Land Force Reserve Restructure
- Thread starter army
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 50
Re: Land Force Reserve Restructure
Posted by Rob Clarke from Orleans ON Canada on March 18, 1999 at 00:15:53:
In Reply to: Land Force Reserve Restructure posted by Maj B Mainville on March 17, 1999 at 23:38:34:
So, in this spirit of "oneness", will our reservists be paid the same rate of pay as their regular counterparts? If not, why not?
If their contribution to domestic and other ops is as valuable as their regular force counterparts why shouldn‘t they get the same benefits class C pay aside?
I must admit that I don‘t know all of the details of this restructure, but I fear that this exercise is nothing more than another cheap manpower fix for a regular army that can not meet its manpower needs.
Enlighten me, SVP
Posted by Rob Clarke from Orleans ON Canada on March 18, 1999 at 00:15:53:
In Reply to: Land Force Reserve Restructure posted by Maj B Mainville on March 17, 1999 at 23:38:34:
So, in this spirit of "oneness", will our reservists be paid the same rate of pay as their regular counterparts? If not, why not?
If their contribution to domestic and other ops is as valuable as their regular force counterparts why shouldn‘t they get the same benefits class C pay aside?
I must admit that I don‘t know all of the details of this restructure, but I fear that this exercise is nothing more than another cheap manpower fix for a regular army that can not meet its manpower needs.
Enlighten me, SVP
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 50
Re: Land Force Reserve Restructure
Posted by Reserve Infantry Officer from Canada on March 18, 1999 at 21:03:54:
In Reply to: Land Force Reserve Restructure posted by Maj B Mainville on March 17, 1999 at 23:38:34:
I must say, the general thoughts my peers and I are having lately about this initiative is that it‘s going to amount to a huge exercise which will have ended up wasting years in person-time and actual calendar time of concentrated effort, and amount in nothing significant.
As time has passed, the messages I have heard about this have "softened" considerably. Initially we were told of this drastic investigation on unit viability where no unit was safe, and which would ultimately result in units being disbanded, resized, re-roled and / or amalgamated. The latest I have heard is that no units will be disbanded outright. The definition of "what is a viable unit" has been changed again and again.
Those units which put huge effort and concentration into excelling in the Unit Viability Assessment have had their efforts diminished by the redefinition of the rules as we went through it.
For example:
Think of units which put concentrated focus on budget to ensure they came within 2 of plan in order to gain full points. At the end of the year a Brigade Commander redistributes funds across the Brigade to ensure all units come in with the maximum points on the budget criteria. Thanks for the time and effort troops, but let‘s let everyone win. This measure was effectively removed.
Now I‘m not saying that adjusting the criteria as time goes by is not necessary. Obviously, the more time that goes by, new criteria and case evidence should result in refining any decision making process. For example - the Ice Storm of 98 not only demonstrated what reserve units can actually provide when called upon suddenly for an operation, it also illustrated the need for military presence in personnel and facilities in communities. Changes in measures or criteria must be well thought out and add value to the final decision being made however.
Some good things have come out of this program so far. In particular I think units have been encouraged to focus leadership attention on the important things like task standard oriented training.
I am curious as to what the final results of this program will be. I hope that fair, necessary and meaningful decisions are made, and are made for the right reasons. The messages which are coming down the chain of command to me certainly have not convinced me that this will be the case.
Reserve Infantry Officer with Doubts
Posted by Reserve Infantry Officer from Canada on March 18, 1999 at 21:03:54:
In Reply to: Land Force Reserve Restructure posted by Maj B Mainville on March 17, 1999 at 23:38:34:
I must say, the general thoughts my peers and I are having lately about this initiative is that it‘s going to amount to a huge exercise which will have ended up wasting years in person-time and actual calendar time of concentrated effort, and amount in nothing significant.
As time has passed, the messages I have heard about this have "softened" considerably. Initially we were told of this drastic investigation on unit viability where no unit was safe, and which would ultimately result in units being disbanded, resized, re-roled and / or amalgamated. The latest I have heard is that no units will be disbanded outright. The definition of "what is a viable unit" has been changed again and again.
Those units which put huge effort and concentration into excelling in the Unit Viability Assessment have had their efforts diminished by the redefinition of the rules as we went through it.
For example:
Think of units which put concentrated focus on budget to ensure they came within 2 of plan in order to gain full points. At the end of the year a Brigade Commander redistributes funds across the Brigade to ensure all units come in with the maximum points on the budget criteria. Thanks for the time and effort troops, but let‘s let everyone win. This measure was effectively removed.
