The Royal Fleet Auxiliary (RFA) staff, represented by the RMT union, have overwhelmingly voted to accept an improved pay offer from the Ministry of Defence (MOD), bringing an end to a prolonged dispute.
The agreement follows several rounds of industrial action and marks a significant win for the workers on pay and conditions.
Details of the agreement include:
- Significant salary uplifts and backpay to address years of pay suppression.
- Retention of key benefits, such as travel vouchers and the bonus scheme, for the duration of the agreement.
- Improved work-life balance through shorter assignments.
RMT General Secretary Mick Lynch praised the result, stating, “This is a fantastic result for our RFA members, who’ve stood strong, united and taken several bouts of strike action during this dispute. They’ve secured real terms pay increases, important improvements to their working lives and I thank them for their efforts.”
Lynch also mentioned the long-term significance of the agreement, saying, “This agreement lays the groundwork for securing their future and vital role assisting the Royal Navy. RMT will keep fighting to ensure the contributions of RFA workers are properly recognised going forward.”
The RMT has announced plans for further discussions with the RFA and MOD to address structural changes, service conditions, and salaries. Lynch expressed optimism, adding, “We expect to make further significant improvements for our members.”
Voting results
The e-referendum saw a turnout of 83.43%, with 84.29% voting in favour of the agreement and 15.71% against.
This deal marks a crucial milestone for RFA workers, highlighting their vital role in supporting Royal Navy operations and the strength of collective action in achieving substantial workplace improvements.
At last!
A bit of good news……now get these new RFA ships sorted out and its a result
Yes please, let’s hope nobody rests on their laurels over this and it translates into action. There are so many things Britain needs to be spending money on even as we somehow all get poorer (where’s it all going?) but we certainly need a functioning military, in depth. Losing a single ship or fighter aircraft would be disastrous for Britain at the moment, while its enemies can afford to lose dozens without even really noticing.
I hope it is a good enough deal to both recruit and retain.
I’ll see the proof as being in the pudding when 33% of RFA is always at sea.
Embarassing they’re making out like this is a ‘fantastic result’ when it is far short of both our aspirations and what we deserve.
This has been pushed through because the unions have allowed the government/treasury to mess the RFA around, eventually breaking the Civil Service pay cap of 5% but only pushing it to 6.5% rather than a realistic pay offer.
It is by no means a ‘real terms pay increase’ considering the massive effective paycut over the last 10 years, and the ‘important improvements to their working lives’ is ridiculous assertion as well considering there has been no improvement of the leave ratio, and no other real marked improvements to conditions.
The assertion that this ‘lays the groundwork for securing their future’ is rich given there is zero concrete plan put forward for how to achieve this, whether looking at retention or recruitment, both of which are continuing to falter.
Overall no surprises that the unions have been asked to not disclose the percentages/pay so they can pretend that they didn’t breach the civil service pay cap, and so that the RFA/unions can pretend they did something when realistically the pay offer is poor and well below expectations.
Hopefully its a step in the right direction. The RFA were the absolute backbone of the RN whilst i was serving. We had the Dilipig with us on deployment and always had the best support from the RFA crews.
Surely you’re not saying the unions are in bed with the government and creating a good news story on their behalf. Shame we seem more willing to hand over 100s of millions to lease back an India Ocean island that we pay nothing for rather than giving you guys a decent pat rise.
Without the RFA the RN can barley function and selling off very useful hulls is the hight of stupidity from MOD and Gov. The RFA needs real funding to get the crews needed so they can do their role. Need taking out of the Civ Ser corner as they are really combat support personnel an should be rewarded as such. Not only for the RN and UK armed forces but NATO. All 6 tankers should be retained so we can actually ensure the numbers are available to support the efforts of the UK, RN and NATO. RFA get 100% support from me as they always delivered way more than expected. Pay them right and sort it all out. Unions, well of course they will ease over with their lefty brothers in the Gov.
Unfortunately by the time we rebuild crews for 4 tankers and the FSSS being built, the Waves will have reached the end of their design life
Thye have been laid up for an extended time and in general in good order so keeping them around for years to come would be no great effort apart from getting the crews. Other RFA hulls are well older and will be about for many years to come so could the Waves to ensure there is ar least 2 x operational tankers available all the time. The planners in the RN are easily not with it even with the reduced escort numbers. The Tankers are force multipliers and allow other units to deliver a better outcome. Been there and seen it in action. Sorry but the RN/MOD are in need of some real smart people to lead the way.
