Reservist Roles?

[Spr.Earl]

I say 5% at max!!
We can't even deploy 1,000 Reg.'s at a drop of the hat,so what makes any one thing we could mobilise 25% of the Reserves at the drop of a hat?

 

[Satelliteslayer]

Just to be clear even though I am a member of the Reg force I am a strong proponent of the Reserves, having come from the reserves and worked as a Cl B/A reservist for more than three years as a Regt. Ops NCO, a BMQ/SLQ instructor in WATC etc.

I look on the reserves as a team... if you expect a lot from the players you will get a lot but you also have to give them all of the tools required to meet their tasks. A clear mandate from NDHQ, proper funding ( I mean lets face it, dollar for dollar the reserves are cheap, thats why we have them other wise we would all be Reg force).

Job protection legislation... I mean holly !@#$% lets drag this horse into the next millennium, every single Defence Review has stated this as a failing of the reserve  systen in Canada.

Finally, the reserves as a group needs to be better managed and utilized. They are a part of the Department of National Defence....a key part....when do we allow special interest groups to hijack DND ??

 

[Torlyn]

Heya...  Just wanted to throw my 2 cents in.  Please, by all means, correct me if I'm wrong.

Now, the reserves were created in order to have (from the gvt's POV) a larger pseudo-standing army post World War ?.  I believe that the purpose was should WW?+1 come along, they would be able to call up soldiers who were partially trained almost immediately...  For example, given the old method of war (I mean world wars, fought over huge areas, encompassing large, "regular" (ie. non-terrorist/guerrilla warfare) if we were to engage in WWIII, the gov't could call up ALL active reserve members, regardless of hardship for leaving work.  If you are needed to defend your country, you go.  End of story.  You agreed to enlist as a reserve member, but when it comes down to it, the government can make you go, right?

Reason I'm asking is that much of this thread seems to focus on the fact that these reservists are *ASKED* to volunteer...  And in the current politically-charged situations overseas, I would imagine many reservists aren't volunteering based solely on personal beliefs regarding current conflicts.

From experience, a family member is a Lt. Comdr with the Naval reserves.  He got an LOA from his place of employment (private company no less) for 1 year in order to continue his MARS training/duties on a MCDV.  He volunteered for this posting...  (Mind you, I believe that the majority of the MCDV's are staffed by Naval reserves...)  Now, he's the first to admit that he was much "rustier" than his regular forces counterparts, but he was able to catch on quickly, (ie. faster than if they trained a new MARS officer from scratch...)  If he were asked to go again, he would almost certainly have to say no.  He's got a wife, 2 kids, (nice cousins, still trying to convince them to go CF) and a great job...  HOWEVER, if we were in a conflict such as one I mentioned above (one that Canada needed to fight in, PLEASE don't respond politically, this is an example) he would be "drafted" and wouldn't have a choice.  If the gvt' demanded reserves to go regular, he'd either go full-time, or go to prison, right?  (I can't ask him, he's hiding in Quito somewhere right now.)

I'm of the opinion that if you join the reserves, you shouldn't be under any obligation to go one tours, UNLESS REQUIRED (to keep training up, etc.)  Face it, like it or not, the reserves (IMO) ARE weekend warriors, so should we really call them up, or expect a higher number to "volunteer"?  I signed up full-time knowing that I'm going to be risking my life on a semi-permanent basis.  Reservists (IMO) don't.

I don't believe that the three-tiered system mentioned above would work, for the logistical nightmares it would cause, but the way in which the CDN military is used has altered dramatically since the inception of the reserves...  I believe they are necessary, but should be used more for homeland security than any real intention of sending them abroad.  IE. if Toronto gets a few inches of snow this year, send in the reserves to dig them out. 

B.N.S.

P.S. Application went in for MARS officer, full-time...  MAN, there's a lot of paperwork, isn't there? 

 

[12alfa]

I can't speak of other units or other area's, but.

My unit does not have a "social club".When we were gearing up for that Y2k BS we had above 90% commitment to deploy within 24hrs, and more in 48hrs.

