Any RDFRA news? (Re-org and the 'other thing')

Maoltuile · 28-10-2013 09:51AM #1

It's been all very, very quiet...

hopperdavy · 28-10-2013 09:28PM

Love to help you bud , but Im gone out of it myself now ,

Still have all the gear all the same .

Pm me and I will make a few calls to those fairly high up the food chain and ill let you know ,

62 Reserve Battalion · 28-10-2013 10:48PM

I heard they were too busy hanging and suing each other to give a rats ass about the RDF. Too busy to even make a submission to the new white paper.

Then the DoD investigation unearthed expenses fraud in the "Tens of thousands of Euro". All our money went into RDFRAs pockets.

But don't ask Questions - you'll get sued.

Maoltuile · 29-10-2013 02:13AM

Thanks for that. Does anyone know of *any* representative activity by RDFRA in the past few months?

Doctor14 · 29-10-2013 11:38AM

Maoltuile wrote: »

Thanks for that. Does anyone know of *any* representative activity by RDFRA in the past few months?

No. Last thing was the Dail Committee hearings, since then, only what you read in the papers about the internal wranglings.

mcko · 30-10-2013 08:46AM

The NSR Committee are active, have regular meetings with Naval Service top brass and made a really good submission for the new green paper might be white can't remember which. It is like any organisation it is only as strong as its members. For years people in the AR kept complaining about it but no one seemed to step up and try to change it.
The NSR lads on it are a great bunch and are mostly pretty young, this might have an effect on it.

Doctor14 · 30-10-2013 03:17PM

mcko wrote: »

For years people in the AR kept complaining about it but no one seemed to step up and try to change it.

A lot of people tried to change it but generally got nowhere - too many vested interests. I know people who fought the good fight and eventually realised they were just banging their heads against a brick wall. Not worth putting that much effort into it.

I remember some of the ideas floated down through the years to make fundamental changes to RDFRA - 1 was to get rid of all the hangers on by getting rid of all pay for delegates, just have bare expenses. That went down like a lead balloon. Given the scandals over pay and expenses that have arisen, it is just unfortunate that it did.

As for what is left, I just have to remember the Colin Powell quote - "Avoid having your ego so close to your position that when your position falls, your ego goes with it". It is so relevant when it comes to RDFRA today.

edit: know nothing about the NSR side of it - just my experiences on the AR side.

Maoltuile · 01-11-2013 09:45AM

Thanks all. Is there any prospect of being able to "throw the bums out"? Is RDFRA still based on the old structures?

JimmyMercury · 07-11-2013 12:22PM

62 Reserve Battalion wrote: »

I heard they were too busy hanging and suing each other to give a rats ass about the RDF. Too busy to even make a submission to the new white paper.

Then the DoD investigation unearthed expenses fraud in the "Tens of thousands of Euro". All our money went into RDFRAs pockets.

But don't ask Questions - you'll get sued.

You paint such a pretty picture.

I wonder what the membership to RDFRA is like? Surely it must be so low that it can't actually represent the majority of Reservists? In which case, who does?

ace86 · 30-12-2013 05:21PM

Is there talks of a recruitment campagin for the rdf in March 2014 i got it in our RDFRA Xmas Newsletter any other one get it and what yer opinion on it, I have seen a person with nearly 40 Yrs service and roughly 5 to go till retirement sign out this yr bcos he is sick of the sh**t and another fellow hand in his commison with 20 yrs plus saying he's had enough.Is this happening all over the country with other Units??

Maoltuile · 30-12-2013 05:34PM

ace86 wrote: »

Is there talks of a recruitment campagin for the rdf in March 2014 i got it in our RDFRA Xmas Newsletter any other one get it and what yer opinion on it, I have seen a person with nearly 40 Yrs service and roughly 5 to go till retirement sign out this yr bcos he is sick of the sh**t and another fellow hand in his commison with 20 yrs plus saying he's had enough.Is this happening all over the country with other Units??

