09/10 Budget Impact on PRes - Unit stand-downs, Class B Freeze, and so on!

[aesop081]

Do you have any idea what cancelling BMQs midway will have on those units? 

Do you have any idea what significant cuts to flying hours do to operatinal flying units ?

For some it will take years to recover from.

For some squadrons, it will take years to recover the experience levels and much effort to regain the skills that have to be put on the backburner.

  We'll be losing some good people as well.

Same everywhere. We will be losing alot of good flyers if we dont let them fly.

Part of it has to do with how vague this all seems. 

So vague in fact that some people here have managed to decide who was to blame. It is vague because people dont have all the facts but that hasnt stopped them from jumping to conclusions.

It's a giant shit sandwich and we are all going to have to take a bite.

 

[armyvern]

Oh there are metric ass loads of them. The bloat I see in Ottawa is just staggering. Everyone is very very busy, but soooo much of it is not usefull work. NDHQ has become such a self-licking ice cream cone that a huge amount of time and effort is spent on the left hand trying to figure out what the right hand is doing, usually unsuccessfully.

The problem is that reforming the bureaucratic borg collective is a complex, difficult task. So many activities are interlinked/interdependant between the Lvl 1s it's hard to separate them. Trimming here and there is all that's possible without reforming the way the CF and Department as a whole does buisness. It honestly would be easier to burn NDHQ to the ground and start over with a whole lot fewer dot com HQs to staff & support & pay for too.

So what happens? We take the easy route and cut things like trg, maint, fuel, and people.

Just my $0.02...

There. Now I think it perfectly reflects my thoughts too. 

You know, especially over the past 9 years or so when what we've really needed was boots on the ground vice in all the newer levels of HQ.

Anyone actually privy to or can provide a ref to a link to anything indicating how much the re-structuring of HQs and the addition of some dot coms has actually cost us in annual operating costs? I'd be willing to bet another pole dance that it hasn't 'saved' us anything on our budget.

 

[bigcletus]

Ahhh yes, but then an accountant would also be aware of a much bigger picture and all the bits and pieces at play and would be very careful not to 'judge' a small single bit without having the 'knowns' of the whole.

A Pte (R) could not have done a worse job on this whole farce.  Heads should roll on this, and those heads should be wearing maple leaves an cross-swords.

 

[Remius]

Do you have any idea what significant cuts to flying hours do to operatinal flying units ?

For some squadrons, it will take years to recover the experience levels and much effort to regain the skills that have to be put on the backburner.

Same everywhere. We will be losing alot of good flyers if we dont let them fly.

So vague in fact that some people here have managed to decide who was to blame. It is vague because people dont have all the facts but that hasnt stopped them from jumping to conclusions.

It's a giant crap sandwich and we are all going to have to take a bite.

To answer your first question: No I don't.  So I can't comment on those effects.  I'm not minimising it though.  I'm sure the impact is significant.  But those flyers still get a pay cheque and can still pay their bills and rent.  Maybe they don't have to worry about tuition but 80% of reservists do.

Hopefully those flyers will stay on.  They have that choice.  The BMQ/PLQ candidates didn't.  Their courses were cancelled.  Units have lost a year's worth of intake.  No new blood.

If the top wasn't so vague and dismissive maybe the speculation wouldn't be as rampant.

 

[bigcletus]

Don't worry, she will kick some *** for you too. 

Oh ?? Did you lose your job too ??  Thought not...

 

[blacktriangle]

It's a giant crap sandwich and we are all going to have to take a bite.

This pretty much sums it up. The only thing difference I see is that RegF pers will do so while still being employed.

The Class B guys knew (or should have known) the risks, but it is pretty sad that Class A guys are having their already modest (and often only) incomes lost. Class A requires a person to show up, what, once a month as a minimum to stay on effective strength? The army should be forced to make a minimum committment to them as well, regardless of financial issues.

I don't see why guaranteeing a parade night a week (roughly two days pay per month) would be such a tall order. It seems like the PRes has been told "if you want a full time job, go regs" and "if you want a part time job, go work at Mcdonalds". I agree with one but no so much the other.

