- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 50
Posted by "william durrant" <[email protected]> on Sat, 1 Apr 2000 21:44:33 -0500
List,
At the risk of starting a fight, I‘d like to share my first hand experiences
when it comes to "the paper pushers". I don‘t argue the fact that pay,
clothing, food, medical are important and required functions within The
Forces...But, the bottom line is that service and support only exists to
serve and support the combat arms. I think we have forgotton that. NDHQ‘s
main function is to justify and maintain it‘s own existance and this way of
thinking has been passed down to the individual units. The CF spends more
money on enforcing "policy", diversity training, SHARP training, and
civilian contracters than we do on training. The CF is so restricted
especially the reserves when it comes to training that sometimes it is not
even worth doing.
A couple of first hand examples....
1. Members of a reserve army unit conduct unauthorized training in civilian
clothing, with weapons, in an urban area, without contacting brigade or the
civilian authorities. Obviously, this contadicts about 300 references from
the QRO‘s. So, the action to be taken is already provided for....charge
everyone directly or indirectly involved and punish them with all the might
of the NDA....But, of course, this is not what happened. instead, Brigade HQ
issued a policy that every unit in the Brigade must file a request for ANY
TRAINING TO BE CONDUCTED OFF ARMOURY PROPERTY. This policy alone will
produce 1000‘s of hours per year of paperwork per unit. not to mention the
clerks at HQ who have to deal with it all.
2. Members of a reserve army unit, while conducting a range, without
authorization, fire their weapons at unautorized targets outside the
autorized arcs of fire during silent hours. Again, There are already rules
and consequences for their actions, however, instead of employing these
options, Brigade decides to employ a civilian range warden, on overtime, to
watch over all soldiers Sgt‘s, Major‘s, Colonels when they are using the
range.
When I hear about how much more important it is to pay all these people to
do NOTHING than it is to preserve the proud traditions of combat arms units,
it makes me want to puke. I have daily contact with a group of RMS
personnel, after their leave days, "CTO" days, hockey afternoon, extended
lunch breaks, come to work late wednesdays, and leave early no uniform
fridays, they work less than 23 hours per week!!.....last week I worked 82.
The bottom line is that yes, they perform a vital service, but obviously, at
23 hours...there are too many.
for your consideration...
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto
[email protected]]On Behalf Of Gordan Dundas
Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2000 2:51 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Fwd: They also serve who ...]
Ahh... they already did just that if they do again if you think you‘re
having
difficulty getting paid ‘clothed .fed. downsize NDHQ.I suspect no one will
like
what happens or does‘nt after that.
I suspect that while there‘s some fat there still it‘s unlikely to be cut
first
and any cutting will those who efforts affect the troops.
John Gilmour wrote:
> I concure with Dave Newcombe, go one step further to say DOWNSIZE the
> PAPER-PUSHERS @ NDHQ !!!!
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dave newcombe
> To: [email protected]
> Date: Friday, March 31, 2000 10:51 PM
> Subject: Re: They also serve who ...
>
> >What happens if we have another domestic crisis, such as Oka. Lets pray
> >that it doesn‘t happen during the annual flood season, or during the turn
> >around time for units deploying on U.N. missions. We barely had enough
> >combat troops to deploy during the Oka crisis. We still had plenty of
> staff
> >at N.D.H.Q., taking their early Fridays, and pushing paper back and
forth.
> >We need to make our Armed services less bound to desks and paper trails.
> If
> >we plan on making our reserve units more efficient, then couldn‘t we
spend
> >that much energy making our headquarters at all levels more stream lined.
> I
> >for one don‘t believe that there is any place on any base for people who
> are
> >not in uniform.
> >How many Army Officers of all classifications are there out there in
> >administrative only roles, vs, Officers in Combat formations. this
carries
> >down to other ranks as well
> >We need to learn to do more soldiering and less papering.
> >We need leaders to lead men in combat units, not make coffee for higher
> >ranks at command H.Q.s
> >
> >I think I‘ll switch to de-caf this week.
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Gordan Dundas"
> >To:
> >Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 8:18 AM
> >Subject: Re: They also serve who ...
> >
> >
> >> Am I missing something ?
