Cutting the CF/DND HQ bloat - Excess CF Sr Leadership, Public Servants and Contractors

[Infanteer]

In my comment "Army being the one to decide", I was referring to the suggested notion that these schools should fall under Army (LFDTS I believe it was suggested) mangement ... the point being that you'd need to actually slice that purple pie (3 seperate and distinct merit lists) into 3 different entities with each enviornment then taking ownership of it's own purple people. If we don't do that, then purple management is required at the top as, right now, we have one merit list and serve in all three enviornments competing against each other.

As it is now, a Navy background Master Seaman suppy is no 1 on the merit list, then he gets his Petty Officers ... and may very well then find himself posted into a first line Army Unit where he has zero experience.

Ah, I misunderstood you.  Thanks for the clarification.  As for this:

Split us out into our three colours and then everything will be just peachy.

That makes sense to me.  There is no reason why three distinct parts of a single trade (ie: Green Storemen, Light Blue Storemen and Dark Blue Storemen) can't be managed separately and handled through a single purple school.

 

[Infanteer]

My own opinion is that HQ staff can have tendency to grow and justify their existence.

Agreed.  There has to be a way of building some institutional discipline into our organization.  Parkinson and Brooke's Laws both apply here.  A "sneaky" get around, when you can't blatently expand your HQ, is to hire civilians and Class B reservists.

All in all, there is some real pressure being put on various organizations to make the right cuts, so I am confident that we are at least heading in the right direction.  Front line units and combat equipment have priority at this time.

One of the problems to which LGen Leslie alluded is the 'tasks' or programmes or policies imposed upon DND (and other government departments) which bring with them a requirement to report at a very high level which seems to automatically require a flag/general officer or a civilian EX with, of course, an appropriate staff of captains/colonels, commanders/lieutenant colonels and so on, including a bevy of ***, sergeants and CRs.

Employment equity, Official Languages, Access To Information/Privacy Act; these are a few that do require management.  If I'm not mistaken, civilians tend to fill a lot of these billets.  I don't think they take the lions share of the bloat though - I'd argue that bloat lies in growth in our core HQs.  Why have a staff branch of a Major and 2 Captains when you can have a LCol, 3 Majors (1 Class B), 6 Captains, 2 MWOs and 3 Civilians?  I'd like to see us objectively look at some of our internal processes and ask "is this necessary".

The arguement will be made that you need that additional manpower in your HQs with all the reports and returns demanded from higher HQ.  Sure.  Essentially, your staffers are committed to managing excel spreadsheets.  But is this information really necessary or is it, as a smart man told me, something that some Major in a higher HQ said "The Commander needs to know this!" only to hear "Yep, next slide please" at the briefing.  The process has to start from the top.

 

[Journeyman]

OTTAWA— From Friday's Globe and Mail

This scathing assessment by Lieutenant-General Andrew Leslie, who commanded the Canadian army during the Afghanistan war, arrives at a pivotal moment for the military.....

So essentially, he oversaw and was therefore directly responsible for major portions of the Army's HQ bloat, but now that he's out the door, "you guys are all screwed up."  :

 

[frank1515]

They make it sound like he was the one Commanding troops. When newspapers say "Commander of the Army during the Afghanistan War" they should say "Commander responsible for lending (Force Generator) troops to Commander CEFCOM during the Afghanistan War". That would be more appropriate!  ;D

 

[The Bread Guy]

They make it sound like he was the one Commanding troops. When newspapers say "Commander of the Army during the Afghanistan War" they should say "Commander responsible for lending (Force Generator) troops to Commander CEFCOM during the Afghanistan War". That would be more appropriate!  ;D

But sooooooooooooooooooooooooooo clunky and unsexy for the headline  ;D

 

[frank1515]

But sooooooooooooooooooooooooooo clunky and unsexy for the headline  ;D

Nevertheless, it's the truth! 

 

[OldSolduer]

I can easily imagine that:

- Pl Comd
- Pl 2IC
- Pl Signaller
- Weapons Det Comd
- #1 C6
- #2 C6
- #1 84
-# 2 84
- LAV Driver
- LAV Gunner
- LAV Sgt
- Medic

I know I am being an ***. ;D

The Pl HQ is just that.....the Comd, Pl 2 I/C, LAV crew and Signaller.

The Weapons Det is commanded, correct me if I am wrong, by a Sgt....it is in reality a section of its own.

