Informing the Army’s Future Structure

[Kirkhill]

The Army Res establishment is a work of fiction, larger than the authorized strength, and includes no BTL.

Fixing the Army Reserve means fixing the establishment. Which means that with about 22k paid strength target including BTL, radical change is necessary.

How many Class A days were paid out last year?

 

[markppcli]

total? I don’t think anyone beyond DRes would be able to pull that data.

 

[dapaterson]

DMPAP, not CRes.

 

[daftandbarmy]

The Army Res establishment is a work of fiction, larger than the authorized strength, and includes no BTL.

Fixing the Army Reserve means fixing the establishment. Which means that with about 22k paid strength target including BTL, radical change is necessary.

Well, good thing that the plan has been nicely laid out in this article, then

Canadian Armed Forces: A New Vision for the Reserves​

by Rob Roy MacKenzie and Howard G. Coombs

Within this most recent defence policy is clear direction to fundamentally change the way the Reserve Force been recruited, trained, equipped, and employed. This is no small feat, as Canada’s own history with respect to making changes to the Reserve Force has not been replete with examples of long-term success.15 Nevertheless, Canada expects more out of its Reserve Force, with this clear articulation that the Reserves will contribute across the spectrum of operations, be they at home or abroad. Historically, the Reserve Force has operated using an ad hoc approach entailing a high degree of uncertainty surrounding whether Reservists were available to train or to deploy. This must change, and is changing.

The four primary foci of the Chief of Reserves and Employer Support explored in this article are designed to contribute to the achievement of objectives outlined in Strong, Secure, Engaged: Canada’s Defence Policy. These are: (1) support to institutional integration; (2) support to retention; (3) learning from our international partners and allies; and (4) pan-CAF and external engagement, and all are underpinned by the concept of integration and the activities that support its furtherance. These Chief of Reserve and Employer Support endeavors will assist the CAF towards building, supporting, and sustaining an agile Reserve Force that can predictably commit to operations, thereby increasing military capacity exponentially. It will assist with creating an ability to fully employ and deploy Reservists, provide greater opportunity to tap into Canadian diversity through the Reserve Force, and allow the CAF to attract in-demand skills and trades in a way that is not possible in the Regular Force. This will all contribute to meeting Canada’s defence need for an integrated Reserve that can be counted upon to deliver “full-time capability through part-time service.”

Canadian Military Journal Vol. 20, No. 3

 

[Kirkhill]

total? I don’t think anyone beyond DRes would be able to pull that data.

DMPAP, not CRes.

Just curious.

It seems to me to be a reasonable metric that should be available.

 

[FJAG]

Consent of the Governed.



Short walk from there to here



Shorter walk from there to here



And to here

Conscription Crisis of 1917 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

If you want to blow up the Militia in its entirety then by all means proceed as you suggest. Push harder and you can blow up the government while you are at it.

I don't usually say this, but that's bloody ridiculous.

Your argument is hollow because the bottom line is that no one, absolutely no one has to join the ResF. Every reservist is a volunteer. They have joined up on day one with the intent on being part of the Army. The same way that the RegF joins up. Each one of them, RegF and ResF, agrees to be bound by the standards of the CAF until they complete their term of service and are released in compliance with the NDA.

There isn't some vague philosophical imperative involved here. There isn't some passive movement of revolt going on that's just waiting for one order too many before it unleashes itself in full. The fact of the matter is that the reservists we value are equally pissed off at those that don't show up and the fact that their training is substandard. Most of the people that join are looking for a challenge and would welcome some order and a professional approach from their leadership.

Those that can't abide by those standards are free to take their release and go on to live their lives amongst a less demanding society.

Scottish Catholic Priests have nothing to do with enforcing the standards that already exist under law. I Betcha that if Friar Duns Scotus, as a Franciscan, heard your argument he'd be rolling over in his grave.

 

[dapaterson]

Just curious.

It seems to me to be a reasonable metric that should be available.

Meaningless without other data points. Bob training 20 days when the requirement was 40? Daphne training 30 when her requirement was 21?

 

[FJAG]

Maybe the problem with the Reg Force and the Reserve Force is that there is a Reg Force and a Reserve Force. How can you expect a "Total Force" to work if it's just two separate forces that you try to mash together when required?

Instead of two separate forces we need a single Army. And the units in that Army would be fully manned with whatever mix of full-time and part-time personnel make sense for the role/level of readiness you expect of them.

