Why should I train your recruits if you cant be arrsed?

#1
Having spent a bit of time largeing it at a Regional Recruit Training Wing, I've realised that, although they train all kinds of capbadged bods, the instructors tend to be from a limited number of units.

I've also realised that there are a number of units that continually send recruits but no instructors.

I'm unable to quantify this, but my suspicion is that the units that fail to send instructors may also have a lower headcount than those that are seen to be supporting the efforts of the Training Wing.

The number of instructors is always a problem; friday night looks chaotic but in true TA fashion by saturday morning its all sorted.

So, why should I give of my time, effort and enthusiasm to train recruits for units that have better things to do than ensure that their future soldiers are cared for?

Why is it that the same units continually fail to send staff?

Sure, some will have large numbers mobilised, but one unit I can think of ( and I won't say who ) have not sent an instructor for over a year.

Look up...
 
#2
RTC RTWs should have a permenant cadre of instructors posted to them, we have, however, it's always gripped my sh*t that units send drivers up with the recruits that aren't part of the units recruit training team & stay over, if they did it would benefit both sides, we'd get more instructors, albeit temporary, they get the expierience(?) teaching larger numbers & therefore the unit gets a better understanding of how we work, what is expected what problems we face. It happens everynow & then but the good old MTD monsterraises it's head to scupper things.
 
#3
Fuck me FF, pushing for your 1000th post?

The other thing is that Units seem loathe to let instructors with lots of skills and quals go to an RTC when they need those skills at the unit, with PTI's being a particular problem!
 
#5
TopBadger said:
Alternatively, we just might not have the qualified instructors to send???

TB
Thought about actually sending some on a course or two and getting some qualified?
As a side issue. If you haven't got qualified instructors, how are your blokes passing their MATTS? Not from an MI Bn are you? :twisted:
 
#6
Bravo_Bravo said:
Why is it that the same units continually fail to send staff?

Sure, some will have large numbers mobilised, but one unit I can think of ( and I won't say who ) have not sent an instructor for over a year.

Look up...
Is the recruit training team mainly infantry? Appears to be up here, they also appear to be poaching officers and recruits. So I guess its a two way thing
 
#7
Prae, hadn't thought about it........honest!
Polar, 51(Scottish) Bde isn't, we have a mix of Inf, Arty, Bleeps, RLC et moi, the wing WO is RLC & both OC & 2ic are Inf.

Much as I hate to say it, since there is fieldwork & Tactics involved the Inf guys(& Gal) are better suited, it saves me getting my boots dirty.

We always mention to visiting instructors, when we get them, & we rate them we'll mention we're looking for more instructors, if they're interested...

Top, they don't have to be qualified instructors, competent people will do, however, in the same vien as Baldrick66, how do you go about training your recruits between the w/es at the RTCs?
 
#8
Baldrick66 said:
TopBadger said:
Alternatively, we just might not have the qualified instructors to send???

TB
Thought about actually sending some on a course or two and getting some qualified?
As a side issue. If you haven't got qualified instructors, how are your blokes passing their MATTS? Not from an MI Bn are you? :twisted:
This whole thread illustrates the fact that we still haven't managed to resource Phase 1 training properly.

Fundamentally RTCs should be able to provide all the staff they need (i.e. they should be properly established) without expecting the sending units to send trainers as well. Whilst I understand the frustration of the RTCs over the lack of assistance, TopBadger's comment that units may not have any to send is highly relevant. In the errrr- "less military" capbadges, there is a strong tendency for a few individuals to be qualified in everything ( because they want to be) and the remainder to be more interested in whatever "less military" pursuit they specialise in. Hence, an RTC expecting a CBRN instructor might deprive a sub-unit of their BCD instructor, RMQ, PTI and a Pl Sgt.

Does anyone else think that it might have been quite clever to base the regionalised training on the existing Inf Bn HQs (giving them a more meaningful role than just the smoke and mirrors of CCRF) rather than setting up new structures.
 
