Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Dislikes Dislikes:  0
Page 4 of 22 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 537
  1. #76
    Chief of the Diet Tribe Groundhog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    S 116 349
    Posts
    10,095
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Sluggie View Post
    There seems to be some confusion on the rdf proposal. They are not seeking to reduce the establishment by 66%. they are calling for 4,900 (about 45%??).
    Quote Originally Posted by kermit View Post
    The call is to reduce it by (note, not of) 4900, which is a reduction of about 40% of the current establishment......The reduction of 66% is in funding.
    That's not what the report says.


    The Group also considers that a smaller, more focused
    Reserve Defence Force (RDF) could deliver a more usable capability to the Defence Forces for less expenditure. It recommends accordingly that the RDF be reduced by two-thirds.

    Programme A – Contingent Capabilities

    Indicative share of pay savings €16.5m
    Indicative share of non-pay savings €13.3m
    A.1 Charge full value of rent to ‘overholders’ of married quarters €0.1m
    A.2 Discontinue the Army Equestrian Team €1.0m
    A.3 Reduce the Reserve Defence Force by two-thirds €5.6m

    Programme A savings €36.5m



    Say NO to violence against Women

    Quote Originally Posted by hedgehog View Post
    My favourite moment was when the
    Quote Originally Posted by hedgehog View Post
    red headed old dear got a smack on her ginger head

  2. #77
    Cpl
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Monaghan, back arse of No where
    Posts
    275
    Post Thanks / Like
    Would cutting the pdf more and recruiting more rdf to balance the loss ie more part timers than full timers so not as many pensions, full weeks pay etc would be spent?

  3. #78
    ltsmarty
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    www.1bderdf.com
    Posts
    185
    Post Thanks / Like

    numbers v expenditure

    Using the 2008 figures, 4321 used 81000 mandays, stated earlier
    At 31 Jan 09, strength was at 7500.
    1037 of the 4321 were recruits, leaving 3284 of the standing force attending at least 7 days FTT.

    So, 7500 - 1037 (recruits) = 5426 - 3284 (FTT) = 2142. (40%)

    This 40% of the RDF could not / would not commit to 7 days FTT for ones' unit, for one's nation !, when individual FTT was up and over 42 days !!!

    Why would you recruit more RDF ? 40% we have won't commit to even Annual Training.
    What are the set of factors for which this 40% won't commit ? Anyone know ?

    In fact, we should be discarding all this lot ! and stop fooling ourselves.

    Next cut will be the cadre, 400 (05) up to 421 (09), at approx cost 29m, supporting a force of 4321 that will commit to FTT (hours during which the PDF operate) won't last. The WP 05 gave a model of 299 for the Non-Integrated Cadre, so up its going rather than down !!

    The deciding factor in this will be the proposed 2.8m budget, that will sweat down the Reserve, similar to 1983.

  4. #79
    2/Lt
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Cork
    Posts
    1,141
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Groundhog View Post
    You propose to discharge 2,656 integrated reservists on the grounds that they are better trained than the non-integrated?:confused:
    No, he wants the Integrated Reserve removed from the establishment of the Reserve Forces. There was only 300 Int bods or so, and they are all now RTU'd so it doesn't mean anyone is discharged.
    I probably am wrong, sorry about that!!!

    Please PM me to correct me.

    But, not if I state an opinion, only if I state something as truth!!!

    I have bad opinions but I stick by them!!!

  5. #80
    Private 2*
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    12
    Post Thanks / Like

    Credentials & RDF Cutbacks:

    I would like to make a contribution to the current An Board Snip issue, which is

    Closely related to my own situation and without coming across as been too

    inconsiderate I would take this opportunity to pose a small question:


    Assuming recommendations are implemented. Would it be fair to assume that

    opportunities for those who work within support units of the RDF who fail to meet the

    academic civilian training requirements i.e. medics without any civilian medical skills

    Engineering officers without Engineering Degrees etc) or any RDF personnel who

    is not necessarily expendable to the DF , will be expected to go first ?


