Seafarers serving in the Royal Fleet Auxiliary have begun strike action after overwhelmingly rejecting the latest pay offer from their employer, the UK Defence Journal understands.
The maritime union RMT confirmed that its members walked out today, Tuesday 7 April, with a further day of action planned for Thursday 16 April. The union said it had made sustained efforts to reach a negotiated settlement, but that RFA management had continued to put forward proposals that fell short of members’ expectations.
The RFA provides essential logistical and operational support to the Royal Navy. During the strike, the union said members would continue to ensure the safety of vessels at all times, including managing moorings and gangways.
A key grievance centres on pay transparency. The union highlighted that seafarers can routinely work up to 12 hours a day, yet there remains no clear formula setting out how their pay is calculated against those hours.
RMT General Secretary Eddie Dempsey said, as quoted in the union’s statement: “Our members in the Royal Fleet Auxiliary are taking a principled stand today and I congratulate them.”
He added: “They will not accept substandard pay offers and are prepared to take further strike action if necessary to get the pay rise they deserve.”
Dempsey also pointed to the nature of the work, stating: “Our members play a vital role in supporting the Navy, often in some of the most demanding and dangerous working conditions.”
He called on the Ministry of Defence and the employer to “come forward with a serious, long-term commitment to improving pay and conditions, including ensuring they comply with National Minimum Wage legislation, if they are serious about retaining staff.”
The MoD has not yet publicly responded to the strike action.
How has this not been fixed yet?
Because politicians are narcissist gits who only care about their pet projects
Ain’t that the truth
Why can’t someone higher up step in and sort out this carry on? It’s pretty poor treatment of a vital force. Where’s the fair pay and some common sense?
Christ, having seen this Government bend over backwards for the Doctors, why aren’t they just taking that money and going to the RAF and saying, the greedy shits in the BMA wanted more. Let’s settle this and secure future employment under the RFA using that money and up yours, since you actually do a key job… (And by creative accounting, it’ll count as our defence spending, right!)
Back of a fag packet calculation
If RFA staffing at about 2,000 and Registrars (Junior Doctors) at 71,000 for the UK as a whole
Salaries of fully qualified RFA and Registrars are similar.
How can the Gov not get this sorted!
Isn’t only 30% of the public care about the armed forces? What chance does the RFA have.
Because they don’t care.
A navy without logistic support has a very small circle of operations.
FFS! You couldn’t make it up.
I hear HMS Dragoon is have problems and is in port for some maintance, hope not as it be jumped on by the world press and embrassing. Doctors got 24/5 % pay rises less than 2 years ago, we were told ten this would make then bold and it has, poor armed forces just told to shut up and put up.
Not many if any MPs backing the RFA, no surprise there not enough votes in it.
Think Jnr Doctors got 30% spread over 3 years. I don’t know why they think they should be a special case say over the police or any other government employee. If the government were to cave in then they should pay that increase across the board to every other government employee and then raise income tax 10p in the pound to pay for it and then wait for the fall out. I’m afraid they dint get my vote.
We were warned that the doctors and public sector would be back for more and this Government can say what it wants but will give in, and every one else will pay for it, yet they can not rase the pay for about 2000 RFA sailors, why because its always about votes no matter how any one dresses it up, totally shamless the lot of them.
The RFA are public sector workers, so I don’t understand your point.
There are 2000 of them, not enough to win votes and too small to loose too many votes. Other wise the Labour lot would falling over them selves banging on about it. Police are public sector but they are not allowed to strike and their pay is crap, and number reduced not hearing many Union reps up set over that.
Unions and Labour the reason why bugger all works, we have not much industry and it cost so much to make any thing here, Look at doctor 25/30 % pay rise, yet on strike again. If you gave the RFA that big a rise they wouldnot be on strike, they are not big enough to matter to unions or Labour,
Absolutely disgraceful. The RFA sailors deserve a decent wage. They are just NOT seafarers, but Seafarers who support and follow the Royal Navy around the world, working in conflict zones, and deserve to be treated and compensated accordingly.
The Royal Navy cannot operate without the fleet auxiliary
I would think this reticence to pay the RFA properly is down to the MOD just wanting to save money. Justified by a reluctance to pay merchant seamen more than serving RN regulars. Which misses the point that the RFA are civilians working in a competitive industry who could work fewer hours and still earn a lot more working for commercial shipping companies.
Healey needs to get himself involved here, push the MOD aside and sort out a proper deal for the RFA civilians, so that we can at least support the minimalist fleet we still have.
Whatever the rights and wrongs of the pay demand, continued disruption of support service could lead to the French solution- support vessels manned by military personnel who can’t strike.
And then they become military vessels.
RN are struggling to manage their own vessels with a crew, never mind having to manage the RFA ships
That would be far more expensive than just giving the RFA a pay rise… every time the RN look at the possibility, they come back with needing at least 50% more crew to run an RFA compared to their current complement, and each of those sailors is also higher paid than the RFA equivalent.
The RFA deserve a high pay because they’re a bigger target then the actual RN.