> >> I say this because I ‘ve got an idea that is probably quite stupid
but
> >> here goes .Instead of adding more service units to the roster why
don‘t
> >we
> >> just expand the the current ones?
> >> Now I know the reason for this restructuring is an attempt by NDHQ to
> >> basically get something for nothing.ie: a transport unit shouldn‘t cost
> >> anymore to run then a rifle coy.and a transport plt. is probably more
> >useful
> >> to the reg. force then a militia rifle coy.
> >> This is I‘m afraid going to further erode what good feeling reservists
> >have
> >> toward their reg force brethren and reinforce the feeling that all
> >> reservists are viewed as expendable cannon fodder.Or at least as a
source
> >of
> >> warm bodies.
> >> To be be honest from this lowly civvies point of view it is the reg
> force
> >> that is need of restructuring it ‘s the one that is in desperate need
of
> >> service units.However combat arms is "sexy" combat support is‘nt.So
let‘s
> >> fob this off on the Militia.
> >> The real problem isn‘t the the reserves or the reg force or even DND
it
> >our
> >> political leadership who have for years ignored the sad state of the
> Armed
> >> Forces.The armed force have been extremely lucky that we‘ve had had a
> very
> >> large deployment that has lasted more then 90 days.
> >> By this I mean 5-8000 troops deployed during the Red river flood and
the
> >ice
> >> storms the following year.what would have happened if the Winnipeg
flood
> >way
> >> had collapsed or the Brunkild Dike given way?Or if the ice storms and
> >> exterme cold weather conditions had gone on?
> >> In either event they would have been followed by the collapse of the
> >> Canadian Forces.This is not helped by our current leaderships desire to
> >send
> >> troops just about everywhere on a moments notice.One begins to suspect
> >that
> >> the Motto of the Armed Forces is "if this is tuesday,this must be
> >Belgium?"
> >> If I‘ve been rambling it‘s the cold medication.....Honest!
> >> Cheers !Gordon
> >>
> >> Ian Edwards wrote:
> >>
> >> > I think a strong legal argument could be made against restructuring
a
> >> > euphemism certain units. Let‘s consider the case of The Royal Moose
> Jaw
> >> > Fusiliers to keep it neutral. For the younger readers - YES it‘s a
> >> > made up name.
> >> >
> >> > The RMJR has a fine history dating back to before Christ was a Cpl.
It
> >> > raised battalions for blah, blah, blah wars. Today the "unit" IS THE
> >> > REGIMENT. Or perhaps not. During WW2 the Regiment had several
> battalions
> >> > on Active Service Overseas, a battalion in the Reserve Army at home
and
> >> > one in July 1945 at Shilo preparing to join the Canadian Army Pacific
> >> > Force before the Bomb was dropped. Times got tough over in Paga
Pogo
> >> > in 1944 and the 1st Battalion was converted from Infantry to a Postal
> >> > Battlion, scaring the **** out of Hitler. it was a dirty job but
some
> >> > had to do it. When the emergency passed they reverted to Infy and
went
> >> > back to the front lines as part of the 9th Canadian Infantry
Division.
> >> >
> >> > Change them now in the year 2000 to a Mobile Bath and Laundry Unit?
> >> > Well, depends on who the "them" is. It can be argued, somewhat
> >> > successfully, that DND does not "own" the name RMJF. Ottawa doesn‘t
own
> >> > the Regimental customs and traditions, doesn‘t "own" the cap badge
was
> >> > in existence before approval by a General Order, and certainly
doesn‘t
> >> > own their dress uniforms, etc, etc. or the right to wear a copy of
> them.
> >> > The Regiment is much more than just its unit, which is in essence
their
> >> > 1st Battalion only bn numbers being dropped when there is only the
one
> >> > "unit". Legally, the RMJR Senate has the right to refuse to be
> >> > converted to "The 43rd Mobile Bath and Sanitation Battlion Royal
Moose
> >> > Jaw Fusiliers". The Senate has a choice. About all Ottawa can do is
> >> > reduce the "unit" to nil strength and transfer the unit to the
> >> > Supplementary Order of Battle in reality, completing the death of
the
> >> > Regiment. The same day Ottawa can cut a piece of paper creating The
> >> > 43rd Mobile Bath and Sanitation Battalion no supplementary title,
> thank
> >> > you and transfer all ranks to this new abomination for as long as
the
> >> > Old Fus‘ FORMER MEMBERS will stay. If that‘s the only game in town,
> some
> >> > might. A few. I dunno.
