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

Exploiting reservists' love of their regiments

John Nayduk

Full Member
Inactive
Reaction score
0
Points
210
Here's a CO with his head on right.  Too bad there isn't more like him.  Well done Calgary Highlanders!

Exploiting reservists' love of their regiments
 
Bob Bergen
Special to The Windsor Star


Wednesday, June 13, 2007


It seems like such a simple concept, but capitalizing on Canadian Forces reservists' love for their regiments and sense of purpose could be both short-term and long-term solutions for its nationwide manpower shortage. The wonder is why the Canadian Forces don't take better advantage of that.

Here is why: Prime Minister Stephen Harper recently singled out the Calgary Highlanders and praised them for their extraordinary effort raising 64 soldiers who will deploy to Afghanistan in February 2008.

Perhaps only the Regiment de Voltigeurs in Quebec and one or two others match their success, according to Lt.-Gen. Andrew Leslie, the Forces chief of land staff.

Those efforts are remarkable, given that reservists are civilians who have school, jobs and families which come first and part-time military duties that come second.

They usually train one night a week and one weekend a month.

To commit to a six-month deployment to Afghanistan is not just half a year's commitment -- it's more than a year, because they must undergo full-time predeployment training, as well.

As a result, although their rotation begins next February, 58 Highlanders are now training in either Shilo, Man., with the 2nd Battalion Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry or with the Patricia's 1st Battalion in Edmonton.

The question is: What did the Highlanders do with such spectacular success that is different than what most other Canadian reservist units are doing?

Lt.-Col. Tom Manley, the Highlanders commanding officer, thinks it began when he took command in 2005.

SHORT OF COMMITMENTS

Manley knew the Forces were some 5,000 soldiers short of meeting its commitments over the next few years. It would need reservists -- lots of them -- to make up for that shortfall.

It's no secret that he set a goal to recruit and train a company of about 150 Highlanders who could be sent to Afghanistan as a formation as opposed to being scattered among regular force units.

When his soldiers learned of his plan to potentially send them as a formed company, they became excited and that excitement kept building.

Unlike regular force soldiers who are posted to different locations about every two years and sometimes to different organizations, most reservists stay for years in the cities and towns where they live and work.

They train with the same people for years, if not spend most of their lives with them.

"The soldiers are deeply in love with their regiment," Manley explains.

At the time, he had 114 volunteers for Afghanistan, which was admittedly short of a full company, but he was close. He gave them more than two years to think about the deployment.

That was enough time for them to think it through with their employers, to talk to their families and to re-arrange their lives sufficiently to make it possible.

"Any time you can take advantage of the incredible love the soldiers have for their regiment and service to their country, they will perform a higher level. That's essentially what we did."

In the end, Manley's plan to send a formed company of Highlanders to Afghanistan was rejected by the Forces' chain of command.

What the army said it needed was individual solders to fill individual tasks and, realistically, the Highlanders don't have LAV III drivers, crew commanders and gunners needed for a formed company.

There is also another reason that Manley is loathe to discuss, but you don't have to spend much time around soldiers to learn what it is.

ACUTELY AWARE

Strategically, Canadian Forces commanders are acutely aware of the effects casualties have on the Canadian public's support for the mission. The resulting negative publicity is thought bad enough when four soldiers from across Canada are killed in one day, let alone four soldiers from the same city.

Regardless, the idea of a formed Highlander company is a dead horse Manley has stopped beating.

The culmination of his effort, however, is 64 Highlanders who will be serving in Afghanistan next year.

Most of the Highlanders will augment other units, but at least 33 of them will be deployed together as a defence and security platoon that will defend the main camp at Kandahar and perform some convoy protection tasks. Another 10 will deploy with another defence and security platoon.

That's the short-term benefit.

The long-term benefit will take place when those soldiers return to Canada. Coupled with 27 Highlanders who served in Afghanistan in 2006, about half of the 185 Highlanders who normally parade will be Afghan veterans.

That means they will have war zone experience and the ability to train others to a level that hasn't been possible in more than half century.

The Highlanders' Afghanistan effort was sufficiently astounding to warrant the specific attention of the prime minister.

With the Canadian Forces some 5,000 short of its manpower needs, Canadian Forces commanders would be well-advised to pay attention, too.

