Army Reserve Restructuring

[QV]

25,000 St John's Ambulance
20,000 Red Cross
20, 000 SAR volunteers
90,000, volunteer firefighters
How many thousands of Citizens on patrol and block watch volunteers.
How about accessing the Corps of Commissionaires for another 20,000 or so.

Perhaps some of these (all of these could be registered with the MRES)

I think a lot of those people are already doing something critical that probably can't be turned off. Volunteer firefighters for example - you would have no fire response coverage in all those places if you re-purposed them.

That said I think there are swaths of people that can be put to work doing something useful in a crisis:

• extra set of hands for mass casualty (St John Amb), events/flood mitigation work
• guarding/observing vital points (anyone with very short trg period)
• moving equipment (trucking military equipment/supplies, survival essentials)
• heavy equipment operating (flood berms, defensive structures, repairing vital infrastructure like roads/airfields)
• distribution of equipment (someone has to had out all the radios/guns/truck keys)

When I look around where I work (there are a few hundred civil servants) I think I could fill a number of the above billets with very minimal training. I could prob generate 40-50 pers (who are not total slobs) just for vital point security tasks quite easily (with some basic equipment + a real QRF), plus a bunch of other tasks.

 

[Kirkhill]

I think a lot of those people are already doing something critical that probably can't be turned off. Volunteer firefighters for example - you would have no fire response coverage in all those places if you re-purposed them.

That said I think there are swaths of people that can be put to work doing something useful in a crisis:

• extra set of hands for mass casualty (St John Amb), events/flood mitigation work
• guarding/observing vital points (anyone with very short trg period)
• moving equipment (trucking military equipment/supplies, survival essentials)
• heavy equipment operating (flood berms, defensive structures, repairing vital infrastructure like roads/airfields)
• distribution of equipment (someone has to had out all the radios/guns/truck keys)

When I look around where I work (there are a few hundred civil servants) I think I could fill a number of the above billets with very minimal training. I could prob generate 40-50 pers (who are not total slobs) just for vital point security tasks quite easily (with some basic equipment + a real QRF), plus a bunch of other tasks.

I agree that they are all doing useful work. And that work will still be needed in a crisis.

But does the government know they are there, what they are doing, how they can contribute and what help they need?

I am start to think of these MRES types not as volunteers so much as registrants. The 5 days a year (40 hours? spread over the year?) is not so much a workload, or even a training load so much as a wellness check.

Perhaps there is no reason for a volunteer to leave her current organization whdn she registers for the MRES. Equally unaffiliated people could register and be directed to related organizations.

As some have noted not much is known. At this stage I think speculation can be useful.

 

[FJAG]

Just a couple of points on SuppRes.

1) The useful aspect of this plan is that once enrolled in the SuppRes these individuals can be placed on Active Service pursuant to NDA s 31 by an order in counsel. They are subject to this provision until properly released from the SuppRes.

2) OTOH, the terms of service of the SuppRes, under the current regulations, makes them not compellable to serve on Aid of the Civil Power (NDA 275/276) or to attend training (NDA 33(2)(a)) or to be called out on service to perform any lawful duty (NDA 33(2)(b)/NDA 33(3). Attendance on these activities is currently only if they volunteer to participate. This provision has its foundation in a Ministerial order - QR&O 2.034 b. QR&O 2.034 is the order which creates the 4 sub components of the reserve force. 2.034 b limits when the SuppRes can be compelled to participate.

It is always possible for the Minister to amend this QR&O to suit what is being contemplated here but it would have to be done carefully as you have basically two classes of SuppRes - the first is what we have now, released RegF and PRes with prior service and training, and this new category of briefly trained folks. IMHO, they bring different skills to the game and should be managed differently.

This is why I've been saying that the better course of action would have been for the Minister to create a new, 5th sub-component of the reserve force with different legal obligations.

 

[Brad Sallows]

They have dedicated people working on this. You saying they are not does not make your statement valid.