    Whereas in contrast those RDF personnel who maybe of a lower rank, but who still

    hold the necessary civilian qualifications in their respective battalion (medicine

    engineering) which are recognised by the DF - will be kept on as part of a smaller

    integrated reserve.


    Is this too pre-assumptious to call or could this be considered a fair comment ?


    Discuss.

  6. #81
    C/S goc132's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    westmeath
    Posts
    939
    Post Thanks / Like
    I reckon the Reserve will be re intergrated into pdf units pre 1979 i.e. There will be no stand alone RDF units left and the saving on Cadre will see about 250-300 of the 500 PDF savings needed the rest will be natural wasteage thats just wht I think will happen and for the RDF left the training will probably be better.The draw back is only rdf to survive will be attached to barracks left open and my bets are on the following:
    McKee Dublin
    Dundalk
    Finner
    Athlone
    Galway
    Limerick
    Cork
    Curragh
    That means if you want to serve you will need to live in these locations or travel

  7. #82
    Chief of the Diet Tribe Groundhog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    S 116 349
    Posts
    10,095
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Dazzler View Post
    No, he wants the Integrated Reserve removed from the establishment of the Reserve Forces. There was only 300 Int bods or so, and they are all now RTU'd so it doesn't mean anyone is discharged.
    You lads seem to be unable to grasp that this is about cutting numbers. So moving lads from integrated to non integrated in the context of McCarthy is a meaningless exercise.

    The report says cut the RDF by two-thirds so for example if there are 12,000 personnel in the RDF they want it reduced to 4,000.

    Say NO to violence against Women

    Quote Originally Posted by hedgehog View Post
    My favourite moment was when the
    Quote Originally Posted by hedgehog View Post
    red headed old dear got a smack on her ginger head

  8. #83
    ltsmarty
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    www.1bderdf.com
    Posts
    185
    Post Thanks / Like
    Hi goc132,

    Sounds awfully like the Integration Model !!

    I totally agree with your opinion. Furthermore, as each PDF unit in an occupied post has a daily Orderly Sgt (24 hour duty), this duty can also serve the Reservists on their training night/day,etc and receive the cadre allowance !
    Therefore, no need for separate cadre at all !!

    Hence the RDF will become urbanised ! into what the Brits call 'super barracks'.

    Home location is not an issue for the TA, in relation to their Trg Bks, as they get paid for travel !, and structure their training schedule to suit those traveling.

  9. #84
    Sergeant Major Thorpe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    North East Cork
    Posts
    1,226
    Post Thanks / Like
    From looking at it the model they are looking at is closing all rural posts and pulling them into full time occupied barracks and that is it. If you are willing to put in the time and effort its will probably still be there for those will to commit to it. If not as they say "on the truck".

    This years camp was going to be last camp anyway (time is up for me due work and other issues) but even that didnt happen due to a work related accident.
    Last edited by Thorpe; 17th July 2009 at 23:01.
    Only the dead have seen the end of war - Plato

    "Where there is no guidance the people fall, but in abundance of counselors there is victory" Proverbs 11-14
    http://munsterfireandrescue.com

  10. #85
    Commander in Chief hptmurphy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    13,188
    Post Thanks / Like
    From looking at it the model they are looking at is closing all rural posts and pulling them into full time occupied barracks and that is it.
    define 'rural' ?

    The re org was supposed to have removed the outposts...if they are gone it can oly mean that Barracks outside of the main centres of population would be for the chop..addall thses up and you'll probably find the cost of operation meets the requirement for reduction.

    While the reductions are aimed at the RDF.. the higher number this reworking would in effect also reduce the cadre staff and civilian admin people in the department which would possibly equate to the number for reduction in the PDF.

    By reducing one you meet your targets with the second , and it would suit the COS..who doesn't want the RDF any way and would be willing to trade it to retain a three brigade structure.
    Just visiting

  11. #86
    Moderated
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    383
    Post Thanks / Like
    Scrap the RDF full-stop. We have a first line reserve. The LDF/FCA/RDF started life during The Emergency, it ended in 1946 so do we need a group of kids and old people who have no role in the DF. All they care about is money they are getting for doing no notting.