Now I‘m not saying that adjusting the criteria as time goes by is not necessary. Obviously, the more time that goes by, new criteria and case evidence should result in refining any decision making process. For example - the Ice Storm of 98 not only demonstrated what reserve units can actually provide when called upon suddenly for an operation, it also illustrated the need for military presence in personnel and facilities in communities. Changes in measures or criteria must be well thought out and add value to the final decision being made however.
Some good things have come out of this program so far. In particular I think units have been encouraged to focus leadership attention on the important things like task standard oriented training.
I am curious as to what the final results of this program will be. I hope that fair, necessary and meaningful decisions are made, and are made for the right reasons. The messages which are coming down the chain of command to me certainly have not convinced me that this will be the case.
Reserve Infantry Officer with Doubts
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 50
Re: Land Force Reserve Restructure
Posted by Benoit Mainville from Canada on March 18, 1999 at 21:06:13:
In Reply to: Re: Land Force Reserve Restructure posted by Rob Clarke on March 18, 1999 at 00:15:53:
Through its Defence Policy, the Government has requested the Army to be ready to accomplish certain tasks. That the Army is receiving public funds. The Army includes the Regular Force, the Reserves and the Civilians.
For decades, the Army has been focussed on a East-West conflict. The Reserves and the Regular Forces have to restructure themselves to face more probable scenarios. The Reserve must be in a position to do its share of the job. Its must be equipped, train and resource to do it.
As for the Benefices like Pay and pensions, it is part of the project.
Posted by Benoit Mainville from Canada on March 18, 1999 at 21:06:13:
In Reply to: Re: Land Force Reserve Restructure posted by Rob Clarke on March 18, 1999 at 00:15:53:
Through its Defence Policy, the Government has requested the Army to be ready to accomplish certain tasks. That the Army is receiving public funds. The Army includes the Regular Force, the Reserves and the Civilians.
For decades, the Army has been focussed on a East-West conflict. The Reserves and the Regular Forces have to restructure themselves to face more probable scenarios. The Reserve must be in a position to do its share of the job. Its must be equipped, train and resource to do it.
As for the Benefices like Pay and pensions, it is part of the project.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 50
Re: Land Force Reserve Restructure
Posted by Benoit Mainville from Canada on March 18, 1999 at 23:33:02:
In Reply to: Re: Land Force Reserve Restructure posted by Reserve Infantry Officer on March 18, 1999 at 21:03:54:
I heartly agree with you that as a Reserve Officer LFRR represent an enormous investment in time and effort. As one of the Staff member involved in LFRR at the Army level, I can attest of the effort that all have put into this project.
I believe that those were not in vain. Unit Viability Evaluations provided focus for the Units. It allowed us to gather extremely valuable data on the Reserve. From perception and conceived ideas, we can now discussed with facts, knowing what those number means. The CLS published on the 4 Feb 99, his guidances for LFRR. The document is of vital importance since it gives precise timelines and defines the way ahead for the next month and it takes us from now to past April 00. It also enumarates the principles that will be applied in Reserve Restructure. As an Officer, you should read it.
Changes for the better are already planned to take places in term of equipment, Unit structure, Resources allocation and Roles. LFRR will happen. The importance of changes is still yet to be decided by the Reserve Senior Leadership, the Army and the CF leadership.
I‘m curious to know if you have seen the published articles in the Maple Leaf and in the Reserve Advisor Bulletin on LFRR.
Posted by Benoit Mainville from Canada on March 18, 1999 at 23:33:02:
In Reply to: Re: Land Force Reserve Restructure posted by Reserve Infantry Officer on March 18, 1999 at 21:03:54:
I heartly agree with you that as a Reserve Officer LFRR represent an enormous investment in time and effort. As one of the Staff member involved in LFRR at the Army level, I can attest of the effort that all have put into this project.
I believe that those were not in vain. Unit Viability Evaluations provided focus for the Units. It allowed us to gather extremely valuable data on the Reserve. From perception and conceived ideas, we can now discussed with facts, knowing what those number means. The CLS published on the 4 Feb 99, his guidances for LFRR. The document is of vital importance since it gives precise timelines and defines the way ahead for the next month and it takes us from now to past April 00. It also enumarates the principles that will be applied in Reserve Restructure. As an Officer, you should read it.
Changes for the better are already planned to take places in term of equipment, Unit structure, Resources allocation and Roles. LFRR will happen. The importance of changes is still yet to be decided by the Reserve Senior Leadership, the Army and the CF leadership.
