Reconstitution

[Kirkhill]

Caution: Geezer Eruption

In there 1950s and '60s the consensus, amongst the politico-military grownups was that we were gonna fight the "big one," complete with nukes, fairly soon. Those politico-military grownups had been part if the leadership tweak IN 1939-45 and in 1950-53 som they knew what worked and what didn't. They also understood the society in which they operated and they knew that young people were, at least, often aimless or disconnected from their parents' values or even delinquents and they knew that those kinds could be first rate sailors and soldiers. Both the Navy and the Army developed "apprentice" programmes - the RCN's was more ambitious but, I think, based on very limited knowledge I hasten to point out, that the Army's programme (two years after successful 9th or partial 10the grade) was better.

The Army's programme, as I recall, as confined to 4 corps: Artillery, Engineers, RCEME and Signals. The graduation requirement were that the apprentice soldier must have advanced one (general programme) academic grade and earned a trade. The aim was to build a solid, career NCO cadre.

I'm going to say that the "green monsters" as we called them - apprentice soldiers wore a green band on their epaulettes - was a resounding success, going well beyond achieving its aim. It was cancelled because it didn't fit with either unification or, slightly later, late 1960s/early1970s, with the government's general anti-military/there'll be no war stance.

Personally, I'm not worried about recruiting officers - especially not fighter pilots - in peace or war. But our lack of young men and women in the hard sea trades and combat soldier trades scares the f_ _k outta me.

I think the the "big one" feels closer than ever and I also think that the CF "feels broken" as someone else said about a bigger issue and my sense is that the biggest problem is that we cannot or have decide not to try to attract the people who make the best sailors and soldiers.

Im know I'm old and old fashioned, but I think I know what works.

Both the Navy and the Army developed "apprentice" programmes - the RCN's was more ambitious but, I think, based on very limited knowledge I hasten to point out, that the Army's programme (two years after successful 9th or partial 10the grade) was better.

The Army's programme, as I recall, as confined to 4 corps: Artillery, Engineers, RCEME and Signals. The graduation requirement were that the apprentice soldier must have advanced one (general programme) academic grade and earned a trade. The aim was to build a solid, career NCO cadre.

But what would those unskilled, delinquent 17-20 year olds do in the modern world to earn their pay and opportunities in the forces? What would attract them in the first place?

For the Army, as we are re-discovering, it actually doesn't take very much to make an effective field soldier. A few weeks training and you have someone that can fall in on a battalion and start standing sentry or lugging ammunition for crew served weapons, maybe aspire to becoming a driver, a mortarman, or maybe, eventually even, a gunner.

For the Navy, what is the equivalent? Small boat sailor? Boarding parties? Riggers? Local security force when in foreign ports? Home ports?

For the Air Force - well the Air Force needs its own army - the RCAF Regiment. - Base security at home and abroad.

An 18 year old, granted a conditional minimum security clearance for a couple of years of low level service would have ample opportunity to prove themselves and also to observe other people doing jobs they might find interesting.

Should those people be immediately inducted into the Reg Force? Or should they be inducted into a Class C Reserve Force until they have proven themselves?

 

[FJAG]

Should those people be immediately inducted into the Reg Force? Or should they be inducted into a Class C Reserve Force until they have proven themselves?

I'm not sure how that helps.

While there are some fundamental differences between the RegF and Class C, in practice it's the same thing; a soldier serving full-time.

The issue from the management point of view is ceilings on manning and the budget to fill the positions. And that isn't what should dictate whether a person is hired RegF or Class C. The issue should be how many people are needed full-time to meet defence needs and how many are needed part-time to allow for a surge in manning when needed.

The fact that reservists need training is immutable. Whether that training should be Class A or B or C depends on whether the training can be done successfully at a lower level of cost.

Frankly, if we can't afford to fix tanks and howitzer barrels then we shouldn't spend full-time salaries on having teenagers prove themselves to us.

 

[Quirky]

That and the pay increase RUMINT. Although I've seen pushback on people randomly speculating now.

Until the pay is restructured by trades and qualifications/responsibilities and not by rank, you'll never please everyone. Paying someone more money because they 'tick the boxes' when in fact they offer nothing more than lip service and can't actually perform well in their trade, i.e. tech trades, will always be an issue. I've never seen so much incompentence in the Sgt-CWO ranks than I do now. Leaders who finally make it past Sgt after 30 years because of attrition, not leadership abilities. It's sad.

