Poll

How much use do you make of a personal (non-government provided) cellular device to exercise C2 within your unit?

I don't.  My leadership and/or soldiers can wait for me to come in to the unit on paid time.
1 (4.3%)
A few texts, e-mails and/or calls a month.
1 (4.3%)
A few texts, e-mails and/or calls a week.
4 (17.4%)
A few texts, e-mails and/or calls a day.
6 (26.1%)
I'm in almost constant daily contact with my leadership and/or soldiers.
11 (47.8%)

Total Members Voted: 23

Voting closed: May 13, 2018, 01:30:26

Author Topic: MILITARY RELATED CELLULAR USE BY RESERVISTS  (Read 11679 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline SupersonicMax

    is back home.

  • Mentor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 81,375
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,774
Re: MILITARY RELATED CELLULAR USE BY RESERVISTS
« Reply #50 on: May 04, 2018, 14:03:09 »
Because of the 0.1%, we have to make rules to replace common sense.  Let's keep removing any logical reasonning and leadership from the equation...

Offline Not a Sig Op

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 58,007
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,805
  • I'm just a musical prostitute, my dear.
Re: MILITARY RELATED CELLULAR USE BY RESERVISTS
« Reply #51 on: May 04, 2018, 14:40:16 »
Have you honestly never been employed by a high readiness unit which requires you to be contactable?

A high readiness reserve unit?
Remember troops, the minimum acceptable standard is still an acceptable standard.

Offline Lumber

  • Donor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 55,964
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,995
Re: MILITARY RELATED CELLULAR USE BY RESERVISTS
« Reply #52 on: May 04, 2018, 14:47:21 »
A high readiness reserve unit?

Their arguments were not specific to reserve units, but whether or not the CO (of any unit) has authority to order a member to provide accurate contact information, whatever it might be.
"Aboard his ship, there is nothing outside a captain's control." - Captain Sir Edward Pellew

“Extremes to the right and to the left of any political dispute are always wrong.”
― Dwight D. Eisenhower

Death before dishonour! Nothing before coffee!

Offline Haggis

  • "There ain't no hat badge on a helmet!"
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 56,340
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,555
  • "Oh, what a glorious sight, Warm-reekin, rich!"
Re: MILITARY RELATED CELLULAR USE BY RESERVISTS
« Reply #53 on: May 04, 2018, 16:44:26 »
Their arguments were not specific to reserve units, but whether or not the CO (of any unit) has authority to order a member to provide accurate contact information, whatever it might be.

And that contact information could be a cell number...

...or a landline number.....

...or a grid reference.
Train like your life depends on it.  Some day, it may.

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 272,631
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,390
Re: MILITARY RELATED CELLULAR USE BY RESERVISTS
« Reply #54 on: May 04, 2018, 17:11:03 »
Ok I'm not 100% certain but it really seems like you guys are trying to be lower deck lawyers.

Have you honestly never been employed by a high readiness unit which requires you to be contactable?
All the time.  But how is this a matter of trying to be a pseudo lawyer? 

I've seen my unit try and charge soldiers for not answering the phone in the middle of the night and missing unit recalls.  When that got shot down they were given extras.

But where in the QR&Os etc.. does it say a member must have a phone and answer it when called?  I've been put on X hour/day notice to move but never given a pager or cell phone to be contacted on. As pointed out, members must have an address where they can be reached.  Doesn't mention phones as far as I know.



For the reserves and fastballs/tasks I made a Facebook page and would post the times dates and details of the job/task and say first one to contact me gets it.  The Coy OC previously demanded all tasks and coursenominations get vetted through him.  Sometimes that was a 2 or 3 week turn around. Lots of missed job and course opportunities. The unit also wanted certain soldiers not to be given tasks/jobs (as a form of punishment, which I don't disagree with) but refused to put it in writing.

There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline Loachman

  • Former Army Pilot in Drag
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 208,932
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,233
Re: MILITARY RELATED CELLULAR USE BY RESERVISTS
« Reply #55 on: May 04, 2018, 17:16:06 »
Because of the 0.1%, we have to make rules to replace common sense.  Let's keep removing any logical reasonning and leadership from the equation...

Have you ever been a member of an Army Reserve unit?

Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 224,980
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,829
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Re: MILITARY RELATED CELLULAR USE BY RESERVISTS
« Reply #56 on: May 04, 2018, 18:17:12 »

For the reserves and fastballs/tasks I made a Facebook page and would post the times dates and details of the job/task and say first one to contact me gets it. 

We had an RSSWO who did exactly that and it was an excellent process. He gathered in all the applications on FB for various courses/tasks, emailed the COC for a fast approval/ denial, then processed everything within the same day. Brilliant.

It took a bunch of reservists to mess up that approach after he left us, sadly.
"The most important qualification of a soldier is fortitude under fatigue and privation. Courage is only second; hardship, poverty and want are the best school for a soldier." Napoleon

Offline PPCLI Guy

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 165,185
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,307
  • It's all good
Re: MILITARY RELATED CELLULAR USE BY RESERVISTS
« Reply #57 on: May 04, 2018, 19:06:02 »
I was Ops O in a Reserve Unit, then RSS, and then 10/90, all before e-mail.

The direction from higher came by phone, or by message - the latter a laborious process, and so the phone was preferred.  Orders and directives for an exercise were handraulic, and then went thru the Gestetner or photo copier.

We made plans, and executed them in an efficient and vertical manner, unencumbered by horizontal (ie cc effect) opportunities for everyone to chime in.  We either phoned people, or waiting until Tuesday night.

More immediate comms does NOT equal more efficiency.

I think perhaps texting, Facebook and e-mails are the problem, not the solution.
"The higher the rank, the more necessary it is that boldness should be accompanied by a reflective mind....for with increase in rank it becomes always a matter less of self-sacrifice and more a matter of the preservation of others, and the good of the whole."

Karl von Clausewitz

Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 224,980
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,829
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Re: MILITARY RELATED CELLULAR USE BY RESERVISTS
« Reply #58 on: May 04, 2018, 19:14:23 »
I think perhaps texting, Facebook and e-mails lazy leaders who can't be bothered with proper battle procedure are the problem, not the solution.

There, FTFY :)
"The most important qualification of a soldier is fortitude under fatigue and privation. Courage is only second; hardship, poverty and want are the best school for a soldier." Napoleon

Offline E.R. Campbell

  • Retired, years ago
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 478,835
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,331
Re: MILITARY RELATED CELLULAR USE BY RESERVISTS
« Reply #59 on: May 04, 2018, 20:31:34 »
I was Ops O in a Reserve Unit, then RSS, and then 10/90, all before e-mail.

The direction from higher came by phone, or by message - the latter a laborious process, and so the phone was preferred.  Orders and directives for an exercise were handraulic, and then went thru the Gestetner or photo copier.

We made plans, and executed them in an efficient and vertical manner, unencumbered by horizontal (ie cc effect) opportunities for everyone to chime in.  We either phoned people, or waiting until Tuesday night.

More immediate comms does NOT equal more efficiency.

I think perhaps texting, Facebook and e-mails are the problem, not the solution.

 :off topic:  But ...

... speaking as someone who has some knowledge about communications systems and technology and some ~ less than some here ~ military and command experience, I want to say just how important PPCLI GUY's insight is.

I've been retired, retired for a decade now but when I was serving and in my decade long second career I rubbed elbows with e.g. George Cope, CEO of Bell and Bob Simmonds, former Chairman of Clearnet (now TELUS Mobility) and I will tell you that THEY ~ high tech industry CEOs ~ were worried about the impact that mass, immediate, and especially lateral comms was having on their business practices. I watched as the, then CEO of one major firm, did a major "about turn" on the subject of how "connected" his executives and manager needed to be: he went from imagining trying to get a 24/7 "connected" work force to insisting that mobile phones and pagers and so on (now smartphones) went off for at least n hours every day so that executives and managers could relax, "regroup," mentally and ponder, rather than just reacting.

Before that I was instrumental, in the 1970s and '80s at defining some of the technical aspects of military C3; that was, of course, before we had mobile (or even transportable) computing but not before we understood its potential ... and it scared many of our best thinkers because they could not believe that we, humans, could "manage" the incredible volumes of "information" that would be available. We had a test bed at the (then) Defence and Civil Institute of Aviation Medicine (DCIEM) in Toronto and I recall, vividly, a frighteningly bright defence scientist and a very, very fine general (with an MC for bravery) discussing the practical impossibility of sound information management when all people wanted was more and More and MORE.

