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

[FormerHorseGuard]

10% reg force might be a bit unrealistic.

There are 15 units in my brigade. So 150 reg force. That’s one CBG. 4 Div has 3 CBGs. So 450 reg force types give or take that you are pulling from reg force units in 4 Div alone.

I’m not sure that is achievable.

I’d buy it if they make it so they get posted if they are near getting out, embed with the a unit a facilitate a component transfer if that is what they want. But make sure they have the incentives to do so to go with that.

Heck even broken guys that can still add value and experience.

That is what happened in some of the 10/90 units, soldiers on their way out were posted as farewell posting and they did not bring any value to the table and moral and training suffered. They needed to post younger soldiers who were still willing to work and train hard because they had to set the standard for the Res troops to reach. Having a Captain posted at the end of his/her Career and knowing he/she was not going back to the Home Regiment, and no chance of promotion. They did and do nothing but sign off training requests. They do not mentor or even provide answers to officers or troops who were asking question about training or courses. When it was a dumping ground for the unwanted it showed all the way down to the newest recruit walking in the door. They need to post soldiers who see this as career stepping stone. Because a Mcpl in the Res unit will do a lot more than a Reg Force Mcpl because they have to step up more often as the SGT or WO cannot make the exercise and they have to fill a position or rank above them more often. Cpls do the work of Mcpl because they are there and the Mcpl is not. So the Reg Force staff will always be jumping to fill in positions in the training plan that is left empty because some one cannot make it to the exercise. So troops on the way out might not want to step up and provide the extra service. Yes a broken soldier can give knowledge, value, and share experience but an able body has to be pitch in and show how it is done.

 

[markppcli]

That is what happened in some of the 10/90 units, soldiers on their way out were posted as farewell posting and they did not bring any value to the table and moral and training suffered. They needed to post younger soldiers who were still willing to work and train hard because they had to set the standard for the Res troops to reach. Having a Captain posted at the end of his/her Career and knowing he/she was not going back to the Home Regiment, and no chance of promotion. They did and do nothing but sign off training requests. They do not mentor or even provide answers to officers or troops who were asking question about training or courses. When it was a dumping ground for the unwanted it showed all the way down to the newest recruit walking in the door. They need to post soldiers who see this as career stepping stone. Because a Mcpl in the Res unit will do a lot more than a Reg Force Mcpl because they have to step up more often as the SGT or WO cannot make the exercise and they have to fill a position or rank above them more often. Cpls do the work of Mcpl because they are there and the Mcpl is not. So the Reg Force staff will always be jumping to fill in positions in the training plan that is left empty because some one cannot make it to the exercise. So troops on the way out might not want to step up and provide the extra service. Yes a broken soldier can give knowledge, value, and share experience but an able body has to be pitch in and show how it is done.

Yes thank god were all fully manned for NCOs here in regular army Bns, never see Sgts / MCpls running platoons. Nope never not a thing.

 

[markppcli]

Lots of moving little green army men all over the sand box here.

What's the plan for the Svc Support and Sigs Support units and personnel ?

The inherent problem with reserve Svc Support people is that they’re likely doing the same job for a lot more money Monday to Friday. It’s much harder to convince a mechanic to come fix vehicles for a fraction of their wage on a weekend than it is to convince someone to go run around the bush or kick in doors. Similar with Signals. The way to increase these numbers is to make it easier to parade, see my comment about the reserve Svc Bn being more of a standards org, and edit the requirements of the Vetrans Education Benefit so that reg for members releasing can be incentivized to join the reserves as opposed to incentivized to not. Increase integration with trade unions / governing bodies so that hours in uniform can translate to apprenticeship time would be another help.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

Fundamentally our divergence stems from if we can have reservists forced to deploy or not. I don’t ever see that happening so I think the deployable units need to be 100/0 at least on paper.

The mechanisms actually exist to make this happen. It's the whole reason for Class C Contracts. Now getting the CAF organized enough to make it happen would be a challenge.

IMO, Regular Force Units should all be kept at their war time doctrinal strength when in the R2HR and HR/Deployment phases of their readiness cycle.

A Canadian Infantry Battalion is supposed to be 800+ pers by doctrine when it deploys overseas so by rights, the units in LOO1/LOO3 should be at their actual established strengths, the Military shouldn't be robbing from other Units/Formations to form BGs overseas.

