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

[dapaterson]

[off topic: Reserve court-martials]

I can think of two, off the top of my head.  R v Balint, http://www.jmc-cmj.forces.gc.ca/en/2012/balint.page?, where "Prosecutorial discretion" meant that the defence's plea in bar was met by the prosecution with "Don't worry, we'll prove it during the trial", leaving the learned judge to conclude that he lacked jurisdiction over the accused.

The prosecutor submits that there are a number of bases upon which he will establish in evidence during the trial that the accused was subject to the Code of Service Discipline at the time of the alleged offence. He declined to specify one or more of the enumerated bases in subsection 60(1) as he claimed to be reserving the right of the prosecution to exercise its discretion. Whether this is or is not an area of prosecutorial discretion I need not decide because in my view the submission is simply not to the point. The opportunity to lead evidence that might satisfy the court as to its jurisdiction over the accused at the time of the alleged offence was given during the course of the plea in bar proceedings, and was declined. From an evidentiary point of view, I am left only with the terms of the charge itself.

The more amusing one was R v Byrne (tragically, it's old enough that it's no longer on the CMJ website).  Maj Byrne did not attend his own court martial, so the judge ordered him arrested and another charge was laid for failing to attend his own court martial.  During the court martial on the failure to attend charge, the same judge dismissed the charges as there was insufficient evidence that, as a class A reservist at the time, Maj Byrne was subject to the CSD when he was ordered arrested.

[/off topic: Reserve court-martials]

 

[FJAG]

[off topic: Reserve court-martials]

I can think of two, off the top of my head.  R v Balint, http://www.jmc-cmj.forces.gc.ca/en/2012/balint.page?, where "Prosecutorial discretion" meant that the defence's plea in bar was met by the prosecution with "Don't worry, we'll prove it during the trial", leaving the learned judge to conclude that he lacked jurisdiction over the accused.

The more amusing one was R v Byrne (tragically, it's old enough that it's no longer on the CMJ website).  Maj Byrne did not attend his own court martial, so the judge ordered him arrested and another charge was laid for failing to attend his own court martial.  During the court martial on the failure to attend charge, the same judge dismissed the charges as there was insufficient evidence that, as a class A reservist at the time, Maj Byrne was subject to the CSD when he was ordered arrested.

[/off topic: Reserve court-martials]

Glad to say that the Balint decision came after I retired. I have three comments on it. 1. Peter Lamont is a good judge 2. While it may seem obvious with 20/20 hindsight that the prosecutor should have led evidence, this is a rare circumstance and I can see why he might have declined to do so; and 3 It sure looks like there were far too many lawyers working this case. Since having gone to DMP and DDCS it has now become necessary to give new legal officers some trial experience by sitting as 'second' (and it appears 'third') seat on trials. The optics of having five lawyers sit on a trial though are really poor.

I don't recall R v Byrne and wish I could review it but it makes sense. I would think though that it was not a matter of insufficient evidence but a clear conclusion that the evidence proved that he was not subject to the CSD at the time. There was a considerable period of time where we legal officers were having a hard time convincing reserve COs that a reservist who was AWOA from his place of duty was at the time of the offence not subject to the CSD unless at that time he was in some way meeting one of the conditions of the s 60(1)(c).

Anyway while I've enjoyed this chat we've really gone quite far  ff topic: and should give the thread back to its lawful owners.

:cheers:

 

[McG]

So there is hope for the 3rd Div Mess Tin and Bicycle Repair Coy?

Maybe but, when it comes time to stand-up the div engrs, I anticipate an emotional bun-fight over who is entitled to the name of 3 FER.

Re the reservists with 20 years accumulated full-time work (who were friends of mine) let me simply say that they made their own beds. Each of them could have gone reg f but chose the route they did because they could not be posted or deployed or be subject to numerous matters they found didn't suit their lifestyle. In exchange they got a lower salary, no job security, and no pension. They were good at what they did but they were not the equivalent of their reg f counterparts who were subject to much more stringent  terms of service.

