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

[PhilB]

In reference to the territorial batt. I understand the current plan of employment for the planned unit. My point is that here is a group of obviously keen reservists that are volunteering for a full time contract. Now many reg force members here are saying, and I agree, thats reservists need a higher level of trg in order to be deployed. The new unit would be a perfect opportunity to provide said trg. Further more Im sure that many troops would be willing to deploy from this porposed unit, and aside with the new canforgen re active/inactive service tecnically couldnt they be made to?

Just and idea, if im off base in my understand of the propsed unit please let me know

 

[sgtdixon]

Oh dang... this isnt cool in the least...

So Im going to have to share a command Structure with the KOCR's....

:-X

 

[Remius]

I think you may be referring to the Territorial Defence Battalion Groups that are being considered for formation in various major urban centres across the country.  These are not "new" units; they are intended to be groupings of existing Reserve units tagged for force employment in domestic ops.  As such, it's likely they'll see additional training in things related to domestic ops, and could deploy in whole or in part on domestic ops under CanadaCom.  But I doubt that they would constitute organizations that are deployable on expeditionary ops.  If that's the understanding that you and your buddies have, it's probably unrealistic.  You may want to discuss the matter with your chain of command for further details.

Well nothing is concrete about how these units are going to work. There will be a significant number of troops on Class B though.  most of them will be dagged green.  The army has hinted that these units could be used to fill any shortfalls for operational tours overseas.  Yes the main focus is domestic ops but don't kid yourself about the need for more troops on the ground and what the CF will need to do to get more of them there.

 

[dglad]

Well nothing is concrete about how these units are going to work. There will be a significant number of troops on Class B though.  most of them will be dagged green.  The army has hinted that these units could be used to fill any shortfalls for operational tours overseas.  Yes the main focus is domestic ops but don't kid yourself about the need for more troops on the ground and what the CF will need to do to get more of them there.

As you said, nothing is concrete about this, including there being a "significant number of troops on Class B"--certainly outside of unit-level HQ elements.  We should probably wait until some more water goes under the bridge before trying to make any definitive statements about these things.  That's why I used a lot of weasel words in my original post i.e. "being considered", "intended to be", "likely they'll see", etc.  I've been briefed on these things quite recently, and they're still very much works-in-progress.

The one thing I would say, directed to PhilB and Crantor both, is that expectations about large-scale, full-time employment for Reservists should probably be reigned in, at least for the time-being.  These TDBGs could very well end up being simply groupings of existing Reserve units that, under some circumstances, could be placed under the command of TDBG HQs for domestic ops.  In this case, the TDBG HQs would be new, and could end up employing something like a couple of dozen class B Reservists as staff officers, clerks, info tech people, etc.  But the only difference the grouped units may see would be be some more emphasis on dom ops trg in their trg plans and a few more days of class A per soldier each year.  As I said, your chain of command should be able to update you on this as it develops.

 

[dglad]

While these ideas all have merit, no one had addressed the most important equation.

"Were will we get the manpower to fill these new battalions, companies"?

If you're talking about the Territorial Defence Battalion Groups, then we're probably not talking about new units or sub-units.  These are still works in progress, but they're probably just going to be groupings of existing Res F units that would be employed, as needed, for domestic ops under TDBG HQs.  These HQs might be new organizations, but we're talking maybe a few dozen full-time staff for all of them, across the country.  The units, however, would just be the same units we have now, with some dom ops training added to their trg plans, and maybe a few more days of class A pay per soldier.

Obviously, the messaging about these TDBGs is getting very muddied.  There seem to be lots of folks who are thinking these are going to be new, standing/full-time/Reg F organizations.  But based on a briefing I had recently, that's not really what's being considered (unless there have been some VERY recent and quite dramatic changes!)

 

[COBRA-6]

Obviously, the messaging about these TDBGs is getting very muddied.  There seem to be lots of folks who are thinking these are going to be new, standing/full-time/Reg F organizations.  But based on a briefing I had recently, that's not really what's being considered (unless there have been some VERY recent and quite dramatic changes!)

+1, until the Government makes an announcement it's all speculation. I expect a number of new full-time positions, but not the addition of several-hundred PY's initially.

 

[PhilB]

Roger that sir, in my unit we still havent heard basically anything about this aside from the fact the they are in the works, it was just a thought. Thanks for the clarification

 

[RangerRay]

39 CBG is adopting a "Tactical Grouping" plan that will see (I believe) all of our Cbt Arms units under "Shared HQ's" until they achieve a 200 pers parade state, i.e. the Rocky Mountain Rangers and Seaforth will share a HQ until one or the other parades 200 pers, at which point they will regain their independant HQ.  Same for the Arty, Armd (are they just Recce now?), and Eng.

