# DP3B Rant



## westie47 (4 Apr 2005)

I'm going to go on a bit of a rant here, so bear with me. I'm sure I'll get some appropiate responses as well....

I was slated to go on DP3B(6B) this year in Gagetown, as I work for the Federal Gov't (Corrections) I had to get the time off. I used some of my holidays as well as Military Leave Without Pay (MLWOP) to cover the time. No biggy, just get a letter from my CO, beg my Warden/CCO, and it's off to the races. You see it happens to come in the high season for annual leave so management doesn't really like people leaving, too much OT is incurred. So anyway, it's looking all set and I'm starting my personal prep and I am informed the dates changed, the course now starts two weeks earlier. 

Now my rant is this, how come these guys can't get their **** together and organize these courses. This is Gagetown after all and this course happens every year. I get told, "...just change your leave days..."  Well that is easier than it seems. Sometimes I think that the Reg guys think we are just sitting at home waiting for the phone to ring, well I work a full time job, have a family and still am able to make about 90-95% of training including Cougar Salvo. I also use up alot of my annual leave, sick days and family related leave for the army. It's my choice and I'm not looking for any pats on the back. It's just that when I commit, I commit. So I think it's only fair that they commit to me.

I ask you, is that too much to ask?


----------



## Fishbone Jones (5 Apr 2005)

westie47 said:
			
		

> I ask you, is that too much to ask?



Nope, and guess what? It happens every year. We've addressed it a million times and they keep doing it, and it's not just the Infantry. Almost like they want you to miss it after your Unit commits to it. They keep the money and don't have to teach you. Every year they say it won't happen again, but it does. More belt fed, full auto c**k. On the bus, off the bus.


----------



## Gunner (5 Apr 2005)

This goes with the thread about Reserves commiting to training in Wainwright.  We wonder why the Reserves are dying out west...


----------



## HollywoodHitman (5 Apr 2005)

Dean, BRUTAL..........You gonna be able to swing it?

I feel your pain though. Happened to me 2 years ago, now look at me. The meds aren't working, the twitch in my left eye is back........

TM


----------



## Garett (5 Apr 2005)

Most of the guys that make these decisions have been in the Reg Force so long they don't even understand the challenges of co-ordinating time off for military training.  

Just like how Reserve units tend to schedule training right during exams.


----------



## Horse_Soldier (5 Apr 2005)

The reserve training system is broken.  Period - end of story.  I've watched things go downhill for the last decade and some lonely nights wonder why we still have a semi-coherent reserve at all.  They pulled the same stunt for officer training a few weeks ago, with the result that we lost one of our candidates who could not change the dates with his employer either.  You think planning would be easy in the CF, seeing that we're fed planning principles with mother's milk, but apparently not.


----------



## Eowyn (5 Apr 2005)

Garett Hallman said:
			
		

> Just like how Reserve units tend to schedule training right during exams.



And which exams would you like the reserve unit to avoid?  High school, university courses with one midterm, university with 2 midterms, technical schools, all of them?  As you can see, you can't avoid all of the exam periods.


----------



## Dissident (5 Apr 2005)

Same everywhere. Add to that that coy has tentativelly cancelled the plan to teach BMQ,SQ, Driver wheel, QL3A/B all in a row for the new guys this summer. It was a nice plan, but a lot of people are gonna get screwed over bad if the courses are not thaught.

I'm sure there is good reasons why courses get cancelled, but mosts peoples schedules are not easely managable. Then they stress max attendance all the time. Hey, if you gave us a date and stuck to it, we would show up.


----------



## Michael Dorosh (5 Apr 2005)

We had a Brigadier from, I believe LFWA, come to our Armouries last month, gathered us around like Monty, sat us all down crosslegged on the parade square, begged us to commit to training this summer then took questions.  About a dozen Highlanders highlighted the need for co-ordination of summer training, and he came right out and said the same thing - its broken.  His exact word was "bullshit."  "We're working on it" he said and acknowledged its been said before.  The multi-week courses, the changing of dates, the whole thing.

I was tempted to ask that if we've had a Militia presence in Calgary since 1910 and they STILL can't get it right, what chance do they have of ever doing so?  

One of the bones of contention was of course the way the junior leadership course(s) are laid out now - it was bad enough when it was just two or three blocks - I knew guys that had to repeat Block 1 one or more times because so much time elapsed after they took it.

Very silly stuff, and all apparently designed by Regular Force guys who have not lived in the "real world."

So rant away, but you're preaching to the choir.


----------



## Steel Badger (5 Apr 2005)

Addendum to Mike's last post.....

Some of those involved in making a complete and Godless stromash of the reserve training system are not our regular bretheren (who do contribute some great ideas to solving the issue)...but our own....reservists who have some how become unhinged and lost all touch with the current reality of reserve service....

SB


----------



## ZipperHead (5 Apr 2005)

> Very silly stuff, and all apparently designed by Regular Force guys who have not lived in the "real world."



It's nice to see that the Reg Force isn't exempt from some some good old bashing for a change. The Reserves and Cadets had the monopoly on being on the receiving end for so long......

