Volunteer unpaid Militia idea (split from Reserve role thread)

[Kirkhill]

As people have mentioned before, why not expand the Canadian Rangers to other areas of Canada? I would imagine there wouldn't be any problems recruiting people either ex military or civilians. This would bring a presence to areas with no military nearby and would be very useful in an emergency.

Like it. 

 

[RangerRay]

I'm not sure how this idea would work.

Back in BC, I was a member of a volunteer search and rescue organisation.  Training was paid for, as well as expenses for tasks and traveling to training out-of-town.  As well, unlike other SAR groups in the province, ours was one of the few with full funding from the regional district, so we had all the toys.  Unlike most other SAR groups, we did not have to fund raise.  The only things the individual had to supply was their clothing and personal gear, and their time.

In spite of all this, it reminded me of my time in the PRes.  Our group had close to 100 members on paper, yet only the same dozen or so members actually showed up regularly for practices and tasks.  Other SAR groups with less funding had the same problem of retaining dedicated volunteers.

The few people with higher level training (e.g. search managers, team leaders, etc.) burnt out fast because they were needed to assist other teams, and because they needed to work more during their own time to perform administrative functions for the team.

If the volunteers were paid at least an honorarium for their time, would we have more people showing up?  I don't know.  Or maybe people didn't like getting calls at 6 pm on a cold, wet November Sunday evening to go look for a lost hunter...?

The PRes had pay, and we were hard pressed to field a platoon.  The SAR group had no pay but all the bells and whistles, but we would still have to call for help from neighbouring teams that were not as well equipped because we either lacked the numbers or the needed people with special skills.  I think it boils down to more people having less spare time, or less willingness to devote time, to serve in these types of teams.

 

[Old Sweat]

Speaking from a level of abject ignorance, having never served in either organization, what are the similarities and differences between the militia and a typical volunteer fire department (VFD?) An obvious one is that the latter tends to be in smaller communities, but is there something to be gained by a comparison?

 

[Kirkhill]

Thanks for the "coalface" response Ray.

It sounds as if you were suffering from the same Flank Company problem as always.

Here's a question - does the organization of the units have to modified to reflect the low turnout and the need to bolster local "forces" with additional "troops" from adjacent areas?  I note that the Swedes, Danes and Norwegians all subdivide their Volunteers into Ready Reaction with about 10% of the volunteers and the remainder.

A second question would be where is money better invested for drawing in volunteers?  Bells and whistles or pay?  You said that the PRes was paid but had few "toys".  The SAR groups had "toys" but weren't paid.  Do you have any sense of how that played out in terms of recruiting and retention?

 

[Tibbson]

As any number of lawyers will tell you, waivers are not worth the paper they are written on so the issue of having to pay them from the start would not be an issue.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I'm not sure how this idea would work.

Back in BC, I was a member of a volunteer search and rescue organisation.  Training was paid for, as well as expenses for tasks and traveling to training out-of-town.  As well, unlike other SAR groups in the province, ours was one of the few with full funding from the regional district, so we had all the toys.  Unlike most other SAR groups, we did not have to fund raise.  The only things the individual had to supply was their clothing and personal gear, and their time.

In spite of all this, it reminded me of my time in the PRes.  Our group had close to 100 members on paper, yet only the same dozen or so members actually showed up regularly for practices and tasks.  Other SAR groups with less funding had the same problem of retaining dedicated volunteers.

The few people with higher level training (e.g. search managers, team leaders, etc.) burnt out fast because they were needed to assist other teams, and because they needed to work more during their own time to perform administrative functions for the team.

If the volunteers were paid at least an honorarium for their time, would we have more people showing up?  I don't know.  Or maybe people didn't like getting calls at 6 pm on a cold, wet November Sunday evening to go look for a lost hunter...?

The PRes had pay, and we were hard pressed to field a platoon.  The SAR group had no pay but all the bells and whistles, but we would still have to call for help from neighbouring teams that were not as well equipped because we either lacked the numbers or the needed people with special skills.  I think it boils down to more people having less spare time, or less willingness to devote time, to serve in these types of teams.

A good response, regardless of the volunteer group 10% do 90% of the work. I know that our own SAR group here in the Northshore is worried about the call out demand on it and funding.

 

[Monsoon]

Speaking from a level of abject ignorance, having never served in either organization, what are the similarities and differences between the militia and a typical volunteer fire department (VFD?) An obvious one is that the latter tends to be in smaller communities, but is there something to be gained by a comparison?

Having spoken quite a bit about this with a friend who was a volunteer in Kingston before becoming part of their full-time service (they have a mix of both), the relationship between the two is a strange dynamic. The volunteers are subject to roughly the same standards and receive approximately the same training as the full time service, but are paid by the call. The volunteers end up responding to the majority of calls as they comprise the stuff the full-timers are deemed too important to be wasted on (vehicle accidents on the 401, etc), while the full-timers wait back in the station for one of the occasional major fires. Of course the full-timers jealously guard against any expansion of the volunteer service as they recognize it as a threat to their franchise...

...so in almost every important way, the comparison is spot on.  ;D

 

[Mike5]

The Canadian Coast Guard Auxilary was cited earlier in this discussion as an example.  For what it's worth, my CCGA station has 45 uniformed, trained, experienced volunteers on the water doing patrols 32 hours every week during the boating season (more if there is a callout after duty hours) -- on an annual grant which is less then one average person's salary. 

