Posted on Nov 23, 2015
"Army National Guard Considers Increasing Annual Training Days"
37.7K
109
36
10
10
0
From: Military.com
The head of the Army National Guard is looking to see if training one weekend a month and two weeks in the summer is enough to ensure Guard troops are ready for future fights.
Army Maj. Gen. Timothy Kadavy, who took over as director for the Army National Guard in March, is assessing the readiness needs of the Guard at the request of Army Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Milley.
"The chief of staff has challenged our current thoughts on training and readiness," Kadavy told an audience at a Nov. 18 Institute of Land Warfare breakfast sponsored by the Association of the United States Army.
As part of the assessment, Kadavy is examining if the current minimum of 39 annual training days is the right number to maintain readiness. That minimum number of training days, he said, was established in the 1900s and may no longer be relevant.
Kadavy will also determine if Guard units are getting the right number of annual rotations to the Army's Combat Training Centers.
"Everything we do must be looked at through the lens of readiness," Kadavy said. "Do we need to rethink how we use the Reserve component of today's Army?"
Kadavy also said he is considering ways to ensure that the training Guard units do takes advantage of the lessons that were learned when units were routinely mobilizing and deploying to Iraq or Afghanistan.
"My concern is if we don't continue to do that at some level, we will lose that muscle memory for any reduced mobilization period by almost 50 percent for certain types of units and capabilities," he said. "We need to continue to exercise to some degree those lessons learned and learn new lessons and continue to progress."
Under the Army's rotational readiness model a portion of our National Guard is always available for combat missions, for support to civil authorities, humanitarian assistance and theater security.
But the Army will need to continue to keep Guard units equipped at the level they were they were regularly deploying alongside active units, Kadavy said.
"We are the benefactors of a tremendous investment in equipment by the Army and by Congress in support of operations over the last 15 years,"he said. "But modernization is fleeting."
Kadavy recently met with commanders of the Guard’s seven armored brigade combat teams.
Commanders are concerned that "because of the decrease in mobilizations and the opportunities to modernize because of mobilization, there is this ever-growing gap that they see between their active component brothers in ABCTs and where they are today."
"There must be a strategy to help us maintain our equipment and our interoperability within the Army," Kadavy said.
"I liken it to an example of digital and analog -- the two don’t work together. And if you have one component in a digital world and one component in an analog world, how do you talk to each other and how do you operate effectively as a team on the battlefield?
"Readiness should be looked at as a measure of investment and not simply as a measurement of cost."
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2015/11/21/army-national-guard-is-looking-at-increasing-annual-training-day.html?ESRC=todayinmil.sm
The head of the Army National Guard is looking to see if training one weekend a month and two weeks in the summer is enough to ensure Guard troops are ready for future fights.
Army Maj. Gen. Timothy Kadavy, who took over as director for the Army National Guard in March, is assessing the readiness needs of the Guard at the request of Army Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Milley.
"The chief of staff has challenged our current thoughts on training and readiness," Kadavy told an audience at a Nov. 18 Institute of Land Warfare breakfast sponsored by the Association of the United States Army.
As part of the assessment, Kadavy is examining if the current minimum of 39 annual training days is the right number to maintain readiness. That minimum number of training days, he said, was established in the 1900s and may no longer be relevant.
Kadavy will also determine if Guard units are getting the right number of annual rotations to the Army's Combat Training Centers.
"Everything we do must be looked at through the lens of readiness," Kadavy said. "Do we need to rethink how we use the Reserve component of today's Army?"
Kadavy also said he is considering ways to ensure that the training Guard units do takes advantage of the lessons that were learned when units were routinely mobilizing and deploying to Iraq or Afghanistan.
"My concern is if we don't continue to do that at some level, we will lose that muscle memory for any reduced mobilization period by almost 50 percent for certain types of units and capabilities," he said. "We need to continue to exercise to some degree those lessons learned and learn new lessons and continue to progress."
Under the Army's rotational readiness model a portion of our National Guard is always available for combat missions, for support to civil authorities, humanitarian assistance and theater security.
But the Army will need to continue to keep Guard units equipped at the level they were they were regularly deploying alongside active units, Kadavy said.
"We are the benefactors of a tremendous investment in equipment by the Army and by Congress in support of operations over the last 15 years,"he said. "But modernization is fleeting."
Kadavy recently met with commanders of the Guard’s seven armored brigade combat teams.
Commanders are concerned that "because of the decrease in mobilizations and the opportunities to modernize because of mobilization, there is this ever-growing gap that they see between their active component brothers in ABCTs and where they are today."
"There must be a strategy to help us maintain our equipment and our interoperability within the Army," Kadavy said.
