• ARRSE have partnered with Armadillo Merino to bring you an ARRSE exclusive, generous discount offer on their full price range.
    To keep you warm with the best of Merino gear, visit www.armadillomerino.co.uk and use the code: NEWARRSE40 at the checkout to get 40% off!
    This superb deal has been generously offered to us by Armadillo Merino and is valid until midnight on the the 28th of February.

Graduated Commitment Model

#1
I've heard a lot of comment about the Graduated Commitment Model on here but can't find any hard information about it, (yeah, I know, I know, it's a *rumour* service..)

Anyone got a linky/source for the report/proposals or whatever so I can educate myself as to what it actually (potentially) entails? :?
 
#2
Basically it is a plan to turn the TA into a recruit training and junior soldier IR generating machine. No place for officers or SNCOs except as admin bitches and training enablers. There has been a paper kicking around the bazaars for a couple of months now, but IIRC it's 'RESTRICTED' - so you (probably) won't find it online....though it has been copied pretty widely (to all TA COs for a start).
 
#3
Intresting, was there any input on retention both of the OR's and of the seniors and officers?

And if that is the idea why than call it 'Graduated Commitment Model', rather than 'Rerole the TA'? It sounds as if there is a sliding scale of commitment vs return.I'm assuming that there is more to it than just that, but that is probably the overal thrust of it.
 
#4
There is a lot of guff around the edges - "more resources if preparing for operations" etc. But when you strip away the bullsh*t the net effect will be to deliver what the Army says it wants and needs. A source of cheap private soldiers to support surges of requirement; not formed units with command structures that are never going to be used on operations.
 
#5
dergeneral said:
There is a lot of guff around the edges - "more resources if preparing for operations" etc. But when you strip away the bullsh*t the net effect will be to deliver what the Army says it wants and needs. A source of cheap private soldiers to support surges of requirement; not formed units with command structures that are never going to be used on operations.
So the Army can supply and man enough Field Hospitals by itself? That will please the NHS.

GCM has nothing to do with what the Army "thinks" it needs for the next 2,3,4,5 or 6 decades but what HM Treasury "thinks" it can afford. Anything else is smoke and mirrors.
 
#6
Kitmarlowe said:
dergeneral said:
There is a lot of guff around the edges - "more resources if preparing for operations" etc. But when you strip away the bullsh*t the net effect will be to deliver what the Army says it wants and needs. A source of cheap private soldiers to support surges of requirement; not formed units with command structures that are never going to be used on operations.
So the Army can supply and man enough Field Hospitals by itself? That will please the NHS.

GCM has nothing to do with what the Army "thinks" it needs for the next 2,3,4,5 or 6 decades but what HM Treasury "thinks" it can afford. Anything else is smoke and mirrors.
I am looking forward to seeing the TA training programme that is going to turn a recruit into a Consultant Anaesthetist or even a moderately competent Nurse in a timely and cost effective manner!
 
#7
dergeneral said:
There is a lot of guff around the edges - "more resources if preparing for operations" etc. But when you strip away the bullsh*t the net effect will be to deliver what the Army says it wants and needs. A source of cheap private soldiers to support surges of requirement; not formed units with command structures that are never going to be used on operations.
Well, the recruiters say they are battering potential recruits away from the doors with sticks - so the GCM appears to be the answer to yesterdays problem....
 
#8
saladin said:
..... so the GCM appears to be the answer to yesterdays problem....
Ahhh, about right for introduction in around 6 months when they've *just* identified a totally different requirement then :wink: :roll:

Ta for the steer gents, doubt I'll get a nose at it as our CoC don't believe in passing out too much info but I shall watch with interest anyway.

Mind you, could be a queue for some monster mess functions before we all get laid off. :twisted:
(at least until 6 to 12 months later when they realise it's fubar'd and quietly try to reverse everything on the cheap...)

Interesting times!
 
#9
hook, line, and sinker? Ok, you got me.

here goes....the GCM (as I have been banging on about for ages) is indeed, the means by which the Regular Army finally 'controls' the TA, wipes out those irritating Officers and SNCOs, and 'caps' MTDs (control, control) for those 'wasters' who aren't able or willing to mobilise.

In a simple sleight of hand, the GCM will define the TA as a simplistic machine for generating IRs. Indeed, many Corps are already off down this line with the Infantry talking about all units becoming 'Training' Battalions and the Royal Signals (even they with so few to play with now) talking about 'generic signallers'.

