Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on [email protected] for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact [email protected]

Waiting for VFM

  • 01-10-2012 8:44pm
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 634 ✭✭✭


    This week, innit? Has anyone heard differently?


«1

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 138 ✭✭ruserious


    It's been due every few months for the last few years. The latest was the end of September. Now October, pfff. Await and see.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,798 ✭✭✭Local-womanizer


    Maoltuile wrote: »
    This week, innit? Has anyone heard differently?

    Think it's this week on the minister's desk, possibly a bit longer till it gets to the public.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,195 ✭✭✭goldie fish


    Isn't the minister out sick at the moment? Was in hospital last week for a "routine procedure".


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,798 ✭✭✭Local-womanizer


    Isn't the minister out sick at the moment? Was in hospital last week for a "routine procedure".

    Hope it's not from the shock if the VFM!


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 2,688 Mod ✭✭✭✭Morpheus


    What VFM???

    nothing to see here, move along move along...

    original?v=mpbl-1&px=-1


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 311 ✭✭KickstartHeart


    According to the RDFRA the VFM on the Reserve Defence Forces will be published on Wednesday the 24th. This was posted a few minutes ago on their twitter account.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,195 ✭✭✭goldie fish


    24th of when......


  • Site Banned Posts: 317 ✭✭Turbine


    They'll find a reason to delay it again.

    But whenever it does get published, I can see them going beyond just mirroring the announced changes to the PDF. I wouldn't be surprised if they made another (and final) attempt at full integration. Anything short of that would be a missed opportunity IMO.


  • Registered Users Posts: 174 ✭✭Doctor14


    Turbine wrote: »
    But whenever it does get published, I can see them going beyond just mirroring the announced changes to the PDF. I wouldn't be surprised if they made another (and final) attempt at full integration. Anything short of that would be a missed opportunity IMO.
    Have to agree - either disband it or make major changes. "More of the same" is the worst thing that can happen.


  • Registered Users Posts: 311 ✭✭KickstartHeart


    24th of when......

    This month


  • Advertisement
  • Site Banned Posts: 317 ✭✭Turbine


    Surprise, surprise, the release of the VFM report has been delayed again.:rolleyes:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,430 ✭✭✭testicle


    Turbine wrote: »
    Surprise, surprise, the release of the VFM report has been delayed again.:rolleyes:

    Only from the date that RDFRA made up.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,430 ✭✭✭testicle


    I wouldn't take any notice of a Shinner


  • Site Banned Posts: 317 ✭✭Turbine


    testicle wrote: »
    I wouldn't take any notice of a Shinner

    I'd sooner trust them than the scum in Fianna Fáil.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,430 ✭✭✭testicle


    Turbine wrote: »
    I'd sooner trust them than the scum in Fianna Fáil.

    So you support terrorism then?


  • Site Banned Posts: 317 ✭✭Turbine


    testicle wrote: »
    So you support terrorism then?

    :rolleyes:

    My local TD isn't a terrorist and has no connection with the RA. Grow the f**k up and move on...


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,195 ✭✭✭goldie fish


    Turbine wrote: »
    :rolleyes:

    My local TD isn't a terrorist and has no connection with the RA. Grow the f**k up and move on...


    Indeed. We should all move on, and those who were imprisoned for their crimes while members of the IRA should stay in jail.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,430 ✭✭✭testicle


    Turbine wrote: »
    :rolleyes:

    My local TD isn't a terrorist and has no connection with the RA. Grow the f**k up and move on...

    They haven't gone away you know.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,771 ✭✭✭Alkers




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,348 ✭✭✭davetherave


    For those short on time

    The Steering Committee Recommends:
    *The retention of a re-organised Reserve with a strength of 4,000 personnel (3,800 Army Reserve and 200 Naval Service Reserve). This is subject to the abolition of gratuities for members of the Reserve and the re-assignment of this budgetary provision to paid training.

    *The utilisation of the Reserve in a voluntary unpaid capacity for aid to the civil authority type tasks, subject to appropriate regulatory and training adjustments. In addition members of the Reserve with professional skills from their civilian lives should be afforded the opportunity to assist the PDF in a voluntary unpaid capacity.

    *A Reserve organisational model with Reserve Units becoming sub-elements of PDF Units and administered and trained by those PDF Units, and that the Reserve retains a country wide geographical spread, albeit with fewer Units.

    *The implementation of a system to capture indirect costs for PDF personnel subsuming Reserve duties in order to provide greater transparency with regard to new Reserve costs.

    *That the Naval Service Reserve should be consolidated within its current effective strength of approximately 200. The current PDF Cadre strength of the Naval Service Reserve should be adjusted downward to reflect the reduced Unit establishments. Recommendations in this regard should be brought forward by the group tasked with bringing forward proposals for the broader re-organisation of the Defence Forces.