 

[Good2Golf]

I didn't see any mention of the critical lack of capacity in other Canadian government departments that exacerbated DND's inability to expend fully its allocated resources.  There was a dearth of experienced personnel across the Government, PWGCS, IC, etc... and this coupled with the demanding (not a bad thing, but an impact nonetheless) reporting and approval requirements made it incredibly difficult to cash out fully. 

One should also keep in mind that while $1 Billion sounds like a lot (and it is, of course), it is 'only' 4.8% of total budget, so one might consider that being given billions and billions of dollars, and being told you that by law you cannot overspend, and being given a rather constrictive set of policies and regulations to work within....expending 95.2% of one's budget is actually not too bad.  I also understand that the underspent amount was most often much less than the $1 Billion figure that LGen Leslie mentioned.

:2c:

Regards
G2G

 

[The Bread Guy]

One Two more media outlets gets the report:

A major report from National Defence has identified ways to save the department $1 billion a year and calls for "dramatic changes" so the military can meet its future obligations.

Lt.-Gen. Andrew Leslie led a "transformation team" at the request of Defence Minister Peter MacKay that spent nearly a year studying ways to overhaul the Canadian Forces and Department of National Defence to find efficiencies.

The group's Report on Transformation 2011 was completed in July but not made public. A copy of the report was obtained by CBC News.

The report says that for the military to meet the demands upon it, while living within its means and with balanced books, it has to carefully reallocate its resources.

Leslie calls for cuts to the bureaucratic side of the military's operations, including the possible elimination of thousands of jobs so that the people on the front lines have the support and equipment they need ....

Source:  CBC.ca, 19 Aug 11

Bureaucrats tried to stymie a report by Lt.-Gen. Andrew Leslie that calls for deep cuts to civilian ranks at National Defence Headquarters, interfering in his study months before his still secret transformation document was finished.

"The team was directed to stop further work on the civilian structures in late November," says the report, parts of which were shared with Postmedia News on Friday.

Leslie was named Chief of Transformation in June 2010, after finishing his term as chief of land staff. Assisted by a team of military and civilian staff, he spent the last year authoring a report on how to make the Canadian Forces a leaner, meaner and more cost-effective organization.

But he began encountering resistance some six months before the tough report was finished.

Leslie writes that his team had only examined the top two layers of the civilian bureaucracy — the deputy minister and assistant deputy ministers — before the order to halt was given in November. The report does not specify who gave the order to stop examining the civilian side of the department.

"At that point we had only examined the senior levels — levels 1 and 2 — and had not yet had time to drill down below the level 2 (assistant deputy ministers)," the report says.

Leslie's team reported only to Deputy Minister Robert Fonberg and Chief of Defence Staff Gen. Walter Natynczyk. In his report, Leslie writes that his superior said NDHQ's civilian staff was none of his concern.

"We have been told that this will be addressed in the future by the upcoming development of institutional alignment options," the report says ....

Source:  Postmedia News, 19 Aug 11

 

[ProudNewfoundlander]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/why-report-advocating-massive-military-cuts-will-be-a-hard-sell/article2135950/

A major report that advocates streamlining the Canadian military by chopping headquarters staff sits in limbo, awaiting a champion to drive its recommendations home.

But with its author, Lieutenant-General Andrew Leslie, leaving the military next month, that report’s future is very much in doubt.

On Aug. 3, Lt.-Gen. Leslie submitted his resignation to Gen. Walter Natynczyk, Chief of the Defence Staff.

“My military duty is complete,” wrote the former head of the army. He and his wife are currently on vacation in the Aegean. “On our return I have been invited to join a great Canadian corporation in the private sector,” Lt.-Gen. Leslie said in his letter.

He could not be reached for comment.

As Chief of Transformation, Lt.-Gen. Leslie was tasked by the Harper government with figuring out how the Canadian Forces could save money and prepare for future missions, even as it sought to replace aging air and naval fleets and as the government pushed for savings in order to eliminate the deficit.

He concluded the military could save $1-billion a year by trimming or redeploying 11,000 civilian, regular military and reserve personnel, mostly at National Defence headquarters.

But the report also contains dozens of complex recommendations that aim to streamline and merge operations. Sources who are not authorized to speak on behalf of the military say the document has received a cool reception from the senior ranks at the Canadian Forces and National Defence.

