the area
of greatest concern presented to the AFF over the last five years.
The social aspects of the job have changed with the introduction
of MoD change programmes and efficiency measures that have reduced
the ability of the chain of command to influence and assist personnel
effectively. The lack of a coherent body representing Army personnel
is felt by all ranks.
1. Features of the Job
1.1 This is not an area that would normally be of concern
in family life however opportunities and travel have been seen
by some as an advantage of Army family life particularly postings
overseas. One change in recent years is the change in travel of
the general population. For example many civilians go to Cyprus
for their holidays therefore Army families posted to Cyprus expect
to be able to spend time as a family, to enjoy good accommodation
as seen on holidays and that the cost of living will be low. The
reality is that whilst family and friends are envious Army families
cope with extended periods of separation[8]
without the support of family and friends, their accommodation
has been of a low standard, the cost of living has not been not
been low and opportunities for employment as a spouse are very
low and low paid.
1.2 Job security is seen as a benefit from a family point
of view.[9] However any
decrease in the transferable skills or training for civilian employment
are noticed by families and reduce choice—ie if a soldier
is trained as a forklift driver he can choose to be a soldier,
own his career choice with confidence. If his qualifications do
not translate into a civilian context (infantryman) his concern
will be after Service career.
1.3 Workplace flexibility is an issue for partners and
families with two careers. Increasingly this is two military careers[10]
where childcare responsibilities and opportunities to live in
the same area are both barriers to work life balance or feasibility.[11]
At present many families find that one parent can continue a military
career and the other has to resign.
1.4 A feature of military life is the lack of separation
between work life and home life, especially for those living in
military accommodation. Service Families Accommodation is seen
as a mixed blessing—being provided with a house as a young
couple is attractive however the last two years have seen disturbing
levels of failure within the housing delivery organisations.
The quantity of available accommodation is reducing all the
time as SFA are returned to Annington Homes, and demand increases
through Units returning from Germany and families unable to afford
to buy their own property. Increasingly families have to live
spread out, not benefiting from Unit cohesion and meeting additional
travel costs. There is frequently expressed concern that SFA charges
will increase further.
2. Impact of the job on family life
2.1 The perceived and real threat of danger has increased
for the total UK population since 7/7 but for the Army it is a
reality within the family. Many have friends who have been wounded
or killed, constant media coverage makes the dangers seem close
and all families have or expect to experience their soldier to
be deployed into a dangerous conflict zone. The coping mechanisms
within families are all individual but there is not one family
that does not feel concern or have greater awareness of danger
levels due to media coverage of conflict zones than was the case
in 2002. Service schools provide support for families but many
Army sons and daughters go to schools where there is no understanding
of the impact dangerous deployments have on family life. The unpopularity
of the Iraq deployment is felt by children in schools where staff
do not sympathise with the present UK involvement in the conflict.
2.2 Hours of work and leave are unpredictable compared
to many civilian roles and make employment difficult for spouses
eg spouses try to work evening shifts or weekends so that the
soldier can provide childcare. Unpredictable leave arrangements
have a significant impact on family life—soldiers on duty
at weekends cannot participate in family activities or socialising
with non military friends. Leave is feast or famine—soldiers
have no weekends, days off or holiday for months and then 30 day
post operational tour leave which can be during the school term
or when the non serving spouse cannot take holiday. The variable
and unpredictable nature of military working hours increases the
pressure on families. Holidays are difficult to plan in advance
and cheap offers are either non-refundable or already sold out
by the time holiday dates are confirmed.
2.3 Separation due to operational military service is
presently at a high level for all ranks. For single soldiers the
concern is managing relationships during long absences, for families
it is difficult to switch from being a family to being single,
sometimes also as a single parent. Children have to adapt to changing
family dynamics and understand, from an early age, complex emotions
and responsibilities. The nature of present operational deployments
means that the soldier who leaves home is not always the same
soldier that returns, either due to injury or psychological impact
of deployment.
Relationships with the wider community for both soldiers
and their families are strained by separation and deployment which
differ to the working patterns of other members of UK society.
The opportunity to become part of the local community is limited—as
volunteers Service families are absent for 6 months in every 18
months.
Management of family finances during operational deployments
is proving difficult. Both partners spend exceptional sums—in
theatre on "treats" due to being away and at home for
respite—"a trip to the park to keep the kids happy".
