# CAF undermanned; budget cuts to recruiting & training



## McG (16 Dec 2014)

Looks like the organization is falling far short of the assigned PY level because budget cuts are preventing recruiting and training from keeping pace with a high attrition.



> Early retirement, weak recruitment mean the Canadian military is facing a shortfall of personnel
> Lee Berthiaume
> National Post
> 16 Dec 2014
> ...


Reducing the CAF will only ensure we are not ready for whatever comes next.


----------



## TCM621 (16 Dec 2014)

Just want to point out that in the "dark days" of the 90s, we had newer equipment and 12000 more regular force members. The party which has continually trots out the "dark days" line has actually been worse then the liberals.


----------



## cryco (16 Dec 2014)

Why were the 90s  (or parts of) considered 'dark days' ?


----------



## a_majoor (16 Dec 2014)

I recall when the manning levels were threatening to fall below 50,000 in the early 2000's, and virtually everyone with a pulse and a temperature of 37C was being inducted to compensate.

While senior management could be told that "manning" was moving in the right direction, there was no corresponding allocation of resources for instructors, training material and ammunition, uniforms etc. The situation was getting so bad that I remember seeing a REO for a "PAT Pl NCO" in Borden, where the NCO would be in charge of an improbable number of PATs (I think a team of 4 NCO's would be in charge of 90 PATs or something like that). And of course we have all heard the stories of PATs waiting their entire 3 year contracts in PAT battalions because there were no course openings.

Look for more "fun with numbers" as people paper over the issue.


----------



## TCM621 (17 Dec 2014)

cryco said:
			
		

> Why were the 90s  (or parts of) considered 'dark days' ?


A huge reduction of the budget, troops who could barely afford to live, Training budgets depleted by January. A lot like now.  Except we had new ships, newish planes, and trucks that were still in good shape.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (17 Dec 2014)

Troops could afford to live in 99% of the places they could be posted to. Units still shot plenty.   The We got new trucks, the 16 ton (I think that's what it's rated for), the 8-10 ton for the Reserves, new tanks, and new guns (M777).


----------



## MilEME09 (17 Dec 2014)

So would the CAF's current situation be more closer to how we were looking in the 70's? some good equipment, a lot of equipment falling apart, and promises of new kit to come.


----------



## ModlrMike (17 Dec 2014)

I see this as no more than the expected post operations ebb and flow. We saw the same phenomenon post Cold War, and post Korea, albeit to a lesser extent because we were a bigger force.

Grow during times of conflict, shrink during times of "peace". Nothing surprising here.


----------



## McG (17 Dec 2014)

Sheep Dog AT said:
			
		

> ... new guns (M777).


Those started arriving in Afghanistan while Paul Martin was still PM.


----------



## TCM621 (17 Dec 2014)

Sheep Dog AT said:
			
		

> Troops could afford to live in 99% of the places they could be posted to. Units still shot plenty.   The We got new trucks, the 16 ton (I think that's what it's rated for), the 8-10 ton for the Reserves, new tanks, and new guns (M777).


Prior to the raise in 98, it was tough to raise a family in some places. I am from Victoria so maybe I saw it a lot more with the Navy.  Army postings may have been better.


----------



## acen (17 Dec 2014)

There are REO's for infantryman positions in 3RCR now, as well as tons of tasks coming down to join 1 or 3 RCR recce for exercises due to MATA/PATA backfills (at least that's the excuse). I've only been in since 2006 but I don't recall ever hearing about stuff like that before now. Was it like that in the 90's?


----------



## McG (17 Dec 2014)

The PATA thing did not exist then, but you could find Cl B pers in battalions.


----------



## quadrapiper (17 Dec 2014)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> I see this as no more than the expected post operations ebb and flow. We saw the same phenomenon post Cold War, and post Korea, albeit to a lesser extent because we were a bigger force.
> 
> Grow during times of conflict, shrink during times of "peace". Nothing surprising here.


Would seem like something that should be better "scaled" and planned for, especially with (I'll throw WWII in as well) three different draw-downs to source lessons from.

