Author Topic: "$3M cut to naval reserves"  (Read 24674 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online kratz

    Spring is still hiding under the covers.

  • Float, Move, Fight
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 262,328
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,312
Re: "$3M cut to naval reserves"
« Reply #25 on: July 12, 2010, 09:41:01 »
The concept of regional reserve training centres has some merit, with a major hurdle. Travel distance and times.
As things are currently, when reservists must travel more than 1.5hours away from their unit, regular attendance becomes more of a challenge.

In your suggestion, between the suggested Western RRCT and Central RRCT is close to 2000kms. If we apply Treasury Board's travel standards, there is a wide gap in between the remains out of reach of potential sailors.
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.

Online milnews.ca

  • Info Curator, Baker & Food Slut
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Relic
  • *
  • 415,565
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 21,895
    • MILNEWS.ca-Military News for Canadians
Re: "$3M cut to naval reserves"
« Reply #26 on: July 12, 2010, 11:08:49 »
STOP the world. I want off. The NDP is defending the military.  :moose:

from CBC.ca
Are the planets in line?  More from the NDP's web site - highlight mine:
Quote
Reports suggesting Canada’s already cash-strapped Navy is facing a $3 million cut to its reserves are alarming for sailors. New Democrats are calling this five percent budget reduction a major blow during what should be a year celebrating and strengthening Canada’s navy.

“The Harper government is more than happy to use the navy’s centennial to serve its own public relations agenda, but it is clear that there isn’t the same enthusiasm when it comes to providing the navy with adequate resources,” said New Democrat Defence Critic Jack Harris (St. John’s East).

The cuts are expected to reduce training for reserves by 50 percent, with five of the Navy's 12 coastal patrol vessels unable to go to sea because of a lack of funds or crew, according to a reserve spokesman.

In May, Canada's Marine Command ordered half of the navy’s coastal patrol vessels to be tied up due to a shortage of both money and sailors. After questions from New Democrats in the House of Commons, the decision was quickly reversed.

“While the May decision to mothball six vessels was reversed it is apparent that a cut in reserve budget will have the same effect,” said Harris. “These ships can't sail without sailors.”

New Democrats have long questioned the government’s priorities when it comes to defence spending.

“The irony is that the Conservative Government’s defence policy is called Canada First,” said Harris. “However, we have seen the responsibilities for patrolling Canada’s coast line and search and rescue take a back seat to the astronomical cost of the war in Afghanistan.”
I don't think this is as much an ideological stance as a "cuts to work in the home riding/ridings with NDP reps" stance.
“The risk of insult is the price of clarity.” -- Roy H. Williams

The words I share here are my own, not those of anyone else or anybody I may be affiliated with.

Tony Prudori
MILNEWS.ca - Twitter

Offline MARS

  • Mentor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 61,335
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 819
Re: "$3M cut to naval reserves"
« Reply #27 on: July 12, 2010, 11:26:43 »
Ok, I think I'm not clear enough... :-\

We all know that even though the CDS said on May 14 that the 6 MCDVs were not going to be mothballed "officially," they will just sit in the harbour doing pretty much nothing, specially with the new cut in training. So, in my opinion, those ships, and any other in a similar position, are not real units.

For IRO, we put the ship in dry dock in Dec 09, the crew was scattered among the fleet (specially ATH) and on random tasks (OP Podium, IFR etc.) There was about 30 people left at the shore office, most of them leaving at noon for lack of useful tasks to do and most of them waiting for a posting out of ATH. Can you describe that as a unit? I don't think so... It is only use for administrative reasons. A unit is more than a hull or a building, you need, at least, some kind of cohesion between the members.

My intent has never been to imply that reservists unit were not real units.
Here you're mixing two things...

I said it is a waste of time and resources to train (reg) sailors on equipment they are not going to use because they'll be posted to another class with totally different equipment (I'm thinking more on the technical side here).

The "we might as well use them" as a reference again to the CDS's statement of May 14th. So we are ordered to keep them but we still don't have the manpower or money to deploy them as they are intended to... so we might as well use them for training for both reservists and regulars for everything not class specific...