#9
FFBox said:
Top, they don't have to be qualified instructors, competent people will do, however, in the same vien as Baldrick66, how do you go about training your recruits between the w/es at the RTCs?
There shouldn't need to be any Phase 1 training other than Weekend 1 of Phase 1A carried out in unit. So it shouldn't really matter.
 
#10
The funding issues of RTC's seem to vary greatly from location to location. From my understanding 160 seem to lead the game as regards to having the RTW fully manned, without having to resource instructors from outside. 143 and 43 Seem to be in pretty much the same situation except outside instructors come from their STW's.
As we've disccused in several posts, until RTC's are taken away from Brigade Control and managed and funded centrally nothing will change. Funding and policy will depend on each change in the local COC and will differ for each Brigade.
 
#11
who_cares.... said:
In the errrr- "less military" capbadges, there is a strong tendency for a few individuals to be qualified in everything ( because they want to be) and the remainder to be more interested in whatever "less military" pursuit they specialise in. Hence, an RTC expecting a CBRN instructor might deprive a sub-unit of their BCD instructor, RMQ, PTI and a Pl Sgt.

Does anyone else think that it might have been quite clever to base the regionalised training on the existing Inf Bn HQs (giving them a more meaningful role than just the smoke and mirrors of CCRF) rather than setting up new structures.
Too true i'm afraid. our unit has a handful of people with a lot of quals, but they can't make every weekend, and yes, often they're already in a time demanding role (Tp Sgt, etc). I'm not high enough in the food chain to make JNCO's do courses, and i don't think forcing people to do quals they don't want is particularly healthy in any case. Besides, priority for us signallers is always trade... otherwise we'd fill with LCpls and stagnate and die. It seems we're already struggling to get people ready for Tp Sgt roles as it is.

who_cares.... said:
Does anyone else think that it might have been quite clever to base the regionalised training on the existing Inf Bn HQs (giving them a more meaningful role than just the smoke and mirrors of CCRF) rather than setting up new structures.
That sounds dangerously like common sense... stop it!

TB
 
#12
polar said:
Is the recruit training team mainly infantry? Appears to be up here, they also appear to be poaching officers and recruits. So I guess its a two way thing
It is, but there are a fair few reps from eg. Engineers in particular.

My main issue is with infantry companies that send blokes but not DS... I dont want to name names but some really do stand out as failing to support the efforts of other blokes to train *their* recruits.

There is the side issue of lack of preparation back at unit; simple things like bergan packing; webbing which continually looks like its been assembled by a fat midget; and the abysmal standard of weapon handling too often seen...
 
#13
[quote="Bravo_Bravo]
There is the side issue of lack of preparation back at unit; simple things like bergan packing; webbing which continually looks like its been assembled by a fat midget; and the abysmal standard of weapon handling too often seen...[/quote]

The only thing they should have done "in unit" is Weekend 1. Everything else is down to RTC or ATR - which includes abysmal weapon handling !
 
#14
Nope; there is no kit packing lesson on the CSMR (TA). Nor is there a lesson on assembling webbing.

What do units do with their recruits on drill nights?

There can be a gap of two months between passsing WHTs and firing live; if you expect a recruit to remember everything that they where taught about the rifle two months previously, we'll have to differ...
 
#15
who_cares.... said:
[quote="Bravo_Bravo]
There is the side issue of lack of preparation back at unit; simple things like bergan packing; webbing which continually looks like its been assembled by a fat midget; and the abysmal standard of weapon handling too often seen...
The only thing they should have done "in unit" is Weekend 1. Everything else is down to RTC or ATR - which includes abysmal weapon handling ![/quote]

Seconded, they shouldn't touch a rifle until RTC!

We do cover webbing and bergan packing at our place though.

TB
 
#16
who_cares.... said:
This whole thread illustrates the fact that we still haven't managed to resource Phase 1 training properly.