Most (99%) Sr nco's are committed to the Regt, and deploy to the field when needed. A large part of our Nco's work in G-town supporting the reg force.

Cpl's and below are generally students, after school they get work or a callout.

Having the system telling us when we expect to deploy and when we can return from deployment over seas unlike what we have now, (seen calling troops 1 week before their course),   does not work.

Telling a unit that they can send names and they will deploy in dates that don't change would boost the number of res's that would deploy, I count myself in this group.
As it stands now no one call tell me for sure if i place my name on the list if i will go, and when i will know if i will go. Does this sound like a good way to get anyone to put their name forward for deployments? I think not. Granted some have a flexable life, most don't.

"We still run a system for the reserves that is a hold over from WWII. " It (sys) was before WWII and works if properly funded, which it is not.

I recommend a system that the reserves have their own funds, and not part of DND's (now it can be drawn from by whoever for what ever).

A trg system that is the same as the reg force, and it's own equipment, that is used for res courses and deployments.

A system that has res's at the top looking out for our intrest, not a ex reg force person who has left the regs and now thinks he/she knows what is best for the reserves, most times they do not.

A system that has our leaders are held to account for mis-spending of our funds. I don't think we would spend millions on refitting AFV's , then take them out of service.

A open system that we can all see how our tax dollars are being spent on our troops and equipment. And measures backed up by laws to enforce them if caught( outside the goverement) mis-using said funds, unlike what we have now in place.

All of this we don't have , and it's the reason for the mess we are in, it will not improve with out changes to the broken system now in place.
We can't or won't change what is in place, therefor we will not recover to what we all want, a res force that is deployable and well trained to support the reg's with the min funds.

 

[Brad Sallows]

The 25% benchmark for deployment in 30 days is in my limited (one unit) experience unrealistic.  The fraction will probably vary among regions.  At any one time the same, small, handful of people is interested in full-time contracts.  As time passes some of them return to school and get jobs and new ones join the pool, but it is always a small pool.  For a short-term emergency (eg. fire-fighting) larger numbers of people are willing to commit on short notice for short periods (a couple of weeks).

People on B"A"/B/C terms of employment are full-time employees.  Presumably they want to be full-time employees and if not employed by the army would be employed or in school elsewhere.  They should not be counted as a representative number of people available for "unlimited liability" contracts unless you assume they would just be cooling their heels somewhere if the army did not employ them full-time.

By the definition confirmed above, I have known very, very few "social club" reservists.  The overwhelming number of NCOs and officers I have known did/do useful work; of those that did not, none were mess dwellers.  Whatever they were, they weren't "social club" reservists.

 

[Spr.Earl]

IMO we should be like the Brits as their system is a hell of a better than the U.S..

In the U.K. every year all Reservists must complete their set standards in regards to their trade and physical tests to remain current, you must pass if you don't you are tagged non effective.
Also you get a Tax Free Bonus if you pass all which was about 500 lbs maybe more now.
This is a incentive to keep people ,may be we should do the same.
The U.K. Reservist's can walk over our's any day just because of their training and attitude.

 

[muskrat89]

Well, at the risk of poking the hornet's nest....   From 83-96, in my Regiment, the closest thing that I saw to a social club was Snr NCOs retiring from the Regular Force, and taking positions in our Regiment - TSM, BSM, Transport NCO, BQMS - the "plum" Senior NCO positions. Why couldn't they get filled by people within? Well - during those years, we seemed to focus our training/recruiting schedules around students. That, in my mind, isn't very smart - students graduate and move away. In those years, often - the people who could get away, either for callouts or courses -were, as Mr. Sallows pointed out - students, people who were unemployed, or people who didn't want to hold down a regular job. The years when my Dad was in - many Militia members were secure, permanent residents of the Community, that could be counted on to get away to courses, etc., and the employers' culture in those days, seemed to accommodate that. So, it was the "system" I guess, that created holes in the manning that were gladly filled by retirees (who had probably spent their years disparaging the Militia) who now wanted some semi-work to fill up their new found retirement hours. As they were ready to move on, there was ALWAYS another retiree coming down the pike, to take their place. (regardless of their quality, IMO - but that was the COs problem).