I‘m curious to know if you have seen the published articles in the Maple Leaf and in the Reserve Advisor Bulletin on LFRR.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 50
Re: Land Force Reserve Restructure
Posted by Muppet from Canada on March 18, 1999 at 23:54:14:
In Reply to: Re: Land Force Reserve Restructure posted by Rob Clarke on March 18, 1999 at 00:15:53:
So if I join your civilian company as a part time computer programmer I deserve to be paid the same wage as a full time one with the exact same benefits package? This would never wash in civie land and shouldn‘t IMHO. I joined the Regs for a reason so I could concentrate on being a soldier. Having served in the Militia as well I knew exactly why I had to make the choice I did.
I‘m not putting Militia pers down, we all make our choices for personal reasons, all I‘m saying is someone who has dedicated themselves to a profession deserves to be compensated at a higher level than someone who does it part time, especially when it‘s a case of being ordered to partake in something vice being able to turn it down.
Posted by Muppet from Canada on March 18, 1999 at 23:54:14:
In Reply to: Re: Land Force Reserve Restructure posted by Rob Clarke on March 18, 1999 at 00:15:53:
So if I join your civilian company as a part time computer programmer I deserve to be paid the same wage as a full time one with the exact same benefits package? This would never wash in civie land and shouldn‘t IMHO. I joined the Regs for a reason so I could concentrate on being a soldier. Having served in the Militia as well I knew exactly why I had to make the choice I did.
I‘m not putting Militia pers down, we all make our choices for personal reasons, all I‘m saying is someone who has dedicated themselves to a profession deserves to be compensated at a higher level than someone who does it part time, especially when it‘s a case of being ordered to partake in something vice being able to turn it down.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 50
Re: Land Force Reserve Restructure
Posted by Ken Newans from Canada on March 19, 1999 at 01:24:24:
In Reply to: Land Force Reserve Restructure posted by Maj B Mainville on March 17, 1999 at 23:38:34:
How about restructing some trades training courses that people with civilian jobs can actually take on weekends, rather than having to quit steady civilian employment and/or divorce their wives in order to attend for 3 months at a time?
Posted by Ken Newans from Canada on March 19, 1999 at 01:24:24:
In Reply to: Land Force Reserve Restructure posted by Maj B Mainville on March 17, 1999 at 23:38:34:
How about restructing some trades training courses that people with civilian jobs can actually take on weekends, rather than having to quit steady civilian employment and/or divorce their wives in order to attend for 3 months at a time?
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 50
Re: Land Force Reserve Restructure
Posted by Rob Clarke from Canada on March 19, 1999 at 10:20:45:
In Reply to: Re: Land Force Reserve Restructure posted by Muppet on March 18, 1999 at 23:54:14:
As a "civie" part timer in my company AKA consultant you would be compensated in an amount commensurate to your qualifications and skills. In most cases the daily rate for these part timers is more than that for a full timer.
Yes there may be an experience factor to be considered. But when you examine the history of reservists deployed to ops areas and indeed augmentation organizations for summer training that factor quickly disappears.
So I ask, why not equal pay for equal work?
Posted by Rob Clarke from Canada on March 19, 1999 at 10:20:45:
In Reply to: Re: Land Force Reserve Restructure posted by Muppet on March 18, 1999 at 23:54:14:
As a "civie" part timer in my company AKA consultant you would be compensated in an amount commensurate to your qualifications and skills. In most cases the daily rate for these part timers is more than that for a full timer.
Yes there may be an experience factor to be considered. But when you examine the history of reservists deployed to ops areas and indeed augmentation organizations for summer training that factor quickly disappears.
So I ask, why not equal pay for equal work?
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 50
Re: Land Force Reserve Restructure
Posted by Rob Clarke from Orleans ON Canada on March 19, 1999 at 10:30:01:
In Reply to: Re: Land Force Reserve Restructure posted by Benoit Mainville on March 18, 1999 at 21:06:13:
Is there a new White Paper on Defence? What are these new tasks and scenarios? Has the demand for a combat capable general purpose army been changed?
Posted by Rob Clarke from Orleans ON Canada on March 19, 1999 at 10:30:01:
In Reply to: Re: Land Force Reserve Restructure posted by Benoit Mainville on March 18, 1999 at 21:06:13:
Is there a new White Paper on Defence? What are these new tasks and scenarios? Has the demand for a combat capable general purpose army been changed?
Similar threads
