# Class A service and AWOL



## ModlrMike (11 May 2018)

Question: is it possible to successfully charge a Class A reservist under Sect 90 for having missed a duty watch?

It is generally accepted wisdom that reserve members are only subject to the CSD under specific circumstances. That being said, I note that QR&O 103.23 does not explicitly mention reserve service in the context of AWOL. In fact, if you read down to sub para (K) on drafting charges, it stats that:

"failing to obey an order of which he ought to have been aware (although misapprehension arising from want of clarity in the order may be ground for excuse)."

I would submit that in order to rely on this principle, one would have to ensure that the member was aware of the duty. Given that Routine Orders are emailed out to everyone, and that there is a requirement under the NDA to acquaint oneself with orders and directives, I propose that you could make a case for AWOL in this instance. Even if the member claimed they did not get the email, they're still bound by the requirement to be aware of the contents of Routine Orders, which are available to them. Provided they're not NES during the period the ROs were promulgated, they're still liable in my mind.

Opinions... thoughts... comments...

QR&O 103.23


----------



## Poppa (11 May 2018)

About 15 or so years ago we charged a member for being absent during a weekend course. mbr had signed the pay sheets on Friday evening and sometime the next day he decided to just walk away from the armoury.


----------



## dapaterson (11 May 2018)

Problem: If they are not subject to the CSD at the time of the offence, they cannot be found guilty of an offense under the CSD.

So, if your charge sheet states that they were not present when they were on duty, but they were not subject to the CSD at that time because the conditions under s60 were not met, you lack jurisdiction and the charge gets tossed.  (Plus your local JAG gets upset with you).

There's 294 of the NDA, but that's under a civilian court. (Text below)

However, nothing would preclude administrative action for the same problem... and admin action can lead to a less than favourable release item...



Failure to attend parade
294 (1) Every officer or non-commissioned member of the reserve force who without lawful excuse neglects or refuses to attend any parade or training at the place and hour appointed therefor is guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction for each offence, if an officer, to a fine not exceeding fifty dollars and, if a non-commissioned member, to a fine not exceeding twenty-five dollars.

Marginal note:Each absence an offence
(2) Absence from any parade or training referred to in subsection (1) is, in respect of each day on which the absence occurs, a separate offence.

R.S., 1985, c. N-5, s. 294; R.S., 1985, c. 31 (1st Supp.), s. 60.


----------



## kratz (11 May 2018)

Yes,
It's possible and been discussed on the site before.

I don't have the time to search, but use this search template on Google.

"site:navy.ca ???" and you come close to your answer.


----------



## FJAG (11 May 2018)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Problem: If they are not subject to the CSD at the time of the offence, they cannot be found guilty of an offense under the CSD.
> 
> So, if your charge sheet states that they were not present when they were on duty, but they were not subject to the CSD at that time because the conditions under s60 were not met, you lack jurisdiction and the charge gets tossed.  (Plus your local JAG gets upset with you).
> 
> ...



Bingo. That's the DS answer.

One very minor add-on. While the member may not be subject to the CSD when he is not there to perform the duty, he might be, coincidentally, subject to the CSD for one of the other stated reasons (for example, he attends at the armouries and goes to the mess for a drink when he should be on duty. He would at the time be subject to the CSD under s 60(1)(c)(viii) by virtue of being in a defence establishment at the relevant time)

 :cheers:


----------



## dapaterson (11 May 2018)

Except, on reflection, one of the situations where a Res F member is subject to the CSD is when they are "on duty".  Defined in s33 in a way that's almost as vague as "active service".

Regardless, the charge would go to court martial, and the JAG's prosecutors and defenders would bash each other all over the head over it, and make a mess...


----------



## Eye In The Sky (11 May 2018)

kratz said:
			
		

> Yes,
> It's possible and been discussed on the site before.
> 
> I don't have the time to search, but use this search template on Google.
> ...



Was that some time ago now?  I can't imagine an instance nowadays where a Cl A or even Cl B reservist who wasn't subj to the CSD was found guilty of a service offense.  Or that, even if it happened, it wasn't thrown out on review by the AJAG.

If I was doing the UDI and looking at the elements of the offense, they could not be met and my recommendation to the Charge Layer would be to not proceed.

Whether the unit decided to pursue admin actions could be entirely different, however.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (11 May 2018)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Except, on reflection, one of the situations where a Res F member is subject to the CSD is when they are "on duty".  Defined in s33 in a way that's almost as vague as "active service".



Not really.  Cl B pers are on duty as detailed in the Unit ROs, or something like that where duty hours are published by the CO.  If a Mon-Fri 8 to 4 worker on CL B at their reserve unit gets into a fight downtown on Saturday night, they are not 'on duty' and not subj to the CSD.  There would have to be evidence to show the mbr was 'on duty'.  I'm sure most CL B folks working at reserve units don't know they aren't subj ot the CSD 24/7 during their class B employment.  If the mbr is on CL B with a Reg Force unit, that is different and they are subj to the CSD 24/7.

When looking at the 'elements of the offense' items, while it might not be covered in Vol 2, Chap 103, it is covered in Vol 2, Chap 102 Disciplinary Jurisdiction, Art 102.01:

"60. (1) The following persons are subject to the Code of Service Discipline:

c.an officer or non-commissioned member of the reserve force when the officer or non-commissioned member is

i.undergoing drill or training, whether in uniform or not,
ii.in uniform,
iii.on duty,
iv.[Repealed, S.C. 1998, c. 35, s. 19],
v.called out under Part VI in aid of the civil power,
vi.called out on service,
vii.placed on active service,
viii.in or on any vessel, vehicle or aircraft of the Canadian Forces or in or on any defence establishment or work for defence,
ix.serving with any unit or other element of the regular force or the special force, or
x.present, whether in uniform or not, at any drill or training of a unit or other element of the Canadian Forces;

I've seen Cl A mbr's not show up for a weekend trg event, but show up that Sat night at the Jnr Ranks mess and then proceed to argue with their superiors about why they weren't able to make it for trg but could make it for beers.  He didn't think he was subj to the CSD because he wasn't 'signed in or in uniform' but he found out later he was during the disciplinary proceedings.  That one saw a MCpl go back to Tpr.

* this topic is (or was, in my case) covered in fairly significant detail during my UDI/CL training with the AJAG;  I'd say 99% of the audience (MCpls to Majors) learned a thing or two about A and B class reserve mbrs and when the CSD applies to them.  

** reference site on the DWAN:  AJAG (Atlantic Region): http://halifax.mil.ca/AJAG/ ;  specifically the documents under the tabs on the left side of the page called “Military Justice” and “Chief’s Corner”.


----------



## ModlrMike (11 May 2018)

Ok...

Let's say that they parade on tuesday and they're told "you're on duty watch next thursday, ensure you're here.", and they subsequently don't show up. Then they parade at the next scheduled night. 

There has to be some recourse for the chain of command.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (11 May 2018)

There is:   

http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/about-policies-standards-defence-admin-orders-directives-5000/5019-0.page

http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/about-policies-standards-defence-admin-orders-directives-5000/5019-4.page

Administrative Actions Versus Disciplinary Actions

3.13 Administrative actions are not punishments under the Code of Service Discipline.
3.14 Both disciplinary actions under the Code of Service Discipline and administrative actions are meant to address a CAF member's conduct or performance deficiency. They may operate independently or one may complement the other.
3.15 Disciplinary actions and administrative actions serve different purposes. Disciplinary actions possess a punitive aspect that administrative actions do not. Disciplinary action is initiated only if there are sufficient grounds to justify the laying of a charge under the Code of Service Discipline against a CAF member.

7.2 All forms referred to in this DAOD and all correspondence indicating conclusion of a monitoring period shall be kept permanently on the CAF personnel record.
---------------------------------------------

If there are valid CM (Corrective Measures) that can be detailed in the RM "member shall report, at the earliest known time, to their superior officer(s) once it becomes known to them that they require to miss any scheduled and published trg events...failure to do so may result in further, more severe, administrative actions being taken...".


This is one of the big differences between now and the old "verbal warning/written warning/C & P" days;  unlike a fine of $50 -$100, all RMs are retained on the mbr's file indefinitely and should follow them until they release whereas for minor fines etc they'll eventually be removed from their Conduct Sheet.

Also, if the mbr is a 'first time offender', you could also give issue them a 5B/adverse PDR and up the score to RMs if they continue to do what they're doing (less formal than a RM but supporting doc's if it continues and RMs are sought).

Don't get me wrong;  I'm not saying what they're doing is "ok" because their A Class;  to not even have the decency to phone so a replacement can be sought is very irresponsible;  that is why you can help the member 'overcome their deficiences' and help themselves thru things like Remedial Measures.   ;D


----------



## FJAG (11 May 2018)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> Ok...
> 
> Let's say that they parade on tuesday and they're told "you're on duty watch next thursday, ensure you're here.", and they subsequently don't show up. Then they parade at the next scheduled night.
> 
> There has to be some recourse for the chain of command.



All kinds of consequences are available but at the time that the offence of not being there happens, the Class A reservist is not subject to the CSD and therefore cannot be tried for an offence of being absent.