Bob Bergen is research fellow with the Canadian Defence & Foreign Affairs Institute (CDFAI) in Calgary. The opinions expressed in this document are those of the author. Learn more about the CDFAI and its research on the Internet at www.cdfai.org

© The Windsor Star 2007
 
I am very proud to be able to call Tom Manley a friend. When we served together in 1PPCLI, he demonstrated qualities that made him one of the very finest officers I've ever been privileged to serve with. When he decided to part ways with the Regular Army and pursue a civilian career, it was a great loss for us in the PPCLI but a great gain for the CalHi's (and a win-win for the Army...). I know that not everybody in the Army sees him in the same light, but to me the proof of his leadership ability is in the strength of his unit. As usual, it's leadership (or the lack of it...) that really makes or breaks a Res unit whose soldiers only make time in their civillian lives for military service because they are motivated to do it.

The only thing that worries me about this whole Res augmentation thing (as I've told Tom...) is just how long we can actually sustain it before the Res trg system chokes and the trained soldier well dries up.

Cheers
 
Good on the Calgary Highlanders.  I am curious however to learn how they will continue to train the soldiers that are left in the Unit for the year those soldiers are away.  My Unit has 19 away right now and we're feeling the pinch of not enough guys for all the training tasks.
 
The same way we did it before.

Admittedly, I would assume units tend to send the more mature/qualified troops overseas, leaving behind junior tropps to fill in leadership positions. However, no one is irreplaceable, someone will (almost)always be there to step in. We are talking about a year, to a year and a half max. I have faith that almost every single resunit could cope with this demand for that period of time.

Feeling the pinch? A bit of pressure? Maybe the training is not as organized or compelling? Or some training has to be scaled back that year? Sure. I don't see this as a problem in the medium/long term.
 
Keep in mind with the new component transfer policy the militia could stand to lose permanently senior NCO's and WO's with the sweetened deal for Afghan Vets being given a direct CT in the Rank and Qual held in theatre.
 
And in counterpoint to the above article I offer the following from today's Calgary Herald (shared with the usual dislciamer):

PUBLICATION:  Calgary Herald
DATE:  2007.06.14
EDITION:  Final
SECTION:  News
PAGE:  A11
KEYWORDS:  WAR
DATELINE:  OTTAWA
BYLINE:  Peter O'Neil
SOURCE:  CanWest News Service
WORD COUNT:  447

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Forces face shortage of reserve soldiers; Afghanistan mission halts training courses

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Canadian Forces, squeezed by the Afghanistan conflict, may be forced to cancel half the training courses for regular and reserve soldiers scheduled for this summer in western Canada.

The training squeeze, caused by the unavailability of qualified officers to teach troops, could cause a shortage of reservists in 2009 if Prime Minister Stephen Harper decides to extend the mission past February of that year, according to one reserve officer.

"We're still struggling to find trainers, there's no question about that," said Lt.-Col. Tom Manley, commanding officer of the Calgary Highlanders reserve unit, which has generated a disproportionate number of volunteers for Afghanistan.

"And there's a chance we simply may not get everyone trained that could potentially deploy, so we may have to leave some behind (in 2009) because they didn't get the training they needed," he said.

The trainer shortage was the result of so many experienced soldiers -- who would normally lead training sessions -- preparing for the next Afghanistan rotation headed by western Canadian soldiers in the first half of 2008.

The national defence department's website says only 18 of 40 summer courses, scheduled in Alberta, B.C. and Manitoba, are expected to go ahead.

Of the rest, six are likely to be cancelled and 16 are flagged as courses that "may be cancelled."

But Lt.-Col. Shane Bridgeman, chief of training for army in Western Canada, doesn't expect the Afghanistan conflict will have a significant impact on training scheduled for this summer.

Courses for reservists and regular forces in Western Canada -- based solely in Wainwright, Alberta and Shilo, Manitoba -- often do depend on qualified officers for instruction who may be less available to teach because of Afghanistan.

But, Bridgeman explains, instructors can, and will, also be found within the regular armed and air forces to help out.

The average number of courses per summer, he adds, is usually about 40 in Wainwright and Shilo combined.

"We expect we'll probably have about the same this summer too," Bridgeman said. "These things are assigned as a priority and we've served the courses on that priority.

"Our commander is now seeking out more instructors."

