# Some Weird Swerve About Deployments [from the Coronavirus thread]



## Jarnhamar (20 Jul 2020)

[quote author=stellarpanther]  
 but people are worried and more and more are talking about RTUing including staff.  
[/quote]
What would they do if they were put on work up training for a warzone? 

Maybe these students and staff could flood the CDU and get Covid19 chits.


----------



## stellarpanther (20 Jul 2020)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> What would they do if they were put on work up training for a warzone?
> 
> Maybe these students and staff could flood the CDU and get Covid19 chits.



You do raise a good point but I think a lot of Reservist join thinking it's an easy part time job and don't take the thought of being forced to go to a warzone seriously.
I'm hearing that some regular force courses with September start times have been delayed for now due to COVID.


----------



## stellarpanther (20 Jul 2020)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Someone will eat it if someone tests positive.
> 
> Here's the thing: Is your son confined to base? Are the staff confined to base for the duration of the course? If not, then there's a chance someone could catch COVID-19 from one of the 4500 Canadians across the country that have currently tested positive. I'm willing to bet your son and his coursemates would be bitching and moaning if they were confined to barracks for the duration of the course and isolated from the general military population. Just wait till they all get shack hack and someone panics thinking its a COVID-19 outbreak.



I'll ask him tomorrow if I talk to him about whether they're confined to base.  They should be in my opinion.  They were originally saying they might get a weekend off which would be a bad idea especially if they choose to go into town or go home and see their friends etc.  I personally think that they should be tested prior to leaving the course make sure he doesn't bring it home.  I already told him that he's going for a test the next day after he gets home.


----------



## daftandbarmy (21 Jul 2020)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> You do raise a good point but I think a lot of Reservist join thinking it's an easy part time job and don't take the thought of being forced to go to a warzone seriously.
> I'm hearing that some regular force courses with September start times have been delayed for now due to COVID.



Most of the Reservists I know join specifically because they wanted to go to fight in a real war for their country, and stuff like that. 

They quit when they find out that they can't.

But I'm Infantry, so....


----------



## CBH99 (21 Jul 2020)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Most of the Reservists I know join specifically because they wanted to go to fight in a real war for their country, and stuff like that.
> 
> They quit when they find out that they can't.
> 
> But I'm Infantry, so....




Totally agree.

When Afghanistan was in full swing, I was assisting in recruiting at my unit.  We had people coming in regularly, wanting to sign up & deploy as fast as possible.

When combat operations ended in 2011, there was a noticeable drop in the number of applications, and a noticeably increase in the number of people VR'ing.


----------



## daftandbarmy (21 Jul 2020)

CBH99 said:
			
		

> Totally agree.
> 
> When Afghanistan was in full swing, I was assisting in recruiting at my unit.  We had people coming in regularly, wanting to sign up & deploy as fast as possible.
> 
> When combat operations ended in 2011, there was a noticeable drop in the number of applications, and a noticeably increase in the number of people VR'ing.



I was a Rifle Coy OC through the AFG thing, and beyond. We went from 30 on parade to 80 then, when it all shut down, back down to about 30. About an equal number went Reg F, or got out altogether.


----------



## MilEME09 (21 Jul 2020)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Most of the Reservists I know join specifically because they wanted to go to fight in a real war for their country, and stuff like that.
> 
> They quit when they find out that they can't.
> 
> But I'm Infantry, so....



I can openly admit I was in that boat, but I am a weapons tech, and a patient man. Just because I missed the last war, doesn't mean I'll miss the next.


----------



## stellarpanther (21 Jul 2020)

Wow... the Reserves have really changed since I was in it years ago.  It also seems to be quiet different than the Reg force, I'm sure it's different in the Combat arms trades but a lot of people in the Reg force do everything they can and come up with every excuse possible not to deploy or sail.
I'm sorry but I don't think all these Reservists are volunteering to go because they're super patriotic, they're doing it for the money and join the Reserves because they don't want to deal with or can't handle normal Ref Force life.  If they're so interested in fighting wars, they should become a mercenary, then they can fight in all the wars they want.


----------



## Remius (21 Jul 2020)

People want purpose and be involved and deploy.  It isn’t just about fighting war. 

All sorts of things motivate people to join.  Money, sense of duty and purpose or just want to be in the thick of things.  Or belonging to group or just the respect they get being in uniform.  And yes, some people just want to be able to legally kill. Some can’t get a decent paying job anywhere else.  Some are forced into it by their parents or by necessity.

I’ve seen all types for all sorts of reasons.  Patriotism is not the only be all end all.   A lot of it is a mix.  

I can say this. There is no shortage of troops in my unit that want to deploy.


----------



## Old Sweat (21 Jul 2020)

For whatever this is worth, take a look at Strange Battleground, the official history of the Canadian Army in the Korean War. In 1950. when the composition of what became the Special Force was being debated, the CGS came down against a normal three year engagement because [paraphrasing here] people who would enlist to fight a war were not the type we want in the regular army. 

A fellow lieutenant in 1 RCHA commented, "No, what we need are the good, steady administrative problems".


----------



## mariomike (21 Jul 2020)

Remius said:
			
		

> And yes, some people just want to be able to legally kill.



During World War II, Oscar Levant appeared before the draft-board examiner. “Do you think you can kill?” the official asked. “I don't know about strangers,” replied Oscar, “but friends, yes.”


----------



## BDTyre (21 Jul 2020)

I served with a guy who volunteered to go to Afghanistan "because he wanted to kill someone." He ended up in BG, but not killing anyone. He quit the army very soon after, only to rejoin as an officer a few years later.

I personally didn't join with the intent of deploying. When I put my application in we were still in Kabul and sending reservists on deployments was not a big thing (we had one officer go). When I was sworn in, we still weren't in Kandahar yet and Bosnia was pretty much done with so the prospects of deploying were slim.


----------



## stellarpanther (21 Jul 2020)

CanadianTire said:
			
		

> I served with a guy who volunteered to go to Afghanistan "because he wanted to kill someone."



Anyone who openly says this should be referred to mental health and possibly released.  No sane person says these kinds of things.  Anyone in a leadership postion who knows about this and ignores it should also be replaced.


----------



## Remius (21 Jul 2020)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> Anyone who openly says this should be referred to mental health and possibly released.  No sane person says these kinds of things.  Anyone in a leadership postion who knows about this and ignores it should also be replaced.



That happened on my MG course.  Guy put it in his auto biography.  Was escorted off the range.  Don’t know what happened after.  Mind you he wrote far more than wanting to just kill someone but it was all under that theme.


----------



## PMedMoe (21 Jul 2020)

I think a split is required here, possibly starting with reply #3268, as it has to do with training.  Just my  :2c:


----------



## daftandbarmy (21 Jul 2020)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> *Anyone who openly says this should be referred to mental health and possibly released. * No sane person says these kinds of things.  Anyone in a leadership postion who knows about this and ignores it should also be replaced.



Especially if they're a cook. 

031 Riflemen? I can work with that.... mainly because sanity is somewhat subjective on the other side of the Line of Departure


----------



## stellarpanther (21 Jul 2020)

Remius said:
			
		

> That happened on my MG course.  Guy put it in his auto biography.  Was escorted off the range.  Don’t know what happened after.  Mind you he wrote far more than wanting to just kill someone but it was all under that theme.



Glad to hear that.  It's one thing to say you would have no problem killing the enemy if necessary and that's probably what you want to hear but something else to have a desire to kill people.

On another topic, I was just reading this article about when civil servants can be expected to be back in the office.  It might also shed light on when all CAF mbr's will return.  It sounds like it could still be a while.  

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/federal-public-servants-return-to-office-1.5656377


----------



## Remius (21 Jul 2020)

My department is starting a phased approach. Mid August for the first phase. 

My section is slated for sometime next May.  But some will be working from home permanently.

Strict guidelines are in place for entry and exit.  Some people with premium or handicapped parking will not be pleased.


----------



## MJP (21 Jul 2020)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> I'm sure it's different in the Combat arms trades but a lot of people in the Reg force do everything they can and come up with every excuse possible not to deploy or sail.



That is not my experience for CA trades outside of the Combat Arms, must be an Ottawa thing. Some people sure but vast majority want to deploy


----------



## stellarpanther (21 Jul 2020)

MJP said:
			
		

> That is not my experience for CA trades outside of the Combat Arms, must be an Ottawa thing. Some people sure but vast majority want to deploy



Well I have a friend who's a medic in Edmonton and he said when word of deployment comes, medical starts seeing a surge of people who've suddenly decided to get that long waited minor surgery they were putting off or injuries that require a specialist consult start increasing, people start accidentally shutting doors on their hands or feet etc. It's the same in the Navy.

Anyone who says it isn't a problem is either fooling themselves or lying.


----------



## stellarpanther (21 Jul 2020)

MJP said:
			
		

> That is not my experience for CA trades outside of the Combat Arms, must be an Ottawa thing. Some people sure but vast majority want to deploy



A lot of single people want to deploy but a lot of people with kids a non-military spouse don't.  There are some married people who certainly want to deploy, I won't disagree with that but I don't think it's the majority.  Why someone who is married would go out a seek a deployment is something I will never understand.  If the marriage is bad then maybe it's not meant to be.  Don't run away and hide from the problems.


----------



## MJP (21 Jul 2020)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> A lot of single people want to deploy but a lot of people with kids a non-military spouse don't.  There are some married people who certainly want to deploy, I won't disagree with that but I don't think it's the majority.  Why someone who is married would go out a seek a deployment is something I will never understand.  If the marriage is bad then maybe it's not meant to be.  Don't run away and hide from the problems.



Yea I am gonna say that that is not true at all and not the way most people look at it.  Maybe in your insular, never really been anywhere but one in your career view but that isn't how most people operate. Most people don't view going away on tour as escaping but rather part and parcel of the job they signed up for. I realize that might be hard for someone who is surrounded by a hivemind in Ottawa to break out of that view but you really are not espousing the vies of the CAF writ large here.   I will admit some of your views mimic the greater CAF audience, this isn't one of them.


----------



## BDTyre (21 Jul 2020)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> A lot of single people want to deploy but a lot of people with kids a non-military spouse don't.  There are some married people who certainly want to deploy, I won't disagree with that but I don't think it's the majority.  Why someone who is married would go out a seek a deployment is something I will never understand.  If the marriage is bad then maybe it's not meant to be.  Don't run away and hide from the problems.