Basically you have to look at the structure of reserve service. It's still tied to the old system from over a century ago. Basically most reservists on Class A are operating under NDA s 33(2)(a) which is "ordered to train". Very rarely are they "called out on service to perform any military duty ..." under NDA s 33(2)(b).
By virtue of QR&O 9.04(2) the CDS has, by regulation, prescribed that a reservist may be order to train no more than 15 days on Class B service and no more than 60 days Class A service in a year.

Where a reservist does not show up for the ordered training, he may be charged BUT it has to be before a civilian court under the provisions of NDA 294(1). 

The bottom line is that the law, as set forth by the legislature is complete. The NDA provides a judicial remedy for the very offence that you describe. The fact that you do not like the law as stated is not the problem. The problem is that when I was DJAG/Res I tried for seven years to get this provision worked on and in brief, I could not muster the backing either within JAG or at the Chief of Res and Cadets Council level to move it forward to where it had to be dealt with: Parliament.

 :cheers:


----------



## Blackadder1916 (11 May 2018)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> Let's say that they parade on tuesday and they're told "you're on duty watch next thursday, ensure you're here.", and they subsequently don't show up. Then they parade at the next scheduled night.



While this may stray a bit from the theme of disciplinary vs administrative measure, I'm a little confused about Class A reservists standing duties at their unit location on days other than scheduled parade nights.  Is this common?  It's been a long time since I served in/commanded a reserve unit and the memory may be affected by aluminum mess tins but I don't remember a Class A soldier ever being scheduled for duties other than Duty Cpl (or Duty Sgt) on a parade night (and that was mainly for the messes).  What does the sailor do when he stands "duty watch"?  It's not like your stone frigate is a threat to navigation.


----------



## ModlrMike (11 May 2018)

Blackadder1916 said:
			
		

> While this may stray a bit from the theme of disciplinary vs administrative measure, I'm a little confused about Class A reservists standing duties at their unit location on days other than scheduled parade nights.  Is this common?  It's been a long time since I served in/commanded a reserve unit and the memory may be affected by aluminum mess tins but I don't remember a Class A soldier ever being scheduled for duties other than Duty Cpl (or Duty Sgt) on a parade night (and that was mainly for the messes).  What does the sailor do when he stands "duty watch"?  It's not like your stone frigate is a threat to navigation.



Our duty watch consists of safety, security, and access control. We're in the middle of the city, and not the best part of town. Security is probably the most important thing we do.


----------



## runormal (11 May 2018)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> Our duty watch consists of safety, security, and access control. We're in the middle of the city, and not the best part of town. Security is probably the most important thing we do.



Not to derail this, but do sailors enjoy this? This sounds like it would be extremely boring and not a good use of their time. Is it voluntarily or does everyone do one every X days? I'm just generally curious.


----------



## ModlrMike (11 May 2018)

FJAG said:
			
		

> All kinds of consequences are available but at the time that the offence of not being there happens, the Class A reservist is not subject to the CSD and therefore cannot be tried for an offence of being absent.



Thanks for that... I thought as much, and I can't see anyone invoking NDA 294(1). 

Well, it looks like remedial measures are the way to go.


----------



## ModlrMike (11 May 2018)

runormal said:
			
		

> Not to derail this, but do sailors like this? This sounds like it would be extremely boring and not a good use of their time. Is it voluntarily or does everyone do one every X days? I'm just generally curious.



As with all duty watches, there's going to be an element of boredom... like doesn't really enter into it. The frequency of duty watch depends on one's rank. For OS-LS once or twice per year. MS-P1 twice to three times per year, and SLt-Lt(N) likely 3-4 times per year. It's really just a numbers game. The watch itself is two days out of the week; the regular parade and admin nights, so in the end not too bad a deal. Much better than the watch schedule at sea.


----------



## RedcapCrusader (12 May 2018)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> Our duty watch consists of safety, security, and access control. We're in the middle of the city, and not the best part of town. Security is probably the most important thing we do.


  

We have multiple buildings throughout the city, you could consider them middle of the city, some not in great locations either. We don't have any extra Duty personnel other than the daily assigned Duty NCO (Cl B) and at one location in particular, a Commissionaire.

Making a Duty Watch on someone's day off simply because the people actually working in the building on that day/the commissionaire can't be bothered is really silly. Not to mention you have your local police/nearby MP's to help support the safety and security part. 

If access control is a problem, maybe you need to have a PSS conducted and put in work orders to have a proper control system out in place.  Ordering Class A Reservists to do a Duty Watch on a building outside the minimum service obligation, and expecting them to show up when honestly there's better things they could be doing, is kind of a dick move. Maybe those that don't have much work or are students it's not so bad but this seems a bit ridiculous and honestly, other than giving someone an IC I don't think you can/should do much else unless it's a repeat offence. 

I would make it a voluntary task, ask people if there's anyone that would like some extra paid days to do it, but beyond that any Duty Personnel or Lockup Personnel are usually an NCO that is Class B and regularly works in the building as to not disrupt the lives/careers/studies of the Cl A folks.

That's just my opinion though, maybe your people don't mind.


----------



## ModlrMike (12 May 2018)

You're missing the point:

Regular parade night duty watch. Same number of hours involved. Not something extra that they have to do on their "day off".


----------



## runormal (12 May 2018)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> You're missing the point:
> 
> Regular parade night duty watch. Same number of hours involved. Not something extra that they have to do on their "day off".



Who does it outside of the normal Admin/Parade nights? I'm not telling you how to run the show, but personally I have night classes 2 nights a week, 2 nights a week with the army and the other night is a social sports league. I don't really have any free time during the week and if my COC was "wasting" my time throughout the week the, I'd consider missing another night to make up for it. I'm busy, but I generally enjoy coming in on admin/parade nights. 

If OS Bloggins can only commit one night a week and next week is his duty watch, then he/she has just missed another week of training. Likewise, looking at your breakdown the higher your rank the more often you do it. While I admire this, this then makes key players more often unavailable during parade/admin nights, which ultimately contributes to their inefficiency. 

As a student getting paid to be pass control would be great, because I could do my homework and be paid for it. However once I graduate, you are just cutting in my free time, because I have work that needs to be done on the admin night that now gets shifted to my weekend. Yes, I could do my night school homework while essentially being a commissionaire, but I still need do whatever needed to be done that night outside of the army which makes it much less enjoyable. It's the people that make the job, not the job itself.

Paying LT (N) - $92 -> $122 / a night to be a commissionaire is expensive security.. Plus then you _should_ be paying them for the work that they do on their personal time to make up for it. 

Perhaps, I'm missing something or over simplifying the task at hand, but I don't know why this function isn't just out-sourced to the commissionaires.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (12 May 2018)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> The watch itself is two days out of the week; the regular parade and admin nights . . .





			
				ModlrMike said:
			
		

> Well, it looks like remedial measures are the way to go.



So that we are all reading from the same page, did the sailor miss the "regular parade" or the "admin night"?  If a regular parade night, did any other sailors not show up that particular evening?  How many of those other sailors are being considered for remedial measures?

Okay, not wanting to sound like a barrack room lawyer (however, anticipating a barrack room lawyer's reasoning is sometimes a good thing) but, is your intention to find someway to punish the transgressor because this is a last straw WRT this sailor or is it more "pour encourager les autres"?  Don't answer that, else the offender if he visits this forum may be able to use your statement in a possible grievance.  I admit that my awareness of Naval Reserve culture is minimal and that such culture is likely much different from Militia Army Reserve Health Services Reserve culture.  Did the sailor in question violate a specific instruction (DAOD, CFAO, QR&O, Navy Orders, Unit Standing Orders, etc) when he did not show up or is the establishment of this "duty watch" something that just evolved organically to meet a perceived need?  Are there terms of reference for the duty that includes language that imposes a greater expectation or legal requirement to show up that exceeds current higher level regulations?  If the sailor, by not showing up for this particular parade night, was not much different than any (or a significant percentage of) other sailors, what makes his performance deficient to the point that remedial measures are required.

I found this, from the C Scots R, that clearly lays out their policy about attendance and the measures that will be followed if a member does not show up.  Does your NRD have a similar published policy?

http://www.canadianscottishregiment.ca/index.php?area_id=1011&page_id=1059


> ATTENDANCE POLICY- (CLASS A RESERVE)
> 
> As with any employment, members are expected to attend all training sessions just as they would with a civilian organization. A training calendar is issued every September for the year indicating when training dates are and soldiers shall be governed accordingly. It is recognized that not all soldiers will be available at all times, because of school or civilian jobs. For this, there is an administrative form, named the Leave of Absence (LOA) form, which is in place to allow for absences from training in advance. You must call in, or fill out this form, to inform your supervisors if you know you will not be able to attend any specific training dates.
> 
> ...


----------



## ModlrMike (12 May 2018)

runormal said:
			
		

> ... but I don't know why this function isn't just out-sourced to the commissionaires.



Because duty watch is a fundamental part of being a sailor, and if you can't develop a sense of conscientiousness on shore, you're not going to have it at sea, where the safety of the ship might rest on your actions. It doesn't matter what duties are performed, it's about reinforcing a pattern of behavior.