Fundamentally RTCs should be able to provide all the staff they need (i.e. they should be properly established) without expecting the sending units to send trainers as well. Whilst I understand the frustration of the RTCs over the lack of assistance, TopBadger's comment that units may not have any to send is highly relevant. In the errrr- "less military" capbadges, there is a strong tendency for a few individuals to be qualified in everything ( because they want to be) and the remainder to be more interested in whatever "less military" pursuit they specialise in. Hence, an RTC expecting a CBRN instructor might deprive a sub-unit of their BCD instructor, RMQ, PTI and a Pl Sgt.

Does anyone else think that it might have been quite clever to base the regionalised training on the existing Inf Bn HQs (giving them a more meaningful role than just the smoke and mirrors of CCRF) rather than setting up new structures.
I don't think anyone would dispute that an RTC (certainly the one I know about) doesn't have the establishment to deal with the task set and therefore relies on Instructors from outside (e.g. the local Inf Bns).

However, providing PIDs (the new LSNs) won't solve the problem. The problem is the total number of available Inf JNCOs. We simply don't have enough trained Inf JNCOs to do all the jobs we want them for (Recruit Inst, Op Tours, re-training to MSp Pl skills and, of course, commanding Sects and Dets).
 
#17
Having returned to Recruit Training I feel able to comment here from both sides of the fence.

But in answer to the 'Why should I?' - simple you are an instructor in an RTC in a position of privilage. Do the job you are employed to do, do it well, to give the troops you train the best start in their military careers. Do not worry about all the politics and why and whos its not your purpose to do so or stand in judgement/ take morale high ground. You have the responsibility to train the next batch of troops who could be called for op depolyments worry more about that.

OK - Setting up and staffing RTC's was always going to cause units pain as it meant we may loose good NCO's and Officers for up to two years or more. However making it a career posting may also make sense. Some units could take the pain others just could not. Those holding the qualifications the RTC's wanted at start up were more likely to be Infantry NCO's so they would have even greater pain. At the time though they probably had the most on Op tours so a double wammy!
Resourcing the RTC's will only stabilise as units bring through there fresh blood into NCO slots and fill their LSN's once more but this will take time.

The biggest problem I see thus far for RTC's is location. For example if I were to transfer to my regional RTC that would take me 3 hours just to get there. However local RTC's do exist closer in the next region but not my own. Personally I think RTC's should not be RTC's but just TA (or Army being one Army and all that) Training Centers were after selection at unit level they (recruits) go to the closest one which may not necessarily be their regional one. All RTCs are training or should be to TAFS so it really should not matter a great deal to which one the recruit goes - the special to arm training follows there after. This seems to be a TA thing too as to the best of my knowledge not one RTC has been set up or co located in an existing ATR - where all the training equipment and facilities already exist!

In my region we were due to have two RTC's but only one was staffed. However for the southern most units thats a 3 hour haul just to get there on a Fri night and 3 hours back after a 4pm finish on Sun- this was felt not feasible for new recruits and thus we kept phase one at Unit level as well running concurrently- with our northern sub units sending their recruits to RTC. After RT4 we combine both groups for 5 - 7 and await to see how this works in practice (differing quality and standards etc time will tell).

By virtue of what they do Inf units will have most of the qualifications but that does not mean other CS and CSS units will not but they do have to invest much more time in 'In Role' technical training probably more than the courses that an RTC would require of its Instrs. But RTCs should and will take good instrs and ensure they are trained in the key areas/subjects thus giving units quality staff when they return to unit in the future. There is a benefit here that many short sighted have missed.

As Infantry we proposed training all recruits for the units in our region as far back as 1999 if I remember rightly. However the corps feared poaching and poo pood the idea. Now the RTC is probably the more politically correct means of achieveing a similar aim after all the content of TAFS is the Infantrymans bread and butter a fact you cannot ignore.

Just my tupence worth

Cheers
 
#18
Bravo_Bravo said:
Nope; there is no kit packing lesson on the CSMR (TA). Nor is there a lesson on assembling webbing.