Expect, though, that measures likely to mitigate the ebb and flow; "over"-staffed training facilities, "empty" spaces in units/bases, and mothballed current kit, all managed with the notion of meeting "short" term needs (say, Afghanistan); would either be cut by the first government looking to create easy savings, or wouldn't get off the ground.


----------



## daftandbarmy (17 Dec 2014)

acen said:
			
		

> There are REO's for infantryman positions in 3RCR now, as well as tons of tasks coming down to join 1 or 3 RCR recce for exercises due to MATA/PATA backfills (at least that's the excuse). I've only been in since 2006 but I don't recall ever hearing about stuff like that before now. Was it like that in the 90's?



Nope. 

Back then they regarded the mole-itia as some kind of interesting form of plant life. 

Thanks largely to some more visionary thinkers in the Reg F these days, and reservists stepping up to serve on operations and demonstrate their competence over the past 10 years, we have a greater opportunity than ever to do more interesting and meaningful stuff.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (17 Dec 2014)

Used to be a goodly number of FLYOVER spots for Fall Ex IIRC before Germany shut down.

WRT equipment procurement etc, I wonder how "expensive" a new tank, or MPA, or frigate/destroyer was 'then' compared to now.  Inflation, prices are up, all that financial type stuff.

I used to do a paper route as a kid; 75 cents got me a bottle of pop, bag of chips and some double bubble.  75 cents now won't get you a breath of fresh air.

We have received increases in pay, decreases in benefits in some areas...I would be curious to see how it all balances out from 20 years ago to know in terms of "bang for the buck".

And, Merry Christmas, don't forget the slight increase in pension contributions eff 01 Jan.   :subbies:


----------



## MilEME09 (17 Dec 2014)

Well if this isn't a indicator of the situation I don't know what it, a one year class be for a vehicle tech corporal to be attached to JTF2 according to the REO.

http://armyapp.forces.gc.ca/reo-oer/details-renseignements.aspx?positionnumber=O-18212&lang=eng

If even our SoF need to call on reservist help is that not a problem if THEY can't fill all their positions?


----------



## DAA (17 Dec 2014)

MilEME09 said:
			
		

> Well if this isn't a indicator of the situation I don't know what it, a one year class be for a vehicle tech corporal to be attached to JTF2 according to the REO.
> 
> http://armyapp.forces.gc.ca/reo-oer/details-renseignements.aspx?positionnumber=O-18212&lang=eng
> 
> If even our SoF need to call on reservist help is that not a problem if THEY can't fill all their positions?



Look a bit closer...... "Subj: Class C Res Svc opportunity   "

A "step up" from a Class B position.......

What the REO doesn't specify, is why?  So this could be a short term manning issue or given that it is a one year contract, could be a MATA/PATA backfill.  Good luck filling that one.......even with the Class C "carrot" being dangled.


----------



## MilEME09 (17 Dec 2014)

that is my bad, any way i agree with you, like 90% of the positions posted on that site, it will probably go unfilled


----------



## Harris (17 Dec 2014)

I see we're back to the, "Want a job reserve guy?  Well, feel free to pay your own way to get/live here." days.


----------



## Monsoon (17 Dec 2014)

Harris said:
			
		

> I see we're back to the, "Want a job reserve guy?  Well, feel free to pay your own way to get/live here." days.


Actually we've been there for about a year and a half now. But instead of being up-front about what we're doing (denying people a TB-mandated entitlement, i.e.), we're actually in the, "Want a job reserve guy? Well, sign this false declaration stating that you already live in the local area of the employment," days.


----------



## Stoker (17 Dec 2014)

hamiltongs said:
			
		

> Actually we've been there for about a year and a half now. But instead of being up-front about what we're doing (denying people a TB-mandated entitlement, i.e.), we're actually in the, "Want a job reserve guy? Well, sign this false declaration stating that you already live in the local area of the employment," days.



Strange thing in Halifax most of the sailors that never had their contracts renewed applied and got multiple year contracts working with the army due to already being in the area.


----------

