Transferring/Paying for MTDs cross unit

Discussion in 'Army Reserve' started by Hardysa, Nov 19, 2010.

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. If one unit has work for me on attachment, say for two months, and my parent unit are happy for me to do it, what's the process (if any) for transferring the cost of the MTDs across from one unit to another? I get the impression it can be done but that only black belt admin ninjas of the rarest sort know how.

  2. I had cause to ask the same question a few years ago. The answer then was that no money is moved until the amount in question reaches circa £15,000. Up until that point, the paying unit is merely given an authorisation to exceed the MTD budget by the agreed number of days — a kind of 'get out of jail free' card.

    I understand that the GCM will allow units to do something very similar by agreement.

    Hope this helps in the interval before a real pay guru happens by.
  3. If you 2 months of extra work is being done via ADC's then it can be directly coded to another unit
  4. There is no real money involved. Your Bde HQ holds the overall MTD budget, devolved from Div. Units spend against their allocated amount. Bde would have to increase one units budget, reduce the others. Purely a paper transaction - and they will not bother unless its a big enough amount.

    Ours is very good at moving money to pay for the BAT - "Bde Assistance Table" - Unit X supporting Unit Y with drivers for an event fr'instance. Bde holds back a pot of budget and once a month allocates a slice to each unit based on what they've done to support others - BUT - It has to have been agreed in advance as a "task" by Bde. In a previous role about 30% of my units MTD spend was "BAT" We kept busy, the troops got extra work and Bde thought we were the dogs doo-das for being so helpful....
  5. Seconding Saladin's response above. You regional Bde will manage the pot of money and asks each unit to submit a return for any expenditure on Bde tasks/Div tasks etc that you have provided soldiers for. They then increase your unit budget by the relevant amount, the actual pay, HTD etc is still recorded against your home unit UIN and processed in the normal way. Most units don't bother filling out the return until after Christmas when they realise they are running close to their control total and want to 'claim back' some money.
  6. Thanks for the info. However, the unit that I'm fishing to get attached to for a few weeks (could be longer) is regular.

    Presumably this makes it a bit trickier?

  7. Hardy, far from it; there is an established procedure for this. You need to speak to your Adj and ask him to contact SO1 Reserves (V) at HQ LF for chapter & verse. It has been done many times before.
  8. I can see an attachment happening OK - but what about the reimbursement of MTDs ? The Regular unit has none. Is there some magic that increases the TA units CT from somewhere up in Div or PSC or are we talking FTRS ? In the current climate I can't see a unit being happy to do anything for anyone without some pay-back.
  9. It comes down to an agreement between COs which may need to be endorsed at the connecting command level. Contrary to the opinions of some supposedly informed posters on this site, GCM does not mean that cases such as this are an automatic 'no' — at least it shouldn't if your CO and extended CoC have the ability to read and understand the direction on GCM. I am, of course, assuming that there is some military value to this proposed attachment.
  10. If its an "agreement between COs" then thats all lovely but there is no way on gods green earth that a Regular CO can cross-deck cash for MTDs to a TA CO. He has none, nothing to offer, NADA.

    "...the connecting command level" ?? The TA units Bde HQ may be persuaded by an appropriate case to increase the TA units CT from within the Bde's overall MTD budget ( which means robbing some other TA unit in effect) - is that what you mean ? If not then I'm stumped. I've NEVER heard of Div or higher being involved (or even interested) in funding individual attachments.

    If you know some magic, then spill the beans, otherwise I'm calling you a bluffer.
  11. Err, I know. When I mentioned a cash transfer earlier it was before Hardysa let slip that he was angling for a Regular unit.

    How do you reconcile the two bold statements above? On one hand you appear to suggest that any MTD increase for one unit means a compensating reduction for another unit but on the other hand you state that your Bde keeps part of its budget unallocated. How can you 'rob' MTDs from another unit that hasn't been allocated them in the first place? Now I'm stumped.

    Who said anything about higher comds funding attachments? Their function is to staff the requests and that has hitherto involved an application to Reserves Sec at HQ LF signed by the individual's CO to confirm that the attachment is pukka (ie agreed between COs) and that the TA unit's CO is happy to have X amount of MTDs from his/her own budget spent in this manner.

    Attachments to the Regular Army are not common (low single figures per year, sometimes nil) but they do happen. I am not aware of one happening under the GCM regime (Hardysa may be the first!) but since TA Regs are considered primary legislation I have no reason to think it has changed.

    TA Regulations
    Training Attachments
    2.014. a. An officer or soldier of the TA may carry out, with the agreement of both commanding officers, the whole or part of his annual training with a Regular Army unit or another TA unit of the same arm or service. Attachments to Regular Army units are to be dealt with under para 2.091. (See also paras 2.092-2.095 and 4.104). Applications are to be made on the form at Annex E/2.
    Attachments to Regular Army Units
    2.091. In lieu of Annual Training. The voluntary attachment of officers and soldiers of the TA to Regular Army units in lieu of annual training may be authorized as follows:
    a. To Regular Army units or training centres of the same arm or service on authority of the commander TA/CVHQ or commanding officers. The commanding officer of the Regular Army unit concerned is to confirm acceptance for suitable training in writing. The duration of the attachment is not normally to exceed the 15 days in camp training requirement.
    b. Training by attachment to a unit for the purpose of taking part in exercises requires the authority of HQLF as at para 2.014f.
    Etc. etc.

    If there's a bluffer on this thread, it isn't me sweetcheeks! :wink:
  12. OK, you kicked off about "supposedly informed" posters and blathered on with some generalites. Youve still not quoted anything about how CASH gets back to the TA unit, other than an incorrect statement involving the sum of £15k. Lets remember that the original post asked about cross-decking funds, not the potential to get an attachment.

    Currently Bde holds the funds, trickled down from Div and divvies it up among units based on the case the unit makes - GCM state, manning, etc. Most ( all ?) Bde still hold back a proportion initially and pass that out as they see fit, again usually based on unit bids in year or to recompense for Bde sponsored tasks - so X does a Bde task or helps Y, X gets extra from the pot held back by Bde. Units A-W and Z don't see the cash - their soldiers lose out on MTDs - "robbed" to pay unit X.

    Now. Tell me again, how and where the money moves if a TA soldier does a job for a Regular unit ? The only mechanism I'm aware of is that it comes from the Bde pot referred to above. I would be VERY interested to hear of any precedent for Bde to get an in-year increase in its funding based on support to the Regular Army.
  13. There is a mechanism but it would need to involve APC creating FTRS contract for the duration of the attachment. The funding is then not an issue as the person is paid as a regular and MTDs are not required. We sent a number of personnel to support Bisley last summer and Inf APC created FTRS contracts for them and they were notionally posted to gapped posts in a regular Inf Bn.