I was married before I was sworn (submitted my paperwork a week before the wedding actually) and I deployed with the full support of my wife. I definitely wasn't deploying due to any issues in our marriage. It was something we had discussed for at least a year beforehand.


----------



## PMedMoe (21 Jul 2020)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> Why someone who is married would go out a seek a deployment is something I will never understand.  If the marriage is bad then maybe it's not meant to be.  Don't run away and hide from the problems.



Maybe there's not a problem in the marriage.  Maybe it's just someone doing their job or wanting to progress in their career.   :


----------



## Remius (21 Jul 2020)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> Well I have a friend who's a medic in Edmonton and he said when word of deployment comes, medical starts seeing a surge of people who've suddenly decided to get that long waited minor surgery they were putting off or injuries that require a specialist consult start increasing, people start accidentally shutting doors on their hands or feet etc. It's the same in the Navy.
> 
> Anyone who says it isn't a problem is either fooling themselves or lying.



I’d be interested in seeing the breakdown by trade, family situations and number of times deployed.

Years ago on my ILQ, my div was about to start work up.  The WO I was sitting next to from 1 RCR was looking forward to being able to dump the dead weight he had and bring in motivated reservists.  In fact getting punted from a tour was a seen as a punishment and financial hit.


----------



## MJP (21 Jul 2020)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> Well I have a friend who's a medic in Edmonton and he said when word of deployment comes, medical starts seeing a surge of people who've suddenly decided to get that long waited minor surgery they were putting off or injuries that require a specialist consult start increasing, people start accidentally shutting doors on their hands or feet etc. It's the same in the Navy.
> 
> Anyone who says it isn't a problem is either fooling themselves or lying.



Yea well hate to break your special bubble but I am in Edmonton and was directly involved in the last two HR periods and that simply isn't true. People for the most part want to deploy. Sure there are individuals that don't want to go but they are the vast minority. Other than running short of some low density trades we simply had no issues filling spots with primary choices.

Anyone who speaks about things they don't have a clue about is just simply a parrot or a fool to believe something based on some anecdotal observations.


----------



## dimsum (21 Jul 2020)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> A lot of single people want to deploy but a lot of people with kids a non-military spouse don't.  There are some married people who certainly want to deploy, I won't disagree with that but I don't think it's the majority.  Why someone who is married would go out a seek a deployment is something I will never understand.  If the marriage is bad then maybe it's not meant to be.  Don't run away and hide from the problems.



That makes no sense.  For many trades, deployment is when you actually do what you've learned to do.  That, plus the tax-free money, plus the travel, plus the professional development makes deployment very lucrative for single and married folks.  

Hell, CAF Reddit's biggest complaint is "lack of deployments".  Sure, there are probably a ton of single people on there but I'd bet there are quite a few married ones too.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (21 Jul 2020)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> Well I have a friend who's a medic in Edmonton and he said when word of deployment comes, medical starts seeing a surge of people who've suddenly decided to get that long waited minor surgery they were putting off or injuries that require a specialist consult start increasing, people start accidentally shutting doors on their hands or feet etc. It's the same in the Navy.
> 
> Anyone who says it isn't a problem is either fooling themselves or lying.



Lots of people don't want to deploy, or sail or fly.  They should do the honourable thing and stop wasting the Queens money and time.  If you include yourself in that boat, you should also get out.  Nothing worse than lazy, cowardly slovenly people in uniform.

Riders in an organization that is 100% dependent on team work for mission success should do everyone a favour and get out.  They should also be forced or coerced out if necessary but that's for another discussion.


----------



## rnkelly (21 Jul 2020)

Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> Lots of people don't want to deploy, or sail or fly.  They should do the honourable thing and stop wasting the Queens money and time.  If you include yourself in that boat, you should also get out.  Nothing worse than lazy, cowardly slovenly people in uniform.
> 
> Riders in an organization that is 100% dependent on team work for mission success should do everyone a favour and get out.  They should also be forced or coerced out if necessary but that's for another discussion.



The solution is the “Journey”. Boom, Easy peasy.


----------



## OldSolduer (21 Jul 2020)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> A lot of single people want to deploy but a lot of people with kids a non-military spouse don't.  There are some married people who certainly want to deploy, I won't disagree with that but I don't think it's the majority.  Why someone who is married would go out a seek a deployment is something I will never understand.  If the marriage is bad then maybe it's not meant to be.  Don't run away and hide from the problems.



Excuse me but I've been married for a lot longer than most. 

When I was in I wanted to deploy - and my wife - Niner Domestic - didn't like it but she accepted that it was part of the life we choose to lead. 

I was married on 4 September 1983 and deployed 21 September 1983 to Cyprus. 

At some points after I'd been home for a while she'd ask "Don't you have an exercise to go on or something?" when I became a bit annoying.


----------



## Jarnhamar (21 Jul 2020)

stellarpanther] If they're so interested in fighting wars said:
			
		

> Well I have a friend who's a medic in Edmonton and he said when word of deployment comes, medical starts seeing a surge of people who've suddenly decided to get that long waited minor surgery they were putting off or injuries that require a specialist consult start increasing, people start accidentally shutting doors on their hands or feet etc. It's the same in the Navy.
> 
> *Anyone who says it isn't a problem is either fooling themselves or lying.*



Maybe it's the circles you work in.

A complaint in Petawawa is the people who are on T-Cat flood the CDU to get off their categories when deployments come up. Or flood the CDU to try and get surgeries early and get lingering issues cleared up so they can go. There's always people who don't want to deploy, and a line up behind them waiting to take their place.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (21 Jul 2020)

rnkelly said:
			
		

> The solution is the “Journey”. Boom, Easy peasy.



Briefs real well on a PowerPoint.  Green welfare is the last thing we need.  Imagine all the useless work that would get done if we implemented the "Journey" ... Ottawa would transform in to the world's largest self licking ice cream cone.


----------



## stellarpanther (21 Jul 2020)

MJP said:
			
		

> Yea well hate to break your special bubble



Can we keep the insults to ourselves.  There is nothing special about my bubble as you put it.  I find issue with many posts here yet I don't insult people or get sarcastic.  Not recently anyway.


----------



## stellarpanther (21 Jul 2020)

Dimsum said:
			
		

> That makes no sense.  For many trades, deployment is when you actually do what you've learned to do.  That, plus the tax-free money, plus the travel, plus the professional development makes deployment very lucrative for single and married folks.
> 
> Hell, CAF Reddit's biggest complaint is "lack of deployments".  Sure, there are probably a ton of single people on there but I'd bet there are quite a few married ones too.



I really think it depends on the trade.  In my trade, we actually do more when in Canada.  I've been told by several HRA's and FSA's that the only reason it can get really busy and they work long hours is because they don't send enough people.  Most people in my trade are not seeking out tours, it's the opposite.  I have a buddy who went to Latvia last year but the reason he went was because the person slated to go got caught looking at things on the internet that he shouldn't have and lost the tour.  My friends comment was that it seemed like he was the one getting in trouble and not the other guy.  The other guy was happy to be taken off the tour.


----------



## MJP (21 Jul 2020)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> Can we keep the insults to ourselves.  There is nothing special about my bubble as you put it.  I find issue with many posts here yet I don't insult people or get sarcastic.  Not recently anyway.



I am calling out your bubble of you and "friends" that clearly don't know the reality but are just an echo chamber.  It isn't an insult against you, but rather the premise behind your posts that is largely a self perpetuating bubble driven by like minded folks even though it doesn't match reality.

It isn't a bad thing everyone has bias, large groups like this website have bubbles, hivemind like any other group. It is hard not to fall into the same patterns of thought if everyone is reinforcing that pattern but every once and awhile you have to do some critical thinking for yourself and realize that what I think doesn't match reality.  If you consider me calling out that thought process an insult then so be it. I am merely pointing out that reality doesn't match your bubble.


----------



## Halifax Tar (21 Jul 2020)

I am not sure why everyone is taking issue with stellarpanther.  

We struggle to get sailors to sail in the RCN, and I can tell that during my time in the Army getting soldiers to go to the field wasn’t any easier.  Same for deployments.  

If you think this isn’t a growing and more and more disturbing problem you have your head in the sand.  And "Journey" is not the answer.


----------



## stellarpanther (21 Jul 2020)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> A complaint in Petawawa is the people who are on T-Cat flood the CDU to get off their categories when deployments come up. Or flood the CDU to try and get surgeries early and get lingering issues cleared up so they can go. There's always people who don't want to deploy, and a line up behind them waiting to take their place.



At least for my trade, Petawawa is one of the bases currently suffering from a severe shortage of HRA's at several rank levels.  I've been told by someone in CMP that they are short 18 MCpl's and it's worse at the Sgt rank.  Don't know numbers for other ranks.  It's like this in Edmonton and Valcartier as well.  The major reason is a lot of them don't want to deploy or go to the field so they release or somehow get posted out or release when they they get a message forcing them to go.


----------



## Jarnhamar (21 Jul 2020)

[quote author=stellarpanther ]The major reason is a lot of them don't want to deploy or go to the field so they release or somehow get posted out or release when they they get a message forcing them to go.
[/quote]

Do you see anything wrong with that?


----------



## PPCLI Guy (21 Jul 2020)

Sigh.  This is not the military I joined.  It is not the one that eventually became the military I thought I had joined.  It is not the military I still want to be in....

Conversations like this one make me count the weeks until I am done - 6 if any one is asking.


----------



## MJP (21 Jul 2020)

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> I am not sure why everyone is taking issue with stellarpanther.
> 
> We struggle to get sailors to sail in the RCN, and I can tell that during my time in the Army getting soldiers to go to the field wasn’t any easier.  Same for deployments.
> 
> If you think this isn’t a growing and more and more disturbing problem you have your head in the sand.  And "Journey" is not the answer.



Field I can buy, but CA-wise at least in the bubble I work in we have no issues filling spots on tours.  Our problem is not having enough of certain trades at times but if we have the people the spots are generally filled.  



			
				stellarpanther said:
			
		

> At least for my trade, Petawawa is one of the bases currently suffering from a severe shortage of HRA's at several rank levels.  I've been told by someone in CMP that they are short 18 MCpl's and it's worse at the Sgt rank.  Don't know numbers for other ranks.  It's like this in Edmonton and Valcartier as well.  The major reason is a lot of them don't want to deploy or go to the field so they release or somehow get posted out or release when they they get a message forcing them to go.



