RP578 - all good stuff. But could you offer up a shout about the topic? Or is your on-topic point the following?

"There is nothing wrong with or lacking in the Proposition/Offer, it's all about the attitude and selectivity of individual units. Recruitment and retention flows from that. The Future Reserves 2020 authors were wrong: it's not about resourcing."

Originally Posted by RP578

As for your last sentence; as a matter of fact this very issue is the sole subject for discussion at the battalion's conference on recruiting this weekend.

The trouble is that the 'holding to account' needs to occur several pay grades above your Battalion HQ....

m-s-r

Originally Posted by Dr_Evil

RP578 - all good stuff. But could you offer up a shout about the topic? Or is your on-topic point the following?

"There is nothing wrong with or lacking in the Proposition/Offer, it's all about the attitude and selectivity of individual units. Recruitment and retention flows from that. The Future Reserves 2020 authors were wrong: it's not about resourcing."

Sometimes I love lawyers.

It's all about resourcing. And anyone who fails to see that should hand back their commission. Or in RP's case, slink back to their stores and carry on counting the webbing.

m-s-r

To avoid this turning into a recruiting thread, perhaps the TA Infantry simply have a better offer i.e. "Want to fight in Afghanistan without joining the regular army? Join us and we'll have you on tour, doing warry shit in 18 months time. Then - touch wood - you can walk away."

Not bad, and in all honesty, if I were an 18 year old bloke smart and motivated enough to have a decent civvy career, I would take it. Its also evidently much simpler and more deliverable than that offered by most CS / CSS units. Unfortunately experience proves its not one that retains blokes well, and it won't recruit post 2014.

So the question of what the peace time reserve "Offer" will be remains. I think we'll be waiting for a while to find out what form the new TA will take - so I wouldn't hold your breath.

Sadly between now & then a lot of guys with valuable trade & operational experience will leave / be made redundant from the regular Army. Judging by current stats, the great majority will either not think of joining the TA, find the paperwork too much of a nause or the commitment too much and find other things to do with their time. By the time the new structure has been confirmed a lot of guys who might otherwise be manning the expanded units with quals to train recruits, run ranges, maintain vehicles, operate armour, share tactics proven for real will be playing football, pottering in the shed or being dragged around a shopping centre on their weekends. And the "offer" will have to be pretty bloody good to entice them back.

It would probably be a good deal cheaper than spending £30k to attract a student, though. I joined the OTC at university for £40 a day, a £300 bounty and £1 pints of dodgy beer in the TAC bar.

Originally Posted by Charlie_Cong

To avoid this turning into a recruiting thread, perhaps the TA Infantry simply have a better offer i.e. "Want to fight in Afghanistan without joining the regular army? Join us and we'll have you on tour, doing warry shit in 18 months time. Then - touch wood - you can walk away."

Not bad, and in all honesty, if I were an 18 year old bloke smart and motivated enough to have a decent civvy career, I would take it. Its also evidently much simpler and more deliverable than that offered by most CS / CSS units. Unfortunately experience proves its not one that retains blokes well, and it won't recruit post 2014.

Now that's what I mean by the Offer. The inf does have it "easier", in the sense that a doughty chap can go from puddingesque civ to gnarled STAB infanteer, doing the inf stuff he joined to do, in 18 months. In the case of the cav (for instance), it takes two to three years to get guys from doughball to slightly dashing mailed fist. That's largely due to course inflation/proliferation/exaggeration, not something inherent in the relative complexity of the two jobs. The US reserves Stryker course takes two weeks to take someone who can drive a car and turn them into a trained Stryker driver, commander and gunner. Now, it goes without saying that they are completely cack at all three, what with being American and all, but there are some who say that those guys can then get out and practise doing those things from the outset, and gradually get better. And because they are doing the challenging stuff they joined to do,* they stay in.

* Oh, and are paid for their studies. Let's not forget about that.

Originally Posted by Dr_Evil

"There is nothing wrong with or lacking in the Proposition/Offer, it's all about the attitude and selectivity of individual units. Recruitment and retention flows from that. The Future Reserves 2020 authors were wrong: it's not about resourcing."

Well up to a point Lord Copper ...

I do actually think that the very nature of the Armed Forces' Reserves are its biggest sell. That is to say, a means in which to serve in the Armed Forces whilst retaining your existing career and lifestyle (mostly, kind of ...). Everything else is a bonus or a sweetner. Who actually enlists for the bounty? It certainly keeps people in, but does it sway them to sign on the line? I genuinely believe it is the desire to serve on the Armed Forces, with all that that entails, which brings people through the gate. An awareness that they can do this part-time without giving up their primary career is what needs to conveyed, especially to school and college leavers who think it's an all or nothing decision between the Regulars and a civilian career. I base this last contention on my experience of talking to students at the last two schools that I have worked at.

Reference resourcing: I believe, based on nothing bar the anecdotal evidence of what is happening at my sub-unit location, that the national campaign is having a salutary effect. Who is to say however that this isn't entirely associative? Where resourcing will most certainly become crucial is at RTCs where things could very easily bottleneck. We will find out shortly whether this has been sufficiently catered for.

Why don't the TA have a central Recruit Training Units where all the new recruits go until they are trained. All the paper work, medicals, drill nights, training weekends could be done in one place.




Edited to add "s" to Units, Many RTU's across the UK, not just one.

Originally Posted by Dr_Evil

Oh, and are paid for their studies. Let's not forget about that.

And I rest the case for the prosecution.

£30m squiddlies is barely 10% of the savings envisioned and a mere rounding error in some of the big ticket MOD items.

In my eyes a bargain for a burgeoning Officers' Mess.

m-s-r

Originally Posted by LordVonHarley

Why don't the TA have a central Recruit Training Unit where all the new recruits go until they are trained. All the paper work, medicals, drill nights, training weekends could be done in one place.

TA training: it's not about value for money, it's about value for time.

How can you have a central unit which is less than a 1 hour drive from all TACs?

m-s-r

Originally Posted by Charlie_Cong

To avoid this turning into a recruiting thread, perhaps the TA Infantry simply have a better offer i.e. "Want to fight in Afghanistan without joining the regular army? Join us and we'll have you on tour, doing warry shit in 18 months time. Then - touch wood - you can walk away."

Not bad, and in all honesty, if I were an 18 year old bloke smart and motivated enough to have a decent civvy career, I would take it. Its also evidently much simpler and more deliverable than that offered by most CS / CSS units. Unfortunately experience proves its not one that retains blokes well, and it won't recruit post 2014.

It's a telling point and I think that we (TA Infantry) have perhaps overplayed to this strength by tailoring recruitment to upcoming deployments. The thing is, it does get them in. By the droves.