New TA Recruit Training Scheme

Discussion in 'Army Reserve' started by TopBadger, Jan 23, 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. Hi All,

    Had eyes on the draft for the new TA recruit training scheme (i don't think this will break INFOSEC tho), and thought it might interest you.

    Current scheme (at least for my lot) is TAFS (2 weekends), CSC (2 weeks) and then GAP (4 weekends). At the moment TAFS & GAP are offered "in unit", CSC is at an ATR.

    The new scheme will be:

    - TAFS (2 wkends), followed by EITHER
    - 4 weekends training (MAPS, CBRN, SAA, DRILL, etc, essentially same as GAP, but renamed, and i can't remember the new name) [for NON-INF pers]
    - 7 weekends training (above plus 3 wkend infantry man course) [for INF pers], and then:
    - 2 week CSC at ATR.

    The main difference is that only TAFS will be offered in unit. The 4/7 weekend package will be offered by newlyformed RTC's (Regional Training Centers). The idea seems to be that training is completely standardised across TA pers. Each Regional Bridage will run an RTC, so we'll have Inf/RE/REME/Sigs/RLC etc recruits all in the same pot as it were.

    Having the CSC at the end is a good idea in my opinion, as in the current scheme some recruits seem to get a bit complacent after CSC and don't go on to complete the GAP weekends.

    My concern came from looking at the manning of the RTC's. It seems that in the VAST majority of RTCs all the manning will be done by SNCO's, with NO places for JNCO's. However, I'm not sure this is a great idea for two reasons:

    1 - Discipline, some of the newbies seem to pop out of the system thinking that they only need to take orders from people with at least three stripes. And i've got better things to do than AGAI kids and/or run them around until they get the correct idea. Running recruits about the place ensuring they are in the right place at the right time with the right kit is a JNCO job.

    2 - it excludes keen-as-mustard newly-qualified JNCO's from imparting the latest docrine into fresh recruit minds. I've seen SNCO's teach drills that were culled before i was born. To my mind SNCO's should be shaping JNCO's into future SNCO's, and JNCO's should be shaping the newbies into potential future JNCO's.

    The last point could potentially also be seen as a retention issue, i wonder how many JNCO's get jacked off because they go on a course and never get to use it due to the old SNCO taking over (and teaching old drills)? I'm sure it happens. But i hope this is a small scale issue.

    I'm not even sure how one would go about applying to be an RTC instr.

    I'm hoping someone with a bit of influence on ARRSE can adress lack of JNCO concerns and factor it into the new scheme (it is still only a proposal at the moment).

    And of course fellow ARRSEr's comments/additions are appreciated.

  2. Doesn't sound right to me. In fact there are more than a few JNCOs who regularly post in these forums and who may - or may not be - based at RTCs ;)

    By the nature of the RTC with Offr Trg under Sandhurst's watchful eye and Specialist Trg requiring: qualifications, occupational competence, occupational currency and credibility it is highly likely that only an SNCO or WO will fit in most of the appointments it is really only the Ph1 Trg where I would see opportunity in number for JNCOs to get involved.

    But the opportunities are there and the JNCOs do - at least they do where I am.
  3. TB,

    Speaking entirely out of turn, knowing nothing and having reflected on what you've just told us for about a nanosecond, here is my view on the bit quoted above. Presumably the RTCs will become centres of excellence, with SNCOs updated on the latest drills. JNCOs coming straight off courses will be freed up to impart their new knowledge on their peers (who may have outdated info) rather than on the newbies who may not end up staying.

    The no respect for less than three stripes problem could be cured by warning newbies, in a stern voice, to fear stripes (though obviously not pips).