Not for us. We're having a great Integration (this seems to depend on having an interest taken in RDF sub-units by persons in authority on the PDF side, as far as I can see).

Recruitment can't happen fast enough. The average Pte age where I am is late twenties.

62 Reserve Battalion · 31-12-2013 01:11AM

ace86 wrote: »

I have seen a person with nearly 40 Yrs service and roughly 5 to go till retirement sign out this yr bcos he is sick of the sh**t and another fellow hand in his commison with 20 yrs plus saying he's had enough.Is this happening all over the country with other Units??

My Reorg is going good - a bit rocky to start with but once the PDF got used to us, they really made time for us. Really looking forward to 2014. As for people leaving - a lot of different motivations. Those people with 20/40 years service, maybe it was time for them to go and they knew it - it is a young mans game.

ace86 wrote: »

i got it in our RDFRA Xmas Newsletter any other one get it and what yer opinion on it,

Frankly, I think some of it is embarrassing. I mean, I thought we had left the bad old days of the FCA far behind and had grown more professional but some of the stories are cringe inducing.

Deciding half way through training to go for a walk up a hill and have "Lemonades" afterwards??? Is this really what we want to be espousing. If I prepare for a camp, I have to find out all the training details - The ATD, the Syllabus id number and TMS training code, the Training Programme, doctrinal publications.... if I do anything without having ticked all the boxes, I get a quick visit to the COs office and not a nice visit. Preparation for training starts 6 months in advance. And that is the way it should be - uniformity of procedure, doctrine and training. Going off half cocked, making up stuff as you go along went out years ago. And drinking in the middle of the day??? Have we not all been briefed on the DF Alcohol Policy? I know this was only 1 page but it is embarrassing reading it.

As for the rest of it - after waiting years for a new newsletter, there is nothing in it that the vast majority of people didn't know. Nothing new at all. The real questions are ignored.

With the amount of money going to RDFRA, you would really expect something a lot better. No mention of all the scandals and fraud, court cases and corruption.

The newsletter was disappointing, embarrassing and insignificant - I suppose a true reflection of the current state of RDFRA.

Maoltuile · 31-12-2013 10:39AM

62 Reserve Battalion wrote: »

My Reorg is going good - a bit rocky to start with but once the PDF got used to us, they really made time for us. Really looking forward to 2014. As for people leaving - a lot of different motivations. Those people with 20/40 years service, maybe it was time for them to go and they knew it - it is a young mans game.

It depends on keenness, fitness, health and role as well. Infantry privates need to be young, other ranks and Corps rather less so. However, the ongoing clean-out of Sergeants/Lieutenants who had it as nice holidays away from the wife and family is long overdue.

Frankly, I think some of it is embarrassing. I mean, I thought we had left the bad old days of the FCA far behind and had grown more professional but some of the stories are cringe inducing.

In fairness, I'd say that more reflects a certain age and mentality, which is now surplus to requirements. And there's an equivalent of PDF officers blowing smoke up our ##### and telling us how great we are, how the "FCÁ" needs to be proud of itself, etc. To hell with that. Give us the real story of how we need to improve. We're big boys and girls, and those of us who are trying to achieve the level can already see a lot of it for ourselves. Having it just passed over sends a bad message to us that higher-ups just don't care.

On a related note, there needs to be some sort of rigorous penalty system for getting rid of serial incompetents or those just not putting in the effort anymore. The current KPIs don't weed that class of person out. I'm thinking of stories of how regular US Army officers went through Reservist units like a knife through hot butter back in the '90s, firing people who (very obviously) couldn't do their jobs on the spot.

(snip)

As for the rest of it - after waiting years for a new newsletter, there is nothing in it that the vast majority of people didn't know. Nothing new at all. The real questions are ignored.

With the amount of money going to RDFRA, you would really expect something a lot better. No mention of all the scandals and fraud, court cases and corruption.

The newsletter was disappointing, embarrassing and insignificant - I suppose a true reflection of the current state of RDFRA.