Note that in the quote you used, I clearly mentioned "not class specific" MARS being clearly in that category. So, in a near future, when FELEX will tie most ships alongside, why not go back to using the MCDVs training platform for MARS or any other trade with transferable knowledge...



Seen.  Thanks.
"Managers do things right; Leaders do the right thing"

Offline N. McKay

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 11,505
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,255
Re: "$3M cut to naval reserves"
« Reply #28 on: July 12, 2010, 17:28:59 »
In another thread, I have proposed that we do away with the reserve units (I know, sacrilegious) and save on the cost of maintaining and operating 24 buildings. Instead, they would be replaced by larger, fully equipped regional reserve training centres, full of every conceivable simulators and manned, for the trainers, by regular force personnel.

That would take away the principal naval presence from 20 communities, many of them inland, to the detriment of the public's knowledge of the navy as a whole.  The Naval Reserve's purpose is broader than just providing MCDV crews and individual augmentation of other units.  It has an important role in connecting with the population of a country, many of whose inhabitants have never seen salt water.

The Forces as a whole did something similar in the '90s when we consolidated bases and withdrew from many smaller centres in favour of a few "super bases".  Might have saved some money but we've paid for it in other ways.

Online kratz

    Spring is still hiding under the covers.

  • Float, Move, Fight
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 262,328
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,312
Re: "$3M cut to naval reserves"
« Reply #29 on: July 13, 2010, 09:53:17 »
from the Chronicle Herlad

Quote
Stoffer: Reserve cuts 'wrong way to go'

By JEFFREY SIMPSON Provincial Reporter
Tue. Jul 13 - 4:53 AM
New Democrat MP Peter Stoffer says cuts to naval reserve training will come at a cost to the Halifax area where 215 members are based.

"Every time you do these cuts it has a ripple effect, there’s no question about it," Stoffer, who represents Sackville–Eastern Shore, said Monday.

Naval reserve training is being reduced by about $3 million, or five per cent, across the country’s 24 naval reserve divisions, which have 4,132 reservists. Between 15 and 20 full-time positions will also be eliminated as contracts expire this year and aren’t renewed, according to the Department of National Defence.

Stoffer said the changes will also hurt the navy’s ability to recruit regular force members.

"They’re the wrong way to go," he said. "What you’re doing is you’re affecting morale, you’re affecting recruitment, and you’re affecting training and that is simply not the way to go.

"Besides the cadet programs, the reserve programs are the best possible areas where you can bring people in that have other jobs or university studies, for example, allow them a feel and the taste of the navy. An awful lot of the people who are in the regular service now were part of the reserves at one time."

Stoffer said the spending cuts will also affect the reservists’ readiness to serve.

"Even though it’s only a few million dollars, what you’re doing is diminishing our capability in the event that we require those types of folks in the future," he said.

"If you’re looking to save money within the Defence Department, there’s many ways you can do it without having to cut these reserves first."

Commander Denise LaViolette, a spokeswoman for the navy, said she didn’t know the exact extent to which Nova Scotia’s reserve division would be affected but expected it would be minimal.

The training programs being reduced consists primarily of "refresher training for routine skill sets that have already been learned," such as for firefighting and damage control, she said.

"The majority of people who were getting this training weren’t actually deploying on ships," she said.

"The reduction on an individual person is quite minimal because it was just a few training days. Normally they get about 45 per year, so there will be a loss of maybe three to four training days for them this year."

About 15-20 positions of the 2,110 naval reservists on full-time employment throughout the Canadian Forces will be eliminated, LaViolette said.

About 893 of those people are on contracts of 180 days or longer, while 1,217 have contracts of less than 180 days, she said.

"There’s been reallocations because there’s been higher priorities that have required readjustments and reallocations of money," she said.

"It’s just part of fiscal management."

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 dapaterson

    Mostly Harmless.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 451,415
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 16,505
Re: "$3M cut to naval reserves"
« Reply #30 on: July 13, 2010, 10:14:39 »
A loss of 4 trainig days on 45 represents a cut of just under 10% to the class A reservist.  Interesting how class A reserve pay is always seen as flexible, but Regular Force pay is somehow sacred - we'd never dream of standing down the Reg F for a week or two to meet a fiscal crunch.