  12. #87
    CQMS
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    185
    Post Thanks / Like
    It is all about value for money, the AR still goes on camps which is a code for piss ups really, the Army see you as a handy posting but look into your hearts and ask what value is the AR really.

  13. #88
    C/S Tango_Charlie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    434
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Vamp369 View Post
    Would cutting the pdf more and recruiting more rdf to balance the loss ie more part timers than full timers so not as many pensions, full weeks pay etc would be spent?
    You must be joking. Tell me you are joking right?

  14. #89
    Faeces idem Dies Diversus Traumagod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    In a big yellow Van with blue lights on. Now in the Valleys!
    Posts
    835
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Border Bunny View Post
    Scrap the RDF full-stop. We have a first line reserve. The LDF/FCA/RDF started life during The Emergency, it ended in 1946 so do we need a group of kids and old people who have no role in the DF. All they care about is money they are getting for doing no notting.
    Are you for real like? For most of the AR nowadays going on a camp involves taking a massive pay cut.There are a lot of us who still do it for the love of it and not the money. Kids and old people, Jeez are you talking about the Volksturm?
    Go Mairidís Beo

  15. #90
    Faeces idem Dies Diversus Traumagod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    In a big yellow Van with blue lights on. Now in the Valleys!
    Posts
    835
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by popeye View Post
    It is all about value for money, the AR still goes on camps which is a code for piss ups really, the Army see you as a handy posting but look into your hearts and ask what value is the AR really.
    Ah this old chestnut. Perhaps that used to be the case a number of years ago. As for the value the RDF has, ask members who have made lifelong friendships, important contacts and all the free advice they have received from their comrades who may be solicitors, doctors etc. in civvie street what value it has to them?

    The piss ups as you describe them are actively discouraged nowadays and indeed mentioned in the A7 briefing given at the start of every camp and career course. You cannot forcibly restrain individuals from making eejits of themselves either in a barracks or out in the public. Short of declaring a dry camp (which is nearly the norm now on some courses) it is the job of SNCOS and officers to control the activities of their troops to prevent this behaviour. If some don't then they are failing in their duties.

    I digress however. The value of the AR goes far beyond that of a fiscal nature in my opinion and while some cuts are inevitable and indeed necessary, it should not be disbanded in its entirety as an easy target.
    Go Mairidís Beo

  16. #91
    Lieutenant X-RayOne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    dublin
    Posts
    1,276
    Post Thanks / Like
    as mentioned in the "What barracks should close...." thread the future of a survivable RDF seems to be units solely based in the large barracks that are full-time occupied.

    as the PDF units concentrate in a smaller amount of locations, posts like sluagh halls, etc. around the country will quickly become unviable on travel and running costs basis. the RDF units will have to concentrate like the PDF units on central locations. in effect, the idea of a battalion having companies spread over a geographical area will die off.

    this will have the benifits for the units that PDF units have seen in relation to training facilities, weapons access, reduced duties, etc. however the big drawback for RDF units is volunteer personnel willing to travel large distances for a few hours training each week.

    looking forward ahead from that situation, a return to reserve companies, etc. in parent PDF units would probably the best way to utilise the reserve in the future. the end of the RDF as a stand alone entity but for the remainder, a much closer working relationship with PDF and increase in capability because of co-location within the PDF unit. in effect, the entire reserve would be integrated into the current PDF establishment, e.g. 5th inf bn with existing coys + 1 reserve coy.

    whether this would be by design or just the way things develop naturally remains to be seen.
    Last edited by X-RayOne; 18th July 2009 at 12:28.
    The people of England have been led in Mesopotamia into a trap from which it will be hard to escape with dignity and honour. They have been tricked into it by a steady withholding of information. The Baghdad communiqués are belated, insincere, incomplete.....It is a disgrace to our imperial record, and may soon be too inflamed for any ordinary cure.We are to-day not far from a disaster.

    T.E. Lawrence, 2 Aug 1920.