To paraphrase PPCLI GUY quantity quality. (I might have made quantity red and quality blue because in tactical C2 I believe that one is your enemy and the other other your friend.) One of the jobs of commanders, from a Recce Pl Patrol Det Commander to a brigade group commander is to decide on what matters and pass it up and put the dross aside ... as an observation by an old, retired outsider if it is on PowerPoint it is very, very likely dross.

Information is a valuable, vital tool: IF you can trust it. You can trust it as much as you trust the source ~ if the source is Sgt Jones in 5 Pl of B Coy then you know it's probably "good gen," if, on the other hand, the source is some fancy and emote 'All Source Intelligence
 Center' then I would suggest that your trust should be a whole lot less. We "gamed' this in the 1970s in the UK: we demonstrated just how, in a totally manual system, one piece of information could be "grown" into serious misinformation when it was "handled" in a stovepipe by an intelligence system that stopped, actually, being about intelligence and became, instead, an "information collection" function.

It's a bit like the Internet ~ it is full of enormous volumes of information ... some of which is actually true and useful. (And those two things are not always tied together.)

I'm not going to launch into a diatribe about information management ... but I am not convinced that anyone in the Government of Canada, and certainly not in DND or the CF, actually "gets it."

To repeat: More immediate comms does NOT equal more efficiency.

If you don't understand and believe that then you are part of the problem.

< end highjack>
It is ill that men should kill one another in seditions, tumults and wars; but it is worse to bring nations to such misery, weakness and baseness
as to have neither strength nor courage to contend for anything; to have nothing left worth defending and to give the name of peace to desolation.
Algernon Sidney in Discourses Concerning Government, (1698)
----------
Like what you see/read here on Army.ca?  Subscribe, and help keep it "on the air!"

Offline ModlrMike

    : Riding time again... woohooo!

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 212,099
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,747
    • Canadian Association of Physician Assistants
Re: MILITARY RELATED CELLULAR USE BY RESERVISTS
« Reply #60 on: May 04, 2018, 20:59:27 »
PPCLI Guy, Edward... I would take it one step further: more immediate comms has a detrimental effect on efficiency.

We've cluttered the daily battle space with so much information that we're reduced to picking fly sh!t out of pepper.

Some of us have so much traffic in our inboxes, that it takes an inordinate amount of time to find and respond to what's really important, as opposed to what the various senders think is important... because everything is sent with high priority.

I'm the LogO for a unit of 150 part timers. There's no way I'm sufficiently important to have 100 emails between tuesday and thursday, let alone the mountain that accumulates over the weekend. All of which need to be responded to immediately.
« Last Edit: May 04, 2018, 21:48:45 by ModlrMike »
WARNING: The consumption of alcohol may create the illusion that you are tougher,smarter, faster and better looking than most people.
Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats. (H.L. Mencken 1919)
Zero tolerance is the politics of the lazy. All it requires is that you do nothing and ban everything.

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 212,035
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,493
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: MILITARY RELATED CELLULAR USE BY RESERVISTS
« Reply #61 on: May 04, 2018, 22:51:38 »
Ok I'm not 100% certain but it really seems like you guys are trying to be lower deck lawyers.

Why is that the default for anyone who says "show me the policy"?   The same people who tend to use that term are also usually the ones who point to NES policy, etc.  It has to cut both ways;  the CofC can't haul out the Regs at when it works in their favour, but refuse to take the same regs into consideration when dealing with subordinates. 

Quote
Have you honestly never been employed by a high readiness unit which requires you to be contactable?

Yup, I have been for years now and, back in yester-year I was also a Cl A type.  It's comparing apples to bowling balls.  Cl A folks are just that, Cl A - they are not high ready (because the reality is, if you call them, they don't have to answer the phone).  I am on high ready (deployment) and I also hold standby on weekends when I'm not away.  I don't have the option to not answer my cell.  They don't get the pay, vacation, benefits and other stuff we get with our Reg Force TOS.  If I'm not on the Standby crew on a Friday when I leave the Sqn, the next expected timing I have is 0800 Monday morning.  I can go to "anywhere in Canada" without a leave pass - heck I don't even have to tell anyone I am going anywhere, I don't have to answer my phone if it rings, I don't have to be at my home because when I left my unit, my next timing was...Monday at 0800.  I'm Reg Force, still receiving my pay and benefits but I am not "on duty".   Why would you or anyone expect more from a Cl A reservist, and if you are, is that really fair to them?