In essence, the GCM splits the TA into 3 pools - Pool 1 is normal jogging, no commitment, 27 MTDs to achieve a basic level of training and attendance. Pool 2 is when, and only when, members of Pool 1 put their hand up as 'interested in being mobilised. It's not clear how long one stays in Pool 2, how it is administered, and how this links with FORM, the OCP and/or hybrid TA/Reg Units. However, the MTD allocation rises to circa 90 MTDs. Pool 3 is in the sand. When you have finished in the sandy bits, you either fall back into Pool 1 or possibly Pool 2 to 'share' the experience and/or train others on their way through albeit that again, this isn't clear. Pool 1 is about 75% of the force, Pool 2 about 20% and the rest are on Ops - how big the 'Force' will be though is again unanswered at this stage however, you can bet your life it won't be 30,000.

So, add this to the RTC Review (Regular commands?), the Review of the Reserve Estate (fewer bigger TACs), and hybrid TA/Regular Units, then the dearth of TA Officers and a screwed up funding system through the Divisions (soons to be axed) all will seem somewhat immaterial...

The Army in it's blind short term ignorance will get what it thinks it wants. By the time it realises that it ripped the heart out of the volunteer ethos, it will be a) too late and b) all those involved will have moved on, taken tea, received medals, and retired on a fat pension.

Don't think it is a myth - it was approved in the summer before the previous CRF moved on. It's coming to a TAC near you and soon. [edited to add...'and it really FCUKS me off']

RIP
 
#10
so what happens when "the sand" stops, possibly within three years (5 even is still very short term but looking probable), are we left with an army and reserve which can only do one single type of operation? what happens when something different has to be dealt with?
 
#11
It's rather a simplistic idea and won't sit well at all with the reality of what my unit currently does, and I doubt we're alone. SNCOs aren't all enablers where I am, most of us are analysts and it takes most people until they're a Sgt to become useful in that role. Now we can of course redefine ourselves as merely a LCpl generation unit, but that means a much smaller unit and the regs probably lose a Bn (and the CO / RSM roles they covet) as 3 and 5 would shrink and become ripe for amalgamation.

That of course means we'd be no more than a gap year provider of choice, and once commitment scales down there'd be no use for us at all, as normal jogging in the UK has openings for analysts not baby A3 LCpls.

I'm also puzzled as to how they think a unit providing a steady stream of IRs (us again) manages the switch from Pool 1 to Pool 2. How do we generate the critical mass for training without involving the rest of the Bn ? Also, how do you manage the inevitable missed weekends when the soldier's commitment doubles - after all, the other stuff they planned for weekends, pre-booked annual holidays and so on doesn't go away. It's not as if they can make us turn up after all. And let's not even mention where we get the instructors from. (Train more you cry - what, on 27 MTDs a year ? Ho ho.)

More importantly, it's hardly a compelling offer for those thinking of joining, particularly once AFG starts to scale down. The regular reserve has failed utterly, the Reserves Review noted that the TA was too small as a percentage of the regs ... and yet we get this. Bizarre, utterly bizarre.
 
#12
One_of_the_strange said:
It's rather a simplistic idea and won't sit well at all with the reality of what my unit currently does, and I doubt we're alone. SNCOs aren't all enablers where I am, most of us are analysts and it takes most people until they're a Sgt to become useful in that role. Now we can of course redefine ourselves as merely a LCpl generation unit, but that means a much smaller unit and the regs probably lose a Bn (and the CO / RSM roles they covet) as 3 and 5 would shrink and become ripe for amalgamation.

That of course means we'd be no more than a gap year provider of choice, and once commitment scales down there'd be no use for us at all, as normal jogging in the UK has openings for analysts not baby A3 LCpls.

I'm also puzzled as to how they think a unit providing a steady stream of IRs (us again) manages the switch from Pool 1 to Pool 2. How do we generate the critical mass for training without involving the rest of the Bn ? Also, how do you manage the inevitable missed weekends when the soldier's commitment doubles - after all, the other stuff they planned for weekends, pre-booked annual holidays and so on doesn't go away. It's not as if they can make us turn up after all. And let's not even mention where we get the instructors from. (Train more you cry - what, on 27 MTDs a year ? Ho ho.)

More importantly, it's hardly a compelling offer for those thinking of joining, particularly once AFG starts to scale down. The regular reserve has failed utterly, the Reserves Review noted that the TA was too small as a percentage of the regs ... and yet we get this. Bizarre, utterly bizarre.
Bizarre indeed, and so short sighted it beggars belief. It would be funny if it weren't true.

What I fail to understand is how this can be pushed through without anyone in the TA being proeprly consulted or indeed, our esrtwhile senior echelons putting a stop to it - are we now impotent that such systemic change can be foisted on us without even a whimper?

I suppose the R Signals debacle says it all.
 
#13
MrTracey said:
One_of_the_strange said:
Bizarre indeed, and so short sighted it beggars belief. It would be funny if it weren't true.

