To match an exact phrase, use quotation marks around the search term. eg. "Parliamentary Estate". Use "OR" or "AND" as link words to form more complex queries.


Keep yourself up-to-date with the latest developments by exploring our subscription options to receive notifications direct to your inbox

Written Question
Social Services: Veterans
Tuesday 2nd February 2016

Asked by: Jo Cox (Labour - Batley and Spen)

Question to the Ministry of Defence:

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, whether Veterans Welfare Service staff are permitted to represent ex-servicemen and women at tribunal hearings to contest War Pension Scheme decisions made by Veterans UK.

Answered by Lord Lancaster of Kimbolton

Veterans Welfare Service staff are not permitted to act as representatives for veterans engaged in Pensions Appeal Tribunal hearings. They would, however, provide advice about the range of organisations that would be able to act as representatives, or explain how they could request someone of their own choosing.


Written Question
Air Force: Pay
Friday 29th January 2016

Asked by: Jo Cox (Labour - Batley and Spen)

Question to the Ministry of Defence:

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, by what process the trade supplement for an RAF weapon technician was decided under Armed Forces Pay Reform.

Answered by Penny Mordaunt

For Other Ranks, the Ministry of Defence uses a long-standing and rigorous process of Job Evaluation (JE) to determine the pay treatment of each trade. In the current binary pay model which consists of High and Low Pay Bands, JE evidence assigns the role of the RAF Weapon Technician to the High Pay Band. In the new pay system, with its four supplements and greater flexibility, the same JE evidence assigns the Weapon Technician to Supplement 2, while other trades in the RAF's Trade Group 1 (TG1) (Aircraft Engineering) are assigned to Supplement 3. This does not mean there has been a reduction in the Weapon Technician's technical status or intrinsic value. It reflects the fact that the other trades in TG1 continue to score higher in the JE process and therefore continue to be treated differently in pay terms.

No-one will take a pay cut on transition to the new model and Service personnel will continue to be eligible for any Government approved pay award. Incremental progressions will also continue to be a feature of the new pay model, though rationalised.


Written Question
Air Force: Pay
Friday 29th January 2016

Asked by: Jo Cox (Labour - Batley and Spen)

Question to the Ministry of Defence:

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, for what reasons the trade supplement for a RAF weapon technician is no longer grouped with aircraft engineering trades under Armed Forces Pay Reform.

Answered by Penny Mordaunt

For Other Ranks, the Ministry of Defence uses a long-standing and rigorous process of Job Evaluation (JE) to determine the pay treatment of each trade. In the current binary pay model which consists of High and Low Pay Bands, JE evidence assigns the role of the RAF Weapon Technician to the High Pay Band. In the new pay system, with its four supplements and greater flexibility, the same JE evidence assigns the Weapon Technician to Supplement 2, while other trades in the RAF's Trade Group 1 (TG1) (Aircraft Engineering) are assigned to Supplement 3. This does not mean there has been a reduction in the Weapon Technician's technical status or intrinsic value. It reflects the fact that the other trades in TG1 continue to score higher in the JE process and therefore continue to be treated differently in pay terms.

No-one will take a pay cut on transition to the new model and Service personnel will continue to be eligible for any Government approved pay award. Incremental progressions will also continue to be a feature of the new pay model, though rationalised.