Faced with a very serious shortage of technically qualified manpower, which started to become public knowledge last summer, the RN is to be commended for quickly tackling the problem. The underlying causes were not entirely of its own making, although perhaps it should have fought harder to retain more of the engineers made redundant in 2010. There are now 150 separate initiatives to improve conditions and careers for personnel being implemented across the fleet. In the short-term the gaps must be filled as quickly as possible and in the long-term the service must create the conditions that will ensure it retains skilled people in the face of fierce competition with the civilian sector. The problems will not be solved overnight but in time these measures will help restore morale and create a stable manpower situation. It is critical not just for operational readiness, but for the credibility of the service which will be under scrutiny in the coming defence review to demonstrate it can manage its people effectively.
Putting people before programmes
It has been a long a painful road to get here but the RN has now fully recognised that in the past it too often said “Yes, can do” to its political masters when it should have said “No, you have not provided us sufficient resources to meet that tasking”. By striving to meet every demand, at times it asked too much of people and then suffered a backlash in falling morale and subsequent resignations.
There is now a determination amongst senior officers that the service will keep its promises and meet its obligations to people’s welfare. Ships will be kept to more predictable programmes that will allow people to plan time with their families and not have to keep letting them down.
A very tangible demonstration of this commitment was shown when HMS Dauntless was unable to sail for her planned Gulf deployment before Christmas (due to on-going propulsion issues being suffered by the Type 45s). Instead of disrupting the long-planned Atlantic Patrol (South) tasking of HMS Dragon (the only available replacement), it was agreed by government that there would be temporary reduction in RN vessels in the Gulf. HMS Dauntless finally sailed in January and HMS Dragon continues her deployment as planned without the disruption to everyone that a switch in programme would have entailed.
The policy announcement last year that grabbed the headlines was the change from 6-months to a new standard 9-month deployment for some ships but this was accompanied by a raft of new promises to reduce the pressure on sailors. Not only will there be free flights home for 2 weeks mid-deployment, but there was a guarantee not to be sent on another 9 month trips for at least 16 months afterwards. When ships are short of key personnel they will no longer drag people from another ship at very short notice to fill the gap. As a result on at least 2 occasions recently ships have been kept alongside that were materially ready to go to sea, but were short of people.
Obviously from an operational perspective these situations are far from ideal and show how brittle the RN has become. This is a luxury that a ‘peacetime navy’ can probably get away with for a while but the loss of flexibility will weaken the RN’s global presence if applied indefinitely. However the benefits of having happier sailors who are not planning to leave at the earliest opportunity and the resulting manpower stability may far outweigh the temporary operational limitations.
The RN is investing very significantly in recruitment advertising. TV adverts will draw new recruits but also help to subtly reinforce the message to those serving that they have made a good career choice. The TV, radio and online campaign begun in late 2014 marks a big change in strategy. Instead of just highlighting training benefits and cutting edge equipment, the new campaign focuses much more on the person and their journey through the experiences of navy life and how it shapes them. The old “Life without limits” strap line has been made secondary (always bit of a stretch as life in the armed forces clearly has very defined limits!) and replaced with the much stronger “Made in the Royal Navy”. The new campaign has been very successful and applications for new-entry into the navy are buoyant. Of course the bigger challenge lies in retaining this new generation of recruits beyond their late twenties, especially those that acquire technical skills.
Obviously from an operational perspective these situations are far from ideal and show how brittle the RN has become. This is a luxury that a ‘peacetime navy’ can probably get away with for a while but the loss of flexibility will weaken the RN’s global presence if applied indefinitely. However the benefits of having happier sailors who are not planning to leave at the earliest opportunity and the resulting manpower stability may far outweigh the temporary operational limitations.
Radical new career paths for RN engineers
For the first time (since the days of direct entry Artificers) the RN is considering taking people with suitable technical qualifications and experience and starting them at Petty Officer (PO) rank. Instead of having to work up from a humble able seaman (AB), new entrants would receive the pay and privileges that the average rating would not get until having served for at least 7 years. This could be a source of grievance from other branches who have had to ‘do their time’ but makes sense if the RN needs good engineers fast. People who already possess many of the required technical skills before joining will save on time and training costs. The challenge will be to quickly give skilled civilians their ‘sea legs’ and blend them into a ship’s company.
There will also be an extension to the system of “golden handshake” and “golden handcuff” bonuses to provide incentives for engineers to join and to remain in the service for longer. This will cost money and create a bigger and potentially divisive mis-match of pay scales across branches but makes sense in the urgent drive to recruit and retain technical staff.
Civilian contractors in the ship’s company?
