There are a lot of things that you and I agree on but on this issue - no way.
I view our Res F structure as fundamentally flawed. Pretty much every occupation/classification in the Army these days is much more complex than it was fifty years ago. Each one of them needs a fairly detailed individual training regime and a system of regular refresher training as well as advanced collective training (and by advanced I mean at the company level for the vast bulk of reservists and at bn level for a selected group)
We are utterly unable to do that with a "come when you feel like it" philosophy. Increasing the pool might - maybe - increase that pool of available folks but I think that when you are already falling short of your manning levels then you will never achieve the numbers that you need. To create those additional numbers (assuming that you can even get them) places a massive burden on the system which starts with the clear increase in pay for the new candidates but much more so in the administrative burden placed on the training and administrative cadre that is needed to feed them through the system. If you plan to increase your pool ten fold then you will need a ten fold training and admin effort just for starters.
Sometimes when you see a problem you have to come to the realization that the only way through it is an unpopular path. For me the solution comes down to a very tightly controlled system of obligatory training that balances the needs of the military with that of the civilian employer and the soldiers family.
I break that into phases. The first is to use the young soldiers student status to the utmost by using every spare summer school break session to the utmost to train them to Reg F DP 1 standards while giving them a maximum summer job. Secondly you leverage financial support for university and community college courses to off-load critical skills training (mechanics, medics, truckers, administrators, food services) onto civilian instructors while giving the soldier a marketable civilian qualification and locking them into a period of obligatory service.
Once fully trained as an individual to DP 1 and some DP 2 standards you move to phase 2 whereby you cut back on the obligatory activities they are required to participate in to the minimum necessary to maintain those skills and to keep the unit (I put that at roughly 45 days annually) This is where the balancing act is critical because you want to maintain a critical core of leadership especially at the senior NCO level.
Fundamental to any system like this is the need for a much greater integration of Reg F leadership in actually leading at the Res F level and a much greater involvement by Reg F personnel in all of the training of the Res F. Simply put, training the Res F must be part and parcel to every Reg F units annual training cycle.
The concept of predeployment training that was developed for the Afghan War is simply ludicrous. If one has six months to deploy, one could take civilians off the street and have them trained to a DP 1 rifleman or gunner or crewman standard in time for deployment. You do not need a Res F for that. The issue is that we shouldn't need six months. We should have a pool of people who can go on deployments with one or two months of theatre specific training because they already have a known and acceptable basic standard. And when the chips are really down, they should be able to get on a plane within 48 hours and be useable by the time that they land.
Sorry, K. We'll never agree on your model. We need to aim much higher. Like I said, the path ahead is not a popular one but it is a necessary one. This is one pig where a coat of lipstick just isn't going to cut it. We've been trying and failing since the fifties.
I understand that we won't come to terms with this. But I'm going to make an effort to put my thoughts in a coherent form.
That may take a day or two.
In the meantime I came across this factoid which I thought worth sharing.
In the US, the National Guard is the well regulated militia funded by the State and at the disposal of the Governor. I trust we can agree on that.
The National Guard is in part funded by, and equipped by the Federal Government. In return for that support the National Guard agrees to be "federalized", in whole or in part, when the President signs the appropriate papers.
The armies of the individual states are then united in support of the federal army.
Somebody will correct me when I swerve, I know.
So.
In looking at the Militia model a came to the conclusion that the critical roles are not the CO and the OCs Rather the critical roles are the Adjutant and, as I described it, the OC Adm. And as usual I am a dollar short and a day late.
The appropriate terms are well enough known as Adjutant and Quartermaster. Whodathunkit.
The Adj handles recruiting. personnel records, pay, surgeons and chaplains
He is assisted by the QuarterMaster who handles quarters (armouries), uniforms, kit and vehicles.
The next two critical positions, as I came to see them, were the Training Officer and the Int O with honourable mention going to the Sigs O.
Now if you have a bunch of units you need a bunch of Adjs. A bunch of Adjs equals a Corps. Once you have a Corps you need a General. Likewise for the QM, the QM Corps and the QM General.
Peculiarly the British adopted this system in the early 1900s, using 18th century terminology, while the US Army adopted the Prussian system. Something to do with a misplaced loyalty to a chap name of von Steuben, perhaps.