Not that I will defend the seemingly endless arbitrary changes to course dates, as it never effects us (Reg Force) in the least. That was sarcasm, for the uninitiated. We have had guys come off of tour to go on a course, spend minimal time with their family, fly out to the course, and then find it was cancelled, delayed, or
 pushed up, and had to race to play catch up. Things are tough all over. I watched a lot of good Reservists get disenchanted with the way the Army is in '96 in the workup to going over to Bosnia, when a whole whack of guys were cut from the tour after 2 months of trg, and giving up schooling, family time, work, etc, because a bean-counter decided that we could do more with less, so guess who the majority of the guys were? 

One of the biggest factors that I have seen (from my perspective at the Armd Sch) for the everchanging course dates comes for Kingston. The courses are getting shorter and shorter (but the content remains constant, or increases...... teach more, in less time), and there is no extra time given for mandated things like PT. We do PT at 0600, and train until 1700 (in garrison). There are no (or very few) admin periods. The course I am instructing on now will have had X2 12 day work weeks during it (weekends) so that the course doesn't run longer than neccesary. The SSM's course here runs 6 days a week to accomodate Reservists, so they are gone from home for the shortest period possible. 

Oh, and I was wondering, Mr Dorosh, in the "real world" who does the majority of the instruction and support for these courses (including Reserve course)??? Feel free to come to Gagetown to teach on one. Or to Wainwright. Or Meaford. The welcome mat is out....

Allan


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (5 Apr 2005)

To add my 2 cents, perhaps to balance things out here, not all the blame can be directed at "the system" or the Regular Force.  Frankly, there are enough Reservists involved in the training system that to blame one element is ridiculous.

Furthermore, in my experience (admittedly dated), the Reserve Force doesn't help things much.  In the days of yore, all the Reserve formations were required to submit estimates of course attendance so that serials could be built.  Instructors were then requested against those serials, as was huge amounts of equipment (this is the part I dealt directly with).  Unfortunately, the "requirement" was often massively inflated, sometimes due to over optimistic recruiting projections or to "keep" vacancies until the last minute.  The result?  Course serials that don't meet minimal load that get cancelled - sometimes with short notice as it is realized that the students aren't going to show up to meet minimum load requirements.  Again, the caveat is that my knowledge on this subject is dated.

Complicating this is the fact that summer serials often rely heavily on Reserve instructors and getting instructors has proven increasingly difficult.  Part of the reason why is a systemic change that has (or so I'm told) precluded full summers of employment for Reserve junior leaders (a huge mistake IMHO).  As a result, the system is forced to try and task Regular Force instructors - again at the last minute.  Because the Regular Force is tapped out (due to national commitments), instructors may not be available and a course could well be cancelled due to lack of instructors.

Is it a s**t sandwich?  Yup, but everyone gets a bite...

Again, my 2 cents...

TR


----------



## ZipperHead (5 Apr 2005)

Good points Teddy. I was going to bring up the point about the inflated course numbers, only to watch 2 people show up (I was a driver on a course like that.... 17 staff (including Reservists), 2 students). That was in the bad old days, but I doubt things have changed that much. 

I vaguely recall a senior officer (Col) making noises a few years back, saying that if "you" (Reservists) won't support your own courses, "we" (Reg F) won't run them. That was a hollow threat if I ever heard one.... 

The blame game is fun to play, but nobody really wins....

Al


----------



## Bartok5 (5 Apr 2005)

I have to agree with Allan Luomala on this one....

It is easy to blame the "Army Training Establishments" for changes in Res F course dates, seemingly endless amendments to the TSs and TPs, "Mods in/Mods out" changes, etc, etc.   And certainly, at the end of the day the Regular Army in the form of LFDTS bears some responsibility for this fluid (and therefore difficult to cater to) situation.   But at the same time, having served on both sides of the fence as have other members here (PBI by all means speak up), this is not in the least a one-sided situation.

The brutal truth of the matter is that the Res F senior leadership bear equal responsibility for whatever "heart-ache" that hopeful summer trainees are currently enduring.   First and foremost, the semingly ceaseless "module" adjustments for both officer and NCM professional development training most often occur at the behest of the Reserve Force.   Not all, but most.   Where the PLQ is concerned, some of the grief is certainly due to the ongoing agony and resultant "negotiation" between the various factions of the "purple" versus "brown" verus "green" Army.   At the end of the day however, the modularization of training is a genuine effort on the part of LFDTS to cater to Res F needs while simultaneously preserving minimal training standards in accordance with a common training standard.   The Army Training Establishments (Inf Sch, Armd Sch, Arty Sch, Tac Sch) simply dance to the tune that LFDTS HQ directs.   