The RN is also actively trying to re-recruit former marine and weapons engineers, but may find it challenging to win over cynical ex-matelots, some of who were forcibly made redundant and whose current employment conditions may be hard to match. The RN did promise greater civilian support for engineers when ships are alongside but appeared to go a step further when an advert appeared in mid-January on the Ex-Military Recruitment website. Positions were being offered (apparently by Babcock in Plymouth) for civilian weapons maintenance engineers on RN vessels for 4-months periods, although limited to UK waters. The advert was only online for a few days before being withdrawn. Perhaps the implications of reliance on civilians to man warships were deemed too problematic. Having civilians embedded in the ship’s company of operational warships is not without precedent, Chinese laundrymen and civilian NAAFI managers have served at sea for years but their roles cannot be deemed mission-critical.
Helping hands from abroad
Although greeted with hysteria in some sections of the media, the recruitment of up to 100 engineers from foreign navies makes sense in plugging the gaps in the short-term. The US Coast Guard and the Canadian Navy both have more trained engineers than they currently need due to unavailability of vessels. It makes sense for all concerned to offer them postings on RN vessels where their skills can be used and maintained. 4 USCG personnel have started work aboard Type 23 frigates with another batch of 16 arriving soon. A significant number of Canadians and a few New Zealanders, French and even Indian navy personnel may also be joining them in the coming months.
The new face of Royal Navy recruitment
The RN is investing very significantly in recruitment advertising. TV adverts will draw new recruits but also help to subtly reinforce the message to those serving that they have made a good career choice. The TV, radio and online campaign begun in late 2014 marks a big change in strategy. Instead of just highlighting training benefits and cutting edge equipment, the new campaign focuses much more on the person and their journey through the experiences of navy life and how it shapes them. The old “Life without limits” strap line has been made secondary (always bit of a stretch as life in the armed forces clearly has very defined limits!) and replaced with the much stronger “Made in the Royal Navy”. The new campaign has been very successful and applications for new-entry into the navy are buoyant. Of course the bigger challenge lies in retaining this new generation of recruits beyond their late twenties, especially those that acquire technical skills.
Related articles
- The hidden crisis – Royal Navy Manpower (Save the Royal Navy)
- 9 month deployments and the Navy’s sensible response to the manpower crisis (Save the Royal Navy)
- Skills shortage leads navy to recruit overseas (Express)
- Royal Navy wants engineers from NZ (NZ News)
- Canadian, U.S., New Zealand and French naval engineers being used by Royal Navy to keep its ships operating (Ottawa Citizen)
to be honest
the new navy adverts are good and actually make me want to rejoin but in a different capacity as i am almost through an international relations degree.
BZ RN and lets get back some pride again after the sacrifices of 2009-2013
These are good ideas but the RN is nowhere near understanding this problem never mind solving it. Ships engineering departments, like all others, have long been designed lean. Unfortunately, to meet cuts and be seen to do ‘more with less’, they’ve since been reduced further; responsibility for delivery of OC has been devolved to more junior rates who have often struggled with the burden; and we are continuing to deal with the results of decisions taken throughout the last decade like changing the sea/shore ratio from largely 2years on/off to 3 on 1.5 off. These decisions taken as a whole mean that ships engineering departments are undermanned even before gaps are considered and ratings are being broken by long sea jobs. Ratings spending 3 years on a ship can expect possibly 3 sets of officers who come with their own new ideas and boxes to be ticked for their next promotion, which adds to workloads. The increased shore support, used to justify manning reductions, just isn’t there. Ships are no more reliable (in most cases much less) than before and technologically much more demanding. We aren’t operating new ships within the threshold they were designed for and thus they are breaking much much more often than it was considered they would.
While it may seem counterintuitive in a period where they are struggling to retain engineers and fill jobs now, decisions need to be made to reverse the reductions in engineering department size and change the sea shore ratio back to a more manageable 2 on 2 off. This will mean more people are needed but that is unfortunately the cost of having a deployable blue water navy. Also the RN must realise that engineers are highly sought after commodities today with a massive draw from the civilian world (much more than in virtually any other branch). Measures must be taken to acknowledge this truth and reward engineers who are willing to stay. If the rumours of a disappointing NEM pay result for engineers are true the RNs problems could only be beginning. Pay2000 backlash could seem like a walk in the park in comparison.
The RN faces a number of challenges in the coming years on the engineers front. The new pension will have an effect. CPOs/POs FRI expires around Apr16 along with NEM pay beginning. WOs who took the FRI initially see it expire in Apr 17 closely followed by those selected later in late 17. If the RN doesn’t get its act together and sharpish then the current situation will be a dream and getting a few people from abroad will not solve things.
I think you nailed it there.
Could you please alter the wording in your article stating that skilled crew from foreign navies will be invited to transfer to the RN. No need to say “even” Indian personnel as if they are inferior in some way. They are every bit as skilled and proficient as any other nationality.
This was not meant as a slight on the Indian navy, rather because the US, Canadian and French navies have regularly exchanged personnel with the RN in the past it is more unusual. Also at the time of writing Indian participation is just a rumour that has not been reliably confirmed.