My proposal would be that units in R2HR sign Reservists to 2 year Class C contracts to actually fill out their line units properly for employment overseas.

Year 1 - R2HR
Year 2 - Force Employment
Year 3 - Reconstitution

In Reconstitution the Reservist positions could be left empty and all the Reservists employed in the Line Units could return to Class A service.

I would offer opportunities for the Reservists to transfer to the Regular Force.

I think it would be a great way to deliver instant value added in experience and significantly improved training to the Reserves.

 

[markppcli]

The mechanisms actually exist to make this happen. It's the whole reason for Class C Contracts. Now getting the CAF organized enough to make it happen would be a challenge.

IMO, Regular Force Units should all be kept at their war time doctrinal strength when in the R2HR and HR/Deployment phases of their readiness cycle.

A Canadian Infantry Battalion is supposed to be 800+ pers by doctrine when it deploys overseas so by rights, the units in LOO1/LOO3 should be at their actual established strengths, the Military shouldn't be robbing from other Units/Formations to form BGs overseas.

My proposal would be that units in R2HR sign Reservists to 2 year Class C contracts to actually fill out their line units properly for employment overseas.

Year 1 - R2HR
Year 2 - Force Employment
Year 3 - Reconstitution

In Reconstitution the Reservist positions could be left empty and all the Reservists employed in the Line Units could return to Class A service.

I would offer opportunities for the Reservists to transfer to the Regular Force.

I think it would be a great way to deliver instant value added in experience and significantly improved training to the Reserves.

Sorry for clarity I meant “being made to deploy” vs be allowed to. The difference between being able to know you have x amount of soldiers vs having to ask for y and getting z.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

Sorry for clarity I meant “being made to deploy” vs be allowed to. The difference between being able to know you have x amount of soldiers vs having to ask for y and getting z.

And on a Class C contract, there wouldn't be a choice . You're on Class C Service, if the unit you're with that is ready to deploy, ends up being sent somewhere, you're going.

 

[Remius]

And on a Class C contract, there wouldn't be a choice . You're on Class C Service, if the unit you're with that is ready to deploy, ends up being sent somewhere, you're going.

And maybe that might be a way to go. Keep class B as short term fills. Anything under a year or 180 days and make anything over that into class C.

I know it’s not perfect but the new reserve readiness policy would essentially make all reservists deployable for Dom ops and partially ready for anything international. If it’s actually done properly it could be a first step in helping to modernise reserve force service.

 

[ArmyRick]

My personal opinion (subject to having rotten tomatoes thrown at me) is that highly skilled and technical trades should not have a P Res equivalent. It seems very difficult to get these trades trained and employable.

I would make exceptions for Regular force said trades retiring and joining a local P Res unit, but no P Res entry.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

My personal opinion (subject to having rotten tomatoes thrown at me) is that highly skilled and technical trades should not have a P Res equivalent. It seems very difficult to get these trades trained and employable.

I would make exceptions for Regular force said trades retiring and joining a local P Res unit, but no P Res entry.

The problem is the Army's archaic recruitment and mundane PLAR process. Reserve Units like Sigs and Comms as an example, could actually have highly skilled members if they tailored their recruitment towards that.

Why we recruit so many unskilled people in to the Reserves is beyond me? High training cost to us with low return on investment.

IMO, cash incentives and a robust PLAR process is what is really needed. Maybe Pte Bloggins needs only 1 week of actual trades training and a kit famil as opposed to months of training in the summer?

 

[daftandbarmy]

Fundamentally our divergence stems from if we can have reservists forced to deploy or not. I don’t ever see that happening so I think the deployable units need to be 100/0 at least on paper.

If there was one way we could get more 'bang for the buck' out of the A Res it would be how to fix this, so that the CT from 'DAG Green' A Res to Class C, or whatever, can be done reliably and rapidly and the A Res becomes seen as a valuable asset as opposed to an annoying little brother

 

[FJAG]

Fundamentally our divergence stems from if we can have reservists forced to deploy or not. I don’t ever see that happening so I think the deployable units need to be 100/0 at least on paper.

Strangely enough, this is the argument that I had with a number of GOFOs during the Reserve Force Employment Project.