Now, I probably sound bitter, but it was frustration, more than anything. The "system" often prevented the best from progressing - chances are if a person was dependable and a leader in the Unit, then they were dependable and a leader at their civvie job, and not as likely to be given time off for courses, etc. The old boy network, which, admittedly, I was a part of, on a lesser level - did a good job providing employment for each other, as they retired. On the flip side, the individual usually (not always) was a benefit to the Unit, and brought a lot of experience.

Sorry for rambling, but this subject does tingle a nerve or two.....

 

[PuckChaser]

I think the reserves would be a more feasable option for permanent residents of a city if we had a job protection system as good as the US. Friend of mine has a full time job, and only has 4 weeks to do courses in the summer. He's losing money to take the time off to train, but has to pick and choose what courses so he can get back to work.

 

[ackland]

I think the reserves would be a more feasable option for permanent residents of a city if we had a job protection system as good as the US. Friend of mine has a full time job, and only has 4 weeks to do courses in the summer. He's losing money to take the time off to train, but has to pick and choose what courses so he can get back to work.

I've heard that alot of employers in teh states won't toouch reservist because of the legislation down there any one know how true that is?

 

[pbi]

In general I guess I have to side with Brad: he seems to be presenting the argument that is closest to what I recognize as "the facts". I base my comments below on eight years as a Res Inf soldier, three years on RSS under the old system (previous to LFCO 11-30 that integrated Regs into the Res units), and two plus years so far as COS of a Res CBG. There are so many targets in the preceding posts that I could go on for pages, but I'll restrict my comments to a few ideas.

"We should stop recruiting students and recruit solid community members. The Militia used to be full of them."

Disagree. Generally speaking, only younger people have the physical attributes to complete recruit training and then perform in the field to a useful standard in the positions such as rifleman, gun number, etc. Being in a rifle section is not a job for 35 year olds. As well, only young people have the time available for the heavy individual training burden needed to complete DP1. As well, it is extremely unlikely that a peson who is married, has kids and has established themselves in a job will be attracted to an entry-level position in the Reserve. In my experience, you get them when they're young, and then grow them into it so that Army Reserve life is a permanent part of their lifestyle. Those are the people who will stay, because Reserve service is such a deep love for them that they bend their personal lives to make it work. As for the idea that Reserve units were once full of "established citizens", that may have been true in the years following WWII and Korea when Reserve units tended to function as social clubs for wartime buddies, but it definitely was not the case when I joined in 1974. We were overwhelmingly based on student recruits. I see nothing wrong with that.

"We need job protection legislation"

Maybe, but be careful. Last year in our CBG we received a USARNG briefing team from 34 Inf Div, giving us a general overview of ARNG methods and issues. At that time, they expressed very grave concern over the time demands being placed on ARNG soldiers due to OEF and OIF. The Active Army is relying very heavily on ARNG and ARES soldiers, just as the other US services are relying on their respective reserves (in some cases as much as 50% of their deployed strength). They stated that they were already getting a reaction from their soldiers and from some employers. This is particularly true of smaller employers who cannot afford to lose their skilled employees, especially if the loss translates into loss of business. Medical Reservists, especially doctors, are complaining about the time away from their practices back in the US. While each state (and the Feds) have job protection legislation, they seem to prefer to gain the willing cooperation of the employer, as we do, because there is less impact on the soldier. In 1987 when I was in Staff School I wrote a paper on the idea of job protection legislation, and I researched the Reserve attrition situation in the US at that time. The biggest single cause of US Reservists leaving their units was employer pressure. So, I think that while we should certainly have JPL for emergencies, we should be careful about using it. It is far, far better to get the willing cooperation of employers, as the CF Liaison Council tries to do. In 38 CBG, during Op PEREGRINE (BC Fires) we got excellent support in all three of our provinces. Admittedly, this was for a deployment of only about three weeks in length.

