The new Labour government will face many challenges, foremost amongst these is the issue of national security. The world around us is the most volatile it has been since the end of the Cold War, with conflict raging in Europe, across the Middle East and Africa, and fresh conflicts threatening to break out elsewhere. Labour has decided to undertake a Strategic Defence Review (SDR) to take stock of the threats, what the nation needs to defend itself, and what the government can afford. One of the most important aspects of the SDR should be its approach to recruitment and retention.
Labour’s manifesto outlined how armed forces personnel are at the “heart of our security” and that the government would “strengthen support for our Armed Forces communities”. Elsewhere, the manifesto gave assurances that Labour would deliver a “New Deal for Working People”. These commitments show promise. But the scale of the challenge facing the SDR team is daunting when it comes to the current recruitment and retention crisis, especially if the SDR decides that the threats warrant an increase to the size of the Armed Forces.
Looking at the situation as a snapshot, things may not seem as bad as they are. When looking at the full-time trained strength of the Armed Forces, the British Army is slightly above its planned strength and the Royal Navy and Royal Air Force are only slightly below theirs. But these figures are for a force which politicians have allowed to shrink to dangerously low levels and they hide concerning trends. The full-time trained strength of the UK armed forces as of January 2024 was 131,000, down by almost 4,000 from a year earlier. The long-term trend of outflows exceeding inflows should be a great concern. Between 2000 and 2023, only 5 years (2 of which during the pandemic) saw net inflows of personnel and 2010-2019 saw nine consecutive years of net outflows.
What makes matters worse is that many of the people leaving are specialists. That the Armed Forces are seriously struggling to retain specialist personnel can be seen in the number of ‘pinch points’ identified. There are two types of pinch points, delivery pinch points (when current people issues impact the delivery of an output) and sustainability pinch points (when shortfalls present a risk to the delivery of an output in the future). For security reasons the precise details are no longer published, but the 2024 Armed Forces’ Pay Review Body Report (AFPRB) said there were 183 pinch points, up from 82 from the 2023 report (although there was a change in the specificity of reporting).
There are myriad causes behind these problems. Pay is one significant factor. It is known that across the public sector, pay rises have not matched those in the private sector; between 2019 and 2023, inflation adjusted private sector pay grew by 2.3% but public sector pay has fallen by 0.3%. This is born out in the Armed Forces which faces tough competition in attracting new people. Pay was also a major factor for those leaving, with only one third of personnel satisfied with pay and almost half citing pay as one of the reasons for leaving. It has been great to see the government already take action on this front, announcing that there will be a headline increase in Armed Forces pay of 6%.
But pay is only part of the problem. When it comes to recruitment, many are still applying to join the Armed Forces (around150,000 in 2023), although more are always desirable. However, stringent medical requirements and prolonged processes means too many fall through the system. Low morale is a serious problem, 58% of personnel report their morale as low, causing retention issues. Only one third of personnel are satisfied with the welfare support their families receive when they return from deployment, many personnel live in poorly cared for accommodation, and only 23% believe leaders will take meaningful actions to improve issues identified in the Continuous Attitude Survey Report.
Labour has long held improving the lives of working people as one of its core missions and there are an array of options available. Working closely with personnel to identify issues, find, and fund solutions – and push through change if necessary – will be key. Labour’s proposal to establish an independent Armed Forces Commissioner to improve service life is another welcome move.
Some changes will be low (or even no) cost. This could include reviewing medical requirements to better suit a workforce where medical conditions are less stigmatised and which people are now more likely to self-report; for example being lactose intolerant currently bars (with some exceptions) you from joining the Armed Forces, yet up to 10% of the UK’s population are lactose intolerant – how much would it cost to cater for this cohort? Other solutions however will be more costly. It is estimated that improving Service Family Accommodation could cost over £6 billion, investing more in other support (such as psychological) will also have hefty price tags, as will other options such as increasing retention bonuses for key roles.
All are worthy investments. The government faces a tight fiscal situation and the demands for funding will be many; the queue of Ministers to the door of No.11 will be long. But for a Party which places such emphasis on national security and the live’s of working people, an increase in defence spending beyond 2.5% of GDP (to include a great deal of investment in the Armed Forces workforce) is surely the right thing to do. Given the Labour Party’s good track record in government on both of these issues and the steps already taken, we should be cautiously optimistic.
To read more from William Freer, see ‘Labour’s defence policy journey: nearing the summit’.
The post The challenge facing Labour on Armed Forces Recruitment and Retention appeared first on Progressive Britain.