At the end of the day, we have all been down this road back and forth for more years that I can personally keep track of.   Does the Res F want the same standard and course-code?   Fine - the Reg F designs modular courses so that they can attain that standard (with "no train" limitations).   Does the Res F not want the same standard and course-code?   Fine - the Reg F designs Reserve-specific training courses.   The ongoing ACT Infantry Reserve Dismounted Company Commanders' Course that I teach every year would be a "non-total-force" case in point of a course that seems to work just fine for the Reserve Force.   The alternative to this "Reserve-specific" course would be to load Res F candidates on the annual Reg F "Combined Arms Team Commander Course".   And I am here to tell you that based on first-hand experience, any such initiative would be an utter and complete disaster for all concerned.   

At the end of the day, the Res F senior leadership needs to (finally!) decide what it wants/needs out of training courses.   The endless cries for "training equality without equitable training commitment" are complete and utter crap.   I'm sorry, but it simply doesn't work that way. "Less" truly does mean "Less".   You either commit to the time, or you have one of two choices -You can accept an identical standard with a reduced range of tasks/expectations, OR you can accept a lower standard across the full range of tasks/expectations

When my Training Establishment (the Army Tactics School) receives students for the annual ACT Infantry Course (eg. the Dismounted Company Commander's Course), the time available precludes us from teaching anything more than the most basic of dismounted tactics.   We are constrained by a 14-day window, of which 2 days are devoted to travel based on the average civilian holidays of Res F participants.   

Hey - genuine kudos for spending your annual holidays running up and down the Gagetown training area, but that doesn't change what I can and cannot achieve with the average Phase 3 Infantry-qualified Res F candidate in 12 training days.   The field-based company group-level curriculum is VERY basic, and most of the students seriously struggle with that.   I can not accomplish anything more advanced than the utter basics, and to be brutally frank, the average candidate couldn't handle anything more challenging.   Just ask any past graduate - they were maxed out, big-time.

The same applies to the Res F version of the ATOC (Army Tactical Operations Course) that the Tactics School runs every summer.   The average Res F candidate is an order of magnitude below the experience level of the average Reg F candidate, and it clearly shows.   And trust me, that isn't say much for either component....but I digress.

The Tactics School DS bend over backwards to address the experience and training "delta" of our annual Res F candidates, but it is a seriously uphill battle.   Do the Res F candidates leave better trained and more confident/competent that when they arrived?   Most assuredly.   That is our job.   But do they meet the same standard as their Reg F counterparts?   Not even close.   Yet both categories of student (by virtue of demands from the Res F senior leadership) receive the same qualification for having "attended" the identical training.   

Could someone please tell me just why it is that the Res F senior leadership insists upon ATOC participation in the first place?   The course curriculum is based on a mechanized Combat/Combined Arms Team, whereas the typical Res F candidate these days has no exposure (and no need for exposure) to mech operations.   Unfortunately, this fundamental disconnect means that the Res F candidates are studying and focussing on employment as Cbt Tm/CAT 2ICs, BCs, LAV Capts, etc, that they will NEVER exploit within their professional constructs.   The things that make you go "Hmmmmm.....".   And at the end of the day, the only conceivable reason for the mutual anguish that both the Res F ATOC students AND their Instructors endure is that some politically-motivated "Colonel Blimp" has arbitrarily insisted that all training be "equal".   Well sorry, but that sort of completely ludicrous and unsubstantiated justification for unwarranted (and inadvisable) training simply hurts everyone involved.   

The Res F ATOC students (quite understandably) end up WAY over their heads, and the Tactics School Directing Staff end up working themselves far beyond the call of duty to do the best that they can in the extremely limited time that they have allotted for instruction.   At the end of the day, this situation is equally unfair to both parties involved. 

I could go on, but suffice it to say that the responsibility for ever-changing Res F course dates and training curriculum rests equally with their very own senior leadership.   Perhaps not knowingly, but the fact remains that every time some completely disassociated senior Reserve Force officer bangs his fist to make a point, the national training system attempts to accomodate his/her irrational whims in the interests of inter-component peace and good-will.   More often than not, this results in "trickle-down" changes that take effect to the utter detriment of all concerned.    

Don't believe me?   Here is an honest, non-confrontational challenge for any Reserve F senior Lt or Capt who thinks that the Reg F are "ruling the training roost".   By all means, please, PLEASE take 2 weeks this summer and get yourself loaded on one of the upcoming ATOC-Combat Arms P Res serials.   And when you're done learing all that you can cram into 2 weeks about the employment of a square combat team in conventional combat operations of war with an assessed focus on your commesurate role as a Combat Team 2IC, LAV Captain, Armoured Squadron 2IC, etc???    Well, then ask yourself just what (if anything) your 2 week summer vacation had to do with your future employment within your Reserve unit. And then ask yourself what your own senior Reserve Force Leadership is doing to you in the parochial interests of non-existent (and completely non-necessary!) "equality"...... 

Enough about "Res F summer training blame" for now.   I can go on (and on), if required/desired....