Reservists -- volunteer soldiers who take leave from their jobs -- have typically made up 12 to 14 per cent of the 2,500-person contingent in Afghanistan.

But reserve units are under increased pressure to find recruits and are expected to make up 20 per cent of the rotation in the first half of 2008, which will be led by a battalion from the Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry regiment in Edmonton.

The Princess Pats would also be the lead regiment in Afghanistan in the second half of 2009 if the mission is extended.

Bridgeman said the army has faced similar training challenges in the recent past, and said the comments from the reserve officers reflect the growing pressure on that increasingly important component of the Canadian military.

"The system is routinely under stress," he said. "This is probably the first time that individual (reserve) units have seen that strain to this extent, because they're generating more people for overseas than they ever have before."

With files from Eva Ferguson
 
ArtyNewbie said:
Keep in mind with the new component transfer policy the militia could stand to lose permanently senior NCO's and WO's with the sweetened deal for Afghan Vets being given a direct CT in the Rank and Qual held in theatre.

Why would that be a bad thing, if it could open slots for new NCO's in the Reserve Units and gain already trained regular CF members?

There's a growing curve, but do you see it insurmountable?
 
not neccesarrily a bad thing per se, but put it in perspective, say the Cal Hi's send 60 some odd soldiers to TFA, and they all get CT offers and accept them, so a regiment goes from 158 troops roughly down to about 100 in 1 Roto, then next comes along and the next thing you after about 4 or 5 roto's the reg force has themselves a new kilted regiment and the Cal Highrs have no regiment as recruiting and promotions cannot keep up with attrition at that rate. Reserve units are having a hard to recruiting now (back to my rant about a peacetime recruiting system in a country at war) wait until they lose 1/2 a regiment in a tour and try to replace them, they'll be promoting Pte's to Sgt just to fill the holes (yes I know exageration is for dramatic effect) That said activating a whole regiment of volunteer reservists running them through roto training and deploying them together could have built in benefits.
 
GAP said:
Why would that be a bad thing, if it could open slots for new NCO's in the Reserve Units and gain already trained regular CF members?

There's a growing curve, but do you see it insurmountable?

From a Res POV...

I guess that there is two sides to every story. For larger PRes units it could be a very good thing. Especially if one considers the demographics of the membership.

I know of a Regiment that experienced some rather phenomenal growth in the nineties. Many troops were picked up, often from successful Co-Op programs and they stayed. Those folks have progressed through the ranks and are now in the Sgts/WO's mess.

But in many ways it is an embarrassment of riches... how to employ all these folks? What is the detrimental affect on the hard charger MCpls who are stuck waiting for WO Longname to retire (thus opening a spot on the OrBat). Allowing this sort of CT frees up those spots...

On the other hand, smaller units that have a high(er) turnover may rely on a smaller cadre... losing one of those to a CT could be very detrimental.



Of course, without saying, I wonder what the affects of this will be on Regular Force units, filled with hard working MCpls/Sgts who wake up one day to find the position they have coveted for many years has just been taken by a Sgt/WO who has CT'ed into the position for the Queen's Cornhuskers of Canada.....

 
And what compensation do the Reserve units get for attracting, recruiting, training, developing deploying and supporting this soldier up to the point where s/he CT's to the Reg F?

Nothing, that's what.  Not an extra dime towards attracting, recruiting, training or retaining his/her replacement.  S/he is a no cost Reg F recruit.

This is simply the Reserves getting raped over a barstool once again.
 
I understand Haggis' point.

But what is the point of the Reserves in today's world?

To exist as a 'Force in Being' for sure... but is it not also to serve as a source of trained soldiers to the Reg Force as well?

I guess my point is better to lose a PRes soldier to a RegForce unit than to a jealous mate or an ignorant civvie boss ....<insert_the_any_one_of_the_(other)_million_reasons_that_PRes_soldiers_quit_here>
 
cplcaldwell said:
But what is the point of the Reserves in today's world?

To exist as a 'Force in Being' for sure... but is it not also to serve as a source of trained soldiers to the Reg Force as well?

I guess my point is better to lose a PRes soldier to a RegForce unit

And don't get me wrong, Cpl Caldwell.  I agree with you.  But a Reserve unit has to see a return on investment.    Let's say that 1/2 of those deploying Calgary Highlanders accept a CT upon return.  How many potential COs, OCs, RSMs and CSMs has that unit lost, without recompense?