> >> >
> >> > The Senate has a say. For any kids still reading this far, the
Senate
> >> > is a body consisting of the former COs of the battalions and
perhaps
> a
> >> > few other VIPs and/or "honoraries". It‘s often incorporated under the
> >> > provincial societies‘ act, and is in no way part of DND Take for
> >> > example "the crazy eights". In early 1957, the 8th Princess Louise‘s
> >> > New Brunswick Hussars changed their name to the 8th Canadian
Hussars
> >> > Princess Louise‘s. Why? Well, first of all their regimental senate
> >> > approved of the change. The change was required in order for the
> >> > regiment to gain a Regular Force armoured component and the name
> >> > change was deemed necessary by Ottawa to remove the local-only stigma
> >> > within their name you can just imagine the fights that would have
> >> > broken out in a bar in Saskatoon if those New Brunswickers, ripe from
a
> >> > month in Dundurn, tried to steal a local gal from the Toon Town
boys.
> >> >
> >> > The 8CH. THEY WERE NOT THE FIRST TO BE ASKED. At least one regiment,
> the
> >> > 1st Hussars, from London in the bush, turned down the offer, tempting
> as
> >> > it was. I think "The Plugs" 4PLGD were also asked and declined. The
> >> > 4th Princess Louise Dragoon Guards are no longer with us.
> >> > Death Before Dishonour, disbanded a few years later.
> >> > --------------------------------------------------------
> >> > NOTE: To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> >> > to [email protected] from the account you wish
> >> > to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
> >> > message body.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --------------------------------------------------------
> >> NOTE: To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> >> to [email protected] from the account you wish
> >> to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
> >> message body.
> >
> >--------------------------------------------------------
> >NOTE: To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> >to [email protected] from the account you wish
> >to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
> >message body.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------
> NOTE: To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> to [email protected] from the account you wish
> to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
> message body.
--------------------------------------------------------
NOTE: To remove yourself from this list, send a message
to [email protected] from the account you wish
to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
message body.
List,
At the risk of starting a fight, I‘d like to share my first hand experiences
when it comes to "the paper pushers". I don‘t argue the fact that pay,
clothing, food, medical are important and required functions within The
Forces...But, the bottom line is that service and support only exists to
serve and support the combat arms. I think we have forgotton that. NDHQ‘s
main function is to justify and maintain it‘s own existance and this way of
thinking has been passed down to the individual units. The CF spends more
money on enforcing "policy", diversity training, SHARP training, and
civilian contracters than we do on training. The CF is so restricted
especially the reserves when it comes to training that sometimes it is not
even worth doing.
A couple of first hand examples....
1. Members of a reserve army unit conduct unauthorized training in civilian
clothing, with weapons, in an urban area, without contacting brigade or the
civilian authorities. Obviously, this contadicts about 300 references from
the QRO‘s. So, the action to be taken is already provided for....charge
everyone directly or indirectly involved and punish them with all the might
of the NDA....But, of course, this is not what happened. instead, Brigade HQ
issued a policy that every unit in the Brigade must file a request for ANY
TRAINING TO BE CONDUCTED OFF ARMOURY PROPERTY. This policy alone will
produce 1000‘s of hours per year of paperwork per unit. not to mention the
clerks at HQ who have to deal with it all.
2. Members of a reserve army unit, while conducting a range, without
authorization, fire their weapons at unautorized targets outside the
autorized arcs of fire during silent hours. Again, There are already rules
and consequences for their actions, however, instead of employing these
options, Brigade decides to employ a civilian range warden, on overtime, to
watch over all soldiers Sgt‘s, Major‘s, Colonels when they are using the
range.
When I hear about how much more important it is to pay all these people to
do NOTHING than it is to preserve the proud traditions of combat arms units,
it makes me want to puke. I have daily contact with a group of RMS
personnel, after their leave days, "CTO" days, hockey afternoon, extended
lunch breaks, come to work late wednesdays, and leave early no uniform
fridays, they work less than 23 hours per week!!.....last week I worked 82.