Processing for ROTP is still on at full blast, so look out! The priority seems to be to have a fresh batch of Jnr Officers to fill NDHQ in the coming years.

 

[COBRA-6]

Anyone actually privy to or can provide a ref to a link to anything indicating how much the re-structuring of HQs and the addition of some dot coms has actually cost us in annual operating costs? I'd be willing to bet another pole dance that it hasn't 'saved' us anything on our budget.

It's more likely we have no accurate idea as to the cost. There are two parallel initiatives going on right now that may shed some light on it; the Treasury Board driven Strategic Review and the internal Defence Force Structure Review that are looking into the CF/DND corporate world. I know people involved in both of these at several levels, the term "Chinese Fire Drill" comes to mind. Despite my cynicism I retain some hope that these reviews could be the vehicle for positive change. I may even create a voodoo shrine in my cubicle and make sacrifices to the gods of burocratic efficiency to help the process.

 

[armyvern]

Thanks Cobra6. I hope that your thoughts and hopes on this being a catalyst for posotive change are correct. You construct your voodoo shrine and I'll conjure up some of my witchly capabilities to cast a big old spell ...

 

[armyvern]

Oh ?? Did you lose your job too ??  Thought not...

Fuck. He's on your side. Perhaps it's time to step back from the monitor and the keyboard and give your head a really big shake to de-fog that brain of yours. You're now shitting on people and their posts just for the sake of it.

:

 

[Jarnhamar]

However, I'm sure they'd then just counter-argue that doing such a thing would just be robbing from Peter to pay Paul though beca

I was under the impression that this is exactly what is happening now though?

A few years ago some decisions were made. Money was spent. Things sent places. Money used for this and that.  No real consideration was going to be given to what would happen down the road. We were at war and what w needed we (mostly) got.

Now it's not that our budget is cut-it's that the decisions made those few years ago are biting us in the ass and we can't afford what we bought, maintenance costs and whatever else.
We're robbing from Peter (money taken from various training) to pay Paul (the purchases, upkeep, maintenance, contracts etc..).

Just like it took a few years for us to realize the overzealous spending screw up we made it's going to take a few more years to recover.

 

[Forgotten_Hero]

What things?  What positions?

Well, 2 things I've heard in this thread itself is the RMC mess and the Army Run. In person, I've also heard of this "Territorial Defense Battalion" idea. It does take up positions, and theres a few people that consider such a thing useless, or at least worth cutting in the interest of keeping soldiers payed.

Oh, another thing that I've heard of is all the useless "HQs" popping up all over the place.

For some squadrons, it will take years to recover the experience levels and much effort to regain the skills that have to be put on the backburner.

No need to worry though. We're still going to have an Army Run, and the RMC mess is going to be upgraded! Crisis averted!

I don't see why guaranteeing a parade night a week (roughly two days pay per month) would be such a tall order. It seems like the PRes has been told "if you want a full time job, go regs" and "if you want a part time job, go work at Mcdonalds". I agree with one but no so much the other.

Indeed, it does seem that way. I see that the reserve want commitment from their soldiers... but what about the commitment that the soldiers want from the army?

Now it's not that our budget is cut-it's that the decisions made those few years ago are biting us in the *** and we can't afford what we bought, maintenance costs and whatever else.
We're robbing from Peter (money taken from various training) to pay Paul (the purchases, upkeep, maintenance, contracts etc..).

Unfortunately, a lot of people see it as taking from the poor to pay for the rich's mistakes, instead of taking from the rich to pay for the rich's mistakes.

 

[armyvern]

I was under the impression that this is exactly what is happening now though?

A few years ago some decisions were made. Money was spent. Things sent places. Money used for this and that.  No real consideration was going to be given to what would happen down the road. We were at war and what w needed we (mostly) got.

Now it's not that our budget is cut-it's that the decisions made those few years ago are biting us in the ass and we can't afford what we bought, maintenance costs and whatever else.
We're robbing from Peter (money taken from various training) to pay Paul (the purchases, upkeep, maintenance, contracts etc..).

