Thanks Thanks:  31
Likes Likes:  40
Dislikes Dislikes:  3
Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 98
  1. #1
    Commander in Chief hptmurphy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    13,556
    Post Thanks / Like

    Establishment versus reality.

    The establishment is based on manning a 8 ship fleet and allowing for ship/shore rotations (which the CRE figures could well have changed).
    A high percentage of the vacancies in the ranks never go to sea, there is no appointment for anything above L/Wr or even L/SBA aboard any of the ships... so until where the vacancies are occurring has been identified the issue is null and void.

    However if there is a shortage of 20 L/EAs or PO /RRTs you are in trouble.

    Without being derogatory toward any group or rank the structure must be looked at in dept and ranks vs manning levels needs looking at. Take for instance the Rank of SEior Chief Petty officer.... origin of the rank.... BQMS.. out side the Q branch the rank doesn't exist anywhere lese but every division in the NS has a couple ... because its a pay grade! I stand to be corrected on the actual year but prior to the 19890s the rank didn't exist in the NS as there wasn't the correct establishment figures to justify it.

    The same is true of senior officer ranks based on size Lts could have commanded minesweepers and PVs.....so when Eithne came along..., no offence to the first OC... an extra Commander post was created... at a time when there were already 4 executive branch Cdrs in Service, the NS at one point had 172 officers for just under 1000 men...and all the structures to support the rank.. except ratings. It wasn't uncommon to see the representetives on entire divisions on the square every morning made up entirely NCOs.

    So while the NS may be crying out for appointments to be filled, I wonder at the very end of the food chain how many they are actually short..as these are the people who do the duties and stand the watches and get paid the least!

    No back to the facilities element. The NS has dodged the bullet of having to have its own dry dock for many years because of the availability of other dock in the country. As these become unavailable or unsuitable we could very well see the day when ships won't be able to go to sea. The shift towards larger vessels and more arduous mission overseas will lead to increase in depth maintenance requirements and like the Aer Corps the outcry will only be made the day we need a ship and it wasn't available because of investment.

    Personnel issues and capital investment programmes need to be kept separate. The DF need two budgets, a running cost budget and a capital investment budget and neither should be dipped into to prop up the other.
    Time for another break I think......

  2. Thanks na grohmití, Turkey, CTU, Graylion thanked for this post
    Likes Graylion, Truck Driver liked this post
  3. #2
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    21,174
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by hptmurphy View Post
    Capital investment and and pay related issues should ever be considered in the same sentence. People overlook that all public service workers too k the same pay cuts as the DF and that there is a restoration process in place.

    Like building ships if we don't put capital investment projects in place to support ships, we won't have a navy for people to serve in!
    They did but none have the same terms and conditions as the DF

    Quote Originally Posted by hptmurphy View Post
    A high percentage of the vacancies in the ranks never go to sea, there is no appointment for anything above L/Wr or even L/SBA aboard any of the ships... so until where the vacancies are occurring has been identified the issue is null and void.

    However if there is a shortage of 20 L/EAs or PO /RRTs you are in trouble.
    Look at the ranks where the biggest number of vacancies are
    Lt (NS) - over 1 in 3 vacant
    PO - over 1 in 4 vacant
    LS - over 1 in 4 vacant

    Personnel issues and capital investment programmes need to be kept separate. The DF need two budgets, a running cost budget and a capital investment budget and neither should be dipped into to prop up the other.
    If your investing in new infrastructure that requires more people they are related

    Donít forget that the new ships were paid for (partially) by not filling vacancies

  4. #3
    Commander in Chief hptmurphy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    13,556
    Post Thanks / Like
    Look at the ranks where the biggest number of vacancies are
    Lt (NS) - over 1 in 3 vacant
    PO - over 1 in 4 vacant
    LS - over 1 in 4 vacant
    I'm sure there are plenty of qualified people to fill the ranks should someone sign off on it, what would be more troubling is that if the lead in ranks to these vacancies aren't being filled.

    Recruitment and retention.. HR/IR issues can all be addressed in the short term with the political will to do so, how ever a large investment in a capital project such as a dry dock is a lot more hard sell especially when you have a shared capital budget with two other arms of the DF.
    Time for another break I think......

  5. #4
    Lt General
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,275
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    So how many million should we invest in a drydock facility for NS use only, that will only be used as a drydock for an average of say 8 weeks annually and will be used as maintenance berth the rest of the time?

    Where outside contractors are likely to have to be brought in anyway!?

    At a time when the NS canít retain personnel due to poor wages and conditions?

    In late 2017, these were how many personnel the NS were deficit:
    NS Lt -36%
    NS SCPO -15%
    NS CPO -12%
    NS SPO -14%
    NS PO -27%
    NS LS -26%

    And that is based on a establishment for an 8 vessel NS and was cut
    Do you have a source for those figures? I would like to see the complete breakdown of strength vs establishment.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  6. #5
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    21,174
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmitŪ View Post
    Do you have a source for those figures? I would like to see the complete breakdown of strength vs establishment.
    PQs
    The establishment hasnít been provided in a while but if you go back a while youíll get it

  7. #6
    Brigadier General
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    moving rapidly away.......
    Posts
    2,562
    Post Thanks / Like

    Establishment versus reality.

