Army Reserve Disbanded on the quiet by the DoD over the weekend?

Manic Moran

newby.204 wrote: »

Is that a genuine question manic?? I'm only asking cause I'm not sure if your having a dig or not??

It is in response to your statement: "Overseas trips are essential to fulfill contractual/promotional obligations and as such reservists overseas in place of PDF would never happen"

What sort of contractual obligation is incumbent upon a PDF soldier that if he doesn't go overseas (say because an RDF chap 'took his spot'), that he will be penalised for this?

Maoltuile

Manic Moran wrote: »

It is in response to your statement: "Overseas trips are essential to fulfill contractual/promotional obligations and as such reservists overseas in place of PDF would never happen"

What sort of contractual obligation is incumbent upon a PDF soldier that if he doesn't go overseas (say because an RDF chap 'took his spot'), that he will be penalised for this?

It came in with the Yellowpacks back in the 90s.

OS119

newby.204 wrote: »

...therefore feet on the ground would be opposed to reservists taking their placement/promotion/financial opportunities away from them.

feet on the ground probably don't like getting up at 5am, spending a week in a ditch, and spending 6 months in a hot, dusty ****hole - but they do so, regardless of their happiness, because they are told to do so...

if an RDF soldier is better suited to the mission than a PDF soldier because he happens to have a skill that the mission requires - perhaps a language, or a technical skill - or just that the operational tempo of the DF means that it needs more soldiers than the PDF can provide, then the RDF soldier goes, and PDF soldier who wants a conservatory, or needs a tour to tick his promotion boxes just lumps it.

you would have thought that anyone who'd spent more than a week in the DF would have grasped very quickly that the requirements of the Army come, first, second and third - and that the particular wants, needs and desires of the individual are somewhere between that bottom and nowhere on that list...

i find it deeply ironic to see PDF honking off about how unprofessional the RDF are while castigating the RDF's participation in Defence because it would impact on their personal circumstances.

Manic Moran

Maoltuile wrote: »

It came in with the Yellowpacks back in the 90s.

Wait, so you're saying that if a member of the PDF doesn't go on a deployment for any reason at all, such as that there is no room for him or the Army stops sending people overseas, that he's in breach of contract? What sort of idiot came up with that one?

NTM

Yitzhak Rabin

Manic Moran wrote: »

Wait, so you're saying that if a member of the PDF doesn't go on a deployment for any reason at all, such as that there is no room for him or the Army stops sending people overseas, that he's in breach of contract? What sort of idiot came up with that one?

NTM

The contracts state that they has to have either 2 career courses and 1 overseas trip OR 3 career courses.

I believe provided the soldier is a consistent volunteer for overseas, but ultimately doesn't get a trip, he is not in breach of contract.

Given that priority for overseas is given to soldiers without any previous overseas trips, it'd be unusual for an individual to have 5 years service, and not have had to opportunity to serve overseas.

CIGANO

Manic Moran wrote: »

Wait, so you're saying that if a member of the PDF doesn't go on a deployment for any reason at all, such as that there is no room for him or the Army stops sending people overseas, that he's in breach of contract? What sort of idiot came up with that one?

NTM

This isn't the case at all, if it is out of the soldiers hands then he wont be penalised, during the recruitment/promotions embargo there were loads of soldiers who were technically in breech of contract but the were signed back on any ways as it wasn't their fault that they couldn't fulfil there contract requirements. As yekahS said as long as the soldier keeps volunteering for overseas/courses whether he gets them or not he will be allowed to sign back on.

Midnight Oil

there is a loophole as well, for someone in their first 5 year term, ordinarily they need to have (I think) 2 courses (from a select list) and 1 o/s trip
OR 3 courses. This loophole only exists for 0-5yrs contract and not 5-9, 9-12 or 12 -21 contracts which each require a trip with no loophole as far as I can remember, have not read the relevant sections of AI in about 18 months so going from memory

Manic Moran

Still seems odd to me. if an isolationist government came to power and stopped all deployments, the guys on their second term would be hosed.

Midnight Oil

Manic Moran wrote: »

Still seems odd to me. if an isolationist government came to power and stopped all deployments, the guys on their second term would be hosed.

Are you saying the DF should be a job for life?

