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

[Brad Sallows]

From anecdotes, I came to believe that the junior soldiers and officers responded well to 10/90 because they responded well to being led and trained by experienced full-time officers and NCOs.  If there was lukewarm to negative response, it seemed to reside in the middle and senior rank levels.  Is there anyone who was directly involved at the time who can reinforce my perception one way or the other?

If that perception were borne out, then 10/90 or some other fractional arrangement might be the most successful reserve restructure we never really tried, provided we could afford the full-time staff and the equipment pools.  In the end, while some of the part-time middle and senior leadership at the time of initiation might be shunted aside, it would be reasonable to expect the next crop of reserve leaders to be at least a little bit better for having been trained by, and worked alongside, a sizeable critical mass of regulars.

The train wreck I observed from a distance was that at least one reserve unit dumped a portion of its middle and senior rank levels which were felt (rightly or wrongly, I don't know) at the time to be unnecessary and underperforming, and then was in turn dumped from 10/90 when the battalion withdrew - taking with it not a few component transfers, and supposedly leaving with a slightly more complete CFFET than it brought to the party - leaving the unit shorter of soldiers, leaders, and kit.  Note that the only decision I criticize was the one to prematurely eject the former senior leadership; component transfers are a valuable source of already-committed soldiers and it is axiomatic that the deployable forces have first call on deployable kit.  The lesson is that if we try it again, we must stand behind it for a decade or more rather than changing fashions with the next change of government or senior NDHQ appointments.

 

[McG]

Then train the unit for what it well be doing on tours. Not for what it may do.

Would we start deploying reserve battalions if they were 10/90?

 

[Bobbyoreo]

We should be. Why would we train anyone in the forces if we never planed to deploy them? LIke buying a car and never driving it!!!!

 

[McG]

We don't deploy reserve battalions now, but individual reservists still get deployed.

This gets to another question.  What is the roll/function of a 10/90 battalion (in relation to domestic operations, international operations, and force generation)?  Is to to provide better trained soldiers & sub-units to augment regular force deployments, or is it to proved a battalion sized surge capability?  Should a 10/90 battalion be providing the vanguard sub-units to IRU calls within its AO, or should we continue to generate that vanguard from the regular force while expecting the 10/90 Bn to provide the comd & CSS to the vanguard and then add follow-on sub-units from itself?

 

[a_majoor]

We don't deploy reserve battalions now, but individual reservists still get deployed.

This gets to another question.  What is the roll/function of a 10/90 battalion (in relation to domestic operations, international operations, and force generation)?  Is to to provide better trained soldiers & sub-units to augment regular force deployments, or is it to proved a battalion sized surge capability?  Should a 10/90 battalion be providing the vanguard sub-units to IRU calls within its AO, or should we continue to generate that vanguard from the regular force while expecting the 10/90 Bn to provide the comd & CSS to the vanguard and then add follow-on sub-units from itself?

In the context of the Conservative idea, a 10/90 battalion (actually a 20/80) would exist as a DOMOPS force, but would also provide a cascade effect for the other tasks that the Army is expected to do. I would expect that (given the size) the 20/80would be the vanguard and be able to provide command and CSS to follow on forces arriving from other places. The soldiers in the 20/80 would do both MLOC training to maintain their soldiering skills, as well as contingency training for the various tasks they may undertake in the AOR (some of which would be quite military in nature, in case you are thinking of "rescue columns" again).

The Regular troops would have a breather from operations while posted in the 20/80, and be better off in other ways (spouses in cities will have a better chance of getting employment, for example), while once the Reserve soldiers ended their Class "B" contracts, they will be at a higher level of training if they want to augment a TF, or provide a better level of skill and leadership back in their parent units. For that reason, it might be wise to limit contracts to one year and encourage a flow of reserve troops through the 20/80 (although not a mass turnover of 50% or more).

 

[McG]

So, you are assuming the Total Force Battalion would consist of all full-time reservists?  Could this unit still do both the vanguard (12 hr NTM) and CSS to a full unit if the reserve companies were part time?

 

[Bobbyoreo]

If we had Job protection ...you could do 12 ntm....just like the states!!

 

[Haggis]

The Regular troops would have a breather from operations while posted in the 20/80...

Some posters on these forums would argue that the Reg F neither need nor want a breather from operations, DOMOPS included.

it might be wise to limit contracts to one year and encourage a flow of reserve troops through the 20/80 (although not a mass turnover of 50% or more).

Staggered 2 year contracts would ensure there isn't a mass turnover every year.  Properly using the CFPAS would allow units to cut low performers after one year or grant high performers a year extension (to a max of three years).

So, you are assuming the Total Force Battalion would consist of all full-time reservists? 

Then it may as well be Reg F.

If we had Job protection ...you could do 12 ntm....just like the states!!

Hasn't happened.  Ain't gonna happen.  Canadian business and industry has not and will never support the idea.  Get over it.

 

[Bobbyoreo]

Hasn't happened.  Ain't gonna happen.  Canadian business and industry has not and will never support the idea.  Get over it.


Never been asked. One or two companies. Every company I've ever worked for in Winnipeg supported me when on tour. I've never seen one paper passed to see if it was what people wanted. Most companies dont even know what reserves are.

If anyone has any proof on this matter....it would be nice to see. I've looked everywhere and never seen any work or papers on Job protection for the reserves.

 

[Haggis]

Never been asked. One or two companies. Every company I've ever worked for in Winnipeg supported me when on tour. I've never seen one paper passed to see if it was what people wanted. Most companies dont even know what reserves are.

Since your profile is somewhat lacking in detail, I cannot speculate as to your unit, expereince or your employer.  Maybe you're senior enought to be able to do it or have union protection through a strong collective agreement.

In any case, consider yourself lucky.  I know many Reservists who have had to choose between the Reserves and their civvy job.  Some lost their jobs because their employers didn't want divided loyalty in the business.  At least two I know personally were fired when they approached thier employers for time off.  Another was told he was disqualified from seeking employment with ************** as he "already had an employer".

If anyone has any proof on this matter....it would be nice to see. I've looked everywhere and never seen any work or papers on Job protection for the reserves.

For starters use the "search" function.  Then chat with someone from CFLC and ask about thier collective experiences with legislation as well as their successes/failures with voluntary employer support.

There is recently enacted job protection for Reservists who are called out during an emergency. (If you volunteer, however, you are NOT protected.)  This requires that the government pass an Order in Council.  The chances of that happening are historically slim to none.  Maybe under a Conservative government.....?

 

[Kirkhill]

Perhaps the entire battalion doesn't have to be at 12 NTM.  Perhaps a dedicated sub-unit, on rotation.  Or something like the Royal Marines where their old Mountain and Arctic Warfare Cadre were double-hatted as instructors and also the Brigade Recce element.  Perhaps some of the reservists could be equipped with pagers like Volunteer Firemen for callout. 

 

[dutchie]

I'm enjoying this discussion, but thought I'd add a side note re:job protection for reservists.

Job protection for reservists would be a double-edged sword. Sure, you'd have a job to come back to, but you also may be denied employemt in the first place if the employer knows your a reservist. I understand that this happens regularly in the US. If you are employed by the Canadian Fed Gov, you will not only likely be able to go and keep your job, but you will get all of your raises upon return.

Employers are funny people, and entreprenuers are even funnier - they don't like to be told that they HAVE to hold a job for someone who goes on tour of their own volition.

I myself had no problem holding my job when I went on tour, but some of my buddies did. I kept my employer informed right from the point that I put my name in. I had a job to come back to, and they even gave me a raise/promotion upon return. BTW, I wasn't working for the Gov either.

 

[Bobbyoreo]

I know about the USA's problem with it as I have a buddy who was working with Target...went away ,..came back and was given a lower job.
I do know of problems. ie Might not get a job, might not get the same job when I get back. I know of the problems, but we are not the USA are deployments are not the same as theirs. The US still gets their men and women to join and even with the fact that job protection is not 100%.

I've USED the SEARCH button....I'm not that slow big guy. I'm looking for a piece of paper...proof that the government even asked people if this was a good idea....or was it just a person saying ...naaa..won't work. As that is what I think it is.

Didn't know I had to add all my jobs on this site....by bad. Ill try and fix that one up.

 

[Haggis]

The US still gets their men and women to join and even with the fact that job protection is not 100%.

American society is more historically supportive of their military and, IMO, far more patriotic.

I'm looking for a piece of paper...proof that the government even asked people if this was a good idea....or was it just a person saying ...naaa..won't work. As that is what I think it is.

Then talk to your CFLC rep.

Didn't know I had to add all my jobs on this site....by bad. Ill try and fix that one up.

You don't have to but it helps other participants appreciate the level of training, experience and life skills that you bring to the forums.

 

[McG]

Perhaps the entire battalion doesn't have to be at 12 NTM.   Perhaps a dedicated sub-unit, on rotation. 

Yes.  That lead sub-unit is referred to as the vanguard.

Then it may as well be Reg F.

Your right.  However, I think it is a waste of resources to have a full time battalion (regular or reserve) that has as its sole roll the DOMOPS.  Generally, all that is required of an IRU sub-unit is manual labour (not a skill set which would warrent a full bn trg full time to prepare for).

 

[a_majoor]

Yes.  That lead sub-unit is referred to as the vanguard.
Your right.  However, I think it is a waste of resources to have a full time battalion (regular or reserve) that has as its sole roll the DOMOPS.  Generally, all that is required of an IRU sub-unit is manual labour (not a skill set which would warrent a full bn trg full time to prepare for).

Although I am not 100% for the Conservative DOMOPS battalion idea, there are some elements worth examining. DOMOPS encompasses a wide range of potential tasks, and I am fairly sure the proposal was this unit was there to assist in all contingencies, from an Ice Storm to an FLQ type crisis. (Nukes and WMD mean all bets are off). After MLOC, soldiers in these batalions would be training up for various contingency plans, and I am presuming this is a full time formation so they do have the time to do lots of contingency training. Like I said, this can flow through into the P Res units which feed the DOMOPS Bn, so provides a source of junior leaders and instructors. Perhaps a 500 man 20/80 is a bit much, if they are to be the Vanguard, Command node and CSS backbone for the local units and arriving Regular Force units to rally around, then a 50/50 of about 200 men might do.

WRT job protection, most people are either in the collectivist mind set (you WILL do this for the greater good), or the military mind set (you WILL do this), without looking at this from the employer's perspective. There must be some sort of immediate compensation for the loss of a valuable(?) employee, particularly for prolonged periods. We can speak of long term benefits about training and experience, but the employer needs to meet his quarterly targets, and might not see how letting Bloggins go on course or deployment helps HIM in either the short long term. Probably the simplest idea I ever came across was to offer employers a tax credit for every servicemember they employed. If the credit was matched to the soldier/employee's salary, there would be less incentive to keep the guy in the mail room or drop him in seniority after deploying.

Of course we shoot ourselves in the foot on a regular basis; courses cancelled or amended at the last minute and other administrative nightmares leave the poor soldier stranded (after negotiating time off months in advance) and the employer looks at the CF as a totally cluster f****d organization, not worth supporting or thinking about.

 

[GO!!!]

I'm enjoying this discussion, but thought I'd add a side note re:job protection for reservists.

Job protection for reservists would be a double-edged sword. Sure, you'd have a job to come back to, but you also may be denied employemt in the first place if the employer knows your a reservist. I understand that this happens regularly in the US. If you are employed by the Canadian Fed Gov, you will not only likely be able to go and keep your job, but you will get all of your raises upon return.

Employers are funny people, and entreprenuers are even funnier - they don't like to be told that they HAVE to hold a job for someone who goes on tour of their own volition.

I myself had no problem holding my job when I went on tour, but some of my buddies did. I kept my employer informed right from the point that I put my name in. I had a job to come back to, and they even gave me a raise/promotion upon return. BTW, I wasn't working for the Gov either.

This is a good point.

I am aware of an entrepreneur here in Edmonton who had a reservist as a clerk in his company. She went to Bosnia, and he held onto her job, staffing it with temps and lower quality transient employees in order to keep her job for her when she came back. He said he thought it was his duty - the same as paying taxes or voting. She came back, worked for 3 months, went on maternity leave and quit the day her benefits ran out. He is now understandably leery of hiring reservists. He loves the idea, but this is the third or fourth one that has left hime swinging in the breeze after he went to alot of time, money and effort to accomodate them. This is a pretty big deal in a company of less than 20 employees. If reservists had legislated job protection, I doubt he would ever hire another one.

Different members of my extended family run their own companies too, and they all have a "golden staffing rule" No women under 40, men under 20, or anyone who thinks they can just work a few weeks when they need the money. Not very enlightened, but as a small business owner, you cannot run a business when your employees are rotating in and out on someone elses time table.

 

[Haggis]

If reservists had legislated job protection, I doubt he would ever hire another one.

Around the time of Gulf War 1, a friend of mine ran a small company in Ottawa (he's retired now).  Even though he has no military experience, he hired just about every Reservist/ex Reg that has applied (some didn't have the requisite job skills).  He adored the discipline, work ethic and team attitude they bring to his shop. That being said, the prospect of job protection legislation scared the heck out of him.  Although he supported his guys, he was afraid that 1/3 of his workforce could be ordered to pack up and go.

you cannot run a business when your employees are rotating in and out on someone elses time table.

Which is what happens in the US. Granted, they are at war (so are we, but that's a topic for another thread) but in many cases an employee is now on his second or third tour in four years.  That's a lot to ask of even the most fervently patriotic employer.

 

[Kirkhill]

This is the reason that I have difficulty accepting that "Foreign Service" should be anything other than a Reg Force commitment, with supplementation from individuals in the Militia that are willing and able to make a similar commitment, even if it is for a limited duration. 

Volunteers, Regular and Militia, paid for out of the public purse are a budgeted expenditure. It doesn't come as a shock to the treasury, or to the economy at large.  It is planned.

On the other hand taking a bunch of Militiamen that are contributing to the economy out of that economy can have dire consequences.  It doesn't make sense to me to plan to routinely pull 400 to 500 bodies out of a local economy and despatch them to places unknown.

BUT.  It does make sense, when the local economy is disrupted and needs to be put back on firm footing as quickly as possible, to take those same 4 or 500 bodies ( who can't go to work in any case) and put them to work in getting their community back to normal as quickly as possible.

A solid core of planners, trainers and enablers (don't just love the jargon ie Regs) available full time, coupled with a central core of B and C callouts working 10 to 40 hours a week on training and maintenance (as well as being at x NTM for Vanguard duties along with the local Regs), coupled with a large body of Class As that are able and willing to perform when ably led seems to me to be a reasonable use of public funds and available PYs.

 

[darmil]

Well if your worried about a job when you come back. Get a good education a degree or trade.Something that will not limit you too one employer.Working at a place that doesn't give you a qualification of some sort is a waste of time I think.It does help if you have a good union,I'm in the boilermakers union yes its a trade. But it pays good and when I want to go on tour. I'll have a job when I get back.I think reservists have to pick civvy jobs carefully.The civvy world doesn't care about military..CONSERVATIVE.. will hopefully help us.Right now its 1 man 1 kit.