SAC0045
Written evidence submitted anonymously
Service Accommodation Inquiry Call For Evidence
References:
- Defence Sub-Committee Call for Evidence, Service Accommodation.
Introduction
- Background. I have lived in Single Living Accommodation (SLA) since commission into the Army in August 2013. Over this period, I have lived in SLA across the UK and Substitute Service Single Accommodation (SSSA) while posted to Belgium. The quality of accommodation I have lived in has varied between purpose built Senior Officer accommodation at entitlement and accommodation below standard with all charges were waived for a two-year period, an entire posting.
- Question. I will seek to provide detail on question three: ‘What is the MOD doing and what more could they do to rebuild trust in service accommodation?’ My response will focus on this question in relation to SLA and will also cover other points of the questions raised. It will look at three main areas, Allocation of SLA, from an Army Officer perspective, Grading of SLA and wider issues with SLA
Allocation of SLA
- Needs Based Allocation. Allocation of SLA is primarily based on rank[1] other factors are considered however service personnel serving unaccompanied should not be disadvantaged[2]. I have lived in significantly poorer quality accommodation, regarding both space and access to my own bathroom facilities, when compared to other personnel living in the mess who weekly commute. Over this period, rooms of better quality were unused for most of the time, with personnel arriving on Monday morning and leaving on Thursday evening or Friday afternoon. With policies of not charging personnel who maintain their own residence in place there is little incentive for personnel to change the policy. With certain units holding these rooms at a premium and operating a waiting list system for moving into senior officer SLA or SSSA based on arrival date and rank, individuals who live in SLA full time should be placed at a higher priority, regardless of rank.
Recommendation 1. Existing ‘senior officer’ mess rooms should be renamed as ‘living in’ rooms and should be prioritised to those that live in SLA full time.
- Refusal of Accommodation. Currently no system exists for refusal of SLA. On a posting I was allocated accommodation that had been graded as grade 4. This accommodation was subsequently regraded to grade 4b following a service complaint. The issues raised (heating, hot water, drinkable water and general disrepair of the building) were known by the headquarters element. On movement back from Belgium to Northwood HQ I was allocated a Junior Officer SLA room, below entitlement. This room did not have appropriate storage and no other storage was available in the building or on the wider site. As such the amount of space available for me to use was constrained to the point that I could not effectively use the desk in the room to work. Introduction of a Defence Minimum Standard (DMS) for accommodation and the SLA Management Information System (SLAMIS) should help resolve these issues. Offering greater choice to individuals when selecting accommodation, within reason should be considered. The guidance list on allocation of accommodation[3], during periods of upgrade could be used as a starting point.
Recommendation 2. Individuals should have greater influence when selecting SLA and should be able to refuse accommodation if it is below entitlement or fails to meet the DMS for accommodation.
- Rank Based Charges. SLA accommodation charges are based on the grading of the accommodation and the rank of the individual, split into groups of Junior NCO (OR 2, 3 and 4), Senior NCO and Warrant Officer (OR 6, 7, 8 and 9), Junior Officer (OF 1 and 2 and Senior Officer (OF 3 and above). Within each of the four accommodation brackets the most junior rank pays a higher percentage of their salary for accommodation than others more senior to them. The increase in entitlement when an individual promotes to OF3 is not reflected in the increased cost of accommodation.
Recommendation 3. SLA Accommodation charges should be set as a fixed percentage of Net Salary for all ranks.
SLA Grading
- Process. The process for SLA 4-Tier Grading is outdated and fails to effectively consider the individuals that live in the mess and what they require and expect from SLA. The grading process is only a snapshot of what accommodation is like and issues such as the effectiveness of heating and regularity of hot water can change relatively quickly. Issues such as this can have a disproportionate impact on personnel and the process is not flexible enough to respond to certain problems. Issues such as loss of heating and hot water can trigger a temporary downgrade of accommodation if greater than 5 days but less than 182.5 or a full regrading of accommodation if it persists beyond 182.5 days[4]. This timeline fails to recognise the impact on individuals who occupy SLA over this period and the detrimental impact this has on both physical and mental wellbeing.
Recommendation 4. The existing 4-Tier Grading process should be updated, enforcing greater frequency of grading for accommodation at Grade 3 and 4.
Recommendation 5. Individuals who occupy SLA should have greater participation in the grading process.
