St Jean, needs changes?

[pbi]

Infanteer: I don''t see what is so unrealistic about your concepts. Quite the opposite: IMHO it was (and is...) Unification that is "unrealistic". It has no basis in operational requirements, contributes nothing to operational capability in and of itself, and creates a false image of "jointness" that in fact does not even exist. Since we designed and imposed the system on ourselves, we have the power to change it, such that its insidious and destructive aspects are removed or neutralized. While there may be some ego problems with our current govt party in completely dismantling Unification (since they birthed the ugly beast...) there is little stopping us from changing it from within until the term "Unification" exists only as a label. I'm exaggerating a bit, but you get the point. We have to admit that it was not well thought out, it is a relic of outdated thinking, and it is unresponsive since great chunks of it do not respond to either an operational commander or a force generator. Nobody is interested in copying it. If and when it dies, very few people will cry at the funeral.

Cheers.

 

[Infanteer]

Agree, as I said above, Unification to me seems to be a top-down, strategic affair that should end at the operational level (this is where its cousin, Jointness should come in).  It should be used in order to override the feudal arrangement of Service-based competition and Service-based approaches to National Defence.  Why this requires an Infantry Soldier, an Avionics Tech, and a Bosun to receive common training is beyond me.

Unification does have its uses; a few that I can think of are:
- A National Chain-of-Command with a professional Military Chief (The CDS)
- A National Staff and Planning Capability that ensures a cohesive and joint Defence team (The Land, Naval, and Maritime Staff should be relegated to training, careers and tactical doctrine, essentially part of CDS's staff)
- A higher loyalty to this National (as opposed to Service-based) C-of-C (this means that senior Officers begin to blur in their training and orientation)
- Unified National Commands to overlook Joint Forces - these should be along territorial/functional lines and not service based ones (ie: Western Command as opposed to LFWA, etc)

Purple trades, "lowest-common denominator" training, and cross-pollination should not be in this list.

Cheers,
Infanteer

 

[FSTO]

Man, do I have a lot to say on this subject.

 

[Infanteer]

Let's hear it then! 

 

[Chainsaw]

Hmmmm, this is beginning to worry me. I'm hoping to do my BMQ in the fall, and I really don't want to recieve subpar training.

One of you spoke of "Enhanced BMQ" which combines BMQ and SQ into one. Do you have an estimate on when that will be put into place?

Also, does the quality of training improve at the moment when entering SQ or MOC training?

Thanks,

 

[ZipperHead]

IMO the death of the military can be attributed to the attitude I have heard from certain people (think bars, not chevrons here....) when I bring up the "soldier first, tradesman second" argument (imagine that, something that EVERYBODY here seems to agree on :): "If we do that, a lot of people won't want to join!!!!" Well, tough shit, I say. I think we have people NOT joining (even as tradesmen) because they see how inherently lame our military has become. I would rather have 10 hardcore soldiers who happen to turn wrenches, flip eggs, file PER's, lance boils, than 100 civvies in uniform who can't handle a weapon or man the front gate because they are scared.

I have worked with a guy (teaching SQ) who went through leadership trg with the navy, then came to the Army..... what a fiasco. His attitude was like death (too many examples, but one that sticks in my mind is his insistence that we should all be on a first name basis (regardless of rank), like the navy and the air force. "I say, Pete, do me a solid and charge that MG nest...."), and I would like to think that the soldiers he "taught" came out OK in spite of him (this individual was a section 2ic, with a hard core 3PPCLI section commander to keep the soldiers on the straight and narrow).

I think a lot of the problems with St Jean can be attributed to the fact that nobody wants to go there to be an instructor, unless Quebec is your home province (I won't get into a language/race/Quebec bashing situation here...). When I went in for my career manglers interview, after being told I was here (Gagetown) for another year (or more), I switched to plan B, and asked for a French course. The CWO (being french) decided to see if I was bluffing (saying I wanted to get language trg just to sound like I want to develop myself professionally....) by asking if I'd go to Quebec on completion of SLT. I said "sure, I'd go to Valcartier (to the 12e RBC) or to St Jean....". "You'd go to St Jean!?!?!?!?" And off and running on a recruitment spiel on how great St Jean is, and how I'd love it, and how there's more English spoken there than most Anglophones think. And on and on and on...... Anyway, any guesses on where my #3 posting preference is now????? And not by my choice (other than being stupid enough to say I'd go there ON COMPLETION of SLT). I only know of a few people who have worked at St Jean, and my confidence in the system isn't particularly brought up any appreciable amount with this knowledge. Let me just say that drive and dedication aren't strong suits on these individuals.......

