Author Topic: DG Land Reserve on "sustainable Reserve Force"  (Read 17556 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 167,685
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,473
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Re: DG Land Reserve on "sustainable Reserve Force"
« Reply #25 on: May 07, 2014, 12:39:11 »
I believe the correct term is "Waltabees"

Gold  :nod:
"The most important qualification of a soldier is fortitude under fatigue and privation. Courage is only second; hardship, poverty and want are the best school for a soldier." Napoleon

Online MilEME09

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 31,970
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,369
Re: DG Land Reserve on "sustainable Reserve Force"
« Reply #26 on: May 07, 2014, 14:21:25 »
Too many Army Reserve units are unwilling to take the necessary action to release folks who rarely show up and don't contribute.  Of course, they are not helped by higher headquarters that state, in writing, that Pers Admin is about #5 on the priority list (until it gets bumped further down).

Sounds about right, like my signature says about my unit, we may call our selves one thing but when we do a head count its a different story. Our platoon has 36 pers on paper, eliminate the every one above MCpl and we maybe have 24. Remove those that say work up in the oil sands and we only see once every three months, and those I call "fair weather" soldiers, we maybe have a pool of 8-12 people we can potentially see on any given training night on a good day. Lowest turn out I've seen is 4, and yet our CoC's solution has been and continues to be "ask your buddies wtf, and get them to come out"
"We are called a Battalion, Authorized to be company strength, parade as a platoon, Operating as a section"

Offline Eowyn

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 16,310
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 278
  • Log
Re: DG Land Reserve on "sustainable Reserve Force"
« Reply #27 on: May 07, 2014, 16:23:45 »
Sounds about right, like my signature says about my unit, we may call our selves one thing but when we do a head count its a different story. Our platoon has 36 pers on paper, eliminate the every one above MCpl and we maybe have 24. Remove those that say work up in the oil sands and we only see once every three months, and those I call "fair weather" soldiers, we maybe have a pool of 8-12 people we can potentially see on any given training night on a good day. Lowest turn out I've seen is 4, and yet our CoC's solution has been and continues to be "ask your buddies wtf, and get them to come out"
And if you were the shoes of your CoC, what would your solution be?
Life Blood of Battle

Online MilEME09

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 31,970
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,369
Re: DG Land Reserve on "sustainable Reserve Force"
« Reply #28 on: May 07, 2014, 17:55:53 »
And if you were the shoes of your CoC, what would your solution be?

Well for one I wouldn't be protecting those people who might not be able to show up due to work for months at a time. Policy clearly says they you must attend one in every five training days, if you cant meet that minimum commitment in the long term, you should be sent on your way. One thing my OC tried but was told he couldn't do was prevent people from going on career courses who were soldiers of convenience. Instead he set up a simple marit list for the battalion, those in good standing with the unit would know about the cool/fun/gucci courses first and have first crack at them.
"We are called a Battalion, Authorized to be company strength, parade as a platoon, Operating as a section"

Offline pbi

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 32,680
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,641
Re: DG Land Reserve on "sustainable Reserve Force"
« Reply #29 on: May 07, 2014, 19:58:05 »
Well for one I wouldn't be protecting those people who might not be able to show up due to work for months at a time. Policy clearly says they you must attend one in every five training days, if you cant meet that minimum commitment in the long term, you should be sent on your way. One thing my OC tried but was told he couldn't do was prevent people from going on career courses who were soldiers of convenience. Instead he set up a simple marit list for the battalion, those in good standing with the unit would know about the cool/fun/gucci courses first and have first crack at them.

Why was he told he couldn't do this? Why can't course selection reflect merit? Is it a military unit or an employment agency? Reservists don't somehow "deserve" full time employment as some kind of entitlement. If you can't contribute, don't expect to stand in the way of those who can.

Now, should we be reasonable about people who have real civvy job committments? Yes, of course, or the Reserve will be populated with the unemployed and unemployable. But not, I suggest, to the point that it begins to harm the unit. The CO is responsible for the good order, function and efficiency of the unit, and has to be able to take reasonable measures to do that.
The Nation that makes a great distinction between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting done by fools. ...

The true measure of a man is what he would do if he knew he never would be found out...

Online MilEME09

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 31,970
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,369
Re: DG Land Reserve on "sustainable Reserve Force"
« Reply #30 on: May 08, 2014, 02:40:39 »
Why was he told he couldn't do this? Why can't course selection reflect merit? Is it a military unit or an employment agency? Reservists don't somehow "deserve" full time employment as some kind of entitlement. If you can't contribute, don't expect to stand in the way of those who can.