And though I'm not a sailor, I suspect that refresher training on damage control and firefighting could be seen as rather important skills to maintain in the Navy.
This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Online kratz

    Spring is still hiding under the covers.

  • Float, Move, Fight
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 262,328
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,312
Re: "$3M cut to naval reserves"
« Reply #31 on: July 13, 2010, 10:34:00 »
*SNIP*

And though I'm not a sailor, I suspect that refresher training on damage control and firefighting could be seen as rather important skills to maintain in the Navy.

Yes, those are part of most trade's CRRs and if they are not current, you can be DAG'ed red and not deployable.
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 GK .Dundas

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 18,305
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 456
Re: "$3M cut to naval reserves"
« Reply #32 on: July 25, 2010, 22:33:43 »
I think we are now losing sight of the real issue, which is: How can Ottawa claim that they appreciate reservists service and "increase" their numbers and at the same time cut their training/ops budget in half?

This is where the contradiction really is. That ships may and can be taken out of service temporarily or even for extended period of time is a time honoured tradition of the Navy. Heck, Nelson's Flag ship HMS Victory spent most of its active career at anchor, with half crew on half pay!

However, we are not in Nelson's days when it comes to qualifying crew for service (we don't use press gangs for one thing) and when more ships are temporary laid up, you have to find ways to  train, qualify and promote the reservists some other way if your stated objective is to increase their number, otherwise you will have serious retention problems (more than even the current average).

In another thread, I have proposed that we do away with the reserve units (I know, sacrilegious) and save on the cost of maintaining and operating 24 buildings. Instead, they would be replaced by larger, fully equipped regional reserve training centres, full of every conceivable simulators and manned, for the trainers, by regular force personnel. Four such centres, Atlantic, Quebec, Ontario and Western, would be required. Atlantic and Western could easily be accommodated on base at Halifax and Esquimalt. Quebec would use the already built naval complex in Quebec city, Ontario could easily move back into a refitted and expanded Great Lakes Tr. Centre located in Hamilton at the current HMCS Star facility.

After completing basic, reservists careers would fall under the control of one of those centres. They would receive a schedule requiring them to attend one week end a month and, at least, two weeks a year, at which time they would receive training. Upon request, they would be sent on longer courses or OJT periods when appropriate or to move up faster. Anyway, its my suggestion.

And by the way, could you younger people out there do me a favour and stop using "random" inappropriately. When you get hit by lightning at the Halifax golf course, that will be random. If you are assigned to odd jobs around the base here and there, these are "various" tasks.

Also, Krazyhamburglar, your tag line is wrong: As far as I know, the oldest frontline warship in the western world is the USS Enterprise, she commissioned in 1961 and is still active. That's 11 years more than IRO.
I suspect what would happen is that is the reserve units would shut down and the department would then spend the next 25-30 years  doing studies and conducting seminars on weather to build  the training centres
"Norman. You know my policy on arming morons.If you arm one you have arm them all. Otherwise it 's just not sporting!"

Offline jewalsh

  • Guest
  • *
  • 11,933
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 24
Re: "$3M cut to naval reserves"
« Reply #33 on: October 20, 2010, 07:10:20 »
A 3 million dollar cut to NAVRES was the easiest decision that NDHQ and the government could have made.

PSS Esquimalt alone saved about 1-2 million FYI (although many deadbeats were posted there!)

The MCDVs on the West Coast were so poorly managed at MOG 4, that people quit serving on these vessels. The home port duty watches were outright atrocious. They changed their home port policy afer ten years since their ignorance of morale lost out to a very bit of reason.

NAVRES has failed to train and encourage people to stay in the Naval Reserves since they first introduced C-OJT in 2003. People enduring their OJT phases were treated like 12 year old children. They had very little opportunities to learn their real jobs due to poor selection of OJT instructors and even poorer selection of most senior staff. Umm lets jam 15 people on a ship that is very small and expect all trainees to learn their job to a satisfactory level in less than two months with poor leaders guiding them.

I worked my *** off to get the best training possible for NAVRES personnel. However the "Old boys club" decided that I was too strong and held me back.

