General duties

This is the general discussion area of the canadiansoldiers.com website; a forum in which issues pertaining to 20th Century military history from a British and Canadian perspective can be discussed freely. Posters are asked to please do others the courtesy of posting with their name rather than a pseudonym.

General duties

Steve F
Steve F

January 1st, 2011, 8:31 pm #1

What type of soldier would have had "nature of employment" in his service book listed as "general duties"? The soldier's service number unfortunately does not connect him to a specific unit or trade.
Quote
Share

Joined: April 7th, 2007, 11:57 pm

January 2nd, 2011, 9:17 pm #2

Just your standard rifleman I think. Seen commonly in reinforcement info for D-Day etc., specialists like mortarmen, signallers, Dvr/Mechs, etc. are counted seperately but a large number of GD personnel counted as well. Also seen fairly frequently in personnel files, those not considered suitable for trades training were classed GD and many of those remustered from other arms were classed GD Rifleman.

Kevin Lambie
http://www.reginarifles.ca
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 2nd, 2004, 8:58 pm

January 3rd, 2011, 3:13 am #3

What type of soldier would have had "nature of employment" in his service book listed as "general duties"? The soldier's service number unfortunately does not connect him to a specific unit or trade.
Perhaps Crerar, Foulkes, Sansom, Burns and Simonds had that description in their service books, too ... ... sorry, couldn't resist ...
Quote
Like
Share

Steve F
Steve F

January 5th, 2011, 1:59 am #4

Just your standard rifleman I think. Seen commonly in reinforcement info for D-Day etc., specialists like mortarmen, signallers, Dvr/Mechs, etc. are counted seperately but a large number of GD personnel counted as well. Also seen fairly frequently in personnel files, those not considered suitable for trades training were classed GD and many of those remustered from other arms were classed GD Rifleman.

Kevin Lambie
http://www.reginarifles.ca
That's what I was hoping to hear. I suspected that might have been the case but the other infantry service books that I have seen listed training or trades that indicated what the soldier's job was. General duties is just so vague.
Quote
Share

Steve F
Steve F

January 7th, 2011, 5:21 am #5

He was indeed an infanteer. I went to the LER museum today and was lucky enough to learn that the soldier in question was a member of that unit at the end of the SWW. Sometimes even with the service book in hand it's still difficult to get any real understanding of the person's activities during the war. Obviously they were not all maintained to the same standard.
Quote
Share