Morpheus

you dont get it do you?
unfair... you cannot pick and choose my comments like that and take me out of context!!! i also asked before that, why the limit on numbers deployed overseas?

we have a limit on the numbers of pers we can send overseas...

is this due to a political decision or the reality of numbers, if its a reality of numbers then by simple maths, if we have 13500 available then lets increase the numbers we send overseas, then lets make a commitment that in all future overseas missions 10% will be reserves, initially.

based on the answer to THAT I am suggesting sending a commitment of 10% reserves overseas.

By the way, there is a precedent for RDF going overseas already, not happened much but has happened at least once at officer level.

Manic Moran

Midnight Oil wrote: »

Are you saying the DF should be a job for life?

Surely it should be an option, no? I'd hate to think that company sergeants and battalion and brigade sergeants major were at the tail end of their first stint....

Owryan

Morphéus wrote: »

By the way, there is a precedent for RDF going overseas already, not happened much but has happened at least once at officer level.

Is that a reference the signals (i think) officer who took part in an exercise ?

There is a massive difference between an exercise and a 6 month deployment.

I would love to see the RDF serve overseas but it will take a lot of work and effort to get them to the level needed. From my own experience there would be very few who i would trust to back me up.

Midnight Oil

Manic Moran wrote: »

Midnight Oil wrote: »

Are you saying the DF should be a job for life?

Surely it should be an option, no? I'd hate to think that company sergeants and battalion and brigade sergeants major were at the tail end of their first stint....

The DF rotate about 1000 people overseas each year. Max recruitment at full tilt over the years has been circa 500 per year. The number of trips overseas out number the people that NEED to travel. At private level there are plenty of vacancies. Officers, particularly junior officers are the ones that find it the hardest to travel. Currently almost 300 Lts in the DF and only 32 vacancies a year a part of an overseas battalion. Some junior officers may be a Capt a year or 2 before they get their first overseas rotation depending on corps and luck

dodgydes

Owryan wrote: »

I would love to see the RDF serve overseas but it will take a lot of work and effort to get them to the level needed. From my own experience there would be very few who i would trust to back me up.

Techies in the RDF would probably have more technical skill than the PDF guys, what with working in the commercial environment and all. Signals, transport fitters and drivers, cooks, storemen could all be filled by RDF, probably not Engineers and Ordnance though..

Agree that the line soldier would need a lot of work before an overseas trip

Midnight Oil

dodgydes wrote: »

Techies in the RDF would probably have more technical skill than the PDF guys, what with working in the commercial environment and all. Signals, transport fitters and drivers, cooks, storemen could all be filled by RDF, probably not Engineers and Ordnance though..

Agree that the line soldier would need a lot of work before an overseas trip

How many civilian mechanics are able to work on BAE RG 32m's? Or MOWAGs? Or how many civilian electronic engineers would stand a chance with a SINCGARS? Or Harris etc etc etc

The DF technicians are excellent at their specific trades and the advantage of being able to specialise on specific equipment is that they get to know it inside out.

Even for a RDF soldier to be able to travel overseas, the amount of upskilling required would be huge. I would think somewhere in the region of 6 months minimum BEFORE the current 3 month form up for UNIFIL. Remember that technicians go on patrols too so they are not isolate from danger.

I beleive the only RDF to serve overseas already was a doctor who traveled to Chad

Manic Moran

Midnight Oil wrote: »

dodgydes wrote: »

Techies in the RDF would probably have more technical skill than the PDF guys, what with working in the commercial environment and all. Signals, transport fitters and drivers, cooks, storemen could all be filled by RDF, probably not Engineers and Ordnance though..

Agree that the line soldier would need a lot of work before an overseas trip

How many civilian mechanics are able to work on BAE RG 32m's? Or MOWAGs? Or how many civilian electronic engineers would stand a chance with a SINCGARS? Or Harris etc etc etc

The DF technicians are excellent at their specific trades and the advantage of being able to specialise on specific equipment is that they get to know it inside out.

Even for a RDF soldier to be able to travel overseas, the amount of upskilling required would be huge. I would think somewhere in the region of 6 months minimum BEFORE the current 3 month form up for UNIFIL. Remember that technicians go on patrols too so they are not isolate from danger.