The Cl A reserve world is a 'part time' job, and the system is set up so people can make some training, and miss some.  They are class A so they can decide what they want to attend and what one to say "F that" to.  If they don't show up, they also don't get paid.  That's just how that ball bounces, and it tends to be in the Cl A reservists court vice their CofCs.
Everything happens for a reason.

Sometimes the reason is you're stupid and make bad decisions.

Offline medicineman

  • Well stuck into my new job and thoroughly enjoying it.
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 144,250
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,140
  • In Arduis Fidelis
    • Fed By The Firehose
Re: MILITARY RELATED CELLULAR USE BY RESERVISTS
« Reply #62 on: May 04, 2018, 23:33:29 »
Yeah, used to annoy me somewhat when I was a Class A - I'd answer emails periodically, usually on my days off from my real job.  Funnily enough, the ones that were the worst/most annoying were generated by Reg Force HQ cubicle dwellers who had never worked a day in the civilian sector and couldn't understand that I couldn't just drop what I was doing  to go on a course or exercise or overseas gig without significant planning and forethought, not to mention the concurrence from the people that actually pay me my salary (as opposed to my coffee money). 

One less thing to worry about now...

MM
MM

Remember the basics of Medicine - "Pink is GOOD, Blue is BAD, Air goes in AND out, Blood Goes Round and Round"

I may sound like a pessimist, but I am a realist.

Offline Haggis

  • "There ain't no hat badge on a helmet!"
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 56,340
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,555
  • "Oh, what a glorious sight, Warm-reekin, rich!"
Re: MILITARY RELATED CELLULAR USE BY RESERVISTS
« Reply #63 on: May 05, 2018, 00:28:16 »
This thread/poll has generated a lot more traffic than I anticipated and this is good.  The view points expressed here all point to the same thing.  Immediate comms do not equal more efficiency.

I was PPCLI Guy's Ops WO "back in the day".  Things were simpler when your Bde (Militia District) had to actually put thought into what they were asking for because it would take considerable manual effort and valuable time to generate a return.  And, for those same reasons, they had to forecast their information/data needs and be very prescriptive in what they were asking for.

Now, HQs have become accustomed to being able to generate returns on a quick cycle due, mostly, because technology makes information and statistics easy to obtain, collate and transmit.  This starts right at the top with HQs who do "deep dives" into units to gain information on how XXX is performing or staff check on YYY to see if it's a feasible COA.  In the past, staff officers would have to use their experience and judgement  to determine that because commanders would take a staff officers assessment at face value and not demand that the assessment be shown to be based on detailed analysis and data derived from deep dives and RFIs.  This, in my mind, is symptomatic of a risk averse organization where decisions are subject to "retro-analysis".

Please keep answering the poll and, more importantly, post your stories of how this has worked/not worked for you and your unit.
Train like your life depends on it.  Some day, it may.

Offline Fishbone Jones

    MSC -5185.

  • "Some people will only like you if you fit inside their box. Don't be afraid to shove that box up their ass."
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 267,732
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,317
    • Army.ca
Re: MILITARY RELATED CELLULAR USE BY RESERVISTS
« Reply #64 on: May 05, 2018, 02:35:06 »
Ok I'm not 100% certain but it really seems like you guys are trying to be lower deck lawyers.

Have you honestly never been employed by a high readiness unit which requires you to be contactable?

That's not an answer to my request.

In regards to your second off topic question. Yes. No one had phones, even at home.

Diversity includes adverse opinions, or it is not diversity.
Inclusive includes adverse opinions, or is not inclusive.

Offline Lumber

  • Donor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 55,964
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,995
Re: MILITARY RELATED CELLULAR USE BY RESERVISTS
« Reply #65 on: May 05, 2018, 11:19:30 »
That's not an answer to my request.

In regards to your second off topic question. Yes. No one had phones, even at home.

Why is that the default for anyone who says "show me the policy"?   The same people who tend to use that term are also usually the ones who point to NES policy, etc.  It has to cut both ways;  the CofC can't haul out the Regs at when it works in their favour, but refuse to take the same regs into consideration when dealing with subordinates. 

All the time.  But how is this a matter of trying to be a pseudo lawyer? 

Ok, I get it now. You guys just misunderstood what I was saying, so I probably wasn't being clear enough.