I’ve read Shatocks Nightmare answer and although on the face of it, it’s a “job done” outcome I’m reserving judgement on it long term. If all they have done is fudge it for a year and retention / recruitment don’t improve then it’s been a total sell out for a political “sound bite”.
If on the other hand it’s a short term calming measure to allow the RFA to function whilst they carry out a fundamental review of how they reward the RFA then that’s a sensible compromise.
To me it is nonsense to tie the RFA to CS pay scales and restrictions, not being funny but a bod working at the DVLA doesn’t equate to one sitting on a ship full of fuel and munitions near a war zone. Nor does that bod have highly sought after transferable skills that can work elsewhere for far better pay.
Not sure what a solution would look like but perhaps an additional allowance to broach the gap, after all there is a precedent with “London weighting” ?
You could call it the “High Risk, High Value” allowance.
There is precedence for this with RRP (recruitment, retention payments) in widespread use within the public sector. These are often paid in addition to London Weighting so all add up to a big chunk of $$$
About bloody time!
Welcome for the RFA guys and girls.
But, what difference will it make if so many have already walked what’s left of the RFA is sitting alongside for lack of crew.
The RFA is for me one of the 4 main pillars of the naval service. HMG have already destroyed most of one pillar, Amphibious capability, and they’re now dismantling another, the RFA.
Carrier aviation and SSN remain, and they also have issues.
No mention for MCM then? That discipline in which the RN was a world leader? And CASD? Four pillars?
And carrier aviation is a joke.
I visualise the comment about the 4 pillars of the RN as what capabilities I see in a navy that make it a strategic force. Not what state each might actually be in.
1. Carriers and aviation. You need this for sea denial and power projection. Until aviation itself is no longer relevant and airpower no longer holds at risk an enemies homeland or ships, Carrier Aviation is not a joke.
2. SSN. As above, an SSN can close a sea to most navies.
3. Amphibious. As so much of the worlds population is in the littoral, thus LPD, LSD(A) and wider RM capability, to project force and hold at risk an enemies coast.
4 The RFA, which supports the other 3.
I did not include CASD as that is a political choice, I am only considering conventional power. But yes, it too is vital, as we see by the DNO money being prioritised over all else as our military collapses over the decades.
We could have 24,20,40 Destroyers and Frigates but without those “pillars” the vital enablers and sea deniers, the RN would not be as relevant.
So I would rather have all 4 well resourced, and fewer escorts, than none and 40 escorts.
And yes, numbers, while vital, are not the be all and end all. Capability is.
On MCM, I place that alongside the Escorts, the supporting “glue” that underpins the other 4.
How I see it anyway.
At least it means there will be a future of some kind for the RFA; I was beginning to wonder if it was going to be killed off entirely. It still leaves a plan to create a sustainable RFA in the air, but I don’t believe striking was helpful for that. I lke Rodney’s phrase, “a short term calming measure”. It’s up to the unions to keep pressing because MOD will want this to be a “one and done” deal.
We’ve heard comments on this site that CS pay scales are not fixed even within a ministry, and RFA could be given their own pay scale, freeing them from the rest of MOD. However it’s the plan to get a long term working structure, with training and a career path that I’d like to see.
One small step for man (and woman) ….? Seriously, this is good news. Kudos to the negotiators on both sides for some creative work.
For a few tens of millions a year the RFA pay could have been brought up to market rates and this could have been done at the whim of the government months ago (cf. how quickly the government caved in to pay demands from junior doctors- a much larger financial commitment to people who are not directly critical to national security).
About time too. Labour secured the end of the strikes and ensured a fair equitable settlement for the key personnel of the RFA. Well done Labour. All this mess was due to 14 years of Tory incompetence. No one forget that.
Now we just SDSR to report and hope things are going to get better.
