Saving Money in the PRes (From: The Defence Budget)

[MilEME09]

Maybe not one but a team of clerks, and it probably would cost the same as that 1 major. Any way I think one issue with the PRes is we have no clear directive and identity in the grand picture of the CAF. Last briefing i got was "Well they want reserves to be 90% Dom ops, and 10% expeditionary ops, while the reg force will be the opposite" I would say the floods in Alberta proved that could never happen. If the PRes is to really go that route, then our training needs to go towards that as well. Which will require a different set of skills and different equipment for some PRes units.

 

[Journeyman]

Journeyman:  still want to leave this mess in the hands of a MCpl?

I know quite competent MCpls and I know painfully abysmal Majs; if they both have the backing of some Col and some BGen.....

But truth be told, I'd just as soon not get bogged down in this discussion at all, which is developing all of the hair-trigger responses as the "Relocate NDHQ" thread.

 

[Haggis]

But truth be told, I'd just as soon not get bogged down in this discussion at all, which is developing all of the hair-trigger responses as the "Relocate NDHQ" thread.

And this is developing into a tangent which could probably be it's own thread.

 

[pbi]

Maybe not one but a team of clerks, and it probably would cost the same as that 1 major. Any way I think one issue with the PRes is we have no clear directive and identity in the grand picture of the CAF. Last briefing i got was "Well they want reserves to be 90% Dom ops, and 10% expeditionary ops, while the reg force will be the opposite" I would say the floods in Alberta proved that could never happen. If the PRes is to really go that route, then our training needs to go towards that as well. Which will require a different set of skills and different equipment for some PRes units.

Be careful what you wish for... Find some old vet of the Militia in the 1960's and say "Snakes and Ladders" to him. Let me know how that goes.

 

[RADOPSIGOPACCISOP]

Maybe not one but a team of clerks, and it probably would cost the same as that 1 major. Any way I think one issue with the PRes is we have no clear directive and identity in the grand picture of the CAF. Last briefing i got was "Well they want reserves to be 90% Dom ops, and 10% expeditionary ops, while the reg force will be the opposite" I would say the floods in Alberta proved that could never happen. If the PRes is to really go that route, then our training needs to go towards that as well. Which will require a different set of skills and different equipment for some PRes units.

If that were the case, should the focus of the reserves shift from covering the wide variety of trades they do now to focusing more directly on trades like infantry, engineers, MSE, EGS Techs and heavy equipment.

As well maybe other jobs such as Powerline Technicians (to assist in reconstruction after natural disaster like the Ice storm), and maybe a type of "search and rescue lite" trade for providing assistance in ground search.

In the same mind, should we shift from a Bde setup to one more similar to the Dart? Joint-ier?

I would think the reserves would benefit from greater specialization, in a sense, lessening the breadth of expertise required.

When I was in the reserve one of the biggest problems I noticed was the short time period that the bulk of the reserves would serve. Typically 2 - 4 years, mostly for high school students who would get out once they got a job, or university/college students that would get out once they graduated.
I know in my current trade it takes at least 3 years fulltime before they become truly effective, the scope and complexity of what is expected of new members of the ACISS trade is intense. I know it's the same in all the trades, but perhaps the training ought to be refocused on the key essentials rather than cramming 6 months of training into 6 weeks?

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Where does the time, expertise and money come from?

You've got lots of grandiose ideas, but haven't said how you're going to pay for it and get everyone up to speed in their new 'tasks'.

 

[Old Sweat]

We used to do that sort of thing in the regular army as well, but we retained our warlike kit, unlike the reserves. (Money for the capital program in the army was so tight that the only way we were able to replace our Second World War 19 sets with the C42 family was by making the case that they would improve our capability to conduct post-nuclear strike re-entry operations.) The ropes and ladders stuff was a bit of diversion from the garrison routine for a regular army that, if the truth be known, did not train all that much, but had raised housekeeping, keeping the troops busy stuff to an art form.

To get back to the reserve augmenation issue, I am of the belief that at least part of it was in order to inject some recent operational experience, ie people who had been shot at, into the reserves. As the size and drain of the mission grew, the inclusion of reservists probably became more of a necessity than a nice to have.

 

[dapaterson]

I know of at least one Reg F BGen who stated (in an off the record chat) that the Army would have collapsed without the influx of Reservists to support the mission (both through deployments and by backfilling the institution).

 

[RADOPSIGOPACCISOP]

Where does the time, expertise and money come from?

You've got lots of grandiose ideas, but haven't said how you're going to pay for it and get everyone up to speed in their new 'tasks'.

Typically and idea is thought of first and debated before a full business plan and white paper is drafted. Brainstorming is the word.