To be honest, there is a lack of leaders on extra MCDVs to encourage the spending of 3 million dollars. An entire full time crew plus 20-25 class B billets is 3 million dollars. Oh sure there are enough people promoted into positions that are meant to fill leadership roles to fill the REMAR easily. However those extra people lack any real leadership to actually run a MCDV or anything actually. Those same dead end Lt(N)s and POs work only to promote their "buddy buddies" and the next hot *** that can give them some mess entertainment.

It makes me sad that NAVRES continues to pay life time dead end Lt(N) and POs to stay in their position of nothingness at NRDs and disqualify real candidates for promotion in NAVRES due to the 'Old Boys Dead Weight constitution drafted Febrary 31 1999.n

I too would cut the NAVRES budget by 3 million after seeing the quality of leadership and lack of dedication of the 24 NRDs.

Offline airmich

  • Mentor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 402,202
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,162
Re: "$3M cut to naval reserves"
« Reply #34 on: October 21, 2010, 19:53:47 »
... with poor leaders guiding them.
Are you counting yourself into that?
http://forums.army.ca/forums/index.php/topic,97021.msg980137.html#msg980137
Quote
I have done the best job possible (maybe ever) when I backed a PO1 position as a senior OJT instructor in 2006 when I was the supervisor of the largest department for that summer. Also my people got the best training out of all sections by quite a bit.

PSS Esquimalt alone saved about 1-2 million FYI (although many deadbeats were posted there!)
At the time that PSS was stood up, it was a great necessity.  The pers posted there worked long, hard hours in nasty weather and positions.  My hats off to all of them for the job that they did.

The MCDVs on the West Coast were so poorly managed at MOG 4, that people quit serving on these vessels.
People quit serving on them for a variety of reasons:  contracts ended, family and school commitments, decisions to CT or retire.  Do you have published numbers to indicate that reasons for those leaving were because of poor management?

NAVRES has failed to train and encourage people to stay in the Naval Reserves since they first introduced C-OJT in 2003.
I call BS on that.  I was there for 3 years after they introduced C-OJT and they still had people clamoring for Class C contracts which indicates that people were obviously still interested in being a member of NavRes.

Those same dead end Lt(N)s and POs work only to promote their "buddy buddies" and the next hot *** that can give them some mess entertainment.
Do you have published documentation of this fact?  I know a great number of Lt(N)s and POs who know their own position inside and out and ensure that training is regimented and knowledgeable.

It makes me sad that NAVRES continues to pay life time dead end Lt(N) and POs to stay in their position of nothingness at NRDs and disqualify real candidates for promotion in NAVRES due to the 'Old Boys Dead Weight constitution drafted Febrary 31 1999.n
Can you please provide the link for this Old boys constitution?  I am curious to read through it as I have never seen it much less heard of it.


*Note:  I am aware that before jewalsh posted on this topic that it was 3 months old and it should be dead.  I am not trying to "feed a troll" but instead am trying to put into perspective for others that might search for NavRes and read this thread.  Although I am no longer a member of NavRes, I am offended by many of these accusations within jewalsh's post, both for myself when I was a member, and for a large number of friends that are still proud to be called a SHAD.
So I'll raise a glass, not the first nor last, Come join me in this toast...Because the old black rum's got a hold on me ~ Great Big Sea

Offline Chief Engineer

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 741,367
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,990
Re: "$3M cut to naval reserves"
« Reply #35 on: November 14, 2010, 15:40:15 »
Found out some more info about the ships that are sitting alongside in Halifax. Apparently the "plan" as it is now is to dock both the KINGSTON and GLACE BAY next year and get them back to sea with a mixture reserve/regular force crew. People are being briefed that some of Coxn billets are being given to PO1 regulars to give them experience. If this is all true it makes sense, the ships are no good to anyone rotting alongside.
"When your draught exceeds your depth, you are most assuredly aground"

All opinions stated are not official policy of the CF and of a private individual

كافر

Offline DONT_PANIC

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • 7,650
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 57
Re: "$3M cut to naval reserves"
« Reply #36 on: November 15, 2010, 23:27:16 »
If this is all true it makes sense, the ships are no good to anyone rotting alongside.