I beleive the only RDF to serve overseas already was a doctor who traveled to Chad

The counter to that is that in the peace keeping operations which the Irish tend to focus on, civilian skills that the Army does not necessarily teach can be in high demand. In Afghanistan we had Army units whose sole function was soil assessment , crop recommendation, and teaching Afghans proper farming techniques for their particular environment and crop. We had the Kansas National Guard doing it in our area, they have a high percentage of farmers in their ranks. You can say the same abot trades like plumbing and electrics, we had experts in our ranks which we could draw upon for rennovating buildings like schools etc. Our civilian cops were able to work with and train local police in their area on civilian policing techniques, not military policing. And so on and so forth. Having soldiers with such civilian skills on a deployment can be a significant factor in mission success without the need to distract the Army's official tradesmen from doing their jobs keeping everyone else rolling.

Midnight Oil

Manic Moran wrote: »

The counter to that is that in the peace keeping operations which the Irish tend to focus on, civilian skills that the Army does not necessarily teach can be in high demand. In Afghanistan we had Army units whose sole function was soil assessment , crop recommendation, and teaching Afghans proper farming techniques for their particular environment and crop. We had the Kansas National Guard doing it in our area, they have a high percentage of farmers in their ranks. You can say the same abot trades like plumbing and electrics, we had experts in our ranks which we could draw upon for rennovating buildings like schools etc. Our civilian cops were able to work with and train local police in their area on civilian policing techniques, not military policing. And so on and so forth. Having soldiers with such civilian skills on a deployment can be a significant factor in mission success without the need to distract the Army's official tradesmen from doing their jobs keeping everyone else rolling.

While I accept your point I do however disagree with the applicability of it to the Irish model.

We do not get involved in the sorts of roles that you have mentioned.

Out of interest, what sort of training does a member of the NG go through between the time that they enlist and get deployed overseas?

CIGANO

Manic Moran wrote: »

The counter to that is that in the peace keeping operations which the Irish tend to focus on, civilian skills that the Army does not necessarily teach can be in high demand. In Afghanistan we had Army units whose sole function was soil assessment , crop recommendation, and teaching Afghans proper farming techniques for their particular environment and crop. We had the Kansas National Guard doing it in our area, they have a high percentage of farmers in their ranks. You can say the same abot trades like plumbing and electrics, we had experts in our ranks which we could draw upon for rennovating buildings like schools etc. Our civilian cops were able to work with and train local police in their area on civilian policing techniques, not military policing. And so on and so forth. Having soldiers with such civilian skills on a deployment can be a significant factor in mission success without the need to distract the Army's official tradesmen from doing their jobs keeping everyone else rolling.

I would have thought that a member of the police force would be barred from joining the NG.

dodgydes

Certainly wasn't saying that PDF techs are not excellent at what they do, but the fact is that 3rd line maintenance is not done in the field. A PDF Sgt tech with the right experience could easily work with a team of RDF techs.

In any case, a lot of Military spec equipment is the same as the equipment used in civvie st: just paint it green and double the price

Manic Moran

CIGANO wrote: »

I would have thought that a member of the police force would be barred from joining the NG.

No restriction on most law enforcement. FBI is an exception as they have a wartime function as the nation's counter intelligence agency.

NTM

Manic Moran

While I accept your point I do however disagree with the applicability of it to the Irish model.

We do not get involved in the sorts of roles that you have mentioned.

I'm pretty sure I recall seeing PR shots in An Cosantoir about the occasion public works effort like rennovating a building. It may not have been a primary tasking, but the effects of such activities may well facilitate them.

Out of interest, what sort of training does a member of the NG go through between the time that they enlist and get deployed overseas?

A lot more than the average RDF trooper, I would wager. Recruit and corps skills courses have regular army and reservists intermingled. When mobilised, there is a ten week or so spin-up period prior to hitting the ground.

We have adequate budget and reservist protections to do this, of course.

fenris

Midnight Oil wrote: »

Or how many civilian electronic engineers would stand a chance with a SINCGARS? Or Harris etc etc etc

The DF technicians are excellent at their specific trades and the advantage of being able to specialise on specific equipment is that they get to know it inside out.