Mary Smith.
As individuals I would agree with you, and on a personal basis yes they are as skilled and proficient. The question lies in the training they have received in their own Navies.
Try looking at the record of the Indian Navy and it does not make pleasant reading,sinkings and collisions at sea, fires onboard ships,explosions in one case on a submarine caused it to sink alongside with loss of life. Also ships running aground even on entering harbour.
By all means recruit, but please ensure they are trained to a standard that the RN expects.
AnMESR hit the nail on the head above, further cuts to engineering branches onboard with new manpower models being rolled out are only going to increase the workload on ME/WE SRs in the coming years, Gone are the days of T42 and T22 manpower models we now see the RN adopting a T23 manpower model and applying it to most classes of ship regardless of size/role!
I know of a large number of senior rates already planning to exit when this FRI return of service expires, the pension changes forced upon the RN and ongoing ramping up of ships programmes is not going down well, 9 month deployments have not seen a positive response onboard quite the opposite.
Sea ratios for engineers of 3 years on, 1followed by 18 months shoreside are generous on paper when you take into account PJTs for the next seadraft in those 18 months shoreside as well some are seeing just 6-9 months down time before they are ramping up training for the next 3 years on.. I cant see many doing more than 2 cycles of that. Family are still very much second place and harmony time and down time are overlooked. Yet in the wardroom as mentioned we see 12-18 Month sea billets followed by 5-6 years in shore jobs!!! And the AFPRB surveys reflect the comfort and happiness this gives the officers, when compared to the seagoing conditions and ratios of the junior rates and seniors its no wonder the surveys returning from them spell out quite the opposite.
Even Prince Harry has put his notice in!
And before anyone says yes I know he’s in the army!
But let’s not forget we are all one big tri-service family!
I’d join back up tomorrow but I was a gunner and I’m sure I wouldn’t get entertained as well as now being 47yrs but if the oppourtunity was given then here’s my right arm no need to twist to hard! I served 1984-1990
This is by a serving officer on submarines – it is 12 – 18 months onboard but 12 -18 months of 1 in 2 , I’d take the 3 yrs on and 18 months off if I was you
If you pay stores personnel more than engineers you reap what you sow! Also Many Faraday initiatives are just turning back the clock to yesteryear. The bottom line is the RN never addresses the root cause of engineering manpower problems, they just apply sticking plasters. The fact is the T&Cs for the onboard engineer is dire. First on last off and working to keep kit operational including carrying out operator training (Mach Breakdown Drills) long after other branches have secured – at sea or alongside (the exception maybe the chefs branch).
As an ex seaman spec I happen to remember watchkeeping and working long hours just as much as the engineers , you need to do just what everyone else needs to do, stop making this just about engineers!
Ah, so you could strip and refit a diesel yes? You had to go through an apprenticeship, degree or extra education to do your job did you?
Sorry. While everyone has to work hard the truth is that Engineering is a skilled trade. That means you have to pay more for it. It happens in civilian world and if you think that the RN can keep engineers without doing so also you are mental.
The issue is that rank determines pay in the RN. Changing that could allow experienced seaman specs to have the same (or more) authority as a CPO WE/ME in a broad scale but for the CPO WE/ME to be paid more. Technical skills of one rewarded. Experience in the operational context of the other also rewarded.
Join a decent branch then. Haven’t you got some tanks to dip or some gash to ditch?
Having left just over 3 years ago, I would consider joining again if I was given a decent length contract, only they don’t want CPOAEM(M)s anymore, I’m led to believe.
CPO wafu…i bet you would join again, my wank sock has done more time at sea than you…cheers oppo…
…oh wait you’ll probably reply telling me how you did an OST once on the ocean
Ha love it
Top comments. The officer on the subs doing 1in2, it was always written into your TOR’s. You get handsomely rewarded with shore time, shorter career paths and superior pensions. I’m not complaining, you went to school, but NCO’s and yourselves are miles apart and not for comparison. For us engineers, and me as a CPO ME, doing a 3 year (MINIMUM) draft as a section head and still watch keeping because manpower gaps are so dire that even we are often 1/3. The only time I can usually work on my engines are alongside after secure, IF I have stores support.
It’s not just the manpower, but stores funding and support too. The dire conditions we work in, are often a reflection of the poor support and budget cuts. Much of the gear onboard is advanced, but you find most of the ME kit is old 60’s tech, outdated and often unsupported. That’s what makes our jobs difficult, constantly repairing with limited resources.
Every person in the ‘Made in the Royal Navy’ is now a civilian
Paycut 2001 killed the engineers. Bouncing between drafts and poor management just compounded the issues. It is a shame that everything had to be reactive.
6000 officers in a 30000 navy,what a joke. Pay engineering ratings overtime.