"Reserve units should be done away with/made part of Regular units/commanded by Regulars"

It's probably worth remembering the three roles the CLS has assigned to the Army Reserve: to augment the Regular Army for operations, to provide a base for mobilization, and to connect with Canadians by providing an Army footprint in the community. To achieve any one, or all three of these requires healthy, functioning Reserve units with strong community profiles. Some of our units have that, some don't. Some  work at it, some don't. Try turning a Res unit into a puppy mill for the RegF, or denying Reservists the chance to advance, and you will have probably drive a spike right through what capabilities they do have now. Remember: the Reserve is voluntary and part time. They are there because they want to be, and because there are strong motivations to spend time away from family job and friends. Strip away the motivators and you will just increase attrition. Some people have used the parallel of the volunteer firefighter: it is apt.  While I attended Quantico, I was a member of  the VFD in the town I lived in. Due to the unique arrangement in our County, our stations were manned by the County's "paid men" (ie: "Regular Force") during the period 0600-1800, then by us ("Reservists') 1800-0600 and on wknds/stat hols. We owned the buildings, the trucks and all the equipment, and wore different uniforms from the paid men. I can tell you that the relationship was hideously bad, on several levels, and out of a department roll of about 80 people, there were some nights when we could barely man two out of our eight or so rigs. Very few people attended training sessions. I suggest that if you were to treat a Res unit in a similar way, you would get similar results. I offer the unsuccessful and unloved 10/90 experiment as an example. IMHO it is best to run things pretty much as we do now, with all full time staff, Regular or Reserve, under the command of the Reservists.

"It;s a big social club"

Yes, in some units it probably still is. But, I can assure you that this problem is a tiny shade of what it was when I joined in 1974, when hte Army Reserve did nothing of any significance except rot in the corner. Maybe some folks here lack the historical perspective to see how far we have come. However, there is one Reserve problem that existed when I joined, and still exists today, and that is the almost pathological unwillingness of some Reserve leaders to hold people accountable. I have seen too many examples of this. It is extremely frustrating, both for good Reservists and for Regulars posted in. From time to time it has become a morale issue with some our RegF folks if I hold them to the standard that is expected of professionals, but they can look around and see a Reservist of equivalent or higher rank just tearing the ass out of it. This, IMHO, must be fixed because it goes straight to the heart of professionalism and thus credibility. Are there incompetent idiots or corrupt people in the Regular Army? Yes! Plenty! But, odds are, they are more likely to be held accountable.

Cheers.

 

[ackland]

The point about holding people accountable is a great one. What needs to happen on that account is that it must be enforced from the top. At my unit we are starting to happen. We have a young LT who has been on extras for about 6 months. Good start. But he keeps stepping on his dick. Has he been charged no has any further action been taken NO. So as a senior NCO I was this young LT date Cpl and Do all sorts of other unprofessional things. What are the consequences? Nothing. What message does that give the NC Ms?
After the big mess left behind from the Somalia affair the politicians decided there was a leadership problem in the army. well it sure came down on the heads of the Snr NCO and MCPL's but where is the leadership from above? I rarely see it and the troops see it and I find that this is a big part of why the level of attrition is so high.

 

[pbi]

TR: I think you're on to something there. While I believe that the majority of Reserve leaders are well motivated and try to do well against considerable obstacles, there are some who IMHO should be removed "pour encourager les autres" Tolerating dead wood only frustrates the good Res soldiers, disgusts the Regulars posted in, and generally weakens the credibility of the Res in general. But, again IMHO, it is a Reserve issue to fix: if the Regular Army steps in there will be hell to pay. Cheers.

 

[pbi]

Yes-that's what I meant-"heck". You know-where the Devil has his CP. Cheers.

 

[Simpleton]

I think the reserves would be a more feasable option for permanent residents of a city if we had a job protection system as good as the US. Friend of mine has a full time job, and only has 4 weeks to do courses in the summer. He's losing money to take the time off to train, but has to pick and choose what courses so he can get back to work.

Do we really need job protection? I don't think it will ever happen given that reserves provide 25% of a deployed force without legislation. Why would any government see a need to bring this into effect. Now if the regular force couldn't obtain even 5% reserves - then you may see government interest.

 

[ackland]

Just out of curiosity whta's IMHO?