By the time most commonly deployed tech has gotten through the procurement process it has usually fallen far behind the current commercial state of the market let alone state of the art, coupled with the fact that the kit and its SOP's gets "soldier proofed", this means that the technology is very well known and the specific wrinkles of the mil spec version are generally procedural not technical so it is usually very easy for a good tech to come up to speed. It can be a big shocker to lads when they come out of the military and discover exactly what level their expertise translates to, generally if you have been working on something for 5 years then its civilian equivalent has probably been scrapped and replaced with a later technology.

Traditionally in my area (Telecoms) there are a lot of ex-military techies, the main thing that I value about those guys when hiring is their flexibility, focus and ability to get things done in a stressful environment to a tight deadline.

The main thing that I have to "fix" is ensuring that there is a broad understanding of the technology rather than just knowing specific kit inside out, this allows flexibility across equipment types and better "off-piste" troubleshooting, obviously the cool head and the dry underpants attitude normally bought by the ex-military lads helps.

That to me is the essential difference, there is overlap between both schools, that overlap is useful but forms the lowest common denominator of the available skill set. If that is all that is needed or wanted, then fine.

I would think that a smart PDF lad with an eye to the future should be happy enough to spend time with the people who are in the civilian roles that he would probably be looking to fill at the end of his contract.

The main point is that with a bit of though this can be a very even trade, the RDF lad/lass gets their experience, the PDF personnel gets to build their "outside" network, that sandbag corporal could be interviewing you for a job or giving you the reference you need to get another job in the future or at the very least may save you from a duty that you don't want to be stuck for.

Maoltuile

dodgydes wrote: »

Signals, transport fitters and drivers, cooks, storemen could all be filled by RDF, probably not Engineers and Ordnance though..

Your last statement is very far from the truth.

John_D80

Midnight Oil wrote: »

The DF rotate about 1000 people overseas each year. Max recruitment at full tilt over the years has been circa 500 per year. The number of trips overseas out number the people that NEED to travel. At private level there are plenty of vacancies. Officers, particularly junior officers are the ones that find it the hardest to travel. Currently almost 300 Lts in the DF and only 32 vacancies a year a part of an overseas battalion. Some junior officers may be a Capt a year or 2 before they get their first overseas rotation depending on corps and luck

In fairness junior officers have no right to complain about availability of overseas missions for them to serve in. They chose to join a DF that is extremely top heavy with officers.

Midnight Oil

John_D80 wrote: »

In fairness junior officers have no right to complain about availability of overseas missions for them to serve in. They chose to join a DF that is extremely top heavy with officers.

And in the same vein, RDF members have no right to complain about not being allowed to travel overseas, they joined a section of the DF that does not go overseas

John_D80

Midnight Oil wrote: »

And in the same vein, RDF members have no right to complain about not being allowed to travel overseas, they joined a section of the DF that does not go overseas

Being neither an officer or a member of the RDF, I couldn't agree more.

Donny5

Midnight Oil wrote: »

How many civilian mechanics are able to work on BAE RG 32m's? Or MOWAGs? Or how many civilian electronic engineers would stand a chance with a SINCGARS? Or Harris etc etc etc

I was once RDF Infantry, and while I was, I was far more qualified and capable to work on the SINCGARS than anyone I met in the Signals Corps. There were people in the RDF Infantry working on the JTRS, software radios, NTDR and the HAVE QUICK extensions that were literally worlds more complicated, advanced and modern than anything in service with the DF today, and who would have outclassed in every way the most senior DF communications personnel in relation to the equipment. That idea that even the most complex setup or maintenance of such simple radio systems is beyond RDF personnel who were in some cases designing their replacements is simply hubris.

ChunkyLover_53

Donny5 wrote: »

I was once RDF Infantry, and while I was, I was far more qualified and capable to work on the SINCGARS than anyone I met in the Signals Corps. There were people in the RDF Infantry working on the JTRS, software radios, NTDR and the HAVE QUICK extensions that were literally worlds more complicated, advanced and modern than anything in service with the DF today, and who would have outclassed in every way the most senior DF communications personnel in relation to the equipment. That idea that even the most complex setup or maintenance of such simple radio systems is beyond RDF personnel who were in some cases designing their replacements is simply hubris.

But you were recruited as Infantry, right?

So would you have expected to go Overseas as Infantry or a Signals Technician?

John_D80

ChunkyLover_53 wrote: »

But you were recruited as Infantry, right?

