Divining the right role, capabilities, structure, and Regimental System for Canada's Army Reserves

[dapaterson]

But then we have a problem: the standing force (full-time force) therefore presumably needs a bias towards sustainment functions, as those are skills that we need at short notice.  The pointy-end forces can be smaller in number (in the standing force) as we will generally be able to surge from the force in waiting (part time force) for such deployments.

That's turning the current thinking on its head.

 

[McG]

But then we have a problem: the standing force (full-time force) therefore presumably needs a bias towards sustainment functions, as those are skills that we need at short notice.  The pointy-end forces can be smaller in number (in the standing force) as we will generally be able to surge from the force in waiting (part time force) for such deployments.

That's turning the current thinking on its head.

That it does, but it is the direction that we need to be thinking.

 

[George Wallace]

I am not promoting the maintaining of a "Regular Force and a Primary Reserve Force".  I am proposing a total restructure into one entity as opposed to two........ a Hillier Hellyer's Unification Part II.    >

 

[dapaterson]

I am not promoting the maintaining of a "Regular Force and a Primary Reserve Force".  I am proposing a total restructure into one entity as opposed to two........ a Hillier's Unification Part II.    >

Hillier built new commands; it's Hellyer that unified...

 

[Kirkhill]

That it does, but it is the direction that we need to be thinking.

Agreed with both DAP and MCG and George

Which is why I raised the Swedish model and have raised the Danes, the USMC, USAR and USNG in the past.

Somebody was asking in another thread about what gunners do when they aren't training or on deployment - and got all the usual answers.

Not all trained personnel need to be on strength all the time.  Many of them could be returned to the civilian world on a hard return spring.

And the training for the pointy end doesn't have to be multi years. 

Even with the current intake of some 5000 PYs per year, if all of them received their 3 months basic training and then half of them chose a full time career while the other half chose a reserve career then the reserve pool, if operated on the basis of the USMC with an 8 year obligation, would supply a trained pool of 10,000 bodies liable for call-up*.

*Regardless of their employer's opinion on the subject. The contract is with the reservist and not the employer.  It is up to the reservist to find employment commensurate with his prior obligation to the Crown.  Equally it is up to the Crown to offer a package that makes the restrictions on civilian occupation worth the agony.  The Americans do this by offering a really attractive package of benefits (Education, mortgages, grants, insurances....as well as pay)  You have to pay people who are "on call".  You just don't have to pay them as much.  But if you are paying them then they are obligated to you.

If you only pay them when they show up for work then you are obligated to them.

 

[Old Sweat]

I may be talking out of my butt here and I am not up to speed on any recent amendments to the appropriate sections of the NDA, but Canadian governments even in wartime have been loath to use compulsory call up of reservists for service. This is doubly so for overseas service and in September 1939 when the Mobile Force was mobilized under Defence Scheme Three, the soldiers actually had to volunteer twice. The first was when they enlisted and the second was to agree to serve overseas.

This explains in part the lack of job protection legislation.

In 1866 when the QOR were call up to counter the Fenian invasion, a number of the officers chose not to report as they were professors at the University of Toronto and they had to supervise examinations. In 1885 when the 90th Winnipeg Rifles were called up to counter Riel and company, a number of additional men had to be hastily enlisted, as some employers refused to allow their employees time off to proceed on active service, or would let them go, but their jobs would not be waiting when they returned. Two early examples I have come across and I am sure there are others.

 

[George Wallace]

Hillier built new commands; it's Hellyer that unified...

Opps.....Correction .....Hellyer Unification Part II.....  [

 

[Kirkhill]

I may be talking out of my butt here and I am not up to speed on any recent amendments to the appropriate sections of the NDA, but Canadian governments even in wartime have been loath to use compulsory call up of reservists for service. This is doubly so for overseas service and in September 1939 when the Mobile Force was mobilized under Defence Scheme Three, the soldiers actually had to volunteer twice. The first was when they enlisted and the second was to agree to serve overseas.

This explains in part the lack of job protection legislation.