Very interesting.  When I was in, I always pondered about the RMRang and BCDs amalgamating to become either the Rocky Mountain Dragoons, or the British Columbia Rangers, depending on which trade won out.  Mind you, switching trades for most of the troops probably wouldn't have been very popular!

Is there any talk of full amalgamation into the "Seaforth Rangers" or the "Rocky Mountain Highlanders"?

(oh, as if the sheep jokes weren't bad enough now!  ;D)

 

[dglad]

Very interesting.  When I was in, I always pondered about the RMRang and BCDs amalgamating to become either the Rocky Mountain Dragoons, or the British Columbia Rangers, depending on which trade won out.  Mind you, switching trades for most of the troops probably wouldn't have been very popular!

Is there any talk of full amalgamation into the "Seaforth Rangers" or the "Rocky Mountain Highlanders"?

(oh, as if the sheep jokes weren't bad enough now!  ;D)

There are some very good reasons not to do this.  There will be enormous push-back from some potentially very influential stakeholders (Honouraries, Senates, Old Boys/Veterans Associations, etc.)  Also, if you actually eliminate a unit HQ, it's gone.  It's generally considered easier and better for all concerned to zero-man the HQ of the Royal Polar Bear Highlanders, and then group them as a sub-unit under the HQ of the Queen's Own Caribou Rifles across the pde square.  The RPBH still has its traditions, history, insignia, Senate, Regimental Days, etc.; however, for training and admin purposes, it is subordinate to the QOCR HQ.  Succession to unit HQ can be drawn from either Regiment.  And, if it ever becomes necessary, the zero-manned HQ is still there on the OoB, ready to be reconstituted.  It means fewer billets for LCols and CWOs, but I think most will agree that's a minor problem compared with trying get unity of thought and effort instilled in our Res F training.

 

[Desert Fox]

I tend to agree with one a point Michael made. it might be better to amalgamate thren watch a regiment be disbanded and die.
let's be honest how many Militia Bn's and Regiments do we have that are Coy and Sqn strength. Realistically wouldn't we be better served by say some 18-20 Militia Infantry Regiments of roughly ar at least close to Bn strength (400-600 pers) and a similar reduction in Armoured, Arty and other units.

If such as thing is to happen, and I think it's a realistic possibility, then better it happen on "our" terms rather that some whim of a politician .

Methinks I've opened the proverbial can of worms here, but then again maybe it's worthy of a debate.

I agree with you fully on the pratical application of it... However how do you decide who gets chopped? In some areas it might be easier then in others. In 32 CBG we have 6 infantry "regiments" which = 6 CO's, 6 RSM's, probably 20 CSM's, and maybe 500 trigger pulling soldiers.... 

Its a top heavy system, but the reserves it has to be, due to the nature of our service and fact that not every Sr. Mbr will be there every week/weekend you need to have an over supply of them to keep the big picture running - ie have some one step up, without having too much of a negative impact on platoon level leadership.

Ie. It's almost like a 2 tiered system where u have the training audience which is typically up to the Pl Cmd (or Coy Cmd) those who take part in the training.... and then theres the whole other side of organizing/ running / administering trg.... typically consisiting of Ex- RSM who have CFR, or CSM with 30 years in who have a wealth of knowledge and administrative use, but serve little use in the actual leading / flight..... we all know the type.....

I'd love to see the system get streamlined, and the excess fat trimmed off, literally... but good luck doing it, and good luck keeping up moral of those pers who served in the units that get absorbed by say a larger/ more effective one....  Im sure you know as well as i do what happens when 2 units work together, u get 5 diffrent "by the book" ways of doing somthing..... Prehaps it could get done by geographic lines, or almost at random where people get assigned.... once again, moral killer, but in the end could make us more effective? Like u said... Can of Worms....

Just my $0.02

 

[The Rifleman]

It seems that you are getting shafted the same way the TA (Territorial Army) infantry has been in the UK. Originally, we had volunteer regiments, that became battalions of a parent regular regiment. But those battalions got messed around with endlessly. Inf changed to Engineer, then Arty, then Signals, then back to Inf. Some went to Engineer, then Arty, then Signals, back to Inf - and then Logistics. Some went Inf, Tanks, Signals, disbandment. The lucky ones were reduced down to company or platoon strength.

We did have 7 years of hybrid regiments - that is a regiment made up by multiple cap badged units based on geographical boundaries- and it was a complete mess. For example, the London Regiment was made up by companies with the following cap badges - Royal Regiment of Fusiliers, Royal Green Jackets (x2), London Irish Rifles, Princess of Wales Royal Regiment and the London Scottish. Now, with the regular army going through a massive re-badging exercise, the TA battalions are now back to being part of a larger regular regiment, with a single identity. The Londons however, remain an oddity and have been brigaded with the Guards (less the 2 RGJ companies who will join the Rifles)

 

[Desert Fox]

Wow, Riflemen, that souds more messed up then what we have...

