The Future of the Army Reserve - Discuss

[SwiftandSure]

So in the context of the RDF the programme for government says:

- Implement the White Paper on Defence
- Ensure at least 9,500 PDF personnel and a full strength Reserve
- Ensure the strength, skills base and contribution of the RDF are maximised and target full participation of the RDF at 4,000 personnel.

I don't see how that can be in any way achievable with the current terms and conditions of service. It would require significant ministerial leadership, getting the DoD to tow the line and I just don't see anyone in current appointment rocking that boat.

[AC182]

I don't see how that can be in any way achievable with the current terms and conditions of service. It would require significant ministerial leadership, getting the DoD to tow the line and I just don't see anyone in current appointment rocking that boat.

I think that as an executive summary, it's not.
The current thinking of forcing a "one size fits all" approach to integrating the reserve with the PDF is failing miserably due to complete lack of understanding as to how the two entities are fundimentally different, and require a setup whereby those differences compliment eachother, rather than oppose.

Just this lowly individual's opinion

[trellheim]

So in the context of the RDF the programme for government says:

- Implement the White Paper on Defence
- Ensure at least 9,500 PDF personnel and a full strength Reserve
- Ensure the strength, skills base and contribution of the RDF are maximised and target full participation of the RDF at 4,000 personnel.

Look that paragraph is essentially muck-ology. With a WP just completed and no interest at all in Defence at the moment ( although See Post-BRExit for some fun times )


As for Single Force everyone I know has jobs out the door and a metric shit-ton of work on their plates . In terms of responsibilities and kit we've never had it so good as this year ( ceremonial ) .

I can safely assume there will be no employment legislation in my time - because DOD will NEVER legislate for it .

Given that we can only work within what we have

[DeV]

What hope is there for employment protection legislation when nearly 4 years after the VFM. The principle DFR regarding the RDF hasn't been changed, when it refers to:

Formations that no longer exist
Appointments that no longer exist
Units that no longer exist
Grant in Aid that no longer exist (AFAIK)
Unit funds that no longer exist (AFAIK)
Welfare funds that no longer exist (AFAIK)
Training Obligations different to the AdminO
Even a Corps that no longer exists

[DeV]

According to the PfG:

"Ensure ..... a full strength reserve"

"Ensure the strength, skills base and contribution of the RDF are maximised and target full participation of the RDF at 4,000 personnel"

[trellheim]

dammit barrack jackets not up the top

OK no Grat no incentives , no specialist reserve ?

[DeV]

no specialist reserve ?

"Implement the White Paper on Defence"

[trellheim]

What a week eh ?

Anyway good reserve participation in Friday's All Army Orienteering ( organised by a reservist )


ON to more mundane matters

Defence Forces Reserve Training

696. Deputy Shane Cassells asked the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence his views on the scarcity of Reserve Defence Force, RDF, training units in rural areas, resulting in a lack of opportunity for persons in rural Ireland who wish to participate in Reserve Defence Force activities; his views on whether this is negatively affecting recruitment in the Reserve Defence Force; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14976/16]

Taoiseach and Minister for Defence (Deputy Enda Kenny): The White Paper on Defence 2015 confirmed that the primary role of the Reserve Defence Force (RDF) is to augment the PDF in crisis situations. It is also to contribute to State ceremonial events.

In terms of RDF training units in rural areas, as the Deputy may be aware, the re-organisation of the RDF was a key element of the response to the findings of the Value for Money Review of the RDF published in late 2012. The central recommendation provided for retention of the RDF with 4,000 personnel spread countrywide to be based in barracks and in 16 other locations. As part of the subsequent re-organisation, all RDF units were disestablished and amalgamated with PDF units. The retention of all previous locations was not a viable or sustainable option. The re-organisation offered significant advantages in terms of training and development of RDF personnel with PDF units having Reserve components rather than the previous parallel Reserve organisation structure. Reserve units are supported by their parent PDF unit and the 16 units outside of PDF installations are supported by dedicated full time PDF personnel. At the time of the re-organisation, every effort was made to minimise the requirement for personnel to relocate and to facilitate members in their preferred or local areas.