Is this a career path we want offered?  Someone who spends 20 years of full time service as a reservist but in organizations outside of the reserve is really neither a Reg F nor a Res F member; such a person really understands neither lifestyle and sitting in one job forever they really have more incommon with a civilian public servant (just in a uniform).  If that is what we want, why not hire the civilian?

Maybe Army Reserve career management needs to be done somewhere higher than the unit level.  The Navy does it at the national level, but Army needs could probably be satisfied by managing MCpl & Sgt at the brigade level while WO and up are managed at the division.  One of the outputs of this would be telling pers that "sorry, you have been hiding in that office for eight years, and you are not going back until you have spent some time in a unit."

On another note, I have found more than a handful of Class B positions that are really only required for three of thefive days they work (and of the seven days they are paid) each week.  In the Army Staff and throughout the RCAF, handfuls of Class A positions are established in otherwise fulltime units.  Maybe more such positions should be created to reduce the number of full time Class B and with the expectation that personnel employed in such positions would support thier home units on days that they do not sign-in to the "Class A day job."

 

[Canadian.Trucker]

Is this a career path we want offered?  Someone who spends 20 years of full time service as a reservist but in organizations outside of the reserve is really neither a Reg F nor a Res F member; such a person really understands neither lifestyle and sitting in one job forever they really have more incommon with a civilian public servant (just in a uniform).  If that is what we want, why not hire the civilian?

Maybe Army Reserve career management needs to be done somewhere higher than the unit level.  The Navy does it at the national level, but Army needs could probably be satisfied by managing MCpl & Sgt at the brigade level while WO and up are managed at the division.  One of the outputs of this would be telling pers that "sorry, you have been hiding in that office for eight years, and you are not going back until you have spent some time in a unit."

On another note, I have found more than a handful of Class B positions that are really only required for three of thefive days they work (and of the seven days they are paid) each week.  In the Army Staff and throughout the RCAF, handfuls of Class A positions are established in otherwise fulltime units.  Maybe more such positions should be created to reduce the number of full time Class B and with the expectation that personnel employed in such positions would support thier home units on days that they do not sign-in to the "Class A day job."

I agree with you to a point.  When you're talking about someone that has sat in a non-unit position for an extended period of time in the same position, they become stagnant and their creative thinking drops.  But lets not forget that one of the reasons for this boom of PRes Class B positions was that there weren't the RegF personnel to fill all the required positions.  Granted time has passed and that is no longer the case in all areas with our committment in Afghanistan being smaller and soon ceasing, but it's still something to consider.  And those PRes individuals that have been "hiding" in the office are in good company with their RegF buddies too, so career management needs to be reviewed for everyone.

Your final point about the time worked might look good on paper, but right now there is a cap on number of Class A days that a PRes individual can use in a fiscal year, and the idea of only paying someone 5/7 days of the week (unless they are on a weekend exercise) in a full time position will have that person walking away giving the finger.  Downsizing Class B positions is one thing, but making a have-not class is unacceptable and ethically wrong.

 

[dapaterson]

But lets not forget that one of the reasons for this boom of PRes Class B positions was that there weren't the RegF personnel to fill all the required positions. 

The issue was less "positions we can't fill" and more "I have money so I'll hire people to do things that may or may not be needed".  As work expands to fill available time, it became a self-licking ice cream cone that increased in size as it licked itself.

Indeed, I know of one person who exploited the relaxed annuitant rules to free up key positions for some of his Reg F proteges - "Release and come back as a full-time Reservist and I'll promote you"; then his hand-picked folks would be posted in behind the just released person. 

It was obvious that eventually the gravy train would stop; few of the senior leaders were willing to think about that or to work at creating sustainable models.  Attempts at analysis of full-time Reserve employment by rank and by occupation, its impact on units or its long-term sustainability were largely ignored.

 

[Canadian.Trucker]

The issue was less "positions we can't fill" and more "I have money so I'll hire people to do things that may or may not be needed".  As work expands to fill available time, it became a self-licking ice cream cone that increased in size as it licked itself.