Trying to fix either Force separately will just leave you with an expensive Reg Force that is too small to be effective and a poorly equipped, trained and led Reserve Force that isn't deployable.

The legal separation between RegF and ResF is legislative and for solid reasons. There are very different legal imperatives that the legislature wanted to put in place for each component.

The mental separation between the RegF and the ARes is entirely a construct of those entities themselves that have developed over a century and a half. Prior to 1939, the RegF was a very small component of the Army with a very small role. That continued through the war years and started to reverse itself afterwards and grew in intensity as the RegF's role expanded to predominance in the late 1950s and 1960 with the concept of "forces in being".

I totally agree that we need an Army of both full-time and part-time service if for no other reason than we can no longer afford a full-time Army like we had in the late 1960s. The only folks that don't yet buy into the concept are the ones who are on full-time service and who have let the part-time arm atrophy. The problem needs to be solved from both sides simultaneously.

 

[FJAG]

Well, good thing that the plan has been nicely laid out in this article, then

Canadian Armed Forces: A New Vision for the Reserves​

by Rob Roy MacKenzie and Howard G. Coombs

Within this most recent defence policy is clear direction to fundamentally change the way the Reserve Force been recruited, trained, equipped, and employed. This is no small feat, as Canada’s own history with respect to making changes to the Reserve Force has not been replete with examples of long-term success.15 Nevertheless, Canada expects more out of its Reserve Force, with this clear articulation that the Reserves will contribute across the spectrum of operations, be they at home or abroad. Historically, the Reserve Force has operated using an ad hoc approach entailing a high degree of uncertainty surrounding whether Reservists were available to train or to deploy. This must change, and is changing.

...

I'm glad you brought that one up. The two of them wrote it in response to my article two issues before that in "The Canadian Army Needs a Paradigm Shift".

This was their way of saying "Everything's alright, Jack!". I found it funny they didn't cite my article in this article although Coombs did blow off in his letter to the editor.

Their article summarizes the lack of meaningful effort or results coming out of Chief of Reserves office both while I was on Council there and thereafter.

 

[daftandbarmy]

I'm glad you brought that one up. The two of them wrote it in response to my article two issues before that in "The Canadian Army Needs a Paradigm Shift".

This was their way of saying "Everything's alright, Jack!". I found it funny they didn't cite my article in this article although Coombs did blow off in his letter to the editor.

Their article summarizes the lack of meaningful effort or results coming out of Chief of Reserves office both while I was on Council there and thereafter.

Excellent!

They've seemed to exemplify this quote....

"When we argue for our limitations, we get to keep them."

Evelyn Waugh

 

[markppcli]

Well, good thing that the plan has been nicely laid out in this article, then

Canadian Armed Forces: A New Vision for the Reserves​

by Rob Roy MacKenzie and Howard G. Coombs

Within this most recent defence policy is clear direction to fundamentally change the way the Reserve Force been recruited, trained, equipped, and employed. This is no small feat, as Canada’s own history with respect to making changes to the Reserve Force has not been replete with examples of long-term success.15 Nevertheless, Canada expects more out of its Reserve Force, with this clear articulation that the Reserves will contribute across the spectrum of operations, be they at home or abroad. Historically, the Reserve Force has operated using an ad hoc approach entailing a high degree of uncertainty surrounding whether Reservists were available to train or to deploy. This must change, and is changing.

The four primary foci of the Chief of Reserves and Employer Support explored in this article are designed to contribute to the achievement of objectives outlined in Strong, Secure, Engaged: Canada’s Defence Policy. These are: (1) support to institutional integration; (2) support to retention; (3) learning from our international partners and allies; and (4) pan-CAF and external engagement, and all are underpinned by the concept of integration and the activities that support its furtherance. These Chief of Reserve and Employer Support endeavors will assist the CAF towards building, supporting, and sustaining an agile Reserve Force that can predictably commit to operations, thereby increasing military capacity exponentially. It will assist with creating an ability to fully employ and deploy Reservists, provide greater opportunity to tap into Canadian diversity through the Reserve Force, and allow the CAF to attract in-demand skills and trades in a way that is not possible in the Regular Force. This will all contribute to meeting Canada’s defence need for an integrated Reserve that can be counted upon to deliver “full-time capability through part-time service.”

Canadian Military Journal Vol. 20, No. 3

That was a very long way of saying nothing at all.

