Posted on Sep 8, 2015
COL Jon Thompson
15.6K
76
44
11
11
0
This article from Military.com talks about some of the efforts that the National Commission on the Future of the Army is looking at for the future of the Army. Anyone who has served in the Army knows that relationships between the active component, the Army Reserve, and the National Guard are still somewhat fractured. What can each component do to change that culture? Also, what can the reserve components do to respond more quickly in a national emergency? We learned a lot of lessons over the past 14 years so how do we implement those and make sure the Army remain's combat ready even with the drawdown.


http://www.military.com/daily-news/2015/09/08/effort-to-bring-army-national-guard-closer-results-in-redesign.html
Posted in these groups: United states ar seal.svg Army ReserveArmy national guard logo Army National Guard
Avatar feed
Responses: 16
MAJ Ken Landgren
7
7
0
I served with a NG unit for a couple years and noticed the unit was often committed to administrative and mandatory briefs. There was really not much training being conducted.
(7)
Comment
(0)
MAJ Ken Landgren
MAJ Ken Landgren
>1 y
I am just stating what I observed.
(0)
Reply
(0)
MSG Intelligence Senior Sergeant/Chief Intelligence Sergeant
MSG (Join to see)
>1 y
Bingo. Mandatory means mandatory, not important.
(1)
Reply
(0)
MAJ Ken Landgren
MAJ Ken Landgren
>1 y
The bigger the unit the TLP becomes poorer, the confusion higher, and the more make up training, briefs, admin items must be done for those who miss the original training.
(1)
Reply
(0)
MAJ Ken Landgren
MAJ Ken Landgren
5 y
Maybe briefs one day and training the other day. LTC (Join to see)
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
LTC Chief, Relocation Plans
6
6
0
Make annual mandatory training requirements occur every 5 years. Currently there are more hours of mandatory training than available in 40 days of drill/AT. Why are we surprised when readiness falls or it takes forever to train up past team-level skills?

Make all schools the same -- if a box of books or a two-week DL course can make an officer CCC qualified in the Reserves, then why are we wasting funds sending AC officers away for 4+ months? (This is a little tongue in cheek -- I believe the answer is the opposite, and we won't find satisfactory training in this method ... And will need all personnel to attend in residence.)

Acknowledge and ensure all Soldiers understand the purpose of each component and what it is designed to do. When AC folks get in a bunch bc the RC has train up time, they demonstrate lack of understanding for their own organization.
(6)
Comment
(0)
COL Jon Thompson
COL Jon Thompson
>1 y
I like that idea of reducing the annual training requirements to something less than that. I know those are easy to measure for the report card vs. training on your mission. In my last unit, we failed miserably in my opinion. Maybe even combining BAs into super BAs 6Xyear to give more training time to battle tasks.
(0)
Reply
(0)
LTC Chief, Relocation Plans
LTC (Join to see)
>1 y
There are a few commands where they do this -- I know the 9th MSC has policies that support their personnel manning by allowing Soldiers from the mainland to come over and do drills in bulk. Also, that's the normal plan for IMAs -- believe we'd be better off with longer BAs, but there's definitely more planning necessary to keep everyone engaged.
(0)
Reply
(0)
COL Battalion Commander
COL (Join to see)
>1 y
The good thing is that USARC finally is allowing commanders to accept risk "mandatory training requirements," save eight (safety, suicide prevention, SHARP, etc.). The rest can, with justification, can be requested to the first O6 in the chain if commanders are willing to accept risk and can justify why.

Haven't tried it yet, but Injust got wind of this at PCC and am about to get a staff drill down on this to see what we can push to the right and what to focus on for the next TY. We'll see how it works!
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SSG Warren Swan
4
4
0
1. Senior leadership buy in. No matter what comes down, when the troops see their superiors arguing and bickering publicly it undermines whatever policy they could put in place. Make one unified team and run with it. Keep your differences to yourself and away from the congressmen and news reporters.
2. Top down mindset change. Even with a unified front, if those who will put ideals to the pavement (COL-CSM) are still of the old mindset, they'll do it because they have to; not because they want to. We need to make them do it, but make it so they want to do it.
3. Enforce the regulations throughout the service. Too many time I've seen what the AC does gets knocked down because that's not how the NG, RC troops do it, and vice versa. If it's a AR, DA PAM, FM or whatever the AC Army leadership provides, it's the law of the services, and not to be interpreted by the state leadership in any manner that is inconsistent with what Army leadership provides. But in the same breath, the AC leadership needs to understand how the states regulations can affect the desires and directives of AC leadership.
4. This might not be fun to some, but I think promotions should be the same as the AC. No more of the eternal SPC's that are 50 years old and their date of rank was before I was born with no breaks in service. The AC promotion schools should be attended by all components. Same standards, same levels of instruction. The attendee's can test out in certain cases based upon experience, but SGM Academy, First Sergeants School, and officers mandatory schools should be mando attendance. Build the team with one set of schooling that mirrors each other. The time the NG/RC troops are attending these schools could count towards their weekend/AT time, so it could help rather than hinder.
5. Stop using the NG/RC as the dumping grounds for outdated AC equipment. This I've seen personally, and that's not right. If we expect them to fight alongside us on equal terms, how can they do that with M-1's and we're using M-4's? Or using Shermans and we're using Abrams? (example not reality) If the AC cannot use it, there is a reason why. That shouldn't be an instant reason to dump crap equipment on anyone else with upgrading the equipment to serviceable standards or DRMO'ing the equipment.
(4)
Comment
(0)
COL Jon Thompson
COL Jon Thompson
>1 y
A lot of good points. As long as there are different standards whether it is professional development courses, training, and equipping, the RC will not be seen as equal partners. All officers go to the same BOLC after commissioning. After that, the paths diverge with most RC officers doing a combination of distance learning and ADT to complete the Captains Career Course. Yet we expect them to be as proficient as an AC Captain. Thanks for your reply.
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close