Indeed, I know of one person who exploited the relaxed annuitant rules to free up key positions for some of his Reg F proteges - "Release and come back as a full-time Reservist and I'll promote you"; then his hand-picked folks would be posted in behind the just released person. 

It was obvious that eventually the gravy train would stop; few of the senior leaders were willing to think about that or to work at creating sustainable models.  Attempts at analysis of full-time Reserve employment by rank and by occupation, its impact on units or its long-term sustainability were largely ignored.

Very true.  The significant increase and availability of Class B positions over a period of time also meant that PRes individuals became used to the idea that Class B could be a long term career plan.  This causes significant quality of life concerns when after 6 years in a position and unexpected downsizing takes place that individual who was counting on being on Class B for the next 10+ years has to try and wiggle their way back into the civillian job market and their skill sets they possessed prior to Class B are not current.  I know that this would fall in the category of "their own fault", but when you're told your job is secure and then it turns out to be the exact opposite it messes with people's morale.  Changes happen and we all need to adapt, but the issue of full time employment for reservists is larger than the PRes itself, it's an issue that starts from the top down in all areas of the CAF.

 

[dapaterson]

I spent just over a decade on full-time Reserve service, split between two positions..  I kept my resumé current at all times, and was selective about the work I did - on two different occasions I rejected positions where I was promised promotions because the fit, in my opinion would not have been good.

And I always, always, always remembered that the only promise worth anything was the promise that they could terminate me in thirty days without reason or justification.

 

[McG]

Your final point about the time worked might look good on paper, but right now there is a cap on number of Class A days that a PRes individual can use in a fiscal year, and the idea of only paying someone 5/7 days of the week (unless they are on a weekend exercise) in a full time position will have that person walking away giving the finger.  Downsizing Class B positions is one thing, but making a have-not class is bunacceptable and ethically wrong.

I have suggested no such thing.  If someone is working five days a week then they should be full time.  However, if there is only three days of work then the person should only be working and getting paid three days a week.

If we (the Army) can afford to pay a year long Cl B, then we can afford to pay a more regular Cl A in lieu.  The restriction on number of days per reservist is our own creation.  On the Army staff, directors can authorize more days for their established Cl A. We just need to create a mechanism so that Cl A pay for training is protected against becoming Cl A pay for staff.

 

[Help Desk]

For some time now we have some very accurate reports within Monitor MASS that will answer any of your questions in relation to all Reserve employment. Check it out you will be amazed.

 

[Haggis]

The restriction on number of days per reservist is our own creation.

The restriction that a Reservist who works more than 12 consecutive days is to be placed on Class B is contained in CF Mil Pers Instr 20-04 and is CAF wide, not Army specific.  LFCA/4 Div has also placed a restriction that prohibits reservists from parading more than 16 days cumulative in any 30 day period.
[/quote]

 

[McG]

The restriction that a Reservist who works more than 12 consecutive days is to be placed on Class B is contained in CF Mil Pers Instr 20-04 and is CAF wide, not Army specific.  LFCA/4 Div has also placed a restriction that prohibits reservists from parading more than 16 days cumulative in any 30 day period.

We are not talking about Class A working more than 12 consecutive days in the quote you have taken.  We are talking about reservists working three full days to five half days every week in leiu of a Class B reservist.

I have seen a handful of examples of full-time reservists doing what is really a part-time work load.  This happens (in the cases that I have seen) because it is easier to higher Class B than to get a Class A for the time needed.

Paying 365 days when one only needs about 90 days of work is foolish and wasteful.  As you have pointed out, there is no CAF restriction against using Class A to fill such a requirement except those which are are created at lower levels of command (and even in the case the 4 Div restriction you cite, it would still be possible to employ a Class A to fill a weekly part-time requirement and still have days to attend to weekend training events).

