• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Army Reserve Restructuring

And focus on the basics - turn out a disciplined body of troops that can march, drive, communicate, navigate, save lives, handle tools and shoot.

If the army wants machine gunners or cannoneers it can call for volunteers and train them for the task.
Machine guns are a basic. At least in the infantry.

But you aren’t wrong. Basics, basics, basics. And repeat.
Army Reserves Restructuration will occur in a logical matter when the RegF will know what to to with themselves as an army and not under the white tower of infantry vs all and the 3 regimental mafia. Until that settle, don’t hold your breath.
Last edited:
What you're describing is "cooperative housing".
It could be. My experience is in advising and working for commercial landlord companies and also on first nations' housing. My thoughts were more in the nature of the commercial business. On the other hand the type of first nations' housing I worked with could also work and significantly more effectively with the military. I could see cooperative housing work as well. There are numerous models which could work for individuals who want to be on a property ladder or those who just want to rent.

The key thing that they all need is an initiative to make it happen. Initiatives that aren't forthcoming.

The funding could come through the normal financial markets or through repayable government funding - either way it's basically a business that should make a profit and should be run as a business so that it can continue to expand the service. Providing decent housing for service members shouldn't be a controversial issue

Of course most of that staff work would be done incorrectly, as the “working professionals” of the reserves typically have less than stellar understanding of how the institution of the military functions. That’s why we have working professional staff officers.

Actually you don't. For the most part you have officers who are specialists and professionals in one field - artillery, naval warfare, flying a plane, whatever - who are put into numerous staff positions for which their only training and experience is knowing how to write a memo. On top of that everyone changes jobs every few years and goes into another field entirely so there is a constant period of OJT happening throughout the bureaucracy. There are some guys on this forum who've worked as civvies for years at NDHQ who can candidly tell you about the efficiency, or lack of it, shown by many of the transient "professionals" in the fundamental administration of the organization.

Add to that a systemic problem with a risk averse convoluted processes that progresses at glacial paces that would never be tolerated in most civilian businesses. Don't get me wrong, I've dealt with a lot of piss poor civilian businessmen and businesses as well. The CAF doesn't have a monopoly on that. The design of the basic bureaucracy that is DND, however, is not one optimized for success and certainly not efficiency - in that way it is in all respects typical of Canadian government organizations.

@daftandbarmy is absolutely correct when he stated earlier today that in any efficient business entity, if management couldn't find a way to save costs while still meeting its customer services then the board would fire its CEO. The trouble for DND is that the board of directors are as difunctional as DND's management. I've had one very highly placed former "DND manager" tell me he thinks the problem is about 30% government and 70% internal. I have no cause to question his assessment.

The difference between the Reg F and the Res F is that the Reg F wastes its excessive time, and the Res F wastes its insufficient time.

The Res F believes the Reg F has magical pools of equipment and materiel that they never get to see. Both have complete faith in the existence of "the system" that has done them wrong; neither will admit to being part of that system.

Both will devote months of effort to finding a way to circumvent a week of effort.

Neither understands change management. ADKAR is a four letter word. Short tenure means long term effort founders. Repeatedly. Bill Murray and Andie MacDowell should be the CAF Honoraries.
Don't get me wrong, I've dealt with a lot of piss poor civilian businessmen and businesses as well.
Piss poor private undertakings eventually fail (unless they aren't really entirely private and are being propped up somehow) and the resources they tied up become available for other uses. Feature, not a bug, of the system. Undertakings that are insulated from that, though...