The bottom line is that yes, they perform a vital service, but obviously, at
23 hours...there are too many.
for your consideration...
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto
[email protected]]On Behalf Of Gordan DundasSent: Saturday, March 18, 2000 2:51 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Fwd: They also serve who ...]
Ahh... they already did just that if they do again if you think you‘re
having
difficulty getting paid ‘clothed .fed. downsize NDHQ.I suspect no one will
like
what happens or does‘nt after that.
I suspect that while there‘s some fat there still it‘s unlikely to be cut
first
and any cutting will those who efforts affect the troops.
John Gilmour wrote:
> I concure with Dave Newcombe, go one step further to say DOWNSIZE the
> PAPER-PUSHERS @ NDHQ !!!!
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dave newcombe
> To: [email protected]
> Date: Friday, March 31, 2000 10:51 PM
> Subject: Re: They also serve who ...
>
> >What happens if we have another domestic crisis, such as Oka. Lets pray
> >that it doesn‘t happen during the annual flood season, or during the turn
> >around time for units deploying on U.N. missions. We barely had enough
> >combat troops to deploy during the Oka crisis. We still had plenty of
> staff
> >at N.D.H.Q., taking their early Fridays, and pushing paper back and
forth.
> >We need to make our Armed services less bound to desks and paper trails.
> If
> >we plan on making our reserve units more efficient, then couldn‘t we
spend
> >that much energy making our headquarters at all levels more stream lined.
> I
> >for one don‘t believe that there is any place on any base for people who
> are
> >not in uniform.
> >How many Army Officers of all classifications are there out there in
> >administrative only roles, vs, Officers in Combat formations. this
carries
> >down to other ranks as well
> >We need to learn to do more soldiering and less papering.
> >We need leaders to lead men in combat units, not make coffee for higher
> >ranks at command H.Q.s
> >
> >I think I‘ll switch to de-caf this week.
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Gordan Dundas"
> >To:
> >Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 8:18 AM
> >Subject: Re: They also serve who ...
> >
> >
> >> Am I missing something ?
> >> I say this because I ‘ve got an idea that is probably quite stupid
but
> >> here goes .Instead of adding more service units to the roster why
don‘t
> >we
> >> just expand the the current ones?
> >> Now I know the reason for this restructuring is an attempt by NDHQ to
> >> basically get something for nothing.ie: a transport unit shouldn‘t cost
> >> anymore to run then a rifle coy.and a transport plt. is probably more
> >useful
> >> to the reg. force then a militia rifle coy.
> >> This is I‘m afraid going to further erode what good feeling reservists
> >have
> >> toward their reg force brethren and reinforce the feeling that all
> >> reservists are viewed as expendable cannon fodder.Or at least as a
source
> >of
> >> warm bodies.
> >> To be be honest from this lowly civvies point of view it is the reg
> force
> >> that is need of restructuring it ‘s the one that is in desperate need
of
> >> service units.However combat arms is "sexy" combat support is‘nt.So
let‘s
> >> fob this off on the Militia.
> >> The real problem isn‘t the the reserves or the reg force or even DND
it
> >our
> >> political leadership who have for years ignored the sad state of the
> Armed
> >> Forces.The armed force have been extremely lucky that we‘ve had had a
> very
> >> large deployment that has lasted more then 90 days.
> >> By this I mean 5-8000 troops deployed during the Red river flood and
the
> >ice
> >> storms the following year.what would have happened if the Winnipeg
flood
> >way
> >> had collapsed or the Brunkild Dike given way?Or if the ice storms and
> >> exterme cold weather conditions had gone on?
> >> In either event they would have been followed by the collapse of the
> >> Canadian Forces.This is not helped by our current leaderships desire to
> >send
> >> troops just about everywhere on a moments notice.One begins to suspect
> >that
> >> the Motto of the Armed Forces is "if this is tuesday,this must be
> >Belgium?"
> >> If I‘ve been rambling it‘s the cold medication.....Honest!
> >> Cheers !Gordon
> >>
> >> Ian Edwards wrote:
> >>
> >> > I think a strong legal argument could be made against restructuring
a
> >> > euphemism certain units. Let‘s consider the case of The Royal Moose
> Jaw
> >> > Fusiliers to keep it neutral. For the younger readers - YES it‘s a
> >> > made up name.