    The NS is evolving out of necessicity and growing larger, both in it's original roles and, so far perceived future roles.
    However, like the Army and the Air Corps, it is under establishment, obviously there is little point in expanding the "toys" if we don't have the people to play with them.
    There has to be a NS recruitment drive with added incentive, ie: more money!
    Discuss:
    "We will hold out until our last bullet is spent. Could do with some whiskey"
    Radio transmission, siege of Jadotville DR Congo. September 1961.
    Illegitimi non carborundum

  8. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
    Likes DeV, hptmurphy liked this post
  9. #7
    CQMS
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    195
    Post Thanks / Like
    As difficult as it is to recruit & retain soldiers, I cannot see why anyone would join the NS. The life is much harsher with far more limitations put on having a real life. Relationships suffer from being away all the time. I have a lot of respect for those that can enjoy that work / life balance

  10. Likes DeV liked this post
  11. #8
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    21,174
    Post Thanks / Like
    And your 2 years ashore not being ashore

  12. #9
    Lt General
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,275
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    PQs
    The establishment hasnít been provided in a while but if you go back a while youíll get it
    As you brought up the subject can you provide the details.
    Thanks.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  13. #10
    Lt General
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,275
    Post Thanks / Like
    The establishment does not seem to have changed in the NS since we had 4 p20 type, 1 hpv , 2 cpv and 1 lpv . If we are to replace the cpv type with opv then surely the establishment needs to follow? These ships will be spending more time at sea and having at least one vessel overseas seems to be the norm for future planning. Add to the mix a larger ship to replace the hpv and number are well below what is required. In 1984 bringing Eithne into service with her crew of 85 all ranks saw a recruitment drive to increase the establishment by 200.
    Last edited by na grohmití; 22nd January 2018 at 11:30.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  14. Thanks Turkey, DeV thanked for this post
    Likes Tempest liked this post
  15. #11
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    912
    Post Thanks / Like
    First and only way to address personnel Manning agility is to remove the DPER enforced ECF (employment control framework).

    The DF are still operating an establishment framework based on pre-ww1 military structures.

    Agility, adaptability to the needs of now are the factors of success in Manning the needed roles

  16. Thanks EUFighter thanked for this post
    Likes Graylion liked this post
  17. #12
    2/Lt
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,205
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by TangoSierra View Post
    First and only way to address personnel Manning agility is to remove the DPER enforced ECF (employment control framework).

    The DF are still operating an establishment framework based on pre-ww1 military structures.

    Agility, adaptability to the needs of now are the factors of success in Manning the needed roles
    Manning ships is a complex problem under many headings. The rule of thumb was it took three crew equivalents to keep one crew at sea. Then one has to take into consideration crew specialization and training, avenues of advancement, home life, pay, and the organizational ability to produce right crews with the right skills. Newer ships tend to be smarter technological, so manning needs to look at the ship from casual patrol to full warfighting capability, and/or overseas operations. The crew pools in civilian life are better educated, better housed, and have higher aspirations requiring a response from Naval Training that will encourage retention and offer a worthwhile range of careers . Other Navies are looking at Total Operating Costs but arriving at the Optimal skills and manning levels is an evolving task much depending on what the ship has to do and for how long and in what operational environment.

  18. #13
    CQMS
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    218
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Turkey View Post
    The NS is evolving out of necessicity and growing larger, both in it's original roles and, so far perceived future roles.
    However, like the Army and the Air Corps, it is under establishment, obviously there is little point in expanding the "toys" if we don't have the people to play with them.
    There has to be a NS recruitment drive with added incentive, ie: more money!
    Discuss:
    and maybe relaxing the very stringent eyesight requirements

  19. #14
    Viking HavocIRL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    2,879
    Post Thanks / Like
    Bring back the lash
    To close with and kill the enemy in all weather conditions, night and day and over any terrain

  20. #15
    Lord Chief Bottlewasher trellheim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Cathal Brugha
    Posts
    9,548
    Post Thanks / Like
    Bring back the lash
    More likely than ECF restrictions being eased, anyway. DPER love the DF cos they follow orders.
    "Are they trying to shoot down the other drone? "

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

  21. Likes TangoSierra liked this post
  22. #16
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    21,174
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmitŪ View Post
    The establishment does not seem to have changed in the NS since we had 4 p20 type, 1 hpv , 2 cpv and 1 lpv . If we are to replace the cpv type with opv then surely the establishment needs to follow? These ships will be spending more time at sea and having at least one vessel overseas seems to be the norm for future planning. Add to the mix a larger ship to replace the hpv and number are well below what is required. In 1984 bringing Eithne into service with her crew of 85 all ranks saw a recruitment drive to increase the establishment by 200.
    The establishment was amended to more or less match the ECF sometime between 2011 and 2014 of there abouts

    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    Manning ships is a complex problem under many headings. The rule of thumb was it took three crew equivalents to keep one crew at sea .
    PWC allowed 1.5 crews per ship

  23. #17
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    912
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by trellheim View Post
    More likely than ECF restrictions being eased, anyway. DPER love the DF CoS they follow orders.
    Pun intended??