Anyhow, this has drifted way off course, so this is my last word on why we do duty watches. Suffice to say, it's part of being in the Navy.


----------



## SupersonicMax (12 May 2018)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> Anyhow, this has drifted way off course, so this is my last word on why we do duty watches. Suffice to say, it's part of being in the Navy.



IMO, "because that's how we do it" isn't a good enough answer anymore when we are bleeding people.  Using the stick will not help.  We currently have all the reasons to revisit why we do things the way we do them.


----------



## ModlrMike (12 May 2018)

Blackadder1916 said:
			
		

> So that we are all reading from the same page, did the sailor miss the "regular parade" or the "admin night"?  If a regular parade night, did any other sailors not show up that particular evening?  How many of those other sailors are being considered for remedial measures?



Yes, he was not there on a night that he should have ordinarily been present. Lots of other sailors didn't show up, but then they did not have a specified duty assigned to them.



			
				Blackadder1916 said:
			
		

> Okay, not wanting to sound like a barrack room lawyer (however, anticipating a barrack room lawyer's reasoning is sometimes a good thing) but, is your intention to find someway to punish the transgressor because this is a last straw WRT this sailor or is it more "pour encourager les autres"?  Don't answer that, else the offender if he visits this forum may be able to use your statement in a possible grievance.  I admit that my awareness of Naval Reserve culture is minimal and that such culture is likely much different from Militia Army Reserve Health Services Reserve culture.  Did the sailor in question violate a specific instruction (DAOD, CFAO, QR&O, Navy Orders, Unit Standing Orders, etc) when he did not show up or is the establishment of this "duty watch" something that just evolved organically to meet a perceived need?  Are there terms of reference for the duty that includes language that imposes a greater expectation or legal requirement to show up that exceeds current higher level regulations?



As FJAG pointed out upthread, the problem in the end is that while the member was subject to the CSD when the order was issued, he was not subject to it when the order was to be executed, and is therefore not culpable. I wager this is a familiar experience for many reserve units. 



			
				Blackadder1916 said:
			
		

> If the sailor, by not showing up for this particular parade night, was not much different than any (or a significant percentage of) other sailors, what makes his performance deficient to the point that remedial measures are required.



His absence imposed a burden on another unit member having to take his place. In addition, if folks are going to parade when they're not on Duty Watch, and then miss when they are, that sets a bad example, and is not a culture we want to have take root. The reserve may be a volunteer, volunteer service, but there is a reasonable exception that people are going to show up.


----------



## kratz (12 May 2018)

To combat the mirade of excuses... my NRDs published the Duty Watch 3+ or more weeks in advance. Followed up by the Divisional system confirming the member will be there, at least two weeks before the duty.

So, written, verbal and committed to the duty. If ithis sailor's situation was a  one off problem, I don't think you'd be asking here.

With Class A: proper documentation, correct follow through, effective supervision and policy appplied consistently. Then yes, the Command has options to ensure members report for duty.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (12 May 2018)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> Yes, he was not there on a night that he should have ordinarily been present. Lots of other sailors didn't show up, but then they did not have a specified duty assigned to them.



If he/she did the same action as others (that being, not show up for a scheduled Cl A unit trg event), unless all the other people informed the superiors they would be absent from training, wouldn't they also be demonstrating the same conduct and/or performance deficiency?  If the mbr grieved it and it ended up at the FA, do you think it would stand an impartial review based on policy?

It comes across a little the reason to reprimand the mbr is actually to serve as a deterrent to stop _others_ from also saying "F that" and not showing up for 'Cl A Duty Watch' more than it is to correct the mbr for not attending.  It's hard, of course, to get understand completely - only so much can be conveyed in a few forum posts, but the past few posts do lead me to lean a little in that direction.

You may have posted it earlier and I missed it;  what exactly are mbr's doing during this Duty Watch Cl A trg event?  I'm just curious if this is an unpopular task at the unit and there is a bit of the 'this isn't what I joined the reserves to do' attitude towards it at the unit.  

It is obvious you're not liking some of the feedback, but you did ask for thoughts and opinions.   :Tin-Foil-Hat:  I had no opinion either way about the RMs, but after reading the part in yellow above and below, my gut reaction was the intent (at least partially) of the RMs is to deter others;  I am not sure that is inline with the spirit/intent of the policy.



			
				ModlrMike said:
			
		

> In addition, if folks are going to parade when they're not on Duty Watch, and then miss when they are, that sets a bad example, and is not a culture we want to have take root.


----------



## mariomike (13 May 2018)

kratz said:
			
		

> Yes,
> It's possible and been discussed on the site before.



For reference to the discussion, 



			
				Haggis said:
			
		

> Having gone down the "charging a Class B with AWOL" road several times (with several JAGs) it's pretty well impossible in all but the most blatant cases.  Try it sometimes and if you actually get one through to a conviction, give me the name of your JAG.





			
				FJAG said:
			
		

> The issue of whether or not Class Bs could be charged for AWOL (considering the provisions of QR&O 102.01 (NDA 60(1) which limits when reservists are subject to the CSD) was a matter of debate within the branch and if I remember correctly now (this goes back to many years for my brain and the interpretations did change somewhat) was dependant on how the individual's Class B contract was written. One had to analyse if the individual came within the provisions of the QR&O at any given time. The problem here was not dumb lawyers, but supervisors who thought Class B's were liable just like regular force members when in fact the laws of Canada (NDA 60(1)) said otherwise. The NDA was never changed but I believe (but am not sure) that subsequent contracts were eventually standardized to provide greater certainty.
> 
> Cheers





			
				FJAG said:
			
		

> A reservist on Class A service, who neglects or refuses to attend a particular training session is liable to be charged and brought for trial before a civilian court pursuant to s 294(1) of the NDA and, if found guilty, is liable to be fined a maximum of $25.00 (if an non commissioned member) and $50.00 (if an officer) for every day of training he fails or neglects to attend.
> 
> A reservist on Class B or C service would in a similar case most probably be liable to charges under the CSD because at the time they fail to attend they would most probably be subject to s 60(1)(c).
> 
> ...



etc...


----------



## expwor (13 May 2018)

Just a dumb question and going back to my Militia days (1979-1981) But are Reservists told when they join what their obligations are? Reason I ask after SRTP I decided to join. I knew (because I was told) that the obligation was one night a week and one weekend a month training. Nothing about duty watches. And in fairness never heard of anyone getting a duty watch. So are Reservists now told when they join that in addition to the one evening per week and one weekend a month they may pull a duty watch?
And if not isn't the Reserve unit obliged to tell a prospective Reservist what his/her obligations will be before he/she signs on the dotted line?
Again, just asking a question

Tom


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (13 May 2018)

There has always been duty watches in the Naval Reserve Divisions. The units are treated as ships - not land bases - and onboard our ships in harbour, whether at night, week-end or during the work day, there is always a duty watch in function. That is just the way our working life is organized onboard a ship. Reserve Divisions copy that model to run their activities. That's all.


----------



## expwor (13 May 2018)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> There has always been duty watches in the Naval Reserve Divisions. The units are treated as ships - not land bases - and onboard our ships in harbour, whether at night, week-end or during the work day, there is always a duty watch in function. That is just the way our working life is organized onboard a ship. Reserve Divisions copy that model to run their activities. That's all.



OK Thanks.  That does answer my question

Tom


----------



## FJAG (13 May 2018)

expwor said:
			
		

> Just a dumb question and going back to my Militia days (1979-1981) But are Reservists told when they join what their obligations are? Reason I ask after SRTP I decided to join. I knew (because I was told) that the obligation was one night a week and one weekend a month training. Nothing about duty watches. And in fairness never heard of anyone getting a duty watch. So are Reservists now told when they join that in addition to the one evening per week and one weekend a month they may pull a duty watch?
> And if not isn't the Reserve unit obliged to tell a prospective Reservist what his/her obligations will be before he/she signs on the dotted line?
> Again, just asking a question
> 
> Tom



When a reservist joins his ultimate obligation is that he/she may be required to fight and possibly die for their country (see NDA s 33(1) http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/n-5/page-7.html#h-22). Everything else is small beer. There is no comprehensive list of what they can and cannot be required to do.

That said, it requires an order in council to activate reservists or reserve units. QR&O 9.04 is one such regulation which authorizes the making of orders requiring a reservist to attend "training". To the best of my knowledge there is no existing regulation to allow ordering them to provide security services, per se. I'll leave it to others (read that to mean a serving DJA or AJAG) to determine or argue as to whether or not the services being described here can be considered "training" within the meaning of QR&O 9.04 or any other regulation.

 :cheers:


----------



## expwor (13 May 2018)

FJAG said:
			
		

> When a reservist joins his ultimate obligation is that he/she may be required to fight and possibly die for their country (see NDA s 33(1) http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/n-5/page-7.html#h-22). Everything else is small beer. There is no comprehensive list of what they can and cannot be required to do.
> 
> That said, it requires an order in council to activate reservists or reserve units. QR&O 9.04 is one such regulation which authorizes the making of orders requiring a reservist to attend "training". To the best of my knowledge there is no existing regulation to allow ordering them to provide security services, per se. I'll leave it to others (read that to mean a serving DJA or AJAG) to determine or argue as to whether or not the services being described here can be considered "training" within the meaning of QR&O 9.04 or any other regulation.
> 
> :cheers:



And Thank You Too.  Also answers my question

Tom


----------



## meni0n (14 May 2018)

What is the point of doing this duty during a parade night? Who secures the building for the rest of the week? Sounds like a case of "I had to do it in the Navy, now you have to do it". If I had to take come in and spend my time doing a useless duty instead of training during what little training days there are, I would rather spend my time more wisely like with my family. 