The Operational Welfare Package should meet the costs of family
entertainment within the Unit but this has proved challenging
for all units to access and does not help TA or individual augmentee
families.
Travel during separation is testing for the many Army families
who do not drive or have access to a car yet live in remote barracks
and "patches". Routine grocery shopping has to be at
expensive and limited local stores and access to all other amenities
(including medical and dental care) can be limited.
Separation, as already mentioned, can limit spouse employment.
If two parents work and have between them 30 working days holiday
a year they can plan childcare during school holidays and breaks.
Army spouses cannot rely on the second parent being available
to help and are likely to be living away from extended family
and friends who may assist in normal circumstances.
2.4 Turbulence is still a feature of Army family life.
It should not be seen as purely negative—families enjoy
the opportunity to live in different locations. However, individuals
have little choice, control or ownership of this turbulence and
it impacts on all areas of family life, particularly for those
who are married with children. The impact varies according the
life stage of individuals.
Up to 11% of civilians in the UK move house in a year but
only 2% move outside their Local Authority area.[12]
Up to 40% of Army families move every 12 months and many move
from overseas or the devolved UK areas. This has a massive impact
on expectations, social relationships and state provision. For
example some areas provide high levels of support for children
with additional needs (Cambridgeshire) whilst other authorities
are reducing their provision (North Yorkshire) or IVF treatment
where one Health Authority will provide two cycles of IVF (Shropshire)
whilst others only provide one cycle (Wiltshire). Many families
have to cope with this impact every two years.
Each move involves the family rebuilding social and support
networks. Although X factor and disturbance allowance are designed
to meet the additional costs of mobility it is difficult for families
not to bear additional costs, especially if moving long distances.
No two houses are the same and each one has to be an individual
home, providing personal identity in the middle of conformity.
Expectation of "home" has changed with increased media
coverage of home improvement. The danger is that families "wait
to live" and do not become established in their new area.
Spouse employment is particularly challenged by turbulence.
Careers are almost impossible to develop since opportunities are
difficult to match in new locations (whilst the serving soldier
continues a career progression). Promotion opportunities within
careers are limited if there is uncertainty about duration in
one place and earning capacity is reduced with an impact on pension
accrual, this reducing opportunities for home ownership. Spouse
and family CVs are difficult to translate into the civilian sector.
Overseas spouse employment is through the local garrison and pay
scales are pegged to local salaries—generally lower than
UK salaries. The latter bites hardest for professionals who then
work alongside other professionals employed from the UK doing
the same work at a higher salary.
Spouse training is forfeit if a posting is received during
a training course as there is no recompense for loss of fees or
opportunity to remain until the end of a course unless it is close
to a critical exam stage. Interests and hobbies cannot be maintained
if the facilities do not exist in the new location. Over time
all these factors batter confidence levels of spouses to apply
for work or opportunities.
Home ownership is the aspiration of the vast majority but
turbulence, separation, low second income and lack of certainty
about future mobility all make purchasing a house difficult to
achieve, for many the main effort is to keep alive and afloat.
One of the reasons families were turned down for Shared Equity
Scheme home ownership was due to high debt levels. Some families
suffer negative credit rating from high mobility and from living
in MoD accommodation with a high number of previous occupants.
NHS dentists remain difficult for families to find although
research is being carried out this autumn to assess to continuing
extent of the problem. Accessing doctors does not seem to be an
issue but it is stressful for families to constantly have to start
a new relationship with doctors.
Army children expect to attend many different schools. At
early stages this often means not fulfilling a curriculum ie repeating
subjects (doing the Romans four times!), in non-military schools
social groups take longer to adjust to entrants at odd times in
the school year, confidence is undermined through different schools
and approaches.
UK state schools expect children to register 10 months before
entry and attend trial days months before the start of the school
year but this is generally before Army posting orders have been
received. There has been an improvement as posting orders must
now be accepted to register a child at a school although in reality
it does not give enough information about the school catchment
area where a family will live.
Parents have a difficult choice whether to try and afford
a house somewhere and provide stability for children's education,
to continue high mobility as a family and apply for retention
of SFA during critical periods (GCSE and A level) or send children
to boarding school. The difficulty of this decision is agonising
and difficult to quantify. With present high operational tempo
families desperately want to live together when they can and this
combined with high mobility makes boarding school the feasible
option but the combination of boarding school fees and impact
of mobility on spouse career make home ownership impossible. But
now boarding school is becoming less feasible for those with a
single military career as even with the substantial assistance
from the MoD the cost of independent education is increasing faster
than the continuity of education allowance.