Cheers,

Mark C

Edited to add:

Garret Hallman, a Res F member of this board who has been employed as a DP1, DP 2 and DP 3 NCM Course Officer at the Infantry School for the past year can undoubtedly shed some light on the Res F course-scheduling issue.   Suffice it to say that "we/them" Regular and Reserve animosity does nobody any good and is entirely unwarranted.   Anyone who attends a training course at CTC Gagetown will find that the staff are totally (and I mean TOTALLY) committed to their success - assuming that the candidate has the requisite basic parts.   As far as course scheduling is concerned?   Well Garret can speak to the Infantry school situation.   Suffice it to say that the inavailability of increment staff (based on invariably inflated Res F expectations for course-loading) have a significant impact in terms of what is physically achievable.   

For my part, at the Army Tactics School I have a staff of 20 all ranks running 2 x PRes ATOC-Combat Arms Serials, 1 x ATOC-Combat Service Support, and 1x ACT Infantry serial during the coming summer.   Aside from the LCol Commandant, RSM,   myself (DCmdt), our C Sp, Ops/Trg O, 2 civilians, 3 Standards staff, and a support staff of 5 NCMs, we are left with a grand total of 5 Instructors.   Oh, but of course 2 of our 5 instructors are posted out this summer.   This leaves 4 instructors (one non-"indocrinated") to run 2 x serials of ATOC-CA (P Res), 1 x serial of ATOC-CSS (PRes) and 1 x serial of ACT-Inf.   Each course requires a Course Officer and 3 Directing Staff, not to mention the Ops/Adm support.   

Can you say "fully engaged in the interests of Res F training?   Can you say "no summer leave" (as usual) for the Tactics School?".   I knew you could.   We do this for a living, and by the time that most of us take leave every year, our kids are back in school due to the requirement to support Res F summer training.

All of that to say that whinging about scheduling changes or conflicts don't hold a lot of weight with those of us engaged full-time within the Army training system.   Changes don't occur on a "whim".   Changes to the Reserve Force Summer Course scheduling generally happen for one of 2 reasons:

1.   A lack of resources or staff - both of which were usually "promised" by the Res F but weren't counted upon because historical precedent strongly suggests that "self-support" is an abject pipe-dream, and

2.   A lack of Regular Force "backfill" augmentee staff.   The Field-Force is maxed-out for taskings 12 months out of the year.   And then we ask them to support (and more typically fill vacant) Res F instructor positions during the Summer months.   No offence, but I also need my time-off with my family - preferably when it isn't snowing outside.   Those of us who fill full-time training positions bend over backwards (and then some) to deliver the mandated Res F training at the expenses of our personal lives.   Yes, I know that the Res F candiates are on their holidays during summer courses.   And so should I be.   Lest the Res F folks forget, we get to teach the Regular Force throughout the rest of year.   At the end of the day, it is what it is - and we both get to suck it up.   

All of that to say that there are two sides to every coin.....   Don't like the course scheduling changes?   Suck it up, Buttercup.   Either that, or take off the uniform.   I'm not at all sorry to say that you will get no sympathy   from me.   I am not a "Reserve-Basher".   Indeed, some may be disappointed to hear that I was a Reserve NCM (Infantry Recruit to Sergeant) before I went full-time as an officer.   At the end of the day, you either adapt or overcome the circumstances.   If the the scheduling of training doesn't suit your needs, then you don't expect the rest of the world to tilt upon its axis to accommodate your specific needs.   You sort yourself out, or you move on.   Very simple, sorry to lose you, but no man/woman is irreplacable.   And that is the hard thruth.   

I for one refuse to be a Regular Force "victim" of implied "guilt" from the Reserve Force.   Not after everything that I have given up over the past 3 summers to specifically support Reserve officer training.   Anyone who tries to tell me that they have been "screwed" by the course-scheduling offered by CTC Tactics School is asking for a serious kick in the nads, full-stop.   There is NOTHING to complain about until such time as the Res F is capable of providing its own equivalent training.   Full-stop.

Sorry to sound a tad harsh, but there it is.   Nobody wins in terms of course scheduling, and everyone ends up sacrificing for the collective good.   Let's keep that in mind....

Cheers,

Mark C


----------



## ZipperHead (5 Apr 2005)

Well said Mark. Your keyboard must be smoking after that one....  ;D

I have always wanted to broach the "same....but different" approach to the courses (I taught an SQ course, and when I looked at the difference in trg time spent by Reg F vs Res for the same thing I nearly shat myself..... not the same thing at all, but it ends up on paper as the same). I think we all realize that the Reserve world has less time avail for a course, but in this day and age, we can't pretend that Reservists show up with their horse, musket and a thirst to learn, and be stamped "good to go" in 2 weeks. 

It's either all or nothing, or everything that comes out of the Reserve system will have to have an asterisk beside it, because, at the end of the day, it isn't the same. ENthusiasm is one thing, but you can only drink so much out of the firehose......

But what do I know.....

Al


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (5 Apr 2005)

Wicked rant, Mark! (all true too!)

Makes me miss the old LFWA days!     (Ok, maybe not THAT much!  LOL)


TR


----------



## Gunner (5 Apr 2005)

MarkC, you can rant (and you know that I have) about Sr Reserve leadership but, at the end of the day, who runs the army?   



> Suffice it to say that "we/them" Regular and Reserve animosity does nobody any good and is entirely unwarranted.



