• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

C3 Howitzer Replacement

CBH99 said:
Aren't civilian careers already protected under existing legislation?

I remember during the Afghan war hayday, many reservists were deployed, and there was legislation in place to protect those careers.



Thankfully, most emergency services agencies didn't need the ultimatum, and many supported their members even while they were deployed.

Alberta for example only legally entitles us to 20 days per year. After that it has to be negotiated with the employer. I have a soldier who had to use his vacation for the next two years just to get time off for his DP1. People complain but the enforcement side doesn't seem to happen. I have on three occasions now been basically told sorry we filled the position while you were gone, bye.
 
On the employee protection legislation issue, there are provisions in each province and territory that are designed to protect reservists on deployment. The Federal website providing information on this is here.

The problem - like the 20 day limitation in Alberta - is that each province has it's own legislation; it is mostly toothless; it doesn't provide provisions for training; it doesn't provide any mechanism (such as an ombudsman, arbitrator, or assistant) to help individuals terminated or negatively effected as a result of their service.

In the US, the provisions for reservist protection comes under their Federal "Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act" (USERRA) under Title 20 of the US Code.

For the Act itself, see here;

For an example of an older informational brochure on the USERRA published by the Federal Attorney General for the Eastern District of North Carolina, see here.

While not perfect, USERRA is a vast improvement over our hodge-podge of weak legislation and quite frankly, without a piece of legislation like this, Canada will never have an effective, capable reserve force. IMHO, while labour law is a provincial jurisdiction, legislation like this can and should be issued by the federal government under the National Defence provisions of item 7 of s 91 of the Constitution Act.

:cheers:

 
FJAG, I'd like to hear your opinion on the following.

Many, many years ago (it might have been at Staff College) an authority on the matter, perhaps a JAG officer, stated that, if we had such legislation, employers merely would not hire reservists, and would not allow any of their employees from joining the reserves, on threat of termination.

The lack of job protection legislation may have been the case for a very long time. In March 1885 when the uprising is the NW began, the 90th Winnipeg Rifles and the Winnipeg Field Battery were ordered to occupy Fort Qu'Apelle (sp). When researching the RWR history, I found reference to a number of members of the 90th would did not report for duty, as their employers refused to give them time off work.
 
Old Sweat said:
FJAG, I'd like to hear your opinion on the following.

Many, many years ago (it might have been at Staff College) an authority on the matter, perhaps a JAG officer, stated that, if we had such legislation, employers merely would not hire reservists, and would not allow any of their employees from joining the reserves, on threat of termination.

The lack of job protection legislation may have been the case for a very long time. In March 1885 when the uprising is the NW began, the 90th Winnipeg Rifles and the Winnipeg Field Battery were ordered to occupy Fort Qu'Apelle (sp). When researching the RWR history, I found reference to a number of members of the 90th would did not report for duty, as their employers refused to give them time off work.

It's a good question, Brian, unfortunately any opinion I would have would be, like that lecturer, a guess at best.

I can only point to the US where there are some 807,000 National Guard and Reserve personnel across the four services who seem to be able to find employment in the civilian sector notwithstanding USERRA.

As I pointed out in my little book, restructuring the reserves into an effective force capable of deployment requires several actions to be taken including creating incentives for employers to hire and retain reservists. A few that I touch on there are:

1. First and foremost to create a form of covenant with the soldier, his family, the employer and the military that mandatory training for reservists be set by regulations to a certain number of days and events that will be clearly set in advance AND NOT dicked around with by the local unit. I recommended the months of September to June at a 2.5 day weekend per month; none whatsoever in July to allow for family vacations and a 3 weeks annual exercise in August. I think the single greatest disincentive for an employer (and family) these days is that reserve service is largely unpredictable in the long term as to when exercises or courses will take place (which I think in large part is why many reservists just don't show up for them);

2. Concentrating the mass of training that a reservist needs to be effective into the first four years of service so as to
allow students to have full summer employment and reach trained status well before actually reaching the work force and having major family responsibilities;

3. Supporting the initial civilian education of soldiers by paying for the tuition at universities (for officer candidates) and community colleges (particularly for skilled trades such as transport operators, mechanics, health care workers, cooks, supply technicians, even engineers, etc) and in some cases even offering short periods (a year or two) of full time employment to make them more desirable as new hires;

4. Incentive programs for employers that provide concrete financial support in finding and temporarily replacing reservists called to active service;

5. A robust education program for employers that helps them to understand the benefits that they receive by having a trained reservist work for them (especially a no-cost-to-employer ongoing skills and leadership development program that benefits them as well as the military)

Brian, I know that no system will ever be perfect (except maybe conscription) but at present we are failing miserably in that the bulk of our reservists never show up for training and are incapable of any deployment without a long and lengthy pre-deployment training phase. The reserve units are overloaded with marginally capable leaders, have virtually no equipment to train on or deploy with and in short, are not fit for purpose except for some of the most simple of tasks. They've been in this shape pretty much since WW2. They should be a great low-cost option to allow our government to rapidly expand the size of our force both in breadth and depth in an emergency. They aren't and no one wants to do anything about it.