The Reserves do exist to augment the Reg F but it must be remembered that this initiative is to make up for shortfalls in CF recruiting for Reg F members.  Another point to consider is the the Reserves don't have the luxury of recruiting at the national level, as the Reg F does.  To rebuild a Reg F rifle platoon, CFRG has access to a potential pool of 32 million people. To re-build a Brockville Rifles platoon gutted by CTs, the Brocks have access to a potential pool of 30,000 people and are in direct competition with the Reg F.

I'm not saying that this CT plan is a bad one.  In fact I think in concept it's a great way for the CF to gain and retain critical skills.  But what irks me is that the resources to backfill those skills are not on the Armoury floor, yet the Reserves are being asked to backfill again and again.
 
Dissident said:
Feeling the pinch? A bit of pressure? Maybe the training is not as organized or compelling? Or some training has to be scaled back that year? Sure. I don't see this as a problem in the medium/long term.

The trg is very organized and compelling IMO.  The issue is we require trained Sect Comd's and 2IC's to conduct the training and between Tours and Full time Class B or B/A posns, we don't necessarily have the leadership we require to conduct the training as effectively as it should be.  I have 90ish in my Company on paper but I've then got 17 on tour, another 15 or so in Full Time jobs (And most of them do show up for a lot fo the Unit Trg, but It's difficult to have different Sect Comds every weekend/Thur Night), and approx another 25 who are taking their basic training this summer.  That only leaves 33 or so who are available for Unit Training on a regular basis. Plus an additional 10 or so who are not necessarily the same people each training event.

Scaling back training is an option, but based on the tasks we've been given that isn't going to happen.  This coming year alone my Unit is participating in the Area IRU, TDBG, South Bound Trooper in Virginia over the Feb break, and normal Unit trg.  With the exception of South Bound Trooper, the remainder are mandated activities.  How do you scale that back?
 
cplcaldwell said:
Of course, without saying, I wonder what the affects of this will be on Regular Force units, filled with hard working MCpls/Sgts who wake up one day to find the position they have coveted for many years has just been taken by a Sgt/WO who has CT'ed into the position for the Queen's Cornhuskers of Canada.....

Personally, I have never seen a PRes soldier come over to the Reg Force and keep his rank and status, so this really wouldn't be an issue.  I've seen PRes soldiers come over on a task for whatever reason and keep the rank, but definitely not the status.  Meaning if they come as a Master-Jack, they keep it, but are given a position as weapons det commander or other closely supervised position with few subordinates, as they are unfamiliar with the gaining units SOP's.  But, that's just for a task.  A CT is a whole other matter.
 
cplcaldwell said:
Of course, without saying, I wonder what the affects of this will be on Regular Force units, filled with hard working MCpls/Sgts who wake up one day to find the position they have coveted for many years has just been taken by a Sgt/WO who has CT'ed into the position for the Queen's Cornhuskers of Canada.....

To my understanding, offers are only being made where a vacant Reg F position exists that the career manager has confirmed will not be filled / promoted into.

In addition, if Sgt Goombah of the Reserves just came off tour with the Reg F unit working as a section commander, I don't see a lot of friction or tension.
 
RCR Grunt said:
Personally, I have never seen a PRes soldier come over to the Reg Force and keep his rank and status, so this really wouldn't be an issue.  I've seen PRes soldiers come over on a task for whatever reason and keep the rank, but definitely not the status.  Meaning if they come as a Master-Jack, they keep it, but are given a position as weapons det commander or other closely supervised position with few subordinates, as they are unfamiliar with the gaining units SOP's.  But, that's just for a task.  A CT is a whole other matter.

It's important to note that the trade, rank and IPC retained on CT will be the trade rank and IPC that the member held while deployed.

So, if a Res Inf Sgt, who deployed as a Inf Sgt, CTs he will stay an Inf Sgt in the Reg F.  If a Sgt took a drop in rank to MCpl, he will CT as a MCpl.
 
Haggis said:
And don't get me wrong, Cpl Caldwell.  I agree with you.  But a Reserve unit has to see a return on investment.    Let's say that 1/2 of those deploying Calgary Highlanders accept a CT upon return.  How many potential COs, OCs, RSMs and CSMs has that unit lost, without recompense?