Now, should we be reasonable about people who have real civvy job committments? Yes, of course, or the Reserve will be populated with the unemployed and unemployable. But not, I suggest, to the point that it begins to harm the unit. The CO is responsible for the good order, function and efficiency of the unit, and has to be able to take reasonable measures to do that.

I'll have to get back to you on that one, but I suspect he isn't allowed to block career courses. I agree with you that we need to be flexible, but when you have say a section commander working in Ft Mac 90% of his time, who cant keep up with emails and keeping his section informed and sending up returns. Should the unit not consider "okay, clearly things arent working here, maybe you should go on ED&T while your away or release/sup reserve"
"We are called a Battalion, Authorized to be company strength, parade as a platoon, Operating as a section"

Offline Eowyn

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 16,310
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 278
  • Log
Re: DG Land Reserve on "sustainable Reserve Force"
« Reply #31 on: May 08, 2014, 10:30:35 »
Why was he told he couldn't do this? Why can't course selection reflect merit? Is it a military unit or an employment agency? Reservists don't somehow "deserve" full time employment as some kind of entitlement. If you can't contribute, don't expect to stand in the way of those who can.

Now, should we be reasonable about people who have real civvy job committments? Yes, of course, or the Reserve will be populated with the unemployed and unemployable. But not, I suggest, to the point that it begins to harm the unit. The CO is responsible for the good order, function and efficiency of the unit, and has to be able to take reasonable measures to do that.
I suspect it is a "cultural" mind set.  In the past there has been pressure from higher to get the troops trained up to QL5 and PLQ mod 6 because of the lack of instructors for the summer courses.  In addition, there has been a focus to attempt career management of the lower ranks to make sure they aren't languishing.  These factors add up to an reluctance of denying courses.
Life Blood of Battle

Offline Eowyn

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 16,310
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 278
  • Log
Re: DG Land Reserve on "sustainable Reserve Force"
« Reply #32 on: May 08, 2014, 10:37:11 »
Well for one I wouldn't be protecting those people who might not be able to show up due to work for months at a time. Policy clearly says they you must attend one in every five training days, if you cant meet that minimum commitment in the long term, you should be sent on your way. One thing my OC tried but was told he couldn't do was prevent people from going on career courses who were soldiers of convenience. Instead he set up a simple marit list for the battalion, those in good standing with the unit would know about the cool/fun/gucci courses first and have first crack at them.
I can assure you that the NES policy is enforced.  Between the Adjt and the OR, a NES report is generated monthly.  What you may not know is the NES procedure is quite lengthy and time consuming.  The best outcome is when the member receives the first letter, they decide to voluntarily release.  That speeds things up considerably.  Several people have chosen that in the past couple of months.

As well, there are some soldiers make sure they make a parade a month to stay off that report.  Are they effective?  No, but there is lower hanging fruit to get at.
Life Blood of Battle

Offline NSDreamer

  • Donor
  • Full Member
  • *
  • 9,425
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 313
Re: DG Land Reserve on "sustainable Reserve Force"
« Reply #33 on: May 08, 2014, 11:59:23 »
I can assure you that the NES policy is enforced.  Between the Adjt and the OR, a NES report is generated monthly.  What you may not know is the NES procedure is quite lengthy and time consuming.  The best outcome is when the member receives the first letter, they decide to voluntarily release.  That speeds things up considerably.  Several people have chosen that in the past couple of months.

 That might be true in your case, but I've recommended 3 people this year for NES release, both having more then just one occurrence, but in fact a pattern of failing to parade, making BS excuses to not parade ( My friend came from university to visit so I can't go do our BFT) I point all these out, I offer troops assistance in getting time off work,I even offered one of said 3 troops help getting a higher paying position at my  company, they told me they would send me their resume.  3 Months later, no parade, no resume, submitted for NES, 7 months later? Still up at BDE Hq/Div Hq.

 It's not just the unit level that holds up the NES.
Something relatively witty.