Top. Men.

I am not reassured by hand-waving that whatever they have committed is necessarily enough, or charged to go far enough. I agree we have to see the idea and the product. So far, the idea is underwhelming.

This isn’t WW2. Adopting efforts from 80 years ago.

"OK Boomer" dismissals of the past are of no value. The US did a really good job. There is much there worth studying and emulating.

 

[Brad Sallows]

TB could add a leave provision with pay for those five days annually.

Could, but shouldn't, and won't if they understand the stupidity of moving people from the highest-value use of their time to a low-value use.

If people want to go to Summer Soldier Skills Camp on their vacation time, fine. Not by trading more of their working time. Not when the country has a simmering productivity crisis and almost all public agencies are producing messages to the effect of "we need more people doing what we do".

 

[Brad Sallows]

I agree that they are all doing useful work. And that work will still be needed in a crisis.

But does the government know they are there, what they are doing, how they can contribute and what help they need?

Stand up a liaison office charged with talking to the organizations that already are keeping track of their own people instead of duplicating their work.

 

[Kirkhill]

Stand up a liaison office charged with talking to the organizations that already are keeping track of their own people instead of duplicating their work.

Sounds like an effective part of a plan.

 

[Remius]

Top. Men.

I am not reassured by hand-waving that whatever they have committed is necessarily enough, or charged to go far enough. I agree we have to see the idea and the product. So far, the idea is underwhelming.

"OK Boomer" dismissals of the past are of no value. The US did a really good job. There is much there worth studying and emulating.

I didn’t make any allusions to boomer dismissal. The Romans had effective methods for their time as did the British with their press gangs. Boomers are irrelevant to this as they were not there then and they won’t be here now.

Like I said, it was 80 years ago. We aren’t dealing with the same conditions. If that fact insults you not much I can do about that.

 

[Remius]

Could, but shouldn't, and won't if they understand the stupidity of moving people from the highest-value use of their time to a low-value use.

Like what they do now with reservists? Sorry Brad but you really are out of this lane.

If people want to go to Summer Soldier Skills Camp on their vacation time, fine.

Not how it works now but I suspect you didn’t know that.

Not by trading more of their working time. Not when the country has a simmering productivity crisis and almost all public agencies are producing messages to the effect of "we need more people doing what we do".

Again do you even know how the legislation works?

 

[Brad Sallows]

Like what they do now with reservists? Sorry Brad but you really are out of this lane.

This is a matter in every taxpayer's lane. We're stuck with existing military provisions that should be removed. We should not seek to expand the liability.

Not how it works now but I suspect you didn’t know that.

I worked with plenty of people who had mil leave provisions. It didn't stop me from seeing the flaw.

 

[Kirkhill]

Just a couple of points on SuppRes.

1) The useful aspect of this plan is that once enrolled in the SuppRes these individuals can be placed on Active Service pursuant to NDA s 31 by an order in counsel. They are subject to this provision until properly released from the SuppRes.

2) OTOH, the terms of service of the SuppRes, under the current regulations, makes them not compellable to serve on Aid of the Civil Power (NDA 275/276) or to attend training (NDA 33(2)(a)) or to be called out on service to perform any lawful duty (NDA 33(2)(b)/NDA 33(3). Attendance on these activities is currently only if they volunteer to participate. This provision has its foundation in a Ministerial order - QR&O 2.034 b. QR&O 2.034 is the order which creates the 4 sub components of the reserve force. 2.034 b limits when the SuppRes can be compelled to participate.

It is always possible for the Minister to amend this QR&O to suit what is being contemplated here but it would have to be done carefully as you have basically two classes of SuppRes - the first is what we have now, released RegF and PRes with prior service and training, and this new category of briefly trained folks. IMHO, they bring different skills to the game and should be managed differently.

This is why I've been saying that the better course of action would have been for the Minister to create a new, 5th sub-component of the reserve force with different legal obligations.