The fact that you wanted to charge a class A reservist with AWOL for this shows what kind of leadership style you practice and I wouldn't be surprised if your attempt to punish the individual would have a counter productive effect on the group.

Sent from my LG-H873 using Tapatalk


----------



## MARS (14 May 2018)

It has been decade since I was in a NRD Command team, but during the daytime, with only, say, 11 people in the building from 0800-1600, evacuating the building in an emergency was simple and easily handled by whoever had that responsibility.

On an Admin night, with upwards of 80 people, or a Training Night, with easily double that many in the building, and 3 bars that were open, it required an actual team of people to perform an evacuation in the event of a fire or to deal with whatever other things happened.

Perhaps it is indeed a matter of "the Navy has always done it this way" and I am unsure as to how the other Elements run their show, but my NRD never had any of the fumble-fuck incidents that my neighbouring militia armouries did, with damage being done to the premises as a result of the bars being open and what I assume were less robust Duty Watches.

My 2 cents


----------



## Jed (14 May 2018)

Just an observation, IMO the CAF will continue to bleed people until you can put some of the fun back into being in the military. All work and no play make Jack and Jill dull boys and girls.

What with the politically correct and overly sensitive world that is constantly under public scrutiny, this is a very difficult goal to attain.


----------



## ModlrMike (14 May 2018)

meni0n said:
			
		

> The fact that you wanted to charge a class A reservist with AWOL for this shows what kind of leadership style you practice and I wouldn't be surprised if your attempt to punish the individual would have a counter productive effect on the group.



Don't mistake asking if one CAN do a thing, for WANTING to do said thing.


----------



## CountDC (14 May 2018)

Duty Watch on a stone frigate could also be viewed as training in prep for when the nav-res mbr goes onto a real ship.  

Think of it this way:

Navy - Duty Watch on a ship
Army - Sentry Duty in the field

Seems to me that both are important and good training.  

Part of the problem is that people tend to think of the stone frigate duty watch as equivalent to the army reserve duty/orderly Cpl/NCO/O that mainly seems to be there to look after the mess.


----------



## BDTyre (14 May 2018)

I'm not sure how duty NCO has become such a big deal or so construed that we're talking about it being an additional duty above and beyond or instead of regular training. When acting as duty NCO in my unit you are duty for "two weeks." All this means that on two Wednesdays you wear the duty NCO brassard, report to the duty officer, wear your headdress in the mess and don't consume alcohol. You're required to stay in the mess until 0100 (or the last member leaves, whichever is first) at which point the duty O relieves you and you've made an extra half days pay. During the training night, you still participate in your regular training.

On the third Wednesday, you hand over everything to the incoming duty NCO. The only other time you would actually be required to work outside of your regular training nights would be events like Remembrance Day (at which you would be present any way) or any mess events.

If you can't commit, it is your responsibility to find a replacement otherwise you could face disciplinary action.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (14 May 2018)

CanadianTire said:
			
		

> If you can't commit, it is your responsibility to find a replacement otherwise you could face disciplinary action.



Isn't the part in yellow the original question/topic?


----------



## Eye In The Sky (14 May 2018)

meni0n said:
			
		

> The fact that you wanted to charge a class A reservist with AWOL for this shows what kind of leadership style you practice and...



That's a little harsh, isn't it?  The OP has a situation ( someone decided to not do a duty considered normal in their unit, and there is likely a concern of "if Johny can do it and nothing happens, everyone will do it" ) and is asking for people's thoughts and opinions.  Assuming the OP is also a Cl A mbr, they don't necessarily have the time to dig thru numerous references or attend trg like the UDI/CL trg (some) AJAGs provide that some of us do (and get paid for it, because mine was just a normal work day).

That doesn't have to indicate a "leadership style", just a problem and limited options for a solution, IMO.


----------



## meni0n (14 May 2018)

You're right I might have been too harsh in drawing my opinion. I just despise the attitude that some people take with regards to reserves. People volontueer for this and also have primary careers along with family commitments. Threating people with charges or disciplinary measures is just absurd to me. 

Especially with the attitude of "Well i sent him am email he better be there." or "You're on duty for the next two weeks and if you're busy you need to find a replacement." 

Sent from my LG-H873 using Tapatalk


----------



## BDTyre (14 May 2018)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> Isn't the part in yellow the original question/topic?



It is, yes. And my point is that since something like duty for a Class A member falls within their expected training time, it isn't too much to ask and disciplinary measure up to and including AWOL are not to be unexpected. Somewhere along the line though it seemed to me that people were thinking duty was outside of the one night a week/one weekend a month thing and that we shouldn't punish someone for not attending something outside their expected working period. Technically, yes it is, but the expectation is not that the member will attend every day or night during that two week period. Hell, our duty NCOs don't even have a duty phone.


----------



## meni0n (14 May 2018)

But how can you be AWOL if you didn't sign the pay sheet. 

Sent from my LG-H873 using Tapatalk


----------



## Monsoon (14 May 2018)

meni0n said:
			
		

> But how can you be AWOL if you didn't sign the pay sheet.


His point I think is less about fine legal distinctions and more about the obligations incumbent on leaders in the reserve force. The fact that the military justice system in this case (as in so very many others) fails to provide us the tools needed to help us do our jobs just means we have to rely on other resources.

In the case of class "A" members who don't come to work, I long ago concluded that the tool for the job was administrative: IC/RW/C+P/goodbye, just as any civilian employer would do.


----------



## runormal (14 May 2018)

CountDC said:
			
		

> Duty Watch on a stone frigate could also be viewed as training in prep for when the nav-res mbr goes onto a real ship.
> 
> Think of it this way:
> 
> ...



I've never made a subordinate stand a sentry in the field when I'm in charge. Nor has anyone ever made me do a sentry shift (outside of stove watch). Granted my trade's situation is a little unique in that we are either supporting someone else and they typically provide the security, it's not a tactical exercise or we are so far away from the AO that we won't get bumped. 

What I learned on my DP 1.0 course was that we were supposed to deploy with 1x C9 for security, establish a battle trench and a shell scrape every time we set up. I've been for almost 7 years and I've never seen it done. It's not a good use of time/morale, hell it's very rare that I'll even get blanks issued (which sucks). Therefore, why would I waste my subordinates time and unecessarily sleep fuck my troops? Everything is getting ripped down in 36 hours anyways and we've got a several hour drive ahead of us back to get the armoury. More then likely, one of my guys is going to have drive someone else's truck back because the guys attached to the infantry got sleep fucked. If anyone is bored they can mentor the new guy or the new guy can be mentored by a senior cpl.  

I don't need to question my troops ability to stay awake on a sentry shift, this was covered during BMQ, BMQ-L, BWW and DP 1.0. They aren't children and if they can't stay awake that then they shouldn't of passed and it's a failure on the training system. If/when they fall asleep on shift/sentry it can be dealt with accordingly. All they need to do is be able to do is stay awake and yell "Stand To". If there was an active enemy threat and we were "playing", actually issued ROE's and blanks then it'd be different story, but I'm not cocking my guys around for no reason. 



			
				MARS said:
			
		

> Perhaps it is indeed a matter of "the Navy has always done it this way" and I am unsure as to how the other Elements run their show, but my NRD never had any of the fumble-fuck incidents that my neighbouring militia armouries did, with damage being done to the premises as a result of the bars being open and what I assume were less robust Duty Watches.



We have a commissionaire who does acess control and the other unit that I was in just locked their door from the outside and someone needed to let you in. If you came in late, then you needed to buzz in. In both units, I've never seen anyone break anything at the mess and I'm a very active participant of the mess.



			
				Monsoon said:
			
		

> In the case of class "A" members who don't come to work, I long ago concluded that the tool for the job was administrative: IC/RW/C+P/goodbye, just as any civilian employer would do.



Maybe, but if people don't want to show up to work after how much money/time we've invested into them then there are bigger issues at play. We don't really have extra bodies that we have the luxury of being able to kick people out. Class A should be exciting part-time career, but when it's the same BS over and over again, you can't get the time off for PLQ and the Reg-F won't process your CT/OT then it's no surprise that people pull pin shortly after University is done. Having to stand a duty watch for no real reason instead of doing the job you signed up for doesn't help.


----------



## meni0n (14 May 2018)

Not sure how you can justify any of that. There is a minimum amount of time that a reservist is obliged to parade. Going even the administrative route just because someone didn't show up for a parade night is just ridiculous. There is a reason the military legal system won't entertain AWOL charges and trying to circumvent that by using administrative measures is dishonest and abusive. If the person is not fulfilling the minimal required obligations, that's why there is NES otherwise punishing people because they have lives and prioritize family and career above part-time class A when it's required is why this type of mindset needs to go/retire from the military.

