While the main attention has been focused on the core issue of pay for Royal Fleet Auxiliary sailors, the long-running dispute between the Maritime Trade Unions (MTUs) and the MoD is more complex than has been presented in the media.
RN and RFA leaders have been working hard for some time on project RESURGENT – a package of measures to improve the conditions of service (the ‘offer’) to RFA Sailors. There have been a series of meetings with the MTUs which have been described as positive but the stumbling block remains pay.
To some extent, the Navy’s hands are tied because RFA sailor’s pay is determined within Civil Service frameworks. This is outside the budgetary control of the RN and any change has to be agreed by the Treasury. The MTUs are also keen to re-open the 2023-24 pay deal but the new government has a strict policy of keeping to the agreements for that financial year made by the previous administration.
The discussions between the MTUs and MoD are supposed to be confidential but details of the most recent meeting were leaked. For 2024-25 the MoD offered a 9.35% increase, which translates on average to an extra £3,639 per year for each sailor. Specifically the offer was 6.5% plus £1k consolidated (ie added permanently to annual salary) which is adds a futher 1 – 3%, depending on salary.
Overall this is 5% above that offered to the wider Civil Service but is expected to be rejected by the MTUs. Some union representatives say that the RFA needs a major pay increase between 30-36% to make up for the effects of inflation and the real-terms decline in the value of pay since 2010. This is wildly optimistic and a survey by the Nautilus Union suggests most members would accept around 15%.
Broadly speaking, the MTU’s agree that the remuneration offer needs to be mostly based on consolidated pay (ie annual salary, not one-off lump sums). For the future of the Service, it is important that the gap is closed between commercial shipping and the RFA to make the offer competitive again. There also needs to be a plan of action for the future to restore the RFA back to its required strength.

The RFA has proposed a quite radical set of measures to improve working conditions, pending approval by the unions. The Faststream Recruitment Group report commissioned by the MoD earlier in the year found that the RFA’s appointment length is longer than is typical for British seafarers and the RFA offers less time off per day worked than any other sector. In response, the RFA is now proposing to reduce the time at sea to time on leave ratio to 1:1 (currently, it’s 4:3). This alone would effectively amount to an hourly pay rise of 10%. The length of time each sailor spends at sea would be reduced to a maximum of 10-12 weeks. More flexible working patterns would be available and a package of measures to improve occupational health is being developed. The RFA is also working on enhanced lateral entry routes to make it easier for people to join.
The RFA as an entity sits in a slightly awkward position, being a Civil Service organisation under the command of the Navy and crewed by civilian merchant mariners. This identity crisis complicates matters in trying to resolve problems, fight for resources and make reforms. When surveyed, 80% of RFA sailors see themselves primarily as part of the RFA and not merchant mariners for hire or civil servants. Perhaps the RFA would be better detached from the Civil Service and operated as a fully independent entity, such as the Border Force, which has the freedom to set its own pay and conditions.
If a substantial pay rise is awarded and the RESURGENT measures are implemented it is believed that the RFA could return to some kind of normality within about 18 months as new recruits join and the workforce stabilises. Fundamentally the crisis that has left more than half of the RFA fleet laid up without crews can only be resolved by Government Ministers and agreement from the Treasury to provide what would be a relatively small injection of funds. The RN highly values the RFA and is working hard to resolve the dispute within constraints beyond its immediate control.
Absolutely. Utterly bizarre that sea going RFA crew and officers were ever considered to be civil servants.
I think the biggest news is the proposal to reduce the sea time and opt for a 1:1 sea/leave ratio. This is the direction many commercial operators have been heading towards and it is important the RFA keeps up with commercial contracts. The reality is that it is going to be harder and harder to convince people to be away from loved ones to go to sea.
3 on 3 off would make working for the RFA much more palatable.
Worked for 5 other companies as agency, all of them were time for time.
Absolutely agree. remove the RFA from the dead hand of the Civil Service. I started my seagoing career as a Deck Apprentice in the RFA [first ship: RFA Fort Dunvegan] and have been a deck officer in the service, and a seaman officer in the Navy, so I’ve seen it from both sides of the fence. One thing that might be considered as well; reinstate the RNSTS, which served both the RFA and the RN well.
If train drivers are worth £80k a year………..
And the rest.
Better comparison would be Train drivers and senior deck officers
Starting passenger train driver is £30K
Average is £48K…. work very long hours ( not 1:1 time off) and it could be £65k
The RFA are not civil servants and should not be treated as such. Any agreement on linkage with merchant navy pay should be such that it cannot be broken by HMG as it was in 2010 and ever since. The solution best able to guarantee those two things should be the one chosen for the RFA to go forward with.
Almost impossible to make an employment agreement at can’t be broken by a subsequent government. In principle one government isn’t supposed to bind the hands of the next.
All
I can only 100% agree with Okhamsrazort:
“Absolutely. Utterly bizarre that sea going RFA crew and officers were ever considered to be civil servants.
That key point seems to me to be the “root cause” of all of the issues the RFA has faced since 2010
Peter (Irate Taxpayer)
It comes because they are MoD civil employees
Agreed on overall budget. But pay and conditions can and are set by independent agencies if set out in their statute.
