First Further supplementary memorandum from
the Ministry of Defence
1. This memorandum aims to provide the House
of Commons Defence Committee with additional information in respect
of their inquiry into Recruitment and Retention in the Armed Forces.
It provides responses to the questions posed in the Committee
Clerk's letter of 28 May 2008.
How many Service personnel were paid late last
year? (Q365)
2. No Service personnel were paid late during
the 2007-08 financial year.
When Service personnel do get paid late what costs
do the MoD reimburse (eg bank charges)? (Q368)
3. If an individual has incurred an actual
financial loss such as bank/building society charges or interest
charged against a loan which would have been cleared if the payment
had been made correctly, the department will compensate the individual
on production of documentary evidence of the loss.
Details of the joint personnel administration
inaccuracies and difficulties and the measures that have been/will
be put in place to resolve them (Q368)
4. In January 2008, the MoD provided the
Committee with a Memorandum on Joint Personnel Administration
which explained problems being experienced, including pay inaccuracies.
At that time MoD identified areas where more work was required
before Joint Personnel Administration could be considered to have
delivered its Vision, as endorsed by the Defence Management Board.
Further to this, we can report the following progress against
these areas:
Improvements in the provision of Management Information—The
Management Information capability has not yet fully met the user
expectations or needs. The programme of work to meet these challenges
is prioritised through the Joint Personnel Requirement Steering
Group. The Service Personnel and Veterans Agency and the Services
are working closely together to establish a common basis for future
development which will also align with the MoD wide initiative
to develop improved corporate Management Information capability.
JPA Control Framework—In January MoD reported
that a control framework would be put in place around the Joint
Personnel Administration processes to ensure that the processes
are being followed correctly and that the processes themselves
do not allow opportunity for fraudulent behaviour. A control framework
programme has commenced and the initial output has been agreed
with the MoD finance community and the National Audit Office.
The intention is to ensure that all the key controls are in place
by December 2008.
Improvements to the Enquiry Centre and back-office
functions—Implementation of a revised management procedure
(the Service Request Management Group) and additional training
for enquiry centre staff has resulted in a significant improvement
in customer satisfaction.
Reduced "cost of ownership" through
further harmonisation and simplification—A series of process
reviews is being driven forward under the auspices of the Joint
Personnel Administration Business Optimisation Plan. This provides
a mechanism for looking at each of the processes and determining
a priority for further work, in particular that required to harmonise,
simplify and modernise policies and processes where initial progress
to support Joint Personnel Administration roll-out was insufficient
to achieve optimum business benefit.
5. Joint Personnel Administration is an
ambitious change programme. All key outputs have been delivered
without interruption throughout the implementation process. However,
as indicated in earlier memorandum, there have been a number of
data quality issues which have impinged on the ability of Defence
Analytical Services and Advice to report Army Manning Statistics
and there are still a number of gaps affecting manpower reporting.
The Service Personnel and Veterans Agency Data Management and
Information Group continues to work closely with Defence Analytical
Services and Advice to improve the quality of data held within
Joint Personnel Administration. This joint work has led to the
identification of data issues in some systems which pass data
into Joint Personnel Administration or with the way the data transfer
is operating.
6. MoD are continuing to look at all aspects
of the training of personnel in connection with Joint Personnel
Administration to ensure that this is fit for purpose. This will
focus on the provision of training and processes, primarily for
self-service users and unit Human Relations staff, but including,
where appropriate, Career Managers and specialist Joint Personnel
Administration administrators, to ascertain whether all users
are appropriately trained and sufficiently aware to exploit the
full potential of Joint Personnel Administration.
Details of other wastage statistics for Phase
1 training and Phase 2 training for each of the Services (Q432)
and the number and percentage of recruits who discharge as of
right during Phase 1 training in each of the three services and
how this compares with our major allies
7. Details of Phase 1 training wastages
rate by cause are provided at Annex A for the UK Armed Forces.
This data is derived from the single Services sources and is not
necessarily derived from the employment of identical methodologies,
therefore, direct comparison between the Services may not be wholly
appropriate.
8. Different countries employ different
methods of wastage calculation and other factors, including selection
processes, entry standards, the handling of injury during training
and their policy on back-classing will affect exit rates. Therefore
a direct comparison of Other Rank losses during training between
countries is difficult to achieve. Therefore, the two tables provided
below aim to provide a broad comparison of wastage rates only.