So would you have expected to go Overseas as Infantry or a Signals Technician?

The chap was in the infantry but i doubt he wanted to join the DF and do the same there as he was doing in his day job, although i'm sure he, like most other RDF personnel would be willing to serve in any appointment overseas if they had the chance.

Donny5

ChunkyLover_53 wrote: »

But you were recruited as Infantry, right?

So would you have expected to go Overseas as Infantry or a Signals Technician?

Infantry, as a preference, but had I been qualified for it, I would have deployed in literally any role. When I was in, though, there was no realistic possibility of overseas service, and I wouldn't have let anyone with pips or above find out anything about my abilities with the PRCs or the ICOM models we never got, because I joined to soldier, and I saw what happened to the guys whose proclivities with the radio sets were known to the higher-ups, and they most often became radiomen with stripes.

In my day, there was a real wealth of skills and experience of very complex military-related fields that was held by men and women who were too smart to admit it, because they knew that it could cause them to be pidgeon-holed as clerks or signalmen, when they joined to infanteer. That almost includes myself, except that I wasn't smart enough to obscure it. If it wasn't a permanent sentence to an admin role, I honestly believe many of the RDF (of my day, 3-10 years ogo) would have been much more honest on those skills surveys and with their higher ups.

John_D80 wrote: »

The chap was in the infantry but i doubt he wanted to join the DF and do the same there as he was doing in his day job, although i'm sure he, like most other RDF personnel would be willing to serve in any appointment overseas if they had the chance.

I think that John has it exactly right here. I was not willing to be an admin or signals soldier for the totality of my time in the RDF, but I would have cleaned windows or filled sandbags for 24 weeks if it meant going overseas. That's not an exaggeration, either. At the time, I would have done any old ****e job just to prove that we could go overseas and follow orders.

dodgydes

Maoltuile wrote: »

Your last statement is very far from the truth.

Can you elaborate on this?

CIGANO

Donny5 wrote: »

Infantry, as a preference, but had I been qualified for it, I would have deployed in literally any role. When I was in, though, there was no realistic possibility of overseas service, and I wouldn't have let anyone with pips or above find out anything about my abilities with the PRCs or the ICOM models we never got, because I joined to soldier, and I saw what happened to the guys whose proclivities with the radio sets were known to the higher-ups, and they most often became radiomen with stripes.

In my day, there was a real wealth of skills and experience of very complex military-related fields that was held by men and women who were too smart to admit it, because they knew that it could cause them to be pidgeon-holed as clerks or signalmen, when they joined to infanteer. That almost includes myself, except that I wasn't smart enough to obscure it. If it wasn't a permanent sentence to an admin role, I honestly believe many of the RDF (of my day, 3-10 years ogo) would have been much more honest on those skills surveys and with their higher ups.



I think that John has it exactly right here. I was not willing to be an admin or signals soldier for the totality of my time in the RDF, but I would have cleaned windows or filled sandbags for 24 weeks if it meant going overseas. That's not an exaggeration, either. At the time, I would have done any old ****e job just to prove that we could go overseas and follow orders.

I hope you dont think i am taking a shot at you but if you and some of the other rdf posters on here were so eager to go overseas then why didn't you join the pdf to begin with.

Donny5

CIGANO wrote: »

I hope you dont think i am taking a shot at you but if you and some of the other rdf posters on here were so eager to go overseas then why didn't you join the pdf to begin with.

That's a fair question, but I would never consider the PDF. The RDF was an opportunity whilst I was in full-time education, but I would consider the PDF to be a complete waste of my potential. The PDF is for many a waste of time, and maybe a misuse of the utility of Ireland's military potential. Few educated men or women would settle for the mediocrity of the PDF when there are so many better options available. The guys and girls I served with in the RDF often went on to working in high-tech, the arts, the UN, governement and business. I honestly think that the question should be why does the talent go RDF and not PDF.

testicle

CIGANO wrote: »

I hope you dont think i am taking a shot at you but if you and some of the other rdf posters on here were so eager to go overseas then why didn't you join the pdf to begin with.

Perhaps they wanted a real job?

Manic Moran

Midnight Oil wrote: »

And in the same vein, RDF members have no right to complain about not being allowed to travel overseas, they joined a section of the DF that does not go overseas

Is that a legal issue, or just a matter of current policy?

