Divining the right role, capabilities, structure, and Regimental System for Canada's Army Reserves

[MilEME09]

OF course that does mean smashing a few rice bowls and dismantling some "empires", but if we want to have an effective reserve force, we do have to think outside the box.

Like the decentralization of training for some trades? take weapons and vehicle techs for example, why the hell does everything need to be taught at RCEME School in Borden? Why not teach in a real world environment, have the school just create the standards, and have people learn at base maintenance/service battalions. This would reduce travel costs and the reservist would get to see real world problems, and learn to fix them. Not some broken part that some Sgt took a grinder to so it acted broken, or reblue a part (cause that happens in real life when a part breaks).

 

[daftandbarmy]

OF course that does mean smashing a few rice bowls and dismantling some "empires", but if we want to have an effective reserve force, we do have to think outside the box.

Like the decentralization of training for some trades? take weapons and vehicle techs for example, why the hell does everything need to be taught at RCEME School in Borden? Why not teach in a real world environment, have the school just create the standards, and have people learn at base maintenance/service battalions. This would reduce travel costs and the reservist would get to see real world problems, and learn to fix them. Not some broken part that some Sgt took a grinder to so it acted broken, or reblue a part (cause that happens in real life when a part breaks).

I'm no expert, but that sounds like a traditional Journeyman-Apprentice kind of approach to trades training.

Don't we do that already somewhere in the system for trades people? I hope?

 

[McG]

Like the decentralization of training for some trades? take weapons and vehicle techs for example, why the hell does everything need to be taught at RCEME School in Borden? Why not teach in a real world environment, have the school just create the standards, and have people learn at base maintenance/service battalions.

Running maintenance courses on the backs of line units has the negative effect of cutting into production.  I don't know any unit (Reg or Res) with a healthy enough VOR to look after its own trucks and run a QL3.

I'm no expert, but that sounds like a traditional Journeyman-Apprentice kind of approach to trades training.

Don't we do that already somewhere in the system for trades people? I hope?

RCEME and construction trades do this, but members must get through QL3 to form the baseline before doing a QL4 OJT which then leads to a QL5 and trade qualification.

Force people into the infantry before they are allowed to become a clerk, signaller, or whatever? 

No.  Train people as infantry if they are in occupations which cannot be trained to QL3 in the members' initial summer block training.  The individuals are then employable in an occupation until they are able to get back into the training system and qualify in the trade they enrolled into.

Not everyone wants to be Infantry nor is everyone cut out to be a Infantryman.

If you are in the Army and an operation goes bad, you might have to fight like infantry regardless of what you want to be.  So this is training that can benefit anyone regardless of their intended end-state occupation

... what if Bloggina signs up to be a Maintainer with a Service Battalion but after completing DP1 Infantry and now decides he no longer wants to be a Maintainer. Now the service battalion has lost a new member and has to wait X amount of time until they can get another person to fill that empty position.

Or, there opens an OT opportunity for someone who joined as infantry but realized that is not the path for them.

Regardless, if you don't like the idea, how do you address the problem of PRes who spend multiples of years untrained in any occupation?

• So do we say that if it cannot be done in a summer, it cannot be done in the PRes?  Or are there other ways?

 

[blacktriangle]

When employed in a 'ghetto' on jobs no one else wants to do, like full time gate guards, they don't tend to have the same success rate. And who would, really?

So because someone doesn't feel their assigned task is "cool" enough or feel that it's below them, that's sufficient justification to not do a good job?

 

[Haggis]

So because someone doesn't feel their assigned task is "cool" enough or feel that it's below them, that's sufficient justification to not do a good job?

Never.  You make the best of it.  Get inventive, invest some time in PD and continuation training.  Don't wallow in your situation.  Make it better.

Conversely, others should treat those doing "ghetto" jobs (i.e. gate guard) appropriately.  They deserve to be treated with the same respect as anyone else in uniform.  I have seen this first-hand, both in the CAF and on civvy street.  They are doing a job you'd rather not do.  Help them do it well.

