Military staring down the barrel as 1,000 reservists quit a year - The Times

#1
Article on page 9 today - well researched as ever by Deborah Haynes, but it only echoes what most people in the TA could have told them what could happen. Admittedly there is no mention that traditionally, turnover in the Reserves has been 30%

Depressing that she's 'seen' a document suggesting they will use more courts martial to instil discipline in the TA, smacks of desperation and total lack of ideas that will work - reminiscent of the Russian military police standing behind the soldiers on the front and shooting those who refused to advance.

The sub-piece by Tom Coghlan is pretty negative.
 
M

Mr_Logic

Guest
#3
Firstly, a link would have been helpful. Secondly, before you criticise the Red Army's motivation tactics, you may wish to note that they did work in keeping them fighting at Stalingrad. Also, I am sure that the enforcers were commissars, which I think makes them Party, not Army. One of these chaps at Stalingrad was a bloke called Khrushchev, whose career subsequently prospered somewhat. Total war sometimes calls for extreme measures.

Lastly, a net loss of 1,000 TA personnel each year is hardly a national crisis, is it, given that the Regular Army is currently sacking 5,000 of its personnel, who are better trained and do not have the RFA 96 restrictions. Admittedly, it does call into question the current plans to increase the effective numbers in the TA to 30,000 by 2018, but did any of us think they were deliverable when they can't even decide on basisc stuff, like the name?
 
#5
Depressing that she's 'seen' a document suggesting they will use more courts martial to instil discipline in the TA, smacks of desperation and total lack of ideas that will work - reminiscent of the Russian military police standing behind the soldiers on the front and shooting those who refused to advance.
All leave is cancelled until morale improves...

Rodney2q
 

Goatman

ADC
Book Reviewer
#6
Firstly, a link would have been helpful.
Ah, a subscriber who pays The Times for access to their online content ? Marvelous...knew there were one or two of you out there...perhaps you could cut and paste on behalf of the rest of us?

thanks awfy

Don Cabra
 
F

fozzy

Guest
#8
Article on page 9 today - well researched as ever by Deborah Haynes, but it only echoes what most people in the TA could have told them what could happen. Admittedly there is no mention that traditionally, turnover in the Reserves has been 30%

Depressing that she's 'seen' a document suggesting they will use more courts martial to instil discipline in the TA, smacks of desperation and total lack of ideas that will work - reminiscent of the Russian military police standing behind the soldiers on the front and shooting those who refused to advance.

The sub-piece by Tom Coghlan is pretty negative.
Hmmm - the timing of this is pretty suspect; Release some "bad news" in the midst of the TA Live! Campaign. I suspect the same cabal of disgruntled senior officers (see Telegraph articles passim) are behind it.

The turn over is pretty constant - be good to see the break down of that 1000 a year number.
 
#10
Hmmm - the timing of this is pretty suspect; Release some "bad news" in the midst of the TA Live! Campaign. I suspect the same cabal of disgruntled senior officers (see Telegraph articles passim) are behind it.

The turn over is pretty constant - be good to see the break down of that 1000 a year number.
If that is the case then they've scored an own goal. What I think this does is reinforce the view that the Army is incompetent and a failing public body. Not the TA; the Army.

Were I conspiring to axe the Reg element some more I'd see this as a good mornings work. After all, if the Army cannot run Reserves - which our peers and allies all manage to do - then it must be uniquely incompetent among the same. And after very clear direction from HMG that it is to improve in this area it also appears to be arrogant and unwilling to obey clear orders. Not the view you want your budget holders to have these days I would suggest.

And if the Army is really having to resort to court martial to keep a few part timers in line it kind of undercuts the whole "we're the Army and we're dead good at leadership" thing doesn't it ?
 
M

Mr_Logic

Guest
#11
Ah, a subscriber who pays The Times for access to their online content ? Marvelous...knew there were one or two of you out there...perhaps you could cut and paste on behalf of the rest of us?

thanks awfy

Don Cabra
It weren't me guv, I didn't start nuffin. You need to have a word with the OP.
 
#13
... when they can't even decide on basisc stuff, like the name?
I realise that is a reference to earlier speculation around the time of the DoW's retirement, but I have no problem with the fact that the MoD has consulted publicly about the name. Legislation will be needed to change the legal name anyway.
 
#14
What she has 'seen' is likely to be the staffwork that suggests one way to improve attendance would be to use the existing discipline system more robustly...

But of course, saying that thousands will be court-martialed is far more exciting in print.


Posted from the ARRSE Mobile app (iOS or Android)
A better idea would be to alter the discipline system to take account of the fact that merely pasting on the Reg one to the TA doesn't work well at all. I still remember the looks on the faces of the permanent staff when one lad responded to a six month warning by not turning up for six months .... but rules is rules, no bad behaviour during the period means it's lifted.

Before mobilisation though, the only real sanction is discharge, and as long as SJARs depend on meeting manning numbers then it will be applied less than it should be. The real solution is a TA that people want to join and want to stay in.
 
#15
".....staffwork that suggests one way to improve attendance would be to use the existing discipline system more robustly." And anyone who thinks that concept would survive contact with the current TCOS is rather badly briefed. If it appears anywhere in the staffwork it should be in the list of Courses of Action discarded very early in the decision making.... Personal experience says that getting good attendence at well resourced and high quality training is relatively simple. I suggest the issue here probably revolves around the "resourced" bit ?
 

The_Duke

LE
Moderator
#16
And the realists amongst us know that no amount of dicipline, resourcing, exciting training or anything else will prevent many of those people leaving. They have simply reached the end of their TA lifespan.

That may be due to boredom, family or work pressures, been-there-done-that or simply found something else they wish to do more. We need to work hard to avoid unnecessary wastage and send the rest on their way with our best wishes. They may yet prove to be a key recruiting source if they tell their family and friends about the good experience rather than "it was all great until I had to leave, then they treated me like shit".
 
#17
^^^ Like his Grace says. Well resourced and interesting training will reduce wastage but not eliminate it. Lives change, people move on. The question remains, what sort of demographic are they looking for in this new organisation ? If the model is one where the individual can commit large quantities of time and cope with regular and extended periods of mobilisation then very few people in "normal" jobs will be able to get involved without significant risk to their civvy career prospects. They won't hang around to be threatened with sanctions for not turning up, they'll just resign.
 
#18
They may yet prove to be a key recruiting source if they tell their family and friends about the good experience rather than "it was all great until I had to leave, then they treated me like shit".
So they are like the Regs then? Who'd have thunk it.
 
#19
The 'leader' on Page 2 makes much better reading and summarises the issues much more succinctly. It highlights 3 useful principles to adopt if we wish success, these being TA recruits should not be: deterred by 'red tape'; disillusioned by excessive military discipline; or short-changed by Army accountants.

I'll leave it to you to decide whether we deliver these or not.
 
#20
I cannot believe that Regular soldiers are getting laid off whilst we continue to waste money on the TA. Just disband the TA. It costs a fortune to provide useless soldiers that may or may not turn up. By saving money on civvies, we may end up with more Regular Units that are actually useful.

30,000 my arse. It'd take that number in PSIs just to make it deployable.
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top