Just like it took a few years for us to realize the overzealous spending screw up we made it's going to take a few more years to recover.

You're right. That's exactly what "adjusting" is.

Unfortunately, funds "nice to spend (and not yet spent or contracted to be spent)" somewhere are now being diverted into areas where they have no choice but to "have to spend (and are already contracted to spend)".

I think there must have been a better way to go about it all ... as I've said many times. I don't think anyone in this thread has said what is occuring is a "best solution", but contracts must be paid, troops signed onto full-time contracts must be paid etc etc. It's the things that aren't "must be paids" that the funds are being diverted away from.

Training (both in the RegF and the ResF), flying time, course cancellations (both RegF & ResF) are being cut. BClass posns in the ResF are being cut ... as is recruiting into RegF (& ResF). This also isn't affecting "just" the Army. It's also affecting the ARAF and the Shads too. The entire CF.

Please understand that the cuts being experienced in the ResF are understood by and detrimental to us Reg Forcers too. Cuts in the B Class also directly impact upon my capability to ensure that my RegF section gets it's job done supporting trg and operations overseas ... a red-trade, we depend upon those BClass pers to help us meet our goals too and I just want that clearly understood.

There are some here who'd profess that "we" don't give a crap as it "doesn't affect us" or because "we haven't lost our jobs too, we don't care because it doesn't hurt us too" (here's looking at the poster with the user-name very-closely-named-to-female-appendage-guy) - it does!!

Someone (& I'm sure it wasn't any "one" individual per se) had to cut somewhere to pay the "must pays" --- I wouldn't have wanted to be the one to be put into that place, and I'm quite sure that those pers didn't just come up with "their solution" at the drop of a hat with zero regard to the situation - I'm also quite sure that it was not something they either wanted to do or were eager to do.

 

[Sprinting Thistle]

Strategic Review is government wide and not DND specific.  Each department will give up its bottom 5% to the centre but at the same time they can also bid for extra money for new initiatives.  The catchy phrase being used was divestment with reinvestment.  DFSR has 5 ongoing initiatives.  One of those is optimization of the C2 structure for the CF.  They will be looking for redundancies and suggesting remediation.  Think of DFSR as the CDS' way of re-engaging Transformation that slowly faded a few years ago without successful completion for some organizations. 

 

[COBRA-6]

Strategic Review is government wide and not DND specific.  Each department will give up its bottom 5% to the centre but at the same time they can also bid for extra money for new initiatives.  The catchy phrase being used was divestment with reinvestment. 

The delicious irony is that we have hired several very Senior and General Officers on long-term Class B contracts in order to staff the Strat Review directorate. This is on top of the huge amount of staff horsepower being thrown at Strat Review by each Lvl 1. There have been "Tiger Teams" full of Capts/Majs/Cols put together doing nothing but this since the fall, and the "official" review doesn't start for quite some time.

So in the end the recommendation on the "bottom 5%" might likely be to divest ourselves of the Strat Review!  >

 

[McG]

Hack the Reserves to buy combat vehicles.

Mmmmmm. Smells something like Bison. ;D

At the very least we know that this is not the case.  DND cannot legally move money between Vote 1 and Vote 5.  So, Primary Reserve pay cannot be converted into capital procurement funds.

 

[Sprinting Thistle]

So in the end the recommendation on the "bottom 5%" might likely be to divest ourselves of the Strat Review!  >
[/quote]

That's funny.  That suggestion came up in one of the teams last Spring.  Unfortunately, it was the throw away COA.

 

[Brad Sallows]

My viewpoint comes from the civilian world, of course.  The primary failure (sudden budget emergency) here is the sort of thing that normally results in firings, which does not mean relieved from appointment and posted; it means released from employment.  If senior - trained - people are being layed off in preference to untrained people, that is a red flag which represents either an immediate (picked the wrong person - one should lay off the untrained and inexperienced help first) or long-standing (the position should never have been created in the first place) secondary failure.  If the system - the mysterious and ponderous inner workings of gov.ca/DND/CF that one supposedly must know in order to be permitted to make pointed observations - militates the problems, then the system is also a point of failure.  The failures don't need to be dressed up and excused; they need to be acknowledged and then avoided, eliminated, or mitigated.