What I fail to understand is how this can be pushed through without anyone in the TA being proeprly consulted or indeed, our esrtwhile senior echelons putting a stop to it - are we now impotent that such systemic change can be foisted on us without even a whimper?

I suppose the R Signals debacle says it all.
The TA isn't a homogenous entity, it's a patchwork of small tribes - much as the regs are. I know the efforts the regs are making to keep us in the game as they value of what we contribute. However I doubt that the RSigs TA are perceived by their regular counterparts as bringing much to the game and so why bother ? That's not to defend the incompetence of the implementation by the way.

Now before all you scaleys start to call for my head I'm not trying to start a capbadge war or imply that individuals are to blame - I know you could do a lot more if funded, trained and equipped to do so. But look at the numbers - how many on Ops, what percentage of the unit, what ranks are needed and so on. Those are the metrics currently driving senior officer's perceptions and UK Ops is nowhere, particularly since JDP 02.

But, and here's the root of it, as budgets shrink and everyone's timeline shrinks down to 6 months and the next deployment anyone not generating operational effect right now this second is up for the axe.

Long term of course it's a really, really stupid thing to do. Losing a credible reserve means the Regular Army isn't credible as an effective warfighting organisation. But we've been committing the Army on Ops and underfunding it since 2001, and this is just one more thing that's giving under the strain.
 
#14
MrTracey said:
What I fail to understand is how this can be pushed through without anyone in the TA being proeprly consulted or indeed, our esrtwhile senior echelons putting a stop to it - are we now impotent that such systemic change can be foisted on us without even a whimper?
Their impotence was clearly demonstrated by their inability to influence a cut as small as £20m...

msr
 

OldSnowy

LE
Moderator
Book Reviewer
#15
MrTracey said:
What I fail to understand is how this can be pushed through without anyone in the TA being proeprly consulted or indeed, our esrtwhile senior echelons putting a stop to it - are we now impotent that such systemic change can be foisted on us without even a whimper?

I suppose the R Signals debacle says it all.

Do you really really, think that the 'Top Echelons' of the TA have not been in on this from the start? They most certainly have, and see it as a 'good thing' - or at least, the best offer available.

I will refrain from commenting on the efficacy or otherwise of this model - I won't say proposed model, as it is in, and nothing can change that, but will just say that, given the changes to come in the Regs - of all three Services - next year and over the next two to three years, this will appear very small beer indeed.

That said, I am also convinced that it does signal the end of the TA that existed from 1908 until around 2005, and formalises the situation we are in now - with some COs openly stating that they are not there, for example, to help out their local communities in disaster situations, but are IR machines for their Regular counterparts. Again, my view is that this is a short termist attitude, but then most COs are only there for two years, and go back to their Regular jobs afterwards. Still, the Army is banking on the Reserves providing 25% of personnel for certain types of Ops in the future, so they can't afford to utterly break the TA........

It's the future, and it probably sucks for many, but it has been bought into by the Senior cadre of the TA. There was no alternative offered, other than to disappear completely.
 
#16
OldSnowy said:
MrTracey said:
What I fail to understand is how this can be pushed through without anyone in the TA being proeprly consulted or indeed, our esrtwhile senior echelons putting a stop to it - are we now impotent that such systemic change can be foisted on us without even a whimper?

I suppose the R Signals debacle says it all.

Do you really really, think that the 'Top Echelons' of the TA have not been in on this from the start? They most certainly have, and see it as a 'good thing' - or at least, the best offer available.

I will refrain from commenting on the efficacy or otherwise of this model - I won't say proposed model, as it is in, and nothing can change that, but will just say that, given the changes to come in the Regs - of all three Services - next year and over the next two to three years, this will appear very small beer indeed.

That said, I am also convinced that it does signal the end of the TA that existed from 1908 until around 2005, and formalises the situation we are in now - with some COs openly stating that they are not there, for example, to help out their local communities in disaster situations, but are IR machines for their Regular counterparts. Again, my view is that this is a short termist attitude, but then most COs are only there for two years, and go back to their Regular jobs afterwards. Still, the Army is banking on the Reserves providing 25% of personnel for certain types of Ops in the future, so they can't afford to utterly break the TA........

It's the future, and it probably sucks for many, but it has been bought into by the Senior cadre of the TA. There was no alternative offered, other than to disappear completely.
1) If they're banking on that, they're going to be bitterly disappointed. There isn't going to be enough warm bodies around.

2) Then whichever f**kwit dreamt this plan up is a shortsighted, blind, dribbling, gibbering , bedlam-bound chinless wonder.

GCM just isn't going to work. I just do not see enough bodies staying in capable of conducting admin and training of the raw materials in the first place. The TA pretty much handles the whole training package up to Phase 2 and I do not see enough bodies hanging in to just spend the next few years doing nothing but training new bodies. It's hard enough to get people to volunter to do RRTT now.