 

[RCPalmer]

My Apologies,

I am a long time lurker, but this is a great discussion.

I think that daftandbarmy's point here is that the quality and variety of the tasks undertaken by an organization will impact their performance.

The general principle in any military organization is that you "spread the pain" on any unpleasant duty.  I would consider gate guard to be a prime example of that.  If you put a Regular Force platoon on uninterrupted gate guard duty for six months, they would have discipline problems too.

To build on the example being referenced, I think you will find that in Afghanistan, the reserve NSE and PRT Force Pro platoons that rotated through convoy escort and other mobile force protection duties performed much better than those who were relegated to purely gate guard work.  However, if you create a reserve platoon, and assign it the tasks no one else wants, they will consider themselves to be part of the "ghetto" unit.  It is not an excuse for not doing a good job, but it is not exactly a model for building trust and mutual respect between the RegF and PRes either.

 

[Loch Sloy!]

There seems to be a few posters who do not know the current situation with regard to training in the PRes.
Current training progression for a reserve infantry (because that's what I'm familiar with) officer;

For PRes only
-4 week BMQ; NCMs and Officer combined, offered as a weekend course or full time

-2 week BMOQ; Primarily learning battle procedure and small party tasks, offered part-time or full time

Reg Force/ PRes combined courses (run collectively, no PRes specific course)

10 week BMOQ(L);
-still commonly referred to as CAP, formerly just in Gagetown or Aldershot but now offered at various locations across Canada
-broken into 10 modules of 2 weeks
-rumored to soon be changed to become shorter, possibly as short as 6 weeks

13 Week IODP 1.1;
-Only run in Gagetown. 1 x / year (summer)

-The course commonly starts with about 100+ candidates in 3 Platoons and ultimately graduates a platoon (or less)

-broken into 3 modules of 1 month (ish), mods must be completed within 3 summers (so if you miss a summer because of work or injury you go back to day 1)

-The Brits do a separate reserve infantry officer course which is primarily DL at the unit and then a 2 week residency/ confirmation. Interestingly the reserve PLQ/WO and Inf O are all run together in composite platoons.

-I think 2 weeks is too short but perhaps a reserve IODP 1.1 in 6 weeks, broken into 2 week mods would be more realistic for training people who have jobs etc. As a working professional I personally find getting away for more than 2 weeks at a time to be very challenging…

I realize that the infantry corps as a whole has serious reservations about “diluting” how the course is delivered and views the 13 weeks as a “gut check” however the current set-up is not producing the number of trained officers required by the reserves; some but certainly not all of this can be blamed on the units for recruiting inappropriate people. Surely there are other (more efficient) methods of weeding out people who don’t make the cut.

It’s all well and good to say you will only select candidates who are first year university students but this may mean picking those who merit lower during the board interviews, not to mention violating a myriad of employment standards. Those first year university kids have often also not worked out either for various reasons.

Reserve concentrations; Division or Brigade level, these do occur annually in Spring or August
Frequently summer courses overlap, but even when they do not very few candidates are inclined (or able) after already being gone for 2 or more months to spend an additional 2 weeks away from family/ regular employment. Most attendees are those soldiers who were not doing summer courses as staff or candidates.

Using these exercises as a confirmation of summer training would certainly increase attendance and potentially give bang for buck in training value. Potential downside would be diluting the training experience for the main audience.

37.5 Class A days/ Year
As for "regular" training during the Sept - May/ June time frame, regular exercises have been disrupted for some time as we try to run courses and conduct "make-up" training for things not covered in the infantry DP 1.1. Many of us do train far in excess of 1 weekend and 4 weeknights/ month as we try to accomplish everything that needs to get done. Not sure how valuable weekend exercises are anyway, at least beyond a few shake out weekends prior to a summer concentration. I learned more in 10 days on Grizzly Defender than I did in a year or two of weekends.