There is a very large gap between "can we" and "will we" where people seem to muddle legislative reality and the conscription crisis.

The NDA is absolutely 100% clear:

• 31 (1) The Governor in Council may place the Canadian Forces or any component, unit or other element thereof or any officer or non-commissioned member thereof on active service anywhere in or beyond Canada at any time when it appears advisable to do so
  • (a) by reason of an emergency, for the defence of Canada;
  • (b) in consequence of any action undertaken by Canada under the United Nations Charter; or
  • (c) in consequence of any action undertaken by Canada under the North Atlantic Treaty, the North American Aerospace Defence Command Agreement or any other similar instrument to which Canada is a party.

This provision applies to all members, including reservists and reserve units

If the conditions are met - the GoC can place reservists or units of reservists on active service. Essentially, by having once volunteered to enlist in the ResF the individual has volunteered to allow himself to be placed on active service if the GoC considers it advisable. This is not the same as conscription which takes a civilian off the street and makes him a soldier without their consent.

The real question is "will the GoC" ever place any reservists on active service? If for example the GoC decides it wants to send a reserve unit for a rotation to Latvia as part of the ePF, they could legally do so under s 31(1)(c).

In all my dealings on giving legal advice on this issue I've pointed out that this is a power that the government has by legislation and that it is not up to the CAF to predict or guess as to whether or not the government will ever use that power, but to configure the ResF in such a way that the GiC at least has the option to use it if it considers it advisable.

QR&O states:

4.02 - GENERAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF OFFICERS​

(1) An officer shall:
....
3. promote the welfare, efficiency and good discipline of all subordinates;

QR&O is an order issued by the MND.

One might wish to argue the meaning of the term "efficiency" as it relates to the ResF but, IMHO, I'll go so far as to say that if the CAF leadership organizes and trains the ResF in such a way that the GiC is denied the option of using s 31(1) vis a vis the ResF then the leadership has been negligent in the performance of a military duty to properly structure and train and equip the ResF.

Yup. I'm bullish on this issue.

 

[markppcli]

And on a Class C contract, there wouldn't be a choice . You're on Class C Service, if the unit you're with that is ready to deploy, ends up being sent somewhere, you're going.

If you sign that contract

 

[FJAG]

The inherent problem with reserve Svc Support people is that they’re likely doing the same job for a lot more money Monday to Friday. It’s much harder to convince a mechanic to come fix vehicles for a fraction of their wage on a weekend than it is to convince someone to go run around the bush or kick in doors. Similar with Signals. The way to increase these numbers is to make it easier to parade, see my comment about the reserve Svc Bn being more of a standards org, and edit the requirements of the Vetrans Education Benefit so that reg for members releasing can be incentivized to join the reserves as opposed to incentivized to not. Increase integration with trade unions / governing bodies so that hours in uniform can translate to apprenticeship time would be another help.

I'll add to that the fact that you really can't expect to maintain any volume of equipment by way of part-time reservists. If ResF units are ever given any major equipment then they need full-time maintainers. The part-timers, once trained in their particular trade should, received refresher military training, learn to operate as units in the field on exercise and receive "upgrade" training in their trade but not be counted on as functional day-to-day maintainers or whatever service support trade they have.

 

[childs56]

The inherent problem with reserve Svc Support people is that they’re likely doing the same job for a lot more money Monday to Friday. It’s much harder to convince a mechanic to come fix vehicles for a fraction of their wage on a weekend than it is to convince someone to go run around the bush or kick in doors. Similar with Signals. The way to increase these numbers is to make it easier to parade, see my comment about the reserve Svc Bn being more of a standards org, and edit the requirements of the Vetrans Education Benefit so that reg for members releasing can be incentivized to join the reserves as opposed to incentivized to not. Increase integration with trade unions / governing bodies so that hours in uniform can translate to apprenticeship time would be another help.

Part of that is engaging the employers also. For example Finning (Caterpillar) can possibly fix and maintain Cat engines installed in our Vehicle fleet. A Reservist who works for Finning could possibly be paid/ subsidized training and Wages by the Military to train up on their current job/ Trade. Even learn how to fix the more technical side of the equipment ie optics. The Local Finning Shop could have the contract to fix that equipment. Thus allowing the Reservists to work on the very equipment we run and maintain their job. If they need to deploy there could a agreement with their employer, many of the large international companies do already.