1) Time - As far as time, I see it as saving time more than anything. If the goal is for the reserves to be 90% of the Dom ops and only 10% of the expeditionary ops then we ought to reorient our focus on that basis. My thoughts would be to strip the unnecessary parts out of the general training. Perhaps take those part of the training and create a supplementary course for people heading on expeditionary missions or for those who wish to in the future.
An example of this might be engineer (now this is based on my limited understanding of the engineer trade) might focus much more on the bridge construction, berm construction, earth moving and excavation, and destruction of buildings (like partially collapsed structures). The more expeditionary op focused parts of the trade (IEDs, mine clearing, and all the above domestic stuff while tactical), would be part of an expeditionary supplement that the person would take prior to deploying, or electively if they intended to go on expeditionary tasks in the future. Keep in mind, this is just an example of how this may work.

2) Expertise - Same as now, the reserves are trained by the individual training facilities, however the training be focused more on the essential information required for domestic operations. Some trades might be phased out entirely (ACCIS might be one of them). Some trades, such as Powerline might require a whole new trade startup and require hiring civilian contractors to instruct in the beginning stages. Search and Rescue lite might come from serving or retired SAR techs, civilian ground search specialists. Trade might also include urban search and rescue (like post earthquake collapsed building searches).

3) Money - May not cost more than what things currently cost. If it does, I would argue the money is better spent.

As far as the organization, moving away from the Bde setup (with more layers of CoC than an onion before you get to the few actual worker bees) and to more of a DART or even the original Domestic Response Company (DRC) plan they had 5ish years ago, before it got watered down.

 

[RADOPSIGOPACCISOP]

I know of at least one Reg F BGen who stated (in an off the record chat) that the Army would have collapsed without the influx of Reservists to support the mission (both through deployments and by backfilling the institution).

It definitely would have, any plan would have to allow the reserves to meet that same requirement. Don't let that be a reason to let the organization become stagnant however.

 

[George Wallace]

When I was in the reserve one of the biggest problems I noticed was the short time period that the bulk of the reserves would serve. Typically 2 - 4 years, mostly for high school students who would get out once they got a job, or university/college students that would get out once they graduated.
I know in my current trade it takes at least 3 years fulltime before they become truly effective, the scope and complexity of what is expected of new members of the ACISS trade is intense. I know it's the same in all the trades, but perhaps the training ought to be refocused on the key essentials rather than cramming 6 months of training into 6 weeks?

Once again you bring up the point that some Reservists serve three or four years and then get a civilian job and leave as being a complete waste of money.  What of the Regular Force member who serves three years, (or to the end of their first VIE) and gets out, having had even more money wasted on their training so that they can move on to greener pastures in a civilian job. 

Once again an illogical concept on your part, or perhaps just a major omission on your part, but still a serious flaw in your argument.

 

[McG]

Is this a thread about saving money, or are we duplicating this monster:  http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/24381.0.html

 

[RADOPSIGOPACCISOP]

Once again you bring up the point that some Reservists serve three or four years and then get a civilian job and leave as being a complete waste of money.  What of the Regular Force member who serves three years, (or to the end of their first VIE) and gets out, having had even more money wasted on their training so that they can move on to greener pastures in a civilian job. 

Once again an illogical concept on your part, or perhaps just a major omission on your part, but still a serious flaw in your argument.

Are you on a witch hunt against me or something?

You're going after me across a couple of threads now. I understand when it's a disagreement regarding a topic, but you seem to be personally going after me at this point.

 

[George Wallace]

Are you on a witch hunt against me or something?

Come on.  Answer the question put to you?  Who is the bigger waste of money: the Reg Force member who leaves after their first VIE or the student who works part-time in the Reserves?

 

[RADOPSIGOPACCISOP]

Come on.  Answer the question put to you?  Who is the bigger waste of money: the Reg Force member who leaves after their first VIE or the student who works part-time in the Reserves?

The bigger waste of money is the guy in the Reg Force, I don't think anyone is doubting that. The difference is there is a much higher number of people staying in for 25 years in the regular force than in the reserves. This is based on my personal experience, individual opinion or experience may vary.

 

[George Wallace]

The bigger waste of money is the guy in the Reg Force, I don't think anyone is doubting that. The difference is there is a much higher number of people staying in for 25 years in the regular force than in the reserves. This is based on my personal experience, individual opinion or experience may vary.

Indeed, individual opinion and experience will vary.  I would put it to you that your experience is not the norm and numbers are published to confirm it.  Meanwhile, you admit that the biggest waste of money is indeed the Reg Force member who Releases after their first VIE.  Compared to the number of Reservists who leave after only a few years, that waste (Reg Force) is still the largest.  You may be surprised to know that there are quite a few Reservists who have served and continue to serve well past 25 years.  Your argument is still invalid, in fact it may be argued that it would be better to disband the Regular Force along that line of thought.