Current Role
As for our role, it seems clear to me; provide 1 Domestic Response Company on 72hours NTM for civil emergencies and provide individual augmentees to the regular force for operations overseas.  I feel that we do both of these things reasonably well… We deployed our DRC during Lentus 2013 in less than 48 hours and we sent so many troops to Afghanistan that we earned a unit commendation. 
 
Despite the comments about reservists on 1-10, judging from the individual honours and awards many of our soldiers and officers received for their work while deployed, and general feedback from reg force OICs most of the people we sent performed at an adequate level and many at a very high level..

In summary, from my worms eye view the PRes still delivers value for money, however we are currently hampered by some structural training and training delivery issues which are degrading our capacity. More money for equipment would also be nice, but then I might as well ask for a pony and…

 

[blacktriangle]

Never.  You make the best of it.  Get inventive, invest some time in PD and continuation training.  Don't wallow in your situation.  Make it better.

Conversely, others should treat those doing "ghetto" jobs (i.e. gate guard) appropriately.  They deserve to be treated with the same respect as anyone else in uniform.  I have seen this first-hand, both in the CAF and on civvy street.  They are doing a job you'd rather not do.  Help them do it well.

I agree. I personally won't downplay things like gate guard. Sometimes these guys are protecting some pretty important assets i.e. aircraft, communications/intelligence infrastructure etc. Aircrew or analysts in an ASIC can't do their jobs very well if suicide bombers are driving on to the base and causing all hell to break loose.

The problem I see is a sense of entitlement to do "cool" things while forgoing more basic (yet necessary) tasks. The attitude is rampant in my RegF job, and I also noticed it during my short stint as a reservist.

 

[daftandbarmy]

The general principle in any military organization is that you "spread the pain" on any unpleasant duty.  I would consider gate guard to be a prime example of that.  If you put a Regular Force platoon on uninterrupted gate guard duty for six months, they would have discipline problems too.

Bingo.

During various ops I've been on we never had troops who were gate guards 100% of the time. We had troops who were assigned 'Guard duty' for short periods of time as part of a rotation between guard force, patrols, and other duties.

Coincidentally, we found that spending time on the gate, or in permanent OPs or sangars helped troops get information and context that helped them when they were out on the ground or doing other things later.

 

[LightFighter]

No.  Train people as infantry if they are in occupations which cannot be trained to QL3 in the members' initial summer block training.  The individuals are then employable in an occupation until they are able to get back into the training system and qualify in the trade they enrolled into.

If a member can take 6 weeks(or how ever long DP1 Infantry currrently) is, wouldn't they be able to complete the QL3 course of the trade they signed up for, or at least modules of it? As well, throwing in a DP1 Infantry into a member's pipeline for initial training just means the candidate must request more time off from work, as well is more money a unit must spend to get recruits qualified.

As well, what about the pers who do not meet the medical category of Infantry or fail off on a DP1 Infantry course?

If you are in the Army and an operation goes bad, you might have to fight like infantry regardless of what you want to be.  So this is training that can benefit anyone regardless of their intended end-state occupation

Isn't BMQ-Land supposed to get Army pers(and I believe some Navy/Air Force pers in purple trades) supposed to do? Make them into "rifleman" and able to conduct certain activities at a basic level. IMO, saying "fight like Infantry" implies they are more competent than they really are at the Infantryman's job(at least with the current training system).

As well, it may even loose potential applicants if they had to complete a DP1 Infantry. I've met more than a few people in the Army, who have zero interest in doing any Infantry/Soldier tasks.

Or, there opens an OT opportunity for someone who joined as infantry but realized that is not the path for them.

How is this different than the current system? If someone decides the Infantry is not for them, they can Cease Training during their DP1 or submit a OT in the future.

Regardless, if you don't like the idea, how do you address the problem of PRes who spend multiples of years untrained in any occupation?

First thoughts are the following COAs

COA1 - More generous job protection/legislatrion so members can take the time off, especially in the first year to get to OFP. As well, have members sign a contract on entry that they will attend all DP1 level courses(eg BMQ/BMOQ, DP1/QL3, etc) within X amount of time. Also, ensure the training system is capable of making this happen.