Interestingly the National Guard, at least in some states, seem to have adhered to the more venerable terminology.
And thus this bit of promised info from Washington State.
Lo and behold the senior officer in charge of the National Guard is ..... the Adjutant-General
And his first duties are, as "
he commands all Washington Army and Air National Guard forces" to act as "
Director of the State’s Emergency Management and Enhanced 911 programs." General Daugherty
also serves as Homeland Security Advisor to the Governor of Washington and as
State Administrative Agent for all United States Department of Homeland Security grants awarded to Washington’s state, local, tribal and non-profit agencies and organizations.
That is his day job. Which explains
For most of its history, the National Guard’s mission was focused primarily on the homefront
"The guard’s dual mission at home and abroad means that equipment and training that can pull double-duty is particularly important. Federal missions — which often mean war, or training for it — come first, but the logistics, skills, and structure needed in domestic emergency response can mirror those on the battlefield, or in an overseas humanitarian response. Things like setting up a security perimeter, clearing a route, or moving into an area quickly and setting up shop have some basic similarities, whether troops are fighting insurgents in Afghanistan, responding to an earthquake in Haiti, or preparing for a hurricane in New Orleans, Benton says.
“The template that says, ‘Build the tents, bring the shower, and have the portalets,’ can be a mobile hospital, or it can be an engineer village for a levee breach, or it could be any security mission,” Benton says. “Those templates don’t change. Those become muscle memory.”
The same thing goes for equipment. Both the guard and the reserves prize gear that can be used at war or in a domestic emergency — everything from aircraft and cargo trucks to things like bulk water tank racks. The
Army’s modernization priorities focus on air and land combat equipment and soldier lethality.
According to a recent DOD report, the Army Guard’s air and weapons capabilities are generally more modern, in keeping with these priorities. Areas like engineering, logistics, and transportation, which are critical for responding to natural disasters, have more older equipment or shortages of this dual-use gear, the report says. But as Covid continues to surge, and climate change brings more extreme weather, the guard’s domestic missions, and its reliance on gear like this, are unlikely to abate.
Over the last two years, the National Guard’s “Swiss army knife” capabilities were on display somewhere else: back home.
The last two years have seen a rash of domestic crises and the National Guard has been on the frontline responding to everything from the Covid-19 pandemic to historic fires and flooding, and even widespread protests.
www.armytimes.com
The Adjutant General, Washington
Maj. Gen. Bret D. Daugherty
Major General Bret D. Daugherty assumed duties as The Adjutant General, Washington on July 28, 2012. As The Adjutant General, he commands all Washington Army and Air National Guard forces and is Director of the State’s Emergency Management and Enhanced 911 programs. General Daugherty also serves as Homeland Security Advisor to the Governor of Washington and as State Administrative Agent for all United States Department of Homeland Security grants awarded to Washington’s state, local, tribal and non-profit agencies and organizations.
General Daugherty attended Seattle University where he was awarded an Army Reserve Officers' Training Corps scholarship. Upon graduating as a Distinguished Military Graduate in June of 1980, he was commissioned as a Regular Army Second Lieutenant. He left active duty in 1989 and joined the Washington Army National Guard in 1990.
