This is all part of a mobilization plan, so unrealistic is looking more and more realistic. The 100k PRes isn't to meet the Latvia mission, its to replace casualties in Latvia when we are fighting Russians. There is a massive sea change in thinking that has happend both in the government and particularly within the military. We're getting ready to fight a real near peer shooting war within the next 5 years. Maybe in three different places. North America, South China Sea and Europe. Which means we are going to need these folks.
Given that thinking a Reg F of 120k, PRes of 100k and MRes of 300k is half a million troops for all elements makes complete sense.
Our current way of thinking about the reserves is augmentation which relies on having units with equipment to step into. To a large extent those do not even exist based on their VOR rates. A RegF of 120,000 and an PRes of 100,000 would be the equivalent of two air and around 8 army divisions. They couldn't make that work after WW2 with all the equipment was still mostly there (and no where near as sophisticated as what is needed now. I won't get excited about the manpower figures until someone lays out what the equipping plan is.
Sup Res to be part of the MRes would be my take. Pre ID'd trades that match, previous experience, already DAG'd. They get called, show up, get issued kit, sent to unit. Get your refresher training there or with the PRes units in Wave 2.
It's easy to make categories (see below), but it's vital that there be multiple categories. It's one thing to call back a fully trained someone within three years; its another to call back someone ten years out; and quite another to take a pure civilian off the street regardless of their civilian skill levels. Those difference need to be catered to differently during peacetime and at the opening of hostilities.
You were proposing changes and opening the NDA to make them happen. Why would you keep a broken part of the current system and constrain your proposals to that when solving that existing problem solves the limitations of your proposal?
There is no need to change the NDA for this. The NDA only provides for two components: a RegF and a ResF. Sub components (like the four ResF ones) can be done by regulations issued by the MND. There are a few small issues in the NDA that need changing - s60(1)(c) (disciplinary jurisdiction over the ResF) needs stiffening and several offences under Part VII (Offences triable by civilian court) need to be moved to the CSD.
Yup. Pretty much.
Seems right. Eventually. But lets get people in the door first. And help them get themselves sorted out into the trades that are their best fit. Maybe some will be happy on the books as a 5 day a year reserve rifleman. Maybe you will find a bunch of electronics techs and programmers will be in the intake and are easy fits.
Before we get people in the door, we need to build the doors, then the rooms behind the doors and so on. The CAF tried to build a national data base of civilian skills held by our existing PRes folks. How'd that work out
@dapaterson? My guess is it doesn't exist.
Sure why not change it all, but Changing the NDA is one thing, mind sets will need to change as well, if the reserves were increased to 100k, that would represent a 200% increase in the res force. Making self sustainment possible. As essentially you would turn every res unit into a full strength regiment/battalion. Not to mention a substantial increase in the navres and airres.
By my count we have around 117 battalions/regiments in the ARes. Give them a conservative 500 folks each would equal 58,500. If we up the infantry battalions to 700 then we get close to 70,000 folks. We can barely recruit and administer the 16-18000 that parade on a Tuesday night now. Someone in the RCAF and the RCN tell me what each of your services would do with an additional untrained 10,000 folks.
Well for starters we need to make it take less the 8 months to get in. People will move on unless really dedicated. If we want to rapidly expand we gotta get this process down to 30 to 60 days.
Honestly, you need to qualify a Med Tech or nurse and have her there every Tuesday afternoon. The numbers we're talking about need to be processed that same day and handed over to a MCpl for kit issue and a few hours of drill before he gets home. The type of processing that the CAF has been doing will simply not work for the volume we're dreaming about here. All of that presupposes that the kit will be there. I highly doubt that and this generation won't drill with broomsticks and cardboard tanks.
Fine I suppose for federal works and undertakings, but the federal government cannot legislate terms of employment services for industries that are not federal. Each province would need pretty much the exact same employment standards act provisions, and that is highly unlikely to happen.
I actually think that the Fed Govt should be bolder in how it uses s91 of the Constitution Act which gives it power over "7. Militia, Military and Naval Service and Defence." Residual powers not enumerated to the provinces also fall to the Feds. IMHO, properly framed federal legislation could be made which would provide job protection, military training leave requirements, and even more subtle provisions (such as civilian pension protection) in a variety of ways. Some skilled draftsmanship, a DOJ cell to mediate and prosecute defaulting employers, and so on are all that is needed. The key point is to focus on the individual's military service, the country's need for an effective military and the responsibility of all citizens regardless of their location having to facilitate that. Carrots and sticks. In the US, the several states have stronger constitutional powers that the federal government but reserve service receives federal protection under
Ch 42 of U.S.C. Title 38 "Employment and Reemployment Rights of Members of the Uniformed Services." It's not the be-all either but its a good starting point for a Canadian federal system.
www.canada.ca
but have zero idea as to how many horses we need so that we can start.