The crux of the matter is contained in this statement as it is not an we/them situation and it is only about the army as a whole.   I have stated before that if you want a Reservist to be a Regular, then you sign him up for a multiyear contract and train the heck out of him.   If it is not cost effective to do that, you have to develop a system that provides a mutually supporting capability within the army.   

The individual training system for the Reserves goes from one nightmare to another, year after year. Why can't it be sorted out? Why are the same problems that you experienced as G3 Indiv Trg the same (or worse) that we are experiencing now?

Finally, it was, as always, an excellent rant.


----------



## Brad Sallows (5 Apr 2005)

It's good to hear the complications from all perspectives so we can all include a reasonably full set of factors in our estimates, but at the end of the day the pre-eminent axiom is this: if Canada is to have reserve forces to any useful purpose, the CF must first and foremost accommodate civilian Canada.  If Canada settles for whatever part of civilian Canada can accommodate the CF then the reserves will rarely be more than a tool looking for a use, rather than a tool shaped with a use in mind.


----------



## The_Falcon (5 Apr 2005)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> if Canada is to have reserve forces to any useful purpose, the CF must first and foremost accommodate civilian Canada.



Why must the CF cater to the civillian world.  Why can't we pressure our MPs to lobby the government (while they are in a minority), to enact legislation that would give reservists the opportunity to take leave from work, with using up precious holiday time, annual leave etc., and have a job to come back to, so they could attend a full reg force course.


----------



## Gunner (5 Apr 2005)

> Why can't we pressure our MPs to lobby the government (while they are in a minority), to enact legislation that would give reservists the opportunity to take leave from work, with using up precious holiday time, annual leave etc., and have a job to come back to, so they could attend a full reg force course.



The problems with Reserve Force individual training are not solely focussed around legislation that would allow Reservists to take 2 weeks off per year for military training.  CFLC has done some good work convincing companies to voluntarily provide time off for their workers for training and international operations.  Why train a Reservist to Regular standards?  See my comments above, its not cost effective.


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (5 Apr 2005)

The problem is that there is a Reserve constituency looking to have their cake and eat it too.  There are constant calls (mainly amongst the "oldsters") for high-tech equipment to be issued to the P Res, without realizing the accompanying training burden.  You can only do so much in two weeks and training a Coyote Surv Op, Eryx gunner, ROWPU operator or HLVW PLS driver in that time just isn't going to happen (no matter what innovative distributed training solutions are employed).  Yet there are constant calls for Reservists to be issued this type of kit.

I still feel as I felt years ago.  If a Reservist has the time, he/she should get as much training as the system can give him/her - including Regular Force courses.  Any training we can give our people is a good thing.  However, for the "traditional" Reservist, we need to concentrate on basic skill sets that allow that person to be mobilized and given additional training if required.  This essentially means, as was pointed out, that some Reserve courses have an asterisk beside them denoting a reduced training regime.  So what, as long as we all know what we're dealing with?

TR


----------



## Gunner (5 Apr 2005)

> This essentially means, as was pointed out, that some Reserve courses have an asterisk beside them denoting a reduced training regime.



Isn't that why there is an "R" in front of a Reservists MOC?  We have to break the stigma that equates being a Reservist with being inferior.  A functioning army consists of two components...


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (5 Apr 2005)

Gunner:

I think we've agreed with each other, but am not sure!   ;D


----------



## Michael Dorosh (6 Apr 2005)

Allan Luomala said:
			
		

> Oh, and I was wondering, Mr Dorosh, in the "real world" who does the majority of the instruction and support for these courses (including Reserve course)??? Feel free to come to Gagetown to teach on one. Or to Wainwright. Or Meaford. The welcome mat is out....
> 
> Allan



 I was talking about changing the dates of the courses, not the instructors.  The Deputy Commander of LFWA was begging everyone in the Brigade to come out to Wainwright for two weeks this summer (that's a brigade of reservists in case you're not sure), any two weeks, we name the time, they'll accommodate, just please, please come out and we'll find work for you, guaranteed!

So I bet there will be one or two reservists this summer. 

My words were poorly chosen, and since it is too late to go back and edit them - should have done so after Steel Badger's gentle reminder - I won't bother.  

to MarkC - I should not have made such a sweeping generalization.  There is enough stupidity to around both components.  I appreciate the detailed reply you made to this thread, however, it certainly clears up a lot of things, and was constructively worded to boot.


----------



## ZipperHead (6 Apr 2005)

> I was talking about changing the dates of the courses, not the instructors.  The Deputy Commander of LFWA was begging everyone in the Brigade to come out to Wainwright for two weeks this summer (that's a brigade of reservists in case you're not sure), any two weeks, we name the time, they'll accommodate, just please, please come out and we'll find work for you, guaranteed!



How exactly are you going to change the dates to suit everybody? Change it to suit university students? Seasonal workers? Farmers? Bankers? *IF* you could get 2 people to agree on a suitable date (for anything) you're lucky. Try doing it for hundreds.