  17. #92
    Private 2*
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    UK LONDON & OXFORD univs
    Posts
    2,249
    Post Thanks / Like
    Those who are overstayers in married quarters could be in for a shock

    150 married quarters of which a third [50] are over stayers to contribute €100,000 for this privilage

    That works out at €2,000 per married quarter [some €166.67 per month /€38.46 per week EXTRA a shock for some

  18. #93
    Chief of the Diet Tribe Groundhog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    S 116 349
    Posts
    10,095
    Post Thanks / Like
    Moderated by Monday IMHO.

    Say NO to violence against Women

    Quote Originally Posted by hedgehog View Post
    My favourite moment was when the
    Quote Originally Posted by hedgehog View Post
    red headed old dear got a smack on her ginger head

  19. #94
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,815
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by X-RayOne View Post
    as mentioned in the "What barracks should close...." thread the future of a survivable RDF seems to be units solely based in the large barracks that are full-time occupied.

    as the PDF units concentrate in a smaller amount of locations, posts like sluagh halls, etc. around the country will quickly become unviable on travel and running costs basis. the RDF units will have to concentrate like the PDF units on central locations. in effect, the idea of a battalion having companies spread over a geographical area will die off.

    this will have the benifits for the units that PDF units have seen in relation to training facilities, weapons access, reduced duties, etc. however the big drawback for RDF units is volunteer personnel willing to travel large distances for a few hours training each week.

    looking forward ahead from that situation, a return to reserve companies, etc. in parent PDF units would probably the best way to utilise the reserve in the future. the end of the RDF as a stand alone entity but for the remainder, a much closer working relationship with PDF and increase in capability because of co-location within the PDF unit. in effect, the entire reserve would be integrated into the current PDF establishment, e.g. 5th inf bn with existing coys + 1 reserve coy.

    whether this would be by design or just the way things develop naturally remains to be seen.
    Seems to make sense. Is this the best option for a truly relevant and integrated reserve in the future?

  20. #95
    Lord Chief Bottlewasher trellheim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Cathal Brugha
    Posts
    9,238
    Post Thanks / Like
    Why
    Moderated by Monday IMHO
    "Are they trying to shoot down the other drone? "

    "No, they're trying to fly the tank"

  21. #96
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,948
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Fitter View Post


    Assuming recommendations are implemented. Would it be fair to assume that

    opportunities for those who work within support units of the RDF who fail to meet the

    academic civilian training requirements i.e. medics without any civilian medical skills

    Engineering officers without Engineering Degrees etc) or any RDF personnel who

    is not necessarily expendable to the DF , will be expected to go first ?


    Whereas in contrast those RDF personnel who maybe of a lower rank, but who still

    hold the necessary civilian qualifications in their respective battalion (medicine

    engineering) which are recognised by the DF - will be kept on as part of a smaller

    integrated reserve.


    Is this too pre-assumptious to call or could this be considered a fair comment ?


    Discuss.
    VERY few civilian qualifications are actually recognised apart from the 2 you have mentioned

    Quote Originally Posted by goc132 View Post
    I reckon the Reserve will be re intergrated into pdf units pre 1979 i.e. There will be no stand alone RDF units left and the saving on Cadre will see about 250-300 of the 500 PDF savings needed the rest will be natural wasteage thats just wht I think will happen and for the RDF left the training will probably be better.
    Ie the integrated model that was supposed to happen with the reorg, except the non-integrated would be gone.

    Quote Originally Posted by Groundhog View Post
    You lads seem to be unable to grasp that this is about cutting numbers. So moving lads from integrated to non integrated in the context of McCarthy is a meaningless exercise.

    The report says cut the RDF by two-thirds so for example if there are 12,000 personnel in the RDF they want it reduced to 4,000.
    The report also calls for an RDF that contributes more to the PDF, realistically the only way it can is with integration

    Quote Originally Posted by ltsmarty View Post
    Hi goc132,

    Sounds awfully like the Integration Model !!

    I totally agree with your opinion. Furthermore, as each PDF unit in an occupied post has a daily Orderly Sgt (24 hour duty), this duty can also serve the Reservists on their training night/day,etc and receive the cadre allowance !
    Therefore, no need for separate cadre at all !!

    Hence the RDF will become urbanised ! into what the Brits call 'super barracks'.

