Volume 11, No. 49, August 10, 2006
Quicklinks
to Letters
Reservations about medal process
Valuable source of manpower
Contract makes mess of dining-in plans
This outfit just doesn’t cut it
MPs expert in self defence
HOW
TO GET A LETTER PUBLISHED
Reservations about medal process
AN someone, perhaps from Honours and Awards, please explain to me why currently serving Army Reserve members have to apply for their Australian Defence Medal when ARA members do not?
Can PMKeys not be interrogated for the same information regardless of whether a soldier is ARes or ARA?
Maj Andrew Herbert
LWC (Tas)
Anglesea Barracks
THE process of assessing the entitlement of reserve members (active or inactive) to the Australian Defence Medal (ADM) is a more lengthy and complex one due to possible breaks in their service.
It is therefore a requirement that you apply for the ADM by completing an AD 497 and supply additional supporting documentation when sending your application to DHA. To expedite this process, it is suggested that you may provide documentation signed by your unit CO which will certify your reserve service.
Currently, PMKeyS does not record efficient service for reservists. Any shortfalls in the PMKeyS capturing process are being investigated.
Application forms and further information on the application process are available on the Directorate of Honours and Awards web site at http://www.defence.gov.au/dpe/dpe_site/honours_awards/ or by phoning 1800 111 321.
TOP
Valuable source of manpower
- I READ with interest the letter from Maj Swinsburg regarding employment of ARes soldiers and the reply from Lt-Col Davis (Army, July 13).
Sad, really, to see that the mentality of maligning reserve soldiers is alive and kicking.
Reserve soldiers have participated, in the way suggested by Maj Swinsburg, for a considerable time now. In the first deployment to East Timor, for instance, reservists were used as round-outs for regular units.
They have provided security for the Olympic and Commonwealth Games and currently continue to serve within the ARA in a number of roles, including training and development roles, that release full-time soldiers to concentrate on “war fighting” operations.
Indeed it would be interesting to see just how many reserve soldiers are currently employed on CFTS at the present time.
Given the commitments of reservists to full-time civilian employment and families, on top of which they impose their reserve activities, I am sure that they would be happy to participate in operations such as Op Astute, if that is what Army had in mind as an appropriate role.
Finally I suspect that the $950m quoted as being spent on the reserve is really a pittance that is not even going to go part of the way towards helping the full-time component of Army fill the gap that will be left if there is no reserve in the future.
Maj S. Nicholson
UNSWR
Adamstown
TOP
Contract makes mess of dining-in plans
RECENT JNCO training in the Puckapunyal area for 26 Tpt Sqn included a regimental dinning-in night to expose the young corporals in the squadron to the customs and traditions on such an occasion.
The night was a huge success: the squadron’s catering section provided an exceptional meal and all troops supplied members to assist in the set up and conduct of the evening. I would like to thank Army School of Tpt and Ordnance Road Tpt Wing for the use the Tobruk Barracks Gymnasium as the venue.
However, in terms of the logistic organisation of the venue everything did not run so smoothly. In recent years, Defence has contracted out many ancillary services, including management of messes. Previously Sergeants Messes were managed by SAMs and the services were provided by uniformed stewards and cooks.
My issue is not with the CSP process but with the lack of flexibility within the contracts that determine the level of service that is provided. Originally my intent was to conduct the dining-in night in the Tobruk Barracks Sergeants Mess (TBSM), of which I am the DPMC. This would have exposed all the potential SNCOs to what is required by them at a regimental dinner in an environment that was realistic. Due to the current contract this was unable to be achieved.
The unit’s cooks were to purchase and prepare the meal, with stewards and GDs provided by the contractor. PMC approval for the use the mess had been granted.
However, when the squadron caterer contacted the contract provider, CSIG and JLU-V, to gain approval for the function, the contractor would not allow food from a different source to enter the mess.
Due to this unforeseen contract issue, the TBSM could not be utilised and the only other facility that could be used was the gymnasium. As an SSM, I find this situation totally unacceptable as it has a severe impact on the training of personnel who are the future of the Army.
It is my understanding that the contract for CSP is under review; however, this has indicated to me how we have lost the flexibility to train and motivate JNCOs towards our customs and traditions within the Sergeants Mess.
It should be noted that during this unacceptable incident that the staff of the TBSM were helpful and tried to assist within the current guidelines of the contact. The incident has certainly highlighted to me that, at a minimum, there is a requirement for the mess committee to be involved in or at least consulted on contract issues inherent to messes. Simply put, I cannot conduct a training dinner for my unit unless the unit pays a huge food and labour cost to the contractor.