However, due to the geographic vastness of Canada, vary few Res. units are located in the same area as a Reg unit. There is a big disconnect of the Res and Reg in those terms. This is not to say we don't/can't work in cooperation. But we only come together for deployments and thats about it. The only standing presence of Reg pers within a Res. unit is the attachment of a few pers. typically 1-3 from my expereince with my Regiment. They tend to fill vital roles such as OP's WO.

We've been lucky in terms of Regiments not rebadging in recent times. However we do have a history of some unit doing the change as you desribed.

Now, when you say "Company" do you actaully mean a 120 troops?  Because in our case, every Res. unit is called a regiment, however, for the most part they are at about company strengh. My "Regiment" has three "Coy"  which average just over platoon strenght.  It is my understanding that in the UK a TA Company is actually a fully manned company... can you please clear this up for me? 

Cheers!

 

[Fishbone Jones]

For all the people willing, and advocating, the termination of the top (LCol, RSM, etc) of Reserve Regiments, a question (or a few, if you will). What do you envision the status of these people, that put in 20-30 years with the Reserves? Do you tell them they'll never progress past Maj/ MWO? They'll never have the opportunity to take their Command courses, and be allowed to put these lessons into practice? That after serving faithfully for all those years the best they can ever hope for is Pltn Commander/ WO? With the growth that's being bandied about, (doubling the strength of the Res Regiments), is it so far fetched to expect these positions to remain?

Before everyone jumps in with "It's like that in the Regs", we know we're comparing apples and oranges.

Just a thought, but before you decide these persons careers, you have to look at all aspects of your decisions.

 

[dapaterson]

Recceguy:  most Reserve LCols never will command a battalion. They never put those lessons into practice because they command, at most, a rump company.  You can count on one hand the number of Reserve units that parade over 200 soldiers - and have fingers to spare.  (well, if you round up the one unit with 197 parading for the month, you'll have a finger to spare).

That experiential delta is a key problem in the Army Reserve - LCols have no bn command experience because they do not command bns; RSMs are actually CSMs (or, for some particularly weak units, Pl WOs on steroids).  We do people no favour by fostering this situation and mindset.  Commanders need comand experience.

Why not have a system that lets Majors command full-strength companies, where they can gain experience and possibly (gasp) go outside ther regiment for 2-3 years to work at the CBG, or work with CIMIC or some other endeavour, broadening their military experience.  The current unseemly haste to breed the next CO leads to a diluted gene pool, where far too often the last man standing is promoted.  And god forbid someone from outside the unit be appointed CO or RSM.

Truth in Advertising - an Artillery regiment that parades 49 people is not a regiment (side note: since 1998 that unit's maximum parade strength was 53).  Sticking around for 30 years should not guarantee someone a promotion to CWO or LCol in a unit that can field at best one gun det.

 

[Desert Fox]

Simpley put, we have to many chief and not enough indians. My unit, a Res. Infantry Regiment has the following (roughly)

1 LCOL, 3 Maj, 6 Capt, 6 Lt/2Lt and 1 CWO, 4 MWO, 2 WO, and countless Sgt...

However, we have the junior ranks to field a company. We like every other Res unit are top heavy. Yes Recceguy you are very correct in pointing out the fact that these people have knowledge and expereince and are exteremly valuable in an admin. function. But a significant degree of high ups in the Reserve world are living in the days of the Cold War still, they have no knowledge or expereince of of the current RMA. Until just a few years ago the focus of our training was advance to contact across the flats of meaford.

At the same time, there is a number of people within higher who do seek info on the contemporary nature of what we do, there are those who are in tune. This is not intended to be a bashing session of Sr NCO/Officers. 

But from a business stand point, do you forsee a civilian company with 100 workers having 20 executives and senior management types?
The structure of the Res units in terms of higher has the staffing to support full size battalions. So in terms of economics we need to boost the ranks, or trim the top. The two are out of proportion, as dapaterson put it, there are "CSM" out there filling the role of PL WO's on steroids.....

There are greater systemic issues that prevent the realization of this trimming. Such as the voluntary nature of the job, we need to be top heavy because we need people to plug holes at the top, as frankly you would be left with MCpl commanding Pl if we did not have the surplus at the top. Its a catch 22. Like i said before, its a can of worms.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Personally, I would only accept that if every, in our case, Res Armoured Regt in Ont, became an outlying Sqn of the RCD. With their badge, etc, and everything that goes with it. Equal opportunity amongst all for training, equipment, deployment, et al. The government would have to be ready and willing, financially and morally, to fund and equip us all. The Regs would have to be ready to accept it with no caveats or animosity. If this can't be met, we're just blowing smoke up each others asses.