The RDF remains significantly under-strength and the ongoing challenge is to recruit and train sufficient personnel to meet the establishment figure. This challenge affects all elements of the RDF and is not confined to rural areas. Recruitment to the RDF is ongoing. While recruitment remains a key challenge, the retention of members is also a key requirement in order to maintain strength levels. The implementation of measures set out in the White Paper 2015 will provide opportunities for certain members of the RDF to undertake duties. I am of the view that this, and other initiatives outlined in the White Paper will be a key motivating factor in encouraging more people to join the RDF as well as making it more attractive for current members to stay.

What the fk are we still getting involved in this old shite. There is no benefit to rural posts that are not armed/ shared with sister PDF unit



There is a definite argument for cross referencing the retention values on a before/after reorganization. My hunch is it has not changed at all and we need to keep experimenting. Easter showed very clearly people parade for what they want not for what the unit requires and therefore it seems to me that we have a deeper problem. Access to kit and training is vastly different.

[trellheim]

I'd also like to quote the Taoiseach ( thanks Kieran as usual )

Taoiseach and Minister for Defence (Deputy Enda Kenny): The function of the Medical Corps of the Defence Forces is to provide medical services to serving members of the Defence Forces

I wish he'd tell that to their faces as my people and I have been told to f**k off several times we don't deal with reservists.

[DeV]

There is a definite argument for cross referencing the retention values on a before/after reorganization. My hunch is it has not changed at all and we need to keep experimenting.

I would say we lost a lot of people due to closures, some immediately some over time. We went from something like 99 non-PDF posts to 16. Say if there was an average of 6 in each of those closed posts and 3 of them are still members. That means we have lost 249 personnel (~6% of the establishment).

Of course this wasn't helped by getting rid of Grat.

I wouldn't go doing anything radical like closing the 16 remaining centres for a while, unless milage can be brought in for all. Unless the establishment is also cut (which would be a high cut in the AR!!).

Easter showed very clearly people parade for what they want not for what the unit requires and therefore it seems to me that we have a deeper problem. Access to kit and training is vastly different.

Absolutely which could mean go to pay for everything and replacing volunteerism with professionalism, which would have major implicitions in many ways to many people.

There is little incentive at the moment for many people.

stuff like having no issue warm kit has an impact be it for ATCA or major tactical ex's

[trellheim]

pays nothing whatever to do with it.

[DeV]

pays nothing whatever to do with it.

If you can't afford to put money into the car to travel (be it 10km or 200km) and public transport / car pooling isn't an option. And getting paid when you are supposed to be is also an issue.

The British Army Reserve, having said that, is exactly the same.

Someone senior recently said to me that with due respect we are amateurs he is probably right overall but many of us are striving to be what I term "part time or volunteer professionals".

I agree money isn't the be all and end all, but at least the Grat meant that it wasn't another €100+ that I had to find from elsewhere to put into the car to get where I was going. It didn't anywhere near cover the expenses associated with being a member but it did help towards them. The more costs associated with being a member the more we will lose.

My personal view is that all non-PDF locations should have been closed. The risk is if we currently have an effective strength of around 1500 (establishment being approx 4000), will be lose another 100-200 effective members who may not be able to make the move to a PDF location.

[DeV]

I would argue that we should have 1 fully manned (or close to) RDF sub-unit per PDF unit (maybe 2).

[trellheim]

If you can't afford to put money into the car to travel (be it 10km or 200km) and public transport / car pooling isn't an option. And getting paid when you are supposed to be is also an issue

Yep. Agree 100%

But it has no bearing on informed retention ; I did a spreadsheet many years ago where I did the analysis against most infantry subs I had known and without a fail every year a similar attrition of numbers happened, including pre and post re-org/removal of grat. For those who just can't make the money end work, its a tiny percentage

What I wanted to fix was to stop that massive attrition OR focus on something different - identifying early on the characteristics of the "keepers" and giving them every encouragement to stay in including accelerated "whatevers"

Do Believe Grat should exist but it doesn't affect retention you end up paying most of your mil service yourself.

[DeV]

True

I