I would be interested to see who else is having problems with these types of contracts.
WO2 Dean Maher
26 Tpt Sqn
Puckapunyal
Leigh McJames, A/DGRB, responds:
I APPRECIATE the feedback from WO2 Maher and would like to clarify the methods by which DSG might be able to assist in meeting his goal of conducting a regimental dinner for his unit’s JNCO in the future.
WO2 Maher is quite correct in noting that contracted kitchens are not available for use by ADF cooks and stewards.
These facilities are provided to the garrison services contractor to deliver catering to Defence, and the contractor is required to take full responsibility for ration acquittal, food safety and hygiene, and catering standards in the kitchens and messes.
In addition, the catering contractor is required to meet strict legislative requirements that ensure food and occupational safety standards are met for activities in their kitchens.
The short term use of messes by Army catering staff reduce the ability of contractors to meet their obligations.
I recommend that for future JNCO training dinners, 26 Tpt Sqn consult with local DSG staff to plan the function in the appropriate mess, using the discretionary rations allocated to 26 Tpt Sqn for official functions, and the catering labour available under the contract. This solution will also remove the burden of cooking from the unit and allow the unit caterer and his staff to enjoy the function as well.
TOP
This outfit just doesn’t cut it
I AM writing to find out if anyone else is having dramas with the style and cut of the new cams that have been introduced.
Being 160cm tall and a size 85S in the old-style cams, I’m having trouble with the way the shirt is designed. It seems to fit perfect up the top half of my body but when it reaches my hips it goes skin tight.
I have tried the next two sizes up – 90S fits loosely up the top but goes tight again around the hips and 95S is too big for someone my size as the arms are too long and the chest is too baggy.
I will either have to lose some weight around my hips, keep wearing the old style, have a growth spurt (at 30 years old I don’t think so) or get them altered, which I have never done in the 10 years I have been in the Army.
Out of interest, I wanted to know if any other females were having dramas so I posted this question on my local notice board and have received emails and phone calls from other females with the same problem.
The clothing store manager at Watsonia sent me an email saying that her tailor predicted that this would be the case because “they are not going to fit the majority of females as they are designed for the male physique”.
I have spoken with my RQ about this issue and he has supported me all the way to fill out a RODUM on this matter. The RSM has posted on the notice board that she will help me draft the RODUM as well.
I’m sure when they made these cams they took measurements to cater for all the different physiques of people whether male, female, small or big and did an average – or am I wrong?
If anyone else out there is having these issues, email me at Kim.Clarke@defence.gov.au or if you feel that you are dissatisfied with the fit send in a RODUM.
Cpl Kimmy Clarke
DFSS
Simpson Barracks
Lt-Col J. Walk, SO1 Log Ops AHQ, responds:
CPL Clarke, thank you for your email. I have requested DMO to investigate this issue on your behalf.
The explanation that has been provided is that the new DPCU-NIR jacket has been designed to be longer in the torso compared to the superseded DPCU jacket. This has been in response to user feedback on the superseded DPCU jacket.
An additional button has been added to the bottom of the shirt to account for this additional length. This gives the effect of the DPCU-NIR jacket being more fitted around the hips compared to the superseded jacket. DMO are investigating a solution to the problem you raised, while simultaneously ensuring that the jacket does not flare too much.
I encourage you and other members to continue to submit RODUMs. Any additional information that can be provided to DMO will ensure a more informed solution.
TOP
MPs expert in self defence
RE THE article on Military Unarmed Combat (MUC) or Military Self Defence (MSD), in the July 13 issue, let me be the first RACMP member to put my hand up for such a course; especially since it’s backed by the CDF and will be taught by the all-new ADF martial arts experts.
I find it odd though, that the role will be handed over to the RAAMC (Medics), in particular PTIs at a later date. One would think it more appropriate to hand the role over to seasoned practitioners within RACMP.
MUC/MSD may come as a sigh of relief, but no suprise to RACMP. Little credit is given in your article and in general to the members of RACMP who have tirelessly provided such training over the past few years to the ADF when nothing else existed or was put in place to the scale that RACMP have established.
RACMP members have travelled the breadth of this country, almost always at short notice and having minimal planning time and resources to conduct this training. By doing this, I believe that RACMP has given the ADF its current Defensive Tactics (DT) capability, which can only be enhanced by the welcome MUC/MSD courses.
DT is essentially a system designed for RACMP. This is evident by the greater number of restraint and holding techniques, which competently and legally assist those personnel that are trained. I believe this is why RACMP is so heavily relied on to provide training to soldiers prior to deploying, and because of the established Use of Force Continuum that forms its foundation.