What do units do with their recruits on drill nights?

There can be a gap of two months between passsing WHTs and firing live; if you expect a recruit to remember everything that they where taught about the rifle two months previously, we'll have to differ...

What about the Prep & pack PLCE lesson on TAFS2, as stated in the LAND CTP?

Everything else I agree with, we recommend further training at unit level, telling the recruits this, telling them they'll need revision, continuation training, get their webbing fitting correctly, their S10 correctly fitted & with all the right mods, their helmets sized correctly ie with an IPE hood on, tested in a RTS.....
alsorts of things that aren't in the CTP for phase1b.

Units should have a CTP for their RTC RTW & from that either give their recruits revision or lesson prep for a fortnights time.



Rant over, for now.
 
#19
who_cares.... said:
Baldrick66 said:
TopBadger said:
Alternatively, we just might not have the qualified instructors to send???

TB
Thought about actually sending some on a course or two and getting some qualified?
As a side issue. If you haven't got qualified instructors, how are your blokes passing their MATTS? Not from an MI Bn are you? :twisted:
This whole thread illustrates the fact that we still haven't managed to resource Phase 1 training properly.

Fundamentally RTCs should be able to provide all the staff they need (i.e. they should be properly established) without expecting the sending units to send trainers as well. Whilst I understand the frustration of the RTCs over the lack of assistance, TopBadger's comment that units may not have any to send is highly relevant. In the errrr- "less military" capbadges, there is a strong tendency for a few individuals to be qualified in everything ( because they want to be) and the remainder to be more interested in whatever "less military" pursuit they specialise in. Hence, an RTC expecting a CBRN instructor might deprive a sub-unit of their BCD instructor, RMQ, PTI and a Pl Sgt.

Does anyone else think that it might have been quite clever to base the regionalised training on the existing Inf Bn HQs (giving them a more meaningful role than just the smoke and mirrors of CCRF) rather than setting up new structures.
after agree with Who cares here
i was asked to go to 15 brigade training team

I am one of the only 2 TA skill at arms instructors at my ta Sqn
I am the only CBRN instructor in Sqaudron
i am RMQ, CMCQ qualified
i am one of the 4 or 5 BCDT instructors as well

i might help & be good for a RTC but they wanted me to guarentee my weekends that i would turn up. my training for my class one signals would not get all the training value i want for it. i also run the Squadron team to take part in BAFMA events which i could not go on, bare in mind i have also done my year as a recruiter.

it did not have any benifits for me, really.
 
#20
Bravo_Bravo said:
Nope; there is no kit packing lesson on the CSMR (TA). Nor is there a lesson on assembling webbing.
Unfortunately I don't currently have access to the syllabus, but 3 R Welsh
http://www.theroyalwelsh.org.uk/3bn/print/print.php?id=173
seem to cover this.

Bravo_Bravo said:
What do units do with their recruits on drill nights?
Something else presumably. The Phase 1 syllabus is supposed to be covered in the days allowed for it.

Bravo_Bravo said:
There can be a gap of two months between passsing WHTs and firing live; if you expect a recruit to remember everything that they where taught about the rifle two months previously, we'll have to differ...
Is this a problem which only occurs because of the insistence by the infantry that they must do Phase 1C over weekends instead of at an ATR like everybody else ?

I understand the points you are trying to make but CMS(R) TA was designed to cover a set syllabus in a set number of days. The very fact that everything except the first 2 days is now "out of unit" means that units are not remitted to do the training "in unit" and therefore cannot be expected to maintain that ability. Those that do are duplicating what the RTCs and ATRs are supposed to provide. Perhaps RTCs need to be more robust and back-squad those who don't cut the mustard / stick to the timetable. On the other hand, perhaps the system just doesn't work in practice and D ITrg need to go back and look at TA Phase 1 training for the third time in five years. What do you think ?
 

Latest Threads