3. Social Aspects of the Job
3.1 AFF questions whether the ethos of the Army community
is changing. Army families have greater expectations from the
Army than civilians do from their employers due to the nature
of military service, especially an expeditionary Army with the
high operational tempo. Army family life is a way of life, there
is little space between work and home. In the past this closeness
was offset by the influence of the local chain of command to deliver
the best feasible solutions locally (eg housing allocation that
matched family need). Also social activities encouraged unit harmony,
so activities in barracks and messes encouraged the sense of unique
community and commitment. This translated to Unit cohesion and
identity to support separation and operations.
The situation seems to be changing; Defence Estates is an
Agency that relates less to the needs of military families and
more to management margins, delivery processes and target delivery.
The new allocations system is proving extremely challenging both
for families and the chain of command. The change to PAYD means
that messes are too expensive for social events and on occasion
the food simply too disgusting to eat.
First line support for Army families is the Unit Welfare
Officer but due to high operational tempo many posts are gapped
or post holders have many different "hats" as well as
welfare eg Second in Command, Quartermaster, Careers Officer.
This is combined with intense media coverage of the Army
and present deployments. Much of the coverage is negative and
questioning the purpose and veracity of the deployment. At such
times a close, well informed and trusting community is essential.
However the ability of the chain of command to influence and provide
for this community is diminished by efficiency and change programmes.
There is no hard data available on divorce rates and how
they compare to civilians. Anecdotally the rate is presently high
due to operational deployments. Unit Welfare Officers report spending
a large proportion of their time on relationship issues, especially
for young soldiers.
Health and education have been discussed in "impact
of the job" above. The availability of medical and dental
care for serving personnel is an advantage. Families' difficulty
accessing facilities and rights undermine confidence and sense
of worth, especially when compared to that provided for those
serving and the continuity civilians achieve.
Recent successes regarding social aspects of the job have
been attaining Key Worker status for housing in the south of England
and a change in social housing legislation that permits military
service to qualify families for `local connection'. Although neither
of these will make a major difference to the problem associated
with home ownership they are positive in terms of improving how
the military is seen by local authorities and politicians as well
as for personnel themselves.
Regular Reservists called up for operational service leave
behind families who may have no military experience or understanding.
This situation is isolating and needs continuous monitoring to
ensure any families are supported.
SUPPORT TO
PERSONNEL AND
THEIR FAMILIES
There is little flexibility in the package of benefits for
military personnel. All benefits are based on need for continuity
of service rather than offered as benefits. Since the majority
of personnel are young the package is geared at those who are
fit, able and deployable. As above the personal support is popular
where delivered by the chain of command but has diminishing influence.
Support for families during operational deployments is variable.
The primary concern is communication and whilst the additional
10 minutes telephone time per week in 2007 was welcome, 30 minutes
per week is still significantly below the expectation of most
people today, certainly in the civilian sector. This lack of telephone
time impacts on the soldiers relationship with family and friends
as well as an ability to fulfil any non-military obligations eg
house purchase. Families become impotent to contact soldiers on
operations, they have to wait to be contacted and spend hours
worrying that precious calls will be missed.
Short travel distance to work and subsidised travel costs
are an advantage of military service although an increasing issue
is where SFA allocation is away from barracks the family need
two cars. Civilians who travel overseas on business can return
home for weekends and at regular intervals whereas military personnel
are expected to remain in one place for months (on deployment)
or a year (on posting).
SUMMARY
Overall there is no doubt that military service has a major
impact on family life for Army families. Not all of these are
negative but there are significant changes since 2002 in the level
of operational deployment for all ranks, the diminishing influence
of the Army to support family life and the present high turbulence
and associated costs.
18 March 2008
7
As set out in 2.3 of 2002 AFPRB report. Back
8
Units in Cyprus in 2006-07 had deployments in Falklands, Iraq
and Lebanon. Back
9
King's College London The Army as a Greedy Institution
2005. Back
10
2007 MOD Partners survey. Back
11
Comment in CGS BT Spring 2007 report. Back
12
SP Pol figure in 2005. Back
| 
