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

[tango22a]

The only problem that I can see surfacing is the fact that it is being IMPOSED from on high and there is NO attempt at engaging PRes buy-in. IF it is done this way it's gonna lead to a lot of resistance IMHO.

Still babbling away,

tango22a

In other words there is going to be a big can of worms decaying and stinking up a large number of Armouries. Mark my words People!

 

[WLSC]

The only problem that I can see surfacing is the fact that it is being IMPOSED from on high and there is NO attempt at engaging PRes buy-in. IF it is done this way it's gonna lead to a lot of resistance IMHO.

I remember in the 90's when the 10/90 bn were form.  The Reg F complain that not a lot of reservist showed up at their exercices.  What was missing was good marketing from there part.  Nobody knew what they were so nobody showed up.  Marketing as been tried but since the 10/90 staff did not fully comprehend what was happening, well the succes was...weak

It's a nice wish but it will be push by above.  Because it is the way business his done.  Then, feed back and then, 2 step back...under a new name.

 

[cavalryman]

In other words there is going to be a big can of worms decaying and stinking up a large number of Armouries. Mark my words People!

Being in the middle of things, my take is that the awareness the current system is unsustainable is getting pretty widespread among the younger officers and troops - they're ready to listen to ideas that will give them better, more valid training under more solid leadership.  Most of the decaying and stinking will likely come from the old dinosaurs who still have a bit of the "social club" mentality (and every unit has at least one of those - useful in a narrow sense, but no longer living in the current reality), and the retired COs or honoraries whose grasp of the reality on the armoury floor is tenuous at best.

Watch and shoot.

This will be interesting, and an opportunity to forge a better army.  If our mother army, the British one could do it with regular regiments whose battle honours pre-date European settlement in Canada, then surely we can rationalise 100 man "battalions" like soldiers instead of perpetuating the old Militia sensitivities that earned us (deservedly) so much scorn from the professionals in the past.

iper:

 

[Michael OLeary]

In other words there is going to be a big can of worms decaying and stinking up a large number of Armouries. Mark my words People!

The big cans of worms are already there, and have been for a long time.  They're the ones who have consistently resisted any change that might have improved the training environment for Reserve soldiers.  The complete lack of "grass roots" buy in and proposals for change over decades have led to the inevitable - top down command direction.  Gee, what a concept for an ARMY to use.  It's long time that we got past those remnants of any era driven by a perception that change could only occur if all the regimental mafias agreed.

 

[tango22a]

Gentlemen:
Will be off this means for approx. five (5) days due to other commitments (visiting new granddaughter).
Please carry on trashing my babbling. You aren't going to change your minds and I won't change mine.

See you all next week,

tango22a

Proud member of Regimental Mafia!

 

[Haggis]

Hello, everybody.  My name is Haggis and I am a Dinosaur.

However, I have no desire to follow in the footsteps of my Jurassic predecessors and become extinct at the hands of some bureaucrat.

I think it's time for everyone, young and old, in the Army Reserve to suck back and prepare to engage in a constructive and positive manner.

Past attempts at "restructiring", as dapaterson astutely pointed out, have crashed in the ditch and burned because people were driving emotionally rather than skillfully.  Lets not waste a ton of time, resources and energy by doing that again (it was soooo much fun last time).

TANGO22A: See?  Old dogs can learn new tricks!

 

[McG]

So how exactly does this work? They are talking about closing down many reserve units, I gather? Or does this simply mean, they lose their identity, and become part of a bigger unit? I guess what I'm asking is, will they close down a bunch of armouries? And how does that make any sense, because will it not cost many jobs, as many will leave the reserves. How do you properly train on a regular basis, if you have to travel a great distance to the armoury? How do you parade every week, when people have to travel from all around to be there?

Your questions likely can only be answered with speculation.  If you read back through the entirety of this thread, you will see that it is possible to ammalgamate unit level command structures without closing locations, destroying unit identities, or compromising capabilities.

The only problem that I can see surfacing is the fact that it is being IMPOSED from on high and there is NO attempt at engaging PRes buy-in.

You don't know this.  Just because it has not been consulted down to the level of every Cpl/Pte does not mean that discussion has not occured ... decisions perhapse shaped by conferences with the reserve Comds & RSMs of the CBGs.  Even if lower input has been limited (or not there) that does not mean this need be the case for fleshing-out the implementation.  One should expect that consultation will percolate downwards as the plan develops.  COs of unit (including independant sub-uints) along with the Comds of CBGs would hopefully see participation in defining the plan as as the areas begin developing thier strategic visions within the Army's arcs.

Le 5 R22R
cie A 4 R22R (Laval)
cie B 6 R22R (St-Hyacinthe)
C&S

Given that '4' & '6' are battalion numbers and not regimental identity, wouldn't this be Le 4 R22R

• Cie A (Laval)
• Cie B (St-Hyacinthe)

... alternately, (Ref Here) it could be Le 4 R22R

• Cie A (Le Regiment de Chateauguay)
• Cie B (St-Hyacinthe Infantry)

 

[geo]

5 R22R was already issued to the Fusiliers du St Laurent.
They accepted the designation up to the moment they were told they had to replace their Cap Badge & "wear the beaver"..... NOT going to happen!

Anyway, there are enought Vandoos already - thank you very much

 

[Kirkhill]

...... You aren't going to change your minds and I won't change mine.....

A situation that by definition demands arbitration.

Arbitration: the making of an arbitrary decision by someone, anyone.

 

[Rifleman62]

I posted this here previously on: June 24, 2005, 22:54:58

It was only a matter of time, and the time is now. The Army Reserve needs transformation. We have far too many Reserve units that cannot be sustained. Too many Reserve units that cannot sustain leadership at all levels, especially at the MWO/CWO and Maj/LCol ranks. Unit sucession is difficult. Too many units with less than 75 effective personnel that have a CO, DCO, Adjt, RSM, Trg O, Orderly Room, Unit QM, etc. How many bayonets does that leave? Do we need all this unit infrastructure that we cannot sustain? Our Reserve units have not fought as a unit for over 60 years, and never will ( mobilization is dead, therefore the theory of why we need so many units is dead).In our CBG we have the following in a city of less than 115,000: a Nav Res stone frigrate; an Army Res Inf Bn and Svc Bn; a Coms Res Sqn; and a CFMG Fd Amb.The local area cannot sustain this many units, nor produce the senior leadership. We need to tacticaly group units, and in some cases all the P Res units in location. Why not a LCol or Cdr commanding all five of these units, with one OR, and a  Navy and Army Trg O's.  Sure cuts down on the infransture.  Sure sounds familiar.



Project Management Office
Land Force Reserve Restructure
101 Colonel By Drive
Ottawa, ON    K1A 0K2
  Bureau de Gestion de projet de la
Restructuration de la réserve de la force terrestre
101, promenade Colonel By
Ottawa (ON)    K1A 0K2
1901-6 (PD LFRR)
  1901-6 (DP RRFT)
24 Jun 05
  Le 24 jun 2005
Distribution List
  Liste de distribution
WARNING ORDER
  ORDRE D'AVERTISSEMENT
SITUATION
  SITUATION
1.    The current Army Reserve Establishment (ARE) dates back to its implementation date of 1 Apr 00 and provides for 25,585 positions in the Human Resources Management System (HRMS). They were developed through a two-year consultative process and are based on the recommendations of the LFRR task forces, which were reviewed by the LFRR Structure Working Group and Command Consultative Working Group. It has received annual incremental changes through the Army Reserve Working Group (AResWG) and Army Reserve Advisory Group (AResAG) but has not been subject to a fundamental review since its inception.
  1.      Le TÉRAT actuel remonte à sa mise en Å“uvre du premier avril 2000 et fournissent 25,585 positions dans le Système de gestion des ressources humaines (SGRH).  Ces tableaux ont été développés suite à une consultation étendue sur deux ans, ainsi que sur les recommandations du comité d'étude de la RRFT, et ont été révisés par le groupe de travail sur la structure RRFT et le groupe de travail de consultation du Commandement.  Certains changements annuels ont été implantés à travers le groupe de travail de la Réserve de l'Armée (GT RésA) et le groupe consultatif de la Réserve de l'Armée (GC RésA), mais n'ont jamais subi une révision fondamentale depuis leur création.

2.    With the announcement of the Federal Budget 05 and the Defence Policy Statement we know that the intended strength of the Army Reserve for the foreseeable future is 18,500 soldiers. Of this number, 1,100 are allocated to the Medical Reserve (MedRes) and a further 100 are planned to be filled by the Communications Reserve (CommRes) to provide balanced support to a larger Army Reserve.
  2.    Avec l'annonce du budget fédéral 2005 et la déclaration sur la politique de la Défense nous savons que l'effectif envisagé dans le futur immédiat pour la Réserve de l'Armée est de 18,500 soldats.  De ce nombre, 1000 positions sont octroyées à la Réserve Médicale (RésMéd), et nous planifions d'octroyer 100 positions à la Réserve des communications (Rés Comms) afin qu'il nous fournisse un soutien proportionnel à la grandeur de la  Réserve de l'Armée.

3.    The Army Regeneration Plan, the Managed Readiness Plan, and CF Transformation are placing demands on the Army Reserve, the full extent of which is not yet known in sufficient detail.
  3.    Le plan de regénération de l'Armée, le plan de gestion des niveaux de préparation, et le plan de transformation des FC exercent des demandes sur la Réserve de l'Armée dont les détails restent à être précisés.

AIM
  BUT
4.    The aim of the ARE Review is to ensure that the Army Reserve establishment reflects the best mix of units and mission element types, and locations to force generate Reservists to fulfill the Army Reserve role.
  4.    Le but cette révision des TÉRATs est de s'assurer que les établissements de la Réserve de l'Armée reflètent le meilleur mélange d'unités, de type d'éléments de mission et d'emplacement afin de générer suffisamment de réservistes pour remplir le rôle de la Réserve de l'Armée.

METHODOLOGY
  MÉTHODOLOGIE
5.    The review will be conducted on two parallel tracks, the results of each being brought together to produce the revised ARE:
  5.    La révision prendra deux avenues parallèles.  Le résultat de chacune sera combiné à l'autre afin de produire des TÉRATs révisés.
a.  Track 1. An analysis of defence policy documents will provide a precise measure of the CF expectations of the ARE. All Army Reserve roles and tasks must be considered including:
  a.  Première avenue.  Une analyse des documents contenant la politique de la Défense fournira une mesure précise des attentes des FC envers les TÉRATs.  Toutes les tâches de la Réserve de l'Armée doivent être considérées, comprenant :

i.  framework for mobilization;  i.  cadre de la mobilisation;
ii.  connect with Canadians;  ii.  créer un lien avec les canadiens
iii.  expeditionary operations;  iii.  opérations expéditionnaires;
iv.  domestic operations;  iv.  opérations domestiques;
v.  institutional Army Reserve (to include HQs, training, administration, etc); and
  v.  la Réserve de l'Armée institutionnelle (comprenant les QG, l'instruction, l'administration, etc); et

b.  Track 2. An analysis of existing units and mission elements, along with an understanding of where Canadians are best prepared to support Army Reserve units, will help to determine where Army Reserve units and mission elements should best be located.
  b.  Deuxième avenue.  Une analyse des unités et éléments de mission existantes, avec la compréhension des emplacements ou les canadiens sont prêts à soutenir une unité de la Réserve de l'Armée, afin d'aider à déterminer les meilleurs endroits ou les éléments de mission et unités de la Réserve de l'Armée devraient être situées.

6.    With respect to Track 1, stakeholders will assist in ensuring that the task list is complete. With respect to Track 2, stakeholders will contribute to determining the criteria from which we can best understand the suitability of a location to sustain an Army Reserve unit/mission element. Criteria to be applied must be objective and verifiable by all concerned.
  6.    Dans le cadre de la première avenue, les parties intéressées sont sollicitées afin de s'assurer que les listes des tâches sont complètes.  Quant à la deuxième avenue, nous sollicitons la participation des parties intéressées afin de déterminer les critères par lesquels l'efficacité des sites à soutenir un élément de mission/unité de la Réserve de l'Armée sera jugé.  Les critères sélectionnés devront être objectifs et vérifiables par tous.

CONCLUSION
  CONCLUSION
7.    There is no need to reply to this message. This message will be followed, in Jul 05, with a draft directive detailing how the Review will be conducted. All stakeholders will have the opportunity to comment on the methodology and criteria of the Review. It is my intent to table a draft report of the completed ARE review at the 26 Nov 05 CCAG along with deduced recommendations for how to apply the remaining 1500 positions of unallocated LFRR growth (Ph 2c & 2d). The final report recommending the new ARE to CLS should be tabled at the Mar 06 CCAG. Once reviewed, we can expect that the revised ARE will be subjected to further periodic reviews at an interval (3-5 years?) as determined by CLS.
  7.    Aucun besoin de répondre à ce message, car ce message sera suivi, en juil 05, par une ébauche d'une directive déterminant comment la révision sera effectuée.  Toutes les parties intéressées auront l'occasion de commenter sur la méthodologie et les critères utilisés pour la révision.  C'est mon intention d'avoir une ébauche de la révision des TÉRATs complétée pour le GCC du 26 nov 05, ainsi que les recommandations déduites pour la détermination des 1500 positions de croissance RRFT (Ph 2c & 2d) non attribuées.  Le rapport final recommandant les nouveaux TÉRATs au CÉMAT devra être complété pour le GCC de mars 06.  Une fois examiné, nous pouvons anticiper que les TÉRATs révisés seront réviser périodiquement à un intervalle (3 à 5 ans) déterminé par le CÉMAT.

O.S.B.
E.S. Fitch
Major General
Project Manager
Land Force Reserve Restructure
 
Distribution List
 
CLS
ACLS
DGLS
DGLandRes
LFA//Comd//DComd//COS
LFDTS Kingston//Comd//COS
Land Staff Directors
Council of Honourary Colonels
Reserves 2000

INFO

DGSP
CBG//Comd  CÉMAT
ACÉMAT
DGÉMAT
DG Rés FT 
SFT// Comdt//CmdtA//CÉM
SDIFT Kingston//Cmdt//CÉM
Directeurs EMAT
Conseil des Colonels Honoraires
Réserves 2000

INFO

DGPS
GBC//Comdt

 

[tango22a]

Gentlemen:

Due to "friction de guerre" will not be gone until tomorrow.

Haggis: agreed

Micheal and Dap: I have nothing against becoming "brigaded" with say 1H as long my OLD regiment retains its cap badge/honours/affiliation.

e.g.: A Sqdn 1H London
        B Sqdn WindsorR Windsor    > Composite Armored Recce Regiment
        C Sqdn 1H Sarnia

How does this strike you?

Babbling away,

tango22a

 

[McG]

Micheal and Dap: I have nothing against becoming "brigaded" with say 1H as long my OLD regiment retains its cap badge/honours/affiliation.

e.g.: A Sqdn 1H London
        B Sqdn WindsorR Windsor
        C Sqdn 1H Sarnia

How does this strike you?

This is basicly the type of grouping which has been suggested all along.  To further protect sensitivities, this organization could be known as 31st Armour (or Cavalry) Battalion.

There's 7 inf unit in the Montreal region.  I would suggest

The ??? Regiment
...

Le 5 R22R
...

Le régiment de ???
...

Again, protecting sensitivities by avoiding the word "regiment" in naming the amalgamated HQs, I would go with:

• 1 Bn, X CBG
• 2 Bn, X CBG
• 4 R22eR, X CBG

... and the current size/boundaries of existing CBGs should also not be considered untouchable during a restructure.  Maybe we have too many or too few CBGs.

 

[tango22a]

Kirkhill:

I am not against arbitration as long as it is not imposed ... "You will lose your identity, whether you like it or not...so assume the position... and SMILE!!... this will hurt you more than it will me, but it WILL be good for you!

Still babbling,

tango22a

 

[tango22a]

MCG:

31st RECCE REGIMENT...Please

More babbling,

tango22a

 

[McG]

... but the regiments will be in the sub-units. 

 

[Michael OLeary]

Micheal and Dap: I have nothing against becoming "brigaded" with say 1H as long my OLD regiment retains its cap badge/honours/affiliation.

e.g.: A Sqdn 1H London
        B Sqdn WindsorR Windsor    > Composite Armored Recce Regiment
        C Sqdn 1H Sarnia

How does this strike you?

Hmmm, first can you tell us which period of your regiment's history is effectively your "OLD" regiment for the purpose of this discussion? What happened to the cap badge of the Essex Regiment (Tank)?  Are we talking about the period before or only after the "Windsor" naming was adopted in 1949? 

You are aware that honours and affiliations are not discarded in amalgamations, right?

 

[dapaterson]

Five years ago I built, over an afternoon, a quick paper structure for the Reserves, starting at the bottom and building up.  Obviously, a paper model would need much tweaking to fit the actual terrain, but the quick and dirty check suggested something on the order of 100 full-up trained companies organized into 25 bns of various types (with HQ and some admin), grouped into 5 brigade structures (with HQ sigs), plus a training setup with the recruits and personnel to provide their DP1 training and administration would all fit within the current paid strength limit for the Army Reserve.


Of course, when reaching formation level, is it necessary to have "pure" Reg and Res formations, or could we mix both Reg and Res units within a formation?  All interesting questions...

 

[tango22a]

Michael:

Just to poke the fire a little... I don't see your Regiment (oops sorry!) Battalion being asked to give up its cap badge.

Really Babbling,

tango22a

P.S.:
As I noted before I don't mind being under another regiment for admin...Done it many times at Milcon... I Just don't want to give up my identity ... Be it The Essex Regiment (Tank) or The Windsor Regiment (RCAC) even if I am no longer active. Even if retired I am still proud of having once been a WINDSOR.

 

[dapaterson]

Actually, 4 RCR gave up its identities many amalgamations ago.  but at this time, removal of cap-badges isn't on the table - having one HQ with multiple badges beneath it is the concept (and what has been done in London (England)).

And re: Naming:  I prefer "31st (Iron Fist) Recce Regiment"

 

[Michael OLeary]

Michael:

Just to poke the fire a little... I don't see your Regiment (oops sorry!) Battalion being asked to give up its cap badge.

Really Babbling,

tango22a

Ever hear of The Canadian Fusiliers or The Oxford Rifles?

http://www.theroyalcanadianregiment.ca/history/general_history/perpetuation.htm