In some perverse way, I would actually like to go to St Jean to be an instructor, but after my stint in this part of the trg system, I am going to be good and burnt out. And, if I leave here the same rank as I arrived (ie. not demoted) I'd be surprised, as my attitude ruffles feathers here (in the, let's all say it loudly now,COMBAT Training Center), let alone in the lovely world where teaching sensitivity and memo writing seems to take priority over weapons handling and the responsibility that comes with being a soldier........ As much as the professional in me doesn't want me to say this, but let someone else dash their will to live on the rocks that is (are?) the CFRS.

Speaking from a political point of view, they will never move the recruit school out of Quebec (barring secession, of course....) so many of the issues that come part and parcel with it being there will remain. IF they decide to have different branch (or even strictly field force) recruiting depots (we could only wish....), so many problems that we (in the army) encounter would be minimised so much. Not having to retrain people, having a much higher minimal standard, allowing people to actually be soldiers first, and not have to focus on training people in pre-deployment trg BASIC soldier skills, thereby reducing spool up times for deployments (without having to being scared shit-less any time you see a purple trade with a weapon pointed even remotely in your direction.... if the firing pin is it, of course  : ). We can only dream.......


Al

 

[ZipperHead]

One of you spoke of "Enhanced BMQ" which combines BMQ and SQ into one. Do you have an estimate on when that will be put into place?

I suspect "enhanced" is NDHQ speak for "reduced time frame, and even lesser quality". Sorry for being cynical, but training time gets cut so much, it won't be long before you do in-clearance and out-clearance on the same day for the majority of courses....

Al

 

[Gunner98]

Those instructors (from my Coy in Cornwallis at closure time) that moved to Saint Jean to continue their instructional duties were downtrodden after the first serials of trg.  Say what you want about the last days in Cornwallis but history, tradition, and most of all the isolation of the Annapolis Valley provided alot of focus for the recruits.

The soldiers first attitude for all can't be created in a purple school setting in 9 weeks. 

 

[FSTO]

I went to Chilliwack in 89 for BOTC. Great course, our platoon was all Navy MARS and Air Force Pilots so we were operationally focused. Graduated in Dec 89, went home for Christmas and then sent to St. Jean for SLT. We were all pumped to get on with our training that we thought that 6 months in the Mega would be a snap. Boy was I wrong, right from the start we were treated like crap, the teachers didn't really care about teaching us and the staff were a bunch of tin pot dictators who loved to put the screws to a bunch of anglo officers. By the time I left there they had sucked the drive out of all of us. After about 2 months at Venture (the Naval Officers Training Centre), the school CO sat our class down and asked what the f*** our problem was. Insubordination and bad attitudes was the norm. Make a long story short is that we got fixed up and pointed in the right direction. The Navy has learned its lesson and Junior Officers out of BOTC are sent to Esquimalt for SLT so that they are in a Naval environment and can keep an eye on what they have joined the Navy for.

After 15 yrs and now at Fleet School, the quality of sailor that we get out of St Jean is pretty poor. I blame CFRC for not vetting them at the front door and St. Jean for not instilling the proper discipline. Cut backs in personnel and FRP (remember that fiasco?), touchy feely recruiting campaigns and an unwillingness to use QR&O's and CFAO's to charge and throw out the rotten ones result in Fleet School and Battle School(?) having to clean up the mess.
The Navy that I am in does not use first names when talking between ranks and I actively discourage it when I hear it.
Now that Force Protection is the norm for all the ships, I have been advocating more small arms refresher (presently it is once every 2 years) training for the sailors. It has taken awhile but we are becoming more familiar with our weapons so that I am only nervous instead of terrified when I am around an OS carrying a C7.

 

[pbi]

The Navy has learned its lesson and Junior Officers out of BOTC are sent to Esquimalt for SLT so that they are in a Naval environment and can keep an eye on what they have joined the Navy for.

Well said. BZ.

Cheers.