 

[Kirkhill]

I'm not sure how that helps.

While there are some fundamental differences between the RegF and Class C, in practice it's the same thing; a soldier serving full-time.

The issue from the management point of view is ceilings on manning and the budget to fill the positions. And that isn't what should dictate whether a person is hired RegF or Class C. The issue should be how many people are needed full-time to meet defence needs and how many are needed part-time to allow for a surge in manning when needed.

The fact that reservists need training is immutable. Whether that training should be Class A or B or C depends on whether the training can be done successfully at a lower level of cost.

Frankly, if we can't afford to fix tanks and howitzer barrels then we shouldn't spend full-time salaries on having teenagers prove themselves to us.

If you keep the inductees in the Reserve system then you can grant them A, B or C hours, and keep them compartmentalized from sensitive information. Meanwhile the inductee gets a slow introduction to an alien culture. Some will choose to drop out - no harm no foul. Some will stick with part time service. Some that get lots of Class C work might be worth keeping on reserve for call up. And some might be worth engaging full time and training.

As to fixing tanks and howitzer barrels .... different budget in any event. And we should be planning of using smaller crews.

 

[Navy_Pete]

@Kirkhill I don't think there is a Navy equivalent. The way we run our ships everyone has to be able to contribute to damage control, which means training at the DC school plus time on a particular class getting to know the way around and where the emergency kit is. There are usually some random spots on the ships like scullery for a few folks like that but usually it's for additional QL3 people doing their OJT as that's the only 'training bunks' we have, and untrained folks are basically passengers that need escorts if something happens.

A bunch of random teenagers also won't change the lack of trained crew, insufficient time alongside to do repairs, and lack of people/resources ashore to properly support the 30+ year old ships. And given that the AOPs were delivered with some signficant design flaws those are also sucking up a lot of resources (and crews we don't have).

 

[Kirkhill]

@Kirkhill I don't think there is a Navy equivalent. The way we run our ships everyone has to be able to contribute to damage control, which means training at the DC school plus time on a particular class getting to know the way around and where the emergency kit is. There are usually some random spots on the ships like scullery for a few folks like that but usually it's for additional QL3 people doing their OJT as that's the only 'training bunks' we have, and untrained folks are basically passengers that need escorts if something happens.

A bunch of random teenagers also won't change the lack of trained crew, insufficient time alongside to do repairs, and lack of people/resources ashore to properly support the 30+ year old ships. And given that the AOPs were delivered with some signficant design flaws those are also sucking up a lot of resources (and crews we don't have).

I take your point about the training requirement for the RCN generally. The same thing applies to the RCAF. And also to those elements of the Army that used to be known as the Ordnance (also blue suiters).

But those positions require a pretty big leap on the part of the recruited

from civvy to regimented
from home to overseas
from shore life to sea duty
from (potentially) delinquent to top secret
from unskilled to tech of any type (or even Bosn).

How do you make that leap into a series of smaller steps?

So does the navy need its own RCN Regiment? Equivalent to the RCAF Regiment? Reservists on Class C taskings for port duties? Maybe strap-on Air Defence systems for cargo vessels under escort?

If nothing else it would give Navy and Air Force GOFOs more boots on parade.

Maybe some of those "untrained" berths could go to people whose only DC instruction is muster on the flight deck and stay out of the way.

 

[Navy_Pete]

I take your point about the training requirement for the RCN generally. The same thing applies to the RCAF. And also to those elements of the Army that used to be known as the Ordnance (also blue suiters).

But those positions require a pretty big leap on the part of the recruited

from civvy to regimented
from home to overseas
from shore life to sea duty
from (potentially) delinquent to top secret
from unskilled to tech of any type (or even Bosn).

How do you make that leap into a series of smaller steps?

So does the navy need its own RCN Regiment? Equivalent to the RCAF Regiment? Reservists on Class C taskings for port duties? Maybe strap-on Air Defence systems for cargo vessels under escort?

If nothing else it would give Navy and Air Force GOFOs more boots on parade.

Maybe some of those "untrained" berths could go to people whose only DC instruction is muster on the flight deck and stay out of the way.

Untrained personnel are passengers. Our ships are designed for cargo ship specs, so we don't have things like sprinklers in the eating/living areas and additional escape areas, so that adds some extra risk for no real gain.

Untrained folks also need supervision, so really no benefit to the ships. compared to someone that has the basics done.

Our ships no longer have extra berths for untrained people. And honestly don't see the purpose. CAF is recruiting something like 20% of the annual RCN target, not necessarily into the right trades, so we don't have trained people to really spare to essentially babysit completely untrained people in the fleet.

 

[markppcli]

If you keep the inductees in the Reserve system then you can grant them A, B or C hours, and keep them compartmentalized from sensitive information. Meanwhile the inductee gets a slow introduction to an alien culture. Some will choose to drop out - no harm no foul. Some will stick with part time service. Some that get lots of Class C work might be worth keeping on reserve for call up. And some might be worth engaging full time and training.

As to fixing tanks and howitzer barrels .... different budget in any event. And we should be planning of using smaller crews.

so they join part time, get weeken training or something then apply a year later for full time service? Is that the gist of what you’re suggesting ?

Where are we finding out we need less training, who’s benefiting from this need for people to stand guard ?

As a total aside I’ll say this about the young soldiers I speak to daily. Not a single damned one has ever told me “man I really thought my DP1 was too long, too hard, or too intense”. What they do say is “I finished DP1 and I didn’t feel proud, it was too easy, I got there and was surprised this was it.” That’s where they start becoming disillusioned with the CAF, not from being over trained but feeling under trained and under accomplished. More PT, more field time, and more esprit de corps (gut checks, history, “tradition”) is what helps fix us not less.

 

[Kirkhill]

Untrained personnel are passengers. Our ships are designed for cargo ship specs, so we don't have things like sprinklers in the eating/living areas and additional escape areas, so that adds some extra risk for no real gain.

Untrained folks also need supervision, so really no benefit to the ships. compared to someone that has the basics done.

Our ships no longer have extra berths for untrained people. And honestly don't see the purpose. CAF is recruiting something like 20% of the annual RCN target, not necessarily into the right trades, so we don't have trained people to really spare to essentially babysit completely untrained people in the fleet.

No benefit for the ships. I can understand that. But is there benefit for the Navy?

 

[Kirkhill]

so they join part time, get weeken training or something then apply a year later for full time service? Is that the gist of what you’re suggesting ?

Where are we finding out we need less training, who’s benefiting from this need for people to stand guard ?

I'm not saying that we need less training. I'm saying that people with less training can still be useful. Even if it is just standing guard. In the meantime they get to know the institution.

 

[markppcli]

I'm not saying that we need less training. I'm saying that people with less training can still be useful. Even if it is just standing guard. In the meantime they get to know the institution.

Meantime implies an in between stage; what’s this the meantime of.

Standing Guard of what?

 

[Brad Sallows]

Leadership culture evolves with time and circumstance. The qualities of the people who became soldiers/sailors in, say, 1815, 1915, and 2015 are very different. Whatever was leadership culture in the Canadian forces prior to Aug 1914 or Sep 1939 was affected by the mass mobilization of young men who were not obedient peasants by nature. Following each war, the lessons learned hung on for a while. Many leaders in 1965 had a lot of collective experience of real war and soldiering and leading. By 1985, the collective experience was more along the lines of Pearsonian peacekeeping. Etc.

 

[Kirkhill]

Meantime implies an in between stage; what’s this the meantime of.

Standing Guard of what?

In my "meantime" I am thinking of the interval between the time that an interested civilian is inducted and starts parading to the time that that civilian has useful skills and can be gainfully employed.

I would be bringing any non-technical army troops in through the local armouries and have them attested and kitted. Their responsibilities can start as night watchmen and fire pickets. As they learn, and pick up some Class B hours then their available skills can be applied to other duties - disaster relief for example, or helping out at the local Covid injection site. More skills and they can learn how to secure a FOB or a BMA or an Airfield or the Parliament buildings or patrol GLOCs or man a GBAD system or the Guns.

More training gets them a full time slot with a battalion of LAV infantry instead of just a Class C contract.

 

[markppcli]

In my "meantime" I am thinking of the interval between the time that an interested civilian is inducted and starts parading to the time that that civilian has useful skills and can be gainfully employed.

I would be bringing any non-technical army troops in through the local armouries and have them attested and kitted. Their responsibilities can start as night watchmen and fire pickets. As they learn, and pick up some Class B hours then their available skills can be applied to other duties - disaster relief for example, or helping out at the local Covid injection site. More skills and they can learn how to secure a FOB or a BMA or an Airfield or the Parliament buildings or patrol GLOCs or man a GBAD system or the Guns.

More training gets them a full time slot with a battalion of LAV infantry instead of just a Class C contract.

I’m not against shorter term contracts for people in the training system. Big fan of that. What you’re describing is what we used to do with people on BTL / PAT / Holding Platoons though. Military odd jobs until they hit a OFP. That was seen as “demeaning”

 

[Kirkhill]

I’m not against shorter term contracts for people in the training system. Big fan of that. What you’re describing is what we used to do with people on BTL / PAT / Holding Platoons though. Military odd jobs until they hit a OFP. That was seen as “demeaning”

Not everything deemed wrong is wrong.

There is a real problem if a person signs up for a tech career and spends a year doing fire pickets and sweeping blocks in Borden rather than getting real training. At very least they should be released to the local community college where they could start picking up some relevant trades skills.

But for the combat arms - if the candidate is that gormless that 8 to 12 weeks of BTL doesn't qualify him to join a section in a battalion, even as a sanitary man, then they should be released - preferably before they get offered an engagement of any kind.

 

[btrudy]

Until the pay is restructured by trades and qualifications/responsibilities and not by rank, you'll never please everyone. Paying someone more money because they 'tick the boxes' when in fact they offer nothing more than lip service and can't actually perform well in their trade, i.e. tech trades, will always be an issue. I've never seen so much incompentence in the Sgt-CWO ranks than I do now. Leaders who finally make it past Sgt after 30 years because of attrition, not leadership abilities. It's sad.

That's not really a pay issue though. That's a "we're promoting the wrong people" issue.

No benefit for the ships. I can understand that. But is there benefit for the Navy?

I’m not against shorter term contracts for people in the training system. Big fan of that. What you’re describing is what we used to do with people on BTL / PAT / Holding Platoons though. Military odd jobs until they hit a OFP. That was seen as “demeaning”

Not really; we don't have any massive security force needs going unfilled. The bulk of our physical security requirements are handled by Commissionaires, with armed responses if needed from MPs and the Ships themselves. The Navy doesn't have any particular use for a large group of untrained personnel. Our shore requirements are in training institutions and maintenance facilities.

Basically this is just seems like trying to find something useful for people to do while on PAT platoon, but, well, we've already got those and are struggling to keep them from being so bored they VR. Tightening up the training pipeline so that there's no waiting around doing nothing before people get to the schools and to the ships is a far better solution.

No one likes being given make work projects while they're sitting around waiting for their actual career to start. It is in fact a massive dissatisfier that makes the whole retention crisis worse. Get people in the door and have them doing the job they signed up to do instead. Avoid wasting people's time, instead of trying to focus on finding slightly less useless ways of wasting their time.

We shouldn't be trying to focus on giving people "Military odd jobs until they hit a OFP" because the fact that they're doing these military odd jobs interferes with them attaining that OFP. Any time spend doing military odd jobs is time that they could have otherwise been conducting training that progressed towards becoming occupationally qualified, and thus actually employable.

 

[Kirkhill]

@btrudy

See my comments above about PAT platoons and sitting around Borden. I agree with you.

You are thinking about people in their thirties engaging with their life.

I am thinking of teenagers trying to figure out what they like and what they might do with their life. I want that process to start close to their homes. Continuing on from the Cadet movement's engagement of youngsters.

Any time spend doing military odd jobs is time that they could have otherwise been conducting training that progressed towards becoming occupationally qualified, and thus actually employable.

Any occupation is going to require time spent doing odd jobs. And that includes civvy radar techs and helicopter mechanics. Filling the blank spaces on the timesheet is always a challenge. But it is also part of OJT - for any profession.

 

[Navy_Pete]

@Kirkhill There would be a short term benefit to the Navy, but needs to be done intentionally with additional people beyond the normal ship crew dedicated to supervision/training. That will mean likely coming out of normal operations, and now that the GoC wants us to maintain 3 ships deployed, I don't see how we have the people or platforms to do that safely. The ships are tired, and beating on them now means they are more likely to self retire. Similarly if you are a crew supporting OJT sails it can be a bit brutal over the long term, so that may also impact retention. So maybe long term severe impacts to keep some Pats happy.