COA2 - Have the longer DP1 courses go to a modular system(if they haven't already). Possibly have the unit/brigade battle school  able to conduct some of the PO/EC/mods.

COA3 - if all else fails, have more of the classroom material go DL so the recruits can go on course, do a refresher of the DL material and go straight into the hands on. Although, I am really a fan of DL for the DP1 level.

 

[McG]

If a member can take 6 weeks(or how ever long DP1 Infantry currrently) is, wouldn't they be able to complete the QL3 course of the trade they signed up for, or at least modules of it?

Okay, I perceive now that you read my earlier post without having read any conversation leading up to it.  I will summarize.

The discussion had suggested that taking multiple years to train a reservist was a problem and that proper military indoctrination should be done in a solid training block of 10 to 12 weeks (so, not weekend BMQs and certainly not sitting in front of a screen to do DL).  It was also suggested that a civilian could be trained into a PRes infantry private in a summer training block if the system were to break from the existing series of courses and replace that with a purposed designed (more efficient) single course to achieve that aim.  The same could be done with some other occupations, but not all other occupations.  But, from the ealier discussion, we don't want untrained individuals hanging about units over time measured in years.  That brings us here:

• So do we say that if [an occupation] cannot be [trained] in a summer, it cannot be done in the PRes?  Or are there other ways?

One other way is to use entry occupations that can be done in one summer.  Infantry had been identified as an occupation that could be done in a single summer.

As well, what about the pers who do not meet the medical category of Infantry ...

Then maybe identify alternate entry occupations for such pers.  Maybe Recce Crewman or MSE Op could be trained from civilian to Private in a single summer.

COA1 - More generous job protection/legislatrion so members can take the time off, especially in the first year to get to OFP. As well, have members sign a contract on entry that they will attend all DP1 level courses(eg BMQ/BMOQ, DP1/QL3, etc) within X amount of time. Also, ensure the training system is capable of making this happen.

This would be the easy button.  It is also a hope CoA.  Neither the CAF nor even the federal government control either provincial job protection legislation or academic cycles of high-school and post secondary institutions.  Waiting for perfect conditions could mean waiting forever.  The CAF needs a plan that is at least within the preview of the federal government to implement. 

COA2 - Have the longer DP1 courses go to a modular system(if they haven't already). Possibly have the unit/brigade battle school  able to conduct some of the PO/EC/mods.

This produces individuals who return to their units for at least a year untrained in any occupation.

COA3 - if all else fails, have more of the classroom material go DL so the recruits can go on course, do a refresher of the DL material and go straight into the hands on. Although, I am really a fan of DL for the DP1 level.

... and this fails to deliver the block indoctrination desired by others.

 

[runormal]

Which trades can't be trained in a summer?

For NCM's
I know the following can: Sigs, Inf, Clerk, Arty, Mp.

I believe the following can: Medic, Supply Tech, MSE-OP, amoured recee, cook.

I know the following can't: Combat ENG, Vehicle Tech

I have no idea about: INT OP, Weapons Tech.

I may have missed a few trades, but I'm fairly confident that most NCM trades can be trained in one summer.

The biggest issue I've seen for members not being able to get trained where two things:
-Member availability (school/work/personal issues)
-Course availability

While like you said we can't control provincial legislation or school schedules we can do our best to mitigate this. Right now I say we do a good job.

Legalisation is not the way to solve a problem, force employers to give time off? Way to create a negative stigma for the reserves.... Like other people have said the best way would be tax credits/write offs.

At the end of the day if a member wants to take time off work for a coursee, the employer needs to pay someone to "act", perhaps multiple employees and potentially a student or a temp employee to fill in responsibility at the bottom. While possibilly paying the employees salary or even just "topping them up".

Among everything else, Joe Smith could fail, VR, get hurt and be medically RTU. The course dates could change, the course could be cancelled

And for what? So Joe Smith can be qualified on the 521, CI and know how to set up a rad Detachment?

How does this relate to my civvy Job? Unless I work in some field of engineering/radio/ telecommunications it is going to be a tough sell.

