Jump to content
The Great War (1914-1918) Forum

Remembered Today:

Re-enlistment of 'non efficient' soldiers


ss002d6252
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Admin

This is an item I stumbled across whilst looking for something else - it's the first time I can recall seeing anything in writing regarding the re-enlistment of men previously released as not likely to be efficient soldiers. It could certainly explain some of the re-enlistments I've seen in the past.

2 July 1915

post-51028-0-38793200-1415131829_thumb.j

Craig

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surprising at first sight, but using such men in static defences, guarding vulnerable points etc would have released efficient soldiers for use at the front. It is similar to the use of medically downgraded men for comparable purposes.

At that date, what would later become Labour Corps units were being formed as Labour battalions of infantry regiments.

Ron

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin

I agree - logically it makes perfect sense to free men up but it's the first time I can recall seeing it in writing.

Craig

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is an item I stumbled across whilst looking for something else - it's the first time I can recall seeing anything in writing regarding the re-enlistment of men previously released as not likely to be efficient soldiers. It could certainly explain some of the re-enlistments I've seen in the past.

2 July 1915

attachicon.gif2 July 1915.JPG

Craig

A very interesting piece, but was it actually put into place? I have recently done a trawl of those of the 22nd Bn, N.F., who aren't on the Medal Rolls and who were Discharged under KR Para(iii)c/Medically Unfit, with the added sentence "as not likely to become an efficient soldier" and of about 100 found todate, only one has re-enlisted and that was into the Labour Corps after its formation.

Considering the date of the article it was the Royal Defence Corps, which eventually took on the Home Defence role and many of the men in its ranks were former front line soldiers who had been medically downgraded and who would never return to the Front. So you have to wonder did this Corps take on previously Discharged men?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin

A very interesting piece, but was it actually put into place? I have recently done a trawl of those of the 22nd Bn, N.F., who aren't on the Medal Rolls and who were Discharged under KR Para(iii)c/Medically Unfit, with the added sentence "as not likely to become an efficient soldier" and of about 100 found todate, only one has re-enlisted and that was into the Labour Corps after its formation.

Considering the date of the article it was the Royal Defence Corps, which eventually took on the Home Defence role and many of the men in its ranks were former front line soldiers who had been medically downgraded and who would never return to the Front. So you have to wonder did this Corps take on previously Discharged men?

That's a point to consider re it's implementation - I've seen a few cases which may fall under this but not any great number which your research also seems to confirm, if it was implemented then there were no huge influx of men. The RDC would certainly fit the job description of these men.

Craig

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

A very interesting piece, but was it actually put into place? I have recently done a trawl of those of the 22nd Bn, N.F., who aren't on the Medal Rolls and who were Discharged under KR Para(iii)c/Medically Unfit, with the added sentence "as not likely to become an efficient soldier" and of about 100 found todate, only one has re-enlisted and that was into the Labour Corps after its formation.

Considering the date of the article it was the Royal Defence Corps, which eventually took on the Home Defence role and many of the men in its ranks were former front line soldiers who had been medically downgraded and who would never return to the Front. So you have to wonder did this Corps take on previously Discharged men?

I have a few men who are listed in a 1914 Star roll as "discharged Medically Unfit" very early in the war, but are absent from the V&BWM roll, should i be searching for them on the RDC roll? I thought yu qualified for the Victory medal if you received a Star?

Too early for SWB, but their MIC only gives the one medal, is that right or am i missing them somewhere else?

Derek.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Derek

I'm not a medal expert by any means, but I think there were separate MIC for the Stars and for the BWM and VM. Have you tried looking for another card?

Ron

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can see that many medical situations would compromise the ability to be an efficient soldier.

But the category also seems to be used as catch-all where all definable medical conditions have been exhausted. I would be interested if anyone has any wartime figures, all I can offer is the 10-year period before.

20141224_222102_resized_zpsc1fe6ce6.jpg

Although Item 20 covers intelligence, I suspect that non-efficient soldiering could also include a less tangeable "dullness" aluded to in this WW2 publication.

20141224_222131_resized_zpsd9666192.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin

General Annual Return 1913-1919

Men discharged as not likely become efficent

Yr to 30 Sep 15
107,229 men
Yr to 30 Sep 16
29,879 men
Yr to 30 Sep 17
2,188 men
Yr to 30 Sep 18
749 men

Craig

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...