  24. Likes Truck Driver liked this post
  25. #18
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    21,174
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmitŪ View Post
    As you brought up the subject can you provide the details.
    Thanks.
    https://www.kildarestreet.com/wrans/...+table#g1444.r

    Based on these figures (not sure how old the one I had was but they were 2017)

    Lt (NS) is 45% short of establishment
    PO is 31% short of establishment
    LS is 58% short of establishment
    Seamen is 22% short of establishment

    The SNCOs vacancies have been more or less filled
    Last edited by DeV; 22nd January 2018 at 14:46.

  26. #19
    Brigadier General
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    moving rapidly away.......
    Posts
    2,562
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by restless View Post
    and maybe relaxing the very stringent eyesight requirements
    The hearing test is probably a bigger issue TBH.
    "We will hold out until our last bullet is spent. Could do with some whiskey"
    Radio transmission, siege of Jadotville DR Congo. September 1961.
    Illegitimi non carborundum

  27. #20
    Space Lord of Terra morpheus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Metropolis
    Posts
    3,132
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by restless View Post
    and maybe relaxing the very stringent eyesight requirements
    Hard to be on watch, if ya can't see
    "He is an enemy officer taken in battle and entitled to fair treatment."
    "No, sir. He's a sergeant, and they don't deserve no respect at all, sir. I should know. They're cunning and artful, if they're any good. I wouldn't mind if he was an officer, sir. But sergeants are clever."

  28. Likes Truck Driver liked this post
  29. #21
    Brigadier General
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    2,732
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by HavocIRL View Post
    Bring back the lash
    Press gangs. Head out for a few pints on a Saturday in Cobh. wake up next morning in the Med

  30. Likes HavocIRL, Pegasus, Truck Driver liked this post
  31. #22
    Lord Chief Bottlewasher trellheim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Cathal Brugha
    Posts
    9,548
    Post Thanks / Like
    Press gangs. Head out for a few pints on a Saturday in Cobh. wake up next morning in the Med
    Isnt that what happens anyway
    "Are they trying to shoot down the other drone? "

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

  32. Likes Pegasus liked this post
  33. #23
    CQMS
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    195
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    The establishment was amended to more or less match the ECF sometime between 2011 and 2014 of there abouts
    The current version of CS4 more or less has remained unchanged since 01 Dec 2012. There were some small adjustments in 2014 to tweek things a tiny bit but with no changes to overall figures.

    The ECF was submitted to DPER by the same element that worked on CS4. One was based on the other but both were from the same origin.

  34. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
    Likes DeV liked this post
  35. #24
    Commander in Chief hptmurphy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    13,556
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmitŪ View Post
    The establishment does not seem to have changed in the NS since we had 4 p20 type, 1 hpv , 2 cpv and 1 lpv . If we are to replace the cpv type with opv then surely the establishment needs to follow? These ships will be spending more time at sea and having at least one vessel overseas seems to be the norm for future planning. Add to the mix a larger ship to replace the hpv and number are well below what is required. In 1984 bringing Eithne into service with her crew of 85 all ranks saw a recruitment drive to increase the establishment by 200.
    Between Jan 1985 and April 1986 170 recruits had passed out plus a class of Direct Entry L/ Hands, mostly ERAs, the last cadet class had commissioned in early 1985 but recruitment all but died over the next two years with no cadets taken on until 1988 and one recruit class The NS had lost Spike as a recruit training centre and to say it was bedlam in Haulbowline is an understatement.

    Time have changed and there should be at least two recruits classes processed annually
    Time for another break I think......

  36. #25
    Commander in Chief hptmurphy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    13,556
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    The establishment was amended to more or less match the ECF sometime between 2011 and 2014 of there abouts

    PWC allowed 1.5 crews per ship
    PWC got it badly wrong!

    3 is probably a bit excessive but 2 crews per ship would be adequate


    I cannot see why anyone would join the NS. The life is much harsher with far more limitations put on having a real life. Relationships suffer from being away all the time. I have a lot of respect for those that can enjoy that work / life balance
    Without getting too philosophical about it, you really don't know why you did it until after you've left and realise what you've left behind,bonds made for life, You'll hate a lot of it, love some of it, but you'll never forget it... thats for sure. Its not for everyone, but you won't know unless you try.

    If you are looking for normal..regular hours, good pay and conditions... this ain't it !... but fcuk it.... after 5 years you'll still have the rest of your life to catch up with the guy who went to college and id the same shit day in day out.....and never felt the buzz that only the sea will give you!

    try it.. you might even like it...if even only for a short time
    Time for another break I think......

  37. Likes trellheim, na grohmití, sofa, Turkey, DeV liked this 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
  •