Sent from my LG-H873 using Tapatalk


----------



## dapaterson (14 May 2018)

meni0n said:
			
		

> Not sure how you can justify any of that. There is a minimum amount of time that a reservist is obliged to parade. Going even the administrative route just because someone didn't show up for a parade night is just ridiculous. There is a reason the military legal system won't entertain AWOL charges and trying to circumvent that by using administrative measures is dishonest and abusive. If the person is not fulfilling the minimal required obligations, that's why there is NES otherwise punishing people because they have lives and prioritize family and career above part-time class A when it's required is why this type of mindset needs to go/retire from the military.
> 
> Sent from my LG-H873 using Tapatalk



If Bloggins tells his chain of command ahead of time "I will not be available for the duty watch next Thursday", Bloggins is being responsible.  (Even if his reason is "The Teletubbies are coming to town, and I have a front row ticket.  No, I have no kids.")

If Bloggins is told and knows that he has the duty watch next Thursday, and calls in to say "A thousand pardons, but my house is currently on fire, so I shan't be able to attend" again, Bloggins is being responsible.

If Bloggins, knowing full well that he has been assigned the duty watch decides to just not show up and not tell anyone, then Bloggins is not being responsible.  And the CoC has an obligation to work with Bloggins to improve his performance.  And Bloggins' peers also have a vested interest in this as well, because if he bails without notice, they get stuck with his responsibilities.

So in that final instance, using administrative measures to get Bloggins in gear is entirely appropriate.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (14 May 2018)

runormal said:
			
		

> Having to stand a duty watch for no real reason instead of doing the job you signed up for doesn't help.



On the flip side of the coin...didn't we all sign up under the conditions of "Universality of service"?  And that would include...stuff outside of your trade stuff;  GDs, sentry is tasked for it, etc.  I've never been NavRes, but the idea that they run the Res side similar to the Reg side with duty watches isn't really that far fetched.  Doesn't the Army Res operate similar to the Reg Army?  Similarly, in the Air Force, both Reg _and_ Res folks call each other by their first name, and get haircuts every 2 months if we need it or not.  RCN Reg and Res having 'duty watch' systems...I can see that.

http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/about-policies-standards-defence-admin-orders-directives-5000/5023-0.page

Principle of Universality of Service

Application: This is an order that applies to officers and non-commissioned members of the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF members).

2.4 The principle of universality of service or "soldier first" principle holds that CAF members are liable to perform general military duties and _common defence and security duties_, not just the duties of their military occupation or occupational specification. This may include, but is not limited to, the requirement to be physically fit, employable and deployable for general operational duties.


----------



## runormal (15 May 2018)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> On the flip side of the coin...didn't we all sign up under the conditions of "Universality of service"?  And that would include...stuff outside of your trade stuff;  GDs, sentry is tasked for it, etc.  I've never been NavRes, but the idea that they run the Res side similar to the Reg side with duty watches isn't really that far fetched.  Doesn't the Army Res operate similar to the Reg Army?  Similarly, in the Air Force, both Reg _and_ Res folks call each other by their first name, and get haircuts every 2 months if we need it or not.  RCN Reg and Res having 'duty watch' systems...I can see that.



I mean the reg-f army does duty watches for  what I believe to be a similar purpose, but we don't and there wouldn't be any value in doing it. No one else should be in the building outside our unit on our parade night. The amount of people parading or "special guests" showing up wouldn't warrant us to do it.

I don't see how the Nav Res can be drastically different than the Army Res on a parade night. To me it seems like the wrong time/place to do this. There's such a limited number of training opportunities for the p-res so to waste any of them to do access control to me seems like a complete waste of time. Again, having never served in the Nav Res all I'm assuming that the sailor is doing is sitting a chair and checking in ID's and calling up escorts as/when required.

It also seems odd that it's only an issue if you miss your watch but missing a parade night doesn't matter. I get that I OS Bloggins doesn't show up then it fucks up the whole flow of the training night and someone else needs to do OS Bloggins watch and now your down two students for a lesson/mandatory briefing. I also get that if OS Bloggins doesn't get in trouble then OS Smith might think that's it's ok to say "I'm not doing the the duty watch either." However, then it goes back to the question of "Why is there a duty watch in the first place and could everyone's time be better spent?"


----------



## Journeyman (15 May 2018)

> It also seems odd that ....


....the two most vocal 'SMEs' on how the Navy Reserve should operate are 2 x Militia Sigs Cpls.


('Staying in your lane' -- what a concept)


----------



## Eaglelord17 (15 May 2018)

CanadianTire said:
			
		

> I'm not sure how duty NCO has become such a big deal or so construed that we're talking about it being an additional duty above and beyond or instead of regular training. When acting as duty NCO in my unit you are duty for "two weeks." All this means that on two Wednesdays you wear the duty NCO brassard, report to the duty officer, wear your headdress in the mess and don't consume alcohol. You're required to stay in the mess until 0100 (or the last member leaves, whichever is first) at which point the duty O relieves you and you've made an extra half days pay. During the training night, you still participate in your regular training.
> 
> On the third Wednesday, you hand over everything to the incoming duty NCO. The only other time you would actually be required to work outside of your regular training nights would be events like Remembrance Day (at which you would be present any way) or any mess events.
> 
> If you can't commit, it is your responsibility to find a replacement otherwise you could face disciplinary action.



As a current Class A Reservist and former Navy member if someone told me to do this I would tell them either to pound salt or I am not coming in those nights. Some of us actually have lives, personally I get up at 4 or 5 every morning to go work in a heavy industry job. Staying up to 10 or 11 on a parade night is hard enough, let alone going up to the mess, watching people get drunk, and having to stay up to 1am for no real reason. 

Personally I show up more than the minimum, but no one should be penalized for showing up the minimum. Those people have met the commitment they agreed to and as such do not deserve to be punished for it. Maybe not prioritized for taskings and such, but actual charges and disciplinary measures are against what they agreed to.


----------



## meni0n (15 May 2018)

First of all, just because I'm currently a reserve sig cpl doesn't diminish my opinion. I may be one now but I spent more than 10 years in the regs and wasn't always a Cpl but thanks for showing up with your prejudice of the reserves and trying to demean other people's opinions by telling them to stay in their lane. 

Gof forbid there will be junior ranks that post on this forum and have different opinions than some of the dinausors that have outlived their existence that keep hanging on in the service. 

Also if you don't like some our opinions then please contribute something meaningful to the discussion.





			
				Journeyman said:
			
		

> ....the two most vocal 'SMEs' on how the Navy Reserve should operate are 2 x Militia Sigs Cpls.
> 
> 
> ('Staying in your lane' -- what a concept)



Sent from my LG-H873 using Tapatalk


----------



## RocketRichard (15 May 2018)

meni0n said:
			
		

> First of all, just because I'm currently a reserve sig cpl doesn't diminish my opinion. I may be one now but I spent more than 10 years in the regs and wasn't always a Cpl but thanks for showing up with your prejudice of the reserves and trying to demean other people's opinions by telling them to stay in their lane.
> 
> Gof forbid there will be junior ranks that post on this forum and have different opinions than some of the dinausors that have outlived their existence that keep hanging on in the service.
> 
> ...


Upvote for you Corporal. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Journeyman (15 May 2018)

meni0n said:
			
		

> ..... doesn't diminish my opinion.


Well, I know it's a repetitive expression from me, but "there are opinions, and there are _informed_  opinions."  
You've made it obvious that you don't understand NRD operations, yet you still contribute to driving this to 3-pages of :deadhorse:

I assure you, it has nothing to do with "prejudice of the reserves"; in fact, in a thread about Army Reserve in general, or Signals Reserve in particular, your input may actually provide a useful contribution.  As it is, you're merely repeating "it doesn't work that way in my world, so you're a poor leader and you should change."  

Nonetheless, I'll move along and let you make the most of spamming an essentially Naval discussion.  Enjoy.


ps - For what it's worth, about one-quarter of my military career has been Reserve experience (but not in the Navy, so I stay in my lane -- and I'm not the slightest bit offended by that self-restraint), yet I can't imagine getting worked up about any Reg vs Res squabbles;  there are way too many other things in my life that are irritating that some "anti-Reserve prejudice" is remotely a priority.


----------



## meni0n (15 May 2018)

Thanks for the drive by post. Not sure how you can group opinions of others in the uninformed category just because they're not part of the NRD. Last I checked, they're still part of theCF and have to follow the same rules and regulations as everyone else, be it army reserve or air reserve. The situation that we were discussing seems to be happening at more than one unit and the opinions given are pretty informed considering the demographics. The NRD is not special club that only those who have been part of it can have an informed opinion on. 

Opinions given here were by junior ranks at reserve units in the CF based on the how the situation is perceived by us.  

Sent from my LG-H873 using Tapatalk


----------



## kratz (15 May 2018)

Naval Reserve Division (NRD) Duty Watches serve multiple training objectives.