But if a subsequent government doesn’t like the idea they can just repeal/amend the statute.
The move to one on one off is a welcome move. This is a significant challenge when set against a background of shortages based on the current manning model but the key initial issue is to improve retention particularly amongst key grades and grow SQEP for FSS, current and future roles. RFA pay should be delatched from the Civil Service where it is an NSOG – non standard operational group and the Head of Service should be a uniformed RFA Commodore.
Project Resurgent will hopefully deliver at pace and include RN seniors who understand the the concept of sustainability at range.
You need to look at history to understand why the RFA is under the civil service.
It was done to take advantage of the pension scheme and as a way of giving a pay rise to the rfa when they had fallen behind commercial 25 years ago.
It was an attractive option to a high average age work force.
The final salary principle civil service pension scheme was a skillful compromise at the time it was never meant to limit future pay settlement.
I think you’ll find John Hood knows quite well the RFA history.
Good point regarding the pension. The PCSPS was one of the best final salary non contributory schemes, and despite changes to a career average scheme remains one of the best. Problem is new recruits don’t consider the pension and look at headline salary and rotation so a move to matching commercial packages will be an important move in attracting and retaining SQEP. This will of course require a significant uplift in funding and people to close the gap and difficult to see how this could be achieved in the current climate.
Comments about the RN taking over the RFA appear to miss the point that the RN is unable to fully man its own ships and TCOS and operational models are poles apart. The RFA is essentially a seagoing operation while much of the RN operates a 2nd stage career policy with the majority of its people ashore for most of their careers beyond initial sea phases.
That is about right.
Detach RFA from Civil Service.
Bump pay up substantially say 25%
1:1 time
That will cost peanuts less than £25m per year.
Enables manning growth and potentially enables Albions to have hybrid crews to get those MILSPEC ship numbers up. Yes, I know Albions used to be RN crewed but they could be hybrid with weapons, sensors and C2 RN staffed.
Not sure about the hybrid crews for Albions. It is a distraction to have RFA crews serve on HMS ships or taking RN taskings.
I agree it would be a small sum to substantially improve pay and conditions, and be a multiplier in the operational effect it would bring.
I was suggesting the Albions would be re-flagged to RFA.
They’d be better in semi hot zone than a Bay.
The Bay’s are brilliant for the soft power and mothership roles.
I suspect the crew accommodation on the Albions is not up to RFA (and the wider merchant marine) standard of single en suite cabins.
Zing!
Another good point.
It is nice have a simple thread where we can just kick the ball around!
Good luck getting LPD certified to MCA regs. MLC 2006, SOLAS etc are not going to be easy. MARPOL will be a PITA as well.
Good points.
Should have thought of that myself!
Supportive Bloke
REF: Hybrid Crewing
So why not do it the other way around from what you have suggested?
i.e. put a few junior RN sailors onto the RFA Bay Class: but keeping the Bay’s RFA flagged and officer’ed / skippered
Therefore no revisions would be needed of any ship certification and there is plenty of generous sized accomodation on the RFA.
That might even be an ideal first at-sea posting for RN rates
Peter (Irate Taxpayer)
This source says Border Force – part of the Home Office – are civil servants too ?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_Force
Some of their ‘ maritime jobs’ sound good £60k+
‘Requirements and Build Specialist – Maritime Capabilities Replacement Programme’
used to be part of now defunct Border Agency UKBA but demerged by Theresa May
This articles figures are wildly inaccurate, they did not offer 9.35% across all grades and bands as this article suggests. It was significantly lower that that figure with a consolidated cash offer added to all bands that scewed the percentage increase towards the lower ranks and bands. Additionally they wanted RFA sailors to pay for it by giving up terms and conditions and certain allowances.
That 9.35% figure should be redacted or ammended. It detracts from what we are trying to achieve and paints an inaccurate portrayal of the offer.
6.5% and £1000. Sh**e.
Is it not time for the RN to absorb the RFA. With the likelihood of more platforms with hybrid manning, having some crew who can walk out or strike and others who can’t seems a recipe for trouble.
Absorb them how. The RFA sailors won’t join the RN
The initial remit of the RFA was to allow fleet support ships to call into foreign ports that in wartime. Modern warfare has negates this requirement, so government should disband RFA and crew them as part of the Royal Navy.
Thats not quite right.
There has always been ‘auxiliary’s’
The RFA name in 1905 evolved from an earlier creation the Fleet Coaling Service.
But the term RFA wasnt applied to all Admiralty owned civilian ships at the time such as
“Naval Armament Vessels and Admiralty Cable Ships.”
fascinating researched documents history here in link
https://www.rfaa-london.org.uk/app/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/RFA-history-09-origins-of-the-RFA.pdf
Can’t crew the RN, how will they take on a dozen other ships.
If it had been nhs or rail unions negotiating they would have paid up as soon as this bunch were in power. It’s time the public started appreciating all our armed services rather than backing benefit Britain and allowing hm govt to squander all the revenues earned on associated policies to back minority qualms .