In all cases the statistics provide the total wastage rates.
Percentage Wastage Rates for 2006 from
UK Phase 1 and US Boot Camp
| Navy | Marines
| Army | Air Force
|
| UK1 | 9.4% | N/A
| 21.2%2 | 8.9% |
| USA | 14% | 11.7%
| 13.6% | 7.1% |
| Note | |
| | |
1. Single Service sourced data not validated by Defence Analytical
and Statistics Advice.
2. Excludes Infantry for which there is no separate Phase
1 wastage rate (see Annex A).
Percentage Wastage rates from UK Phase 1 and 2 training
and at the 12 month point in Canada, the USA and Australia
| | 2003-04
| 2004-05 | 2005-06
| 2006-07 | 2007-08
|
| UK1 | RN | 26%
| 24% | 22% | 21%
| 24% |
| RM | 47% |
41% | 47% | 47% |
45% |
| Army | 31% |
26% | 28% | 36% |
38% |
| RAF | 15% |
21% | 19% | 20% |
22% |
| Canada | Navy | 8.4%
| 12.2% | 13.0% | 18.8%
| |
| Army | 18.9%
| 20.0% | 21.3% | 25.3%
| |
| Air Force | 3.3%
| 7.2% | 9.0% | 9.2%
| |
| USA | Navy | 13%
| 14% | 14% | |
|
| Marines | 14%
| 14% | 16% | |
|
| Army | 21% |
18% | 13% | |
|
| Air Force | 11%
| 13% | 13% | |
|
| Australia | Navy | 16%
| 17% | | |
|
| Army | 21% |
21% | | |
|
| Air Force | 12%
| 13% | | |
|
Note
1. UK data is single Service sourced and has not been not
validated by Defence Analytical and Statistics Advice.
The Armed Forces recruitment process in Foreign and Commonwealth
Countries for example Ghana, Fiji and Jamaica
9. With the exception of Army recruitment of Gurkhas,
except when visiting a Commonwealth country at the express invitation
of government concerned, the Armed Forces do not actively recruit
overseas. However, individuals can access the Armed Forces websites
in order to see the range of opportunities open to them, and how
to apply from overseas. Commonwealth or Irish citizens residing
overseas who wish to apply to join the Armed Forces must travel
to the UK at their own expense to undergo the selection process.
They normally arrive on a six month tourist visa and are usually
handled by the Armed Forces Careers Office at St Georges Court
or, for the Army, the Careers Office on the Strand, both are which
are highly experienced in handling the complexities associated
with processing overseas candidates.
RN
10. Since 1997 the RN has visited St Vincent on two occasions
at the invitation of the Island's government. As a result of the
first visit in 2002, 154 individuals joined the Service (126 Royal
Navy and 28 Royal Marine). A second visit took place in 2005 as
a result of which 71 completed training and entered the Royal
Navy.
11. The employment of foreign nationals in those branches
directly related to operations is restricted on security grounds.
As a result the Royal Navy Logistics Branch has a higher than
average number of ratings from overseas, with enough candidates
in the selection process to provide the branch with sufficient
manpower until 2009. Therefore, although Royal Navy recruiters
have been invited to return to St Vincent, there is currently
no requirement to recruit more overseas personnel.
13. As a result of reports back home to family and friends
from those already serving, a steady flow of candidates is making
their own way to the UK with a view to joining the Royal Navy
and the Royal Marines.
Army
14. In recent years the Army have sent selection teams
to some Commonwealth countries at the specific request of the
government concerned where evidence suggests that there is sufficient
interest amongst the local population to merit a visit. These
teams screen out those not thought capable of meeting the full
entry standards to save them the cost of an abortive trip to the
UK to undergo the recruitment selection process. Selection teams
will only see those who have already made an application to the
Army's Recruiting Group Overseas Cell which has passed the initial
sift.
15. Since 1997 Army Overseas Selection Teams have visited
Fiji 10 times, St Vincent and the Grenadines three times and St
Lucia twice. In addition a team has this month just commenced
a visit to St Lucia and Belize.
16. Applicants through the Overseas Cell are the biggest
source of enquiries (some 30,000 per annum). Those that enquire
do so via telephone, email, letter and On Line Enquiry Forms.