Well, it's up to people to make the effort and go for election then. There's an opportunity to break the old boy's club with the new organisation, with or without adopting a barracks-based representation like the PDF do.

62 Reserve Battalion · 01-01-2014 01:45AM

Maoltuile wrote: »

Well, it's up to people to make the effort and go for election then. There's an opportunity to break the old boy's club with the new organisation, with or without adopting a barracks-based representation like the PDF do.

RDFRA is a closed shop - If you are not one of the pigs feeding from the money trough, then you are shut out. My unit elected a rep only for her to be ignored and replaced by an "Appointed" rep. She got no notice of meetings and when she found out one of them was on, she showed up to find someone else there representing the unit..... who wasn't even from the unit but was recognised as the official rep. While she was allowed to stay, she had no voting rights. When she complained and pointed out the constitution, she was told "XXXX is the official Rep" - that is the only answer she was given as if it was explanation enough. No one in RDFRA was willing to even give her the time of day and the same answer was always given - "XXXX is the official Rep".

When an organisation is willing to flaunt its own rules to protect the gravy train, then you have no hope. And given that RDFRA re-elected all its cronies last march (the week before the reorg) for another 2 year stint, nothing is going to change. They were elected based on a 3 Bde structure that no longer exists. Mark my words - in 2015, you will still have reps who are no longer in the RDF, representing units that no longer exist, from brigades that don't exist.

goldie fish · 01-01-2014 10:00AM

Simple solution. Remove your subscription. You pay them to represent you.

Maoltuile · 01-01-2014 10:15AM

62 Reserve Battalion wrote: »

RDFRA is a closed shop - If you are not one of the pigs feeding from the money trough, then you are shut out. My unit elected a rep only for her to be ignored and replaced by an "Appointed" rep. She got no notice of meetings and when she found out one of them was on, she showed up to find someone else there representing the unit..... who wasn't even from the unit but was recognised as the official rep. While she was allowed to stay, she had no voting rights. When she complained and pointed out the constitution, she was told "XXXX is the official Rep" - that is the only answer she was given as if it was explanation enough. No one in RDFRA was willing to even give her the time of day and the same answer was always given - "XXXX is the official Rep".

When an organisation is willing to flaunt its own rules to protect the gravy train, then you have no hope. And given that RDFRA re-elected all its cronies last march (the week before the reorg) for another 2 year stint, nothing is going to change. They were elected based on a 3 Bde structure that no longer exists. Mark my words - in 2015, you will still have reps who are no longer in the RDF, representing units that no longer exist, from brigades that don't exist.

None of that's a new thing, though. I've seen the same attitude and behaviour in the trade union that I belong to in my civilian job. It's up to people to do something instead of just accepting the situation, to organise with like-minded individuals, to agree enough to go for election when the chance comes up to make a difference. It's going to be rough at times (believe me) but Representation is needed right now more than ever for those of us still serving in the RDF, and it's bloody worth fighting for.

And another lesson from a 'proper' trade union in Partnership Land. The bastards are always happy to see troublemakers go, so that's a cop-out too.

Doctor14 · 01-01-2014 08:44PM

goldie fish wrote: »

Simple solution. Remove your subscription. You pay them to represent you.

Except that RDFRA don't answer their emails, phone calls or snail mail. Seemingly the office in the Curragh has a mountain of post inside the door.

I made several attempts to try and stop the subscription with no answer from RDFRA but I then rang Reserve Pay Section in Renmore and they cancelled it on their end in 5 mins.

Better in my pocket that paying for some junket for the RDFRA higher ups. I mean 13 people on the National Executive - 13 People receiving pay and expenses....and nothing to show for it but a lousy newsletter that was written by other people.

Maoltuile · 01-01-2014 09:11PM

Doctor14 wrote: »

Except that RDFRA don't answer their emails, phone calls or snail mail. Seemingly the office in the Curragh has a mountain of post inside the door.

I made several attempts to try and stop the subscription with no answer from RDFRA but I then rang Reserve Pay Section in Renmore and they cancelled it on their end in 5 mins.