NTM

Donny5

testicle wrote: »

Perhaps they wanted a real job?

That's pointlessly demeaning language. The PDF is a real job, and a good one, but not for everyone.

Morpheus

Them and Us raises its ugly head again...

PDF is not a pointless job, thats an insulting comment - and im RDF and work in IT... I however was willing to forego this career to get into the PDF cadets, but I didnt make the cut due to the age profile changes of the early 2000's.

Look, another point for you, if you HAD been deployed overseas as a techie or signalman or whatever, you would still have done infanteer stuff. You still get sent on patrols. Even in a platoon level counter attack scenario (reaction to enemy fire on a patrol) , where do you think the platoon commander is as the assault phase is about to happen, and where are you? thats right up the front under fire and probably returning fire. Its just more kit to hump around and a pain in the back (literally if its the old man pack version) but its just another task of ANY infantry soldier - only thing is not everyone is sent on the course, but it should be a prerequisite to getting 3 stars IMO.

Morpheus

Manic, currently I believe that if an RDF pers was selected to go overseas, that they would have to get a short term contract into the PDF - so its probably a legal issue, if that rumour is correct.

fenris

I think a potential practical issue would be the fact that the specialist skill sets that are most likely to be considered for deployment oversees will tend to belong to people who are in jobs that will not want to release you too easily for more than your average 2 week continuous annual leave period.

You may want to go, but you may not have a job when you come back, movement in the private sector at present dictates that when you pick up something else the chances are that it will be for less money and worse terms if you stay in Ireland.

galwaycyclist

Manic Moran wrote: »

Is that a legal issue, or just a matter of current policy?

NTM

As I recall there was some provision - possibly in the Defence Act - that specified that members of the reserve could not serve outside the state.

OS119

galwaycyclist wrote: »

As I recall there was some provision - possibly in the Defence Act - that specified that members of the reserve could not serve outside the state.

i remember that - somebody quoted it: from recall you could remove the word 'not' from one clause and the legalities would be sorted...

galwaycyclist

Donny5 wrote: »

That's a fair question, but I would never consider the PDF. The RDF was an opportunity whilst I was in full-time education, but I would consider the PDF to be a complete waste of my potential. The PDF is for many a waste of time, and maybe a misuse of the utility of Ireland's military potential. Few educated men or women would settle for the mediocrity of the PDF when there are so many better options available. The guys and girls I served with in the RDF often went on to working in high-tech, the arts, the UN, governement and business. I honestly think that the question should be why does the talent go RDF and not PDF.

I recall going on an FCA/RDF platoon in attack exercise as a section commander. My section included an aeronautical engineer, a computer technician, a girl with a degree in linguistics (and a couple of european languages) one of the privates was a foreman in a construction company the platoon Sergeant was/is an Intensive Care Nurse. I am pretty sure there were a few more with 3rd level quals. We also had mechanics and carpenters with all the certs.

Midnight Oil

Donny5 wrote: »

That's pointlessly demeaning language. The PDF is a real job, and a good one

Donny5 wrote: »

That's a fair question, but I would never consider the PDF. The RDF was an opportunity whilst I was in full-time education, but I would consider the PDF to be a complete waste of my potential. The PDF is for many a waste of time, and maybe a misuse of the utility of Ireland's military potential. Few educated men or women would settle for the mediocrity of the PDF when there are so many better options available. The guys and girls I served with in the RDF often went on to working in high-tech, the arts, the UN, governement and business. I honestly think that the question should be why does the talent go RDF and not PDF.

Pot, kettle, black

Donny5

Midnight Oil wrote: »

Pot, kettle, black

It's not a contrary statement. If, for example, you want to work on radio technology, then the PDF, where you will only ever be an end-user, is a waste of your time. This is not true in all armies, many of whom do actively engage in R&D with contractors. If you aim for the highest levels in any field, law, business, fitness, technology, military sports, even weapons, the PDF has little to nothing to offer. There are many people in the RDF (and who are potential recruits for the RDF) whose civilian skillsets dwarf those available in the DF now.

That doesn't mean that the PDF isn't a real job - it is, and it's a good one if you want to soldier. There are lots of qualifications you can get on the DF's dime, but nothing you can't get outside faster and without the military politics.