Tornado To Be Axed
Discussion
CharlesdeGaulle said:
Notwithstanding, to claim, as some here seem to, that the Services are wrong to want their staff involved in contract negotiations or it is in some way a deficiency, seems to me to be flawed. Why on earth wouldn't you want the end-user involved?
Involving the end user is a great idea when setting a specification and that is what the MOD currently does. However the "end user" isn't involved in the actual contract writing, it's usually a "non-user" with no specialisation in the particular field who deals with the actual contract writing (not the specifying part) which covers all the parts that are usually messed up like poorly defined terms around training, parts, repairs, documents, accountability for modifications/alterations, design help etc rather than the end-user stuff like "I want it this big and this fast" etc which is usually pretty straight forward.CharlesdeGaulle said:
Industry may have the upper hand in many negotiations, but to blame the uniformed personnel is to rather miss the reality.
The problem isn't the individuals for the most part, although there's always a few poor ones. Instead it's the system that puts under-qualified (and usually quite junior) people into very complex contractual negotiations against experienced professionals without giving them any adequate training or time to build any experience as the system swaps Officers around every two years (for promotion etc). I would love for there to be a specific ground Officer trade of "Contract Negotiator" or similar where that is all they do and I'm sure they would be very good at it, but that isn't how the MOD works currently and the end-users suffer because of that.
IanH755 said:
I would love for there to be a specific ground Officer trade of "Contract Negotiator" or similar where that is all they do and I'm sure they would be very good at it, but that isn't how the MOD works currently and the end-users suffer because of that.
I don't disagree with what you hope this would achieve, but to have highly and widely trained and comparatively expensive military personnel doing contracts for their entire career really doesn't make any sort of sense at all, even if you could recruit into such a trade (which I doubt). What you're describing, surely, is the role of a Civil Servant, which is why they're there and what they do.
CharlesdeGaulle said:
IanH755 said:
I would love for there to be a specific ground Officer trade of "Contract Negotiator" or similar where that is all they do and I'm sure they would be very good at it, but that isn't how the MOD works currently and the end-users suffer because of that.
I don't disagree with what you hope this would achieve, but to have highly and widely trained and comparatively expensive military personnel doing contracts for their entire career really doesn't make any sort of sense at all, even if you could recruit into such a trade (which I doubt). What you're describing, surely, is the role of a Civil Servant, which is why they're there and what they do.
CharlesdeGaulle said:
What you're describing, surely, is the role of a Civil Servant, which is why they're there and what they do.
Yeap, thats exactly right, only the current system puts a service member "in charge" of the negotiations and not a civil servant, and that's the biggest problem. Ideally, using the current set-up, you need service "end-users" to specify what they want and then an experienced civil servant to negotiate the contract to achieve the end users request and sign deal, but at the moment the services all want one of theirs to be "in charge" instead, which leads to the issues mentioned.
Procurement is a surprisingly difficult subject. I've only been involved once (from a company's side) when the MOD requested several training courses a year on item of kit we made and, as ex-forces myself, it was dis-heartening to watch someone negotiate in a subject they had little knowledge of (training rather than the kit) and if we'd wanted too we could have walked all over the MOD negotiating team with our contract, making the cost to the MOD rise significantly over time, and they'd have still agreed without even looking deeply at the "fine print", which where most contracts are really written.
One example was they requested a very detailed break-down for the costs of one course (great) but never even asked about subsequent courses on which we had placed a caveat saying "may increase in cost" which, after they agreed without question, could mean charging the MOD anything we wanted and if they failed to pay, they'd be in breach on contract for training on kit that no-one else could provide etc. Their team seemed solely focused on first year cost not "total" cost and, as our single year cost was acceptable the whole contract was OK'd without much "fine tooth combing", completely unlike any Company to Company contracts I'd been involved in.
Lots of misconception about how much contractural negotiations there really are. MoD has standard contract terms and conditions covering just about everything which are very hard for an MoD IPT to deviate from (this is usually handled by DE&S civil servants not serving officers). The new single source regulations / qualifying contracts are 'interesting' to say the least and will probably result in higher costs passed on to MoD in the end despite being aimed at reducing costs.
Where MoD screws up (IMO) is not thinking long term about the nature of the contracts it places. For example feeding peicemeal contracts for new kit hidden as obsolecense removal (because "we're not allowed to spend on upgrades" - costs way more to do it over a series of contracts as each attracts a level of overhead that would be smaller if they could combine the contracts. With every RM, budget holder and IPT struggling furiously for cash it actually seems to make things less efficient in the long run.
Where MoD screws up (IMO) is not thinking long term about the nature of the contracts it places. For example feeding peicemeal contracts for new kit hidden as obsolecense removal (because "we're not allowed to spend on upgrades" - costs way more to do it over a series of contracts as each attracts a level of overhead that would be smaller if they could combine the contracts. With every RM, budget holder and IPT struggling furiously for cash it actually seems to make things less efficient in the long run.
The MoD equivalents in some countries have what is sometimes termed a "Tripartite Legal Directorate" staffed by experienced lawyers who in return for lower stress and a regular pay cheque accept a commission.
These offices cover everything from procurement contract prep to the conduct of Court Martials.
That private sector legal experience allied with oversight from a career military legal CO is an alternative approach.
These offices cover everything from procurement contract prep to the conduct of Court Martials.
That private sector legal experience allied with oversight from a career military legal CO is an alternative approach.
ecsrobin said:
I volunteered with the BBMF 2009-2014 and it was always RAFBBMF.
We would have been working on the team at around the same time and with respect, you're wrong. Here's an image I took in 2012, the copy/file info was written by Yvonne and overseen by Jim (MCOs of BBMF and Coningsby respectively) - you can see it states 'RAFMF'. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Spitfire_F...
The name was dropped within a few weeks (before any official signage etc were changed).
Rogue86 said:
ecsrobin said:
I volunteered with the BBMF 2009-2014 and it was always RAFBBMF.
We would have been working on the team at around the same time and with respect, you're wrong. Here's an image I took in 2012, the copy/file info was written by Yvonne and overseen by Jim (MCOs of BBMF and Coningsby respectively) - you can see it states 'RAFMF'. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Spitfire_F...
The name was dropped within a few weeks (before any official signage etc were changed).
There is a Tonka right now being very slowly put back together at Brunters.
it is likely many years away from being able to do anything, but if the current fleet are up for the scrapper or at least a big hangar somewhere, i am sure someone might throw some dosh at some RB199's.
Depends if they are allowed.
it is likely many years away from being able to do anything, but if the current fleet are up for the scrapper or at least a big hangar somewhere, i am sure someone might throw some dosh at some RB199's.
Depends if they are allowed.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff