talkback

Drugs put career in doubt

LAST December I was subject to Compulsory Drugs Testing (CDT) and tested positive for class C drug stanozolol [anabolic steroid].

Summoned to see my commanding officer in March, I admitted to having taken something for a period of three weeks in September 2009.

My CO took the view that he wished to retain me and wrote a statement, which was forwarded to the brigade commander, to reflect this. I am told that the commander endorsed the decision not to discharge me and that my case would be further considered by manning in Glasgow.

Since then I have heard nothing back down the chain of command. As with other disciplinary issues, is there a set time frame in which this process should be completed?

Due to the uncertainty I have started to apply for jobs on civvy street but am unable to give potential employers a start date as I have no idea what the Army is planning to do. – Name and address supplied.

Brig Mike Griffiths, DPS(A), responds: Your letter raises questions about the time taken to process CDT results and the follow-on action in the event of a positive test.
I can confirm that all action to date has been within the mandated policy time lines. All CDT samples are tested and subject to the same common screening process with further analysis of samples when something is found.
Follow-on testing for steroids can take longer than for other illegal substances, which accounts for the period between your test in December and the notification of your positive result in March 2010.
The CO has up to three months to investigate and consider a case from the date at which he or she is notified of the result. This ensures that there is appropriate time to fully investigate the details, for example consultation with external agencies such as the laboratory which tests CDT samples, to ensure that the individual involved is dealt with fairly.
On completion of the investigation, an application for retention or discharge is submitted through the chain of command to the Directorate of Manning (Army). They will consider all relevant facts and, where necessary, seek advice from Personal Services 2 (Army), the Army’s policy branch that oversees CDT, before reaching a decision. Strict criteria for retention must be satisfied. On average about 50 soldiers a year are retained following a positive result.

 

Herrick R&R issue up in the air

Picture: Steve Dock

IT is my understanding that anyone deployed on operations for more than four months and one day (approximately 121 days) is entitled to one period of Rest and Recuperation (R&R) lasting seven days.
My unit [664 Sqn AAC] has deployed its personnel for 139 days with no R&R and no explanation of any workaround.

Rumour has it that we will get our R&R on returning to the UK, but nothing has been confirmed. Is this allowed and if so what happens regarding allowances, as we would normally still get Longer Separation Allowance (LSA) and our battle bonus for this period?

If the extra week does not count – as we would have operationally located out of theatre – some personnel will miss out on more than £200.

This situation is not a one off. All Apache squadrons deploying on Op Herrick now deploy for more than four months with no tour break and the chain of command has not explained why and what the policy on R&R is. This affects around 150 personnel from each squadron every rotation. – Capt S Lunn, Flt Comd, 664 Sqn, Op Herrick.

Sqn Ldr L Shaylder, SO2 J1 Ops Cap/Dev, PJHQ, responds: The policy on R&R is laid down in Joint Services Publication 760, which states: “The decision to grant R&R rests with the in-theatre operational commander, who will consider a number of factors such as the threat, the operational requirement and minimum force levels, to determine the practicality of R&R.
“R&R is not leave and is to be taken at a time, location and for a duration specified by the operational commander. R&R may only be granted to individuals and units on periods of continuous operations in excess of four months.”
While personnel are on R&R they are not entitled to LSA, additionally there is no authority for either allowance referenced to continue when personnel have returned from ops to the UK.
Unfortunately we cannot comment specifically on local Joint Helicopter Command arrangements.

 

Strip back spending on Service uniforms

AS an ex-Regular and Territorial Army soldier and now a Cadet Force school staff instructor, I am amazed to read such dribble on the thread of uniforms, be it officers concerned that they look scruffy or warrant officers determined to maintain high dress standards.

It’s about time that these individuals were sent out into civvy street for a year’s sabbatical so that they can see what the real world is like.

People seldom go to work in suits and ties any more (only the old colonel- and brigadier-type wear bowler hats) and yet they still get on and do the job they are paid to do.