 

[Horse_Soldier]

Maybe the only thing I can add to all that was said is that the Megastructure in St-Jean (which I not so fondly think of as the Megahorror) is probably the worst possible training environment one could imagine, especially for recruits, and that will have a real effect on the quality of training.

 

[Bograt]

Well said. BZ.

Cheers.

Almost. In my serial, all the squids (MARS, and Engineers) were told they would be doing SLT in either BC or Shearwater. They all received their posting messages, however, the engineers had their posting messages revoked and they were told they were staying in St. Jean.

The Chief Warrent of standards gave our end of course debrief. I was extremely blunt with him. In the auditorium with three platoons present I said "Chief, lets cut right to the heart of the matter. There is a complete and utter void of leadership at this institution. The only time we saw officers was when they were telling us to keep 5 meter spacing and wear leather combat cloves in the field. They did this while they were in the warmth of their trucks, sipping Timmies. Officer's ridiculed us for being substandard and without drive- but they also refused to deal with those of us who should not be here. Their impotence to enforce standards is the reason why the perceived quality is so low. For those of us who may not had any previous knowledge of the military, St. Jean was a piss poor introduction- entirely due to their leadership."

My Sergeant was listening outside the auditorium. A lot of senior NCOs bought me beer after I commissioned.

 

[childs56]

The system is broke and we all know it. How do we fix it is the problem. Seems every thing in our military that is broken takes years to fix. The real problems lie with the people in charge. They have allowed the changes from one extreme to the other. Deep down inside they know that what they are doing is wrong. Yet they allow it to go on. Why is that. Well as we have a military so small it is what one would call job protection. If so and so scratch my back i will scratch their's. The reality of it is that although some high ranking officer in Ottawa or else where has now attained the necessary criteria for the next rank or their position as CEO of a company. it is the soldiers sailors and airmen that have to suffer for their costly and sometimes irreversible mistakes. We have all seen the vehicles we have purchased over the years, the aircraft we have got rid of, the ones we bought, the ships we had and the ones we got. We can say pros and cons of them all. What was the true reason behind each and every decision to buy and build them. A political one. With a military as small as ours we cannot afford to allow General so and so to make the right decision. Because he has his own personal vested intrest at heart. (this is not in all cases but in the vast majority). So now we go onto the training system we now have. How have we allowed our military to go down the tubes and scrape the bottom of the barrel for the standards and the training for new recruits.  For one thing as previously stated the purple training that has taken effect is one of many, the fact that we have been so complacent for so many years, with little more then the army deploying into hostile situations, and even then isolated situations of soldiers being under fire and intense operations. So we grew a false sense of security and how we should grow our new military due to the ability to lower the COST as we have seen less of a threat through out the times. Then we got the other trades complaining about the standards, and how they should be lower due to the fact that they themselves should not be subjected to the level that an infantry was, or an infanterr to the level that a sailor needs. Some genius started to put together a battle plan,(whoops wrong term) influenced more by the saving of MONEY they could attain and the friends they would make. so they came up with the new standards of training, what they did in effect is lower the level of the members of the CF as opposed to the CAF. Such things as removing intense training of weapons and replacing with intense levels of sharp, and how to treat others nicely. The eroding of discipline training such as drill and its benefits of following commands in instinct and reaction. The part of discipline that a soldier sailor and airmen learned from cleaning their own floor, using the rudimentary of supplies. but attaining the level of perfection demanded of a well trained and disciplined outfit. One where you could literally eat off the floor. one where the brass was polished and you were proud of the toilets you just scrubbed, god hope any one that left it un flushed or worse. One may ask why is this type of training important, to learn how to work as a team, to allow members to adjust to following orders, allow themselves to become comfortable with the equipment they may will and shall use for their carrier. We got caught with our pants down numerous times due to the lessoning of this training. The very instinct of a member of a military less then 60 000. The ships now deploy guards with weapons in foreign ports, well at least some ports. I have heard officers comment on whether they should or not as they were uncomfortable with the members and their weapons skills. The airforce has members whom still believe in the old addage of i will never deploy into a hostile environment and if i do i will have the infantry to guard me.these same people haven't been to the field since they joined some 20 odd years ago. Support trades in the army are just starting to wake up due to the levels the US army realizing their training to be inadequate for convoy operations. I think the higher ups are getting scared as to what and how we can deploy and use our whole Battle group system. The only members of that group that can work under fire and do it safely up until a short time ago was the CBT Arms. I feel the new CDS will be changing these around. I have a good sense about what his visions are and how we will change our system back to how it was not some 10-15 years ago. where they had standards and they stick to them. The plan for Jan 2006 will hopefully go ahead and have us form a tri service support system like we have not seen the likes of. This shall require the whole military to conform to a standard of training as intense as ever before and in some areas where we have never done before.  Hopefully the recruit and leadership  schools take head of the changes soon and re implement the way we need to train.
Just in restating yes the system is broken, we need to fix it before we go to far and it is irreversible.