In 1866 when the QOR were call up to counter the Fenian invasion, a number of the officers chose not to report as they were professors at the University of Toronto and they had to supervise examinations. In 1885 when the 90th Winnipeg Rifles were called up to counter Riel and company, a number of additional men had to be hastily enlisted, as some employers refused to allow their employees time off to proceed on active service, or would let them go, but their jobs would not be waiting when they returned. Two early examples I have come across and I am sure there are others.

Old Sweat.

I am not talking about compulsory service call ups.  That is a horse of a different colour.

I am talking about a contractual obligation for the reservist to show up for an alloted number of days each year, for a limited number of years to support collective training (ammunition numbers, truck drivers, riflemen, machine gunners - most Corporal-Private positions).  In exchange the soldier gets an annual stipend and an assortment of other benefits.

In addition, the soldier would be liable for call up.  If the government ever got round to it.

The Afghanistan type soldiers would continue to be a mixture of Regular Force personnel and others, including Reservists, who volunteer for short term contracts.

 

[George Wallace]

Old Sweat.

I am not talking about compulsory service call ups.  That is a horse of a different colour.

I am talking about a contractual obligation for the reservist to show up for an alloted number of days each year, for a limited number of years to support collective training (ammunition numbers, truck drivers, riflemen, machine gunners - most Corporal-Private positions).  In exchange the soldier gets an annual stipend and an assortment of other benefits.

In addition, the soldier would be liable for call up.  If the government ever got round to it.

The Afghanistan type soldiers would continue to be a mixture of Regular Force personnel and others, including Reservists, who volunteer for short term contracts.

How about....Remove "Reservist" and replace with "member".  Remove "Regular Force member" and replace with "member".  Then differentiate three Pay Scales; Full-time Deployed; Full-time Domestic; and Part-time Domestic.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Never gonna happen, and the only thing it would change is giving (what is now) a class b reservist a pay raise. 

Again, you are proposing changing the entire CAF for the benefit of the PRES, most of which only parades a % of the 32 parade days a year or whatever it is now.

I get the same pay and AIRCRA when I am home or deployed, I get theatre benefits based on FSP points, along with HA and RA levels.  Now we should change the entire CF pay system (the new one is being implemented this month for the reg force) to 'solve the PRES problems'?  This would be just one of many changes required for a "TOTAL FORCE" [remember the 8 CH tried this and it failed...] that would produce no tangible benefits IMO.  We'd still field the same number of full and part timers.  SO...why change anything that doesn't extend the 'tooth' ratio but would suck up even MORE money that is becoming scarce? 

 

[Kirkhill]

How about....Remove "Reservist" and replace with "member".  Remove "Regular Force member" and replace with "member".  Then differentiate three Pay Scales; Full-time Deployed; Full-time Domestic; and Part-time Domestic.

I think it is workable.

And I don't think it is just for the PRes benefit EITS.  I think it is for the Army's benefit, in particular the Combat Arms. 

I get that the RCAF and RCN are in a very different situation.  No matter if people are shooting at you or not you still have patrols to conduct and stuff to transport and ships and planes to maintain.  Same thing goes for armourers and mechanics in the Army.

But what is a gunner, or a rifleman, or an AT gunner supposed to do when there are no targets?

When the targets pop up we need them.  And we need a lot of them quickly.  But in the meantime they aren't getting much out of the Army and the Army isn't getting much out of them.  (Perhaps that could be worded better - sorry if offence was given to anybody - none intended.)

There is a need for a number of shooters to be on hand during peace time, and some of those should be deployed overseas to keep skills sharp, but there is very little justification for keeping a large, and expensive, standing force of riflemen in peacetime.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Building unicorn farms and selling unicorns to raise extra money would also benefit the CAF.  How likely is it to happen?

About as likely as getting rid of the Regular Force to benefit an even smaller 32 days paid a year Reserve Force. :nod:

 

[Kirkhill]

I don't think anybody is talking about eliminating the Regular Force.

