F e a t u r e s
HEALTH Whilst this is an ‘old chestnut’ as far as the MOD is concerned, it would be remiss of us if we did not include the continuing angst caused by the lack of access to NHS dentists. Families are either waiting for protracted periods to gain access to dental cover, are travelling back to previous locations to secure continued access, or are simply not registering either themselves or their children for routine dental care. Whilst we acknowledge that this is a national problem that is being addressed by a national strategy, the problem continues to be exacerbated by the mobility of Service families.
Access to GP care for families seems to cause fewer problems and some lucky families are cared for by RAF doctors on training units. There is still concern that family care is split between different doctors, with the Serviceperson covered by the RAF and the partner and children required to register in the local NHS clinic.
Access to specialist medical treatment can also cause difficulties for RAF families. The ”post code lottery” that appears to determine whether specialist treatment is delivered, and if so, at what cost, can create real difficulties for families, with some opting to serve unaccompanied in order to allow a partner or child to continue to receive specialist medical care. Whilst the RAF is sympathetic to requests from serving personnel to delay or cancel a posting that would have a negative impact on medical care, the Service need must come first and this can force families to make very difficult choices.
FINANCIAL Although we have limited evidence in our database regarding financial issues, we are aware that the continuing increase in accommodation charges is considered a negative factor by many families who perceive that the quality of accommodation, lack of choice and limits on self-help to improve the quality of the family home, does not justify the higher rents.
We have received some comments that the pay and allowances for RAF personnel deployed to operational theatres are still insufficient to recompense for the increased risk and danger now being faced in many Out of Area locations. However, we do not sense that financial issues are a strongly negative retention factor, except where the cost of house purchase is concerned.
OPERATIONAL TEMPO/ SEPARATION One of the key concerns arising from RAF families is the increased operational tempo, with some specialisations facing repeated breaches of the ‘harmony guidelines’. Whilst many serving personnel relish the opportunity to serve on operational deployments, and volunteer to put their training into practice, the impact on family life cannot be under-estimated. The constant fear that the next media report will be about your loved one being killed or wounded is a stress most of us cannot imagine and the impact on children is an area that has yet to be fully evaluated. We have received reports of families finding the disruption of the partner’s return extremely difficult to cope with, for all parties, and the difficulties caused when he/she then deploys again having a major impact on children’s behaviour. The difficulties experienced during the absence of a serving partner are often exacerbated by the distance between the family and their other relatives, since many Service families continue to “follow the flag” and will serve miles from their home base and the support that can offer.
Clearly, many families cope extremely well with the regular deployments and might argue their relationships are all the stronger for the enforced separation. Our evidence, however, tends to highlight
feel that they are not kept well-informed when their loved ones are deployed and that their concerns do not appear to merit much support from the Service welfare agencies.
SERVICE TERMS & CONDITIONS OF SERVICE(T&COS) Although our evidence is patchy, there is certainly an emerging theme that the differences in entitlements between the 3 Services, exacerbated in a joint arena, can cause feelings of resentment amongst the cadre with the less favourable T&COS.
A few nights ago I came across the broadcast of the House of Commons Defence Select Committee on one of the BBC TV channels, on which Dawn McCafferty was speaking. As an ex-army officer with 22 years service I wanted to say how well all the speakers presented their cases and supported the well being of current Servicewomen and men and their families. Well done and keep up this essential work, especially at a time when it appears that politicians and senior officers only seem to pay lip service to the military covenant. John Stirling
the negative aspects of separation and its impact on a family’s willingness to continue to support the Serviceman or woman throughout repeated deployments.
We have received evidence of some families slipping through the “welfare net” and of partners not receiving the level of support that is available to them during the deployment of the Serviceman or woman. These individuals report an extreme sense of isolation and many are unsure who to turn to for help, particularly the younger wives and partners who may lack experience of the RAF welfare support structures. We have also received comment from some parents of serving personnel who
We have also received negative comments regarding the inability of those who wish to stay in the Service beyond the Normal Retirement Date (NRD) of 55 being forced to leave at a time when there is so much attention being paid to retention. Similar comments come from those unable to extend beyond an engagement through “continuance” or “assimilation” (both terms referring to Service-led requirements for limited numbers to serve beyond the normal exit point). Whilst the Federation recognises that strategic manpower planning is a complex science, there is a view amongst family members that the RAF is losing experienced staff when it could perhaps retain their services for longer to cover current and forecast gapping or increases in established tasking.
We have received comments from some families that longer tours, particularly
for officers, who tend to move every 18 months to 2 years, would be a welcome step towards mitigating many of the problems experienced by mobile military families. We are aware that proposals for more regional postings are being considered to improve family stability; we would support this development, subject to the Service recognising the needs of those who do not achieve an area of choice – there will always be some who need to serve in locations not of their choosing to meet the Service requirement.
* The Winter 07 Edition of Envoy is available to view on our website at:
www.raf-ff.org.uk
Summer 2008 15
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48