Good for them! They should give whatever garbage ‘advance warning’ that unions are required to give nowadays, and call an all out strike!
This is why the Royal Navy has ceased to be a player on the global stage… It’s not hard to fix
It’s no problem for Starmer’s government; soon there won’t be any auxiliary ships in the fleet. Come on, Starmer! You can disarm the country.
I don’t think that’s quite accurate Micki. We had 12 RFA vessels when this government came in, we will have 12 by 2035 or earlier.
What is happening is that 4 old vessels are being retired and 4 new ones joining the fleet. Being withdrawn – 2 Wave tankers, Argus and eventually Fort Victoria. New construction – 3 FSSS, a second Proteus MROS (though yet to be confirmed?). That will be the most modern RFA we have seen for years, with
4 Tide tankers
3 FSSS replenishment ships
2 Proteus MROS
3 Bay LSD.
The Bays are due to be replaced by a multi-role support ship (MRSS), but can’t see that happening this side of 2035, unless the budget really does increase to 3% or 3.5% of GDP.
Wishful thinking having spent 30 yrs in the RFA it has been decline all the way no matter the incumbent Government. Lack of investment in new ships and crews and even when new ship come along there are to few to properly sustain the RN. The RFA has undergone a 35% fall in real term pay since 2008 but what is a real kick in the b——-LS is the promise last year when we did get a good pay deal but some 7 months later than it should have been and many of the promised improvement in terms and condition have been forgotten. What is worstis the lying toe rags in both the Treasury and civil service know it and we are now 8 months past the day it should have been resolved. Stitched up again so keep striking!!
Be honest Fort Victoria could not go to sea with the CSG there’s no way she’s sea worthy.
We’re selling 4 tankers becasue we can’t crew them not because we don’t need them (or would need them if we had ships capable of going to sea).
That 3 Bays are the combined amphibious assault force of the entire united kingdom…..
FFS. Just give them a pay rise. Quietly. Get it done. When resident doctors have received huge sums of money over the last few years there is no excuse.
Resident doctors haven’t recieved huge sums over the past few years, they’re still 20% down in real terms versus 2008 salaries.
They need to pay the market rate for merchant sailors. That’s it, problem solved.
Our political elite have just given themselves a £5000 pay rise yet they expect people who put themselves in danger each and every day to live off 30 bob and a chicken (and that has the flu). There is no one in parliment to day with any sense of moral duty towards the UK.
The RFA are one of the 4 main pillars of naval power for me, with escorts supporting them. I’d prioritise all over escorts.
1. Carriers and naval aviation.
2. SSN.
3. Amphibious assets.
4. The RFA.
The first two conduct sea denial, the 4th enables all the rest, even 2 once, with Dilligence.
1 has been restored but lacks certain critical assets like weapons for F35, long term ASCS, and FSS.
2 is in a mess through lack of mass and supporting infrastructure.
3, don’t go there, decimated by successive governments.
4, a shadow of what it was as numbers drop across the board so do enabling assets.
I’m curious about the emphasis you put on amphibious assets – I’ve noticed this in your other comments as well. What do we actually need them for?
This is a genuine question, I don’t know much (anything really) about amphibious operations.
Hi PF.
A few things immediately spring to mind.
1. Gives Options to commanders.
2. We’re an island, and despite naysayers, it seems the rest of the world still has them.
3. So many of the world’s population live along the littoral. Be it to land conventional forces, SF, RM, or for HADR, it will be necessary to insert ground forces.
4. A Carrier may not always be available, or even desirable.
5. Not every landing needs to be at an opposed point.
6. The unexpected. We have a history of cutting assets we then find we could have done with.
7. Overseas territories. If they are forcefully taken, one needs to land to get them back.
8. Flexibility. Not just giving commanders options, but an enemy things to consider.
9. We have a Corps of Royal Marines. They cannot all fly to an objective.
10. The planned MRSS, if now doubling as Drine vessels or indeed as a light Frigate, will be useful.
11. Finally, tradition. Like the MCMV knowhow he are throwing away before the new is fully up to speed, we have experience in amphibious operations. A blasted politician wanting to save a few pennies should never be allowed to wreck that, given their bombastic warnings about the dangers of other nations.
12. Northern flank. Just because Sweden and Finland are now in NATO, for me does not stop the need to reinforce Norway, for me our closest ally. A port might not be available for a Point or a STUFT. All it takes are a few scuttled vessels at entrances.
Flexibility.
I don’t know much about amphibious operations either, only what I’ve read, our orbat, history regards them, and what to me as a nobody seems eminently sensible for a maritime nation.
Hi, thanks for the detailed reply.
I hadn’t considered the potential need to land troops in Norway by sea – now you mention it, it seems obvious.
Perhaps someone should remind the powers that be, if there is no RFA, then the RN will have to do the job (actually many countries don’t have a RFA equivalent, their navy does the job). They are the only two options.
Good to see the RFA ensuring Freedom of Navigation for the Russian Navy and Shadow fleet in the English Channel. You could not make it up.