Canada's New, Liberal, Defence Policy

[jollyjacktar]

If your career consists of 9-5 officework, then why do we need you in a uniform?

People would object if I came to work naked.

 

[PuckChaser]

Instead of automatic TOS renewals, selection boards rank personnel and only the top X recieve offers of new TOS.  If some number decline then the offers are extended to the next highest persons on the list.  TOS expiry serves as a gate to remove low performers from the service.

Excellent, thank you.

Seems like we have quite a few ways to release members via the system. Its the willpower to do so and make tough changes that's lacking.

 

[Kirkhill]

If all you are is a project manager, why do you need to be in uniform at all, in any capacity?  Project directors are there to keep the requirements in the forefront, but the PMs have no need for military background.  Indeed, posting people every 2 or 3 years just disrupts the delivery of capability.

The CAF suffers from a uniform fetish, a penchant for building large useless HQs, and a lack of institutional discipline.

Seen.

 

[vonGarvin]

The CAF suffers from a uniform fetish, a penchant for building large useless HQs, and a lack of institutional discipline.

It's not a fetish; it's the nature of the military.  Remember, the "A" stands for "Armed". And the last thing we need is a three piece suit as project director.  Those with the levers on the money?  Of course that's Public Works, but the nature of our game is that *everyone* is replaceable.  The last thing we need is some union hack in an position from which he cannot be fired.

 

[McG]

PDs are uniformed; they are requirements staff in the environmental commands.
PMs are a mix of uniforms and suits in ADM(Mat); they have no need to be military.

 

[Good2Golf]

PDs are uniformed; they are requirements staff in the environmental commands.
PMs are a mix of uniforms and suits in ADM(Mat); they have no need to be military.

:nod:

PMP certification is more important for a PM than looking like his/her PD colleague.

 

[Lumber]

If your career consists of 9-5 officework, then why do we need you in a uniform?

I suppose we could sail without the entire logistics department on board. Who needs them? Or better yet, when they have spent a few years on ship and need a break, we'll just lay them off and re-hire them in a year or two. I mean, where else can we send them when the BOR is full of civilian clerks?

 

[Kirkhill]

I suppose we could sail without the entire logistics department on board. Who needs them? Or better yet, when they have spent a few years on ship and need a break, we'll just lay them off and re-hire them in a year or two. I mean, where else can we send them when the BOR is full of civilian clerks?

I think it is easy to argue against extremes. The hard part is finding the workable compromise.

 

[jollyjacktar]

I suppose we could sail without the entire logistics department on board. Who needs them? Or better yet, when they have spent a few years on ship and need a break, we'll just lay them off and re-hire them in a year or two. I mean, where else can we send them when the BOR is full of civilian clerks?

Don't laugh.  I was told my the bin rats on FRE when I was there the other year, that that is a thing that is really being looked at seriously.  No, log types on the whole and the sections would have to self help themselves.

 

[dapaterson]

I suppose we could sail without the entire logistics department on board. Who needs them? Or better yet, when they have spent a few years on ship and need a break, we'll just lay them off and re-hire them in a year or two. I mean, where else can we send them when the BOR is full of civilian clerks?

For officers, the MARE, AERE, RCEME and Sigs worlds have few ship/field postings compared to their total strengths; a lot of the work is in Ottawa as project managers and other support staff that do not require a military background.  With nine Reg F infantry battalions we have roughly 400 company commanders (majors) in the Regular Force Infantry.

There's a whole lot of culling that could be done at levels above reality that would translate into more PYs for either new capabilities or rounding out existing establishments so it's not the same people constantly being sent away.

 

[Kirkhill]

For officers, the MARE, AERE, RCEME and Sigs worlds have few ship/field postings compared to their total strengths; a lot of the work is in Ottawa as project managers and other support staff that do not require a military background.  With nine Reg F infantry battalions we have roughly 400 company commanders (majors) in the Regular Force Infantry.

There's a whole lot of culling that could be done at levels above reality that would translate into more PYs for either new capabilities or rounding out existing establishments so it's not the same people constantly being sent away.

For clarification - 9 Battalions requires 63 Majors? No?

DCO, Ops O, OC Adm, OC Spt, 3 times OC Rifles = 7 for each of 9?

Edit:

Even if a Reg Force Inf Major were posted to each of the 51 Reserve Infantry Units (63 + 51 = 114), that does seem to leave a considerable surplus.

 

[Remius]

Some of them a COs of smaller units.  CFRCs, Ceremonial Guard and others I'm unaware of.  Still seems like a lot though.