Simpley put, we have to many chief and not enough indians. My unit, a Res. Infantry Regiment has the following (roughly)

1 LCOL, 3 Maj, 6 Capt, 6 Lt/2Lt and 1 CWO, 4 MWO, 2 WO, and countless Sgt...

However, we have the junior ranks to field a company. We like every other Res unit are top heavy. Yes Recceguy you are very correct in pointing out the fact that these people have knowledge and expereince and are exteremly valuable in an admin. function. But a significant degree of high ups in the Reserve world are living in the days of the Cold War still, they have no knowledge or expereince of of the current RMA. Until just a few years ago the focus of our training was advance to contact across the flats of meaford.

At the same time, there is a number of people within higher who do seek info on the contemporary nature of what we do, there are those who are in tune. This is not intended to be a bashing session of Sr NCO/Officers.  

But from a business stand point, do you forsee a civilian company with 100 workers having 20 executives and senior management types?
The structure of the Res units in terms of higher has the staffing to support full size battalions. So in terms of economics we need to boost the ranks, or trim the top. The two are out of proportion, as dapaterson put it, there are "CSM" out there filling the role of PL WO's on steroids.....

There are greater systemic issues that prevent the realization of this trimming. Such as the voluntary nature of the job, we need to be top heavy because we need people to plug holes at the top, as frankly you would be left with MCpl commanding Pl if we did not have the surplus at the top. Its a catch 22. Like i said before, its a can of worms.

The Reserve units have been given the mandate to grow. In some cases, IIRC, by 100 %. You're going to require these people to oversee that mandate and administer the influx.

 

[Desert Fox]

You are correct, the mandate has been given to grow, and until my "Coy" sized Regiment doubles we're still looking at a very very top heavy system. We're one of the larger ones, and we still IMHO do not justify the amout of "higher ups". This manade has been in effect for a while. I have not seen much growth. Rention is a big issue. I would love to have hit the size where we parade a fully manned company at each of our locations. As it stands now, I'm a section commander with a section that resembles a 4 man recce det rather then a proper infantry section... Its hard to maintain the intrest of new Pte. and teach them section level tactics when 1-2 of my fire teams are notional. Bring us back down in terms of organization to reflect our numbers will allow us to train properly at the section level.

Interms of augmenting the reg force, its done mainly through section sized or smaller contributions from a single reserve unit. Res CSM, PL WO, COY CMD do not deploy in those roles.


My CSM has two 60% manned platoon to worry about. Granted he has the NES dead beats to deal with as well. So i guess that bring him up to having almost 2 full platoon.

My RSM over looks a total of 4 undermaned platoons....   

I would love for us to get the resouces and funds required. However they simply are not there. All the extra cash is getting funneled towards a place in South West Asia, that rightfully so must be the focus.

 

[George Wallace]

A question about that mandate "To grow"; is there the money to back this up?  Reservists parading now are budgeted very tightly as to the amount of time they can parade, and that allows for very few training nights or weekends.

 

[Desert Fox]

George, im not sure as to the specifics regarding growth, but the current government has stated a few times they that wish to increase the reserves so to increase the presence of the military in communites across the Canada, as i'm sure you already know.

Do you think that means the realization of Liberals fears of "troops with guns, in our street, in Canada" oh lordy, silly campaign ads... btw, wasnt it Trudeau that enact the War Measures Act...  [SARCASM]

Back to the point at hand, they wish to have the reserves play an increasing role in augmenting the regular forces, which also is old news. So im sure they have somthing set aside... or at least hope so... But in terms of actual #'s or figures I am not aware of the details.

Although speaking with my Units recruiting NCO he has been mandated to recruit above what is needed for sustainment, in other words he has been authorized to expand us, not sure by how much....But I still doubt that my CSM will have a full company anytime soon...

Interms of restricted training, I think that problem has been soloved to a degree????  I've heard the stories of the times when my unit paraded one a month, and did one ex a year and so on... But as far as i know, the units in southern ontario are doing alright on this point. I do believe a few of the northern units had this problem in recent years (heard somthing from someone to the effect) Anyone outside of southern ontario with info regarding reduced training by res units in there area?  ( its a bit off topic, but still relevent, links back to top heavy structure, fund allocation etc etc)

 

[Haggis]

In terms of augmenting the reg force, its done mainly through section sized or smaller contributions from a single reserve unit. Res CSM, PL WO, COY CMD do not deploy in those roles.

Careful about generalizations. Reserve OCs, CSM's, Pl Comds and Pl WOs do deploy.  It's been done before.  It's being done now (KAF D&S Pls) and it will be done again, quite possibly on a much larger scale than we're accustomed to seeing.

My CSM has two 60% manned platoon to worry about. Granted he has the NES dead beats to deal with as well. So I guess that bring him up to having almost 2 full platoon.

A lot of Reg F rifle coys aren't much better off these days.