Cutting the CF/DND HQ bloat - Excess CF Sr Leadership, Public Servants and Contractors

[Monsoon]

Thats because he didn't micromanage the cuts. He directed we trim the fat, where does that order go to? The people who are the fat. They want to keep their jobs, so they hack and slash at the Jr NCMs who are actually required on a daily basis as Cl B individuals.

Don't confuse the reorganization Leslie is talking about with the budget cuts that were enacted this past year. Reducing HQs means reorganizing on a big scale and that takes time (a year or more, i.e.); but if you want to save $50K in SWE this FY you go without a SupTech for a year (while recognizing that quick cuts like this cause capability deficiencies). From what I understand of the process, we're looking at:

Short term cuts across the board to meet in-year budget restrictions -> Medium-term reorganization to "cut the fat" at the HQ level -> Reallocation of those resources to increase ground-level strength -> Long-term sustainability.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

We in Edmonton had a brief a short time ago from his CWO about the transformation. HQ's grew in size since the 1990s. Meanwhile the line units have shrunk, and there are budget shortfalls for training.

My understanding is that there is no shortage of funds for training in LFWA, Regular or Reserve, Individual or Collective, in this Fiscal Year or the next - indeed quite the opposite.

 

[dapaterson]

Hmm, I could probably turn CEFCOM and CANADACOM into a single operational commander, and give them the additional role of filling in when the CDS and VCDS aren't available - maybe call them "the Deputy Chief of Defence Staff".

Maybe roll the Chief of Military Personnel and ADM Human Resources - Civilian into a single Chief of Personnel, with associates for Military and Civilian.

And why not roll the Finance and Corporate Services mantle onto the Vice Chief, with a "Chief Financial Officer" under the VCDS in the hierarchy, but with a dotted line to the Deputy Minister?

There we go.  Three less Level 1 organizations, several hundred redundant HQ staff members, mil and civ, eliminated, a more manageable structure...

 

[Infanteer]

Hmm, I could probably turn CEFCOM and CANADACOM into a single operational commander, and give them the additional role of filling in when the CDS and VCDS aren't available - maybe call them "the Deputy Chief of Defence Staff".

Quit it with the new ideas - are you aiming for your leading change bubble?  (On another note, stick CANOSCOM in that org to eliminate another L1)

This is a laudable effort, as I think the General speaks to a real issue in the organizational culture of the Canadian Forces where over 10% of the uniformed military strength is dedicated to the Capital Region (re: HQs).  If we applied a 1-in-8 ratio to, say, a 4500 man CMBG we would see a Brigade HQ of 500 personnel....

However, this dealing with this organizational hydra seems to me to involve a lot of politics.  To me, the following points are important:

1.  The "tail" can generally be split into 3 categories:  Combat Service Support (log/med/etc), Life Support (const eng, lodger and personnel support functions), and HQs.  I don't think General Leslie is targetting the first two in his discussion; it is clearly the last one.  No need to start with "doomsday" scenarios of now truckers.

2.  Human Resource Management ideas must be fixed - critical is this is the use of Class B/Civilians in roles they should have never been used for.  Expensive overuse of these positions means the CF can get away with poor pers management, creating extra positions that aren't feasible under the current strength.  We need to figure out which full time military positions are important and which can be cut (at all ranks).

3.  Our culture of leadership and command and control also has to be looked at.  Numerous staff officers are needed to handle superfluous requirements from higher headquarters.  Many of these requirements, requiring dozens if not hundreds of hours of staff work, are started when 3 and 2 stars are getting involved in issues of sub-sub unit training or the configuration a section/detachment.  Mission command cannot only exist on the battlefield.

 

[Michael OLeary]

2.  Human Resource Management ideas must be fixed - critical is this is the use of Class B/Civilians in roles they should have never been used for.  Expensive overuse of these positions means the CF can get away with poor pers management, creating extra positions that aren't feasible under the current strength.  We need to figure out which full time military positions are important and which can be cut (at all ranks).

Does this mean we can also get rid of the redundancy of orders, regulations and directives on pers management - and the added staff required to manage the documents over and above the pers management function itself. There was a time when everyone in the CoC, down to the Platoon Commander, used only the QR&O and CFAO (now DAOD) for pers management direction - there was no need for the same direction to be reinterpreted and reissued as command orders, area instructions, brigade guidance, and local base orders, ad infinitum, all of which need to be updated (in sequence) every time the baseline document changes. Even with all that extra "guidance", if there's any question on interpretation, one seeks the "senior" document to try and figure out what to do.

How much staff effort is wasted maintaining unnecessary redundancies?

 

[Dennis Ruhl]

25-30 years ago I remember the number 8,000 as being in Ottawa and everyone thought it to be excessive.  Now there are 15,000?  Speaking as a bean counter, it sounds like the bean counters are starting to outnumber the beans.  It doesn't sound like the system is saveable.  Maybe it has to be broken first.  The system will never change without extreme political will to do so.  The last defence minister to take on the generals was Paul Hellyer back in the 1960s and everyone still hates him.  Mind you, he was responsible for much of the centralization that lent itself to bureacratization.

A novel idea might be actually trust personnel in the operational units to manage their own units.  The bureaucrats might design the framework but the lieutenant-colonels could be responsible for everything in his purview.