I don't like the thought of anybody "begging" people to come out to play, but I have a sneaky suspicion that it has to do with someone's PER and career progression ("the more people who show up, the better I look" vs the requirements of the CF (Reserves included). Maybe I'm crazy, but a commander should order people to show up, or make them want to show up: with the Reserves, option A is a no-starter, option B is doable, but costs money, and a commitment on many people's part (scheduling good employment, or trg, or whatever). 



> Isn't that why there is an "R" in front of a Reservists MOC?  We have to break the stigma that equates being a Reservist with being inferior.  A functioning army consists of two components...



It's all well and good to put an R in front of an MOC, but when a course report for a course (Reserve TP & QS) is given, it doesn't have an R in front of the qualification, so when a Reservist comes over to the Regs, it is ASSUMED that if they are qualified, say, SQ or Coyote Gnr, they are qualified to the same (CF) level as Private Bloggins. I know that I take a Reservists qualifications with a healthy dose of pessimism, until I can determine if they were "really" trained to the same level as a Reg Force soldier (which, based on some of the soldiers I've seen over the last few years come down the pipeline, I shudder to think of anyone being inferior or less trained than some of them). 

I know I have a personal problem with the Reserve system, more out of resentment towards the somewhat cavalier attitude given about qualifications and promotions, that are based on unit, not Corps wide, needs, compared to our system, where you are in competition with all soldiers from your MOC across Canada. If the standards aren't the same, then the rank structure should show it (ie. a Reserve Sgt is NOT the same as a Reg F Sgt, in all regards: pay, respect shown, scales of punishment, messing, etc). I know that will cause people to get their panties in a bunch, but it is a somewhat unofficial policy already (when I was a 27 year old Cpl and saw a 23 year old Res Sgt with half the time in and probably a quarter the experience that I had, I knew that I would be hard pressed to take that guy seriously). They are two separate (and unequal) components, and should treat them accordingly.

If the CF decides to get serious, and change the way things are done (more trg time given, press the gov't to force businesses to protect jobs (a la the US system), a promotion/advancement program more on par with Reg F requirements, a higher expectation of a commitment from Res personnel to show up for courses (in support of, or as a student) with some form of "punishment" given for repeated no-shows (other than having "No Desserts" stamped on their meal cards)), I will give more respect and credence to the rank and "alleged" qualification levels of Reservists, particularly those taking the easy direct entry route into the Regs (I have seen TOOOOOOOO many that come in as Cpl's (or higher), and are vastly inferior to a newly minted TQ3 (now DP1)). I have seen some come in that were very good to excellent, but those are what I would consider to be people who did well *in spite of* the reduced expectations of a Reservist.

Al


----------



## Michael Dorosh (6 Apr 2005)

Teddy Ruxpin said:
			
		

> The problem is that there is a Reserve constituency looking to have their cake and eat it too.   There are constant calls (mainly amongst the "oldsters") for high-tech equipment to be issued to the P Res, without realizing the accompanying training burden.




And, I would imagine, a commensurate maintenance burden also, no?


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (6 Apr 2005)

That's for sure - all equipment has to be in Class S (although the standard has varied lately), which means complete maintenance checks on both end, not to mention the burden on the units coughing the equipment up.  I remember one summer (in the 90s) we tasked 700 rifles to Wainwright for the anticipated massive influx of QL2 trainees.  Guess where they came from?  Yup - 41 CBG units.

TR


----------



## Brad Sallows (6 Apr 2005)

>How exactly are you going to change the dates to suit everybody?

You can't.  Bear in mind the topic was opened with a comment about small shifts in course dates.  Let's be clear about that.  This specific problem affects a number of people every year.  Of those, some have no flexibility - if vacation or unpaid leave was booked three or more months in advance (generally, February) when the courses were first announced, they use it as scheduled irrespective of whether or not the CF employs the member because a couple of weeks prior to the date the member's manager either will not or literally can not rejuggle the schedules.  My guess is that a junior employee in most sectors gets two, or perhaps three weeks of vacation per year.  So, when the course shifts (or is cancelled, for that matter), you better drag out that BBQ or hit the lake and make the most of it.  On the bright side, at least it's paid vacation.  Now ponder the person who took unpaid leave - two weeks (perhaps more) without pay, and no CF pay to compensate.

However, it should be noted that recently (and hopefully still) it became a matter of policy (I don't know how widespread) to find and offer alternate employment to the member in lieu of courses/taskings cancelled at short notice.  The financial hardship was addressed.