Education:
- 1980 Seattle University, Bachelor of Science, Psychology, Seattle, Washington
- 1986 American Technological University, Master of Science, Counseling Psychology, Killeen, Texas
- 1989 Seattle University, Master of Public Administration, Seattle, Washington
- 2000 United States Army War College, Master of Science, Strategic Studies, Carlisle Barracks, Pennsylvania
- 2009 Joint Task Force Commander Training Course, Certificate, United States Northern Command, Colorado Springs, Colorado
- 2011 Dual Status Commander Qualification Program, Certificate, United States Northern Command, Colorado Springs, Colorado
Assignments:
- June 1980 - October 1980, Student, Armor Officer Basic Course, Fort Knox, Kentucky
- October 1980 - July 1981, Student, Initial Entry Rotary Wing, Fort Rucker, Alabama
- July 1981 - May 1985, Attack Helicopter Platoon Leader, Troop B, 7/17 Cavalry (Attack), 6th Air Cavalry Combat Brigade, Fort Hood, Texas
- June 1985 - August 1989, Assistant Professor of Military Science (Recruiting Team Chief), 4th Reserve Officers' Training Corps Region, Fort Lewis, Washington
- August 1989 - February 1990, United States Army Reserve Control Group (Reinforcement), Saint Louis, Missouri
- February 1990 - February 1991, Assistant S-4, 66th Aviation Brigade, Fort Lewis, Washington
- February 1991 - September 1992, Commander, Headquarters Company, 66th Aviation Brigade, Fort Lewis, Washington
- September 1992 - July 1993, Executive Officer, 1-168 Aviation Battalion (Attack), Fort Lewis, Washington
- July 1993 - December 1993, Student, Command and General Staff College, Fort Leavenworth, Kansas
- December 1993 - September 1995, Executive Officer, 1-168 Aviation Battalion (Attack), Fort Lewis, Washington
- September 1995 - July 1996, Assistant S-3, 66th Aviation Brigade, Fort Lewis, Washington
- July 1996 - July 1999, Commander, 1-168 Aviation Battalion, Fort Lewis, Washington
- July 1999 - June 2000, Student, United States Army War College, Carlisle Barracks, Pennsylvania
- July 2000 - September 2001, State Aviation Officer, Headquarters State Area Regional Command, Camp Murray, Washington
- September 2001 - March 2002, Executive Officer, 66th Aviation Brigade, Fort Lewis, Washington
- March 2002 - August 2002, Commander, Task Force United States Army Forces Command, Border Support -Washington, Camp Murray, Washington
- August 2002 - February 2003, Director of Security and Intelligence, Headquarters State Area Regional Command, Camp Murray, Washington
- February 2003 - March 2004, Deputy Commander, 66th Aviation Brigade, Fort Lewis, Washington
- March 2004 - June 2005, Deputy Commander (Rear), 81st Brigade Combat Team, Fort Lewis, Washington,
- June 2005 - May 2008, Commander, 205th Regiment (Leadership), Camp Murray, Washington
- June 2008 - June 2009, Commander, 66th Theater Aviation Command, Camp Murray, Washington
- June 2009 - July 2012, Assistant Adjutant General - Army, Washington National Guard, Camp Murray, Washington
- August 2012 - Present, The Adjutant General of the State of Washington, Camp Murray, Washington
Flight Information:
Rating: Senior Army Aviator
Flight Hours: More than 1,300
Aircraft flown: TH-55, UH-1, AH-1, OH-58, UH-60
Pilot wings from: Fort Rucker, Alabama
Awards and Decorations
- Legion of Merit
- Meritorious Service Medal (with 3 Bronze Oak Leaf Clusters)
- Army Commendation Medal (with 1 Bronze Oak Leaf Cluster)
- Army Achievement Medal (with 2 Bronze Oak Leaf Clusters)
- Army Reserve Component Achievement Medal (with 2 Bronze Oak Leaf Clusters)
- National Defense Service Medal (with 1 Bronze Service Star)
- Global War on Terrorism Service Medal
- Humanitarian Service Medal
- Armed Forces Reserve Medal (with Silver Hourglass and M Device)
- Army Service Ribbon
- Army Reserve Component Overseas Training Ribbon
- Washington National Guard Commendation Medal
- Washington State Emergency Service Medal (with 4 Bronze Oak Leaf Clusters)
- National Guard Service Ribbon
- Senior Army Aviator Badge
- Parachutist Badge
Civilian Occupation:
The Adjutant General, Washington Military Department
Professional Memberships and Affiliations:
- National Guard Association of the United States
- Reserve Officer's Association
- Army Aviation Association of America
- Army War College Alumni Association
Effective Date of Promotions:
(Current as of November 2012)
- Second Lieutenant 28 May 1980
- First Lieutenant 28 November 1981
- Captain 1 March 1984
- Major 20 October 1992
- Lieutenant Colonel 4 June 1997
- Colonel 3 September 2002
- Brigadier General (Line) 7 November 2008
- Major General
mil.wa.gov
You are short of bodies. You can't get sailors to fill berths. You can't get soldiers to fill the billets available in even your small battalions. You need bodies.
Even when you open the ranks to the general population you can't get women through the armoury doors. Or natives. Or minorities. Or the youngsters generally.
Perhaps, as Bread Guy has noted, more people would be attracted if the job were more local.
Or put it another way. How do we Canadianize the National Guard model?
