TA To Be Cut

[Tab]

Did any one else see the notice in the Telegraph today, where it has been suggested that the numbers in the TA are to be slashed again. The reason given for this was that a large number of TA personnel had cried of from going to Iraq. It was being said that if they are going to pick and chose just what they do then whats the point of having them.

[Guest]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jh ... wstop.html

TA faces big cuts to save a regiment

By Michael Smith, Defence Correspondent
(Filed: 13/12/2004)



The Territorial Army is to be cut by 40 per cent in a move that could save one of the four infantry regiments due to be axed this week.

The cuts to the TA will be part of a major revamp demanded by ministers after too few of its soldiers declared themselves available for operations in Iraq.

More than 9,000 of its 41,000 soldiers have been called up for service in Afghanistan and Iraq in the past two years. But they cannot be used on operations for more than 12 months in any three-year period, making most of those who have already served there ineligible for more operations for two years.

Ministers are angry that the majority of the 32,000 who have not served in Iraq or Afghanistan have not made themselves available for operations and have demanded that they be thrown out.

On Wednesday Geoff Hoon, the Defence Secretary, is expected to announce a major Army reorganisation, with all the single-battalion famous-name regiments amalgamated into super regiments.

Gen Sir Mike Jackson, the Chief of the General Staff, is said to have staked his future on a change that would turn every infantry regiment into a multi-battalion unit.

He believes that large regiments will be much more flexible and efficient, effectively making 4,000 more soldiers immediately available for front-line duty.

While most serving officers agreed that the reorganisation was needed, they were determined that their own regiments were not going to be among those to fall under the axe.

Most believe that, with continued commitments in Iraq, Afghanistan and the Balkans, now is not the time to cut the size of the Army.

Lord Guthrie, the former chief of the defence staff, issued a warning at the weekend that axing regiments would leave the Army "dangerously small for what it is being asked to do".

But the defence budget is under continued strain and Mr Hoon insists that the Army must be cut as part of a peace dividend from Northern Ireland. He dismissed Lord Guthrie's concerns as "those of a previous generation".

The regiments to be axed were to include two famous-name Scottish regiments. But ministers backed down when they realised that that would inflict serious damage on Labour's election chances in Scotland.

The English divisions that were made up of single-battalion regiments then rebelled, refusing to name more than one regiment from their division for the axe.

They insisted that the Queen's Division, which is made up entirely of multi-battalion regiments and is the model for Gen Jackson's new Army, should give up one of its battalions as well.

The row led to a series of heated meetings at the Ministry of Defence last week when the executive committee of the Army Board negotiated a way out of the impasse by seizing on the Territorial Army as the target for cost-cutting.

If its true thats 16000 soldiers out of 40000 going, almost half!!

That is well out of order

[Kelt]

First off, no it is not!

People join the TA knowing fine well they may be called up to serve in operations abroad. The main problems lie with soldiers not being fully training and being unfit to serve.

I myself am in the TA and would jump at the chance to serve, not because I am a wannabe hero or a gung ho nut. I have completed my basic training and am currently on my Officers course. From what I have been told I will not be able to serve in operations until I have served my probationary period in my rank i.e. 3yrs as Lt.

Going back to my point about people being unfit for service, I believe these people should be set an ultimatum. Reach the required level of training and fitness standards to serve or be discharge. This should be applied to those who refuse to serve. In my own unit there are a number of people, mainly SNCOs who are unfit to serve, granted we are not a teeth arm unit but the Army has a set standard across all arms, a standard which these "soldiers" and I use that term loosely do not reach.

Each year every member of the TA must pass ITDs (Individual Training Directives) these include such things as weapons handling, live firing, first aid, basic military fitness. I know for definate that many could not pass the fitness ITD let alone any others yet they have still received the tick in the box, be this because of their rank or because not doing so would see the unit's numbers fall I do not know.

At the end of the day the TA is in effect a reserve army, therefore it should be to the same standard in every area, those who do not reach these must be discharged as too the people who refuse service. If this means losing 16000 troops so be it, they can be replaced by 16000 people who can carry out the role as it should be carried out, with honour and professionalism.

Enough said from me.

[HVM_Boy]

From what I have been told I will not be able to serve in operations until I have served my probationary period in my rank i.e. 3yrs as Lt.

I think this is a load of balls. I don't think there is a time to serve before going on ops, and it certainly isnt 3 years.

I know of a 2Lt who went on Op Telic 2 a year after doing his TACC. I think you may be requited to have done your Platoon/Troop Comds course (or O's trade course), but if they are desparate for watchkeepers they may just take you anyway...

[mercury]

Great , get rid of the dead wood and woofters who cried off last time

One sgt I know walked out of the troop and didnt come back until his employer said he could not be spared

[lew]

To be honest from what I’ve seen of the TA so far it would be better to lose it than to lose the regular soldiers from the teeth arms.