----------



## westie47 (6 Apr 2005)

I see my rant had the desired effect.  Firstly I was talking about DP3B, which is run every year not one of a dozen BMQ's.  I have been around long enough to understand why BMQ/SQ type courses get cancelled but the senior courses are different as far as I'm concerned. I wouldn't be upset if it was cancelled but why move it up 2 weeks? Probably to allow the students to instruct afterwards. Now I would love nothing better than to take reg force courses.  In fact my JLC/JNCO was 13 weeks at WATC with all reg instructors, and I'm glad as we had to earn our pass. My Small Arms Course was in WATC as well but the same standards applied (reg instructors).  I know there are alot of Mo' guys that want to get the maximum for minimal output. I don't believe in that.  I think we promote to quickly, I think our system is f****d up. If I had my way it would take 4 years to get Cpl in the reserves as well (as an example). I realize that they are hurting for instructors at WATC, now I get a certain amount of time I can take. Should I use that for courses or instructing. Believe me I have spent many a summer teaching so I figure I've done my time. If I was unemployed or in school, then I'd be right there. It's not that bad in WATC.  Anyway, I've been lobbying to get advanced courses for years but they won't offer them to us. I'd willingly take more time off to take the Advanced Patrol Course or Urban Ops Instructor but they are reg only. If you guys close them to us how do you expect us to get as qualified? Another example is Small Arms, we didn't get taught templating because "we will never do it" that's the RSS/Reg force job. I WANT to do the same courses as do any of the Reserve NCO's worth their salt. Anyway food for thought.


----------



## ZipperHead (6 Apr 2005)

Westie, it's good to see that there are people who actually WANT to get trained. It's been my experience of late that within my organization (Armour Corps), many  people are averse to take any form of training, unless it's a swan. Especially with the shift away from the tank to the Coyote, everybody has to be retrained (well, not everybody, but our trg has shifted from tank-centric to recce-centric, and that has left a lot of people in the lurch). Our RSM and Comdt were students on the 25mm gnry and undertook Surveillance trg, just so they could be up on the new equipment. Too many people, at all rank levels, are avoiding the transformation like the plague. We had 2 "soldiers" in the School who tried to fail the Surv Op course because they didn't want to be "slave ops" (as we call them). If I had my way, they would have been released.....

People like doing what is comfortable for them, and learning new ways is too much to ask, I guess ("can't teach an old dog new tricks..."). 

A lot of what you mentioned (about wanting to learn certain things, but being denied) rings true throughout the CF. It seems that every school wants to teach to the TP and QS only, pass the PC (I've heard where people will only teach what is needed to pass the PO Check and nothing more), and that's that. Well, it's nice to pass a course with the basics, but if you can learn more (particularly advanced, realistic stuff) why not. Well, that costs money (sometimes), and some people (read: some instructors) don't have the knowledge and/or experience to teach any more than the basics, so that's where it ends. Luckily, there seems to be a groundswell of people coming into the training establishments who are enthusiastic about teaching and bring a lot of experience with them. Now, if they'd only give us more trg days and money (and servicable kit, and trg aids, and resources, and, and, and.......)

Al

Al


----------



## BKells (6 Apr 2005)

Hey, this is what I can say. I'm a new private in my infantry reserve unit. This is my first summer coming up and I'm available full tiem for four months. I'm ready to do any training they want to throw at me and taskings, plus Stalwart.. just give me the employment. They won't give me anything I'm afraid. I'll probably get my MOC training and that's it, and probably in the middle of the summer to screw me out of a civvie job and end up broke.


----------



## Garett (10 Apr 2005)

Other then me working at the Infantry School, Mark C was right.

In my opinion, I've seen improvements in the training system since Jan 04 when I started working at AATC.  Examples:

SQ- Taught GPS when the troops didn't know how to use a compass.  GPS was training was lessened for more map and compass. 
-This time last year; section attacks, recce patrols and Pl sized defensive.  Now (at AATC) all that plus VCP's, Urban Ops (attack / defend / patrol), Convoy Ops other stuff and this Spring/Summer (if I get my way) Simunition will be used on some training.

PLQ- This time last year they still had the PLQ Land + Inf 2A + Inf 2B = MCpl.  Now it is Inf 2A + PLQ Inf.  Before, no Urban Ops.  Now Urban Ops, more fighting patrols better defensive stuff (delay instead of deliberate).  We did a full day of Simunition training in the new Urban Ops site in Gagetown, we had 5000 rounds and could only shoot 3000 because we ran out of daylight.  We did a full day of Urban Attacks in Austere Village yesterday.  I sent out every section on an Urban Presence Patrol last night.  They had to do Snap VCP's, Cordon and Knock/Search and deal with belligerent locals.  All En Force only spoke French, Ptl Comds had to deal with them through an attached interpreter.

etc............


Improvements in training take time, before improvements are made at the unit level the leadership has to be trained up on all the latest and greatest.  Also, Bn, Coy and Pl Comd's plus the Ops and Trg staff have to WANT to do good training.  If they don't WANT to do it because they're LAZY or would rather spend the budget on Mess Dinners then the troops get screwed.


Not to toot my own horn, but I came up with a lot of stuff on my own or in co-ordination with my staff.  It  wasn't in the TP but we made it work.  Example, Section sized recce ptls that have to select and mark a firebase posn, assault posn and LD; The presence ptls I referred to, training with Simunition.


----------



## xFusilier (10 Apr 2005)

*All En Force only spoke French, Ptl Comds had to deal with them through an attached interpreter.*

That's one of the better ideas I've heard in a long time...almost a thing of beauty in its simplicity (wondering why I never thought of it myself).