The shortages are there, mostly because the ill thought out HRA/FSA split combined with entrenched HRA/FSAs that have sat in one location too long not willing to help spread out the deficits so they do exactly what you describe and jump ship the moment the ship asks them to do their part. There is some value in looking at the reasons why people don't want to leave areas, I have long said that it will become more and more important to folks to not have to move around willy nilly.


----------



## stellarpanther (21 Jul 2020)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Do you see anything wrong with that?



Yes and no.  A common thing we often hear is "if you don't like it quit".  In this case the Career Manager has the right to post you where they need you but you also have the right to release with either with 30 days depending on time in or with 6 months.  That's what's happening.  If they fake an injury to get our of something I would have an issue with that.


----------



## Infanteer (21 Jul 2020)

Stellarpanther, everything I hear running out of your mouth is "I heard" or "my friend said" or "word is."  Quite frankly, you don't appear to know much, and just spew rumour and innuendo into the threads.  In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if you were a seasoned WO trolling the forum.

In either case, you should refrain from posting unless you can back your statement up with fact.  Otherwise, you're adding static to the net.

PS.  Ask your career manager for a posting to 3 RCR.  It'd do you some good.


----------



## stellarpanther (21 Jul 2020)

MJP said:
			
		

> I am calling out your bubble of you and "friends" that clearly don't know the reality but are just an echo chamber.  It isn't an insult against you, but rather the premise behind your posts that is largely a self perpetuating bubble driven by like minded folks even though it doesn't match reality.



The people I hear this from are not just my friends.  I hear from people I've known that are now in places like Pet or Edmonton and they say similar things.


----------



## Jarnhamar (21 Jul 2020)

[quote author=Infanteer]

PS.  Ask your career manager for a posting to 3 RCR.  It'd do you some good.
[/quote]
3 RCR will send cooks clerks and vehicle techs on their jump course if they want it.


----------



## stellarpanther (21 Jul 2020)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> Stellarpanther, everything I hear running out of your mouth is "I heard" or "my friend said" or "word is."  Quite frankly, you don't appear to know much, and just spew rumour and innuendo into the threads.  In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if you were a seasoned WO trolling the forum.
> 
> In either case, you should refrain from posting unless you can back your statement up with fact.  Otherwise, you're adding static to the net.
> 
> PS.  Ask your career manager for a posting to 3 RCR.  It'd do you some good.



What I notice on this forum is that when someone doesn't agree with a poster, they go on the attack against that person which is what's happening here.  Either way you are the only one adding static because in you post you didn't contribute anything positive except harass a poster for their believes.  And you are directing staff.  Wow.  You and some others disagree with my way of thinking which is more common than you think.  I'm not going to try to spend time to find stats or reports that backup what I say because I don't have the desire to prove myself to someone I don't even know or who may have been retired for several years and doesn't realize the military isn't the same as it was when they left.  If you knew where I worked and what reports I see, maybe you would think different but it doesn't really matter.  My opinion is based on what I hear from others, what I have seen and what reports I've read and I've read a lot.  Not all HRA's just do pay and enter leave passes.  You might be surprised what we see and do.  You are entitled to your opinion and that's all it is.  Your opinion is no more valuable than anyone else on here.  If you like going to the field or like going on numerous ex's and deployments that's great for you but it doesn't mean everyone in the military likes that sort or thing or that they should like that sort of thing.  As for your comment about going to 3 RCR, why would I do that if I have no interest in that sort of thing?


----------



## stellarpanther (21 Jul 2020)

Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> Lots of people don't want to deploy, or sail or fly.  They should do the honourable thing and stop wasting the Queens money and time.  If you include yourself in that boat, you should also get out.  Nothing worse than lazy, cowardly slovenly people in uniform.
> 
> Riders in an organization that is 100% dependent on team work for mission success should do everyone a favour and get out.  They should also be forced or coerced out if necessary but that's for another discussion.



I believe it's part of the "journey" but are you aware that the many people in the top leadership including the CDS don't agree with you which is why there is active planning (or at least before COVID) to create 3 separate groups which are deployable, full time non-deployable and part time?  They have also greatly increased the threshold for medical releases.


----------



## PPCLI Guy (21 Jul 2020)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> As for your comment about going to 3 RCR, why would I do that if I have no interest in that sort of thing?



Hmm.  So some other person has to go there?  Not you?  Because why?  

"That sort of thing" is called service.  Not the type you provide your "clients".  The type that you provide to your country, in exchange for a decent salary, a disability pension while you are still serving and earning full wages, and a great defined benefit pension at the end of it all.  You know.  Paying for the deal you are getting now.  

It is also about sharing the burden with your team mates.  Going on exercise.  Serving in an actual field unit.  Doing a tour.  Taking a less than ideal posting.  The stuff that makes us, the military, who we are.  A team.

Or not.

You are right when you said:



> Your opinion is no more valuable than anyone else on here.



The same can not be said of the breadth of one's experience, or the quality of one's service.  Some people's is more valuable than others.


----------



## Remius (21 Jul 2020)

Sounds like regular force, public service and reserves.

Personally we should have full time and part time.  If you are full time you are full time you are deployable.  That includes all class B. 

If you are non deployable (unless for TCATS) then you should be a PS. 

Edit: Modified for IPad Skynet spell checker


----------



## mariomike (21 Jul 2020)

Remius said:
			
		

> If you are full time you are full time you are deplorable.


----------



## Remius (21 Jul 2020)

Stupid IPad...


----------



## stellarpanther (21 Jul 2020)

Remius said:
			
		

> Sounds like regular force, public service and reserves.
> 
> Personally we should have full time and part time.  If you are full time you are full time you are deplorable.  That includes all class B.
> 
> If you are non deployable (unless for TCATS) then you should be a PS.



The actually plan is well underway although it could be another 5-8 years away.  It's a way to hopefully help with retention and moral.  Over the past couple years, several bases have been having town halls with the Junior ranks and asking mbr's what changes they want to see.  Two that I went to that surprised me was the amount of people that don't want to be promoted higher than Corporal but they would like to see the pay level go higher than IPC 4.  Others didn't want to have deployments and others were saying that enough people volunteer for tours so don't force the ones who don't want to go.  These are comments I've heard people say with my own ears.  Another comment was postings.  Many felt that if someone is the same rank and has the same qualifications, don't take the person who doesn't want to go.  I don't see this one happening but one guy said postings should be based on seniority and that should decide if you get posted or not posted.  All of these things are being taken back to the Armed Forces Council.

edited to add: and moral.


----------



## Kat Stevens (21 Jul 2020)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> What I notice on this forum is that when someone doesn't agree with a poster, they go on the attack against that person which is what's happening here.  Either way you are the only one adding static because in you post you didn't contribute anything positive except harass a poster for their believes.  And you are directing staff.  Wow.  You and some others disagree with my way of thinking which is more common than you think.  I'm not going to try to spend time to find stats or reports that backup what I say because I don't have the desire to prove myself to someone I don't even know or who may have been retired for several years and doesn't realize the military isn't the same as it was when they left.  If you knew where I worked and what reports I see, maybe you would think different but it doesn't really matter.  My opinion is based on what I hear from others, what I have seen and what reports I've read and I've read a lot.  Not all HRA's just do pay and enter leave passes.  You might be surprised what we see and do.  You are entitled to your opinion and that's all it is.  Your opinion is no more valuable than anyone else on here.  If you like going to the field or like going on numerous ex's and deployments that's great for you but it doesn't mean everyone in the military likes that sort or thing or that they should like that sort of thing.  As for your comment about going to 3 RCR, why would I do that if I have no interest in that sort of thing?



One of the big reasons guys (and girls and other) don't want to go is they just got back from their third deployment in four years because some cubicle dweller with a photocopier strapped to his ass and a five doughnut a day habit refuses to step up and take his bite of the shit sammich, and is plain burned out.


----------



## BeyondTheNow (21 Jul 2020)

MJP said:
			
		

> Field I can buy, but CA-wise at least in the bubble I work in we have no issues filling spots on tours.  Our problem is not having enough of certain trades at times but if we have the people the spots are generally filled.
> 
> The shortages are there, mostly because the ill thought out HRA/FSA split combined with entrenched HRA/FSAs that have sat in one location too long not willing to help spread out the deficits so they do exactly what you describe and jump ship the moment the ship asks them to do their part. There is some value in looking at the reasons why people don't want to leave areas, I have long said that it will become more and more important to folks to not have to move around willy nilly.



Yup, our unit got screwed over pretty badly with this. The incoming CClk decided they didn’t want to leave Ottawa. Literally last minute they VR’d. I’ve honestly lost track of hearing of the number of times this has happened.


----------



## Jarnhamar (21 Jul 2020)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> What I notice on this forum is that when someone doesn't agree with a poster, they go on the attack against that person which is what's happening here.



I don't see it that way.

You've sort of set yourself up as a bit of an ambassador for down trodden hard-done-by troops. The amount that these troops are being percecuted is questionable Imo.


----------



## stellarpanther (21 Jul 2020)

Just thought I'd add that I am posted out of Ottawa very shortly.  On HHT right now.  Not saying where and it certainly isn't to 3 RCR.  I actually asked for options to leave Ottawa partly because my wife wants to go to a smaller city where we can afford a house and hopefully less COVID but that was only a small consideration as it won't go on forever.  I think I'll be happy where I'm going after talking with the new Sgt and WO.


----------



## PuckChaser (21 Jul 2020)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> A complaint in Petawawa is the people who are on T-Cat flood the CDU to get off their categories when deployments come up. Or flood the CDU to try and get surgeries early and get lingering issues cleared up so they can go.



Lets be careful here, you've described 2 polar opposite people and lumped them into the same group. Someone trying to get off a TCat to get a deployment but not to go to Wainwright are taking advantaged of the medical system for personal gain. Someone going to the CDU to get pushed up on a surgical wait list/clear a lingering issue are motivated folks looking to get themselves fit to fight as fast as possible. We should not lump people who are legitimately hurt stuck in a glacial medical system in the same group as those using that glacial medical system to hide until the next cool course or deployment comes up.


----------



## BeyondTheNow (21 Jul 2020)

Remius said:
			
		

> Stupid IPad...