Some of these bullet points are common to most NRDs :

*-	Inoculate sailors, to the traditions, roles and responsibilities of naval life.*
•	perform colours and/or sunset ceremonies, as directed,
•	pipe the ship’s routine and any messages approved by the Officer of the Day (OOD), 
•	act as piping party for VIPs crossing the brow, 
•	all members must know the procedures found in the “Brow Pack”
•	learn the watch and station bill system, and
•	instill a sense of teamwork, responsibility and teamwork at the lowest levels.

*-	Immediate Emergency Reaction Team (IERT) to common emergencies. *
Though these may not occur, there are many examples of them happening throughout my career. 
•	this task also simulate the emergency preparedness for shipboard life for fire, flood and medical emergencies, and 
•	NRD Training Department has occasionally run random emergency drills, in place of Sea Training. 
The Duty Watch is expected to close up and  respond as if it was a real scenario. A valued part of training.

*-	Access control:*
•	100% ID check of everyone entering the facility,
•	signing any guests in/out,
•	maintain access points in use (brow, parking lot, jetty ect…), 
•	control the issue / return of keys, and
•	building security: opening, closing and routine rounds during training.

*-	Generate small work part tasking pool, as required.*

*-	Other duties as assigned by the OOD.*
•	example: Ring the ship’s bell to keep the Sip’s time


In practice, as others have mentioned, the above is simple routine stuff, and are important items that must be covered off whenever the Ship’s Company is training (day or night). Through sharing best practices, many NRDs follow similar procedures, modifying areas unique to their needs. An experienced OOD will muster the watch and after Colours, will task the Watch as needed, usually by a set rotation. When not required for the Watch, a sailor will be expected to participate in the night’s regular training. All involved: the department, the sailor and OOD will ensure the task rotation minimizes interference with critical training periods. Though the potential exists for conflict to arise, and is sorted out. This too happens in a ship board environment. 

At the start of the training year, most Duty Watches are overborne with untrained junior members double banked with trained sailors. The goal is to provide inexperienced pers with enough experience quickly enough to reduce reliance on the handful of experienced sailors at the NRD. When everyone in the Ship’s Company attends training, and performs their Watches as scheduled, the system works very well for NRDs and provides sailors exposure of what to expect when they reach the fleet. On the other hand, when an epidemic of “no attendance” is allowed to encroach, with or without notice, this stains the remaining members of the Ship’s Company, who must pick up the slack. 

The most effective solution I witnessed was a multilayered approach to encourage attendance and compliance. Administrative Measures are only one tool. Others have mentioned other tools as well. Combining these methods and applying them consistently is the key to a successful training year with maximum participation, and a full Duty Watch.


----------



## Loachman (15 May 2018)

meni0n said:
			
		

> Thanks for the drive by post. Not sure how you can group opinions of others in the uninformed category just because they're not part of the NRD.



Among Army people, it's the Arty that I least comprehend. They're useful, and conducting Air OP missions was one of the many pleasures of flying Kiowas, but they are different.

Among the three environmental elements, it's the Navy that I least comprehend. They are far more different than the Arty could ever be.

So, the early posts on the Naval reserve part of this thread made no sense to me. Class A duty people? Trying to discipline them? Huh? Ludicrous, thought I.

Further explanatory put this into much better perspective, and Kratz has just given a complete explanation.

So, yes, it's a lane thing. Different communities operate differently, usually for good and valid reason - even though the "good" and "valid" may not be apparent to those from other communities.

Edited for clarity.


----------



## ModlrMike (15 May 2018)

So, after all of the above, this is the solution I will provide to the XO/CO:

We will reinforce the responsibility of the Divisional Offr/PO to make their pers aware of upcoming duties; notwithstanding publication in ROs;
We will impose on the divisional system the obligation to ensure conflicts are resolved well before the scheduled duty;
We will ensure that members are reminded in a timely fashion that they have an upcoming duty;
We will restate the important part the member plays in ensuring they attend, arrange a replacement, or otherwise notify the RPO if they cannot attend their scheduled duty.

The responsibility to ensure the duty watch is attended by those identified for it starts with the DivO/Div PO, and ends with the member.


----------



## klatham (15 May 2018)

This is unrelated to the training merits of duty shifts in a concrete frigate, but I am curious about the section in bold below.

I serve as a reservist in a PRes Sqn of a RegF Regt.  I believe that the "unit" would, in fact, be the Regt and not the Sqn.  Is that correct?  Does this mean that I am always subject to the Code of Service Discipline?



			
				Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> "60. (1) The following persons are subject to the Code of Service Discipline:
> 
> c.an officer or non-commissioned member of the reserve force when the officer or non-commissioned member is
> 
> ...


----------



## Eye In The Sky (15 May 2018)

runormal said:
			
		

> having never served in the Nav Res all I'm assuming that the sailor is doing is sitting a chair and checking in ID's and calling up escorts as/when required.
> 
> It also seems odd that it's only an issue if you miss your watch but missing a parade night doesn't matter. I get that I OS Bloggins doesn't show up then it fucks up the whole flow of the training night and someone else needs to do OS Bloggins watch and now your down two students for a lesson/mandatory briefing. I also get that if OS Bloggins doesn't get in trouble then OS Smith might think that's it's ok to say "I'm not doing the the duty watch either." However, then it goes back to the question of "Why is there a duty watch in the first place and could everyone's time be better spent?"



There's an old saying "train the way you fight, fight the way you train".   :dunno:

I was posted 'ashore' to a Navy unit for a time;  I did Duty Watch (Roundsmen) in A Block (Stadacona).  Every hour or so, I had to do 'rounds' of the entire building in a pre-determined path using a rounds-clock, and turn a key in it and the rounds had to be completed in not less than 20 minutes.  I thought it was pretty stupid, until a few RCN co-workers explained how rounds on a ship work, and that to them it was just 'normal'.  Not really different than Fire Piquet in the army when at a biv site when the whole gang was co-located, or being in a Sqn Harbour or Troop Hide and having sentries out.   :2c:



			
				meni0n said:
			
		

> ... just because they're not part of the NRD. Last I checked, they're still part of theCF and have to follow the same rules and regulations as everyone else, be it army reserve or air reserve... The NRD is not special club that only those who have been part of it can have an informed opinion on.



But here's the thing;  the RCN, Cdn Army and RCAF do not do things the same way.  I've worked for all 3 to one extent or the other and they operate differently.

3 bells/horns in the army - NBC alarm when I was in green DEU.  1 bell/horn...someone might have just broke noise discipline and the Tp WO or Patrol Cmdr is coming to pay them a visit.

3 bells in the Air Force - 'test'.  1 bell - a whole lot of people are dropping what they're doing to perform their '1 bell' duties.  1 bell is the worst thing I can hear where I work.  3 - the best.

Just some things to consider...


----------



## Eye In The Sky (15 May 2018)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> So, after all of the above, this is the solution I will provide to the XO/CO:
> 
> We will reinforce the responsibility of the Divisional Offr/PO to make their pers aware of upcoming duties; notwithstanding publication in ROs;
> We will impose on the divisional system the obligation to ensure conflicts are resolved well before the scheduled duty;
> ...



Quick question if I may;  do all mbr's get Initial PDRs?  If the requirement was captured in that doc and the member was briefed on and signed, it seems it would be very easy to use the available informal and formal admin tools then to document (Div Notes, etc) shortcomings linked to "critical tasks/expected results" and up the ante when required.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (15 May 2018)

EITS is correct: We do things that way for a reason.

And Kratz basically explained that, as on every ship in the fleet, the Duty watch in the Navy is NOT just a security organization. It's primary role is ensuring that all daily routines (the schedule by witch we live our lives on a ship and by witch all activities of the various departments are coordinated - and reserve units ARE ships) and all required ceremonial are carried out properly and at the appropriate time. The duty watch also acts as the Captain's representative and point of contact to keep the command team praised of any unusual situation and the execution of various function.

Remember: Ship's are not lodger units with single focus, as an Infantry battalion, or tank squadron, etc. might be on a base. We are a self-contained mini-base, and multiple trades and sub-groups need their activities using the common equipment coordinated. That's part of the duty watches function. For instance, the duty watch usually coordinates the use of unit's vehicles and boats (yes, NRD's have boats available to them), an item Kratz forgot to mention.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (15 May 2018)

klatham said:
			
		

> This is unrelated to the training merits of duty shifts in a concrete frigate, but I am curious about the section in bold below.
> 
> I serve as a reservist in a PRes Sqn of a RegF Regt.  I believe that the "unit" would, in fact, be the Regt and not the Sqn.  Is that correct?  Does this mean that I am always subject to the Code of Service Discipline?



I think that would be determined by what UIC you belong to.


----------



## klatham (16 May 2018)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> I think that would be determined by what UIC you belong to.



It is an interesting situation.  My MPRR shows my UIC as that of the RegF Regt, but my pay docs, presumably because the pay systems are different, shows the old UIC of a unit that doesn't exist anymore.  So, technically I guess that means we are subject to the Code of Service Discipline 24/7?

Thanks!


----------



## Haggis (16 May 2018)

klatham said:
			
		

> It is an interesting situation.  My MPRR shows my UIC as that of the RegF Regt, but my pay docs, presumably because the pay systems are different, shows the old UIC of a unit that doesn't exist anymore.  So, technically I guess that means we are subject to the Code of Service Discipline 24/7?