    Am I right that the new plan is an increase on the current level of mandatory training that happens before the two-week course? If so, that's a good thing, non?
  4. Certainly looks like a good idea to me. GAP never really seemed to be something that was taken particularly seriously. I’m all for people getting trained up properly before going to their 2 weeks and get their beret but how is it going to be manned? We (the TA) are understrength in SNCOs anyway aren’t we? Where are all the ones for the RTCs going to come from?
  5. There's this big underground bunker in Hampshire, filled with seven-foot glass jars, each one containing a fully-formed TA SNCO in a kind of primordial goo.
  6. Abacus - All the above i've mentioned is Phase 1 Trg, i wouldn't envisage JNCO's taking Phase 2 or 3 lessons.

    Dr Evil - Good point, i would certainly hope that they would be centres of excellence, and i'd like to think that all potential instructors (regardless of rank) would be trialled before given a place on the team.

    Well, for Non-Inf personel, its not an overall increase in the level of mandatory training, more of a reshuffle into a more sensible order. Which is still a good thing. I can't speak for Inf Trg side though.
  7. Or perhaps with the pairing arrangements under FAS/FIS the need for RHQs (and therefore RHQ manpower) will diminish somewhat. Want to stay in the TA and been mobilised in the last 5 years already? Where else are you going to go?
  8. Looks like the RTCs will certainly not be short of applicants then! :D

    The rest of the TA might be a little short of NCOs though! 8O
  9. I was at our local RTC the other week - they are obviously concerned about an establishment rise of from 20 to 100 within the year and are requesting instructors from local units at the rate of 1-2 per sub unit on a 2 year posting.

    It's one of those where if everyone approaches it in the right frame of mind it will work. If units send the right people, if RTCs support and develop them and it doesn't turn into a'I was told by someone I'd go there for a year and be guaranteed my tape' issue it should be workable.

    My concern is that it is another demand for our "top quality" ncos. Once they have rejuvinated our training programmes, recruited us to 112% and done all the Op tours that may come their way we want these paragons to give up almost all of their weekends at an RTC for 2 years notwithstanding the effect on their jobs and families.
  10. Well i'd be prepared to instruct at RTC, i'm already doing "2 year posting" with my unit MTT, so it'd be no change for me.

    However, my rank (note, RANK NOT QUALS) does not appear to be necessary there. :-(

    But then i don't think they'll be able to stay rigid on the rank structure they currently have, i reckon its unworkable.

  11. I am sure TB, that if you write your military CV with details of the military instructor qualifications you hold and send it to the RTC they will consider you. It used to be the minimum, is a BIT/DIT qualification + 2 specialisms. NBC.BCDT, SAA etc. The future may well see them recruiting JNCOs when the establishment is approved.
  12. WTF so much for unit cohesion. Not only will you recruits have bog all idea who the unit members/management are but the RTC's need to pinch all the SNCO's too.

    Then later on while we all recruit like mad, RTC's will take the best for JNCO's! Or are the RCT's going to recruit aswell?

    Why bother with Regts and Sqns etc just push them all through RTC etc and straight out through Chillwell....

    Don't get me wrong, but in my 19 years experience the DSTT/RTC's are not all centres of excellence. I am tempted to say some seem to exist only for their own ends...they must have bent the CRF's ear something rotten to come up with this plan.

    Also, how can they cope with an establishment rise to 100? How many RTC's will there be? At this rate the bulk of the TA will be in training units with no-one doing a war role.
  13. msr

    msr LE


    In actual fact we may as well rename the TA to "Training Army", bin the concept of mass mobilisations (war role) and unit identity and cohesion and accept that our place in the new world order is to provide IRs to the regular army.

    I fear the beefed-up RTCs may be the first step.

  14. I have to say, this is just another nail in the coffin for me, I am sorely tempted to sign off tomorrow in disgust. I have a role in unit recruiting, not a role I chose, but one that I have gone out of my way to make work, we have seen our recruited strength rise by over 15% in a year. I can see this destroying all the work we have done along with any unit/Army identity. What next, Royal Siganls trained by BT/Accenture?
  15. msr

    msr LE

    15% in a year. Pah! I achieved more than that in 5 days ;)

    Someone very grown up needs to explain to us why the TA isn't going to become just a temping agency...