Perhaps instead of providing new uniforms, the MoD should scrap the free issue of this clothing and offer a tax allowance which would require soldiers to pay for their own attire rather than constantly wasting public money on replacement kit ahead of parades.

Uniforms should only be issued on a genuine needs basis – there needs to be more accountability on this issue.

Furthermore, why not scrap the wearing of all headdress?

Just think how much could be saved if money didn’t have to be spent on berets and badges. Come on MoD, get a grip on things. – David Morris, Rhondda.

 

Herrick hairdryer treatment

David Beckham is shown the mounted heavy machine gun on an Army Lynx helicopter

Shooting star: England talisman David Beckham is shown the mounted heavy machine gun on an Army Lynx helicopter by LCpl Chandler (9 AAC), who said of the former Real Madrid and AC Milan man’s visit “it’s good morale for someone like that to come here”.

WITH England fans no doubt still smarting from seeing their side crash out of this summer’s World Cup, David Beckham’s cameo in July’s issue of Soldier provoked some barbed comments from our Facebook fans.

While Allan “big up the Becks” McClure and Brenda Storey commended “Golden Balls” for visiting British Service personnel at Camp Bastion in Afghanistan ahead of football’s showpiece tournament, others were less inclined to hail the actions of the former England skipper.

Perhaps considered guilty by association, Beckham, who missed England’s dire display in South Africa through injury, was branded as being “just like all footballers, overpaid and underachieving” by Lola-Kitty Loki.

On the attack, David Egner was dismissive of Beckham’s three-day tour of theatre, stating “he’s got nowt else to do, has he?”.

He also suggested that the rest of the squad should have gone with the former Manchester United man, been given a “tin hat and gun” and made to do “summat useful for their millions”.

A sentiment shared by Mark Arnold who proposed that seeing all that soldiers do for less money a year than most footballers earn in a month would teach the players what “bravery, loyalty, comradeship and respect really is” and to “not demand it [respect] just because they kick a football around”.

Mike Ashworth said that he would have been more impressed if Becks had chosen to leave “the PR team” at home.

“Personally I think the best way for any celebrity to do this [visit British personnel on operations] would be to do so completely anonymously,” he added.
“That would give me a bit more respect for celebs.”
Defending the LA Galaxy midfielder, Raymond Hamilton said: “At least David Beckham went to see what it is like out there for himself. Good on him, I say.”

 

inequality of the criteria for the award of the Golden Jubilee Medal

I WRITE having read a number of letters in Soldier concerning the perceived inequality of the criteria for the award of the Golden Jubilee Medal.

While I have some sympathy for the disappointment voiced by your correspondents, at least most serving members of the UK Armed Forces were issued the decoration. It could have been worse. I missed out on all three of the commemorative medals awarded during the 36 years I have been serving.

Canada traditionally allocates only a handful of jubilee and commemorative medals to each unit and while a Canadian version of the Golden Jubilee Medal was struck, the vast majority of personnel did not receive it.

New Zealand and Australia’s Defence Forces did not receive allocations of the Golden Jubilee Medal and did not strike their own.

I can only hope we fare better this time round [Diamond Jubilee Medal]. – David Buck, Wellington, New Zealand.

over 37 package only for uk

I’M in my last few years of service and am keen to settle my family down for the future.

It was my understanding that the Over 37 Package was designed for this very purpose. However, I have subsequently been told that is only available to those setting up home in the UK. Is this correct? – Name and address supplied.

Brig Mike Griffiths, DPS(A), replies: One of the underlying principles of the Service allowance package is that the UK Armed Forces are normally recruited in the UK, which is regarded as the home base for Service personnel and their families.
This applies to the Over 37 Package (section 8 of chapter 7 of Joint Services Publication 752) and you have therefore been correctly advised that it can only be used in conjunction with the settling of your immediate family at a selected place of residence in the UK.
Options have been considered in the past to extend this provision to enable settlement in other countries but they proved unaffordable. Given the prevailing financial climate it is extremely unlikely that funding could be found to extend the current entitlements.

Puzzled by insurance business

I AM confused as to the MoD policy regarding car insurance and Motor Mileage Allowance (MMA) claims.