Hmm... they did get a CO from the Reg F - LCol Manley - and the Reg F did not request a single thin dime in return.  Or does this equation only work in one direction - Reg transfers to the Res should be free, while Res transfers to the Regs should see the losing unit getting something?


The overall number of CTs has remained more or less constant for the past several years - around 2% of the paid strength of the Army Reserve... but less than half stay in trade, meaning the Reg F saves only the cost of basic training.  Most of them are Pte/Cpl or 2Lt.  Reg F transfers to the Army Reserve are less than half that - but are much higher ranks, brining more experience with them.

I would be the first to argue we need to do more to encourage retiring Reg F members to join the Reserve - especially those just finishing their BE or CE.  I'd also argue that CTs to the Reg F are sign of success in a unit... but that, perhaps, will take us further down a rabbit hole...
 
Haggis said:
Another point to consider is the the Reserves don't have the luxury of recruiting at the national level, as the Reg F does.  To rebuild a Reg F rifle platoon, CFRG has access to a potential pool of 32 million people. To re-build a Brockville Rifles platoon gutted by CTs, the Brocks have access to a potential pool of 30,000 people and are in direct competition with the Reg F.

That's an excellent point, never thought of it that way....

dapaterson said:
In addition, if Sgt Goombah of the Reserves just came off tour with the Reg F unit working as a section commander, I don't see a lot of friction or tension.

Quite right, but grousers will find a reason to complain. Will it be an 'across the board' thing; I doubt it, members are too professional to fall into that trap, but legends have a way of taking on a life of their own...


It's important to note that the trade, rank and IPC retained on CT will be the trade rank and IPC that the member held while deployed.

And how many WO's, MWO's CWO's will be required on Roto, employed at rank and MOC, return, desire CT and 'find vacant Reg F position exists that the career manager has confirmed will not be filled / promoted into'??

Pretty small selection set there, I reckon. Now for Cpls and MCpls, perhaps a different kettle of fish.

Perspective, it's all about perspective....
 
dapaterson said:
Hmm... they did get a CO from the Reg F - LCol Manley - and the Reg F did not request a single thin dime in return.  Or does this equation only work in one direction - Reg transfers to the Res should be free, while Res transfers to the Regs should see the losing unit getting something?

No, they got a qualified re-enrolee from civvy street.  LCol Manley (and others like him), for whatever reason chose to leave the Reg F and pursue a civvy career in another field.  That the Res F managed to re-recruit them is a different matter and kudos to them for doing it, using their existing Reserve recruiting dollars.

Here the Reg F is actively encouraging Reservists to CT.  In this particular case, I'm would argue that the PPCLI has far more succession depth in which to generate another LCol than does, say, the  N Sask R.

The overall number of CTs has remained more or less constant for the past several years - around 2% of the paid strength of the Army Reserve... but less than half stay in trade, meaning the Reg F saves only the cost of basic training.  Most of them are Pte/Cpl or 2Lt.  Reg F transfers to the Army Reserve are less than half that - but are much higher ranks, brining more experience with them.

True, but this campaign is targeted at Cbt Arms MOSIDs with the aim of retaining them post CT in Cbt Arms MOSIDs.  The closest we've come to a similar program is the "Quick Pick" CTs of the mid 1990's.

I would be the first to argue we need to do more to encourage retiring Reg F members to join the Reserve - especially those just finishing their BE or CE. 
  I agree.  And this is likely how guys like LCol Manley ended up where he did.

I'd also argue that CTs to the Reg F are sign of success in a unit... but that, perhaps, will take us further down a rabbit hole...
Indeed it would. As Harris alluded to earlier the success of a unit is measured by means such as: participation in Bde events, completion of IBTS and mandated training and the number of soldiers that can be recruited and retained.  A soldier who CTs to the Reg F is not "retained" in the purest interpretation of Reserve unit "success".
 
Anology time........when a hockey player gets drafted [CTed if you will] by an NHL team, the league the draftee is from gets compensated. Now having done the NHL training camp and becoming a better player [soldier], but, for whatever reason, goes back the other way the NHL is not compensated.

I see it the same way, the Reg force recruits across the country with a large budget whilst the Res must recruit locally, sometimes with a *cough* less than stellar budget.
Why shouldn't "the show" pay back the Reserve unit for its training /recruiting costs?
 
Back
Top