An Army of 50,000 ?

"Having an army is like having paid-up insurance: when you need it, you really need it!" (Nigel Farage).

The problem is that the UK Whites, with a severely negative terminal decline birthrate, it is now in just the incipient stages of being able to find those of sufficient calibre for the army. Anglo-Asians and Anglo-Carribeans are in general army-shy, and their loyalty, patriotism and reliability is suspect.
 
Drifting slightly - but if cuts are inevitable

Why is Starstreak an RA Regiment - would not a starstreak section per Regiment save manpower overhead - (They could still be RA just attached personnel) removing the Regiment and LAD command structure
I appreciate it adds complexities for training etc -

Same with RMP and REME Battalions is a battalion structure required for these would folding them into other units / commands reduce a management overhead.

I would also ask could JHC - not be rotated between aviation regiments (or wings for crabs) eg
1 regt AAC acts as JHC in Afghanistan with Apache: Lynch / chinook assigned
2nd tour 3 regt takes the task
3rd tour Chinook wing
Could this save manpower

- Just thoughts - I expect there to be good reasons why they are bone ideas -
 

Caecilius

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
So what's the flipside for the reservist?
Same as before. You get to continue to do your day job, live where you want, etc. and still deploy to do fun army stuff every few years. In the mean time we'll pay you extra to do optional training on the weekends, only the payment for that will now be contingent on volunteering to deploy when the opportunity arises.
 

The_Duke

LE
Moderator
(including the memorable 'we won't turn up if the training isn't fun' discussions)
As was covered extensively at the time, the definition of "fun" is both variable and essential to understanding.

In my old Bn, "fun" was high quality rangework, really demanding exercises and learning new skills. These would, on occasion, be overseas.

"not fun" was badly planned and conducted (read lazy) box ticking rangework or exercises, anything that involved drill, gash mil skills competitions and by and large anything mandated by LONDIST.

"enhanced fun" would include AT which was widely offered but rarely taken up. Very few had the spare time available to dedicate to it.
 
Same as before. You get to continue to do your day job, live where you want, etc. and still deploy to do fun army stuff every few years. In the mean time we'll pay you extra to do optional training on the weekends, only the payment for that will now be contingent on volunteering to deploy when the opportunity arises.
What's the flipside for employers and families? Because the deal you're proposing appears to me to render Reservists effectively unemployable, except as civil servants.

Who would take on a Reservist, knowing that they'll need to cover their absence for nearly a year in every three? If it's an employer where a lot of value is held between the employees' ears (you know, like the highly-qualified specialists that you're suggesting), you can't always just call up an agency and get in a temp for eight months; even if you could, contract rates are typically double; so a Reservist will easily cost 30% more to employ than a non-Reservist.

Have you ever held a managerial role in the private sector? I believe the answer is "no", so why not run it past your family - explain the scenario, ask whether they (as professionals) can see any flaws in your cunning plan? Or what the impact would be on that Reservist's career progression?*

* The irony would be if you couldn't find senior and experienced Reservist specialists, because their Reserve service had limited their careers to junior and gapped roles...
 
A bit of both. I think the AR should be reduced to just IAs and specialists, but in the mean time I don't think it's acceptable to tip up on weekends and draw the pay but not volunteer for tours if they're available. Even if we don't alter the AR's purpose, I think the obligation should be introduced somehow.
I made a suggestion a couple of years ago that the AR should be reorganised into a reinforcement pool. No need for half the senior ORs or Officers, could probably cap out at CSgt and Capt, they just can't get the experience beyond that. Agree about the obligation to deploy
 

Gout Man

LE
Book Reviewer
But we have millions of migrants who are all making a net contribution to the economy. Surely that would cover it?

And if not, we should import a few million more to cover the budget deficit.

If we imported 10s of millions more we'd be the richest country on earth..
If Jeremy gets in that could well happen.
 

Caecilius

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Who would take on a Reservist, knowing that they'll need to cover their absence for nearly a year in every three? If it's an employer where a lot of value is held between the employees' ears (you know, like the highly-qualified specialists that you're suggesting), you can't always just call up an agency and get in a temp for eight months; even if you could, contract rates are typically double; so a Reservist will easily cost 30% more to employ than a non-Reservist.
Well they wouldn't have to cover a deployment for one year in three, more like one year in five or six. The reality is that some careers are just incompatible with reserve service and I don't think it's the army's job to account for that by allowing people to stay in the reserve, do the weekends but not mobilise.

Those in key specialist roles should obviously be on different terms to the general IA pool.
 
Same as before. You get to continue to do your day job, live where you want, etc. and still deploy to do fun army stuff every few years. In the mean time we'll pay you extra to do optional training on the weekends, only the payment for that will now be contingent on volunteering to deploy when the opportunity arises.
Compulsory volunteering then?
 
Well they wouldn't have to cover a deployment for one year in three, more like one year in five or six. The reality is that some careers are just incompatible with reserve service and I don't think it's the army's job to account for that by allowing people to stay in the reserve, do the weekends but not mobilise.
Not quite; those careers are incompatible with your version of reserve service. Plenty of other countries seem to manage it, because they structure their Reserves differently, while still managing to commit them to operations.

Two questions:
  • What careers do you think would be compatible with your version of the Reserves?
  • Would you exclude Regular Reservists from your ideal Army, or would you have a "buy out your Regular Reserve liability with a reduced pension" option?
I'm still curious as to what happens after the Dashing Major @Caecilius leaves the Army to set up a business or start a family. Nine months later, his compulsory mobilisation arrives...
 

Caecilius

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Would you exclude Regular Reservists from your ideal Army, or would you have a "buy out your Regular Reserve liability with a reduced pension" option?
Yes I would exclude them, except in case of genuine national emergency. The pension option has already been reduced without a reduction in reserve service so I'm not convinced the two are linked. I'd probably move the regular reserve to the long term reserve, or whatever the bit is called where you only get mobilised if it properly hits the fan.

I'm still curious as to what happens after the Dashing Major @Caecilius leaves the Army to set up a business or start a family. Nine months later, his compulsory mobilisation arrives...
Depends on the situation. I'm likely to join the reserves anyway when I leave so I get the chance to go on tour - I just need to work out if I can drop a rank or two when I do. If for some reason I haven't done that then I would ignore the notice.
 
What do the fire brigade do when they're not putting fires out?

"There's been no fires for at least a week chaps - it's time to start letting some of you go..."
An interesting analogy...

Of course, a significant proportion of the Fire Brigade Service is "retained" - ie they get called-in when the on stand-by unit is called-out

Not unlike an Army where a Regular unit is on stand-by, and a Reserve unit called-up to support if they are ever deployed?
 
If they deployed they would be paid though.
Yes, that much is obvious since thats how it works at the moment. The question was how do you not get a reputation as a crap employer who will ruin your civilian career for a years pay and then toss you on the scrapheap when its finished with you. You volunteered, so no job protection in the TACOS remember!
 
Last edited:

Top