 

[pbi]

Good post CTD. I am glad to see that despite all your disappointment and frustrations, you have some faith in the CDS. If lack of leadership got us where we are, then only leadership will get us out. I also have faith in the CDS, although I do not know him at all. However, when I arrived in Aug 04 at the HQ of US Combined Joint Task Force 76 in Bagram, Afgh, the US DComd there said to me: "when Gen Hillier and the Canadians were running ISAF, at least we knew it had a backbone".  Political buttering up? Maybe, but that US Gen had no need to win points with me: I was a nobody. I saw it as professional recognition for the CDS (then CLS), and I think it is a hopeful sign for us. What we have missed for so long (probably since JADex) is that vital spark in the military system: leadership.

Cheers.

 

[2 Cdo]

A lot of valid points on the failure that our recruit training system has become! I just have one question, how many of you serving members are out there rocking the boat with AAR's and memos pointing out this disaster to the chain of command? Personally I have fired off several memos through the chain to try and address the problem (my career has pretty much stagnated at this point ;D).

I just have to say if more people address this through the chain of command, and ASK for feedback, maybe WE can implement change for the better! Remember it is ultimately our job as NCO's and officers to look after the welfare of our troops and their welfare is best served by training them to the HIGHEST standards!

 

[a_majoor]

I have been an avid memo writer on this subject on every course I have ever taught. What is disheartening is the dull "thud" when it hits the desk and no changes ever come from them. I taught at ATC Meaford in 1997, and reported on the serious problems there at the time. In 2001 I couldn't dodge the bullet and was there again; exactly the same issues were present.

Although I left a bit early due to a family emergency, I have it from several eye witness that at the end of the course, the Commander LFCA and several staff, and the CO ATC and his staff had a session with the remaining instructors. All my witness agree that not one person from LFCA or ATC took any notes during the session. Hearing there are 15 man sections with only one section commander/instructor again this year is a clear indication that nothing has changed since 1997.....

If there are not enough section commanders, 2I/Cs and Dvr Stmn to have a properly constituted platoon staff, then the only possible answer is to CUT BACK RECRUITING so the staff can handle the intake, and grow incrementally from there. I would rather graduate 60 trained soldiers at the end of the summer than have 200 figure 11s filling positions at the units this September, after taking integration and retraining into account, you will probably get just as much out of plan A (60 trained soldiers) as plan B (200 untrained soldiers).

 

[childs56]

you can do all the memo writing and AAR's you want, the reality is  the OC wants to gain his next rank so he himself is not going to rock the boat. He may have the best of intentions of changing the system once he gets a higher rank, but the leadership seems to have a way to ensure that you loose the intrest of such.  What we need to do is face reality of all our short commings and i think we have hit on more then a few important ones during this forum pretty well. Look at them, see how to improve the system and then get on with it.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Interesting topic.  I have no direct experience with St Jean, being a 1980s product of a very tough Chilliwack course, but I have no reason to doubt any of the problem areas that are being exposed here.

I noticed that MCpls are training officers at St Jean.  The year before I started Artillery Trg (1988) at the School in Gagetown, MBdrs trained the OCdts in order to make up for a lack of Snr NCO instructors.  It was, by all accounts, a disaster.  Apparently, all that most of the MBdrs could focus on was getting revenge for real or imagined ill-treatment they had suffered at the hands of an officer in the past and really stuck it to the OCdts.  The experiment, to my knowledge has never been repeated.  My point is not to slag MCpls.  Rather, I believe that, in general, the minimum rank to instruct officers should probably be a Sgt, if not WO.  I remember that the vast majority of my Officer training Chilliwack was done either by Officers (Captains) or very Senior WOs.  They had the maturity (in general), the experience, and provided an excellent example to us students. I left there with an excellent idea of what a good officer should look like and have spent the rest of my career trying to be that officer.