Offline dapaterson

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 361,165
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 14,534
Re: DG Land Reserve on "sustainable Reserve Force"
« Reply #34 on: May 08, 2014, 12:20:23 »
NES letters go out with the CO's signature, on the CO's authority.  No need for Bde/Div engagement until release.
This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Offline NSDreamer

  • Donor
  • Full Member
  • *
  • 9,425
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 313
Re: DG Land Reserve on "sustainable Reserve Force"
« Reply #35 on: May 08, 2014, 12:55:30 »
NES letters go out with the CO's signature, on the CO's authority.  No need for Bde/Div engagement until release.


 Well this concerns me more, as this is the response I'm getting from my OR... Looks like it's time for a phone call  :facepalm:
« Last Edit: May 08, 2014, 13:06:10 by NSDreamer »
Something relatively witty.

Offline dapaterson

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 361,165
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 14,534
Re: DG Land Reserve on "sustainable Reserve Force"
« Reply #36 on: May 08, 2014, 13:49:25 »
Well this concerns me more, as this is the response I'm getting from my OR... Looks like it's time for a phone call  :facepalm:

If they are already NES nd the CO has sent them in for 5f release, then the paperwork will have gone up the chain.

Look at A-PM-245; chapter 19 is Reserve pers admin, and chapter 15 is Release.
This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Offline George Wallace

  • Army.ca Fossil
  • *****
  • 420,795
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 31,138
  • Crewman
Re: DG Land Reserve on "sustainable Reserve Force"
« Reply #37 on: May 08, 2014, 13:56:49 »
Perhaps we are confusing the initiating of Release for NES through the Registered Letter sent out in the name of the CO of the unit and the actual Release procedure that involves documentation and acknowledgement/approvals at higher commands.  I don't believe that a CO has approving authority for the Articles of Release given to a member; only the ability to recommend. 
DISCLAIMER: The opinions and arguments of George Wallace posted on this Site are solely those of George Wallace and not the opinion of Army.ca and are posted for information purposes only.
Unless so stated, they are reflective of my opinion -- and my opinion only, a right that I enjoy along with every other Canadian citizen.

Offline dapaterson

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 361,165
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 14,534
Re: DG Land Reserve on "sustainable Reserve Force"
« Reply #38 on: May 08, 2014, 14:32:04 »
Short version: For Pte-CWO and OCdt, a CO is the release authority for a 4a, 4c or 5a release.  For a 5f release, for Pte-CWO and OCdt the release authority is the Div Comd; for commissioned officers, it is the Div Comd who is the authority to initiate release.  The release authority for all commissioned officers, regardless of the reason, is the Governor General.
This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Offline NSDreamer

  • Donor
  • Full Member
  • *
  • 9,425
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 313
Re: DG Land Reserve on "sustainable Reserve Force"
« Reply #39 on: May 09, 2014, 12:42:57 »
After consultation, the above is certainly correct. The members are waiting on release paperwork, or rather the CoC, two of the members haven't called in to the unit to query proceedings yet despite multiple voicemails.   :-\
Something relatively witty.

Offline E.R. Campbell

  • Retired, years ago
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 453,450
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,054
Re: DG Land Reserve on "sustainable Reserve Force"
« Reply #40 on: December 16, 2016, 08:00:28 »
I am resurrecting an 2+ year old thread rather than start a new one, because I think this fits with the topic ...

I'm surprised no one is mentioning all the new things going on for the naval reserves. The mission of the Naval reserves will be Class A, Orca and new NST. The MCDV's are changing 40% of their billets to regular force this year, and the year after 100%. All class of ship will have 5% reserves at any one time in the future, mostly as back fills. Contracts up to a year will be given no more than two consecutive contracts. All members on Class B/C that have a year experience Class C in the last 5 years will be offered a transfer at rank up to PO1 and LCdr.

I think we, Canada, at large and DND and the CF, in particular, owe the NAVRES a vote of thanks for showing us both the capabilities and limitations of reserve forces over the past 25 years.

The Kingston class of ships was, originally, more about "industrial support" for (then) HDIL (Halifax-Dartmouth Industries Limited) and SNC-Lavelin than it was about the Navy's needs or wants and the decision to make them "shad boats" (reserve crewed vessels) was taken because the big, institutional (regular) Navy wasn't terribly interested.