I have recently taken out an insurance policy with First Central Insurance who provided me with the cheapest quote.

However, the company does not cover members of Her Majesty’s Armed Forces for business use which, according to my admin office, means that I can not claim MMA in the event of no other transport being available.

To do so I would have to purchase additional cover at a cost of £150 on top of my already extortionate premiums.

Surely if a covering letter can be supplied by an insurance company stating that it does not cover Service personnel for business use, soldiers should be able to claim MMA for the occasional journeys to courses that are a requirement for advancement in rank. – Cpl M Palmer, Brize Norton Courier Terminal.

Brig Mike Griffiths, DPS(A), replies: Your admin office is absolutely right – in order to claim MMA for a Service journey you must have business use motor insurance. This is a legal requirement, applying to the civilian community as well as to military personnel.
The solution you offer would simply reinforce the fact that the journey you wish to undertake is illegal. The details for using a private car and claiming MMA are clearly laid out in Joint Services Publication 752.
For attending a course, your unit must provide you with Service transport. This could be in the form of a hire car, particularly if you need to take a lot of kit with you, but you will need to present a case for this to be approved.
This only allows for journeys at the beginning and end of the course. If you want to take your private car then this is at your expense. The choice is yours.

Posting regulations miles apart

I WAS recently posted from Germany to the UK and was told that I could not claim Motor Mileage Allowance for the move.

Why is this the case when an internal move from one UK post to another does attract payment? – Pte C Butler.

Brig Mike Griffiths, DPS(A), responds: Your question is tied up with the complex calculations that produce the Local Overseas Allowance (LOA) rates.
While in Germany you will have received LOA; this includes within it an element that is known as car buy/sell. This is provided on the assumption that you will sell your car in one location and purchase another car at your next location as a result of your assignment.
It therefore compensates you for the “loss” you will make through these enforced sales.
The calculation also assumes that as it is the Army’s responsibility to move you between these two locations, you will do so using Service means, which in the case of Germany is via the air trooping service.
For personnel based in Germany the calculation for car buy/sell assumes that they will serve there for two-and-three-quarter years and therefore the monies to cover this loss are repaid over this period.
At your level this equates to a total of around £1,000.
If, as in your case, you chose not to sell your car and not to fly by the trooper it is considered that you have been adequately compensated already for the costs of driving to the UK through your LOA.

‘Will our cadets be kitted out with camo?’

IS the Army Cadet Force (ACF) going to be adopting the new Multi-Terrain Pattern (MTP) uniform?

In my opinion the introduction of the design provides an ideal opportunity to distinguish the ACF from the Army and give cadets something to aspire to.

If, however, the decision is taken to issue the uniform to cadets, I can foresee a situation where ACF members are wearing the kit before it has been issued to non-operational Regular Army personnel. – WO2 S Okopskyj, AFCO Plymouth.

Maj Allan Law, Log Sp Branch, HQ Land Forces, writes: The issue of Combat Soldier (CS) 95 clothing to the Regular Army will continue until at least 2012 when a range in the new MTP camouflage will be introduced.
This will take at least two years and, after roll-out is complete, the MoD will have no further requirement for the current woodland uniforms, although it is likely that current stocks of CS 95 will be issued to exhaustion.
It is not cost effective to run two similar clothing lines and cadets will eventually be required to wear the new clothing in keeping with all other Regular Army and Territorial Army units. It is extremely unlikely that cadets will receive, or be given the authority to wear, MTP clothing before Regular Army and TA units.


Want to let off steam?
We want to hear from you – but please be brief.
Email: mail@soldiermagazine.co.uk
ACROSS the ranks, your letters provide a real insight into the issues at the top of soldiers’ agendas . . . but please keep them brief. Emails MUST include your name and location (although we won’t publish them if you ask us not to). Anonymous letters go straight in the bin. The Editor reserves the right to accept or reject letters, and to edit for length, clarity or style. Before you write to us with a problem, you should first have tried to get an answer via your own chain of command.
   

Site management bypush logo