No passion for University course

Scroll to see replies

That's the theory going back years, could well be out of date now, but was relevant for when I started [09].

I'm not sure it does work out, tbh. Maybe during IOT, sure, but after that no. A newly qual'd EngO should get more than the 18 yr old APO. The EngO had to go to uni to get the degree - they can't do the job without it so they should get paid more for having the degree, imo.

More of a case for branch specific pay I'd say though. I don't see why somebody going through uni and getting an unrelated degree should be paid more than somebody who focused at a young age. I'd have liked to have the opportunity to go direct entrant, and I guess I'd be pissed if a version of me in 3 years time was earning substantially more than me, having spent 3 years at uni having a ball in a UAS. Don't really know why I'm saying this, I'm now an example of the 'lazy' uni guy, oh well.

Reply 21

Schleigg

I also like to point out that the flaw in the system is that you will never be peers with your school chums.

You will be career peers with the people you joined up with. So irrelevant of whether my mate I went to school with is earning the same amount as me, I've already been in the Air Force significantly longer than he has and as such hang around with different people who are being paid more money for doing the same job as me :tongue:

Branch specific pay will never work. It implies different branches have different values and you should see how much the ground trades moan about flying pay already!

I can't see the RAF or military in general changing their stance on Grads vs Non-Grads pay so unless something radical has happened it's unlikely to have changed. If it were to change it would revert back to degrees not counting toward promotion seniority (which was the original idea in order to attract more graduates).