"I liken it to an example of digital and analog -- the two don’t work together. And if you have one component in a digital world and one component in an analog world, how do you talk to each other and how do you operate effectively as a team on the battlefield?
"Readiness should be looked at as a measure of investment and not simply as a measurement of cost."
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2015/11/21/army-national-guard-is-looking-at-increasing-annual-training-day.html?ESRC=todayinmil.sm
Army
Training
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 20
22
22
0
There’s no debate that more training is a good thing, but here’s the problem. Part time soldiers have to balance military with civilian jobs. I know whenever we have a MUTA 6 or greater it really causes problems with my job. If they increase the requirements I can see retention suffering greatly. They really need to tweek the yearly requirements that take up so much time. Cut out many of the briefings.
Rape is bad, we know. Do SHARPS briefs really make an impact? It’s a CYA thing from big Army usually because some higher up made the news for letting his hormones get the better of him.
Resiliency once a quarter. Really? Maybe if we didn’t coddle the younger generations they'd cope with adversity better.
PMCS’ing vehicles that likely never moved in the last month. Most AGR’s I know have it easy enough that they should do this during the month.
I’m big on PT, but by the time it’s performed and personal hygiene is completed that's a good chunk of the morning. PT once or twice a month is not going to make an impact. They need to do it on their own.
Rape is bad, we know. Do SHARPS briefs really make an impact? It’s a CYA thing from big Army usually because some higher up made the news for letting his hormones get the better of him.
Resiliency once a quarter. Really? Maybe if we didn’t coddle the younger generations they'd cope with adversity better.
PMCS’ing vehicles that likely never moved in the last month. Most AGR’s I know have it easy enough that they should do this during the month.
I’m big on PT, but by the time it’s performed and personal hygiene is completed that's a good chunk of the morning. PT once or twice a month is not going to make an impact. They need to do it on their own.
(22)
(0)
CSM Charles Hayden
SFC (Join to see) Just like the big Army's new retirement scheme, we can do more with less.
(1)
(0)
CW3 Kevin Storm
Nailed it, I would add, that Full time AGR need to learn to use a calendar, have realistic training goals (saying everyone is going to qualify on automatic weapons only happens when you deploy or in an infantry unit) the rest of the Guard seldom sees that. So quit trying to plan for it year in and year out. it makes you, as a leader look like a joke. Worse when you plan this MUDA 10 or 12, find out months in advance that you are not getting the 8 millions rounds some jack wad at state G-3 promised, and you don't revise the training schedule to reflect that. People have to burn up their vacation for your lack of preparedness.
(1)
(0)
Suspended Profile
I'm in a NG brigade that accepted the yoke of longer weekend MUTAs, 3 week ATs already, since 2005. And it has been hell on any citizen soldier that has a full time, professional civilian job. It's hell on college students. It's hell on everyone except for those with often more accommodating state jobs, like prison guards, police officers, game wardens, AGR, Guard technicians -- all of whom suddenly suffer from attention deficit disorder whenever an m-day soldier with a real job says, "no, I can't just drop everything and go to a week-long event with little or no notice." But that has been the expectation for over a decade now.
It's hard to muster the enthusiasm when many of us walk away from existing MUTA 6s and 8s feeling like our time was thoroughly wasted. It's hard to muster enthusiasm when you spend three weeks justifying the existence of Camp Shelby or Camp Atterbury to do things you could well usually do at your home state training facility. Is this the goal, to give Camp Atterbury renewed purpose now that it's no longer a thriving mobilization platform? Put up a FOB or a BSB on one of their training sites instead of the state equivalent camp? Start cycling us through JRTC or NTC instead? Good gravy, I remember as a young PFC visiting Atterbury as part of a contingent from the 101st to help evaluate the Indiana Guard for their AT in the 1990s, and thinking what a hole it was. Let it return to being a hole! I digress.
And even if you think you're coming closer to having us hit assessed unit proficiency in the Guard by merely throwing more days at it, you're going to savage your officer and non-commissioned officer ranks. I am not lonely in the fact that I pay more in state taxes than I receive in Guard pay per year. I serve because I love serving, and I've been extremely lucky with employers supportive of that. But they can't afford to lose you for three or four weeks over the summer. They can't afford the encroachment if MUTA 6s and 8s become the norm. And if we have to choose between the two, most of us will choose the civilian job. I just wish it felt like that part of it *mattered* to the powers that be. The "citizen" component of being a citizen soldier.