So the question then becomes how often you’ve typed the word “deplorable.”  ;D


----------



## stellarpanther (21 Jul 2020)

When I joined the CAF I was very honest with the recruiter about my opinions etc.  One thing I mentioned and I've mentioned it to my other CoC's is that if told I am being sent on tour, I would not try to get out of it by faking an injury or whatever but I am not someone who is going to volunteer to go either.  *Every one* of my CWO's, MWO's and WO's have said they have no problem with that sort of thinking.  A couple of them said they've heard several others say the same thing.  I don't think that makes me or others who think like that any less of a Soldier, Airman or Sailor for that way of thinking.

edit: cleared up grammar.


----------



## PPCLI Guy (21 Jul 2020)

I served in Kandahar with an awesome 58 year old Finance Major (she joined quite late).  When I asked why she deployed, she said "because financial support to deployed operations is what I do, and because it is my turn".


----------



## PuckChaser (21 Jul 2020)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> *Every one* of my CWO's, MWO's and WO's have said they have no problem with that sort of thinking.



You have a serious leadership problem in your trade then, or they're lying to you. You are describing the attitude of a civilian public servant, and I'll be perfectly blunt with you, it very much does (IMHO) make you less of a soldier, sailor or airperson for that way of thinking. Unfortunately we have too many people in the CAF with your way of thinking, but at least you're professional enough not to malinger to get out of deploying where others are missing that set of ethics. 



			
				PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> I served in Kandahar with an awesome 58 year old Finance Major (she joined quite late).  When I asked why she deployed, she said "because financial support to deployed operations is what I do, and because it is my turn".



Perfect example in attitude difference between a soldier/sailor/airperson and a civilian public servant.


----------



## stellarpanther (21 Jul 2020)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> You have a serious leadership problem in your trade then, or they're lying to you. You are describing the attitude of a civilian public servant, and I'll be perfectly blunt with you, it very much does (IMHO) make you less of a soldier, sailor or airperson for that way of thinking. Unfortunately we have too many people in the CAF with your way of thinking, but at least you're professional enough not to malinger to get out of deploying where others are missing that set of ethics.
> 
> Perfect example in attitude difference between a soldier/sailor/airperson and a civilian public servant.



I'm sure you have some knowledge of "the journey" so why in your opinion are they doing it?  It's coming from the top with a lot of support.


----------



## PPCLI Guy (21 Jul 2020)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> I'm sure you have some knowledge of "the journey" so why in your opinion are they doing it?  It's coming from the top with a lot of support.



You seem to think the Journey is about the four "Ms": me, money, medals, and more.  That it is about ensuring that every member of the CAF and their families are happy, self-actualised, free of worry and care, and receive untold benefits for the very jobs that they volunteered for.

It is in fact about re-imagining the terms of service to ensure that we have the right people at the right time to defend the nation.

Not sure how this point gets missed all the time.... :dunno:


----------



## stellarpanther (21 Jul 2020)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> You seem to think the Journey is about the four "Ms": me, money, medals, and more.  That it is about ensuring that every member of the CAF and their families are happy, self-actualised, free of worry and care, and receive untold benefits for the very jobs that they volunteered for.
> 
> It is in fact about re-imagining the terms of service to ensure that we have the right people at the right time to defend the nation.
> 
> Not sure how this point gets missed all the time.... :dunno:



First thing I'll say is don't try to tell me what I think and your assumption is wrong.  What I said was clear and it's what is being planned.  It's just as I said.  They are planning on having full time mbr's who want to deploy (will most likely make more money), mbr's who are full time but don't want to deploy and then part time.  The plan is also to make it easier to switch between the 3.  Obviously not constantly every time something comes up you like or don't like.  
People can word it how they want but the bottom line is they are planning on having full time mbr's who do not want to deploy.  I heard it directly from CMP shortly before COVID started.  The CDS also speaks about it from time to time at his townhalls.


----------



## PPCLI Guy (21 Jul 2020)

As you wish.  You certainly seem to be in the know, and close to the source of these decisions, and the nature of the discussions that led to them.

Like you, I have drawn my conclusions from my interactions with some of the same players. 

We seem to have heard different things.

I suppose that is the way of things.  Or if you like, "so it goes".


----------



## dapaterson (21 Jul 2020)

We already have full time personnel who do not deploy.

They're called public servants.


----------



## stellarpanther (21 Jul 2020)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> As you wish.  You certainly seem to be in the know, and close to the source of these decisions, and the nature of the discussions that led to them.
> 
> Like you, I have drawn my conclusions from my interactions with some of the same players.
> 
> ...



One of my favorite postings was at the Ministers Office.  You learn and hear a lot.


----------



## PuckChaser (21 Jul 2020)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> I'm sure you have some knowledge of "the journey" so why in your opinion are they doing it?  It's coming from the top with a lot of support.



It can come from the top with a lot of support all it wants, but that doesn't mean its right. My personal view is that "The Journey" will compound the problem we have keeping our force fit to fight and deploy. We're an incredibly small force for the size of land mass, ADIZ and EEZ to defend. The more folks we actively encourage to join the CAF with no intention of ever moving or deploying, the less able we are to respond to emergency situations the people of Canada need us to respond to. The devil is in the details, but the only way I see it working is if those who put themselves on long term "non deployable non moveable" are only given short term contracts (like Class B) that are renewed based on the needs of the service and given on a merit basis (you're not hired again if you have a junk PER). "The Journey" should absolutely not be a way to sit in cushy Public Service-esque positions in desirable posting locations for 25 years making the same money as folks slogging it out at Sea, in the field, or on a flight line doing the actual job. The smaller the pool of individuals willing to deploy, the more rapidly they'll burn out and put themselves into the "non-deployable, non moveable" group and we'll eventually end up with no one but brand new troops willing to deploy.

Don't get me wrong, we have a lot of valuable jobs that support the fighting force, but refusing to rotate in to that fighting force to share the hardship is the kind of junk attitude we need to stamp out. Unfortunately a lot of "folks at the top" are incredibly risk adverse individuals who have turned into politicians instead of remaining the solid leaders with strategic vision that got them there.


----------



## stellarpanther (21 Jul 2020)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> We already have full time personnel who do not deploy.
> 
> They're called public servants.



You know exactly what I'm talking about.  It's clear the people posting here don't agree with it but they are talking about CAF mbr's not deploying.


----------



## stellarpanther (21 Jul 2020)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> It is in fact about re-imagining the terms of service to ensure that we have the right people at the right time to defend the nation.



You're right that is a big part of what they want to do but they also know not everyone wants to deploy.  Instead of everyone acting like it's my fault for journey, let's talk about the actual plan and not pretend it's not in the works.


----------



## Remius (21 Jul 2020)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> You know exactly what I'm talking about.  It's clear the people posting here don't agree with it but they are talking about CAF mbr's not deploying.



So that comes with a pay cut correct? Or do those that are deployable get a pay hike? 

class B reservists are currently around 96% of reg force pay.  They should be too.


----------



## Remius (21 Jul 2020)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> You're right that is a big part of what they want to do but they also know not everyone wants to deploy.  Instead of everyone acting like it's my fault for journey, let's talk about the actual plan and not pretend it's not in the works.



Are you sure you are not confusing deployments with postings?

https://www.cfc.forces.gc.ca/259/290/405/305/chetwynd.pdf

Page 14 lists the most common issues that would keep people from leaving.  Deployments does not seem to be an issue.

I also thought that Journey was about those that get posted and those who identify as not wanting to be posted not about deployability.  

Geographic stability being the bigger factor.


----------



## dapaterson (21 Jul 2020)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> You know exactly what I'm talking about.  It's clear the people posting here don't agree with it but they are talking about CAF mbr's not deploying.



The CAF is directed by government to hold certain force levels - currently scheduled to grow to a total of 71,500 Reg F and 30,000 Primary Res F.  Those numbers are all-inclusive; that's everyone from enrolment to release.  Meaning that the BTL/SUTL, ATL, SPHL, LWOP, NES and a number of others all come out of those numbers.  Using round numbers, those "in training / injured / releasing" represent about 20% of the Reg F total at any one time, and closer to 30% of the P Res (time to OFP being the biggest difference between the two).

So the maximum Trained Effective Strength come out to around 57K (Reg F) and 21K (Res F).  There is little to no room within those structural limits to permit a pool of restricted employment personnel.

ACK to there being Reg F members who want work that is public-servant adjacent, but with better pay and more leave.  But it's not a sustainable model; as PuckChaser notes, you end up overburdening your remaining deployable personnel.


Finally, I will note that despite several years of discussion, the hard work of analysis of the current HR system and the required authorities to amend to meet some model of what The Journey (Don't Stop Believin') proposes is in its infancy.  Policy change is (relatively) easy and yet we still have thirty five year old CFAOs (supposed to have all be replaced decades ago); changing regulations (QR&O) is an order of magnitude more complex, and some of the second order effects of some aspects of The Journey will require amendment to multiple pieces of legislation (another order of magnitude more complex than QR&O rewrites) - and then further regulatory change.  A twenty to thirty year horizon to implement would not be unreasonable.


----------



## stellarpanther (21 Jul 2020)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> It can come from the top with a lot of support all it wants, but that doesn't mean its right. My personal view is that "The Journey" will compound the problem we have keeping our force fit to fight and deploy. We're an incredibly small force for the size of land mass, ADIZ and EEZ to defend. The more folks we actively encourage to join the CAF with no intention of ever moving or deploying, the less able we are to respond to emergency situations the people of Canada need us to respond to. The devil is in the details, but the only way I see it working is if those who put themselves on long term "non deployable non moveable" are only given short term contracts (like Class B) that are renewed based on the needs of the service and given on a merit basis (you're not hired again if you have a junk PER). "The Journey" should absolutely not be a way to sit in cushy Public Service-esque positions in desirable posting locations for 25 years making the same money as folks slogging it out at Sea, in the field, or on a flight line doing the actual job. The smaller the pool of individuals willing to deploy, the more rapidly they'll burn out and put themselves into the "non-deployable, non moveable" group and we'll eventually end up with no one but brand new troops willing to deploy.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, we have a lot of valuable jobs that support the fighting force, but refusing to rotate in to that fighting force to share the hardship is the kind of junk attitude we need to stamp out. Unfortunately a lot of "folks at the top" are incredibly risk adverse individuals who have turned into politicians instead of remaining the solid leaders with strategic vision that got them there.



