Efficiency Medal - Territorial Force 1908 - 1921

[Brian Wolfe]

Hello Everyone,

Here is a photo of my first Geo. V Territorial Force Efficiency Medal 1908 - 1921. It is the first issue of Geo. V.

I hope you like it. I'll post the reverse next.

Cheers

Brian

[Graham Stewart]

Who's the recipient, which should be on the rim.

Graham.

[Brian Wolfe]

Hello,

Here is the reverse. I believe that in 1921 they dropped the word "FORCE" from the reverse.

This medal was awarded for 12 years service in the Territorial Forces.

I forgot to list the recipient in my first post.

820804 DVR. G. WILLIAMS R.F.A.

I've never read why they struck these medals in an oval shape. Anyone know the reason?

Cheers

Brian

[Brian Wolfe]

Who's the recipient, which should be on the rim.

Graham.

Hi Graham,

Do I feel stupid! I knew I had forgotten something and by the time I had realized what I forgotten I had gone out of the program.

Cheers

Brian

[Graham Stewart]

Now curiosity has the better of me here as the number on the medal isn't one that you'd normally find on a T.F.E.M., as prior to 1917 they only had four figure numbers. Now as this has a six figure number 820804, it's been issued post 1917 and it's recipient was actually serving with the North Midland Division Ammunition Column, which was made up of men from the Royal Field Artillery(T.F.).

Graham.

[Graham Stewart]

Brian,

Looked on the National Archive online Medal Index Cards and your man served during the Great War and the '820804' number is a post 1917 T.F. number for the North Midland Division. It also gives us his pre-1917 number which is '17'. See the link below;-

http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/documen...p;resultcount=2

However this '17' may not be his original number on enlistment into the T.F. as the Ammunition Columns were formed from all of the Batteries serving in the Brigade and as such all were renumbered on the formation of the Column. The only reason I know this is because my own grandfather was in an Ammo Column and he too was renumbered on it's formation and again in 1917, but I didn't know of his original number until reading his service papers.

Graham.

[bigjarofwasps]

Bit of useless information here, I joined the TA about 18 months or so ago. We recently had new colours given to us, by the Queen. It was during this parade that I noticed several of the old & bolds of the Regiment had two TA LSGC medals, I`m curious to know how this could happen, and not a bar be issued instead. Can anyone shine any light on this for me?

[Graham Stewart]

Not a 100% certain of this but wasn't the distinguishing medals for the T.A., R.N.R. and R.A.F.V.R. replaced some years ago by a single "Reserve Forces Medal". I'm ex-T.A. myself and was awarded the Territorial Efficiency Medal, which carries the wording "Territorial" on a scroll above the leaves.

Now technically whether or not you're entitled to wear both would be a matter for Queens Regulations, but an officer of the T.A. who was to receive a 'T.E.M.', while serving as another rank, would be allowed to wear it when commisioned, until such time that he was due to be awarded his bar. He would then have to replace the T.E.M. with a 'Territorial Decoration. and Bar', as he's not allowed to wear both.

Graham.

[Graham Stewart]

The T.E.M. as it was until 1992 when it was replaced. Post 1968 the bar had "T.A. & V.R." but seems to have been replaced by the traditional T.E.M.

Graham.

[Graham Stewart]

The Volunteer Services Medal, which replaced the T.E.M. in 1992. Now here's a poser my medal (T.E.M.) wasn't awarded until 1998 and yet by all accounts it's this medal I should have been awarded?? Was this the other medal being worn by the 'old & bold' among your T.A. colleagues??

Graham.

[bigjarofwasps]

Yes the above two are the ones, these guys were wearing. I must admit to the untrained eye it looked like this guys were old campaigners when the golden jubilee was added. I`m not dissing them in any way, if I had two LSGCs and was allowed to wear them together I would.

[Brian Wolfe]

Brian,

Looked on the National Archive online Medal Index Cards and your man served during the Great War and the '820804' number is a post 1917 T.F. number for the North Midland Division. It also gives us his pre-1917 number which is '17'. See the link below;-

http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/documen...p;resultcount=2

However this '17' may not be his original number on enlistment into the T.F. as the Ammunition Columns were formed from all of the Batteries serving in the Brigade and as such all were renumbered on the formation of the Column. The only reason I know this is because my own grandfather was in an Ammo Column and he too was renumbered on it's formation and again in 1917, but I didn't know of his original number until reading his service papers.

Graham.

Many thanks for all of this information Graham.

Cheers

Brian

[Graham Stewart]

Bigjar,

I think the only way that they could end up wearing two medals, of exactly the same purpose is because the bar is no longer available for the T.E.M., as it's now obsolete. To get the V.S.M., they would have to put in an additional ten years efficient service on top of the previous twelve years for the T.E.M., so in effect they must have had twenty two years T.A. service.

However there used to be a ruling whereby if you actually did 'active service' as a member of the T.A., your 'active service' time would be doubled towards your T.A. service. For instance if you did a six months or one years active service with the regulars, then you would infact have accumulated 1 & 2 years T.A. service respectively.