> >> >
> >> > The RMJR has a fine history dating back to before Christ was a Cpl.
It
> >> > raised battalions for blah, blah, blah wars. Today the "unit" IS THE
> >> > REGIMENT. Or perhaps not. During WW2 the Regiment had several
> battalions
> >> > on Active Service Overseas, a battalion in the Reserve Army at home
and
> >> > one in July 1945 at Shilo preparing to join the Canadian Army Pacific
> >> > Force before the Bomb was dropped. Times got tough over in Paga
Pogo
> >> > in 1944 and the 1st Battalion was converted from Infantry to a Postal
> >> > Battlion, scaring the **** out of Hitler. it was a dirty job but
some
> >> > had to do it. When the emergency passed they reverted to Infy and
went
> >> > back to the front lines as part of the 9th Canadian Infantry
Division.
> >> >
> >> > Change them now in the year 2000 to a Mobile Bath and Laundry Unit?
> >> > Well, depends on who the "them" is. It can be argued, somewhat
> >> > successfully, that DND does not "own" the name RMJF. Ottawa doesn‘t
own
> >> > the Regimental customs and traditions, doesn‘t "own" the cap badge
was
> >> > in existence before approval by a General Order, and certainly
doesn‘t
> >> > own their dress uniforms, etc, etc. or the right to wear a copy of
> them.
> >> > The Regiment is much more than just its unit, which is in essence
their
> >> > 1st Battalion only bn numbers being dropped when there is only the
one
> >> > "unit". Legally, the RMJR Senate has the right to refuse to be
> >> > converted to "The 43rd Mobile Bath and Sanitation Battlion Royal
Moose
> >> > Jaw Fusiliers". The Senate has a choice. About all Ottawa can do is
> >> > reduce the "unit" to nil strength and transfer the unit to the
> >> > Supplementary Order of Battle in reality, completing the death of
the
> >> > Regiment. The same day Ottawa can cut a piece of paper creating The
> >> > 43rd Mobile Bath and Sanitation Battalion no supplementary title,
> thank
> >> > you and transfer all ranks to this new abomination for as long as
the
> >> > Old Fus‘ FORMER MEMBERS will stay. If that‘s the only game in town,
> some
> >> > might. A few. I dunno.
> >> >
> >> > The Senate has a say. For any kids still reading this far, the
Senate
> >> > is a body consisting of the former COs of the battalions and
perhaps
> a
> >> > few other VIPs and/or "honoraries". It‘s often incorporated under the
> >> > provincial societies‘ act, and is in no way part of DND Take for
> >> > example "the crazy eights". In early 1957, the 8th Princess Louise‘s
> >> > New Brunswick Hussars changed their name to the 8th Canadian
Hussars
> >> > Princess Louise‘s. Why? Well, first of all their regimental senate
> >> > approved of the change. The change was required in order for the
> >> > regiment to gain a Regular Force armoured component and the name
> >> > change was deemed necessary by Ottawa to remove the local-only stigma
> >> > within their name you can just imagine the fights that would have
> >> > broken out in a bar in Saskatoon if those New Brunswickers, ripe from
a
> >> > month in Dundurn, tried to steal a local gal from the Toon Town
boys.
> >> >
> >> > The 8CH. THEY WERE NOT THE FIRST TO BE ASKED. At least one regiment,
> the
> >> > 1st Hussars, from London in the bush, turned down the offer, tempting
> as
> >> > it was. I think "The Plugs" 4PLGD were also asked and declined. The
> >> > 4th Princess Louise Dragoon Guards are no longer with us.
> >> > Death Before Dishonour, disbanded a few years later.
> >> > --------------------------------------------------------
> >> > NOTE: To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> >> > to [email protected] from the account you wish
> >> > to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
> >> > message body.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --------------------------------------------------------
> >> NOTE: To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> >> to [email protected] from the account you wish
> >> to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
> >> message body.
> >
> >--------------------------------------------------------
> >NOTE: To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> >to [email protected] from the account you wish
> >to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
> >message body.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------
> NOTE: To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> to [email protected] from the account you wish
> to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
> message body.
--------------------------------------------------------
NOTE: To remove yourself from this list, send a message
to [email protected] from the account you wish
to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
message body.