In short, no.  Your Class of Service determines if you are subject to the CSD.  As a Class A Reservist posted to a Reg F UIC you are subject only during those times when you are deemed on duty (i.e. signed in, or physically at the unit). As a Class B Reservist, you are deemed on duty during scheduled working hours only.  Once "dismissed" (e.g. your work day ends as scheduled or you are no longer required to be at your place of duty), you are not on duty for CSD purposes.  As a Class C Reservist you are deemed to be equivalent to Reg F for CSD purposes.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (16 May 2018)

According to the AJAG recently, anyone on CL B with a Reg Force unit is subj 24/7, another thing I learned on UDI/CL trg.  I thought CL B was Cl B but, if you're CL B at your home unit or any Res unit, you're only subj during 'duty periods', not 24/7. 

I didn't think a Res unit could have a Reg Force UIC.  Learn something new every day.  So, if you are a Res sub-unit under a Reg Force unit directly, I wonder how they draw the line for this?  Look to the route letter?

Vol 2, Chap 102 Disciplinary Jurisdiction, Art 102.01:

"60. (1) The following persons are subject to the Code of Service Discipline:

c.an officer or non-commissioned member of the reserve force when the officer or non-commissioned member is

i.undergoing drill or training, whether in uniform or not,
ii.in uniform,
iii.on duty,
iv.[Repealed, S.C. 1998, c. 35, s. 19],
v.called out under Part VI in aid of the civil power,
vi.called out on service,
vii.placed on active service,
viii.in or on any vessel, vehicle or aircraft of the Canadian Forces or in or on any defence establishment or work for defence,
ix.serving with any unit or other element of the regular force or the special force, or
x.present, whether in uniform or not, at any drill or training of a unit or other element of the Canadian Forces;


----------



## Ostrozac (16 May 2018)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> I didn't think a Res unit could have a Reg Force UIC.  Learn something new every day.  So, if you are a Res sub-unit under a Reg Force unit directly, I wonder how they draw the line for this?  Look to the route letter?



This has become a bit of a trend lately, Reserve sub-units of Regular units. I can think of three examples off the top of my head: the Army Intelligence Regiment, 21 Electronic Warfare Regiment, and the Military Police Regiments. In some cases, the reserve sub-unit has retained a separate UIC, but UIC doesn't necessarily equal Unit status -- there are geographically dispersed regular force units with multiple UICs, one for each geographic location. In all cases, the unit has a single CFOO that states that it is embodied in the Regular Force.

As to what it means for Code of Service Discipline purposes? We'll probably have to wait for a court martial to test the waters.


----------



## dapaterson (16 May 2018)

UIC is a deprecated term.  Strictly speaking, within HRMS, there are DeptIDs; DeptIDs can be subordinate to each other.


----------



## FJAG (16 May 2018)

Haggis said:
			
		

> In short, no.  Your Class of Service determines if you are subject to the CSD.  As a Class A Reservist posted to a Reg F UIC you are subject only during those times when you are deemed on duty (i.e. signed in, or physically at the unit). As a Class B Reservist, you are deemed on duty during scheduled working hours only.  Once "dismissed" (e.g. your work day ends as scheduled or you are no longer required to be at your place of duty), you are not on duty for CSD purposes.  As a Class C Reservist you are deemed to be equivalent to Reg F for CSD purposes.



It's not the Class of Service that dictates the status but the provisions of NDA 60(1) and, as Eye in the Sky points out, para (IX) specifies you are subject when "serving with any unit or other element of the regular force ...".

I'm starting to wander a bit out of my lane because of how long I've been retired but, in my mind, if you are posted to (on the UIC of) a regular force unit, you would be subject to the CSD 24/7 regardless of the Class of Service you are on.

It strikes me that NDA 60(1) is starting to fall behind the way we are organizing and using reservists. It was built for something where the reg f and res f were kept segregated except in cases of mobilization or attachments such as Afghanistan. One can always do an interpretation of how the provision "serving with" operates (although it may need a court decision to settle it) but one should try to stay ahead of the curve and write the legislation in the way that you want it to work rather than leave it to serendipity. If we are going to change organizations so that some Class A reserve members are part of reg f units and others in res f units, does it make sense that we treat them differently vis a vis the CSD?

 :cheers:


----------



## daftandbarmy (16 May 2018)

FJAG said:
			
		

> It strikes me that NDA 60(1) is starting to fall behind the way we are organizing and using reservists. It was built for something where the reg f and res f were kept segregated except in cases of mobilization or attachments such as Afghanistan.
> :cheers:



This.  :nod:


----------



## Haggis (16 May 2018)

FJAG said:
			
		

> It's not the Class of Service that dictates the status but the provisions of NDA 60(1) and, as Eye in the Sky points out, para (IX) specifies you are subject when "serving with any unit or other element of the regular force ...".



I daresay that the application of 60(1) to a Class A Reservist occupying a position in a Reg F UIC (DeptID) leads to an absurd conclusion that a Class A Reservist is subject to the CSD 24/7.  He is only "serving with" said unit while deemed on duty IAW QR&O 9.06(1).  There are limitations on the length/duration of Class A Service found within CF Mil Pers Instr 20-04 (12 consecutive days) which would imply the member is NOT subject to the CSD once those 12 days have been worked.  Lastly, a member of the Reserve Force must consent to serve with the Regular Force IAW QR&O 9.05.  That consent is given when the member signs in for local training as travel to/from the local training location is not deemed to be "on duty" IAW QR&O 9.06 (2). 



			
				FJAG said:
			
		

> I'm starting to wander a bit out of my lane because of how long I've been retired but, in my mind, if you are posted to (on the UIC of) a regular force unit, you would be subject to the CSD 24/7 regardless of the Class of Service you are on.



As dapaterson pointed out, Regular Force units (DeptIDs) often have subordinate units which are within the Reserve Force Structure.  1 MP Regt is a good example where it's MP Platoons are either within the Reg F or P Res but can be occupied by members of wither component.



			
				FJAG said:
			
		

> It strikes me that NDA 60(1) is starting to fall behind the way we are organizing and using reservists. It was built for something where the reg f and res f were kept segregated except in cases of mobilization or attachments such as Afghanistan. One can always do an interpretation of how the provision "serving with" operates (although it may need a court decision to settle it) but one should try to stay ahead of the curve and write the legislation in the way that you want it to work rather than leave it to serendipity. If we are going to change organizations so that some Class A reserve members are part of reg f units and others in res f units, does it make sense that we treat them differently vis a vis the CSD?



The definition of "deemed on duty" has bedeviled the senior Reserve leadership for years as it has implications for pay, compensation for injury and illness, access to medical care and pensions, to name but a few.  One only needs to imagine, for one moment, a Class A Reservist member of a Reg F unit who is seen on civvy street at 1330 on Thursday afternoon wearing his FedEx uniform instead of CADPAT and not being in possession of a duly completed CF100 to see the absurdity of this interpretation of NDA 60 (1)ix.


----------



## dapaterson (16 May 2018)

1 MP Regt is a Reg F unit.  That it has subordinate DeptIDs that are mostly occupied by Res F pers does not change the fact that it is a Reg F unit.  (One cannot have a unit within another unit; units have dets, but dets are part of that larger unit).

As written, the NDA suggests that Cpl Bloggins of the Res F who is a member of a Reg F unit is subject to the CSD 24/7.  It may not be intended, but I am not convinced that any great deal for forethought went into the creation of units like 1 MP Regt or the CAIR or 21 EW or... from the perspective of the legal implications of O&E.


----------



## FJAG (17 May 2018)

Haggis said:
			
		

> I daresay that the application of 60(1) to a Class A Reservist occupying a position in a Reg F UIC (DeptID) leads to an absurd conclusion that a Class A Reservist is subject to the CSD 24/7.  He is only "serving with" said unit while deemed on duty IAW QR&O 9.06(1).  There are limitations on the length/duration of Class A Service found within CF Mil Pers Instr 20-04 (12 consecutive days) which would imply the member is NOT subject to the CSD once those 12 days have been worked.  Lastly, a member of the Reserve Force must consent to serve with the Regular Force IAW QR&O 9.05.  That consent is given when the member signs in for local training as travel to/from the local training location is not deemed to be "on duty" IAW QR&O 9.06 (2).
> 
> As dapaterson pointed out, Regular Force units (DeptIDs) often have subordinate units which are within the Reserve Force Structure.  1 MP Regt is a good example where it's MP Platoons are either within the Reg F or P Res but can be occupied by members of wither component.
> 
> The definition of "deemed on duty" has bedeviled the senior Reserve leadership for years as it has implications for pay, compensation for injury and illness, access to medical care and pensions, to name but a few.  One only needs to imagine, for one moment, a Class A Reservist member of a Reg F unit who is seen on civvy street at 1330 on Thursday afternoon wearing his FedEx uniform instead of CADPAT and not being in possession of a duly completed CF100 to see the absurdity of this interpretation of NDA 60 (1)ix.



As I said, because of the length of time that I have been retired, I'm straying a bit out of my lane.