----------



## Highland Laddie (11 Apr 2005)

Some great insight and points on this thread, particularly from Mark C & Allen L! I'm surprised PBI has spoken on this yet, as he usually has some very good points on these issues.

I think some of our Reg Force partners will be happy to know that many of us Reservists share the same concerns. I fully understand where you folks are coming from, and if any one from the Reserve world has not said this lately: Thanks. You guys (and girls) bust your butt to help us out and train us, while also giving up leave time, family time etc, all between your 5th tour of Bosnia and second or third tour of the 'Stan. Once again, thanks, your efforts are truly appreciated. 

Many of us in the Reserve world are also frustrated with the consistently changing training structure, course dates, course material, doing more in less time, etc. One of my more interesting observations over the past couple of years as a Coy 2 I/C is that many of the pers who could not make the time for training under the 'old' system (ie QL3 Inf course full time for the summer / Phase II & III over two summers), are also the same pers who have problems committing to courses under the new modularized system. The net gain for the Reserves of this new system is questionable. The modularized system also creates a bit of an administrative & planning problem in the Coys & units (at least from my Inf perspective). Under the old system you could point to any QL3 Inf soldier and point to any weapon system in the Coy, and say "Hldr Jones, man the C-9 / Gustof / 60MM / GPMG". Now under the new modularized system its an admin burden - SQ can only do this, BIQ can only do that , IPSW are the only pers for the C-6, etc - and it gets more interesting for Pl / Coy live fire, MILCONs etc. But, in the big scheme of things, this is minor to some of the challenges faced by the Regs. In my mind, bring back the old QL3 / ISCC / Phase systems of training, and live with the limitations of that system. In our present system, I think the 'cure' is worse that the original problem(s).

I also know that many Reservists like myself recognize the difference in experience levels between Reg & Reserves, and have the greatest respect for what you guys do. When the Regs are around, I know myself and many others shut up and go into "observe / learn" mode, simply to learn from what you folks have to offer. I have learned just as much listening to Reg Pte's & Cpl's as Capt's & WOs. Many of us are constantly picking the brains of our Reg force brethren, particularly the RSS attached to our units. Unfortunately not all Reservists are like that, and trust me, most of us would like to have 'a few words out back' with these individuals.

As for those Reservist who don't want to do training or show up for ex's: sort yourself out, or get out. That's my attitude. Our unit recently started punting out the "Tuesday night solider' (ie not courses or ex's) with a vengeance, as it should.

As for myself and others in the Reserves, particularly in leadership roles- its time to shut up and put up. Either your a complainer (part of the problem) or an enable for change (part of the solution). I've spent the past training year attached to Training Det as Course O for courses (BIQ & BMQ), and start DL for my course as a candidate next week (ATOC - Combat Arms here I come!). What motivates me (other than professionalism, pride, and a sense of duty) is TF 0308 - our Brigade's tasking of 250 pers for the 'Stan. Everything I do between now and then will be to get myself and others ready for that tour. Full stop.

Well my 2 cents - rant button off. Flame / comment away.


----------



## JBP (18 Apr 2005)

Allan Luomala said:
			
		

> Westie, it's good to see that there are people who actually WANT to get trained.



You should see the guys in my Section on BMQ, we've only got 2 more weekends left of BMQ, then 4 weekends in a row of "Pre-SQ", everyone keeps asking our Sgt, "Will our home units be active? Will we get to go out into the field and train", I'll come join your unit if my unit doesn't do enough stuff..."?...

It seems that most of the guys I joined up with, including me, can't get enough of it. I'm not worried about our home unit (Lincoln and Welland Reg) because they're quite active, but some people will drive 45mins-1hr to have good, hard training!

There are those of us who didn't join for the money, because there certainly isn't much of that at our level!  It's a nice bonus though...

Just an FYI...


----------



## swanita (24 Apr 2005)

Allan Luomala said:
			
		

> I have always wanted to broach the "same....but different" approach to the courses (I taught an SQ course, and when I looked at the difference in trg time spent by Reg F vs Res for the same thing I nearly shat myself..... not the same thing at all, but it ends up on paper as the same). I think we all realize that the Reserve world has less time avail for a course, but in this day and age, we can't pretend that Reservists show up with their horse, musket and a thirst to learn, and be stamped "good to go" in 2 weeks.
> 
> It's either all or nothing, or everything that comes out of the Reserve system will have to have an asterisk beside it, because, at the end of the day, it isn't the same. ENthusiasm is one thing, but you can only drink so much out of the firehose......
> 
> ...



As a reservist, I totally agree.  Our training isn't the same, & quite honestly it shouldn't be absolutely identical.  The simple fact of the matter is that the Reg force guys are the "experts", if you will, of their trade. They constantly train to learn & improve everything involved with their job.  As for the reservists, it's obviously a different world & some people expect too much to happen too soon in too little time.  We should do what we can, and learn when we can from our reg force counterparts.


----------



## timstec (7 Jul 2008)

I was on that 2005 PP3B course! The Defence phase was just BRUTAL!! Good, wet, and cold times!! Got to love CFB Gagetown.


----------