Each enquiry is screened for eligibility and if everything is
in order, the candidate is invited to attend a careers office
in the UK.
RAF
17. Individuals from Commonwealth countries can apply
through Broadsystems, a response-handling company, whose job is
it to handle responses resulting from national advertising and
direct marketing activity, via telephone, online enquiry and interactive
TV. Any resulting "live" queries are passed to the field
force in the Armed Forces Careers Office.
Clarification about the Retention Action Plan referred to by
Major General Gregory, Director General Personnel (Army) in the
Evidence Session of 22 April (Q276)
18. The Retention Action Plan is a matrix of measures
and actions, currently consisting of some 73 serials, which are
being progressed to either examine or improve retention in the
Army. It is owned by the Army Retention Executive Committee chaired
by Director General Personnel (Army) and the Plan is reviewed
at each meeting and updated on a quarterly basis. The Retention
Action Plan serves to coordinate effort and enable a more holistic
approach to retention.
19. The Retention Action Plan has been operating in its
current form for about 12 months, although a similar document
had previously formed part of another Action Plan. Key areas include
the formulation of Financial Retention Incentives, coordinated
retention estimates and plans by Arms & Service Directors,
establishing and prioritising research requirements to better
inform balance of investment decisions and better ways of communicating
the problems and what is being done.
Annex:
A. Loss of Recruits during Phase 1 and 2 Training.
18 June 2008
RAF Flying Trades
PHASE 1
| FY | Type |
No in to IOT | VW |
Prof | Med | Total %age
|
| 04/05 | Pilot |
| | | |
|
| Weapon Systems Officer |
| | |
| |
| 05/06 | Pilot | 92
| 3 | 8 | 1 |
13.0 |
| Weapon Systems Officer |
19 | 2 | 6 | 3
| 57.9 |
| 06/07 | Pilot | 134
| 1 | 0 | 0 |
0.7 |
| Weapon Systems Officer |
26 | 0 | 0 | 0
| 0.0 |
| 07/08 | Pilot | 153
| 9 | 7 | 1 |
11.1 |
| Weapon Systems Officer |
27 | 3 | 0 | 0
| 11.1 |
| Note: | |
| | | |
|
Since this pipeline has been up to two years long (because of
backlogs), the number being withdrawn in any year does not necessarily
correlate with the number-in in the same year.
PHASE 2
| FY | Type |
No in to FT | VW |
Prof | Med | Total %age
|
| 04/05 | Pilot | 63
| 5 | 22 | 1 |
44.4 |
| Weapon Systems Officer |
30 | 3 | 10 | 1
| 46.7 |
| Weapon Systems Operator3 |
83 | 6 | 1 | 3
| 12.0 |
| 05/06 | Pilot | 74
| 2 | 7 | 1 |
13.5 |
| Weapon Systems Officer |
23 | 2 | 6 | 3
| 47.8 |
| Weapon Systems Operator |
65 | 0 | 4 | 4
| 12.3 |
| 06/07 | Pilot | 105
| 7 | 6 | 2 |
14.3 |
| Weapon Systems Officer |
18 | 2 | 2 | 1
| 27.8 |
| Weapon Systems Operator |
73 | 1 | 0 | 0
| 1.4 |
| 07/08 | Pilot | 133
| 8 | 7 | 1 |
12.0 |
| Weapon Systems Officer |
27 | 3 | 0 | 0
| 11.1 |
| Weapon Systems Operator |
88 | 4 | 0 | 0
| 4.5 |
Notes:
FT—Flying Training
VW—Voluntary Withdrawal
Prof—Profesional Failing (Airwork)
Med—Medical Withdrawal
1. Withdrawal—removed from course but often cascaded from
Fast Jet to Rotary Wing or Multi-Engine; or Rotary Wing to Multi-Engine
for pilots; Weapon Systems Officers withdrawn from trianing are
sometimes cascaded from Fast Jet to Multi-Engine (there are no
longer Rotary Wing Warfare Systems Officers) and Weapon Systems
Operators can also be cascaded within their various specialities.
It is not possible to define those that are ultimately successful
or otherwise.
2. The pipeline can be up to four years long therefore the
number being withdrawn in any year does not necessarily correlate
with the number-in in the same year.
3. Weapon Systems Operators are Non Commissioned Officers.
| 
