09/10 Budget Impact on PRes - Unit stand-downs, Class B Freeze, and so on!

[Otis]

Another problem that seems to have happened THIS year as I understand it ...

For the last few years, people have gotten used to not budgeting properly ... knowing that Treasury Board will "top up" money at the end of the year. This year they've said enough is enough. The CF got the biggest budget it's had in years, and the TB was unwilling to go higher or give more.

Having said that, I agree with Vern ... the Army shouldn't have had to pay costs for A'stan out of it's own Op budget all these years.

WRT the arguments Res vs Reg ... I've been both, I've worked with both, I've done Class A, Class B ... There are useful people in ALL areas, there are useless people in ALL areas. No one 'group' can be wholly blamed for the current situation. Every individual is going to judge based on their current situation. "I can't get what I want because the damn RegF hasn't filled the Admin billet in my unit" ... "I can't get that lazy reservist to show up even for the limited training he's supposed to show up for" ... "Why can't I keep the class B job I've been doing for the last 8 years"

We've got a job to do ladies and gents ... it's going to take all of us to get through it and get it done ... we're not getting any more from Ottawa by bitching about it ... let's not start fighting among ourselves and make it HARDER!

On top of that, if it's going to come down to ME to be the reasonable, peacemaking one ... we're all in some REAL trouble!!!

Otis

 

[dapaterson]

Pri 5: Reserve units.  Pri 6: Garrisons etc.  Last time I checked, Pri 6 units were filled more than Pri 5.

(1) The CF's military leadership hasn't treated this like a war; why, then, should the political leadership?  Since 2001, how many service members have we sent on year-long Dari or Pastu courses?  Zero.  How many have we sent on two-year long Korean courses, so they can fill staff college exchange billets?  We're a business as usual CF.  No need to change.  If we ignore things long enough they'll return to nrmal - look, 2011 is just around the corner...

(2) The Army has yet to grapple with its tooth to tail ratios.  Dedicated 2nd line CSS units are just that - 2nd line CSS, not base support augmentees.  The Army leadership (generally) doesn't want to take the time to understand CSS - and doesn't want to admit that a peacetime force will be oriented towards the skillset heavy CSS trades vice the Cbt Arms.


Cdn Aviator:

There are unmotivated Res and Reg F pers both (walk around a HQ some time and play "spot the blob with no fitness testing since the '90s" - I think the Reg/Res ratios are pretty much proportionate). The whole Reg F doesn't hate the Reserves; the whole Res F doesn't hate the Regs.  I think sometimes we do let things get out of hand in finger-pointing.

But when the Army arbitrarily cuts 10% of the Reserve pay budget in halfway through the year, after the summer where over 1/3 of the money is spent, it's hard not to be upset.  The army is taking about 3/8 of its cuts directly from Reserve pay (but still is proceeding with other dubious initiatives - $1M for the Army Run, who knows how much for 1 Can Div's glorious resurrection...).  A question I was asked by a subordinate: "Where are the big-brained high speed people who are supposed to be planning things?"

Perhaps the biggest problem with the current reductions is this: poor communications.  A PAff LCol should not be speaking on this to the press.  The Army Commander made a decision with significant impacts - he should be the one to stand up and talk, not slough it off to a low-ranked staff wanker.  (Note: by definition, all PAff staff are wankers, Reg or Res)


In short, be they Reg or Res, we need the institution's leaders to display some leadership.

 

[DjC]

Today's citizen.

http://communities.canada.com/ottawacitizen/blogs/defencewatch/archive/2010/01/06/army-reserve-training-takes-brunt-of-dnd-fiscal-adjustments.aspx

Any new word (asides from the article) on the hiring freeze? I applied in October but have yet to hear anything.

 

[McG]

O F also stated enough times that he respects fully and completely the res troops who've stepped up, or was I the only one who read that?

I do not remember reading this, I might have missed it.

I also missed what you say he stated.