Alan Williams is a former assistant deputy minister of defence who created controversy when he testified last year that the government was wrong to proceed with the acquisition of a fleet of F-35 fighter jets without a competitive bidding process. He examined the report, which has been obtained by The Globe and Mail, Friday.

Its recommendations are “going to be a hard sell” within both the military and the government, he said. “There is always a tendency to status quo.”

Without a “champion,” as he put it, to push for the reforms, Mr. Williams predicted Lt.-Gen. Leslie’s report will join a long list of proposals to reform the military that have been quietly shelved.

“This will only get done if someone very senior says: Make it happen,” he added.

Is there a champion within the government itself? Defence Minister Peter MacKay was not available for comment. The minister’s spokesman, Jay Paxton, was non-committal.

“This government will use this report, and other tools, to better focus resources” and to meet the government’s deficit-reduction goals, he said.

As for Lt.-Gen. Leslie’s claim that defence headquarters had become overloaded with civilians and needed to be trimmed, Mr. Paxton said that the civilian side at National Defence had grown during the Afghan war to free up military personnel for front-line duties.

But just as “Canadians are tightening their belts” in difficult times, so too must all departments of government, including National Defence, he added.

 

[Old Sweat]

It seems to me that most of the reporting, and the analysis, has been incredibly shallow. A few commentators have noted that the use of contractors will be scaled back because of the change of roles in/withdrawal from Afghanistan. Not too many people have wondered if General Leslie has not taken aim at some of his favorite targets, the levithans of Startop. To my mind the only way savings in the numbers touted can be achieved is if a combination of the two is used along with judicious paring in other areas. Mind you, it would help if people at all levels could concentrate at what is important. Look how the reintroduction of the former service titles began to get mired down in calling cards and shoulder titles.

As one of the few members here who served in the old CFHQ, I recall that the merging of that headquarters with the DM's staff into NDHQ kicked off considerable bloat and empire building. I submit that this is a characteristic of organizations that are created to solve problems, real or imagined. The circa 1973 version resulted from a management study to resolve the issue of the MND receiving conflicting advice from the CF and the DND. The MND and I guess the PCO apparently were not comfortable with exercising executive authority to resolve issues and instead papered over the conflicts.

 

[Edward Campbell]

It seems to me that most of the reporting, and the analysis, has been incredibly shallow. A few commentators have noted that the use of contractors will be scaled back because of the change of roles in/withdrawal from Afghanistan. Not too many people have wondered if General Leslie has not taken aim at some of his favorite targets, the levithans of Startop. To my mind the only way savings in the numbers touted can be achieved is if a combination of the two is used along with judicious paring in other areas. Mind you, it would help if people at all levels could concentrate at what is important. Look how the reintroduction of the former service titles began to get mired down in calling cards and shoulder titles.

As one of the few members here who served in the old CFHQ, I recall that the merging of that headquarters with the DM's staff into NDHQ kicked off considerable bloat and empire building. I submit that this is a characteristic of organizations that are created to solve problems, real or imagined. The circa 1973 version resulted from a management study to resolve the issue of the MND receiving conflicting advice from the CF and the DND. The MND and I guess the PCO apparently were not comfortable with exercising executive authority to resolve issues and instead papered over the conflicts.

Bang on from where I sat, too. I didn't highlight PCO because I'm not sure what the Clerk (Gordon Robertson who, from what I understand, was not averse to exercising authority) thought - except that, even way back then the general mistrust of military management was, evidently, growing. Dextraze was the CDS back then - I recall a lecture when we were at the staff college that both informed and troubled me. He explained that an inordinate amount of his time was spent with e.g. back-bench MPs who wanted DND to clear their cottage lots (maybe that (the QC Liberal caucus) where Raymond Lavigne (who was an MP, albeit much later) got his ideas) but Dextraze had a Churchillian streak: he tried to interfere with his 'good ideas' where he had no technical competence and not much executive 'reason,' either.

Re: Ibbitson's article - I think that Alan Williams is right, no champion = no action. (Even a stopped clock had to be right twice a day, Williams does understand the bureaucracy.) That's why Leslie leaked it to (almost) everyone; he hopes there will be some public support which might drive the MND to some action.

And, of course, 'Buzz' Nixon was riding high in those days and see here and here for more on the topic.

Finally: it is possible, even desirable, to impose a flat 15% across the board - every single office, every single rank and trade, civvie and military - cut to NDHQ and do less than 1.5% harm. Six months after a harsh, even draconian cut NDHQ will, in fact, work (if that's the right word) better. Don't worry about organization or anything else: just slash and then slash again, ruthlessly. The survivors will "re-org on the objective" and get own with the work that needs doing. 