My personal opinion (subject to having rotten tomatoes thrown at me) is that highly skilled and technical trades should not have a P Res equivalent. It seems very difficult to get these trades trained and employable.

I would make exceptions for Regular force said trades retiring and joining a local P Res unit, but no P Res entry.

See my above. I can add to the above and say The Reserves have people from all different back grounds and experience to bring to the table. A few I have met and worked alongside were Engineers, Doctors, Ships Captains, Lawyers, Paramedics, Heavy Duty and light Mechanics, Aircraft Mechanics, Tele communication specialists etc. Many bring a wide variety of skills to the table that may or may not be utilized direct or indirectly.

The problem is the Army's archaic recruitment and mundane PLAR process. Reserve Units like Sigs and Comms as an example, could actually have highly skilled members if they tailored their recruitment towards that.

Why we recruit so many unskilled people in to the Reserves is beyond me? High training cost to us with low return on investment.

IMO, cash incentives and a robust PLAR process is what is really needed. Maybe Pte Bloggins needs only 1 week of actual trades training and a kit famil as opposed to months of training in the summer?

See above

I'll add to that the fact that you really can't expect to maintain any volume of equipment by way of part-time reservists. If ResF units are ever given any major equipment then they need full-time maintainers. The part-timers, once trained in their particular trade should, received refresher military training, learn to operate as units in the field on exercise and receive "upgrade" training in their trade but not be counted on as functional day-to-day maintainers or whatever service support trade they have.

I agree with this to a extent. Properly equipped shops and staff are required. Again you can have Reservists work for local Repair shops while working on our equipment and we could top their pay up. It is workable solution and could be hit for all. Engage the employers and see what could happen.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Alas. Modern soldiering is too complex for low-skilled part-timers to be much use, and modern skilled workers command too much money to be interested in part-time soldiering.

 

[McG]

Why do we keep thinking that, not only do people want to join the reserves to do their day job, but that there are enough such people to build a force model around them?

 

[RangerRay]

Why do we keep thinking that, not only do people want to join the reserves to do their day job, but that there are enough such people to build a force model around them?

On my reserve Infantry QL2/3 many moons ago, one of my section mates was a cook at his civie job. I asked him why he didn’t go into the cook trade instead. He looked at me like I had three heads and said “Why would I want to do my day job on the side? I want to blow shit up!”

 

[Remius]

Why do we keep thinking that, not only do people want to join the reserves to do their day job, but that there are enough such people to build a force model around them?

We shouldn’t build a model around them. But we should be leveraging the skills they have when we can.

On one of the Lentus DomOPs they wouldn’t let us go out without a medic with each group. We only had 2 but we were sending out multiple groups. We had two infantry cpls who were civy fire fighters. Both were way more qualified than the two reserve medics we had so we managed to get permission to have them act as our « medics » with the two we had.

I’m sure there are plenty of other examples where civy skill sets could be utilized but we just ignore to our loss.

 

[childs56]

We shouldn’t build a model around them. But we should be leveraging the skills they have when we can.

On one of the Lentus DomOPs they wouldn’t let us go out without a medic with each group. We only had 2 but we were sending out multiple groups. We had two infantry cpls who were civy fire fighters. Both were way more qualified than the two reserve medics we had so we managed to get permission to have them act as our « medics » with the two we had.

I’m sure there are plenty of other examples where civy skill sets could be utilized but we just ignore to our loss.

Thats like when the HLVW had a air line brake during the 2003 fires. The Forestry Officer was a Heavy Duty Mechanic and wanted to fix the truck so it wouldn't get burnt. The Military said no your not qualified to perform this fix. We will leave the truck and come back for it later. He convinced the Section Commander to leave him a driver and the rest leave on another truck. He fixed the line and the driver drove the truck out.

 

[GK .Dundas]

Thats like when the HLVW had a air line brake during the 2003 fires. The Forestry Officer was a Heavy Duty Mechanic and wanted to fix the truck so it wouldn't get burnt. The Military said no your not qualified to perform this fix. We will leave the truck and come back for it later. He convinced the Section Commander to leave him a driver and the rest leave on another truck. He fixed the line and the driver drove the truck out.

There's stupid and then there's Army stupid.