Yes it might keep Joe Smith happy and he may stay at company X longer but most people don't think like that. There also maybe transferable skills.

Don't get me wrong there are transferable skills I've learned such as attention to detail and ability to handle stress and multi tasking.  I've been told by countless people "we can't believe for someone so young your attention to detail". I attribute this directly to inspections on course. Even other things like writing PDR's have helped.

The other major issue is the training system. It took me two summers to get trained for something that at the time was 3 months. 1 month for SQ and 2 months for DP1. After I finished DP1 in June " Are we done for the summer?" "Yup see you in September". So I go back to my student Job and two weeks later " WE'VE GOT A SPOT FOR YOU ON YOUR DP 1,  it starts next week does that work for you?" "No sorry, I've already told my other employer I'm back for the sumner".

Then when we look at my SQ there was only 2 PLTs training in May vice 4 for the other 2 courses. But unless you were on the may course you wouldn't even be able to do your 3s in the same summer*. *unless you were infantry because it took only two months and the dates didnt overlap. Who was in my PLT? 80% Infantry,  when in reality it should of been all of the support trades because our DP 1.0s take longer. :facepalm:

 

[LightFighter]

Okay, I perceive now that you read my earlier post without having read any conversation leading up to it.  I will summarize.

The discussion had suggested that taking multiple years to train a reservist was a problem and that proper military indoctrination should be done in a solid training block of 10 to 12 weeks (so, not weekend BMQs and certainly not sitting in front of a screen to do DL).  It was also suggested that a civilian could be trained into a PRes infantry private in a summer training block if the system were to break from the existing series of courses and replace that with a purposed designed (more efficient) single course to achieve that aim.  The same could be done with some other occupations, but not all other occupations.  But, from the ealier discussion, we don't want untrained individuals hanging about units over time measured in years.  That brings us here:One other way is to use entry occupations that can be done in one summer.  Infantry had been identified as an occupation that could be done in a single summer.
Then maybe identify alternate entry occupations for such pers.  Maybe Recce Crewman or MSE Op could be trained from civilian to Private in a single summer.

Yea I did go on a tangent based on the current system in reply to your last post with regards to my COAs, my apologies.

To get back on discussion regarding the block indoctrination/training if the system could be worked where a member/untrained recruit shows up at the start of summer and at the end of it they are trades qualified that would be great.  My issue with it was the idea of making recruits who are unable to do the QL3 of the trade they signed up to be and having them complete another trade's QL3 course. IMO, it's just adding more cost and possibly other issues(ex member not wanting to be trained in another trade). I'd rather see the member complete at least a portion(mod) of the QL3 course of the trade they signed up to be, followed by OJT and possibly a mod taught over the parade/training nights and weekends and finished off the following summer. 

Aside from I believe only a couple NCM trades, the majority of Army Reserve NCM trades could probably be trained in one summer. Assuming courses can be confirmed/dates set in stone, and staff being available to run these courses having recruits do all their training in one large block over the summer would be ideal.  Also, provided the recruits are available to do 10-12 weeks straight.

 

[Kirkhill]

If, at the end of the first summer block the candidate knows who to salute, which uniform to wear, how to fire and care for a rifle safely, how to operate a radio and how to drive a 4x4 cross country, then that person becomes usefully employable in a variety of trades.  And you can probably figure out who is motivated to continue with self-directed learning that will permit new skills to be checked out during weekend drills - all of which should include some range time (at least if they are infantry).

That means that during the two weeks annual exercise the candidate can fall in as a supernumerary on a rifle section or an MG det or a mortar det, gun det, radio det......  and learn by watching.  Meanwhile the reg force unit gains strong and willing backs.

As for the trades training aspect of things - why do you need to go to school to get accreditation before you are allowed to hand a wrench to a mechanic, or go fetch a can of 10W30?  Many tradesmen have learned their craft simply by being gophers for experienced hands.