 

[The Anti-Royal]

"But with its author, Lieutenant-General Andrew Leslie, leaving the military next month, that report’s future is very much in doubt."

Very nice.  After the poo is tossed . . .

 

[Old Sweat]

The devil is in the details of imposing a cut, especially at the higher levels. It can be done but it requires a bloody-binded b.st.rd to pull it off. Probably even better, it requires two of them, one military and one civilian. It also requires adult supervision to ensure cuts are applied uniformly. Well, that probably ain't going to happen.

Two Jadex stories, one good, one not so much. Against all sort of opposition he re-introduced the Junior NCO Course by grabbing then Col Don Holmes in the mess and telling him to do it. When Don asked him what he wanted in it, Jadex exploded and told him not to be so f...... stupid; they both knew what was in the Junior NCO Course and to get on with it. On the other hand, there was a helicopter crash in Petawawa in which one of the pilots lost his lower left arm. Jadex visited him in hospital and in response to his query, promised him that he could stay in the CF and keep on flying. The pilot was released medically. I don't have all the facts, and maybe the lad decided to pursue other options, but that has always bothered me.

I agree that he tended to shoot from the hip far too often, especially in areas where there were long term implications. He authorized the re-introduction of Air Command based on an emotional appeal, not on a logical analysis.

Back to the present, even a 15% cut in NDHQ will not produce the scale of savings proposed in the Leslie plan. This suggests that he was posturing or there is something we are not being told, or maybe his real objective was less, and he aimed high to hit low. Did anybody with some knowledge of the real cost figures do an independent check of his numbers? Hello, DAP.

 

[Edward Campbell]

As Fibber Muldoon once said, "pink slips and running shoes" for masses of bureaucrats, grey suited and uniformed alike:

Source: The Globe and Mail[/i]

 

[Dissident]

This suggests that he was posturing or there is something we are not being told, or maybe his real objective was less, and he aimed high to hit low.

That was my thought when I saw the 1b figure on tv today. Leslie leaks the number (with or without the PMO's approval). Then when Harper slashes "only" $500 millions he still looks like a good guy for cutting only half of what even a military guy suggested.

 

[Journeyman]

That was my thought when I saw the 1b figure on tv today. Leslie leaks the number (with or without the PMO's approval). Then when Harper slashes "only" $500 millions he still looks like a good guy for cutting only half of what even a military guy suggested.

Although the 'all things Harper = evil' crowd would respond with, "even the military says they could 'do without' $1B, but Harper the war-monger only cut $500M...taking food from the mouths of starving Toronto NDP-voters...." 

 

[Kirkhill]

One of the problems to which LGen Leslie alluded is the 'tasks' or programmes or policies imposed upon DND (and other government departments) which bring with them a requirement to report at a very high level which seems to automatically require a flag/general officer or a civilian EX with, of course, an appropriate staff of captains/colonels, commanders/lieutenant colonels and so on, including a bevy of ***, sergeants and CRs.

We cannot tell the government (or the policy centre (Privy Council Office)) "F_ck off! Rude message follows," but we can do menial tasks with relatively small, low ranked staffs. (I suspect we would actually raise the morale of the flag/general officer corps if we fired a bunch of 'em and gave their 'jobs' to lieutenant commanders/majors.)

Am I reading you right here ERC?  A contributing factor to the number of GOFOs is that our own civilian mandarins (and allied GOFOs) might get their noses bent out of shape if we sent a mere Sgt/Killick to brief them in?

 

[The Bread Guy]

That was my thought when I saw the 1b figure on tv today. Leslie leaks the number (with or without the PMO's approval).

We will hear VERY shortly (or we would have heard already) if PMO is not pleased with this leak, which will also add to the tea leaf reading.

 

[Kirkhill]

The Pl HQ is just that.....the Comd, Pl 2 I/C, LAV crew and Signaller.

The Weapons Det is commanded, correct me if I am wrong, by a Sgt....it is in reality a section of its own.

Go you one better - Make the LAV the Wpns Dets veh.  When sans-LAVs the LAV crew belongs to the Wpns Det Comdr.

The Pl HQ is the Comd, 2 I/C and Signaller with Medic Attached.

HQ grabs space in available transport