 

[Rocky Mountains]

Giving the Reserves a vehicle such as the TAPV serves no useful purpose as it doesn't generate an actual capability and the Reserves have no way to support the vehicle.  People can dream all they want but need to be brought back down to reality.  The Reserves serve a useful purpose in that they provide bodies to beef up the Army in times of need but they don't generate capability as they have no actual cohesive structure.

So are U.S. National Guard F16 Squadrons useless?  The U.S. is committed to military reserves and half of overseas deployments seem to be reserves of one sort or another.  Canadians reserves have been gutted and re-gutted until there is nothing left to gut.  Then they are criticized for lack of capability.  The state of the reserves is deliberate and in no way the fault of the reserves.  Prior to 1940 the primary mission of the permanent force was to train the militia not fight wars.  It seems to have worked.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

So are U.S. National Guard F16 Squadrons useless?

This has relevance how?  The US has reserve Apache battalions.  We don't even have Apaches.  Comparing apples and asteroids here.

The U.S. is committed to military reserves and half of overseas deployments seem to be reserves of one sort or another.  Canadians reserves have been gutted and re-gutted until there is nothing left to gut. 

And there is your difference.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

So are U.S. National Guard F16 Squadrons useless?  The U.S. is committed to military reserves and half of overseas deployments seem to be reserves of one sort or another.  Canadians reserves have been gutted and re-gutted until there is nothing left to gut.  Then they are criticized for lack of capability.  The state of the reserves is deliberate and in no way the fault of the reserves.  Prior to 1940 the primary mission of the permanent force was to train the militia not fight wars.  It seems to have worked.

Bullcrap.  The Militia in Canada has been reduced to the state it is currently in for two reasons:

1) a Regular a Force which consistently misunderstands the unique challenges faced by reservists
2) Reserve Regimental Senates which have consistently, vocally and politically fought off any attempt to meaningfully update and change the structure of reserve units.  They are stuck in a mobilization mindset, which has led to Regimental HQs leading Platoons.

In the current state of affairs, the reserve force cannot be entrusted with complex kit.

 

[dapaterson]

Bullcrap.  The Militia in Canada has been reduced to the state it is currently in for two reasons:

1) a Regular a Force which consistently misunderstands the unique challenges faced by reservists
2) Reserve Regimental Senates which have consistently, vocally and politically fought off any attempt to meaningfully update and change the structure of reserve units.  They are stuck in a mobilization mindset, which has led to Regimental HQs leading understrength Platoons.

In the current state of affairs, the reserve force cannot be entrusted with complex kit.

FTFY

 

[OldSolduer]

In the current state of affairs, the reserve force cannot be entrusted with complex kit.

Now that its out there, and its true....some bright spark will think we need a company of LAVs in Winnipeg.

 

[MilEME09]

And issue the Reserves standard civilian vehicles.  They will support local training and be useful in local DomOps (Humanitarian and Disaster Relief Ops.)

MSVS and LUVW Milcot ring a bell, heck in our lot the only SMP vehicles we have left are a couple broken ML's, an LS, and one cargo HL. Also I will point directly to the Alberta floods when you say Dom ops and reserves, 90% we sat around and did shit all. If the reserves are to help in Dom ops we need equipment and the trades to help do things like restoring power.

 

[MilEME09]

Now that its out there, and its true....some bright spark will think we need a company of LAVs in Winnipeg.

yeap and then they'll rust for the most part and only get used one time a month, Only time I think the reserves need new kit is if its a CF wide capability issue like replacing our wreckers, or the LS. Rest of the time while even I can dream of one day using maybe a Bison once the Reg force stops using them I doubt it would happen. That said though for the benefit of augmentation Reserves especially techs should get the option of training on the kit the reg force uses so that if they plan on going over sea's they can work on all the kit.

 

[Journeyman]

...... do things like restoring power.

  :rofl:  Yet SMP vehicles are too complex....

 

[PuckChaser]

The reg force can barely afford to maintain and fuel the bison, why would we dump them on the reserves? It would bankrupt your unit after a weekend exercise.