 

[Jed]

If, at the end of the first summer block the candidate knows who to salute, which uniform to wear, how to fire and care for a rifle safely, how to operate a radio and how to drive a 4x4 cross country, then that person becomes usefully employable in a variety of trades.  And you can probably figure out who is motivated to continue with self-directed learning that will permit new skills to be checked out during weekend drills - all of which should include some range time (at least if they are infantry).

That means that during the two weeks annual exercise the candidate can fall in as a supernumerary on a rifle section or an MG det or a mortar det, gun det, radio det......  and learn by watching.  Meanwhile the reg force unit gains strong and willing backs.

As for the trades training aspect of things - why do you need to go to school to get accreditation before you are allowed to hand a wrench to a mechanic, or go fetch a can of 10W30?  Many tradesmen have learned their craft simply by being gophers for experienced hands.

An often overlooked factor in our new society that values paper accreditation above actual capabilities.

 

[mariomike]

At the end of the day if a member wants to take time off work for a coursee, the employer needs to pay someone to "act", perhaps multiple employees and potentially a student or a temp employee to fill in responsibility at the bottom. While possibilly paying the employees salary or even just "topping them up".

Where I worked, it cost the city 80 hours at double time a half ( plus benefits ) "for the two week period of absence, to attend the Canadian Armed Forces Reserve Training Program."

 

[Eaglelord17]

As for the trades training aspect of things - why do you need to go to school to get accreditation before you are allowed to hand a wrench to a mechanic, or go fetch a can of 10W30?  Many tradesmen have learned their craft simply by being gophers for experienced hands.

This falls into the militaries fear of allowing people who aren't 'qualified' to do something without formal courses (even if they have proper supervision). There are people in the military which are civvy side qualified aircraft engineers, but are not allowed to touch a truck because they haven't gotten the formal qualification. This is not a exaggeration as I have seen it.

In regards to not being trades trained in a year, is it really that big a issue? Personally I am not currently trades qualified in my current trade however, most people who don't know me think I am due to the fact I have figured out how/been informally trained how to do most of my trade.

The other thing about being trades qualified, is realistically how often as a Reservist is it actually used? Regular garrison nights, they aren't used (for the most part) and most work is GD related (which anyone can do). For a weekend ex, sometimes you just need a co-driver whether or not the co-driver is actually qualified to do anything.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Before a gun detachment commander becomes one, they have spent time in each position of the gun, then time as the 2IC. The Detachment commanders course just fills in the gaps and adds another level on top of all that experience. Unlikely some armies who train a raw recruit to NCO/commander in one go. Generally by the time a NCO gets to be a gun commander, they have worked for 2-3 different ones and gained a lot of practical knowledge. I know that really helped me. Quality mentoring has a lot of value. Perhaps this element is missing with the focus on checking the boxes? 

 

[a_majoor]

Before a gun detachment commander becomes one, they have spent time in each position of the gun, then time as the 2IC. The Detachment commanders course just fills in the gaps and adds another level on top of all that experience. Unlikely some armies who train a raw recruit to NCO/commander in one go. Generally by the time a NCO gets to be a gun commander, they have worked for 2-3 different ones and gained a lot of practical knowledge. I know that really helped me. Quality mentoring has a lot of value. Perhaps this element is missing with the focus on checking the boxes?

In "Continental System" military forces, NCO's are often given their stripes upon completion of some technical speciality (i.e the sergeant is a radio operator or vehicle mechanic), while jobs like gun detachment commander are actually given to junior officers (who do the sorts of jobs that are usually the province of NCO's in British/American/Commonwealth system military forces).

While it pains me to say this, time and resource constraints may make a Reserve military force on the British/American/Commomwealth system virtually impossible to do, and so long as *we* continue to restrict resources to the Reserves and allow what little resources *we* do get to be poorly allocated, then perhaps the Continental model might actually be more appropriate for the Canadian Reserves.

 

[PuckChaser]

We can't have 2 different rank models, unless you never plan on deploying the Reserves to augment the Regular Force, or even having them work together. We already have enough issues with inflated ranks on deployments to match other countries (Op ATTENTION comes to mind).