To get back to the topic of a replacement for the C3. There are literally dozens of options for equipment (both guns and other) that could go to the reserves that I would agree with. My single requirement is that it isn't merely a training tool but something that you can go to war with. However, regardless of the kit we eventually select, unless there is an across the board, fundamental change on what we want the reserves to do, how they are organized, what their terms of service are and how they will go about getting there, all we are really doing is putting lipstick on a pig.

Personally I'd rather have one viable reserve manoeuvre brigade, one viable combat service support brigade and one viable artillery brigade of 10,000 or so trained and equipped reservists in total than 20 - 30,000 of what we have now. But give me 22 - 25,000 reservists and you can have the five brigade structure I laid out in the book.

:2c:
 
Along with the legislation should be some carrots which will help offsets some of the costs to the employer, like a tax credit for active reservists who are employed with the company.
 
FJAG said:
It's a good question, Brian, unfortunately any opinion I would have would be, like that lecturer, a guess at best.

I can only point to the US where there are some 807,000 National Guard and Reserve personnel across the four services who seem to be able to find employment in the civilian sector notwithstanding USERRA.

As I pointed out in my little book, restructuring the reserves into an effective force capable of deployment requires several actions to be taken including creating incentives for employers to hire and retain reservists. A few that I touch on there are:

1. First and foremost to create a form of covenant with the soldier, his family, the employer and the military that mandatory training for reservists be set by regulations to a certain number of days and events that will be clearly set in advance AND NOT dicked around with by the local unit. I recommended the months of September to June at a 2.5 day weekend per month; none whatsoever in July to allow for family vacations and a 3 weeks annual exercise in August. I think the single greatest disincentive for an employer (and family) these days is that reserve service is largely unpredictable in the long term as to when exercises or courses will take place (which I think in large part is why many reservists just don't show up for them);

2. Concentrating the mass of training that a reservist needs to be effective into the first four years of service so as to
allow students to have full summer employment and reach trained status well before actually reaching the work force and having major family responsibilities;

3. Supporting the initial civilian education of soldiers by paying for the tuition at universities (for officer candidates) and community colleges (particularly for skilled trades such as transport operators, mechanics, health care workers, cooks, supply technicians, even engineers, etc) and in some cases even offering short periods (a year or two) of full time employment to make them more desirable as new hires;

4. Incentive programs for employers that provide concrete financial support in finding and temporarily replacing reservists called to active service;

5. A robust education program for employers that helps them to understand the benefits that they receive by having a trained reservist work for them (especially a no-cost-to-employer ongoing skills and leadership development program that benefits them as well as the military)

Brian, I know that no system will ever be perfect (except maybe conscription) but at present we are failing miserably in that the bulk of our reservists never show up for training and are incapable of any deployment without a long and lengthy pre-deployment training phase. The reserve units are overloaded with marginally capable leaders, have virtually no equipment to train on or deploy with and in short, are not fit for purpose except for some of the most simple of tasks. They've been in this shape pretty much since WW2. They should be a great low-cost option to allow our government to rapidly expand the size of our force both in breadth and depth in an emergency. They aren't and no one wants to do anything about it.

To get back to the topic of a replacement for the C3. There are literally dozens of options for equipment (both guns and other) that could go to the reserves that I would agree with. My single requirement is that it isn't merely a training tool but something that you can go to war with. However, regardless of the kit we eventually select, unless there is an across the board, fundamental change on what we want the reserves to do, how they are organized, what their terms of service are and how they will go about getting there, all we are really doing is putting lipstick on a pig.

Personally I'd rather have one viable reserve manoeuvre brigade, one viable combat service support brigade and one viable artillery brigade of 10,000 or so trained and equipped reservists in total than 20 - 30,000 of what we have now. But give me 22 - 25,000 reservists and you can have the five brigade structure I laid out in the book.

:2c:

All laudable and worthwhile initiatives in your book FJAG. I wonder how they will withstand a post-covid economic environment.
 
Weinie said:
All laudable and worthwhile initiatives in your book FJAG. I wonder how they will withstand a post-covid economic environment.

Here's the thing. The part-time reservist costs us about 1/6th of a full-time soldier (both in immediate pay and benefits as well as long term pensions). Converting the reserves to the type of system that I propose is pretty much a wash over current costs based on a limit of 48 days annual mandatory training; the existing four years annual summer training for students; and the existing educational benefits programs. If you yank all the Class B's out of Ottawa where they are merely constituting a workaround the authorized PY limits on the RegF you have even more cash available.

