Divining the right role, capabilities, structure, and Regimental System for Canada's Army Reserves

[Furniture]

Fully agree that the Army Res C2 structure is inadequate, bloated, and too often filled with individuals of questionable competence.

But that same eye needs to be applied across the board. A navy with sixteen warships (with respect to their crews, KIN and AOPS are not warships) sounds like a flotilla where even a single Rear Admiral would be excessive. An Army writ large which under duress might be able to cobble together three brigades (Reg and Res combined) sounds suspiciously like a command for a MGen.

And so on throughout the structure...

Do that and the pay for the new top ranks would have to increase to match what the old ranks were paid.

What Maj will stick around to take over a Col's job, but still only get Maj pay? Everyone with their 20/25 would be out.

 

[dapaterson]

You assume that all those jobs and structures are necessary.

 

[Weinie]

Disagree; those troops would just join the regular army of the option for the reserves didn’t exist. The numbers probably end up being neutral from the “don’t join the regular army because I can join the reserves” vs the “tried it and liked it” crowd.




Why is that a joke? You have 10 Cols, and DGen Res to advocate to the Div commanders as to how they can be be organized / support their Div commanders intent. What does a “real seat at the table” look like to you? Do you need equal representation ? Where is that going to come from?



Was there a point to this beyond trying to grand stand on our casualties ? I was a reservist augmentee in 2008. We did 10 months with 1 VP before we deployed. Hard to call us “mitiatmen” at that point I’d think. You obviously know that no one can answer your first question because no inquiry will ever say “soldier x wasn’t adequately trained” so your just trying to create a manufactured outrage. Be an adult.

Are you just trying
to be outraged?

 

[Brad Sallows]

Curious as to why the Regular Force needs work up times if they are that better trained then the Reserves?

At least two scenarios come to mind.
1. They have to integrate some reservists.
2. Specialized domain/mission skills (particularly those associated with peace enforcement).

 

[Furniture]

You assume that all those jobs and structures are necessary.

There are definitely jobs that could be cut, but that also requires a massive cut to our administrative paperwork.

It's something that needs to be done, but I expect that the people who can make the changes won't, they like their stacks of reports.

 

[dapaterson]

Shrink the number of units - Army Reserve, for example, should be about 1/3 of the current number. That means you can shrink the number of HQs by a third as well. Which means that even if you keep the same number of reports and returns, you have 1/3 of the number of HQs demanding them, and 1/3 the number of HQ staff officers demanding them (and not reading them, then asking for the same info in a different format a week later).

Reduced C2 burden reduces the number of staff before you look at automation or elimination of redundant / unnecessary reports.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Shrink the number of units - Army Reserve, for example, should be about 1/3 of the current number. That means you can shrink the number of HQs by a third as well. Which means that even if you keep the same number of reports and returns, you have 1/3 of the number of HQs demanding them, and 1/3 the number of HQ staff officers demanding them (and not reading them, then asking for the same info in a different format a week later).

Reduced C2 burden reduces the number of staff before you look at automation or elimination of redundant / unnecessary reports.

Each Division could have a 'Reserve Force Generation Brigade' aligned with it.

Make it accountable to a desk in the Div Comd's HQ, and give them 'readiness targets' to achieve on an annul basis.

Align the units to the Div Comd's FG requirements e.g., X # of Inf/Armd/Eng/CSS positions.

Staff the units with a Reg F Cadre including a CO and Training staff, like an OMLT I guess.

Run an annual exercise to test readiness, maybe in May every year.

Promote the people who pass the readiness tests. Fire the people who aren't ready. Or something like that.

Simples.

 

[FJAG]

Each Division could have a 'Reserve Force Generation Brigade' aligned with it.

Make it accountable to a desk in the Div Comd's HQ, and give them 'readiness targets' to achieve on an annul basis.

Align the units to the Div Comd's FG requirements e.g., X # of Inf/Armd/Eng/CSS positions.

Staff the units with a Reg F Cadre including a CO and Training staff, like an OMLT I guess.