But the Unicorn farm is something I could get behind.

 

[Haggis]

But the Unicorn farm is something I could get behind.

CFIA has strict regulations controling the breeding and sale of domesticated unicorns.  Also, international trade in unicorns is governed under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES).

Mods, perhaps this should be in it's own thread?

 

[Haggis]

There is a need for a number of shooters to be on hand during peace time, and some of those should be deployed overseas to keep skills sharp, but there is very little justification for keeping a large, and expensive, standing force of riflemen in peacetime.

Agreed, we will need shooters available on short notice in peacetime.  And, frankly, it doesn't matter what thier deployability status is (i.e. full time or part time "member") but it's important to remember that, aside from training, we, the CAF, don't get to decide when and where we go overseas to "keep skills sharp".  The government does.  And if they elect to keep us out of future overseas "skills maintenance" adventures then we are no further ahead.

 

[Brasidas]

Suppose that the Reserves were effectively gutted, particularly the army, with army positions reallocated primarily to Edmonton and Quebec City. Cadre and recruiting put in place and sustained to substantially expand the local units to absorb the positions.

Sharing the local equipment pool and facilities, with some expansion, does it become substantially more practical to cut the delta between reg force and reserve?

 

[MilEME09]

Sharing the local equipment pool and facilities, with some expansion, does it become substantially more practical to cut the delta between reg force and reserve?

I can't speak for others, however my unit has been forming a good partnership with 1 Service, they usually let us know of upcoming EX's well in advance and let us send anyone available to be dropped in. Those that go out have said it was excellent training value to work with their reg force counterparts, and it definitely cut that delta.

 

[The Bread Guy]

One option shared with Senators this week ...

The new Liberal government should massively expand the country's part-time military force and overhaul its mandate, a Senate committee heard Monday.

John Selkirk, a retired lieutenant-colonel and a member of the group Reserves 2000, said there should be at least 45,000 army reservists and their roles should be re-oriented towards to responding to domestic emergencies, including natural disasters and even cyberattacks.

He wouldn't speculate on how many air force and naval reservists the country might need.

Such an increase would be dramatic in light of the fact there are only 21,000 part-time members of all three branches of the military on the books at the moment, which is about 19 per cent less than their assigned strength.

The traditional role of reservists has been to fill out the ranks of regular force units headed overseas for operations and peacekeeping missions, but Selkirk said he believes future threats to the nation's security will come at home, in the form of terrorism and weather-related emergencies.

"Today, we feel the real threat to our way of life, if you wish, is a domestic threat and the disruption it would cause would require a tremendous amount of consequence management," he said.

"And although we have large security forces, they are nowhere near large enough to provide that consequence management on a 24/7 basis." ...

 

[Kirkhill]

Logistics!

A reserve (in the classical business sense as opposed to capitalized institutional sense) of transport and communications capable of operating in difficult environments, is the first priority.

The capability is the first thing the government reaches for in times of disaster or crisis.  Trucks and radios and people with boots and mukluks.

Those people need to understand, when they are engaged, that they are being hired to do mundane jobs under dangerous conditions, including when people are shooting at them.

The fact that some of them have the skills to backfill combat units and have the opportunity to shoot back at their tormentors, is a bonus.

Bandvagons, Kerax and Navistars over TAPVs and LAVs.  CB90s, AOPSs and Enforcers over CSCs.  And helicopters. Lots and lots of helicopters.

My priority kit lists for the Reserves:  Boots, Trucks and Radios.

 

[MilEME09]

My priority kit lists for the Reserves:  Boots, Trucks and Radios.

After those i'd say we need people to fill those boots. While I'll believe when I see it the government has hinted it wants to eventually expend the forces, and to do it cheaply would be to expand the reserves. Either by increasing authorized strength of units, reactivating units from the Supplementary ORBAT, or a combination of both. The infrastructure funds given out in the latest budget could allow DND to do some foresight into training ranges closer to reserve units, hangers for air Res at local airports, etc.. possibilities are endless if planned correctly.