I wasn't saying that everyone has to have a phone, nor was I saying that everyone (including class-A reservists) needs to answer their phones (if they have them).

Recceguy said that the number they had on file for him in the unit's nominal roll lead to a disconnected number.

I said, the chain of command has every right to ask you what your contact information is. If all you have is an address and no phone or email, that's fine, but you have to tell them. If you simply refuse, to tell them your address, phone number, or a reliable email if that's all you have, I think a CO would have grounds to  charge. Further, you can't lie about what your contact information is. If you don't want to give them your phone number, but they insist, and so you give them a fake number, I believe that could also lead to a charge.

Not everything needs a reference to back it up; a lawful order by the CO is any order that is neither manifestly unlawful (murder, rape, theft), nor specifically prohibited by regulations. It's the actual lack of a reference to the contrary that makes the CO order lawful. Source: this is exactly what my local AJAG described to me.
"Aboard his ship, there is nothing outside a captain's control." - Captain Sir Edward Pellew

“Extremes to the right and to the left of any political dispute are always wrong.”
― Dwight D. Eisenhower

Death before dishonour! Nothing before coffee!

Offline Lumber

  • Donor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 55,964
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,995
Re: MILITARY RELATED CELLULAR USE BY RESERVISTS
« Reply #66 on: May 05, 2018, 11:29:21 »
PPCLI Guy, Edward... I would take it one step further: more immediate comms has a detrimental effect on efficiency.

We've cluttered the daily battle space with so much information that we're reduced to picking fly sh!t out of pepper.

Some of us have so much traffic in our inboxes, that it takes an inordinate amount of time to find and respond to what's really important, as opposed to what the various senders think is important... because everything is sent with high priority.

I'm the LogO for a unit of 150 part timers. There's no way I'm sufficiently important to have 100 emails between tuesday and thursday, let alone the mountain that accumulates over the weekend. All of which need to be responded to immediately.

(ModlrMike, I don't know how I'm only realizing now that you're Navy working for an NRD. )

For everyone else, I agree there's too much information; I'm constantly filling out spreadsheets and submitting reports to HQ for readiness levels for everything (medical, C7, 404, dental, ID, Trailering, TDGC, FORCE, security clearances, et), reprot for HISB training, for employment equity training, to ethics training, etc... they want to know about and track everything!

But, I would also say it's not just information overload, but also tasking overload. Let me explain.

Earlier I said I had to learn when to send to people's civilian emails vs their military emails. If it could wait 2 days, I would send to their civilian emails... but not always! The Class-A department heads only have so much time on tuesday/thursday night to deal with all of the projects they've been assigned, and on top of that they have department meetings, head of department meetings, maybe there's a promotion parade, maybe their's a guest speaker, maybe there's the annual ethics brief or annual security brief that night (crap that reminds me, we never did those last year...). So when I'm deciding to send it to their military emails because it's not time sensitive, I also ask myself, while he actually have any time at all on Thursday to read and address this issue? Maybe it will get read but not actioned, and then he'll forget about it over the weekend, and then it will get lost in his inbox by the time he comes in next.

So, in these cases I might send it to his civilian email; not because it's time sensitive, but because I know there's so much on his plate, and so much that going to happen during the next training/admin night, that the only way I think it will actually get taken care of is if it gets sent to his civilian email.

"Aboard his ship, there is nothing outside a captain's control." - Captain Sir Edward Pellew

“Extremes to the right and to the left of any political dispute are always wrong.”
― Dwight D. Eisenhower

Death before dishonour! Nothing before coffee!

Offline Fishbone Jones

    MSC -5185.

  • "Some people will only like you if you fit inside their box. Don't be afraid to shove that box up their ass."
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 267,732
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,317
    • Army.ca
Re: MILITARY RELATED CELLULAR USE BY RESERVISTS
« Reply #67 on: May 05, 2018, 11:37:05 »
Ok, I get it now. You guys just misunderstood what I was saying, so I probably wasn't being clear enough.

I wasn't saying that everyone has to have a phone, nor was I saying that everyone (including class-A reservists) needs to answer their phones (if they have them).

Recceguy said that the number they had on file for him in the unit's nominal roll lead to a disconnected number.