Your post made me look at this from a different perspective but the question that I keep coming back to is what do we do about retention that does seem to be a huge problem for the last 3-5 years at least.  The mentality of a lot of people joining now is often incompatible with the type of military we had even 10 year ago.  I've seen Pte's yell back at a Sgt because they felt they were disrespected in the way they were spoken to and then walk away saying "I don't care who he is or what his rank is, he's not going to talk to me like that".  Sure you can charge the person or give them extras but as soon as you do, they bring you up on harassment charges that will eventually get tossed but it's still not something you want to deal with or the person will all of a sudden be on sick leave for stress for a few months.  I think we have to some how learn to adapt (not the best word) to the new generation.  I have no idea how the organization can do that the way things are now.  
I have a friend at CFRG who's fairly high up, on numerous occasions the comment was made that recruiting brings in good people, they do well on their courses, so what are some of these units doing to these people?  I have no idea how to answer that.


----------



## CBH99 (21 Jul 2020)

Remius said:
			
		

> Are you sure you are not confusing deployments with postings?
> 
> https://www.cfc.forces.gc.ca/259/290/405/305/chetwynd.pdf
> 
> ...




I would tend to agree.  Deploying would be an absolute treat (speaking from an ex-Army perspective) as it gets you out of garrison, garrison life, and the boring 9 to 5 a lot of the troops used to complain about.

Without deployments, you end up being tasked with a lot of 'same old, same old' nonsense to keep people busy.  Cleaning weapons that haven't been used since the last time they were cleaned, continual training on things that have already been refreshed regularly, etc etc.

That was one of the reason so many people got out after Afghanistan winded down... with no focus & direction of an upcoming, highly engaged deployment, a culture of 'garrison BS' slowly crept up again.  A culture which had, thankfully, disappeared when the military had a specific focus, i.e., generating combat forces for a theater they were guaranteed to be in combat in.



I don't believe it's necessarily that people don't want to deploy.  I'd assume (perhaps wrongfully) that deployments really are exciting and a chance to apply your job in the real world.  Even a peace support operation in Haiti has you doing things & solving problems you wouldn't normally experience, and that in itself can be rewarding and engaging enough to feel as if your making a difference.

I'd suggest, as other members have mentioned, the problem would be more that of postings, rather than deployments.  We have a gigantic country geographically, with a pretty tiny population.  

Some military bases give you the luxury of living in a nice, modern city where you can live a life outside of the military culture/circle (such as Edmonton, Victoria, Winnipeg, etc.)  Some bases, such as Gagetown, Shilo, Valcartier, and Petawawa, it's a military culture and military social circles where you are on duty or not, or live in base or not.  



I know I've been out for a while, but I remember TONS of hands shooting up to volunteer for deployments whenever our RWO came in for briefings.  By the time I got out, every single member of my unit had deployed at least once - unless they were a newer/younger member who wasn't qualified yet, or a senior member who already had multiple tours and were in senior positions.

I distinctly remember one evening, our RWO came in to give us a briefing, and asked "Okay folks, who here wants to go to Afghanistan?  I need 5 names."  And I kid you not, about 18 people raised their hands.  Those who didn't were shaking their heads & laughing at themselves, because they wanted to go but couldn't.   :2c:


----------



## brihard (22 Jul 2020)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> Your post made me look at this from a different perspective but the question that I keep coming back to is what do we do about retention that does seem to be a huge problem for the last 3-5 years at least.  The mentality of a lot of people joining now is often incompatible with the type of military we had even 10 year ago.  I've seen Pte's yell back at a Sgt because they felt they were disrespected in the way they were spoken to and then walk away saying "I don't care who he is or what his rank is, he's not going to talk to me like that".  Sure you can charge the person or give them extras but as soon as you do, they bring you up on harassment charges that will eventually get tossed but it's still not something you want to deal with or the person will all of a sudden be on sick leave for stress for a few months.  I think we have to some how learn to adapt (not the best word) to the new generation.  I have no idea how the organization can do that the way things are now.
> I have a friend at CFRG who's fairly high up, on numerous occasions the comment was made that recruiting brings in good people, they do well on their courses, so what are some of these units doing to these people?  I have no idea how to answer that.



A big fix would be building an institutional culture of treating adults like adults and using proper mechanisms to hold people accountable. Yelling at trained professionals is very seldom necessary or useful. Yell at me when it’s not necessary (eg immediately correct something that’s unsafe), sure, I’ll do the job to shut you up, but it will only harm your own credibility and my respect for you. The vast majority of self respecting professionals can be developed and corrected more effectively and maturely than that. Tell me bluntly to my face that I figged up and why and give me an opportunity to show that I understand the significance and to fix it, and I’ll respect and work hard for you. I was an infantry NCO; there’a sure as hell a time to yell. There’s a time and place in basic training and some leadership and other courses for stress inoculation that some good barking might be a part of, and of course on exercise or ops when you need to be clearly heard in order to precipitate some immediate violent acts by your people. But in a normal workplace in normal circumstances, you’d better bring more to the table than a loud voice if you’re gonna lead worth a damn.

The challenges the new generation brings may not be comfortable or fun for some of the old guard, buy they’re a reality. Corollary to that- show us decent leadership from someone who can make a goal or mission understood, show us leaders who treat their people as well as circumstances allow, and leaven it with decent pay, benefits, and job security and you’ll see some loyal, hard working troops.


----------



## stellarpanther (22 Jul 2020)

So I'm wondering then if it's the newer generation who simply just want a good paying job and some older folks who are finishing up their last few years and just want to coast through their final years?  As Halifax Tar said earlier, they struggle getting people to sail in the Navy  For some reason I'm getting the negative comments because I'm saying many people in the CAF have the attitude that they don't want to do to the field or deploy or sail but it is a well known current problem we have.
So what's the solution to this problem?


----------



## CBH99 (22 Jul 2020)

Brihard said:
			
		

> A bit fix would be building an institutional culture of treating adults like adults and using proper mechanisms to hold people accountable. Yelling at trained professionals is very seldom necessary or useful. Yell at me when it’s not necessary (eg immediately correct something that’s unsafe), sure, I’ll do the job to shut you up, but it will only harm your own credibility and respect for you. The vast majority of self respecting professionals can be developed and corrected more effectively and maturely than that. Tell me bluntly to my face that I figged up and why and give me an opportunity to show that I understand the significance and to fix it, and I’ll respect and work hard for you. I was an infantry NCO; there’a sure as hell a time to yell. There’s a time and place in basic training and some leadership and other courses for stress inoculation that some good barking might be a part of, and of course on exercise or ops when you need to be clearly heard in order to precipitate some immediate violent acts by your people. But in a normal workplace in normal circumstances, you’d better bring more to the table than a loud voice if you’re gonna lead worth a damn.
> 
> The challenges the new generation brings may not be comfortable or fun for some of the old guard, buy they’re a reality. Corollary to that- show us decent leadership from someone who can make a goal or mission understood, show us leaders who treat their people as well as circumstances allow, and maven it with decent pay, benefits, and job security and you’ll see some loyal, hard working troops.




Absolutely.

I feel like this has probably already been covered in other threads, but since we're here -- agreed with everything said above.


Treat professional adults as such.  Allow people to do their jobs.  Empower them with meaningful tasks, and give them ownership of those tasks.  By doing that, you make them a meaningful part of the team.  

Speak and behave professionally.  Rarely do I ever find yelling a 'professional solution' to a problem.  



Between reinforcing a professional, adult culture of meaningful tasks, accountability, empowering troops and junior leaders with important functions at the unit -- interesting training -- streamlined and organized courses so that members can become qualified quickly -- and interesting deployments to keep people motivated and 'moving towards something' in their career -- combined with decent postings that allow for a good living outside of military life, I think the Army could really improve things.


I don't have any experience with the RCAF or RCN, so I'm not sure if either of those apply.  (Although, Victoria or Halifax both sure beat the heck out of Shilo and Gagetown, I'm sure!!)


----------



## medicineman (22 Jul 2020)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> A lot of single people want to deploy but a lot of people with kids a non-military spouse don't.  There are some married people who certainly want to deploy, I won't disagree with that but I don't think it's the majority.  Why someone who is married would go out a seek a deployment is something I will never understand.  If the marriage is bad then maybe it's not meant to be.  Don't run away and hide from the problems.



Weird, my experience was usually the opposite - all of a sudden the never ending TCat problems seemed to magically resolve...the blind could see, the lame could walk and the broken picked up their beds and ran away to be DAG'ed GREEN.

MM


----------



## OldSolduer (22 Jul 2020)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> So I'm wondering then if it's the newer generation who simply just want a good paying job and some older folks who are finishing up their last few years and just want to coast through their final years?  As Halifax Tar said earlier, they struggle getting people to sail in the Navy  For some reason I'm getting the negative comments because I'm saying many people in the CAF have the attitude that they don't want to do to the field or deploy or sail but it is a well known current problem we have.
> So what's the solution to this problem?



I was well into my 50s and still volunteering to deploy to Afghanistan. I'm sure several other "older folks" were too.

There is no problem.


----------



## Halifax Tar (22 Jul 2020)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Lets be careful here, you've described 2 polar opposite people and lumped them into the same group. Someone trying to get off a TCat to get a deployment but not to go to Wainwright are taking advantaged of the medical system for personal gain. Someone going to the CDU to get pushed up on a surgical wait list/clear a lingering issue are motivated folks looking to get themselves fit to fight as fast as possible. We should not lump people who are legitimately hurt stuck in a glacial medical system in the same group as those using that glacial medical system to hide until the next cool course or deployment comes up.



You hit the nail on the head right there. 



			
				stellarpanther said:
			
		

> When I joined the CAF I was very honest with the recruiter about my opinions etc.  One thing I mentioned and I've mentioned it to my other CoC's is that if told I am being sent on tour, I would not try to get out of it by faking an injury or whatever but I am not someone who is going to volunteer to go either.  *Every one* of my CWO's, MWO's and WO's have said they have no problem with that sort of thinking.  A couple of them said they've heard several others say the same thing.  I don't think that makes me or others who think like that any less of a Soldier, Airman or Sailor for that way of thinking.
> 
> edit: cleared up grammar.



I am not sure what people are taking issue with in this post.  I have no issue with not volunteering.  As long as you dont avoid when volun-told.  Perhaps we need to stop looking for volunteers so much and start ordering more.  Then use volunteers to fill the gaps left over by the weak.


----------



## AKa (22 Jul 2020)

My pet theory is that they should make it harder for the CoC to say no to members who want to deploy.  I had three postings in my last stint in the Reg Force and despite begging for another deployment, I was consistently denied.  After they yanked the rug out from under me a couple times, I gave up and went back to the Reserves where I can control my career and at least avoid the soul-sucking jobs.