Run an annual exercise to test readiness, maybe in May every year.

Promote the people who pass the readiness tests. Fire the people who aren't ready. Or something like that.

Simples.

I guess my question is:

1) does this RFGB simply generate slot fillers for the RegF brigade in that division; or

2) does it have some other role such generating additional sub-units or even units for a force over and above the 4 RegF brigades?

If it's the former than we're really not accomplishing much beyond what the ResF does now other than to eliminate 6 ResF brigade headquarters (which is in and of itself a laudable goal - and you should get rid of two div headquarters while your at it)

The other things - cadres, trainers, exercises, evaluations, firing - you could do now if you chose to.

I keep going back to the view that you really don't improve the army as a whole until you convert the 35-40,000 some odd folks it already has into let's say 8 or 9 fully manned brigades with a few of them at high readiness with full-time personnel and the rest of them at low readiness with a high part-time component.

 

[KevinB]

I guess my question is:

1) does this RFGB simply generate slot fillers for the RegF brigade in that division; or

2) does it have some other role such generating additional sub-units or even units for a force over and above the 4 RegF brigades?

If it's the former than we're really not accomplishing much beyond what the ResF does now other than to eliminate 6 ResF brigade headquarters (which is in and of itself a laudable goal - and you should get rid of two div headquarters while your at it)

The other things - cadres, trainers, exercises, evaluations, firing - you could do now if you chose to.

I keep going back to the view that you really don't improve the army as a whole until you convert the 35-40,000 some odd folks it already has into let's say 8 or 9 fully manned brigades with a few of them at high readiness with full-time personnel and the rest of them at low readiness with a high part-time component.

I viewed @daftandbarmy ’s proposal as an interim step.
1) Align under a Reg Bde

Once you have that, you can start looking at what is the most practical combination, like you I think the future is 30-70 units for most.

 

[daftandbarmy]

I viewed @daftandbarmy ’s proposal as an interim step.
1) Align under a Reg Bde

Once you have that, you can start looking at what is the most practical combination, like you I think the future is 30-70 units for most.

Yes, exactly.

You'll need to spend time on the change management, and people development, as opposed to a sudden switch from Point A to Point B.

 

[Brad Sallows]

There has to be some first step to give the Res F a focus other than "whatever COs and/or Bde commanders decide". "Align under a Reg Bde" is as good as many and better than most.

 

[McG]

I viewed @daftandbarmy ’s proposal as an interim step.
1) Align under a Reg Bde

Once you have that, you can start looking at what is the most practical combination, like you I think the future is 30-70 units for most.

We may need a few interim solutions. Spiral development for the PRes. I’ve already presented where I think we need to go, but I think there will be necessary evolutions beyond the states that I have shown.

 

[daftandbarmy]

We may need a few interim solutions. Spiral development for the PRes. I’ve already presented where I think we need to go, but I think there will be necessary evolutions beyond the states that I have shown.

Good luck getting all those units in BC to align under the name 'British Columbia Regiment'.

You'd have more success going back to the WW1 practise of numbered units

 

[FJAG]

Yes, exactly.

You'll need to spend time on the change management, and people development, as opposed to a sudden switch from Point A to Point B.

There are two very opposing change management principles at play here.

On the one hand you need to move forward in an orderly measured manner establish quick wins but also testing and retooling along the way.

On the other hand you need to ram through sufficient change so that it becomes impossible for the bureaucracy to backslide to the status quo.

Over the last fifty years I have seen every attempt to reform the reserves, no matter how enthusiastically it started, die a withering death into meaningless minor tweaks that accomplished nothing because enthusiasm was not maintained at the highest levels as leadership changed and champions were replaced by 'meh' guys.

I'm of the mind that one needs a champion who is prepared to ram things through quickly even if eggs are broken and a number of sacred cows slaughtered. Otherwise our grandchildren will be having this same conversation twenty to thirty years down the road.

There has to be some first step to give the Res F a focus other than "whatever COs and/or Bde commanders decide". "Align under a Reg Bde" is as good as many and better than most.