    Home location is not an issue for the TA, in relation to their Trg Bks, as they get paid for travel !, and structure their training schedule to suit those traveling.
    If you have a centralised unit in barracks, maybe only in addition personnel are required

    Quote Originally Posted by Border Bunny View Post
    Scrap the RDF full-stop. We have a first line reserve. The LDF/FCA/RDF started life during The Emergency, it ended in 1946 so do we need a group of kids and old people who have no role in the DF. All they care about is money they are getting for doing no notting.
    Incorrect the Volunteer Force was formed in the 20s/30s
    We don't get paid for the vast majority of what we do




    Quote Originally Posted by Border Bunny View Post
    All the RDF do is 2 hours a weak plus the odd 'camp' (like boy scouts) what is their role in the DF.

    The PDF apart from Defence of the State carry-out Barrack Guards, MSGs, CITs, Brigade Stand To, Prisoner Escorts, EOD, Portlaois Prison Security, Central Bank Security, Security and Night Patrols of Goverment Buildings - Foreign Embassies - Airports - Docks etc etc. plus all our overseas missions.

    What do the RDF do???

    If we need Support in an Emergency it be the First Line Reserve Called Out.
    The State also have The Civil Defence who also Aid the Civi Authorities and they do it unpaid Voluntarily in their spare time.

    If you 'Love It' so much why are you not in the PDF?
    There are plenty of RDF personnel who do duties but they aren't allowed/let by the PDF!

  22. #97
    Lord Chief Bottlewasher trellheim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Cathal Brugha
    Posts
    9,238
    Post Thanks / Like
    overall numbers associated with the RDF
    What we don't know - is this establishment or actuals enlisted. Since it's not in the report only DOD would know I'd say.
    "Are they trying to shoot down the other drone? "

    "No, they're trying to fly the tank"

  23. #98
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,948
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by trellheim View Post
    What we don't know - is this establishment or actuals enlisted. Since it's not in the report only DOD would know I'd say.
    I'm presuming its the strength, cutting the establishment will not save any money.

    I really hope when/if it does happen they do a reorg and not just reduce the authorised strength.

  24. #99
    Chief of the Diet Tribe Groundhog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    S 116 349
    Posts
    10,095
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by kermit View Post
    If you go back and read what I said, it's exactly what the report says. Funding for the RDF is to be cut by 5.6m (66%) - the establishment is to be cut by 4900.

    A.3 Reduce the Reserve Defence Force by two-thirds
    There is scope to find additional savings from the Reserve Defence Force (RDF) and there is emerging evidence that the direction set for the RDF in the Defence White Paper (which was published in 2000) is not providing the desired result. It may be that a smaller more focused Reserve could deliver more usable capability to the Defence Forces for less expenditure. The D/Defence is seeking to prioritise a Value for Money and Policy Review of the Reserve Defence Force in order to critically examine the Reserve and make recommendations for its future development. A review of the contribution of the Reserve and a reduction in strength could result in additional savings on expenditure. It is recommended that the allocation for the Reserve Defence Force be reduced by two-thirds which will yield savings of €5.6m and a reduction in the overall numbers associated with the RDF of 4,900.
    Then either the report contradicts itself or Colm McCarthy has reorganised the English language.

    Say NO to violence against Women

    Quote Originally Posted by hedgehog View Post
    My favourite moment was when the
    Quote Originally Posted by hedgehog View Post
    red headed old dear got a smack on her ginger head

  25. #100
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,948
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by hptmurphy View Post
    define 'rural' ?

    The re org was supposed to have removed the outposts...if they are gone it can oly mean that Barracks outside of the main centres of population would be for the chop..addall thses up and you'll probably find the cost of operation meets the requirement for reduction.

    While the reductions are aimed at the RDF.. the higher number this reworking would in effect also reduce the cadre staff and civilian admin people in the department which would possibly equate to the number for reduction in the PDF.

    By reducing one you meet your targets with the second , and it would suit the COS..who doesn't want the RDF any way and would be willing to trade it to retain a three brigade structure.
    In this case "rural" could end up meaning the outside the gates of any PDF 24/7 manned post!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •