Printable View
These are both PDF numbers and RDF numbers interspersed into this discussion, please be careful in what you are referring to. Annual PDF Attrition figures month by month by rank and service is not regularly asked as a PQ , it is not the same thing as PDF Strength as it takes no account of people in training . Another good question is number of people enlisted into RDF and PDF by service by month for GS and Cadets
I corrected myself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fridge Magnet
Recruits (being a grade of Pte) and Cadets (having been enlisted as 3*s for the duration of their cadetship) are included in the figures for privates as they are on the DF's strength.Quote:
Originally Posted by trellheim
I corrected myself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fridge Magnet
But you'd expect say at least 200 to be living on TOE/age grounds alone annually
Recruits (being a grade of Pte) and Cadets (having been enlisted as 3*s for the duration of their cadetship) are included in the figures for privates as they are on the DF's strength.Quote:
Originally Posted by trellheim
Quote:
Originally Posted by TangoSierra
That's a large disparity between answers given in the Dail in 2012 Vs ones given in 2016.Quote:
DAIL answers Wednesday 14th March 2012
Gives details of vacancy levels in PDF
4. Deputy Dara Calleary asked the Minister for Defence Alan Shatter the total number of retirements from the armed forces at the end of February 2012; the number of senior positions that are now vacant in the armed forces; the number of positions that have been or will be filled; his plans to maintain military capacities in view of these retirements; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14579/12]
Deputy Fergus O’Dowd:
As the Defence Forces are currently more than 500 below the agreed serving cadre of 9,500, phased recruitment of in excess of 500, I believe, will be undertaken in 2012. I am advised by the military authorities that a new recruitment competition will be advertised shortly.
Strength at 29 Feb 2012 8,918
Four years on and the Defence Forces is still at the same figure, 500 under strength, despite how many being recruited over 4 years? 2000+?
The strength given by Paul Keogh is probably the end of year or something.Quote:
Originally Posted by TangoSierra
Because they are generally putting off attestation until towards the end of the year in order to save money that can be used elsewhere in Vote 36.
End of year for 2011 was 9,438 (Kehoe) with end of Feb 2012 figure being 8,918 (O'Dowd)
In two months 510 people left??
According to annual reports
Strength 31 Dec 11 was 9438
Strength 31 Dec 12 was 9359
633 having been inducted in 2012
So if my maths are correct 712 left in 2012
Page 108 - Key Output Targets 2016
PDF strength 95-100%
Actual output was 9,044 in September with all probability that it fell below 9,000 by December. 9000/9,500 is <95%
http://www.per.gov.ie/wp-content/upl...s-16062016.pdf
https://www.kildarestreet.com/wrans/?id=2017-02-15a.774
The Minister for State has stated that the DF strength at 31 December 2016 was 9,126 personnel, comprising 7,332 Army, 704 Air Corps and 1,090 Naval Service, whole time equivalent.
subtract the 690 new entrants that were inducted in 2016 (590 General Service and 100 Cadets), who have just finished or in the majority of cases are still in training you are left with only 8,436 trained personnel. When you subtract the additional 60 cadets (all services) still in training and the 72 personnel on leave of absence, the real figure approaches
8,300.
Subtract the 500 personnel overseas at any one time and you can see why Reserve Recruit applications are left on a desk for several months. It also shows why people are leaving in droves due to burnout and why emergency transplant patient transfer flights cannot be manned
Add to that not having the personnel to answer the questions being asked
https://www.kildarestreet.com/wrans/...%3A152#g1016.r
Fixed that for youQuote:
Originally Posted by TangoSierra
803 left in 2012Quote:
Originally Posted by DeV
Attachment 8467
https://www.kildarestreet.com/wrans/...ection%3Awrans
The real reason the DoD are happy to let the DF bleed personnel
Permanent Defence Force: pay 30,556 Savings of €30.556 million arose due to higher than projected
retirements and lower than projected recruitment in 2016, leading to
lower than anticipated numbers of personnel serving in the PDF
during the year. A supplementary estimate allocated savings of €23
million from this subhead to subhead A.11 to facilitate payments for
a fourth naval vessel under the Naval Vessel Replacement
Programme.
It isn't necessarily the DoD!
I was in a room where either the COS or ACOS (can't remember which) was forthcoming in saying that is how the DF paid for it (and the other 3 vessels).
But remember during that period, people were still being pass the same, recruitment was still happening
I remember a Dail Written Answer stating that the DoD did not have a policy of paying for equipment using money saved from the pay subhead
Even the press is catching on to the crisis. The budget will be an indication of whether the government intends to do anything about it beyond pouring cups of recruits and cadets into the bucket with the hole in the bottom.
Can we expect to see flying machines and armoured vehicles being purchased by this gimmick in the future, then, depending on which arm replaces him?Quote:
Originally Posted by TangoSierra
There was a time when savings went back into central funds.. At least the DF is seeing the benefit now.
Vehicles and equipment can be bought almost instantly.
Recruiting, training and providing experiential learning to personnel to make them competent to operate vehicles and equipment takes years.
When you have such a high turnover in such a short time, it means that experience is lost without that being passed onto the upcoming personnel to build upon. You lose capability as the system cycles on a downward spiral below technical competence.
What happens when there are no more instructors left? The DF will have cadets and recruits being trained by cadets and recruits at this rate
Sure as long as there are some hardy bucks to point some bayonets into the sky at Easter, thats all that really matters.
The process of buying vehicles, or anything else for that matter, is so long winded that you could easily generate a basically trained man. 16 weeks will do that. The DF cannot buy any capital item bigger than a loaf of bread without jumping thru hoops, Civil service style unless it's an item given urgent priority.
You want to stop people leaving in droves, especially expensively trained techs? Shake up the Staff ranks to stop insisting that trained techs go abroad to act as rifle carriers; stop insisting that Air Corps techs do the same NCO's course as infantrymen, so that they waste 16 weeks of their lives instead of doing a proper tech NCOs course (the RAF stopped doing it in 1954, so the Don has a bit of catching up to do); stop dicking around with Naval personnel, who find themselves doing back to back rotations so that the 180 days at sea becomes a sick joke.
Basically trained does not equal technical competence. Support weapons, vehicle driving, exercises to provide experiential learning opportunities etc etc take years.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoneToTheCanner
Your point was that vehicles can be bought almost instantly, which is really not the case. The only way the DF would take on any vehicle, from a bicycle to a recovery vehicle, at any kind of short notice, would be if there was a critical national or overseas emergency and they had to commandeer or otherwise take up into service as an Urgent Operational Requirement (UOR-a term familiar to UK servicemen), ie, we want it now, as in right now, not next year or the year after. I don't know if it's still the case but some Officers had the power to spend several thousands to buy instantly required kit, without going thru channels but they had to be able to justify it later. As for training techs or skilled men, the DF seems stuck on the formula that 16 weeks is what it takes to learn to do anything smarter than tying shoelaces, which takes 16-week sized chunks out of the available manpower. The DF moans about lack of available vehicles/helicopters/ships but they keep shooting themselves in the foot by taking away the very people who are doing the job to do unrelated things. A vehicle tech going on a UN tour to keep Mowags rolling is doing his job; a helicopter tech or an ERA going on a UN tour because he has been told that he will never get promoted unless he does a tour and then finds himself spending six months holding a rifle or stacking a shelf is not doing his job, by being unavailable for seven months and the end result is that the vehicle/aircraft/ship spends longer up on a ramp/up on jacks/tied alongside than it should. The long term effect is that serviceability and availability fall to pieces (in this day and age, the basic standard is greater than 90%...I suspect the DF's is considerably less), the DF Staff form the opinion that their own techs are useless, which is not the case and ultimately, maintenance gets farmed out to civvies and the DF gets tied into expensive service contracts. It's the same for other grades and trades; why do you think AC pilots leave? Because they have to do ground tours and they end up bored to tears doing anything but flying and they jack it in. Other air arms have what is called the Professional Aircrew Spine or stream, where pilots are pilots first and foremost and are not sent off counting boots or rifles; they serve to fly and that's what they do...Why was the Navy losing ships Captains? because promotion to ships command was so slow, they literally had to wait until a man died before getting his seat. The DF doesn't help itself, sometimes.
Personnel numbers still in a downward spiralQuote:
Originally Posted by TangoSierra
https://www.kildarestreet.com/wrans/...ection%3Awrans