    *The success of the revised organisational approach and effectiveness of the Reserve should be reviewed after a period of not later than four years by a group with similar representation to the Steering Committee for this review. Key metrics in line with those outlined in chapters 5, 6 and 7 should be agreed by the Department of Defence and the Defence Forces, monitored by the Defence Forces and reported in the Department of Defence and Defence Forces Annual Report in order to facilitate ongoing review.


    In the event that the recommendation to abolish gratuities for members
    being unacceptable, the Steering Committee considers that a Reserve of 2,600 – 2,700 personnel would be viable within existing resources and that a Reserve organisation of this strength should be predominantly barrack based.

    --
    At end 2011 the regulatory defined effective strength of the Reserve was 4,554 personnel. This represents 47% of its numerical establishment level of 9,692 personnel

    In 2011, the number of personnel that met training requirements for payment of a gratuity was 2,010. This represents 44.1% of the regulatory defined “effective strength” or 20.7% of the establishment.


  • Registered Users Posts: 634 ✭✭✭Maoltuile


    So, Cadre being slashed and the remainder being put on a tighter leash, locations being drastically trimmed, everyone becomes a sub-unit of a PDF unit, and 1,000 fortnights & 3,000 weeks (i.e. a 38% increase in training days allocation). And hopes that RDF will work for nothing in tasks supporting the PDF.

    What did I miss?


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭galwaycyclist




  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭galwaycyclist


    So we are to have a situation where all attendance at training is to be paid. This limits access to training to availability of man days and would seem to place an upper limit on the number of training "events" an individual can avail of.

    At the same time as voluntary training is being dispensed with, we are expected to volunteer time to assist the PDF.

    Why do I feel this has not been thought fully through?


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,649 ✭✭✭Muppet Man




  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 2,688 Mod ✭✭✭✭Morpheus


    Where did it say that Voluntary training (week nights) was to be abolished? I didnt read that in it.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭galwaycyclist


    Morpheus wrote: »
    Where did it say that Voluntary training (week nights) was to be abolished? I didnt read that in it.

    See the news reports
    The system of training reserves will also be changed from the existing combination of some paid training days mixed with unpaid days with a gratuity payment - to a system of fully paid training days.

    The weeknight training will likely go the way of the local RDF hall


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 2,688 Mod ✭✭✭✭Morpheus


    an unpaid training day is a day on the range or a field day.

    training nights as far as im aware will continue, they are the staple of the training. you CANNOT train someone up if you only meet 2 weeks out of the whole year. theres a TON of prep work that requires the weekly meetings to continue.

    IMO that is a misinterpretation - nevertheless it remains to be seen.

    the tragedy out of all of this is that they looked at all of these other countries Reserves, saw that they were ACTUALLY using them, then decided that instead of OUR approach being wrong, that everyone else was wrong. COP out.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 794 ✭✭✭bluecode


    A few things spring to mind. They rejected the option of disbandment but somehow I think this is the ultimate effect of this. They've capped the numbers at 4000, in practical terms if the figures follow the current pattern of effective strength being around 20%. Then were are looking at less than a 1000 personnel who are fully engaged with the training. That may be on the low side but unless there are changes in the training and courses available there is no reason to suppose members will be any more engaged than they are now.

    Then there's the issue of cutting the PDF cadre while handing more responsibility for training and administration to PDF units. Now we all know that the PDF in general are not really interested in the RDF. I do think it's a little optimistic to think that reducing the numbers of PDF directly linked to RDF training will somehow help improve the situation. It's quite likely the local PDF unit will do only the minimum required.

    The aid to the civil power idea is all very fine and laudable. It won't happen for much the same reason, it's never happened before. Not least the logistical difficulties in getting boots on the ground. Then there's the question of training and availability. Telling an employer already struggling with missing staff because of the weather that you're off to shovel snow will not go down well. There will be no mandatory mobilisation.

    I suspect the this idea was thrown in partly to add to the justification for keeping the RDF. The reality is that there is little in the report which tells us why it's needed at all. There is mention of the use of reserves in other countries but fails to elaborate on how this could be copied other than to say they have 'well developed support structures'.

    Note this paragraph:

    Given the considerations above, the Steering Committee recommends the retention of the Reserve, subject to it becoming more cost effective. The Steering Committee recommends that Reservists should be utilised, when required, in a voluntary unpaid capacity as outlined above.
    The italics are mine. Anyone here think that will happen?
    It would need a whole change of mindset. It's not disbandment but it's close.


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭galwaycyclist


    bluecode wrote: »
    Then there's the issue of cutting the PDF cadre while handing more responsibility for training and administration to PDF units. Now we all know that the PDF in general are not really interested in the RDF. I do think it's a little optimistic to think that reducing the numbers of PDF directly linked to RDF training will somehow help improve the situation. It's quite likely the local PDF unit will do only the minimum required.

    This integrated unit model was tried before and, going by the FCA men I knew, the net result was that the FCA ended up being treated as barracks dogsbodies. This integrated model may work for some of the Corps such as the Artillery but for the Infantry I am deeply skeptical.


Advertisement