Edit to add:  I assume some are posted to various schools as well as OCs et al.

 

[McG]

DCO, Ops O, OC Adm, OC Spt, 3 times OC Rifles = 7 for each of 9?

Unless the unit is assigned a named mission, the Ops O is a captain.

 

[Bird_Gunner45]

For officers, the MARE, AERE, RCEME and Sigs worlds have few ship/field postings compared to their total strengths; a lot of the work is in Ottawa as project managers and other support staff that do not require a military background.  With nine Reg F infantry battalions we have roughly 400 company commanders (majors) in the Regular Force Infantry.

There's a whole lot of culling that could be done at levels above reality that would translate into more PYs for either new capabilities or rounding out existing establishments so it's not the same people constantly being sent away.

I agree that we have too many officers, but I think the fallacy in your logic is that reducing the number of officers will somehow magically result in more soldiers. The fact that there are MANY NCM billets unfilled right now indicates that there are just not enough people interested in joining the military as there are positions open.

 

[McG]

I agree that we have too many officers, but I think the fallacy in your logic is that reducing the number of officers will somehow magically result in more soldiers. The fact that there are MANY NCM billets unfilled right now indicates that there are just not enough people interested in joining the military as there are positions open.

That is one possible explanation.  But could your identified symptom not also be explained by failings in the recruiting and training systems?  The limiting capacity may not be public interest but through-put at either (or both) these entities internal to the CAF.

 

[dapaterson]

I agree that we have too many officers, but I think the fallacy in your logic is that reducing the number of officers will somehow magically result in more soldiers. The fact that there are MANY NCM billets unfilled right now indicates that there are just not enough people interested in joining the military as there are positions open.

In fact, the problem is more foundational: the establishment has morphed over time without adequate oversight. The BTL (and SUTL, which is usually included in discussions about the BTL) isn't big enough to accomodate the intake required to sustain the force in being (based on data that reflects attrition rates and time to OFP for officers and NCMs).  The SPHL is much smaller than the number of pers assigned to it.  Therefore, if we remain within the paid ceiling assigned, since BTL and SPHL are overstrength, then the trained effective establishment (TEE) can't be filled.

Any change to the establishment then requires changes to recruiting and training to bring in the new (and retrain or retire the old).  The time frame to accomplish that is measured in years, not days.

One hopes that the new defence policy will take a long term view and direct the CAF to transition towards long term goals.  Too often, we jerk and swirl around to address short term problems that should ahve been addressed in long term plans.

 

[Halifax Tar]

I suppose we could sail without the entire logistics department on board. Who needs them? Or better yet, when they have spent a few years on ship and need a break, we'll just lay them off and re-hire them in a year or two. I mean, where else can we send them when the BOR is full of civilian clerks?

I would like to meet the supply dept that works days and that's it.  No offense lumber but you just excentuate the extreme lack logistical understanding you "Hard Sea" types have.

God I never thought I'd say it but I miss the Army.

 

[FSTO]

I would like to meet the supply dept that works days and that's it.  No offense lumber but you just excentuate the extreme lack logistical understanding you "Hard Sea" types have.

God I never thought I'd say it but I miss the Army.

I think he was being sarcastic. Wasn't he?

 

[Bird_Gunner45]

That is one possible explanation.  But could your identified symptom not also be explained by failings in the recruiting and training systems?  The limiting capacity may not be public interest but through-put at either (or both) these entities internal to the CAF.

The recruiting and training systems certainly are problems as well. The fact that it can take up to a year to get someone in the military from their going to the recruiting centre to starting basic is ridiculous. The fact that (for officer especially) it could take another 2-3 years to have them trade qualified for a basic entry job that they might do for 1 year is also a deterant.

I do, however, believe that there is something to be said for there just being a lack of recruits or interest in joining the military in society in general. We have a large number of societal and internal factors working against the military for recruiting, including- lack of bases near major cities (and subsequently persons from Toronto, Vancouver, Montreal being less interested in joining as they cannot return to anywhere near their home areas), a relatively strong economy, and a higher educated public generally less inclined to do many of the types of jobs that the military is hiring for. Heck, society in general is screaming for tradespeople, so why would someone who can be a tradesman from Toronto, work in Toronto, and be his/her own boss want to join the military to do the same job, not be their own boss, and be posted to somewhere like Petawawa or Shilo?

 

[Halifax Tar]

I think he was being sarcastic. Wasn't he?

Perhaps.