Army Reserve Restructuring

[FJAG]

The gain is that people have some exposure to the CAF, and a basic understanding of military things...

Agreed. Assuming you get a broad enough group and can find the resources to actually deliver that training/exposure.

The more the reality of their CAF is exposed to people, the more likely people are to join. When people watch Full Metal Jacket and think that's the CAF, they tend to not want to take part or encourage their kids to take part.

It has to be a positive experience for people. I've run SYEP in the 70s out West, there was minimal uptake by ResF units - some but not a lot. More importantly in 5 days you can't teach what is being put forward here, not with any margin of safety.

Also, every week of training delivered in a non-emergency situation, is a week or two of training not needed in the middle of an emergency.

See @Brad Sallows comments about skill fade. I'll go one further. The CAF is not well known for taking into consideration an individuals previous experience when starting up anything, especially in an emergency. It's generally a sausage machine that treats everyone as a tyro.

I'm open on this initiative, but folks have to convince me with facts. Facts are in short supply.

 

[Furniture]

The problem isn't the fact that after 80 years someone is finally "looking at it." The problem is that when, after 80years, DND is looking at an earth shaking defence initiative that entails a large change in direction for not only the military and the society then it behooves DND to have a proper communication plan that a) a need for a new way of looking at defence is needed that involves a larger portion of the population, b) we're starting broad consultations c) stay tuned - here's our public facing website.

So... to be clear, the CAF shouldn't discuss things until it has a completely funded, and properly sourced website?

The whole silliness was stirred up by a leak of discussions, which would lead to a plan.. Do you think the CAF needs to have a fully resourced section with a website before it can have discussions about options?

What are the chances that wouldn't get leaked to the press and that it wouldn't be ridiculed.

Zero... But that doesn't mean the CAF shouldn't be having these discussions. We don't live in the 80's anymore. Any person with a connection and a few moments to spare can share information.

And its not the press at fault. Let's not blame the messenger for exposing a poorly constructed message.

It wasn't a "message" it was a discussion between professionals that was shared without context, and without the discussion being resolved.

I'd just dust off the old SYEP and use the Res F framework.

I have 25 years of service, and have no idea what SYEP is beyond hearing my bosses talk about it back in the early 2000s... That is not a framework that is known, or relevant. It hasn't been relevant since the 80's when it ended.

I may have missed the conditions of continuing employment, but a week of training delivered and then not applied or practiced for months or years is a week of money wasted. Skill fade at least is going to be slower for a Reg F or Res F person on Supp List, and only provided (for the latter) that they spent a few years going over the same material.

It may come as surprise to some, but some things stick.

I haven't done firearms handling testing in a few years, but I can still manage to not kill myself with a C7.

What the CAF considers "perishable" and what is actually "perishable" isn't the same. There is also the reality that someone taught how to handle a C7 20 years ago is still ahead of a person who has never touched a rifle before in their life.

Too many of you are focused on the "perfect" solution, and refuse to accept that there are shades of "ready" and shades of "good enough".

 

[Kilted]

So, who is going to train all these people?