The Naval Reserve, 4,000ish people in 24 Naval Reserve Divisions, was able to provide 400+ (well enough) trained people to crew a dozen small warships, top to bottom. But, as the years wore on the "bill" could only be paid by having, as the NAVGEN message says, "A CADRE OF FULL-TIME CLASS C RESERVISTS WHO FOR SEVERAL YEARS WERE ABLE TO MEET KINGSTON MANNING REQUIREMENTS," but who were, essentially a new, second tier of the NAVRES: full time, at sea, not "at home" training reserve sailors in their Divisions for the NAVRES' primary task: augmentation of the fleet. But, the NAVRES showed us all what good people can do when there is opportunity, which in this case, meant a flotilla of modern ships. If the 4,000 strong NAVRES could crew a dozen ships we have to assume that the 18,000 people in the Army Reserve ought to be able to field, say, 50+ (well enough trained) platoon/troop sized units from within the 11 Reserve brigades, IF they had enough proper equipment and fuel and ammunition etc for training.

The Naval Reserve also showed us the limits of trying to do too much with too little. The Navy is right, in my opinion, to want one "full time" fleet, crewed, in the main, by regulars and augmented by reservists and to have a reserve "base" from which "surge" manning, in a war, can be found without having to build the foundations. I do not doubt that the NAVRES can provide hundreds of well enough trained people to augment ships for both work-a-day tasks and for training. Equally, I do not doubt, that, given the right focus, each Canadian Army Reserve brigade could produce four or five platoon/troop sized units to, annually, train with regular force regiments and battalions, and to provide hundreds of individual augmentees on an ongoing basis.

But what the NAVRES did to and for the Navy, and vice-versa, was only possible because there was both equipment, the Kingston class ships, (and now the Orcas), and money available to make it happen. The Army Reserve, it appears to me, from far away, lacks both ... and maybe more.

The key, 20+ years ago, was that the institutional Navy was committed to making the Kingston class ships at least minimally useful so resources were provided ... sometimes grudgingly, but more and more freely as the little Kingstons proved their worth in training and operations from the High Arctic to the Caribbean.

I wonder if the institutional Army's leadership has anything like that sense of commitment to the Army Reserve.

It seems to me that we, Canada, needs the Department and the CF to recognize the capabilities and limitations of its reserve forces and direct, staff, equip and fund them to do practical, achievable, useful, important things.


Edit: typo

« Last Edit: December 16, 2016, 09:18:28 by E.R. Campbell »
It is ill that men should kill one another in seditions, tumults and wars; but it is worse to bring nations to such misery, weakness and baseness
as to have neither strength nor courage to contend for anything; to have nothing left worth defending and to give the name of peace to desolation.
Algernon Sidney in Discourses Concerning Government, (1698)
----------
Like what you see/read here on Army.ca?  Subscribe, and help keep it "on the air!"

Offline Journeyman

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 467,325
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,802
  • The only solution for some people is <ignore>
Re: DG Land Reserve on "sustainable Reserve Force"
« Reply #41 on: December 16, 2016, 08:22:04 »
But what the NAVRES did to and for the Navy, and vice-versa, was only possible because there was both equipment, the Kingston class ships, (and now the Orcas), and money available to make it happen. The Army Reserve, it appears to me, from far away, lacks both ... and maybe more.

The key, 20+ years ago, was that the institutional Navy was committed to making the Kingston class ships at least minimally useful so resources were provided ... sometimes grudgingly, but more and more freely as the little Kingstons proved their worth in training and operations from the High Arctic to the Caribbean.

I wonder if the institutional Army's leadership has anything like that sense of commitment to the Army Reserve.
I would say there are three strikes, not the two you initially highlighted.  The leadership simply isn't there.  'Connect with Canadians' in Butt-f Saskatchewan doesn't garner much attention or support.

....in my opinion.
I even read works I disagree with;  life outside  an ideological echo chamber.

Online MilEME09

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 31,970
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,369
Re: DG Land Reserve on "sustainable Reserve Force"
« Reply #42 on: December 16, 2016, 09:02:59 »
I would say there are three strikes, not the two you initially highlighted.  The leadership simply isn't there.  'Connect with Canadians' in Butt-f Saskatchewan doesn't garner much attention or support.

....in my opinion.