Labour were the start of the problem with a failure to put AO tankers, AOR replacements, Argus replacement (FSS) and Diligence replacement on a stable footing in 2007. By then the now Tides project had already been running 5 years and they dillied and dallied and delayed the decision to odrer MARS. Yes sinve then the tories made a complete mess but remember Labour started the major decline and the present Pay rise in not thanks to them but MOD taking risk as HMT and Cabinet office refused to increase the original offer. The real pitty now is no one wants to go to sea for a living let alone serve their country so the services including the RFA will struggle no matter any future pay awards.
Exactly. Still so many rose tinted glasses Tories responsible for everything. Both parties are responsible since 1995, the first SDR beyond OFC in 91.
There is a way to generate more funds within the current spend on Defence. One, let the MOD be VAT free on all purchases. Same funds to MOD allowing them to get what they need and pay the people a sensible amount to get them in and retained. Not rocket science but give early results and the a big chunk of the monies needed to sort the mess and defend the UK People. There are other options too such as the state fund the Nuclear deterrent as it once did outside the MOD allocation for defence, it would help.
Going back to State funding CSD would be a good idea.
The problem is where SSN fits into that. How do you draw that wiggly line?
As it is some rather large ticket items are swallowing a huge % of RN budgets and as others have pointed out they is what is strangling conventional forces.
….thatch’s what is….
Isn’t the SSN wiggly line drawn pretty straightforwardly at the moment? I thought it was initial build = nuclear; everything else = conventional.
Hi SB I’m not sure how HMG (or their Treasury Masters) would mentally manage to separate the provision of UK CASD from the rest of defence and if they did they’d make damn sure it all still counts as part of of % of GDP NATO spend commitment. It all comes out of the same pot which most of us think is too small.
You may be surprised to know that I don’t think we would do much better even if the overall pot was 3% of GDP without major reform of how MOD / Treasury operate. I believe that we actually need to change and manage the Equipment budget over a 30 year cycle rather than 10 and include Infrastructure renewal in that plan.
Here we are trying to renew CASD, the Army’s AFV, RN surface escort fleet, RAF combat aircraft, rebuild our infrastructure and pay the Bods a proper wage. All at the same time, and we wonder why we can’t buy any extra equipment, it’s a monumental Bow wave of multiple costs all misplaced to occur at the same time.
In the past a 30 year cycle was fairly hard to manage as in the case of the SSN/SSBN they needed at least 1 LOP(R) and 🤞🏻now they shouldn’t.
My reasoning is based simply on the premise that most Major bits of modern equipment seem to have coalesced to a 30 year life span. Where things get really tricky cost wise is where we have to refuel / lifex items beyond their intended service life (usually down to Political interference). So that has to avoided like the plague (see CR2/3 and T23 for details).
When you take a step back from looking at individual programmes and consider the underlying cause of many of our budget crisis’s it usually comes down to idiotic, short term thinking by smart arsed politicians or the Treasury trying to save a £ now but costing ££££’s 10 years down the line.
My solution would be to set a 30 year plan in stone, enact it as a law that it’s the governments responsibility to manage it and only Parliament can alter it. Just take a look at how Italy has been quietly building up its Navy for the last 30 years for an example or how Japan maintains its industry by replacing most ships on a 25 year cycle.
Oh and if it subsequently found out that someone messed it up they are then held personally responsible, even when out of office.🤔
BOOM.
Observation, not comment:
RMT represents 500 members of the RFA, so a 83% turnout is 417 voting members. 84% voting in favor is 351 members. Based on the 2022 RFA numbers of 1750 (probably far lower now, but no updated figures available open source – please correct me if you have a source) means approx 20% of the RFA agreed/approved this motion. There are approx 200 members in the Nautilus Union (mainly officers representing 11% of the total RFA) who are yet to comment. That also means approx 60% of the RFA are un-unionized or with other minor unions and have not been in this consultation.
Comment, not observation:
Any step forward is a good one, but it is perhaps not the end of this particular argument. One hope this is somewhat near or indeed over market rate for a professional mariner if we hope to restore this vital requirement. The USN consider a true blue water navy to have 5 capabilities: Carrier Strike; ability to endure operations in all five oceans simultaneously; Nuclear Powered Submarines; opposed amphibious landings and sustaining those 4 functions at sea through organic (non-allied means). We have lost one, arguably three… let’s hope this is a meaningful step in recovering the latter one!