To a certain extent, I disagree.  I think that even along side, there can be considerable value in using the hull as a training platform for OJT related training.  For instance (I think I may have said this before), it could be an ideal place to get a know your ship book done; a place for stokers to crawl through and get drawings completed; a place to get quartermaster qualifed; a place for NCIOPs to practice flashup and presail checks.  I think the list could go on.  To a certain extent, this sounds a bit like C-OJT of years past (a consolidated location for all OJTs to work on their packages before heading out to the ships for consolidated training).  I can understand the reluctance for going bck to that model, as quality control (in my admitedly limited opinion) was an issue. 

I know the ships that are sailling are often short bodies, but I think the way forward might be for them to each contribute a few bodies to help supervise the OJTs.  These bodies in turn would (hopefully) be replaced by someone from an NRD that while trade qualifed, just needs some refresher training to be brought up to speed.  As packages start getting close to completion, the OJT could start to rotate onto the sailing ships as double banks.  I think that involving the ships actively in the OJT process right from the start might help mitigate some issues from COJT, in that COJT instructors were often (and certainly not always) from NRDs, not from the ships; they didn't have a day to day stake in the quality of the trainees.

The flip side of this is that we should limit the number of OJT contracts given out during the summer months.  If we can't provide meaningful training, we shouldn't give them contracts to begin with.  Simply overstuffing COJT (as has happened in the past) doesn't work.  Without COJT, sending them to the ships doesn't work either, as capacity can often become an issue very quickly.  For instance, during summer of 2010, some ships were gone for weeks, and weren't getting back for weeks to come.  D702 kept sending trainees down to Nanaimo, where they were busy trying to get ready for RRIs and going to see again.  When Nanaimo sailed, they transfered all the excess OJTs (I think there were about 20+ at that point) on the downships with little in the way of meaningful trade supervision.  I head that a number ended up doing demo platoon for BOTC courses being run out at Venture, which brings me back to wondering why they have contracts for OJT, if there is no meaningful plan to get them meaningful OJT? 

Offline Chief Engineer

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 741,367
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,990
Re: "$3M cut to naval reserves"
« Reply #37 on: November 15, 2010, 23:52:48 »
I agree that what we should be concentrating on now is force generation. There are hundreds of pers in the training pipeline that need OJT. From what I was told COJT is on the West coast this year. As stands now Kingston and Glace Bay are in a state of "preservation" but is fairly easy to reactivate. I did bring up the fact just the other day with CCD that we haven't see anybody on the ship to train and we have 2 wonderful training platforms to train on, Scotian is spending Wed nights on board and conducting training. What I would like to see is both ships with reduced manning operating out of Halifax this coming summer and conducting as much OJT as we can to get bodies trained. Until NAVRES spends more money on OJT which they aren't right now we won't see any OJT's for a while. We are wasting a golden opportunity right now to train people. It also doesn't help that 2 ships are being sent to NATO in the med in Mar, not much chance for OJT there.
"When your draught exceeds your depth, you are most assuredly aground"

All opinions stated are not official policy of the CF and of a private individual

كافر

Offline Snakedoc

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 13,200
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 395
Re: "$3M cut to naval reserves"
« Reply #38 on: November 15, 2010, 23:59:49 »
Scotian is spending Wed nights on board and conducting training.

Perks of being an NRD on the coast.  It would be nice to have some sort of platform to conduct weekly 'Wednesday night' training on during the year.

Offline Chief Engineer

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 741,367
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,990
Re: "$3M cut to naval reserves"
« Reply #39 on: November 16, 2010, 00:07:56 »
Years ago a lot of small units had unit tenders, perhaps we should bring that back?
"When your draught exceeds your depth, you are most assuredly aground"

All opinions stated are not official policy of the CF and of a private individual

كافر

Offline airmich

  • Mentor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 402,202
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,162
Re: "$3M cut to naval reserves"
« Reply #40 on: November 16, 2010, 05:49:11 »
Perks of being an NRD on the coast.  It would be nice to have some sort of platform to conduct weekly 'Wednesday night' training on during the year.

Years ago, the non-coastal NRDs spent at least 2 weekends in a training year on either coast for a "Pig boat" weekend.  It was mandated and worked into the budget. (Yes, I'm aging myself here  ;))
So I'll raise a glass, not the first nor last, Come join me in this toast...Because the old black rum's got a hold on me ~ Great Big Sea