This same system was used during both the Great War and WWII, so that a T.F. lad surving the fours years carnage on the Western Front would in effect have done eight years accumulated service.

Confusing eh?

Graham.

[bigjarofwasps]

Bigjar,

I think the only way that they could end up wearing two medals, of exactly the same purpose is because the bar is no longer available for the T.E.M., as it's now obsolete. To get the V.S.M., they would have to put in an additional ten years efficient service on top of the previous twelve years for the T.E.M., so in effect they must have had twenty two years T.A. service.

However there used to be a ruling whereby if you actually did 'active service' as a member of the T.A., your 'active service' time would be doubled towards your T.A. service. For instance if you did a six months or one years active service with the regulars, then you would infact have accumulated 1 & 2 years T.A. service respectively.

This same system was used during both the Great War and WWII, so that a T.F. lad surving the fours years carnage on the Western Front would in effect have done eight years accumulated service.

Confusing eh?

Graham.

Graham,

One of the guys, in my squadron has served 35 years in the TA!!!!!!! I think he`s the longest serving guy in the Regiment.

Re the double time thing, yes I`d heard of that, but I don`t think its used any more is it? I wonder where this idea came from in the first place? Any ideas?

Gordon.

[Graham Stewart]

Gordon,

Not actually sure where the double of service for T.A. lads came from so I'll check my T.F.Regulations for 1908 & 1912, although any later Army Orders regarding this won't be included. I'm certain though that when I was in from 1986 - 2000 that the doubling rule was still included as we had some members who had served in Northern Ireland and 1st Gulf War, who also received the G.S.M. and Gulf Medals, but also doubled their service for it.

Going back to the T.E.M., it wasn't really regarded as a long service medal as some lads had been in a lot longer than myself, but had no T.E.M.. This was because for one reason or another they hadn't been returned "efficient" during their terms of service. It was something like 12years service, 12 annual camps or courses in lieu and returned "efficient" on no less than 10 occassions during that period. I can't remember the exact terms, but it was something like that or 10 camps and 12 years efficient.

Now my understanding is that the V.S.M. is for only ten years service without being returned as "efficient", which would indeed place it as a "long service decoration", rather than an efficiency medal. Looking back on it my own T.E.M. really is something of a rarity and must rank as one of the last ever given out, plus it had be made obsolete in 1992 and mine came along in 1998!!!

All of this is actually covered under Queens Regulations for the T.A., so if you can get hold of a copy you'll find some interesting reading in them.

Graham.

Edited September 11, 2007 by Graham Stewart

[bigjarofwasps]

Gordon,

I'm certain though that when I was in from 1986 - 2000 that the doubling rule was still included as we had some members who had served in Northern Ireland and 1st Gulf War, who also received the G.S.M. and Gulf Medals, but also doubled their service for it.

Graham.

Thats really is interesting. I know any time spent on tour counts towards your bounty & that the MATTS (old ITD`s) you do prior to deploying also counts towards your bounty..

Gordon.

[Tony Farrell]

Anyone fulfilling the eligibility criteria for the Efficiency Medal (Territorial) [EM(T)] prior to 1st April 1999 received that medal. After that date the Volunteer Reserves Service Medal became current. The only personnel who had a choice of medals were commissioned ranks who had five years' reckonable time served prior to 1 Apl 99. This only concerned the TD/VRSM changeover, not the EM(T).

Full Time Reserve Service (formerly S Type Engagement) did/does not count 'double war service' time for either the EM(T) or VRSM. The double time rule only concerned auxiliary service in British West Africa and fully mobilised service during both the Great War and WWII.

Whilst service in the ranks counted towards the Efficiency Decoration, there was no TD 'exchange programme' for EM(T) holders upon commission per se. Twelve years commissioned service subsequent to the award of the EM(T) would result in the award of the Efficiency Decoration (TD). Both awards could be worn, though I seem to remember the eighteen year bar for the medal having to be surrendered (though retained) as full periods of qualifying service had to be met for both awards to be worn, i.e. no overlapping of qualifying time: twenty-four years. I also understand that the option was there for the commissioned EM(T) holder to exchange his medal for the decoration and bar at the eighteen year point in lieu of a bar for the medal. [i don't have my regs and notes to hand, so I'm working from memory.]

I have also seen several instances of medal groups containing two EM(T)s - both Territorial and T&AVR (and vice versa). These combinations reflected the changeover period when suitably qualified recipients of either medal exchanged two bars for the (then) 'new' medal. I am also aware of one officer wearing two TDs on parade! One T&AVR and the other Territorial. Whether this was an erroneous award in lieu of the more logical bar to the award or a genuine example of 'grandfather's rights' (choice) for officers is yet to be ascertained, though I suspect the latter.

As has already been stated, the medals are for reckonable service, i.e. certified efficient with courses and bounties earned. Simply turning up for ten/twelve years was not enough - as more than a few have found out the hard way.