Honestly is feels like the army is a federal political party, cares about Ontario and Quebec, doesn't give a rats *** about the rest until they absolutely have to. Connecting with Canadians is also difficult when many of our bases in or around major populations centers were closed (probably to get us out of sight and mind along with the rest of the politics behind it) Winnipeg, Calgary, Chilliwack, Downsview, London to name a few. The Canadian Armed forces has lost over the past 30+ years much of its footprint and visibility in Canadian society.
"We are called a Battalion, Authorized to be company strength, parade as a platoon, Operating as a section"

Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 167,685
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,473
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Re: DG Land Reserve on "sustainable Reserve Force"
« Reply #43 on: December 16, 2016, 10:38:53 »
Honestly is feels like the army is a federal political party, cares about Ontario and Quebec, doesn't give a rats *** about the rest until they absolutely have to. Connecting with Canadians is also difficult when many of our bases in or around major populations centers were closed (probably to get us out of sight and mind along with the rest of the politics behind it) Winnipeg, Calgary, Chilliwack, Downsview, London to name a few. The Canadian Armed forces has lost over the past 30+ years much of its footprint and visibility in Canadian society.

Which, coincidentally, lines up geographically with 80% of the Army reserve units in Canada. The closest regular force infantry company to us is based a 14 hour bus ride (ask my troops about that one last summer) away.

The Naval Reserve seems to be co-located with their regular counterparts, so augmentation/ collaboration is much easier from the get go.
"The most important qualification of a soldier is fortitude under fatigue and privation. Courage is only second; hardship, poverty and want are the best school for a soldier." Napoleon

Offline Halifax Tar

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 31,728
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,362
  • Ready Aye Ready
Re: DG Land Reserve on "sustainable Reserve Force"
« Reply #44 on: December 16, 2016, 10:48:58 »
The Naval Reserve seems to be co-located with their regular counterparts, so augmentation/ collaboration is much easier from the get go.

Umm no.... The RCN has 2 regular bases (Esq and Hfx) they each have 1 of the 24 NRDs across the country.  The other 22 are very much on their own.

Ask HMCS Unicorn or HMCS Queen how long they have to travel to interact with the regular RCN.  You aint driving that distance for a weekend ex sonny Jim! 
« Last Edit: December 16, 2016, 12:20:42 by Halifax Tar »
Lead me, follow me or get the hell out of my way

Offline Remius

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 62,295
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,267
Re: DG Land Reserve on "sustainable Reserve Force"
« Reply #45 on: December 16, 2016, 10:55:05 »
Umm no.... The RCN has 2 regular bases (Esq and Hfx) they each have 1 of the 24 NRDs across the country.  The 22 are very much on their own.

Ask HMCS Unicorn or HMCS Queen how long they have to travel to interact with the regular RCN.  You aint driving that distance for a weekend ex sonny Jim!

Question though.  Would you still consider Toronto, Montreal and Quebec City as on their own?
Optio

Offline Halifax Tar

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 31,728
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,362
  • Ready Aye Ready
Re: DG Land Reserve on "sustainable Reserve Force"
« Reply #46 on: December 16, 2016, 11:18:05 »
Question though.  Would you still consider Toronto, Montreal and Quebec City as on their own?

When the nearest RCN regular counterpart is in roughly 1800, 1400 and 1200Kms to the east in Halifax, yes.
Lead me, follow me or get the hell out of my way

Offline Remius

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 62,295
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,267
Re: DG Land Reserve on "sustainable Reserve Force"
« Reply #47 on: December 16, 2016, 11:31:17 »
When the nearest RCN regular counterpart is in roughly 1800, 1400 and 1200Kms to the east in Halifax, yes.

I was asking just in regards to port access, ressources etc and what not.

Thanks.   
Optio

Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 167,685
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,473
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Re: DG Land Reserve on "sustainable Reserve Force"
« Reply #48 on: December 16, 2016, 11:34:33 »
Umm no.... The RCN has 2 regular bases (Esq and Hfx) they each have 1 of the 24 NRDs across the country.  The 22 are very much on their own.

Ask HMCS Unicorn or HMCS Queen how long they have to travel to interact with the regular RCN.  You aint driving that distance for a weekend ex sonny Jim!

I give!

 :surrender:
"The most important qualification of a soldier is fortitude under fatigue and privation. Courage is only second; hardship, poverty and want are the best school for a soldier." Napoleon

Offline Halifax Tar

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 31,728
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,362
  • Ready Aye Ready
Re: DG Land Reserve on "sustainable Reserve Force"
« Reply #49 on: December 16, 2016, 12:17:54 »
I give!

 :surrender:

Striking your colors, how nautical. ;)  I accept

I was asking just in regards to port access, resources etc and what not.

Thanks.


I can see how that may seem so on the surface; but there are no ships, regular or reserve, stationed at these locations.
Lead me, follow me or get the hell out of my way