What you have to take into account though is that the NDA is the legislation. QR&Os are subordinate regulations and Pers Instrs are even further down the chain. S60(1) will be analyzed and interpreted on it's own words. "Serving with" connotes being a member of a certain military organization. I don't think we'd have any problem in saying that a Class A reservist on strength with the CScotR is "serving with" the CScotR even when he isn't present at drill or training. The fact that the various paras of s60(1) are alternative conditions gives rise to an inference that it covers something more than simply being "present at drill or training" or any of the other conditions.

My point is simply that, at best, s60(1)(IX) is ambiguous but more likely may create a legal liability that we did not intend within some of these new organizations.

With respect to QR&O 9.05, I doubt that reservists that are now engaged in a hybrid unit have ever been asked to give their consent to serve with the reg f. I presume that these were/are organizational changes that happened without input from individual members. (I should note that during my time we had no such organizations and I'm not aware of how they were created or what the internal organization is nor what discussions or considerations were at play during their development)

QR&O 9.06(1) and (2) (or for that matter 9.07, 9.075, or 9.08) are of no moment for this interpretation. They only define what Class A, B and C service is but does not define what "serving with" means IAW NDA s60(1)(IX).

 :cheers:


----------



## SeaKingTacco (17 May 2018)

Interesting discussion. I wonder how this all affects the reservists embedded within the various RACF Wings and Sqns around the country. As far as I know, those reservists occupy line serials within a Regular Force unit.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (17 May 2018)

FJAG said:
			
		

> . . . I should note that during my time we had no such organizations . . .



Were you not around when "10/90 battalions" were briefly in vogue?


----------



## Haggis (17 May 2018)

FJAG said:
			
		

> QR&O 9.06(1) and (2) (or for that matter 9.07, 9.075, or 9.08) are of no moment for this interpretation. They only define what Class A, B and C service is but does not define what "serving with" means IAW NDA s60(1)(IX).



We both know that regulations serve as disambiguations of legislation and polices serve the same purpose in support of regulations.  QR&O Chapter 9 and CF Mil Pers Instr 20-04 exist because of the, now obviously, unintended consequences of broad and unguided interpretations of NDA 60(1).  Nowhere in the NDA have I been able to find a clear definition of "serving with".  NDA 33(2)a uses regulations (QR&O Vol 1 Ch 9), to define Reserve services and the classes thereof and CF Mil Pers Instr 20-04 and the Military Human Resources Polices and Procedures Manual further articulate how that service is to be controlled and administered.  Although it's tempting, it is disingenuous to read NDA 601(1)ix in isolation to reach a defensible conclusion that a Class A Reservist serving with a Reg F unit is, at all times, subject to the CSD.


----------



## klatham (17 May 2018)

It seems the answer to my question is not clear-cut and there might be some disambiguation required in the future.  I am finding the discussion very interesting though, so I appreciate everyone's responses.

I am guessing that there is a presumption, within the unit, that the CSD does not apply 24/7 to the reserve members, but that presumption might be in error.

Thanks!


----------



## garb811 (17 May 2018)

We have the ludicrous situation where it appears, technically, our highest ranking civilian in DND is subject to the CSD when she walks in the door to work as her biography states she currently holds a commission with the Naval Reserve. How about the family members who have joined the local reserve unit while living with his/her parents/spouse in a RHU?

The hybrid units are another excellent case in point.  When I was at a MP Regt we were very clear in continuing to treat our PRes members as if they were members of any other PRes unit, notwithstanding the fact they belonged to a Reg Force UIC.

I'd submit that contrary to FJAG's observation that NDA 60(1) is starting to fall behind, I'd say it has totally been over taken by events a long time ago and the reality is, fortunately, there is a lot of "common sense" currently being practiced on the ground to make sure we aren't putting folks into legal jeopardy simply because of that fact.


----------



## dapaterson (17 May 2018)

garb811 said:
			
		

> I'd submit that contrary to FJAG's observation that NDA 60(1) is starting to fall behind, I'd say it has totally been over taken by events a long time ago and the reality is, fortunately, there is a lot of "common sense" currently being practiced on the ground to make sure we aren't putting folks into legal jeopardy simply because of that fact.



The Government did strip a member of the Supp Res of a patent because he was a Supp Res member when he came up with the invention, so it's dangerous to assume bad law away - all it takes is one person to decide to follow the law and not common sense and the entire enterprise may collapse on itself.


----------



## Loachman (17 May 2018)

1 Wing's Squadrons and Headquarters have been Total Force for over two decades, and I am unaware of any such problems experienced by Class A pers.

Perhaps klatham, though, would be willing to engineer a test case so that we can sort this one out properly...


----------



## FJAG (18 May 2018)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> The Government did strip a member of the Supp Res of a patent because he was a Supp Res member when he came up with the invention, so it's dangerous to assume bad law away - all it takes is one person to decide to follow the law and not common sense and the entire enterprise may collapse on itself.



That's an excellent case in point that I had forgotten about. Note that while DND tried to strip Brown of the patent, the Federal Court of Appeal later ruled, in part, in Browns favor and while upholding that his Supp Res service made him a "Public Servant" at the relevant time, ruled that his failure to disclose that status did not invalidate the patent. The court left open the question of whether the patent vested in the Crown. I'm not sure about the final resolution of Brown's situation with DND but the case certainly showed how far DND would go when it gets its a** in a twist.

See here:

https://decisions.fca-caf.gc.ca/fca-caf/decisions/en/item/135341/index.do

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/veteran-reserves-public-servant-patent-1.3660867

To Haggis: Disingenuous? Really? 

The manner of the interpretation of a statute, such as the NDA, can follow several different theories but primarily it is an exercise in determining what the legislature intended the text to mean when the statute was written. Regulations and orders and policies are written not by the legislature but by civil servants who themselves are interpreting the statute within the scope that the legislature allows them to. That said a civil servant's opinion of what the statute means (as interpreted in regulations etc) is worth nothing to the court when the court is asked to make the interpretation. See here eg for a primer: http://aix1.uottawa.ca/~resulliv/legdr/siinscc.html

 :cheers:


----------



## dapaterson (18 May 2018)

FJAG said:
			
		

> Regulations and orders and policies are written not by the legislature but by civil servants who themselves are interpreting the statute within the scope that the legislature allows them to.



Except for QR&Os it's not always that clear.  QR&Os can be under the authority of the CDS, the Minister, the Treasury Board, or the Governor in Council; in the latter two instances, at least, it's arguable that a court would give greater weight to such regulations due to their source.


QR&Os are odd ducks in many respects (no pre-publication, for one); far too many in the CAF don't understand them, their role, their origin, or the significant latitude granted by the legislature to the CAF in controlling many aspects of its own destiny.  (Or for real fun, try to explain to folks the difference between legislation, regulation, policy & process)


----------



## FJAG (18 May 2018)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Except for QR&Os it's not always that clear.  QR&Os can be under the authority of the CDS, the Minister, the Treasury Board, or the Governor in Council; in the latter two instances, at least, it's arguable that a court would give greater weight to such regulations due to their source.
> 
> 
> QR&Os are odd ducks in many respects (no pre-publication, for one); far too many in the CAF don't understand them, their role, their origin, or the significant latitude granted by the legislature to the CAF in controlling many aspects of its own destiny.  (Or for real fun, try to explain to folks the difference between legislation, regulation, policy & process)



You're quite right about the sources of QR&Os but even the GIC and TB are delegated entities under legislation. 

I think that we frequently downplay the supreme role that the legislature plays in the whole scheme of our laws. Quite frankly, the individual members of the legislature rarely understands the true extent of the legislation that they are enacting because the whole process of legislative drafting is in the hands of smaller committees and specialized civil servants (including DoJ lawyers and military lawyers) of various Ministries. 

However, once legislation is enacted it is out of the hands of the drafters and it is up to the courts to interpret the legislation in line with the intention of the legislature when there is a dispute or conflict about the meaning of the law.

 :cheers:


----------



## Haggis (18 May 2018)

FJAG said:
			
		

> See here eg for a primer: http://aix1.uottawa.ca/~resulliv/legdr/siinscc.html



It's going to rain this weekend.  Now I have something to do.


----------



## FJAG (18 May 2018)

Haggis said:
			
		

> It's going to rain this weekend.  Now I have something to do.



I've been replacing some old lawn edging with new the last few days and have more to do. It's going to rain here too and, quite frankly, I'd rather be out in the rain laying more edging than reading law.  ;D Retirement is retirement.

 :cheers:


----------



## Haggis (20 May 2018)

*FJAG*:  it didn't rain as much as expected so i haven't yet read your link.

Disingenuous?  Yes, but let me put some much needed (and originally omitted) context to that.

My point was not that the courts could and, possibly, would apply NDA 60 (1)ix literally.  it was that the _unit chain of command_ would be disingenuous to lay a charge based on NDA 60(1)ix read in isolation and without the amplification of relevant regulations, instructions and policies.  Could it happen?  Of course.  A vindictive chain of command may want to make an example of him and "see what happens" when "the lawyers sort it out".  in any case it could possibly bring the discussion of what "deemed on duty" means in a pan-Reserve context back to the forefront.


----------

