Chosen for a role

Discussion in 'Infantry' started by Bad_Crow, Jun 22, 2006.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. As a team commander in a currently deployed infantry platoon i feel confident in the men under my command. One of which is a Non Inf type attatched in. We have been in the role for 8 weeks and have worked fine. The lad is very proffesional and very switched on. He has a better grasp of most of the work we do than alot of the other toms in the platoon and i see him as my immediate number 2.
    So imagine how sick i was to hear that when we change AOR's for next month he will no longer be able to join us because his training is deemed minimal and insignificant. Why is the platoon losing one of its best blokes because of his cap badge... Further more why is he fit to do the same job in one area but not in another?

    Is the army really that narrow minded that it just looks at a piece of paper to decide who does a job? If this is the case and we only deploy Infanteers to play the infantry on tours, then:

    A. Why are so many corps doing Force Protection and ground holding tasks
    B. Why are we bolting on corps types to infantry companys to fill spaces instead of Other Inf lads/TA/Our own battalions REMF population
    C. Why aren't we raising the standard of our training so we dont need to attatch medics/signallers/RLC to get by with normal platton tasks
     
  2. I bet it will have a lot to do with some misconceived attitudes to 'duty of care' and being legally liable should he be injured or killed in a role he has not been trained to do. Did this guy go through the pre-deployment training with you? Did that training cover the role you are about to re-deploy to do? If the answer to both these questions is yes then there shouldn't be a problem. It would be risk-aversion gone stupid if he was not allowed to deploy with you. What does your platoon commander think?
     
  3. The platoon commander is equally pissed off but has no leg to stand on as he argued the toss for having these lads in the first place.

    Yes he did all the appropriate training but apparently "he should have done his phase 2 in catterick if he wanted to gallop round the woods."

    The bloke is a good soldier and already the team is suffering due to a good character being put elsewhere. The army in all its wisdom doesn't half P1ss me off sometimes!
     
  4. Grumblegrunt

    Grumblegrunt LE Book Reviewer

    should do what the yanks do - full 20+ weeks basic regardless then 10+ week trade training

    if the guy's up to the job they should keep him - training is better when its on the job. they used to keep lads in hq rather than patrolling until they were 18 then send them out despite them not doing thetford with the rest of us.