Infantry's loss - our gain

Discussion in 'RLC' started by Ford_Prefect, Jan 9, 2005.

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. I wonder if anyone in DRLC / MCM div is rubbing their hands with glee at the potential glut of transferees that we could secure from the downsizing of the Infantry. Just think by actively targeting Inf Regts with greatly diminished career opportunities etc. We could:

    1. Introduce STANDARDS at phase 1 & 2 Trg!

    2. Cull the deadwood, dogsh!t subalterns and just transfer in good guys who have not been extended in the Inf because they are not the top 10%

    We could solve our manning / quality shortfall overnight!

    Without doubt the argument would be that these people particularly the Officers have no 'Logistic' experience. Well firstly what is 'logistic experience,' do you need any for such functions as Pioneers and Transport? Any Warrior Plt Comd should have a basic understanding of vehicle maintenance. I think some peoples pride concerning how specialist we believe ourself to be will ensure that we lose out as a Corps.
  2. As long as one doesn't make the assumption that 'ex'-Infanteers are automatically going to make better RLC soldiers/officers than current RLC soldiers/officers.

    Whilst I agree that the fighting front is the Army's best, the Infantry (much like the RLC) has their fair portion of to**ers too.
  3. Even working on the assumption that every Regt / Corps is equal, because of horrendous promotion potential compression we could seek to replace our bottom third with their middle third!
  4. Agreed.

    How shall we execute the bottom third? Gas or Lead sir?
  5. You are of course assuming that an infantry officer would actually want to be transfered to the RLC as a Pioneer officer. There must be othere corps who are stood at the sidelines looking for additional numbers. If an infantry officer wanted to do anything on the logistics side, do you not think they would have taken that, dare I say it, easier path straight from sandhurst?

    Any ambitious officer who wants to really get to the top of the officer field has to have a formation command in his sights, and just because they are not in the top bracket in low level infantry tactics doesn't mean that they aren't destined for something better. How many Armoured or Infantry Brigades have been commanded by commanders from a logistics backgroung?

    The officers you are more likely to attract are the 'anything rather than civvy street' rather than the people with eyes on the top.
  6. I wasn't.

    I don't think F_P was either.

    I am however assuming that you are in that third of your Corps, that are somewhat concerned with the potential influx of quality.
  7. I knew someone would chip in with something like this....

    I never assumed that an Inf officer would actually want to transfer into the RLC but having spoken to friends of mine they do actually want to have a job! You know, pay the bills, put food on the table........its not all a boy's own / Victor Comic story! Someone may not have wanted to join the Logistic Corps at Sandhurst but that may be true of a few RCT/RAOC/RPC Officers, sh!t happens, goal posts move.

    I envisage a good number of SSCs and IRCs not being converted in Inf Regts and personally I am prepared to welcome that as an opportunity. Likewise there will be Soldiers whose promotion pyramid to WO1 has just significantly compressed and if they are clued up they may realise their own promotion ceiling and realise what that would be in Corps that has not suffered a reduction in size.

    [/quote]The officers you are more likely to attract are the 'anything rather than civvy street' rather than the people with eyes on the top.[/quote]

    The situation is a little more dire than that for many Infantry Battalions. I know of a Sword of honour winner who is not being extended in his Regt as he is an ex-soldier and is too old to compete with the thrusters, now the SOH doesn't necessarily mean he was THE best Cadet but it speaks of his quality
  8. Whereas Infantry soldiers often walk into the careers office wanting to be a pilot/technician/mechanic and get talked into being cannon fodder; Infantry officers mostly join the Army specifically to be Cannon fodder.

    F_P's examples nothwithstanding, I'd caution the recruiters to examine the motivations of those infanteer officers that do wish to transfer. Like it or not (and contrary to some Tpt Regt CO's aspirations) the RLC is vastly different from the Infantry.
  9. woopert

    woopert LE Moderator

    There's also the old "G3 snobbery" issue with some inf types. If there are a glut of applicants looking to transfer in then the benchmark for acceptance also has to include a desire to do the job not just the need to have one. Any officer/soldier who constantly bangs on about how pump field skills are in the RLC, or how better things were done in the inf is not going to win friends and influence people, and to be blunt about it, I think anyone adjusting from one situation to another is likely to fall into that trap to some extent to try and make sense of the changes going on around them.

    The RLC is now way past being a "commissioner of last resort" at RMAS and are actively pointing candidates towards other cap-badges as we are over-subscribed. Just like every organisation you get good, bad, and indifferent, but I don't necessarily see there being such a huge skill shortage that we have to look to recruit ex-inf en masse when we can have the inf skill base attached to unit formations when needed. I do see the logic however of retaining experience and accepting those willing to make the transition but it has to be managed carefully.
  10. I'd hate to see the candidates we are turning away at RMAS then. I've heard this futures bright stuff before but the reality differs somewhat.

    I don't really care what peoples motives just the effect that they achieve.