I'm of the rights and responsibilities school, carrots and sticks.

What might this MRES offer its partcipants, beyond keeping the flag of freedom flying and their children safe?

I thought the notion of exempting their pistols and semi-automatic rifles from seizure as suitable defense weapons was an interesting start. Perhaps access to MRES approved ranges? First Aid and comms courses? Off road driving and boating courses?...

Just a sense of community?

A deep enough pool that in a crisis you can ask your volunteers for volunteers and not have to resort to compulsion?

Concurrently, by putting the volunteer on active service give them legal cover if they have to discharge their fire arm or kill somebody when trying to save them but also subjecting to KR&Os and courts martial.

 

[mariomike]

SYEP was a government funded work program for high school students.

They called ir SSEP when we did it.

All boys age 16 - 17.

We were members of the Service Battalion.

 

[Brad Sallows]

I didn’t make any allusions to boomer dismissal. The Romans had effective methods for their time as did the British with their press gangs. Boomers are irrelevant to this as they were not there then and they won’t be here now.

Like I said, it was 80 years ago. We aren’t dealing with the same conditions. If that fact insults you not much I can do about that.

The conditions are the same. We still need to manufacture materiel and switch a significant fraction of the population to wartime employment (military and non-military) without breaking everything. We need to know what we can reasonably build and sustain, and how to get there.

I'm not talking about press gangs or contingency War Plan This or That.

 

[Remius]

This is a matter in every taxpayer's lane. We're stuck with existing military provisions that should be removed. We should not seek to expand the liability.

I worked with plenty of people who had mil leave provisions. It didn't stop me from seeing the flaw.

Ahhhh, Now I understand. Well thankfully none of that is on the table.

Having been able to utilize most of those provisions in my reserve life I’ve seen the benefits first hand.

In my opinion that take is incredibly short sighted.

 

[Remius]

The conditions are the same.

No they are not. The population pool has changed. Cultural norms have changed and demographics have changed as has generational motivations.

We still need to manufacture materiel and switch a significant fraction of the population to wartime employment (military and non-military) without breaking everything. We need to know what we can reasonably build and sustain, and how to get there.

Understanding what I posted above is key to the how or you will break everything.

I'm not talking about press gangs or contingency War Plan This or That.

Of course you aren’t. The point still stands.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Ahhhh, Now I understand. Well thankfully none of that is on the table.

Having been able to utilize most of those provisions in my reserve life I’ve seen the benefits first hand.

In my opinion that take is incredibly short sighted.

From where you sit, as a public employee and reservist?

From where I sit, it's an unnecessary perq. Politicians might find it a hard sell when people start pointing out that whatever it costs, it's competing with everything else people are finding in short supply from government.

 

[Kirkhill]

Ahhhh, Now I understand. Well thankfully none of that is on the table.

Having been able to utilize most of those provisions in my reserve life I’ve seen the benefits first hand.

In my opinion that take is incredibly short sighted.

As a civilian who didn't enjoy those benefits I can sympathize with Brad's position. If you wrre doubly blessed we were doubly cursed.

 

[Brad Sallows]

No they are not. The population pool has changed. Cultural norms have changed and demographics have changed as has generational motivations.

People is the least part of the problem.

 

[Remius]

From where you sit, as a public employee and reservist?

Yes.

From where I sit, it's an unnecessary perq.

Of course you do. So it’s a perk then that an employer gives time off for military service? Just do we are clear on your worldview. One you see no value in?

Politicians might find it a hard sell when people start pointing out that whatever it costs, it's competing with everything else people are finding in short supply from government.

Is that actually happening beyond the anti military types?

 

[Blackadder1916]

I wonder if there is a correlation in Denmark between Community Sportshalls, Handball teams and the Homeguard?

Yes, there is. They are predominantly used by or the membership is largely Danish citizens/residents. Danish persons (especially those born and educated/socialized in Denmark) have remarkedly similar life experience and attitudes.