I didn't keep the uniform to sit at a desk at NDHQ.  I kept it to sit behind a computer in a nasty environment where I can make a difference. But I've gotten tired of fighting and pleading so I don't have my hand up anymore.

Cheers,

AK


----------



## Jarnhamar (22 Jul 2020)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Lets be careful here, you've described 2 polar opposite people and lumped them into the same group. Someone trying to get off a TCat to get a deployment but not to go to Wainwright are *taking advantaged of the medical system for personal gain. *



No disagreement here. Just an example of people wanting to deploy.


----------



## stellarpanther (22 Jul 2020)

Target Up said:
			
		

> One of the big reasons guys (and girls and other) don't want to go is they just got back from their third deployment in four years because some cubicle dweller with a photocopier strapped to his *** and a five doughnut a day habit refuses to step up and take his bite of the crap sammich, and is plain burned out.



If only you knew what you were talking about.  I've sat hear reading comments about people not stepping up for tours.  With the exception of the past few years, I was asking for a short tour at least every few months or even a short tasking somewhere. I wasn't going to volunteer for Afghanistan but would have went if ordered with no issue.  I'm not volunteering to go to war, I have been clear about that. I have several memos on my Pers File showing that.  The fact is that a lot of people at the Junior rank level don't get taken from Ottawa in the HRA/FSA trade because they say they are too short staffed.  Usually it was just sorry we don't have enough other people to send you.  One time it was, sure, I'll submit your name but she really didn't. The last time I asked, they got pissed off and I called into the CWO's office and given crap for trying to go somewhere else and not thinking of the needs of the unit.  That time I was told "if you want to go on tour, get your CM to post you to an operational base".  My CWO also wasn't an HRA, he was a combat arms trade.  Stop the BS of saying it's the mbr's fault for not stepping up because those who say that don't have a clue as to what the hell they are talking about.  Many CoC's in Ottawa won't willingly give up their people and go short staffed.  They do when they have to.


----------



## daftandbarmy (22 Jul 2020)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> If only you knew what you were talking about.  I've sat hear reading comments about people not stepping up for tours.  With the exception of the past few years, I was asking for a short tour at least every few months or even a short tasking somewhere. I wasn't going to volunteer for Afghanistan but would have went if ordered with no issue.  I'm not volunteering to go to war, I have been clear about that. I have several memos on my Pers File showing that.  The fact is that a lot of people at the Junior rank level don't get taken from Ottawa in the HRA/FSA trade because they say they are too short staffed.  Usually it was just sorry we don't have enough other people to send you.  One time it was, sure, I'll submit your name but she really didn't. The last time I asked, they got pissed off and I called into the CWO's office and given crap for trying to go somewhere else and not thinking of the needs of the unit.  That time I was told "if you want to go on tour, get your CM to post you to an operational base".  My CWO also wasn't an HRA, he was a combat arms trade.  Stop the BS of saying it's the mbr's fault for not stepping up because those who say that don't have a clue as to what the hell they are talking about.  Many CoC's in Ottawa won't willingly give up their people and go short staffed.  They do when they have to.



That was the same for most Class B people in the CBG HQs who weren't 'allowed' to go. Regardless, I know a few who risked their longer term employment prospects 'on the tit' by just saying 'Eff it, I'm off', and headed to the sandbox anyways.

My hat's also off to a couple of them who went Class A, just so they could deploy.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (22 Jul 2020)

AK said:
			
		

> My pet theory is that they should make it harder for the CoC to say no to members who want to deploy.  I had three postings in my last stint in the Reg Force and despite begging for another deployment, I was consistently denied.  After they yanked the rug out from under me a couple times, I gave up and went back to the Reserves where I can control my career and at least avoid the soul-sucking jobs.
> 
> I didn't keep the uniform to sit at a desk at NDHQ.  I kept it to sit behind a computer in a nasty environment where I can make a difference. But I've gotten tired of fighting and pleading so I don't have my hand up anymore.
> 
> ...



This is a very real problem.  It's one of the reasons I left the Army.  My first tour of Battalion, I watched three or four different rotations go to Afghanistan for Op ATTENTION that was filled with Reservists.

Meanwhile us Regulars deployed year after year to MAPLE RESOLVE.  I often wondered why we are being paid for full time service when they aren't actually deploying us.

Most of the Reservists I did my training with deployed on Op ATTENTION while none of us Regulars did.  I don't have a problem with Reservists deploying and think it's an incredibly noble thing but I can't see the sense in deploying them when you've got thousands of regular soldiers sitting around on rucksacks.


----------



## Kat Stevens (22 Jul 2020)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> If only you knew what you were talking about.  I've sat hear reading comments about people not stepping up for tours.  With the exception of the past few years, I was asking for a short tour at least every few months or even a short tasking somewhere. I wasn't going to volunteer for Afghanistan but would have went if ordered with no issue.  I'm not volunteering to go to war, I have been clear about that. I have several memos on my Pers File showing that.  The fact is that a lot of people at the Junior rank level don't get taken from Ottawa in the HRA/FSA trade because they say they are too short staffed.  Usually it was just sorry we don't have enough other people to send you.  One time it was, sure, I'll submit your name but she really didn't. The last time I asked, they got pissed off and I called into the CWO's office and given crap for trying to go somewhere else and not thinking of the needs of the unit.  That time I was told "if you want to go on tour, get your CM to post you to an operational base".  My CWO also wasn't an HRA, he was a combat arms trade.  Stop the BS of saying it's the mbr's fault for not stepping up because those who say that don't have a clue as to what the hell they are talking about.  Many CoC's in Ottawa won't willingly give up their people and go short staffed.  They do when they have to.



You're absolutely correct how could I, a guy that spent 23 years in combat arms units watching this shit happen, know about it? It's not like I have a high up friend who stayed in a holiday inn express or anything. Misleading, was I? So field troops aren't burning out after back to back to back tours? Maybe go talk to someone who doesn't work in air conditioned splendour every day.


----------



## dapaterson (22 Jul 2020)

Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> I don't have a problem with Reservists deploying and think it's an incredibly noble thing but I can't see the sense in deploying them when you've got thousands of regular soldiers sitting around on rucksacks.



Now apply this to DomOps, and you'll confront another piece of foundational Army cognitive dissonance: Thousands of Regular soldiers sitting around on rucksacks, but we bring in part-timers to do the work.


Perhaps COVID-19 will drive some much needed force structure considerations - just how many folks paid full-time to sit around on rucksacks do we truly need, day-to-day?


----------



## daftandbarmy (22 Jul 2020)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Now apply this to DomOps, and you'll confront another piece of foundational Army cognitive dissonance: Thousands of Regular soldiers sitting around on rucksacks, but we bring in part-timers to do the work.
> 
> 
> Perhaps COVID-19 will drive some much needed force structure considerations - just how many folks paid full-time to sit around on rucksacks do we truly need, day-to-day?



You've just reminded me of the famous 'Snowstorm of '96' in Victoria, where hundreds of reservists deployed to dig out and rescue the regular Navy personnel at CFB Esquimalt who bravely watched my part-time teenaged riflemen shovel snow off of, and save, the collapsing Canex roof from their windows at base accommodation.

We did have two regular force personnel turn up at the armoury, they were home on Christmas leave and came down to help out, so I guess you could say that we weren't a 100% reserve force manned DOMOP.


----------



## MJP (22 Jul 2020)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Now apply this to DomOps, and you'll confront another piece of foundational Army cognitive dissonance: Thousands of Regular soldiers sitting around on rucksacks, but we bring in part-timers to do the work.
> 
> 
> Perhaps COVID-19 will drive some much needed force structure considerations - just how many folks paid full-time to sit around on rucksacks do we truly need, day-to-day?



We must be on different DOMOPs, out west it is always the Reg F that responds first and then a few weeks later some PRes trickle in. Sometimes they are able to take over, most times they augment some AO. That has been my experience for the last 20ish years or so.

 I will say that given the CA support structure for the PRes is messed up even when we have a pure PRes DOMOPs response their support is 90% Reg F.


----------



## stellarpanther (22 Jul 2020)

Target Up said:
			
		

> You’re absolutely correct how could I, a guy she spent 23 years in combat arms units watching this crap happen, know about it? It’s not like I have a high up friend who stayed in a holiday inn express or anything. Misleading, was I? So field troops aren’t burning out after back to back to back tours? Maybe go talk to someone who doesn’t work in air conditioned splendour every day.



Then I guess it's different where you were because in Ottawa and I'm sure in many other locations.  You don't just go tell your CoC to send you to where ever you want to go to.  You can ask, you might get shot down right of the bat or they will tell you to submit a memo and then shoot you down.  I'm not saying it's not that way it other trades but it's not that way in the HRA/FSA trades in the NCR or a few other places.  You wait for them to ask you if you are interested in something and that offer usually doesn't come because they try to take from the operational bases first.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (22 Jul 2020)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Now apply this to DomOps, and you'll confront another piece of foundational Army cognitive dissonance: Thousands of Regular soldiers sitting around on rucksacks, but we bring in part-timers to do the work.
> 
> 
> Perhaps COVID-19 will drive some much needed force structure considerations - just how many folks paid full-time to sit around on rucksacks do we truly need, day-to-day?



I completely agree, I don't think we need nearly as large of a standing Army as we have.

I was in a LIB and I always thought you could get rid of that entire organization (which didn't and still doesn't have a  valid FE construct) and see zero impact to anything.

I've looked at the Danes and Norwegians do things and think pieces of their model would work far better for us.

In the case of the Norwegians, Telemark Bn and Panzer Bn do basically all their overseas deployments and are manned by full time personnel.  They also have way better kit than us but that's what you get when you have units equipped to their actual scale, unlike us where we have make believe Battalions and Brigades.


----------



## PuckChaser (22 Jul 2020)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Perhaps COVID-19 will drive some much needed force structure considerations - just how many folks paid full-time to sit around on rucksacks do we truly need, day-to-day?



How many part time soldiers do we need who are only being used for sandbagging, digging fire breaks or cleaning long term care homes? I'd buy massive use of the PRes 10 years ago when we had almost 3,000 troops deployed just in SE Asia, but there was no need to use them for LASER unless they had specific skills.


----------



## stellarpanther (22 Jul 2020)

I'd be curious to see how many of the Reservists that were put on Class C were actually used.  I don't mean sent to Borden waiting for something happen.