 

[daftandbarmy]

That was a very long way of saying nothing at all.

Well, not nothing. I heard alot of this

 

[Kirkhill]

I don't usually say this, but that's bloody ridiculous.

Your argument is hollow because the bottom line is that no one, absolutely no one has to join the ResF. Every reservist is a volunteer. They have joined up on day one with the intent on being part of the Army. The same way that the RegF joins up. Each one of them, RegF and ResF, agrees to be bound by the standards of the CAF until they complete their term of service and are released in compliance with the NDA.

There isn't some vague philosophical imperative involved here. There isn't some passive movement of revolt going on that's just waiting for one order too many before it unleashes itself in full. The fact of the matter is that the reservists we value are equally pissed off at those that don't show up and the fact that their training is substandard. Most of the people that join are looking for a challenge and would welcome some order and a professional approach from their leadership.

Those that can't abide by those standards are free to take their release and go on to live their lives amongst a less demanding society.

Scottish Catholic Priests have nothing to do with enforcing the standards that already exist under law. I Betcha that if Friar Duns Scotus, as a Franciscan, heard your argument he'd be rolling over in his grave.

Lawyer - believes that words mean things and that words are unchanging.

No matter what is written on scraps of paper you cannot coerce people who are not willing to be coerced. If the coercion becomes more than they can bear they will no longer allow themselves to be coerced. In short, they will withdraw their services, or, they will rebel.

Every person who joins the reserves, and the regs, is a volunteer, which makes the position of the person given authority by higher to command all the more precarious. The Crown says "I put you in charge. Make them do stuff." The Bolsheviks in the ranks respond "I didn't sign up for this!"

Irresistible Force. Immovable Object.

 

[markppcli]

Lawyer - believes that words mean things and that words are unchanging.

No matter what is written on scraps of paper you cannot coerce people who are not willing to be coerced. If the coercion becomes more than they can bear they will no longer allow themselves to be coerced. In short, they will withdraw their services, or, they will rebel.

Every person who joins the reserves, and the regs, is a volunteer, which makes the position of the person given authority by higher to command all the more precarious. The Crown says "I put you in charge. Make them do stuff." The Bolsheviks in the ranks respond "I didn't sign up for this!"

Irresistible Force. Immovable Object.

That’s absurd.what you’re implying is that the structure of the reserves is a matter for its individual members to decide, VS it being a matter of what is best for the execution of operations. This is precisely the problem.

 

[Kirkhill]

Meaningless without other data points. Bob training 20 days when the requirement was 40? Daphne training 30 when her requirement was 21?

Perhaps.

But any more meaningless than an indeterminate number of authorized bodies that may or may not be parading with indeterminate ranks and qualifications?

At least it would ascribe limits to the dollars and bodies on hand.

 

[markppcli]

Perhaps.

But any more meaningless than an indeterminate number of authorized bodies that may or may not be parading with indeterminate ranks and qualifications?

At least it would ascribe limits to the dollars and bodies on hand.

Which again is why this structure is absurd as it doesn’t allow for realistic management of people. The fact that the average reserve unit can’t tell you its effective strength should be seen as unacceptable.

 

[Kirkhill]

That’s absurd.what you’re implying is that the structure of the reserves is a matter for its individual members to decide, VS it being a matter of what is best for the execution of operations. This is precisely the problem.

No. What I am suggesting is that whatever structure is finally adopted has to work for the government, the army and the people that are considering engaging. And if the terms of the contract change they will re-evaluate their commitment. They are private individuals.

 

[Kirkhill]

Which again is why this structure is absurd as it doesn’t allow for realistic management of people. The fact that the average reserve unit can’t tell you its effective strength should be seen as unacceptable.

I don't disagree with the absurdity of the situation. Especially not being able to state the number of bodies on parade each year.

I just think there is a difference in expectations between a regular force of contracted volunteers and an occasional force of task oriented volunteers.

 

[MilEME09]

Which again is why this structure is absurd as it doesn’t allow for realistic management of people. The fact that the average reserve unit can’t tell you its effective strength should be seen as unacceptable.

All the metrics on reserve ES and TES are tracked, and easy to find on the DWAN. But to save you a search, it's a lot of dark red, red, and a tiny bit of yellow, and 1 green unit.

 

[KevinB]

I still think there needs to be two types of reservists, and reserve units, or sub units.

The more willing and able, in one, and the less flexible/unwilling/unable in another.