He has said it in other threads and in this thread:

• ... as I have said before, I appreciate the Reserves who have stepped up to the plate and deployed overseas...without them under our present deployment modus operandi, carrying out the mandate of the Government of Canada would not be possible.

• I'm not interested in hearing we could not function overseas without the contribution from our deployed Reservists...and I am certainly not knocking the contribution they have made...but a Reg Force fit for purpose would not need to draw on reserve augmentation.

As far as I'm concerned, he's clarified it by accepting what's been stated without rebuttal.

I think he has been misrepresented in some of the counter points put to him.  I do not believe he has been attacking either Reservists or their contribution to the current war effort.  He has, however, derided the fact that the Regular Force should have been able to handle the Afghanistan mission without the need for a massive reserve lifeline.

It seems to be Old Fart's opinion that this failing on the part of the Regular Force is the result of a resource shortfall.

Imagine you are a parachutist and both your primary and reserve chutes are getting a little worn & of questionable reliability.  If you can only only have the resources to fix one (and for the sake of the analogy, not jumping is not an option), do you put your money into the primary or the reserve? 

Fortunately, the Army is a more complicated beast than the parachute analogy.  Niether the Reg F nor the PRes are all-or-nothing entities, and so trade-offs are possible (ie: lessen capacities in some places to reinforce in others).  At the same time, there is probably enough waste inside the system that we are not in a position either Reg F or PRes need to be sacrificed to sustain the other. 

As Sun Tzu said: "To be prepared everywhere, is to be weak everywhere."  This applies as much to tactical disposition on the ground as it does to strategic resource allocation. 

 

[Jarnhamar]

Imagine you are a parachutist and both your primary and reserve chutes are getting a little worn & of questionable reliability.  If you can only only have the resources to fix one (and for the sake of the analogy, not jumping is not an option), do you put your money into the primary or the reserve? 

But do you use material from the reserve chute to fix the main one then jump without the reserve?  ;D

I understand what you're saying about OF.
He's not taking credit away from the reserves persay who have served overseas he just feels that the money is better spent on the regular force with a view to them being able to do the job without augmentation.

The problem is that won't happen and the regular force will depend on reserve augmentation for a longtime therefore money needs to be put into the reserves in order for the regularforce TO accomplish the mission.

 

[Dissident]

Imagine you are a parachutist and both your primary and reserve chutes are getting a little worn & of questionable reliability.  If you can only only have the resources to fix one (and for the sake of the analogy, not jumping is not an option), do you put your money into the primary or the reserve? 

I am no parachutist, but yes, you put your money in the primary.

However, to use your analogy what I am weary of is the reserve (chute) not having enough money to be maintained and fall apart completly(again?).

Would it not be a shame to lose everything we (the reserve) have learned lately? Especially if it is a consequence of the reserve taking a disproportionately bigger budget hit?

The problem is that won't happen and the regular force will depend on reserve augmentation for a longtime therefore money needs to be put into the reserves in order for the regular force TO accomplish the mission.

Are there not also tasks where the reserve exceed beyond their training? Do I not keep hearing that the reserve does well in reconstruction or CIMIC?

 

[blacktriangle]

Why don't we just downsize the Regs to CANSOFCOM, 3x Inf Bn, and 1x Armd, Arty, Engr regiment each? Keep a slightly larger CSS tail like DAP alluded to in his post. Never deploy more than a company or a combat team at a time, and deploy them as a part of US or Brit units. Get rid of all the fatties, and get rid of the hundreds of senior officers that command desks. Select only the best applicants. We could at least have fully manned units then. Keep the reserves, and hold them to a good standard. Only Class A and B under 180 Svc for training and courses. Get all the best kit for the troops.

Then I'm sure we can get rid of Class B over 180 days, right?

Anyways I'm going to get ready for the danger close fire, but let's be honest, the way we are organized right now sucks.