And we head straight back to the point of too few MTD's. If all you have is 27 days a year then PTD is going to have to shoot up to match the whole regular cycle, or put up with low levels of training in IR's. Otherwise you're going to have entire units on Pool 2 at 90 days each, blowing any "budget Savings" into thin air. If there are few or no SNCO's/Officers to plan and conduct training then the regulars, who of course have plenty of spare bodies, are going to have to to do.

I'm just talking Infantry of course. There are some trades that require skills before you join but there are still a lot of trades with no real Civi street match that are in short supply in the Army.
 

The_Duke

LE
Moderator
#17
One_of_the_strange said:
But, and here's the root of it, as budgets shrink and everyone's timeline shrinks down to 6 months and the next deployment anyone not generating operational effect right now this second is up for the axe.

Long term of course it's a really, really stupid thing to do. Losing a credible reserve means the Regular Army isn't credible as an effective warfighting organisation. But we've been committing the Army on Ops and underfunding it since 2001, and this is just one more thing that's giving under the strain.
Funnily enough, I have been saying that on here for some years now, generally to howls of outrage and derision.

The GCM plan is a nonsense, because of course all units will desperately struggle to justify remaining in pool 2 for the majority of their training cycle.

Mr_T has taken great pleasure in the past in claiming that the TA Inf will die post Herrick as us "lemmings" will no longer be required, the future is in the hands of the enablers etc, etc, etc. Actually, the GCM (whilst ridiculous) probably fits the TA Inf better than the more technical areas of the TA. 27 days is nowhere near enough to maintain the level of skills required of a TA Inf soldier, but there is at least the chance of bringing them up to speed given 3 or 4 months of very high intensity PDT.

TA technical trades? Unless you are one of those whose TA job matches their civvy job (ie stand fast AMS, LIAG etc) then I would be very worried about being budgetted out of existence.
 
#18
Duke,

Hear, Hear.

I also eagerly await news of what "the offer" will be under GCM.

The TA I joined had a fairly simple offer - Do two weekends a month or thereabouts, pass courses etc and stand by for Ivan coming across the IGB - at which point you will be required to become uniformed land-fill. In return we will let you play with all sorts of big bits of kit, throw some stunning parties and contribute a few bob to the holiday fund.

Todays TA is a rather different offer. Rather more " You are expected to deploy", lots more admin shite and rather less fun. Fine for a "gap year" IR, not so appealing for those who actually run the thing long-term - goodwill heading rapidly into overdraft ?

Whats the new offer going to be ? - The Pool 1 piece is just nuts. 27 days is insufficient to achieve any decent level of training, will not encourage the habit required for retention - and has NO time for any of the fun stuff. Pool 2 - Well for the real basic recruits why not just become a Regular ?

I'd suggest that 27 days is not going to survive contact. The budget might look like 27 per man but the reality will be that, like now, there will be a fair few who do more, using funds not used by those who came in and left or do not attend. In my experience you need folk to do at least one weekend a month plus camp - with training evenings too - averages 50 MTD ?

Rather than piss about with a small percentage within a unit on "Pool 2" with all the attendant training bill in unit would it be better just to offer say a one year FTRS contract and head off to either the Regular unit being supported for IR posts or some location where composite sub-units could train centrally - Chilwell Plus ?

Bottom line is Pool 1 needs to have enough training that individuals feel comfortable - it also needs a big add-back of fun ! For those who are actually deploying they need to be given a decent opportunity to do PDT on terms more like a Regular ( i.e able to devote time to training and still get some time off with the family...) and have a decent remuneration package.

No-one has mentioned employee protection or the incentive package for employers yet either ? My first bid would be a 100% NI rebate for the employers of all serving reservists.
 
#19
saladin said:
No-one has mentioned employee protection or the incentive package for employers yet either ? My first bid would be a 100% NI rebate for the employers of all serving reservists.
Potter did, quite a long time ago. He correctly identified the two main audiences for the review: family and employers.

msr
 
#20
msr said:
saladin said:
No-one has mentioned employee protection or the incentive package for employers yet either ? My first bid would be a 100% NI rebate for the employers of all serving reservists.
Potter did, quite a long time ago. He correctly identified the two main audiences for the review: family and employers.

msr
Absolutely right. "Hello dear, I've just joined this organisation which requires me to be away most weekends, I also need to get fitter so I'm going to start running a couple of evenings a week. - Oh and I'm off to Afghanistan for 6 months next year. I'll get two weeks off in the middle and some holiday at the end, so thats OK .........what do you mean I don't love you anymore and what about the kids ??"

" Hello Boss, yes, those plans for the new office in Hounslow look great. Can I have 9 months off next year ?"
 

Latest Threads