Not just TA recruiting which has hit the buffers

Discussion in 'Army Reserve' started by msr, Jan 28, 2007.

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. msr

    msr LE

  2. By the looks of those figures since when has the RNR been popular? :p
  3. Hmmm, fucking hell, we seem to be fighting a losing battle....

    Bring back conscription? :pissedoff:
  4. OldSnowy

    OldSnowy LE Moderator Book Reviewer

    One reason why the RNR is losing numbers (and has been for years) is that it's members do not really have any 'real' jobs. There are very, very few RNR mobilised at the moment, and haven't been for a long while (and those mostly specialists such as Doctors).

    Oddly enough, people tend to want to join the Reserves nowadays because they want to go on Ops- and if the RNR isn't doing it, then young peeps join the TA instead.
  5. msr

    msr LE

    Or not as the figures would suggest.

    It seems the TA has lost somewhere near 2000 people last year....

  6. It's a sign of the times.....
  7. Apart from the fact that 6 SCOTS doesn't have a "D Company" (not any more), apparently they aim to recruit 107 officers to the TA in Scotland next year.

    An interesting exercise would be to see how many TA Gp.A officers were actually recruited, each year, from (say) 1986 with the start of TACC for men. This could be broken down into "direct entrant" and "NCO entrant". By way of amusement, compare it against the number of people who sat DAB / TCB in Scotland, each year, over the same period. That should give a rough wastage figure.

    Numbers should be easy - RMAS should have all of the historical records. It would be interesting to see whether the system has ever produced 107 TA Gp.A officers for Scotland in a single year. I very much doubt it. Just as well they didn't do a TA-wide target, RMAS would have discovered a need to commission 1000 TA YOs in the next 12 months.

    By way of even easier calculation, when was the last time 6 SCOTS (or either of its antecedent battalions) managed to recruit 7 officers in a year? I can't think of a single occasion in fifteen years.

    Targets have to be meaningful. If those targets are serious, then the person who set them is a moron. If those targets are in fact "how many people we're short right now" then they've told a porky-pie in a Parliamentary answer. No shock there.
  8. Maybe it's something to do with the fact that it feels we are under appreciated and that if you look at other country's they treat military personnel with much higher regard than our government does eg pay, housing etc. Everybody that joins expects the hard work, long weeks, being away from family's and everything that goes with it but would it be all worth it if when we came home we felt that the whole nation was behind us, we could spend the tax free lump sum on whatever we wanted and our best interests were being looked after? i think so. Sometimes it doesn't feel like what we are doing and why is fully understood and alot of stereotyping by civvies p1sses me off too. Maybe if the government backed us and we educated the public it might entice more people to join but at the moment what is the appeal to those that are mis guided? They don't see it as a great job/opportunity they just see it as a crazy waste of time or a game that they can leave whenever they want.

    edited cause in a drunken rant i fcuked up.
  9. As someone who left the Army many years ago after 22 years service and still has several family members serving I think I can safely say the majority of the decent people in Great Britain do support the Military and appreciate what they do . The problem is that the operations the military is now involved in , Iraq and Afghanistan , are not seen by the general population of being of any of our business and there is no support for them.
    There is only one person to blame for this ... Bliar
  10. So what is the RMR doing right? At a recruit selection weekend about 18 months ago the RMR drew in over 300 applicants. They had advertised on local radio and in the press, over a long period, stating very clearly how tough it was to get in and pass the training and that once having passed out deployment would be inevitable.

    300+ potential recruits, how many of us wish we could get that many through the doors. In the event they only wanted 30-35 so selected the best, many were told to try their hand at joining the TA since they had potential, some acted as if they had been slapped in the face by such a suggestion.

    So what is the TA and RNR failing to do that the RMR does well?

  11. Good point on the SCOTS, but 42 (I think) of the Officers required for Scotland look to be PQOs for the AMS units so that's not quite as unreasonable as it looks.

    However, the 60 odd remaining across the Bde is still a steep old hill to climb.

    Incidentally, anyone know why figures for TA inflow and outflow prior to 2003 are "unavailable"?
  12. The RMR has the advantage that since its formation at the RMFVR in 1947ish its role has been basically to provide IRs so it hasn't had to cope with change in the same way as the TA.

    However IMO the big advantage they have is that they have been able to maintain standards and this has reflected in the image that they present to the potential recruit. 4 Para has been able to achieve something similar (supported by their regular brethren) despite the efforts of the bigger TA to impose common (lower) standards on them and this has been reflected in their recruiting numbers. Both RMR and Para Regt Reserve are able to differentiate themselves in the minds of the potential recruit who is looking for something that provides a real challenge.

    The RNR really do struggle to find a role for themselves that is attractive to the bloke on the street. They are actually quite well supported by the RN these days (not always the case in the past).
  13. When they had their own ships.

    Having said that, I don't know how the crew system worked. In the TA, when only half the Sqn tips up on a Friday, we still go out on an FTX. I'd imagine for the RNR lack of crew might present more of a problem!
  15. [Fact]The target for 51 Bde is 1 per sub-unit per year, excluding LEs. Those individuals are expected to be a mix of UPOs/DEs trained through RTC & (especially) Fasttrack SC07 plus Gp B to Gp A Transferees from UOTCs, including those who they Commission this year across the 3 RMAS Module 4s.

    As "moronic" as that target might seem, anything less than 1 is zero and I hope no-one in these forums thinks that is a credible option. Doing fcuk all is, of course, achievable; but it is hardly an aspiration worthy of anyone who expects to be taken seriously in this arena.

    As a side observation, 1 per sub-unit per year is not even sufficient (overall) to match current outflow so I would argue that anything less is further evidence of the slow (but accelerating) death of the TA.

    Even at 1 per sub-unit, us morons, when we got together to discuss the art of the possible, recognised that such a low target was PALLIATIVE care rather than the RESTORATIVE care which is really needed. But then, targets have to be achievable as well as meaningful.

    And before anyone argues the case for lower targets again, please let me remind you: less than 1 is zero, we cannot set a recruiting target of zero.