----------



## Navy_Pete (22 Jul 2020)

I don't get the 'I don't want to deploy' attitude; I didn't join because I really enjoy sitting at a desk fighting bureaucracy and pushing the red tape rock up the hill. Pretty much past the deploying with ships portion of my career, but would happily do one of the purple jobs on a deployment if available. Haven't seen anyone looking for those since Afghanistan closed down shop though, so seems weird to be rewarded/punished for a choice on deployment when the odds of it actually happening right now are effectively zero.  :dunno: 

Obviously varies a lot between the whole CAF, but think it's generally impossible to get any kind of one size fits all solution for CM in one element, let alone across all three.


----------



## daftandbarmy (22 Jul 2020)

Navy_Pete said:
			
		

> I don't get the 'I don't want to deploy' attitude; I didn't join because I really enjoy sitting at a desk fighting bureaucracy and pushing the red tape rock up the hill. Pretty much past the deploying with ships portion of my career, but would happily do one of the purple jobs on a deployment if available. Haven't seen anyone looking for those since Afghanistan closed down shop though, so seems weird to be rewarded/punished for a choice on deployment when the odds of it actually happening right now are effectively zero.  :dunno:
> 
> Obviously varies a lot between the whole CAF, but think it's generally impossible to get any kind of one size fits all solution for CM in one element, let alone across all three.



If I could try to defend someone who does not want to deploy, much as that attitude mystifies me, in our recruiting we tend to 'string people along' and emphasize money, career, family, friends over duty, danger, deployments etc.

I recall an interesting conversation with one of my in laws, a really, really smart doctor (who I would also peg as a bit of a 'save the worlder'). 

He was talking about the time he almost joined the CAF 'so they would pay for my education'. He actually went so far as to go to the Recruiting Office where they emphasized this benefit of joining. He thought that, although he didn't join, it might be a good option for his kids.

My comment was something along the lines of 'if you're not willing to give, or take, a life for your country on foreign soil, then forget it buddy.' 

He was shocked, and said they hadn't mentioned anything about that.... of course  :


----------



## stellarpanther (22 Jul 2020)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> If I could try to defend someone who does not want to deploy, much as that attitude mystifies me, in our recruiting we tend to 'string people along' and emphasize money, career, family, friends over duty, danger, deployments etc.
> 
> I recall an interesting conversation with one of my in laws, a really, really smart doctor (who I would also peg as a bit of a 'save the worlder').
> 
> ...



I tend to be off on my dates but I think it was about 10 years or so ago that they had a recruiting bonus for doctors of $250,000, dentists I think was $100,000 and for some reason I think lawyers were also on the list for $100,000.  I think they had to stay for 5 years.  Several took the CAF up on it and apparently several then quit as soon as their TOS expired.


----------



## stellarpanther (22 Jul 2020)

It was mentioned that recruiting likes to glorify things and talk about money, friends, family etc.  I once worked with a guy who was told that he needed to stay and work overtime as something last minute needed to be done by morning for the DCO.  He told his supervisor he couldn't because his son's baseball team was playing for the championship that night and his son was supposed be the pitcher.  His glove was also in his car.  The boss basically said sorry you need to stay.  The mbr apologized back and said do what you need to do and left.  The next day he was in with his supervisor, RSM and CO.  The supervisor apparently thought this person should be charged.  The RSM and CO said something to the effect that the CAF likes to say family first and thought it was a perfect example and time to exercise that.  Everyone left that office and that was the end of it.  This RSM was a big believer in family.  
I'm curious as to what people think family first means to people here because it is something that is said and it does help get people in the door but pisses some off when they find out it's not really something everyone believes in.


----------



## BDTyre (22 Jul 2020)

I don't know, my CoC over the last few years has been pretty understanding as to why I don't always go on ex, or have to miss a night. I've even been allowed to leave early on the odd parade night during my wife's last pregnancy so I don't have any trouble believing that family can sometimes first (of course I'm sure we all get the Snr NCO that says "sure family first, the military is your family.").

That said, I've also been put in the position where, at times, I was the only one able to do my job and did have to make some (albeit small) sacrifices.

And there was that one time we kept getting our leave changed around and the question of how we were to get flights home came up and my wife, getting very tired and frustrated at having to change plans every other day, made a complaint that ended up with our Ops O and then with Brigade, LFWA and ultimately Ottawa. Shortly after that we were told our flights would be covered and our immediate chain of command had to put in extra hours scheduling leave.

So family can come first...


----------



## daftandbarmy (22 Jul 2020)

CanadianTire said:
			
		

> I don't know, my CoC over the last few years has been pretty understanding as to why I don't always go on ex, or have to miss a night. I've even been allowed to leave early on the odd parade night during my wife's last pregnancy so I don't have any trouble believing that family can sometimes first (of course I'm sure we all get the Snr NCO that says "sure family first, the military is your family.").
> 
> That said, I've also been put in the position where, at times, I was the only one able to do my job and did have to make some (albeit small) sacrifices.
> 
> ...



I wish your wife would complain on behalf of some of my troops


----------



## stellarpanther (22 Jul 2020)

CanadianTire said:
			
		

> I don't know, my CoC over the last few years has been pretty understanding as to why I don't always go on ex, or have to miss a night. I've even been allowed to leave early on the odd parade night during my wife's last pregnancy so I don't have any trouble believing that family can sometimes first (of course I'm sure we all get the Snr NCO that says "sure family first, the military is your family.").
> 
> That said, I've also been put in the position where, at times, I was the only one able to do my job and did have to make some (albeit small) sacrifices.
> 
> ...



I notice you said "Parade night" I assume that means you are a Reservist and the reason I say that is because you didn't necessarily need to show up that night anyway.  My understanding is that as long as you Parade at least once a month they can't do much.


----------



## CBH99 (22 Jul 2020)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> I notice you said "Parade night" I assume that means you are a Reservist and the reason I say that is because you didn't necessarily need to show up that night anyway.  My understanding is that as long as you Parade at least once a month they can't do much.



Technically, from an admin perspective, you are right stellar.

However, it was expected that most members parade every night, or at least 3 weeks, each month.  If you were only there one night a month, consistently, you weren't held in particularly high regard by the CoC when it came to courses, deployments, or unique opportunities that might pop up.

If you attended consistently and were a decent troop, and you didn't come in for a parade night, nobody cared.  Your professional reputation was solid.  If you trained consistently, were a useful member of the unit, and conducted yourself professionally -- one might just say "Oh, hey, Cpl. XX wasn't in tonight."  Nobody cared.

That being said, if you weren't parading regularly, usually the CoC would talk with you about your goals, career aspirations, etc etc.  (A lot of our CoC was in emergency services, and so were quite a few of our members, so there was a decent understanding between the two.)  

A minimum of one night a month, while still meeting the minimum criteria, you weren't considered a useful member of the unit and weren't particularly valued.   :2c:


----------



## stellarpanther (22 Jul 2020)

CBH99 said:
			
		

> Technically, from an admin perspective, you are right stellar.
> 
> However, it was expected that most members parade every night, or at least 3 weeks, each month.  If you were only there one night a month, consistently, you weren't held in particularly high regard by the CoC when it came to courses, deployments, or unique opportunities that might pop up.
> 
> ...



That makes sense and it's why I push my son to go even when he prefers to stay home and play video games some nights.  3 hours a week isn't much to ask especially when it's his only job.


----------



## BDTyre (22 Jul 2020)

Correct, yes - one night a month. But as others pointed out, that is the bare minimum. Depending on who our CO is at the time, the unit has been told that full attendance is expected. We even had a few years were we would need to submit memos or fill out leave requests if we weren't going to be on exercise.

That said, I have the "misfortune" of being dependable and capable at my job, as well has trying to take as many class A days as possible so the expectation was that I would be working every Wednesday night (to the point where the CQ just stopped asking if I'd be handling company weapons draw and just expected me to be there).


----------



## stellarpanther (22 Jul 2020)

CanadianTire said:
			
		

> Correct, yes - one night a month. But as others pointed out, that is the bare minimum. Depending on who our CO is at the time, the unit has been told that full attendance is expected. We even had a few years were we would need to submit memos or fill out leave requests if we weren't going to be on exercise.



How can they make you submit a leave pass, what type of leave would that be?  As I said earlier, I'm all for parading as much as you can especially if you have the time available and I tell my son that as well.  But that said, I'm curious from a regulation perspective.  I don't understand how they can do much if you are meeting the minimum requirements.  That would be like putting a person on remedial measures for PT if you just met the minimum requirements on a force test.  Just met the times for example.  I can also see there being consequences if a person never shows up for any ex, but again if you are meeting the minimum I don't see how they can do much.


----------



## brihard (22 Jul 2020)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> How can they make you submit a leave pass, what type of leave would that be?  As I said earlier, I'm all for parading as much as you can especially if you have the time available and I tell my son that as well.  But that said, I'm curious from a regulation perspective.  I don't understand how they can do much if you are meeting the minimum requirements.  That would be like putting a person on remedial measures for PT if you just met the minimum requirements on a force test.  Just met the times for example.  I can also see there being consequences if a person never shows up for any ex, but again if you are meeting the minimum I don't see how they can do much.



A CO can lawfully order soldiers to parade. Failure to attend sufficiently to be useful can be a performance unit, and handle it through remedial measures. My old unit did it. The ‘once a month’ applies to Non-Effective Strength designation. It does not in and of itself constrain the ability of a commanding officer to command their unit and to manage the performance of the members of their command. If you are ‘just meeting the minimum’, you generally are not worth keeping on strength unless it’s a temporary situation. This is a big factor in why I elected to release before I became a burden on my regiment.


----------



## stellarpanther (22 Jul 2020)

Brihard said:
			
		

> A CO can lawfully order soldiers to parade. Failure to attend sufficiently to be useful can be a performance unit, and handle it through remedial measures. My old unit did it. The ‘once a month’ applies to Non-Effective Strength designation. It does not in and of itself constrain the ability of a commanding officer to command their unit and to manage the performance of the members of their command. If you are ‘just meeting the minimum’, you generally are not worth keeping on strength unless it’s a temporary situation. This is a big factor in why I elected to release before I became a burden on my regiment.



Is there a written policy that states a mbr must parade x amount of says per month or go on x amount of exercises per month or does every unit decide on their own.  One of my friends worked RSS at a unit in southern Ontario a few years ago and he used to say it's hard to plan things because you never knew how many people would really show up for an Ex until the Friday night because people who committed to going the night before often wouldn't show up.


