ARmy Rumour SErvice

Thinking about it, with teachers being such a bunch of lefties, is there any reason we should be supporting the activities of the Red Army Reserve

My wife (girlfirend at the time) was a teacher when she joined my TA unit. Both she and her school knew what to expect..our camps are always in September/October. The answer: she did her basic training in the holidays. She did her camps or courses in the summer holidays. It wasn't difficult to sort out.

The one time she did have to do a camp in September, the OC went to the governor's meeting and asked very politley if she could be given the time off. Questions were asked about exactly why they should do it and effectively, what was in it for the school.
The result? Two weeks UNPAID leave. Everyone was happy.

Schools are special, and they expect their teachers to fit their lives around the academic timetable.
Dr_E may I suggest going to the governor's meeting and humbly requesting?

This thread exposes one of the TA's major current challenges and I will not repeat the arguments seen above but throw in a view on one of the other closely related challenges.
To my mind, that challenge is the increasing pressure on TA personnel generally to train during the week rather than at the weekend. Increasing integration with the regular army (a good thing in itself) will lead to further pressure in this direction.
Will this, as the cynics suggest, lead to a TA composed of those who either can't get a job or don't need a job?

Sorry old chap. Even the NHS is now getting a bit threaders with TA and time off for camp with some Trusts simply stating that they MAY allow personnel time off, but at their own expense. Slightly different to teaching because of the term time constraint, however, it serves to show that state employers are becoming a little less enthusiastic than they were.

Until it becomes law (and I doubt that we shall see any work on the Reserve Forces Act 96 until 2016 at the earliest) we shall continue to have this difficulty. Employers are very much part of the Reserves question and we ignore them at our peril, particularly during the current financial climate.

You may wish to tell your bloke to try getting SABRE involved at a local level. Yeeah, I know they're an expensive bunch of irritants, but occasionally they do pull one out of the bag.....about once per decade as far as I'm concerned, but hey! it might be THE decade.

Of course your man could simply tell the School to shove it and join the Regular Army. Just a thought.

Dr Evil,

You are, quite justifiably, looking at this from a TA point of view. I would expect no less. But, the employers point of view is just as important.

You are quite right that, if we are serious about increasing the role of the TA, we must have appropriate legislation but we must also consider the whole, not just parts.

If you make releasing TA for training mandatory on employers, they will want compensation. That will cost money. Some, and schools may be a very good example, may simply declare that TA is not compatible with employment by them. They will be right. Continuity is important in education. If this individual is a Primary teacher, it is arguably even more significant. Anything that makes employing TA less attractive for employers will need to be looked at very carefully in balance with any benefits from doing so.

Ultimately, and I cannot see why you find it difficult to comprehend, anything that makes it harder to be employed and in the TA at the same time (and that is anything that makes it less convenient for an employer) risks reducing the number of people in the TA or increasing its reliance on individuals who are not in employment/unemployable.

In the meantime, it is not mandatory for the school to release "yer man" and I fully support their point of view (as the parent of children in school and as a serving member of HM Armed Forces). there is no mileage in you getting precious about it.

If you want my honest opinion, the whole "expand the role of the TA" thing is nonsense. There are enough warm bodies in this country for service in the Army to be a full time profession, not a second job.

If I were an employer, I would do my very best not to employ women of child bearing age, male partners therof (due to recent changes in paternity law) or TA. I would give preference, where I could get away with it, to retired/redundant servicemen.

Originally Posted by ugly

The way the govt has used the volunteer reserves since 1997 is shocking and possibly ilegal but without the men and women stepping up to the mark the old and bold would be dug out.

The Regular Reserve was indeed the Reserve of First Choice. Unfortunately it was then discovered that a call out ratio of something over 2.5 notices to get one Soldier on the ground was needed as the records of where people lived were not up to date, the Reg Reserve who turned up were then frequently unsuitable to serve for a wide range of reasons & so on.

When they went for the TA the MoD discovered that a far higher percentage of those called up turned out to be fit for service (something around 1.5 call outs to get a Soldier in place). Indeed in the early stages of TELIC (trust me, I was involved on the Staff side for the surge mobilisations) people who were perfectly suitable to serve were being sent home for fairly spurious reasons because there were simply too many Troops available. That was why the TA took on the role into which it has now been thrust.

Originally Posted by CaptainPlume

Thinking about it, with teachers being such a bunch of lefties, is there any reason we should be supporting the activities of the Red Army Reserve

Sad lack of beards in schools now... unlike Womens Red Army Corp (*wrong*)

Originally Posted by putteesinmyhands

Employers are required to release TA soldiers for training, but at a time that suits the employer

You sure about that?