I wonder if it would be helpful of those enough on this board and elsewhere who care about the quality of our recruit training (both officer and NCM) to at least volunteer to work a serial in St Jean as incremental staff.  While I wouldn't want to be posted to St Jean (a location issue, vice job issue, although I hate the Mega) maybe if I did one serial on TD for 3 months, I could at least say that I turned out one good serial of officers and would have first-hand knowledge of the problems happening there.  I know that I can't change the basic problem of lack of resources, a poor TS, a crappy environment for training (the Mega)- but at least I could temporarily help alleviate an instructor shortage.  If enough of us did that, we might make a difference.

Anyone else up for it?

Cheers

 

[aesop081]

Interesting topic.   I have no direct experience with St Jean, being a 1980s product of a very tough Chilliwack course, but I have no reason to doubt any of the problem areas that are being exposed here.

I noticed that MCpls are training officers at St Jean.   The year before I started Artillery Trg (1988) at the School in Gagetown, MBdrs trained the OCdts in order to make up for a lack of Snr NCO instructors.   It was, by all accounts, a disaster.   Apparently, all that most of the MBdrs could focus on was getting revenge for real or imagined ill-treatment they had suffered at the hands of an officer in the past and really stuck it to the OCdts.   The experiment, to my knowledge has never been repeated.   My point is not to slag MCpls.   Rather, I believe that, in general, the minimum rank to instruct officers should probably be a Sgt, if not WO.   I remember that the vast majority of my Officer training Chilliwack was done either by Officers (Captains) or very Senior WOs.   They had the maturity (in general), the experience, and provided an excellent example to us students. I left there with an excellent idea of what a good officer should look like and have spent the rest of my career trying to be that officer.

I wonder if it would be helpful of those enough on this board and elsewhere who care about the quality of our recruit training (both officer and NCM) to at least volunteer to work a serial in St Jean as incremental staff.   While I wouldn't want to be posted to St Jean (a location issue, vice job issue, although I hate the Mega) maybe if I did one serial on TD for 3 months, I could at least say that I turned out one good serial of officers and would have first-hand knowledge of the problems happening there.   I know that I can't change the basic problem of lack of resources, a poor TS, a crappy environment for training (the Mega)- but at least I could temporarily help alleviate an instructor shortage.   If enough of us did that, we might make a difference.

Anyone else up for it?

Cheers

Sign me up...i'de rather be part of the solution than part of the problem.  I have been trought St-Jean in 93 for recruit training so i would not want to be posted there but i would not mind going there on TD to do a few serials now and then.

 

[TCBF]

" I would rather graduate 60 trained soldiers at the end of the summer than have 200 figure 11s filling positions at the units this September, after taking integration and retraining into account, you will probably get just as much out of plan A (60 trained soldiers) as plan B (200 untrained soldiers).'

- Interesting subject.  Ratios should differ depending on the subject being taught, as per the TP.  At CFRS Cornwallis, whatever came off the 707 at CFB Greenwood, the train station behind CFRS HQ, and the bus/taxi/mom on the highway was your platoon.  The shacks could hold 160 - four squads of 40.

A MCpl per Squad (times four), and a Trg Sgt and Pl Comd (Sgt or WO) per Pl.   

You had ten weeks - make it happen.

At CFLRS St-Jean, the Rct Pls were limited to 60 - the max capacity of the Trg Theatres.  You could have two squads of 30, or four of 15, but three of 20 was common.  Design of the Mega was not conducive to teaching recruits and getting a pl to bond.  You had eight weeks - make it happen.

In both cases, 'Hands on' classes were taught by Trg Cadres to the proper class ratio.

A loss of standards was caused by;

1.  Shoddy recruiting practices.
2.  Poor MHR policy - a DND problem.
3.  Weak-kneed and lily-livered administration of the standards at Coy and School level.

and,

4.  Poor course design and 'false economy', teaching too much too fast.  We are not just teaching skills - we are inculcating them with our military CULTURE.

Tom