Practically speaking they have been since the 1950s. There have always been geographic alignments as between RegF brigades and Land Force Areas and ResF districts and bdes. The Land Force Areas/divisions have had actual command of both RegF and ResF brigades since they were formed in 1991. Nothing meaningful seems to have come out of that.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Being tied to a Reg F bde, presumably including ties between units, would be a much tighter association than a bunch of formations commanded by a regional HQ.

 

[FJAG]

We may need a few interim solutions. Spiral development for the PRes. I’ve already presented where I think we need to go, but I think there will be necessary evolutions beyond the states that I have shown.

Some interesting thoughts.

You've seen my ideas upthread so I won't go into details but just make some general comments.

I firmly believe in restructuring most, but not all, ResF battalions into company size sub-units but letting them keep their geographic facilities and unit character. I don't believe in giving these aggregated battalions some neutral new name. Our units have history and heritage which should be retained even if it bends some noses out of joint. If the CScotR don't like being a company in the Seaforths then tough sh!t.

You've created a fourth RegF brigade group by creating a new RegF armoured regiment, artillery regiment, engineer regiment, service battalion and signals squadron. That's over 2,000 PYs that aren't there for that even at a 90/10 manning level; so one is forced to leave it at three brigade groups unless you are prepared to go to a 70/30 structure for most of those units. That requires a whole different equation.

I'm more and more of the view that all artillery, RegF and ResF, should be taken out of the brigades and brigade groups and concentrated in two artillery brigades for numerous reasons but principally for training and deployment augmentation reasons.

I'd also remove the service support groups from the divisions and restructure them into one or, more probably, two sustainment brigades and a signals brigade. The later would also get 21 EW Regt, the Int Regt, the Influence Activity and all the ResF sigs regts/sqdns

Similarly I'd take 4ESR into an engineer brigade with all the ResF engr regiments.

I'd leave the three RegF brigades with their infantry, armour/recce, an engineer squadron, a service battalion and a signals squadron.

I'd leave the four ResF Inf regiments with all their regional infantry and recce squadrons amalgamated into one recce regiment.

Finally, I'd reduce the divisions to two and allocate 3 Div 1 CMBG and what you call 30 and 40 CRG an artillery brigade and a sustainment brigade and the signals brigade while 2 Div gets 2 and 5 CMBG, 10 and 20 CRG an artillery brigade and a sustainment brigade.

Being tied to a Reg F bde, presumably including ties between units, would be a much tighter association than a bunch of formations commanded by a regional HQ.

Probably true but it depends very much as to what you call "ties". There's the tie that currently exists between 2 RCHA and 7 Tor, 11 Fd, 30 Fd 42 Fd, 49 fd, and 56 Fd and then there is the 30/70 battalion/regiment concept.

I don't think the paradigm will ever shift until you have a RegF CO with the responsibility, authority and resources to train his reservists. Everything else is blowing various densities of smoke up our collective butt holes.

 

[McG]

You've created a fourth RegF brigade group by creating a new RegF armoured regiment, artillery regiment, engineer regiment, service battalion and signals squadron.

That’s more a discussion for the other thread, but your observation is incorrect. We already have a fourth brigade (numbered 6) and it already has engineer and artillery regiments. The infantry an armoured units also already exist.

 

[Halifax Tar]

We may need a few interim solutions. Spiral development for the PRes. I’ve already presented where I think we need to go, but I think there will be necessary evolutions beyond the states that I have shown.

I like your restructuring. That's bang on I think.

 

[ueo]

Is the highlighted part maybe a big part of the problem? Other than deploying for a natural disaster, etc. there really shouldn't be any "fastballs" when it comes to training schedules, etc. Any reason that the annual schedule couldn't be posted on Day 1 of the new Fiscal Year?

Tell/sell that to much higher.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Being tied to a Reg F bde, presumably including ties between units, would be a much tighter association than a bunch of formations commanded by a regional HQ.

It also presumes an enduring mission e.g., 'FG troops for X Bde', which is entirely achievable with the resources currently in place IMHO.