I said, the chain of command has every right to ask you what your contact information is. If all you have is an address and no phone or email, that's fine, but you have to tell them. If you simply refuse, to tell them your address, phone number, or a reliable email if that's all you have, I think a CO would have grounds to  charge. Further, you can't lie about what your contact information is. If you don't want to give them your phone number, but they insist, and so you give them a fake number, I believe that could also lead to a charge.

Not everything needs a reference to back it up; a lawful order by the CO is any order that is neither manifestly unlawful (murder, rape, theft), nor specifically prohibited by regulations. It's the actual lack of a reference to the contrary that makes the CO order lawful. Source: this is exactly what my local AJAG described to me.


Sorry Lumber, you are the one that misunderstood. I never said a 'disconnected' number. I said and 'unlisted' number. Meaning the number wasn't to be published or passed around and used for emergencies only.
« Last Edit: May 05, 2018, 11:40:56 by recceguy »
Diversity includes adverse opinions, or it is not diversity.
Inclusive includes adverse opinions, or is not inclusive.

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 212,035
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,493
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: MILITARY RELATED CELLULAR USE BY RESERVISTS
« Reply #68 on: May 05, 2018, 11:43:49 »
Ok, I get it now. You guys just misunderstood what I was saying, so I probably wasn't being clear enough.

I wasn't saying that everyone has to have a phone, nor was I saying that everyone (including class-A reservists) needs to answer their phones (if they have them).

Recceguy said that the number they had on file for him in the unit's nominal roll lead to a disconnected number.

I said, the chain of command has every right to ask you what your contact information is. If all you have is an address and no phone or email, that's fine, but you have to tell them. If you simply refuse, to tell them your address, phone number, or a reliable email if that's all you have, I think a CO would have grounds to  charge. Further, you can't lie about what your contact information is. If you don't want to give them your phone number, but they insist, and so you give them a fake number, I believe that could also lead to a charge.

Not everything needs a reference to back it up; a lawful order by the CO any superior officer (IAW QR & O, Vol 1, Art 1.02 Definitions) is any order that is neither manifestly unlawful (murder, rape, theft), nor specifically prohibited by regulations. It's the actual lack of a reference to the contrary that makes the CO order lawful. Source: this is exactly what my local AJAG described to me.

Thanks for the additional 'context' info.  I think I get what you're laying down now.  I recently did the UDI/CL training with the AJAG and it was evident that admin actions are far easier to use than disciplinary, even for CL B folks not employed at Reg Force units, as they are only on duty and subj to the CSD during duty hours (and that is not 24/7).
Everything happens for a reason.

Sometimes the reason is you're stupid and make bad decisions.

Offline Lumber

  • Donor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 55,964
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,995
Re: MILITARY RELATED CELLULAR USE BY RESERVISTS
« Reply #69 on: May 05, 2018, 11:44:33 »
Sorry Lumber, you are the one that misunderstood. I never said a 'disconnected' number. I said and 'unlisted' number. Meaning the number wasn't to be published or passed around and used for emergencies only.

Ah. My bad then. I misunderstood what you meant by unlisted. Then yes, I think if you're concerned about privacy that your CoC can have your number in a separate recall list that isn't available to the rest of the unit. We have those on ship too.
"Aboard his ship, there is nothing outside a captain's control." - Captain Sir Edward Pellew

“Extremes to the right and to the left of any political dispute are always wrong.”
― Dwight D. Eisenhower

Death before dishonour! Nothing before coffee!

Offline runormal

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 26,965
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 539
Re: MILITARY RELATED CELLULAR USE BY RESERVISTS
« Reply #70 on: May 05, 2018, 12:25:11 »
Now, HQs have become accustomed to being able to generate returns on a quick cycle due, mostly, because technology makes information and statistics easy to obtain, collate and transmit.  This starts right at the top with HQs who do "deep dives" into units to gain information on how XXX is performing or staff check on YYY to see if it's a feasible COA.  In the past, staff officers would have to use their experience and judgement  to determine that because commanders would take a staff officers assessment at face value and not demand that the assessment be shown to be based on detailed analysis and data derived from deep dives and RFIs.  This, in my mind, is symptomatic of a risk averse organization where decisions are subject to "retro-analysis".

For everyone else, I agree there's too much information; I'm constantly filling out spreadsheets and submitting reports to HQ for readiness levels for everything (medical, C7, 404, dental, ID, Trailering, TDGC, FORCE, security clearances, et), reprot for HISB training, for employment equity training, to ethics training, etc... they want to know about and track everything!