We should really should focus on our sovereignty and a specific area that we can excel at as part of a larger international force. MCG's quote of Sun Tzu is completely what I am talking about. However, I do think that both the Reserves AND the Regs need to be completely shaken up to do this. We have to determine what we want to be, and match it with something that we can actually AFFORD to be.

Ok I'm in the shell scrape now, popnfresh out!

 

[Jed]

Why don't we just downsize to the point of the entire CF working out of maybe 4 or 5 Bases? Why does Canada need the CF anyway? We have the US near by and I'm sure they can look after Canada's interest? Let's get real, Popnfresh, I'm sure the Canadian people want a CF that provides more capability than the establishment you have put foward.

Popped a flare to mark your defensive position, lol.

 

[Monsoon]

Or better yet, do what the Navy did during the 1930s and go to an all-reserve structure. Train the reservists only in dress, drill and deportment for Ceremonial Guard duty. In the event of a crisis or invasion, use them to put up the "KEEP CALM and CARRY ON" posters and organize an orderly transition of power to whoever feels like assuming responsibility for our national debt.

To be honest, I'm afraid there may be a surprising number of Canadians who do only want that from their military.

 

[George Wallace]

Imagine you are a parachutist and both your primary and reserve chutes are getting a little worn & of questionable reliability.  If you can only only have the resources to fix one (and for the sake of the analogy, not jumping is not an option), do you put your money into the primary or the reserve? 

You of course have to keep the Main maintained, however, come the day that the Main fails, and the Reserve is no longer there.........All part of the "Peace Dividend" that we have witnessed since the mid 1950's.  We have saved the Main and sacrificed the Reserve.  Once that is done, cuts will then continue to the Main and we have no chute to safely perform the task.

Fortunately, the Army is a more complicated beast than the parachute analogy.  Niether the Reg F nor the PRes are all-or-nothing entities, and so trade-offs are possible (ie: lessen capacities in some places to reinforce in others).  At the same time, there is probably enough waste inside the system that we are not in a position either Reg F or PRes need to be sacrificed to sustain the other. 

Indeed.

 

[armyvern]

I had a visit just prior to Christmas by someone here in the midst of the CFRG world ...

Said person advised that the CF Recruiting system had done an absolutely awesome job of recruiting this year - early on meeting the numbers to replace forecasted releases and the "bell-curve" of those unforecasted releases. Signing up what the CF required for the FY ... only they also stated that we then got thrown a huge 'wrench' because after signing up all those news pers ... our nation the found themselves in the midst of a nice little thing we'll call an "economic depression" ... ergo, they went on to say that the "bell curve of unforecasted releases" just DID NOT happen, but the recruiting to replace them was already looked after. So, now we've got 2 pers to pay wages to. The recruited pers and those pers who didn't pull pin as expected - that kicks a shitload of dollars out of the SWE envelope no?

We've got ZERO choice but to pay that SWE and the money has to come from somewhere (because the good old feds ain't going to pay us a dime more on our budget to pay wages to "overage" amounts of personnel we hired (not that we hired them with a minset to 'go over') before the economy took a dive and pin-pulling pers didn't act as expected.

Perhaps, somewhere out there, this move on B Class was deemed "the quick and easy way (admittedly, not the best way)" to find that SWE money now required over and above what we thought we'd have to forkout.

I dunno, but that's my .02 cents worth.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I'll apologise to Old Fart. I obviously missed his intent and wasn't able to fathom everything he said, as I don't read every thread here. I'll retire to the bedlam that is the giant clusterfuck of a Reserve shutdown and concentrate on maintaining whatever Unit cohesion remains, for the future.

 

[BlueJingo]

...CF Recruiting system had done an absolutely awesome job of recruiting this year - early on meeting the numbers to replace forecasted releases and the "bell-curve" of those unforecasted releases.....