You have displayed a great lacking in your experience and knowledge on this matter.  You have not acknowledged the 'raison d'etre' of the Reserves as put forward by other more knowledgeable posters in this thread.  Another point that I will add, is that one of the main roles of the Reserves is to augment the Regular Force at home and abroad.  The Reserves are also a great recruitment tool and training tool for the Regular Force bringing in people off the street, training them and then watching them CT to the Regular Force.  This is at a great cost saving to the Regular Force, hiring 'Skilled' members and accounts for a great number of those students you claim join the Reserves and then quit.

 

[RADOPSIGOPACCISOP]

Indeed, individual opinion and experience will vary.  I would put it to you that your experience is not the norm and numbers are published to confirm it.  Meanwhile, you admit that the biggest waste of money is indeed the Reg Force member who Releases after their first VIE.  Compared to the number of Reservists who leave after only a few years, that waste (Reg Force) is still the largest.  You may be surprised to know that there are quite a few Reservists who have served and continue to serve well past 25 years.  Your argument is still invalid, in fact it may be argued that it would be better to disband the Regular Force along that line of thought.

You have displayed a great lacking in your experience and knowledge on this matter.  You have not acknowledged the 'raison d'etre' of the Reserves as put forward by other more knowledgeable posters in this thread.  Another point that I will add, is that one of the main roles of the Reserves is to augment the Regular Force at home and abroad.  The Reserves are also a great recruitment tool and training tool for the Regular Force bringing in people off the street, training them and then watching them CT to the Regular Force.  This is at a great cost saving to the Regular Force, hiring 'Skilled' members and accounts for a great number of those students you claim join the Reserves and then quit.

I'm glad your experience with the reserves was a more positive one. Obviously your perspective is deeply held and I'm not going to try to convince you otherwise.

My experience leads me to think that the reserves, as they are currently organized, are not delivering the value for money that I would expect. My expectations are different from yours.

At this point in time, I'm going to kindly ask that you stop constantly replying on my every post and accusing me of not having the lofty experience or impressive credentials that are demanded of an internet forum user.

 

[George Wallace]

At this point in time, I'm going to kindly ask that you stop constantly replying on my every post and accusing me of not having the lofty experience or impressive credentials that are demanded of an internet forum user.

Are you suggesting YOU stifle my freedoms to point out flaws in your thinking?

Just read what I quoted you having posted above and then reflect on your post.  It would seem that you have the impression that ONLY you are entitled the freedoms of posting on a private forum that doesn't belong to you.  Are some of my posts hitting the mark more than yours, and that is unacceptable to you? 

 

[RADOPSIGOPACCISOP]

Are you suggesting YOU stifle my freedoms to point out flaws in your thinking?

Just read what I quoted you having posted above and then reflect on your post.  It would seem that you have the impression that ONLY you are entitled the freedoms of posting on a private forum that doesn't belong to you.  Are some of my posts hitting the mark more than yours, and that is unacceptable to you?

No, because here's the thing:  you are a moderator. Regardless of whatever your signature says, as a moderator you should be fostering forums that encourage people to debate. You are doing the opposite, you are seemingly on a mission to chase away anyone new. Here's a quote from something in another thread earlier:

RADOPSIGOPACCISOP

You really are bizarre.  Your logic in recent topics escapes me.  You sure you have any idea of what the heck you are talking about?  It really doesn't seem that way to me.  This is only one of your more illogical statements, and so out in left field to really not even be considered valid in any way, shape or form.  You comments are those of a civilian with no knowledge of the military, or that of a Pte who has not the smarts to absorb what was being taught him/her.

Fact of the matter is, if I were a civilian, or even "a Pte who has not the smarts to absorb what was being taught him/her" on what planet would I not be turned away from participating in that debate, even if my own thoughts or opinions were not as well developed as yours? You know what, I'm not a civilian, or Pte. I have been posted to the NCR (which related to the thread of that last quote), I was I the reserves, so you know what, I do have an experience and perspective on these topics. You don't have to agree with them, or even acknowledge them, but to pretend to "moderate" these forums and continue to talk down in the same condescending manner to new forum members is a joke.

Think maybe for a second that someone else might have a different experience that you never did, and then listen to what they say. In my trade we call that turning on your squelch. Otherwise you're just making white noise.

 

[ArmyRick]

I am not staff member of moderator BUT long time poster. Here is my freindly advice to some people (won't say who). If you want to come on here and post some ideas be prepared to back them up and explain or go into depth in such a manner as to win over intelligently the other members...or be prepared to get flame broiled here. Thats army.ca life.

Would love to see much more grander explanations and specifics on organizations, training (individual and collective) and career prgression for your future concepts of the P Res. Not just abstract ideas. Please, please, do list your mil experience so we know if we should take you seriously or not.