Most of what I’ve seen and experienced is a joke. I’m a "fully trained" soldier in the army's eyes and will be eligible to be called up once I’m traded, yet I haven’t handled a rifle in nearly four months, my "basic" training lasted 6 weekends and a two week course at Pirbright. 30 days training, in full before trade. Tell me know if you think I would be able to do my job to the same standard as a regular soldier??? I think not.


lew

[mercury]

In my experiance , TA bods are simply used as gap fillers, blokes I know in the sigs are out there , one is working in computers , the other in electric safety.....They are both rad ops of one type or another but to be fair the one in elec safety is a sparky in civvy life

[Daveb]

Most of what I’ve seen and experienced is a joke. I’m a "fully trained" soldier in the army's eyes and will be eligible to be called up once I’m traded, yet I haven’t handled a rifle in nearly four months, my "basic" training lasted 6 weekends and a two week course at Pirbright. 30 days training, in full before trade. Tell me know if you think I would be able to do my job to the same standard as a regular soldier??? I think not.


lew

I completely agree with you mate. I was in the TA Royal Artillery and only did the same amount of training as you stated above. As we were Air defence, we were told that we were Artillery first (obviously), but was infantry when we ran out of ammo (we only had 3 missiles per 'det'). We had hardly any infantry training - about one or two weekends a year. I really felt we were not trained well enough for the infantry aspect of it.

Dont get me wrong, the artillery aspect was fairly good as this was our main role....but basic infantry skills serverely lacked. Plus judging by the size of a few of the lads in my old battery, PT wasnt top of their agenda!

I'm only judging by experience of my old unit, so obviously am not commenting on others as they could be 100 times better.

[lew]

I'm only judging by experience of my old unit, so obviously am not commenting on others as they could be 100 times better.

Same here mate, as you mentioned the fitness side of things is lacking big time at my det to, we have a PTI who I'm fitter than as you said other places may be better, but the only competent TA personnel I have met have been ex regs.

lew

[mercury]

By and large thats true I'm afraid. But you do get some TA pers who really did miss out on a good career by never joining up

[dannyd]

The only experience I ever had of the TA was 131 Cdo Sqn RE (V). But that was only a visit as I was interested in joining. Have to say I was very impressed - all the guys seemed to be very fit and switched on. Then again it is a Commando unit and is also the only TA unit (as far as I know) that is part of a regular Brigade - 3 Cdo Bde RM.

I'm a bit surprised about what you guys say about the TA not being that professional. I was under the impression that they were by and large pretty good.

[lew]

I'm a bit surprised about what you guys say about the TA not being that professional. I was under the impression that they were by and large pretty good.

dannyd, I can only comment on what I’ve experienced. It may well be different with TA infantry, I don’t know? The major factor with training the TA is time. You have to get enough people together for training weekends for it to be economically viable, and then you only have a few hours a week, which is mostly taken up with maintenance. As it’s the only time we get. I personally think the money spent on the TA could be put to better use elsewhere. It would be a shame for the people involved, but hey, nothing is perfect.What would be better? Better equipment that’s more readily available for the armed forces when they actually need it, or 40,000 or so poorly to adequately trained part time soldiers.


lew

[AdamR]

Fact is that without the TA the Regulars would have been up the creek on Fingal and Telic and the first round of compulsory call ups served well to get rid of the time wasters and bounty hunters... Within my unit (the LCV) the majority are those who have done tours and those who are waiting to be called up/volunteer... As for seniors not being sent away the requests are mainly for those at the lower end of the food chain (ie corporal and below), besides someone needs to be left around to train recruits (heard that one of the London TACs was left with nobody but a few officers and their PSI).

Although most TA soldiers can never even come near the level of training of their regular counterparts (bear in mind there is an extra six weeks of pre-deployment training for all us STABs) you shouldn't be so quick to cast them aside.

[Tab]

I feel that there are a lot of things to be considered here, Now a number of people who are in the TA can not afford to leave their civilian job for that length of time, mainly because of their financial commitments. Also a number have their own businesses to run or are self employed, now just who is going to pay their mortgage while they are serving in the TA are do they give up their houses and jobs to play soldier for a year. Now giving your time to train to be soldier in case of an emergency is one thing, but is this an emergency. The Government has seen fit to slash the Army down to next to nothing to save money and then want the TA to bail them out on the cheap by covering the gaps their cuts have made in the Regular forces. Now when you join the Army that is your career choice and you know what goes with it, but the TA are weekend warriors to be used in an emergency as I said, so can you blame them for not wanting to go to Iraq and other places.

[theparamancan]

(heard that one of the London TACs was left with nobody but a few officers and their PSI).

I joined up mid telic. There was no-one in our TAC but the Joes and a reduced recruit training team. 30 Guys went from my platoon first time round and almost all the remaining went on Telic 3.