Fighting bureaucracy is an almost impossible task.  Alberta's healthcare spending increased 13.2% from 2008/2009 to 2009/2010 and wait times for procedures went up.  The increase was just soaked up in the bureaucratic ooze.
http://www.albertahealthservices.ca/198.asp

 

[ArmyRick]

I like the generals idea to "trim" the HQ. I have never worked in a HQ (other than an infantry PL HQ or COY HQ, doesn't really count though

What about combing LF Northern Area into LFWA and SQFT? One more HQ eliminated.

CEFCOM, CANOSCOM and CANCOM combined probably not a bad idea (All operations under one command?)

Now as far as Fed Govmnt employee (Civy) filling in as RMS clerks, could we not hire more RMS clerks? Replace those people as they retire so there is no uproar.

My 3 cents anyways.

 

[aesop081]

What about combing LF Northern Area into LFWA and SQFT? One more HQ eliminated.

I know there was a CF Northern area (CFNA) that is now JTF(N) but i dont think there was a LF Northern area.

 

[Rifleman62]

The more bureaucrats you have, military or civilian, the more bureaucracy is created. Ever expanding HQ creates more bureaucrats, military and civilian, who create more bureaucracy. New positions means eventual new "establishment" positions = new positions for Maj, LCol, and Cols. So, lots of people are happy as they never thought they would get that far. General positions, I believe, have been hovering.

I think part of the reason why we have more people in HQ's, and more HQ's, is the officer corps. Where are you going to put all the officers we have and handle the career stream promotions. Surly you cannot leave a "streamer" as a Capt for more than three or four years. They must be promoted.

The CF is too top heavy. The same rational that Mobilization is dead can be applied to CF rank inflation as well as the number of Reserve units.

Economy flows downhill, and it is Reserve units that will suffer. I have seen it time after time over 45 years.

Please do not reopen Reg F/Res F or getting rid of some reserve units (we need to).

 

[Dennis Ruhl]

I think part of the reason why we have more people in HQ's, and more HQ's, is the officer corps. Where are you going to put all the officers we have and handle the career stream promotions. Surly you cannot leave a "streamer" as a Capt for more than three or four years. They must be promoted.

Is part of the problem that the military is now looked upon as a lifetime career instead of a young man's game?  After troops have been promoted through the battalions etc., instead of being shown the road, there is a great effort to create jobs at the high end of the pay scale along with a staff befitting the rank.

 

[OldSolduer]

Is part of the problem that the military is now looked upon as a lifetime career instead of a young man's game?  After troops have been promoted through the battalions etc., instead of being shown the road, there is a great effort to create jobs at the high end of the pay scale along with a staff befitting the rank.

That isn't the problem, at least not in my view.

For one, you don't "show people the road" after over 20 years dedicated service.

One of the problems is that people who are in fairly senior ranks are doing the same jobs they were when they were a lower rank, in my view.

 

[Infanteer]

Is part of the problem that the military is now looked upon as a lifetime career instead of a young man's game?  After troops have been promoted through the battalions etc., instead of being shown the road, there is a great effort to create jobs at the high end of the pay scale along with a staff befitting the rank.

It's called a professional military....

 

[REDinstaller]

My understanding is that there is no shortage of funds for training in LFWA, Regular or Reserve, Individual or Collective, in this Fiscal Year or the next - indeed quite the opposite.

It is true there is more funds for the next trg year, but if the Commanders start to outnumber the Soldiers then all of the trg value will be lost. Too many jobs have gone civi, especially in the IT support end. True it frees up troops to go back to field units. But if the treasury board doesn't approve funding then you are hooped, just like the failed IM/IT rationalization. Try to deploy a Civi or contractor like Calian to support an Ex in Suffield. Some civi's have been sent on Ex, but this is the rule rather than the norm. And Calian only does their Maint contracts from the hardstand at the contracted base. Where as our 411s do it where ever they get told to.

 

[aesop081]

And Calian only does their Maint contracts from the hardstand at the contracted base. Where as our 411s do it where ever they get told to.

Civillian contractors will go wherever the contract says they are paid to go. If the contractor is only doing work from hardstand, thats what they were contracted for. If DND wanted them do do more, they should have contracted for it.

 

[armybuck041]

I find this article entertaining as I drop off my DEUs at the Drycleaners for the 1 Can Div "Red Patch" parade next month.......

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I was at a conference a couple of weeks ago where one of the briefing points was that they would be consolidating some of the dot comms. IIRC, unfortunately, they said this would necessitate the production of a higher HQ to administer the new conglomerate who would likely retain their indivdual HQs anyway.

The whole thing seems to be morphing into a self licking ice cream cone :

 

[54/102 CEF]

He's retiring soon isn't he......

I see a lot of frustration in his comments

 

[patt]

when i first read the title i thought it was going to talk about getting rid of fattys that are in the forces...

 

[aesop081]

when i first read the title i thought it was going to talk about getting rid of fattys that are in the forces...

Clear policy already exists to get rid of those who cannot pass their PT test.

 

[OldSolduer]

Clear policy already exists to get rid of those who cannot pass their PT test.

Policy exists but its not always applied.