Are these two statements true, or not:
1) There are quite a few reservists employed full-time.
2) There are (or at least until recently, were) still some full-time vacancies posted for reservists.

If those statements are true, one can only conclude that there are already fewer people employed than should be, and many fewer Reg F than should be.  [Edit: If "trained" positions are being deleted in preference to "untrained" positions i]t follows that the budget emergency can't lie with the total pay envelope unless unnecessary positions were created that should not exist.  I realize full well the latter may be one of the systemic problems.  In that case, one would not expect the full-time positions which require trained/experienced people to be replaced at some future time: if they are less important than incompletely trained recruits, they are essentially of no importance at all.

While I suspect there are too many unnecessary class "B" positions padding out various levels and organizations, the suggestion that any given position holder should have "gone Reg" doesn't wash: a position is either required or not; it's importance is not dictated by the conditions of employment of the person holding it.  Neither does the suggestion that recent recruits must be kept hold water: if a position in a HQ can be deleted, so can a position in a PAT platoon.  A person whose position is zeroed can either fill an alternate position for which he is qualified or be released from employment.

 

[aesop081]

I see that the reserve want commitment from their soldiers... but what about the commitment that the soldiers want from the army?

Wait a second, i seem to remember some good advice give to new reservists....advice posted on this very site :

Rule #1- Your regiment doesn't "owe you" anything.
Lots of troops come back and seem to think their regiments owe them for I don't know, passing their course? *
Basically, give me whatever course or class B tasking or I'll quit.

So which is it ? The army does or does not owe people anything ?

 

[McG]

If senior - trained - people are being layed off in preference to untrained people, that is a red flag ....

...  If "trained" positions are being deleted in preference to "untrained" positions it follows that the budget emergency can't lie with the total pay envelope unless unnecessary positions were created that should not exist. ...

While I suspect there are too many unnecessary class "B" positions padding out various levels and organizations, the suggestion that any given position holder should have "gone Reg" doesn't wash: a position is either required or not; it's importance is not dictated by the conditions of employment of the person holding it.  Neither does the suggestion that recent recruits must be kept hold water: if a position in a HQ can be deleted, so can a position in a PAT platoon.  A person whose position is zeroed can either fill an alternate position for which he is qualified or be released from employment.

Are you suggesting that Regular Force recruits should be released so that we can continue to employ more of the existing long term Class B?  I might by onto this with the condition that the long term Class B also be compulsorily component transferred to the regular force.

Experience is not the only factor.  Being career managed and the flexibility for the service to put you where you are needed when you are needed is a significant benefit the institution receives from the regular force solder.

I agree that one should not blame the reservist for being Class B when employment dries up.  If the position is required, it is not the reservists fault that the position was not created as a regular force position, and it is not the reservists fault that we have not found ways to increase mobility between the two components.  In the end it is not a matter of "if you want a full time job you should join the regular force."  It is a matter of if a full time position is permanently required, that position should have be regular force.

 

[Brad Sallows]

>Are you suggesting that Regular Force recruits should be released so that we can continue to employ more of the existing long term Class B?

First ask and answer, for each "long term Class B" (really, any position), why the position exists.  If it is unnecessary, why is it there?  Cut it and leave it cut.  There should be no Class "B"s for the sake of having Class "B"s.  If a position occupied by a Reg F member is deemed unnecessary, cut it and bump a necessary Class "B".  Otherwise, cut loose the recruits.  That's the general practice: first the unnecessary "middle managers", then the newest hires.

>I might by onto this with the condition that the long term Class B also be compulsorily component transferred to the regular force.

Or just leave the position unfilled if no one accepts the conditions.  If the organization isn't suffering after 2 months, delete the position permanently.

The institution receives a significant benefit from hiring Class "B"s.  Like contractors in the civilian world, they can be fairly abruptly cut loose for a couple of weeks or couple of months to balance a budget.  Having a number of not-quite-100%-necessary positions filled by Class "B"s is a godsend to commanders when the "budget adjustments" come down.