Enough other people have raised the wastes of time in terms of mandatory training. I'd also like to mention the constant preparation for this or that IG, COMET, or whatever inspection. I work 50-60 hours a week in my civilian employment. Try calling the AGR folks after 1630 on a workday one time. The often holier-than-thou, at risk of making obscene blanket statements, AGR folks seem to make very little headway on any single task that would be meaningful to m-day when they arrive on Friday or Saturday morning. It's clear that many tasks simply wait for m-day, and drills become a soul crushing exercise in fulfilling various admin functions. I've been in a different MOS slot for two years now, and after reclassing finally at Fort Lee this past summer, I've realized that the ENTIRE time I've been in this slot, I have *yet* to perform any MOS related duties.
I know this General invariably must make his mark, but this is the wrong avenue to pursue. Eliminate the waste and abuse of our precious time first, *then* get back to us about extending the amount of time we have to give up with every confidence that they will simply abuse that time, too. Otherwise I think many of us will demanding not General under Honorable, but rather Honorable discharges to get from out from under yet more leadership that doesn't see the forest for the trees.
It's hard to muster the enthusiasm when many of us walk away from existing MUTA 6s and 8s feeling like our time was thoroughly wasted. It's hard to muster enthusiasm when you spend three weeks justifying the existence of Camp Shelby or Camp Atterbury to do things you could well usually do at your home state training facility. Is this the goal, to give Camp Atterbury renewed purpose now that it's no longer a thriving mobilization platform? Put up a FOB or a BSB on one of their training sites instead of the state equivalent camp? Start cycling us through JRTC or NTC instead? Good gravy, I remember as a young PFC visiting Atterbury as part of a contingent from the 101st to help evaluate the Indiana Guard for their AT in the 1990s, and thinking what a hole it was. Let it return to being a hole! I digress.
And even if you think you're coming closer to having us hit assessed unit proficiency in the Guard by merely throwing more days at it, you're going to savage your officer and non-commissioned officer ranks. I am not lonely in the fact that I pay more in state taxes than I receive in Guard pay per year. I serve because I love serving, and I've been extremely lucky with employers supportive of that. But they can't afford to lose you for three or four weeks over the summer. They can't afford the encroachment if MUTA 6s and 8s become the norm. And if we have to choose between the two, most of us will choose the civilian job. I just wish it felt like that part of it *mattered* to the powers that be. The "citizen" component of being a citizen soldier.
Enough other people have raised the wastes of time in terms of mandatory training. I'd also like to mention the constant preparation for this or that IG, COMET, or whatever inspection. I work 50-60 hours a week in my civilian employment. Try calling the AGR folks after 1630 on a workday one time. The often holier-than-thou, at risk of making obscene blanket statements, AGR folks seem to make very little headway on any single task that would be meaningful to m-day when they arrive on Friday or Saturday morning. It's clear that many tasks simply wait for m-day, and drills become a soul crushing exercise in fulfilling various admin functions. I've been in a different MOS slot for two years now, and after reclassing finally at Fort Lee this past summer, I've realized that the ENTIRE time I've been in this slot, I have *yet* to perform any MOS related duties.
I know this General invariably must make his mark, but this is the wrong avenue to pursue. Eliminate the waste and abuse of our precious time first, *then* get back to us about extending the amount of time we have to give up with every confidence that they will simply abuse that time, too. Otherwise I think many of us will demanding not General under Honorable, but rather Honorable discharges to get from out from under yet more leadership that doesn't see the forest for the trees.
CSM Charles Hayden
SGT Brian Kresge Very well expressed, weekend Soldiers are just that!
Big Army and congress are always trying to maintain readiness on the cheap! Even w/ the longevity of many politicians, they have no institutional memory and after every conflict, want to go to the cheap side again!
Big Army and congress are always trying to maintain readiness on the cheap! Even w/ the longevity of many politicians, they have no institutional memory and after every conflict, want to go to the cheap side again!
(0)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
My primary question is where are the additional days going to come from? I am not in the reserves yet, about to transition from active duty in a year, and therefore do not quite understand the MUTA system very well. Yet if you do the math even the one weekend a month two weeks a year leaves three required training days to place somewhere, if it were to go to 100 required training days and not encroach on civilian employment, meaning keeping it solely on weekends, you would be drilling virtually every weekend. I have long believed that reserve and national guard are the true patriots because they actually have something to leave behind and a schedule that gets interrupted where as its business as usual for us active duty folks. From my perspective this new requirement will work and raise readiness until retention and recruiting start failing and people start vacating the reserve units so they can feed their families
(1)
(0)
MAJ Tom Harper
Not every employer is going to be eager to release employees for more days of training. Some may decide that it isn't worth hiring NG or Reserve members.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google