That being said, there are real challenges with a volunteer force.  As noted above, 10% of the people do 90% of the work, training standards vary dramatically from crew to crew and station to station, attendance is always a problem.  Most of our folks are either young guys who want to get experience in order to get hired by a fire department or retired / off-duty military / EMS / police.

 

[Remius]

Part of the issue is the NDA.  If you are dealing with an all volunteer non paid force/element how do you enforce the NDA?

 

[Lightguns]

Hard enough to get folks out when you pay em.  Imagine the odds and sods that would show up for an unpaid militia. 

 

[Old Sweat]

Having spoken quite a bit about this with a friend who was a volunteer in Kingston before becoming part of their full-time service (they have a mix of both), the relationship between the two is a strange dynamic. The volunteers are subject to roughly the same standards and receive approximately the same training as the full time service, but are paid by the call. The volunteers end up responding to the majority of calls as they comprise the stuff the full-timers are deemed too important to be wasted on (vehicle accidents on the 401, etc), while the full-timers wait back in the station for one of the occasional major fires. Of course the full-timers jealously guard against any expansion of the volunteer service as they recognize it as a threat to their franchise...

...so in almost every important way, the comparison is spot on.  ;D

A number of us are in the "garage gang" which gathers afternoons for a few beer and a recap of the day. Three of the gang were in the local VFD and two also served in the local militia field battery. Methinks the next time I get with them I will do some brain picking. Our VFD was and still is pretty effective and picked up a number of awards in various competitions. In fact they were good enough to earn us a reduction in our fire insurance rates.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Wasn't there a Albertan Group that filled this "void"

 

[Stoker]

Has anyone had any experience with the Canadian Rangers? I was wondering what their typical attendance is for training and patrols? I know they do get paid for part of what they do. I also know that many Ranger Patrols have a waiting list of people wanting to join.

 

[McG]

Wasn't there a Albertan Group that filled this "void"

Do you mean this:  http://www.frontiersmenhistorian.info/canada.htm ?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I was thinking the "Alberta light rifles" or something along that line sort of a wannabe "free militia"

 

[RangerRay]

Thanks for the "coalface" response Ray.

It sounds as if you were suffering from the same Flank Company problem as always.

Here's a question - does the organization of the units have to modified to reflect the low turnout and the need to bolster local "forces" with additional "troops" from adjacent areas?  I note that the Swedes, Danes and Norwegians all subdivide their Volunteers into Ready Reaction with about 10% of the volunteers and the remainder.

A second question would be where is money better invested for drawing in volunteers?  Bells and whistles or pay?  You said that the PRes was paid but had few "toys".  The SAR groups had "toys" but weren't paid.  Do you have any sense of how that played out in terms of recruiting and retention?

In answer to your first question, I think the organisation is modified in that there are fewer people in executive positions doing more work that would normally be by others.  People were elected to the positions every year at the AGM (usually getting 20 - 30 people to show up) but it was pretty rare if there was an actual race.  Usually, the incumbent would be acclaimed unless he stepped down, and if it looked like some positions would not get filled, senior members would try to "recruit" some of the more keen members to "run" during one of the breaks in the meeting.

For the second question, I think the "toys" helped with initial recruitment, but when people saw the time commitment required, and the length of time to get on a basic training course in the local area (sound familiar?) people drifted away.  Like the PRes, one requires Basic SAR, usually held at the local level, before one can take more specialised "cooler" training like swift water rescue, ropes, avalanche, etc.  But to get a local Basic SAR course, there has to be numbers.  If there are only two new members, it is not worth the expense to run a course locally, and those two new members may not be able to travel to another part of the province to train with another team.

To me, it seemed that there were so many parallels between PRes and volunteer SAR even though there were huge differences in pay and funding.  I don't know what the answer is, except that maybe people feel that they have less spare time to devote to outside organisations.  Even the "young, single guys" were probably at the low end of commitment, leaving the day-to-day operations to the older married people who presumably have less time than the young single guys, but a greater sense of commitment.

:dunno:

 

[cryco]

Hi all,
I am wondering as a potential reservist, let me set up the hypothetical scenario:
I show up one weekend a month and one night a week. One particular weekend, my wife and kids are not home, but it's not an 'on' weekend. Can I, on my own time, go somewhere to do some training, say rifle practice (ammo on my own dime?), or participate in something somewhere (say an exercise, or even just some PT)?

 

[LightFighter]

I'm not sure what you are asking?  Do you mean go shooting with your issued weapon, etc on a weekend there is no exercise?  Absolutely not. What do you mean by participate on an exercise? If your unit isn't going out, than generally you aren't either - unless there is a brigade tasking that you have a CFTPO for, or you are on a course.
If you have your own civilian rifle and belong to a civilian range, you can go shooting as much or as little as you want.  As well, you can PT whenever you want at home, a gym, etc.

 

[ModlrMike]

Your attendance must be authorized in order for you to be paid. If your unit is not holding a parade or administration session, then the answer will be no. PT you can do on your own, but you won't be paid for it.

 

[cryco]

I wasn't looking for paid stuff, the money is irrelevant. I'm just looking to know if there's any way you can do extra stuff on your own time but with army equipment and tools.
So there's no army range where you can go shoot with issued weapons? (firing with my personal rifle is not the same as using a c7) So if your unit is not on exercise, there's nowhere to go?
The unit is empty on non duty weekends?