- Deficiency Points. Grading of accommodation is based on a series of deficiency points that can be allocated at a 4-Tier accommodation grading board[5]. How points are calculated, and the disproportionate impact certain aspects can have on a grading makes minimal sense. As an example, a bed space that was between 25 and 39.9% below the size entitlement would attract 5 deficiency points this would then prevent any points being awarded for a lack of furniture where 10 points could be allocated. Should the temperature drop below 13.5 degrees Celsius then 5 points can be awarded, any further decreases are not recognised. A bed or a double wardrobe offers the same number of points. Points are also awarded for proximity to a public telephone. This scoring criteria is outdated and fails to reflect how times have changed, access to reliable and reasonable priced internet services is not mentioned anywhere within the scoring criteria. Access to a kitchen or a food preparation area is viewed as a positive, with the pay as you dine system now in place across all UK bases, this should now be viewed as a deficiency should personnel not have access to cooking areas at the appropriate ratios.
Recommendation 6. The deficiency point system used for grading SLA should be updated to reflect modern day life and the practicalities associated with living in SLA.
Wider Issues
- Quality of Mess services. While the quality of services available through the mess system sit outside the scope of this inquiry, I feel it is necessary to identify linkages between them and the issues with SLA. Having personnel living on site while not being able to offer personnel appropriate facilities to cook generates a requirement to offer central feeding arrangements. Throughout my career there has been a noticeable decrease in the quality of food offered at each unit I have been based at with the exceptions of Northwood HQ and the Defence Academy. Failing to address issues with the quality and variety of food available through the mess system is generating greater demand for improved cooking facilities in SLA. Should one or both issues fail to be addressed then issues around retention of personnel are likely to increase. Costs associated with running and maintain public rooms within messes should also be looked to see if maintaining these buildings represents value for money.
Recommendation 7. Quality of service offered through the mess system must be addressed and decisions made on if funding could be used to improve accommodation.
- Complaints Process. The most recent version of JSP 464[6] introduces the first process for complaining about SLA in a formal manner. I previously raised a service complaint about the standard of accommodation I was occupying which took approximately 13 months to resolve, with a further 4 months to be refunded charges, by which time I had left the unit. My concern with the process is the lack of what can be achieved through the complaint. My complaint delivered a refund in accommodation charges, while movement to different SLA on site was possible the same issues would have existed. This is directly linked to paragraphs 4 and 6, where there is seemingly nothing that can be done once SLA is assessed to be at the minimum standard.
Recommendation 8. The SLA complaints process must lead to an end state that resolves the underlying issues the complaint was raised about and deliver tangible improvements for the individual.
- Single Living Accommodation Expert Group. This organisation is referenced in an NAO report[7] from Feb 21 and the UK Armed Forces Accommodation Strategy from October 22[8]. The Chief of Defence People is identified as the senior sponsor for this group. Beyond this fact there is little other information available on the defence intranet on who is part of this group, what they deliver and how information can be passed to them. My concern is that very few members of this group will be members of the military who currently occupy SLA. In this situation I fail to see how they can offer a full view representing all stakeholders from across defence when it comes to SLA.
Recommendation 9. Expansion of the Single Living Accommodation Expert Group to include serving personnel that occupy SLA as their permanent residence.
Summary
- Above I have attempted to layout some of the issues associated with living in SLA from just over a decade of military service. It is my opinion that subsidised accommodation is one of the most tangible benefits the military offers to its personnel. Without this I would not have been able to complete the number of moves required of me in my career to date. The recommendations above are points based on my own personal experience and research. The service complaint I made was initiated following several issues; including the need to boil a kettle so that I could shave with hot water each morning and not having heating or drinking water for periods of time. This posting and the issues on this site was over the COVID-19 period. There is still much the MOD must do in relation to SLA to rebuild the trust I have lost in the system.
- The New Accommodation Offer is something that I look forward to seeing implemented as it promises to resolve some of the issues I have raised. I doubt however that the investment required to bring certain units up to standard will be available and it will be single service personnel that suffer most from this lack of investment. I have now reached a point in my career where I have greater flexibility in where I will be employed. When selecting future jobs, it is likely that I will seek out roles where the accommodation available provides me with something that offers me an improved quality of life. Should I be posted somewhere that doesn’t offer this then I would start to look at employment outside the military.
26 October 2023
Page 4 of 4
[1] JSP 464, Vol 2, Part 1, Para 5.201.
[2] Ibid, Para 5.202.
[3] Ibid, Para 5.304.
[4] JSP 464, Vol 3, Part 1, Para 0819.
[5] Ibid, Annex A to Chapter 8.
[6] JSP 464 Vol Part 3, dated 28 Jul 23.
[7] NAO, Improving Single Living Accommodation, 3 February 2021, page 7.
[8] MOD, UK Armed Forces Defence Accommodation Strategy, October 2022, page 10.