Better in my pocket that paying for some junket for the RDFRA higher ups. I mean 13 people on the National Executive - 13 People receiving pay and expenses....and nothing to show for it but a lousy newsletter that was written by other people.

It's one proposition to say "RDFRA is being run badly". It's another to claim that "we don't need representation". Clearly we do, and to have the MA take them seriously.

Otherwise it could be another unilateral 10% pay cut this year (how the one in 2013 - over and above the PDF one - was legal is beyond me. The legislation requires that TPTB engage with the RDFRA first before any changes, so what happened?)

62 Reserve Battalion · 02-01-2014 01:14AM

Maoltuile wrote: »

It's one proposition to say "RDFRA is being run badly". It's another to claim that "we don't need representation". Clearly we do, and to have the MA take them seriously.

Otherwise it could be another unilateral 10% pay cut this year (how the one in 2013 - over and above the PDF one - was legal is beyond me. The legislation requires that TPTB engage with the RDFRA first before any changes, so what happened?)

I never said we don't need representation... but I would much prefer no representation that the embarrassment we have to deal with every time RDFRA mess up. I still remember the day when a PDF guy showed me an RDFRA document calling for the discharge of PDF and their replacement by RDF. He couldn't believe that the ordinary RDF man didn't know what was going on in RDFRA. A lot of PDF senior officers saw that document. Then there was the 2 attempted mutinies.

Yes, I would be delighted if RDFRA didn't try to represent me.

syklops · 02-01-2014 01:24AM

Maoltuile wrote: »

Thanks all. Is there any prospect of being able to "throw the bums out"? Is RDFRA still based on the old structures?

In my unit they threw the bums out, in the hope they could recruit again. They were denied recruiting, and the unit was disbanded. Sad day.

The country is in recession. Less so now, but austerity is still in place. Austerity might be the end of the RDF full stop. The PDF would rather see the RDF go first than lose PDF personnel.

edit: by bums I mean people who had emigrated for work mostly and couldnt be contacted and hadnt been parading for a few months(and didnt know how to work facebook)

Maoltuile · 02-01-2014 01:34AM

62 Reserve Battalion wrote: »

I never said we don't need representation... but I would much prefer no representation that the embarrassment we have to deal with every time RDFRA mess up. I still remember the day when a PDF guy showed me an RDFRA document calling for the discharge of PDF and their replacement by RDF. He couldn't believe that the ordinary RDF man didn't know what was going on in RDFRA. A lot of PDF senior officers saw that document. Then there was the 2 attempted mutinies.

Yes, I would be delighted if RDFRA didn't try to represent me.

The problem is that they do and will continue to represent you, not least because it's in the legislation. And it doesn't matter a blind bit to the average PDFer that x number of reservists are or aren't in it; the fact is that they're established as the reservist RA and we're all going to continue to get tarred with the brush of their actions even if it goes down to just a membership of the 13 of them.

Believe me, I have the same situation in my 'real' (pays the rent) job and I'm sick of it. But there too, if I opt out I'm just losing any chance to cast a vote or have a say. And they're glad to be rid of any awkward members.

Maoltuile · 02-01-2014 01:40AM

syklops wrote: »

In my unit they threw the bums out, in the hope they could recruit again. They were denied recruiting, and the unit was disbanded. Sad day.

The country is in recession. Less so now, but austerity is still in place. Austerity might be the end of the RDF full stop. The PDF would rather see the RDF go first than lose PDF personnel.

edit: by bums I mean people who had emigrated for work mostly and couldnt be contacted and hadnt been parading for a few months(and didnt know how to work facebook)

By "bums" I meant the RDFRA heads. Hopefully in new units etc. they won't have as much opportunity to just carry on as before with whatever method they're using to keep getting elected, and we might have a chance of turfing the lot of them out.

ace86 · 02-01-2014 01:39PM

syklops wrote: »

In my unit they threw the bums out, in the hope they could recruit again. They were denied recruiting, and the unit was disbanded. Sad day.