In my proposal, we reduce the existing four divisional headquarters to just two, the ten reserve brigades and the CSSB to five brigade headquarters, and the number of individual units from some 146 non-deployable reserve (that's army, MP and medical) and hybrid units to 52 deployable reserve and hybrid units and 5 non-deployable hybrid units (essentially the depot battalions). That saves a significant high priced staff overhead which can also be laid off for additional cost savings.

I'm looking at the same armories and trg facilities footprint, so that's a wash.

Equipment does constitute a cost. That's a long range process that can also be tied to a national economic recovery process if done right.

I know this makes no sense to the people in Ottawa who have zero respect for the potential that a properly structured reserve force can bring to the defence table, but the single most wasted funding within DND is for full-time personnel costs (both military and civilian) that exist at the headquarters level above brigade. If you read Leslie's Report you'll see just how much inflation went on there during the 2004-2011 period.

If we truly get hit with post-Covid cutbacks then our first reaction should be to cut back massively on the administrative headquarters cost that DND/CAF bears (and I do not mean the logistic tail here - that's needed. I mean the administrative leadership and their staff. I've previously said that half of the legal branch could go. Same goes for the public affairs branch ;D) i.e Reg F PYs need to be cut to stop the current and future funding bleed.

If we need to cut more than that then we should realistically look at again cutting full time PY's at the brigade, wing, fleet level and transferring their equipment to a restructured/reformed reserve.

The first exercise should not cut our actual defence outputs (merely the administration which badly needs reform anyway) the second will transfer some of our current defence outputs to a reserve status which obviously means less responsive force but one with equal capabilities once mobilized.

The entire idea behind my proposal in restructuring and equipping the reserves into deployable entities is to increase our actual defence outputs more commensurate with the existing funding envelope Canada already supplies. Right now everyone in government is talking about maintaining that funding commitment. I guess we'll see. Either way, we need reserve reform.

:cheers:
 
At this point I would just be happy with a new gun that won't break or end up killing some of our own gun crews

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UN84r_4GTdQ&feature=share&fbclid=IwAR2zXTZjGxEmgS6MYw6UFUCqhUxepp0EesA1uDXrqAivZSUaaMKfm3c0GKA
 
Wolf, you may have to an estimate if Trudeau is re-elected, and some Provinces leave. ;D
 
A touch off topic but look what I found while unpacking my model railroad. The old C Tp, J Bty 3 RCHA tac signs salvaged from my command post from 1971 when we switched over to the new NATO system.

122652825_2929725903832957_639253445647676469_o.jpg


;D
 
FJAG said:
A touch off topic but look what I found while unpacking my model railroad. The old C Tp, J Bty 3 RCHA tac signs salvaged from my command post from 1971 when we switched over to the new NATO system.

122652825_2929725903832957_639253445647676469_o.jpg


;D

"Salvaged"

 
I have been mulling over FJAG's plan, and think there are a number of very good points to it, but I think it may founder on the principle of forces in being that has been the backbone of our defence policy since about 1950. Being one known to have dabbled in military history, I can state with some confidence it is much easier to predict the past than it is to do the same for guess the future.

The CAF would have to convince the Federal bureaucracy that we had an achievable solution, after we had convinced ourselves, and then would have to do the same to our allies and to our Parliamentarians and academics, and, probably above all else, the HCols cabal. There are a number of aspects that would have to be addressed, and solved economically and effectively, or we will be bogged down like a Centurion in the Lawfield Corridor. (OK, a flash from the past, but a number of you will get my drift.)

Mods, I suggest this could be a stand along discussion separate from the C3 replacement.
 
Agreed. Army Reserve Restructuring is a good place for it. It tends to go off the rails every time I point out that before we fix the kit issue we need to fix the role/mission issue first.

Mea culpa.

:cheers:
 
FJAG said:
Agreed. Army Reserve Restructuring is a good place for it. It tends to go off the rails every time I point out that before we fix the kit issue we need to fix the role/mission issue first.

Mea culpa.

:cheers:
It's almost like we should have a doctrinal mission or task to support buying equipment, instead of just buying something and shoehorning it into whatever job we're doing today...
 
Are you trying to simultaneously put people gainfully employed in Doctrine development AND procurement at NDHQ out of a job?
 
Oldgateboatdriver said:
Are you trying to simultaneously put people gainfully employed in Doctrine development AND procurement at NDHQ out of a job?

A non-applicable adverb.
 
I was thinking of "gainfully" in the same sense that "fruitful" is used in the following:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmOvEwtDycs
 
Back
Top