Providing your orderly room is up to date (which has been the case for the two units I've worked at) why can't the Div/Brigade just pull all of this data from Monitor Mass/Peoplesoft themselves ? Why would they even need to ask you for this stuff? This doesn't make any sense and it poor use of everyone's time. You can follow up with individual units as required based on what you query. I.E "We noticed that your last Force test was held in 2016, is this accurate?" It's not really that difficult.

Offline PPCLI Guy

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 165,185
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,307
  • It's all good
Re: MILITARY RELATED CELLULAR USE BY RESERVISTS
« Reply #71 on: May 05, 2018, 12:50:17 »
I actually think that Defence Program Analytics (business intelligence) should be a huge boon to the Reserves.  We have to stop having WO and Capts filling in each other's spreadsheets.  It is a ridiculous waste of time.  If we have good baseline (and well curated) data in systems of records (HRMS, CFTPO, DRMIS etc) as well as the odd bespoke spreadsheet or database properly curated in the Business Warehouse, then reports and returns can and will be updated in seconds. 

There are two elements to DPA - good data, and good reports (that answer good questions).  Lower levels should focus only on ensuring that we have valid and accurate data, and higher levels (and I mean L1 and L2) should be the ones that create the reports.  That ensures that the burden of skill (specialists trained in DPA) does not get transferred to the Armoury floor.

There are over 400 reports already available within the system,  Each one of them creates links to data sources of record, and arranges / manipulates them to answer a question, or to provide insight to decision makers.  Those reports are easily tailored from the corporate level to the Armoury floor.

DPA is coming, whether you agree or not.  If we fight it, we will spend all of our time reporting bad data to unnecessary staff officers.  If we leverage it (and the over $1B that the institution has already spent on the system) we will find ourselves with a solid start point for cutting staff bloat.  If reports and returns are automated, why do we need all those staff Capts and Majors?

The key here is to automated the mundane, so that we can focus of the sublime.  Less reports and return fuckery, and more field training.

My  :2c:
"The higher the rank, the more necessary it is that boldness should be accompanied by a reflective mind....for with increase in rank it becomes always a matter less of self-sacrifice and more a matter of the preservation of others, and the good of the whole."

Karl von Clausewitz

Offline kratz

    Laughter drives the sun.

  • Float, Move, Fight
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 256,273
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,204
Re: MILITARY RELATED CELLULAR USE BY RESERVISTS
« Reply #72 on: May 05, 2018, 12:51:32 »
I was one of the few career Class B types.

The rare breaks that I was a Class A, I contributed to the current "on call" mentality.
I did the crap jobs and was offered the jammy jobs faster because I was "always" available.
Those extra jobs, earned me more skills / qualifications than if I had of stuck to the minimum mantra:
"A Wednesday night and a Saturday per month".

As a department clerk, I had to receive, process, sort, push all comms (email, voice, written ect)...
between my SHO (F/T & P/T), CoC (F/T & P/T), members of my department (F/T & P/T), and other parts of the ship's company
(F/T & P/T).

On average, I was working the two half nights (incoming info), and working another 2 days (outgoing / confirming) each week.
Yes, NavRes HQ had to approve additional days per year for me, but the work was done on time and our pers were looked after.
Quote from: Pipe *General Call*
"Tanning Stations on the flight deck"


Remember, this site is unofficial and privately owned. The site benefits from the presence of current members willing to answer questions.

Offline PPCLI Guy

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 165,185
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,307
  • It's all good
Re: MILITARY RELATED CELLULAR USE BY RESERVISTS
« Reply #73 on: May 05, 2018, 12:54:00 »
I was one of the few career Class B types.

I don't think that word means what you think it means....
"The higher the rank, the more necessary it is that boldness should be accompanied by a reflective mind....for with increase in rank it becomes always a matter less of self-sacrifice and more a matter of the preservation of others, and the good of the whole."

Karl von Clausewitz

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 272,631
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,390
Re: MILITARY RELATED CELLULAR USE BY RESERVISTS
« Reply #74 on: May 05, 2018, 13:49:25 »
If I was a civilian boss and my employee was also a reservist who was answering CAF-related  emails while I was paying them to work for me (whether on a company email or personal) I'd probably take issue with it.
There are no wolves on Fenris