The country is in recession. Less so now, but austerity is still in place. Austerity might be the end of the RDF full stop. The PDF would rather see the RDF go first than lose PDF personnel.

edit: by bums I mean people who had emigrated for work mostly and couldnt be contacted and hadnt been parading for a few months(and didnt know how to work facebook)

Just before Xmas in my own unit roughly 20 people got the P45 for being non effective even though they were at wknd camps and annual camp but couldnt make training nights due to work and family commitments. Some fellows had 20-30 yrs service and were just toughed out like that which i feel is wrong. I don't think they will be any recruiting in 2014 and if it happens it will be after the fitness tests etc and be the end of the yr before u see them with security clearance and all that. If the Rdf is disbanded which alot of people feel will happen after 2016 and the PDF think they will be ok they are mistaken bcos they will be next again for more cuts I think.

62 Reserve Battalion · 02-01-2014 02:27PM

ace86 wrote: »

Just before Xmas in my own unit roughly 20 people got the P45 for being non effective even though they were at wknd camps and annual camp but couldnt make training nights due to work and family commitments.

There is no requirement to make training nights. Do your 32+4Hrs and APWTs and you are effective. This was all explained. I did no training nights this year and am still effective as I made it up in other ways - I did close on 60 hours that counted. Camp even counts for 24hrs. It was easier to be effective this year than in past years, you just have to be careful, count your hours right and make sure they are logged. If people are blaming lack of training night attendance, then they don't know how the system works and probably did something else wrong.

Requirements change slightly next year but nothing that is difficult.

Maoltuile wrote: »

The problem is that they do and will continue to represent you, not least because it's in the legislation. And it doesn't matter a blind bit to the average PDFer that x number of reservists are or aren't in it; the fact is that they're established as the reservist RA and we're all going to continue to get tarred with the brush of their actions even if it goes down to just a membership of the 13 of them.... And they're glad to be rid of any awkward members.

Well they ain't getting any more of my money and I have nothing further to do with them. If that is what they want, then fine - it is also what I want.

ace86 · 02-01-2014 04:49PM

62 Reserve Battalion wrote: »

There is no requirement to make training nights. Do your 32+4Hrs and APWTs and you are effective. This was all explained. I did no training nights this year and am still effective as I made it up in other ways - I did close on 60 hours that counted. Camp even counts for 24hrs. It was easier to be effective this year than in past years, you just have to be careful, count your hours right and make sure they are logged. If people are blaming lack of training night attendance, then they don't know how the system works and probably did something else wrong.

Requirements change slightly next year but nothing that is difficult.

My understanding is you were still required to do some many training nights wknd camps toets's ARPS outside of even going to camp but thats what we were told but I will look into it again. Is there anywhere I'd fiind that info asking a pdf man times is torture.

62 Reserve Battalion · 02-01-2014 09:13PM

ace86 wrote: »

My understanding is you were still required to do some many training nights wknd camps toets's ARPS outside of even going to camp but thats what we were told but I will look into it again. Is there anywhere I'd fiind that info asking a pdf man times is torture.

The AI 1/2013 states 32hrs + 4 Voluntary hours. However DFR R5 states 48hrs. A DFR trumps an AI so DFR R5 is more legal. DFR R5 was supposed to be rewritten during the year but still hasn't come out (that I know of) but will be out soon.

DFR R5 states what constitutes hours. Para 39, (1), (a) says "In order to qualify for retention on the effective strength of the RDF, members
shall be required to attend a minimum of twenty-four training parades, each of not less than two hours' duration, in each training year or the equivalent thereof in hours of training." A training night is 2 hours, a field day is 4 hours and, consequently, a weekend is 8 hours. A period of FTT = 24hours.

AI 1/2013 has a requirement for 32hrs + 4 Voluntary hours which is actually less than what is required by DFR R5 but has other requirements like APWTs (All in Section 4 of Annex E).