 

[teltech]

In My Humble Opinion

 

[CanadianSIG]

TR: I think you're on to something there. While I believe that the majority of Reserve leaders are well motivated and try to do well against considerable obstacles, there are some who IMHO should be removed "pour encourager les autres" Tolerating dead wood only frustrates the good Res soldiers, disgusts the Regulars posted in, and generally weakens the credibility of the Res in general. But, again IMHO, it is a Reserve issue to fix: if the Regular Army steps in there will be heck to pay. Cheers.

Agreed: but how do you fix it from a NCM level?

Lack of accountability at the unit's leadership is one of our core members biggest frustrations. The seniors Cpl/MCpl/Sgts can hold the ranks accountable for the tasks we are given, and deadwood gets the message that either they cowboy up or hit the road; but no one seems to hold the unit's higher up's responsible. It seems that if the meager training checkboxes get checked then that is the end of their responsibility - there is no accountablity for a unit's readiness/effectiveness/etc...

On of our challenges this year is to get a clearly defined role of our unit and a copy of the required training plan in the attempt to illuminate the shortcomings of our current 'exs' - shortcomings which are developing extremely hazardous habits...

example ---
OC: your role is to provide comms
NCM: does that mean getting the truck there intact sir
OC: of course
NCM: well sir we've never done any convoy doctrine - ever... we think that might be important to ensure we have the skills/knowledge to know what to do in case the convoy gets bumped....

In the past we've just been met with that deer in the headlight look - hopefully this year will be different.

If anyone has any ideas on this subject please throw your loonie in... because we're running out of ideas.

 

[ackland]

Agreed: but how do you fix it from a NCM level?

Lack of accountability at the unit's leadership is one of our core members biggest frustrations. The seniors Cpl/MCpl/Sgts can hold the ranks accountable for the tasks we are given, and deadwood gets the message that either they cowboy up or hit the road; but no one seems to hold the unit's higher up's responsible. It seems that if the meager training checkboxes get checked then that is the end of their responsibility - there is no accountablity for a unit's readiness/effectiveness/etc...

On of our challenges this year is to get a clearly defined role of our unit and a copy of the required training plan in the attempt to illuminate the shortcomings of our current 'exs' - shortcomings which are developing extremely hazardous habits...

example ---
OC: your role is to provide comms
NCM: does that mean getting the truck there intact sir
OC: of course
NCM: well sir we've never done any convoy doctrine - ever... we think that might be important to ensure we have the skills/knowledge to know what to do in case the convoy gets bumped....

In the past we've just been met with that deer in the headlight look - hopefully this year will be different.

If anyone has any ideas on this subject please throw your loonie in... because we're running out of ideas.

Well do as we do at my unit. When given a task and no training plan from the OC, try and creat your own. We SGT sat down and figured out what the tasks for the year were and came up with our own training schedule to fit the needs. The OC gave us sh*t for going on our own but we got the job done and the soldiers learnt and enjoyed it. Instead of sitting throught the 100th lesson on hide and harbour routine. They had fun trying the new things and got into the spirit of being soldiers and not class room students. Take the responsibility for the short comings of higher and protect the soldier. that is the roll of Snr NCO's so do what needs to be done.

 

[CanadianSIG]

When given a task and no training plan from the OC, try and creat your own. We SGT sat down and figured out what the tasks for the year were and came up with our own training schedule to fit the needs. The OC gave us sh*t for going on our own but we got the job done and the soldiers learnt and enjoyed it. Instead of sitting throught the 100th lesson on hide and harbour routine. They had fun trying the new things and got into the spirit of being soldiers and not class room students. Take the responsibility for the short comings of higher and protect the soldier. that is the roll of Snr NCO's so do what needs to be done.

Tried all last year - only to have the plans deep sixed, or in the words of our Sgt 'sabotaged'... we're going to try it again but even the troops are beginning to ask why we are banging our heads against the wall so hard....

 

[Freight_Train]

Just out of curiosity whta's IMHO?

I have found this online computing dictionary very helpful - http://wombat.doc.ic.ac.uk/foldoc/index.html
Greg