Does this mean we get a pat on the back    or that we get a tsk tsk tsk....  :tsktsk:
I personally am happy we made our SIP, especially for some of the red/black trades (those who we have so few of that are in danger of loosing all experienced personnel)

But I am not sure how these 2 budgets coincide? I think it's a stretch to assume that a Class B pers Freeze has anything to do with the Reg F retention rates increasing. I thought that the Reg F always has room in their budget for their increase of numbers... Maybe i'm just too low in the ladder to understand these huge concepts! 

 

[BlueJingo]

...Get rid of all the fatties....

:rofl:

 

[armyvern]

Does this mean we get a pat on the back    or that we get a tsk tsk tsk....  :tsktsk:
I personally am happy we made our SIP, especially for some of the red/black trades (those who we have so few of that are in danger of loosing all experienced personnel)

But I am not sure how these 2 budgets coincide? I think it's a stretch to assume that a Class B pers Freeze has anything to do with the Reg F retention rates increasing. I thought that the Reg F always has room in their budget for their increase of numbers... Maybe i'm just too low in the ladder to understand these huge concepts! 

It means that we have 2 personnel to pay for the remainder of the FY - whereas we were only expecting to have to pay one. One was recruited (thus has to be paid) to replace the the guy they expected to pull pin in an unforecasted manner this past fall (or put in release VR for Jan of this year - seems to be the big month for them) - but that guy did NOT pull pin after all ... and now we get to pay him too!!

Thus, we're paying for double pers for those "bell curve" of unforecasted releases which were expected to occur in fall with release dates in Jan/Feb/Mar.

Both those pers have to get paid out of THIS years money. As far as he stated ... we're not talking nickles and dimes ... we're talking hundreds of pers who did not, as expected, fire in their releases this fall for the new year. Their replacements were already signed up however.

Do you realize how much money those "hundreds of extra people we're now paying" cost? Every dime of it money that the CF "had no choice but to find somewhere". We MUST pay the troops.

 

[BlueJingo]

Yes, thanks...
... I guess there can be too much of a good thing....(new recruits)
I still say the CDS should play LottoMax to solve the budget crisis.

 

[armyvern]

Yes, thanks...
... I guess there can be too much of a good thing....(new recruits)
I still say the CDS should play LottoMax to solve the budget crisis.

As long as he agrees to a 50/50 of all winnings with me - I say Giddy-up!!  ;D

 

[CorporalMajor]

  Unfortunately I see it far too often in young(er) former Reservists who now treat their past peers with contempt.

I notice this too, and I still don't understand it.

 

[Journeyman]

Unfortunately I see it far too often in young(er) former Reservists who now treat their past peers with contempt.

I notice this too, and I still don't understand it.

Ever dealt with any "born again" Christians? They can be a pretty irritating lot too. 

 

[CorporalMajor]

I notice this too, and I still don't understand it.
Ever dealt with any "born again" Christians? They can be a pretty irritating lot too. 

LOL.  I can understand that way of looking at it; if it turns out my former unit looks bad next to my new one so be it..  what I don't get is shunning the soldier who I once worked alongside / was freinds with.

Enough of the P Res / Reg F debate..

The reallocation has hit my unit pretty hard.  We are not permitted to sign in for anything - period - until the new FY without our Bde Comd's direct auth.  CL Bs at the unit are gone.  Our senior leaders are meeting up unpaid to discuss how we can mitigate the problem.  I intend to show up at the OR when needed, as I am already being paid via another CL B.  Others won't be able to for liability reasons.

This is extremely demoralizing for my peers and I am trying to make light of a positive situation by gathering us juniors together for socializing and to keep connected.  I agree that merely complaining about the situation is going to change nothing, so I will do something about it instead.

Myself, I'm wondering how much worse this can get, for both the Land Res and the rest of the military.  This is after all my career.  I'm optimistic because the CF is in a better place, PR-wise than the mid 90s, but I'm still bracing for the worst.  The email I read from my COC, even hinted at potential releases and transfers.