I believe the contrasts between the two systems will be evident in future MUC/MSD courses and their subsequent use by those individuals. Most martial arts or modified MSD systems employ a number of attack, strike, and disabling techniques as apposed to RACMP DT. Is this training in line with the current deployment tempo on peace support ops where we are heavily monitored and accountable to the public eye via the TV camera?
RACMP DTs has been the knowledge base to teach ADF troops as part of force preparation for deployments and in barracks training for:
- Op Relex 1, 2 and newly re named Op Resolute,
- Brigade/Battalion level population protection and control exercises,
- AMTG (now Overwatch Battlegroup – West), and
Ready Battalion Group, Ready Company Group continuation training.
In line with this new training, I hope that RACMP is also upgrading its current DT doctrine.
Together with this, would MUC/MSD instructors consider joining RACMP in order to assist us while on patrol when we have to respond and deal with the fruits of their labour? By this, I mean intoxicated MUC/MSD-qualified soldiers exchanging attack, strike or disabling techniques with each other on a Saturday night at the local night spot.
Cpl Mark Nelson
1 MP Bn
Oakey
Maj Travis Faure, MUC Cell OC, responds:
WHILE there may be some techniques and skills that are the same between Military Self Defence and the RACMP Defensive Tactics training, the two courses have been designed for very different purposes and participants.
The MSD course has been designed for all Army personnel and its core teachings cover the use of less than lethal force by soldiers in an operational environment. Its philosophy is primarily defensive.
The DT course’s core audience is Service Police and it is taught as part of the Service Police Basic Course. It was not designed with all corps in mind. DT provides Service Police with verbal and physical measures that enhance their operational safety while undertaking law enforcement tasks. Its core teaching is based on the use of less than lethal force to effect and maintain control while maintaining a safe environment for all members involved. As you identified, over the years DT skills have had wider application within Defence and this has seen Service Police deliver modified parts of the DT skill to other military members. While DT and MSD use similar techniques the two training packages have very different aims and outcomes.
I am sure that soldiers who received the DT training have appreciated it immensely. I can understand some of your frustration as I, and all of our other qualified CQF/MSD instructors, have also been providing training for many years but without a specific MUC Cell base and specific postings. However, we have all enjoyed fulfilling this demanding role, often using some of our own time and always in addition to the duties of our posted role. I applaud the CA’s foresight and innovation in recognising the uniform need for this training and the establishment of its own cell.
However, it does concern me that some RACMP personnel have been unaware of the MSD courses available to soldiers of all corps when doing their research over the last few years into what training was already available within Army. Hopefully the launch of the new MUC Cell will avoid this scenario in the future.
It is also necessary to clear up the misapprehension that MSD is new to the ADF. This is not the case. Army has been formally training members in Military Unarmed Combat (MUC) since 1953. These courses have been available to SF and infantry units.
With the development and implementation of Close Quarter Fighting (CQF) the training was expanded to include all arms’ corps in 2000. In 2002, MSD was developed by the SF Training Centre to cater for all corps. To date there have been 28 MSD courses conducted across Australia and about 500 personnel, including Navy and Air Force members, have been trained.
Self-defence training under various names has a long and strong history in Army. It also seems that there is a preconception that the MSD course is a pseudo martial arts course or similar and that the instructors (or exponents) will be “new ADF martial arts experts”. This is not the case.
The current qualified CQF/MSD senior instructors have been conducting this training and participating in ongoing professional training and the development of TMPs since the early 1990s. They would qualify as “seasoned practitioners”. They are a professional group of leading military self-defence instructors, some with many years of civilian martial arts experience, however this is not a prerequisite for learning CQF/MSD. It is not civilian martial art training, it is military operationally focused self-defence skills for all soldiers.
The question as to why the CA has chosen PTIs to ultimately provide this training in the future is answered through the audience the course is designed for: all corps.
All units require this training. All units have access to PTIs. PTIs already have the underlying structure and professional development required as trainers of our soldiers.
The CA’s choice of PTIs to deliver this training is part of the larger strategic plan to ensure our soldiers are “hardened soldiers” and all roles in the ADF are operationally focused.
In your last point you bring up the question of how the RACMP deals with intoxicated individuals who have received MSD training. My first thought is that two Australian soldiers would mediate prior to any conflict and that a sober exponent would be able to deal with an intoxicated member.
Towards that end, I encourage all RACMP members to undertake an MSD course, as it is all-corps and soon to be a reality of all soldier training. .
TOP
|