We currently have a crazy number of ships unable to go to sea at the moment due to major equipment defects that are supposed to be in the rotation, and don't remember ever seeing anything like that before.

The CPFs are in worse shape now mechanically than the 280s were at the end of life, which isn't surprising as the 280s were a lot more robustly built, and had baseline refits for the first half of their life.

 

[btrudy]

@btrudy

See my comments above about PAT platoons and sitting around Borden. I agree with you.

You are thinking about people in their thirties engaging with their life.

I am thinking of teenagers trying to figure out what they like and what they might do with their life. I want that process to start close to their homes. Continuing on from the Cadet movement's engagement of youngsters.

I really don't agree with the notion that teenagers or folks in their early 20s are going to be any happier spending the first bit of their career marking time. Get them in and throw them into things ASAP; forge them into a tool and put them to use. Make their efforts and time meaningful.

Anything else is just going to be breeding resentment.

Any occupation is going to require time spent doing odd jobs. And that includes civvy radar techs and helicopter mechanics. Filling the blank spaces on the timesheet is always a challenge. But it is also part of OJT - for any profession.

Sure, but I expect that filling in the blank time to be measured in hours or days, not months or years.

 

[markppcli]

Not everything deemed wrong is wrong.

There is a real problem if a person signs up for a tech career and spends a year doing fire pickets and sweeping blocks in Borden rather than getting real training. At very least they should be released to the local community college where they could start picking up some relevant trades skills.

But for the combat arms - if the candidate is that gormless that 8 to 12 weeks of BTL doesn't qualify him to join a section in a battalion, even as a sanitary man, then they should be released - preferably before they get offered an engagement of any kind.

No, there’s more to doing an infantry man’s job than a bunch of on the job training.

The absolute last think we need to be adding to everyone’s plate, especially that missing middle of SNCOs and officers, is to be tracking who’s learned / qualified / able to do what across the whole damned Bn as the latest crop arrive able to “stand guard.”

Not really; we don't have any massive security force needs going unfilled. The bulk of our physical security requirements are handled by Commissionaires, with armed responses if needed from MPs and the Ships themselves. The Navy doesn't have any particular use for a large group of untrained personnel. Our shore requirements are in training institutions and maintenance facilities.

You’re crossing me and Kirkill here, I see no purpose for people who are the to do fire picket. They need to driven through the training system as effectively and efficiently as possible.

Basically this is just seems like trying to find something useful for people to do while on PAT platoon, but, well, we've already got those and are struggling to keep them from being so bored they VR. Tightening up the training pipeline so that there's no waiting around doing nothing before people get to the schools and to the ships is a far better solution.

No one likes being given make work projects while they're sitting around waiting for their actual career to start. It is in fact a massive dissatisfier that makes the whole retention crisis worse. Get people in the door and have them doing the job they signed up to do instead. Avoid wasting people's time, instead of trying to focus on finding slightly less useless ways of wasting their time.

100 percent, at the same time I don’t think those people on BTL are actually unemployable.

We shouldn't be trying to focus on giving people "Military odd jobs until they hit a OFP" because the fact that they're doing these military odd jobs interferes with them attaining that OFP. Any time spend doing military odd jobs is time that they could have otherwise been conducting training that progressed towards becoming occupationally qualified, and thus actually employable.

Totally agree.

@btrudy

See my comments above about PAT platoons and sitting around Borden. I agree with you.

You are thinking about people in their thirties engaging with their life.

People join in their mid twenties and have relationships they don’t want to give up.

I am thinking of teenagers trying to figure out what they like and what they might do with their life. I want that process to start close to their homes. Continuing on from the Cadet movement's engagement of youngsters.

Most don’t join in their teens, they try some stuff, live a little, then look for a career. Then we try and move them through the system as effectively as possible. Doesn’t always work.

Any occupation is going to require time spent doing odd jobs. And that includes civvy radar techs and helicopter mechanics. Filling the blank spaces on the timesheet is always a challenge. But it is also part of OJT - for any profession.

Only we’re salaried, so there’s no reason to fill blank space on a time sheet.