----------



## brihard (22 Jul 2020)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> Is there a written policy that states a mbr must parade x amount of says per month or go on x amount of exercises per month or does every unit decide on their own.  One of my friends worked RSS at a unit in southern Ontario a few years ago and he used to say it's hard to plan things because you never knew how many people would really show up for an Ex until the Friday night because people who committed to going the night before often wouldn't show up.



My CO established such a policy for the unit. There was flexibility where needed. The general expectation was 3/4 of parade nights, And every weekend exercise. Exceptions has the expectation of prior notice except for emergencies. Members who had exceptional circumstances (eg shift workers) were accommodated. Experienced and proven members got a bit more flexibility as long as comms were good.

The underlying philosophy was that at McDonalds or Home Depot, if you don’t show up for work, they fire you. The military should reasonably expect at least a Home Depot degree of dedication.


----------



## stellarpanther (22 Jul 2020)

Brihard said:
			
		

> My CO established such a policy for the unit. There was flexibility where needed. The general expectation was 3/4 of parade nights, And every weekend exercise. Exceptions has the expectation of prior notice except for emergencies. Members who had exceptional circumstances (eg shift workers) were accommodated. Experienced and proven members got a bit more flexibility as long as comms were good.
> 
> The underlying philosophy was that at McDonalds or Home Depot, if you don’t show up for work, they fire you. The military should reasonably expect at least a Home Depot degree of dedication.



Interesting, I assumed there would be a national policy and that each CO couldn't make there own rules.


----------



## OldSolduer (22 Jul 2020)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> Interesting, I assumed there would be a national policy and that each CO couldn't make there own rules.



Oh my heavens you are a neophyte- kidding.

There’s a lot of wiggle room for a CO.

The words “A Commanding Officer may...” gives them that room.


----------



## stellarpanther (22 Jul 2020)

Hamish Seggie said:
			
		

> Oh my heavens you are a neophyte- kidding.
> 
> There’s a lot of wiggle room for a CO.
> 
> The words “A Commanding Officer may...” gives them that room.



I didn't think it was like that in the Reserves, I understand that a CO has a lot of authority but didn't think they had that much authority over someone on Class A.


----------



## brihard (22 Jul 2020)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> Interesting, I assumed there would be a national policy and that each CO couldn't make there own rules.



Check S.294(1) of the NDA.


----------



## stellarpanther (22 Jul 2020)

Brihard said:
			
		

> Check S.294(1) of the NDA.



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.


----------



## stellarpanther (22 Jul 2020)

I honestly didn't know that.  I think a lot of people wrongly believe as I did that the worse they can do is release the mbr.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (23 Jul 2020)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> I honestly didn't know that.  I think a lot of people wrongly believe as I did that the worse they can do is release the mbr.



Before you get farther into speculation about using S. 294, I'd suggest that you search for some of the comments made about it on these means by FJAG.

Okay, I'll make it a bit easier for you.  https://army.ca/forums/threads/24381/post-1599807.html#msg1599807  and https://army.ca/forums/threads/121376/post-1405891.html#msg1405891  are starting points.

There are already a few threads about NES and use of the CSD to encourage reservist attendance or lack thereof.

While, as related by FJAG, charging a reservist under 294 (1) is an empty threat, there are other administrative (and leadership) mechanisms for encouraging pers to parade, or to see them out the door if they don't get the hint.  All it takes is will on the part of a CO.


----------



## brihard (23 Jul 2020)

I should have expounded on that- it’s not my intent to suggest we’re gonna charge reservists who don’t show up to parade. That would be silly. What it communicates to me is there there is an intent to empower COs to make those decisions regarding when training will be and when their people will be expected to attend. The National Defense Act and subordinate regulations contain all the tools necessary for a CO to set and manage performance expectations.


----------



## BeyondTheNow (23 Jul 2020)

Brihard said:
			
		

> I should have expounded on that- it’s not my intent to suggest we’re gonna charge reservists who don’t show up to parade. That would be silly. What it communicates to me is there there is an intent to empower COs to make those decisions regarding when training will be and when their people will be expected to attend. The National Defense Act and subordinate regulations contain all the tools necessary for a CO to set and manage performance expectations.



With that post, and in reading several discussions/comments over the years here about parading expectations, should there then be some sort of formal amendment (or at least re-visiting of) the minimum standard attendance which is told to new members right when they’re still in the Recruiting office? I continually find this practice confounding even though it doesn’t affect me personally.

If a member is super gung-ho, is involved in everything, parades multiple times a month, and has the flexibility, that’s awesome—that’s great, and they’ll often be recognized in any number of ways. But if a member is content remaining a Pte or Cpl, enjoys low-pressure, doesn’t have the familial and/or civilian employment flexibility needed to accommodate summer taskings, and increased involvement in the unit—is happy with pdeing 1-2x a month, they won’t be looked upon as just as valuable a member as the other guy/gal. So why does CAF keep using the minimum expectation as a selling point (and it’s commonly cited in other types of interactions) when the bare minimum is, in fact, not acceptable? Why not raise the minimum expectation to avoid issues later on for the member and the unit?


----------



## daftandbarmy (23 Jul 2020)

Just wondering....

This thread stared on a tangent from another thread.

Is it now drifting from the original tangent?

I'd better break out my sextant....


----------



## BeyondTheNow (23 Jul 2020)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Just wondering....
> 
> This thread stared on a tangent from another thread.
> 
> ...



‘Like to keep you in suspense... ;D


----------



## Jarnhamar (23 Jul 2020)

Brihard said:
			
		

> I should have expounded on that- it’s not my intent to suggest we’re gonna charge reservists who don’t show up to parade. That would be silly. What it communicates to me is there there is an intent to empower COs to make those decisions regarding when training will be and when their people will be expected to attend. The National Defense Act and subordinate regulations contain all the tools necessary for a CO to set and manage performance expectations.



Just my opinion. 
Larger units have the benefit of being able to punt dead weight. Smaller units care so much about "numbers on paper" that they excuse poor attendence that would get these guys fired in any civilian job.

That creates a atmosphere where these "soldiers" parents need to push and prod them to get off their Xbox and go to work. 
Because playing video games instead of working doesn't come with any consequence. 

Come summer tasking time, units forgive and forget bad attendence (and behavior) and shotgun everyone out to summer tasks and training.

Reserves are their own worst enemy in this regard.


----------



## stellarpanther (23 Jul 2020)

So thinking about this more, the minimum requirement to parade isn't once a month as is told to people because while they can't release you as NES, if I understand this right, they find a different reason based on the CO of a particular unit creating his own policy.  That doesn't sound right to me.  I guess as an HRA, I like to be able read policy in black and white.
Before someone starts jumping on me go back and read my other comments that said I think people should parade more than just once a month.  Just be up front about it with the troops.  Recruiting needs to start being honest with people and not just worried about filling numbers and create a problem down the road for someone else.


----------



## dapaterson (23 Jul 2020)

There are defined processes within APM145 for NES release which must be followed.  Not overly onerous, but they are time consuming fir the limit HR staff within most PRes units.

That said, many soldiers, on receipt of their first NES letter, will chose to release.

Delays in release processing for part time Army Res members are another problem set, also driven mostly by inadequate personnel committed to the function.


----------



## BDTyre (23 Jul 2020)

A record of minimal attendance has a myriad of effects, from "official" things like being passed over for course (seen it happen), not being considered for deployment (seen it happen, and to bring it back to the original topic) to much more administratively difficult things. We have a member who paraded occasionally for a number of years but never put in much effort. He wanted to deploy. He was passed over because he hadn't shown commitment to training. Fast forward a few years and he hadn't changed. He paraded a minimal amount, often to the point of being considered NES. He decided to transfer to another unit as geographically it was easier for him. Our unit started the process and had him turn in his regimental kit. The unit he wanted to be in hasn't accepted the transfer. So now he is stuck in limbo - not parading with us really and not feeling like a member of our unit, but not being able to parade with his desired unit. 

On the other hand, when soldiers that have a record of consistent attendance and participation suddenly stops showing up it raises alarm bells, and the CoC reaches out to ensure everything is okay. I've seen it happen, even when people have communicated a legitimate excuse for every absence.


----------



## Furniture (23 Jul 2020)

Target Up said:
			
		

> One of the big reasons guys (and girls and other) don't want to go is they just got back from their third deployment in four years because some cubicle dweller with a photocopier strapped to his *** and a five doughnut a day habit refuses to step up and take his bite of the crap sammich, and is plain burned out.



Having experienced this personally myself I can attest to it being a real thing. It's not something you'll see in the cubicle farm in Ottawa for the most part, but it exists in the field/sailing/flying world. 

In five years posted to the West coast I spend more than two of them at sea(794 Sea days), add in the time spend alongside in ports while deployed/training and the number jumps to closer to three years away. I was completely burnt out, but kept going because I was asked to and I enjoyed the job(mostly). That I didn't get charged or placed on admin measures by the end of my time out there due to my slipping attitude is a minor miracle. 

As one of my old bosses liked to say "If everyone takes a bite of the S**t sandwich it's not so bad." Unfortunately not everyone does, so often it's the same people over and over having to eat the whole thing.


----------



## daftandbarmy (23 Jul 2020)

CanadianTire said:
			
		

> A record of minimal attendance has a myriad of effects, from "official" things like being passed over for course (seen it happen), not being considered for deployment (seen it happen, and to bring it back to the original topic) to much more administratively difficult things. We have a member who paraded occasionally for a number of years but never put in much effort. He wanted to deploy. He was passed over because he hadn't shown commitment to training. Fast forward a few years and he hadn't changed. He paraded a minimal amount, often to the point of being considered NES. He decided to transfer to another unit as geographically it was easier for him. Our unit started the process and had him turn in his regimental kit. The unit he wanted to be in hasn't accepted the transfer. So now he is stuck in limbo - not parading with us really and not feeling like a member of our unit, but not being able to parade with his desired unit.
> 
> On the other hand, when soldiers that have a record of consistent attendance and participation suddenly stops showing up it raises alarm bells, and the CoC reaches out to ensure everything is okay. I've seen it happen, even when people have communicated a legitimate excuse for every absence.



It was an interesting experience watching the 'marginal paraders' come out of the woodwork during the whole AFG thing.

One of them, who I argued should not be supported in his (fervent) wish to be deployed because of what I perceived to be a largely self-interested and inconsistent approach to his part time military commitments, was sent anyways.

Tragically, he was seriously wounded on the next tour.


----------

