TangoTwoBravo
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,114
- Points
- 1,110
We've had several threads revolving around the issue of deployments. One common theme seems to be that soldiers want to go on deployment. Another is that Regular Force soldiers want the deployments and quit when they do not get them, attributed in part to having to include Reserves on deployments. Another is that the Reserves want tours but are blocked from doing so.
Running counter to this is the perception that the army is burned out from too many tours. Is this disonnance a generational thing? In my last tour at the Regiment the number of people trying to get on a deployment vastly outnumbered those trying to get out of one (I actually can't think of anyone trying to get out of a tour).
The early and mid-nineties saw multiple deployments at the same time that the Army was reducing in size. These deployments were high stress with an Army not really geared towards doing them. Benefits were also less than today, especially when the tax break for high-risk is considered. Is the "burned-out" army image a holdover from 1994 or a current phenomenon?
Today's tours seem to have more clear aims and the public has been engaged in them. Tours also bring many benefits. Money, prestige, medals, excitement, the fulfillment of "why I joined" all make going on a deployment attractive. The negatives are there as well, of course. Family separation, living in a highly controlled environment, loss of freedom, danger to life and limb and even boredom all make tours difficult things as well.
How many tours is too much? What is the right break between tours? I suppose the answer will depend on the person and the type of tour that they had. Is one tour every three years a reasonable tempo (ie a two year break between getting back and going over). How long should a new soldier have to wait before going on a deployment? What tempo will satisfy the desire to deploy without burning out the troops?
Running counter to this is the perception that the army is burned out from too many tours. Is this disonnance a generational thing? In my last tour at the Regiment the number of people trying to get on a deployment vastly outnumbered those trying to get out of one (I actually can't think of anyone trying to get out of a tour).
The early and mid-nineties saw multiple deployments at the same time that the Army was reducing in size. These deployments were high stress with an Army not really geared towards doing them. Benefits were also less than today, especially when the tax break for high-risk is considered. Is the "burned-out" army image a holdover from 1994 or a current phenomenon?
Today's tours seem to have more clear aims and the public has been engaged in them. Tours also bring many benefits. Money, prestige, medals, excitement, the fulfillment of "why I joined" all make going on a deployment attractive. The negatives are there as well, of course. Family separation, living in a highly controlled environment, loss of freedom, danger to life and limb and even boredom all make tours difficult things as well.
How many tours is too much? What is the right break between tours? I suppose the answer will depend on the person and the type of tour that they had. Is one tour every three years a reasonable tempo (ie a two year break between getting back and going over). How long should a new soldier have to wait before going on a deployment? What tempo will satisfy the desire to deploy without burning out the troops?