Nowhere does it state in either document that you have to do a minimum of training parades - training parades can be used to make up hours but there is no minimum. A training parade doesn't even have to be at night, you can do it in the middle of the day or on a weekend - it is any period of training that is more than 2hrs and less than 4. People need to get out of the old FCA mentality of training nights.

Local-womanizer · 03-01-2014 12:56PM

ace86 wrote: »

the PDF think they will be ok they are mistaken bcos they will be next again for more cuts I think.

Yes the PDF which has sustained multiple cuts and suffered from barrack closures over the last 5 years... No one in the PDF is delusional when it comes to the governments way of handling defence issues, the PDF feel it more as it's a career. The family home depends on it. The RDF is a hobby.

A thing I noticed this year with the RDF in my barracks was they seemed to be out in numbers for the Gucci courses, CBRN and CRC, but when it came to duties it was a disaster to organise. You had people saying they will do such a duty, then the day before or on the morning before they get mounted pull out as something else came up.

This was turning those in the PDF who were favourable towards the RDF off them, some cadre included.

There seems to be a lack of taking themselves to serious at times which I fear may have hurt them too much already...

JimmyMercury · 03-01-2014 02:02PM

Local-womanizer wrote: »

A thing I noticed this year with the RDF in my barracks was they seemed to be out in numbers for the Gucci courses, CBRN and CRC, but when it came to duties it was a disaster to organise. You had people saying they will do such a duty, then the day before or on the morning before they get mounted pull out as something else came up.

Not trying to be funny, but maybe it's because the RDF would rather apply the training doing the job proper rather than doing the duties that the PDF wouldn't do unless they had to? After all, no one really likes being dicked for guard duty, let alone take a day off from the day job to volunteer for it.

By the way, is this thread heavily moderated? There seems to be a few posts missing since I last visited.

As for RDFRA, does anyone here know what's going on with them lately?

Local-womanizer · 03-01-2014 02:15PM

JimmyMercury wrote: »

Not trying to be funny, but maybe it's because the RDF would rather apply the training doing the job proper rather than doing the duties that the PDF wouldn't do unless they had to? After all, no one really likes being dicked for guard duty, let alone take a day off from the day job to volunteer for it.

I'm sorry but you want if you want to soldier it's not all running around mountains and blowing stuff up.

And when do the RDF apply the training to doing the job? I'm not being smart here but everything they do is training, when was the last time the RDF were called in to do the job. The PDF utilise their training overseas, as well as doing the boring duties.

Duties have to be done. The RDF wanted an integrated defence forces, that means duties as well as everything else. And believe me the duties are sought after in my unit, why wouldn't they be, the SDA is actually pretty handy for those on the new contracts.

My point about RDF and duties is people saying they will do then, then drop it last second and hanging the cadre or the standby out to dry. With an organisation that hasn't exactly got the best rep among the powers that be, the above does not help there case.

JimmyMercury · 03-01-2014 03:02PM

But the RDF don't get SDA, so if an RDF man is stagging on, it really is just doing the job of the PDF man for less or no money. I can't see why people would give up their day job and family/social/study/free time to do that? If the PDF think that's okay, then they shouldn't be surprised if the RDFer doesn't turn up when something more productive/attractive/interesting comes up. After all, they've no claim on them out of uniform really, short of war kicking off.

No point blaming the RDF for it, it's a systemic problem across the whole spectrum of Irish Defence policy.

Local-womanizer · 03-01-2014 04:41PM

During the few remaining months, the RDF were getting Mandays allocated for duties, they got a week block at a time in our unit, think 3-4 weeks overall for the sole purpose of duties. These ran along side training camps too. So if the RDF would partake they actually came out the other side a whole lot better for doing duties than you PDF troop. Day on, next day off. Normal camp pay.

Yet you still had some RDF promising to come on duty then something better comes along in their eyes and they catch someone else! If they don't want to do it fair enough, don't volunteer is what I am getting at.

I'm not having a pop at the RDF btw, I was in it long enough myself, but I was not blind to the problems it had, and many brought on by the members themselves.

Any RDFRA news? (Re-org and the 'other thing')

Comments