Edited September 12, 2007 by Tony Farrell

[Graham Stewart]

Tony,

Many thanks for your brilliant input into current regulations regarding the old T.E.M. and new V.S.M. Going back to 'doubling' of service, I can see exactly what you're saying regarding 'S' Type engagements, but how does that stand if you're actually 'embodied' as it used to be known, or mobilised for Colour service?? I can remember T.A. Ambulance units being called up en-bloc during the 1st Gulf War and my own R.E.M.E., T.A. was also due to be embodied to go. Surely in cases like this where you have no choice in the matter, whereby 'S' Types do, you are technically on a "war footing".

Going back to what you were saying about the T.E.M. and long term T.A. members failing to qualify it also worked the other way, if you didn't apply for it. Years ago at a T.A. Camp at Stirling, I was billetted with lads from our Newcastle platoons and among them was two very 'old & bold types'. We got talking as you do and it came to my attention that one, a Newcastle Breweries drayman, had done nearly twenty years and the other about fifiteen. So I mentioned about being due to a bar to their T.E.M.'s, to which they replied they hadn't got one.. So I said 'you mustn't have been returned 'efficient' and missed a boatload of camps'. Big mistake as these lads had never missed a camp since joining and never missed a MTD and received a Bounty every year. I then had to explain to them the terms regarding the T.E.M. and that they both should have received it a long time ago. Turns out their unit Clerk wasn't particularly bothered about this sort of thing hence them missing out. I spoke to our Chief Clerk who was a lovely bloke and he got onto the case and these lads got a well deserved T.E.M. and bar in one case.

Graham.

[Tony Farrell]

Efficiency Medal (Territorial)

RW 23 Sep 1930 clause 13

It is ordained that an officer of the aforesaid forces who has in virtue of service in the ranks thereof been awarded the Medal or Clasps shall, if The Efficiency Decoration be subsequently conferred upon him, not be called upon to surrender the Medal or Clasps, but shall not be permitted to wear them until such a time as he has completed the full periods of qualifying service in respect of both the Decoration and the Medal or Clasps.

AO 16 Feb 1955 Part II - The Efficiency Medal (Territorial) para. 9

The Efficiency Medal, with or without clasp(s), may be worn together with The Efficiency Decoration, with or without clasp(s), only if the full qualifying service in respect of each award has been completed separately.

Efficiency Decoration

RW 23 Sep 1930 clause 14

It is ordained that the recipient of any Long Service & Good Conduct or Efficiency Medal or Clasps for service in the ranks shall not be permitted to wear such medals or clasps with The Efficiency Decoration until he has completed the full periods of qualifying service in respect of each Medal or Clasp and Decoration.

RW 17 Nov 1952 clause 12

It is ordained that service shall not be reckoned as qualifying service for The Efficiency Decoration if such service has already been reckoned towards any Long Service & Good Conduct or Efficiency Medal or Clasps except as provided in the regulations hereinafter mentioned.

AO71 Jun 1953 - Regulations for the Efficiency Decoration para. 6

The following will not count as qualifying service:-

(g) Any service which has been recognised by a Decoration or Clasp thereto for long and efficient service or an award for long and efficient service.

(h) Any service which has been recognised by a Long Service & Good Conduct Medal or clasp thereto or The Efficiency Medal or clasps(s) thereto [13, 14] or the Cadet Forces Medal or Clasp(s) thereto.

Notes to Regulations

13. Officers awarded The Efficiency Medal (Territorial) and/or clasps(s) under the terms of Army Order 73 of 1946 may, however, be awarded the Decoration and/or clasp(s) in lieu provided the service to be rewarded does not consist entirely of service in the ranks.

14. Service in the ranks which has been or can be rewarded by any Efficiency Medal and/or clasp(s) will not count towards the Decoration and/or clasp(s).

CONCLUSION

That's all the information contained within the warrants and regulations apropos the content of my and previous posts. There is absolutely no reference to exchanging clasps for medals or medals for decorations. Note 13 is interesting and provides the only clue to some unit practices that have obviously occurred over time. Ergo:

i) Personnel with the majority of time served in the ranks who subsequently gain commissions are awarded the EM(T) and subsequent clasps.

ii) Officers with sufficient time elapsed since their service in the ranks may gain the TD extra to their EM(T).

iii) Such double recipients can only wear both awards once full periods of qualifying service have elapsed, e.g. 12+12. Quite how clasps fit in this equation is not clear, but one can only (logically) assume that clasps subsequent to the award of an EM(T) be forfeited in lieu of a subsequent TD.

That's how I see it and it's not that far off my initial post on this subject. AS for T&AVR/Territorial combinations of both medal and decoration? There's nothing in the regulations to cater for such anomalies, though broken service would be a logical answer.

Edited September 12, 2007 by Tony Farrell

[Tony Farrell]

Graham, embodied service only counts for single qualifying time for the VRSM: (A maximum of) Five years aggregated service in a permanent service capacity, i.e. regular engagement following call out, or voluntary full-time service with the regular forces counts as single qualifying service. Why it simply cannot be doubled up is beyond me. Whilst service during Granby certainly counted towards the respective reserve forces medals, it also only counted for single time.

Regulations and award criteria for medals are invariably baffling - even to the initiated - and none more so than long service awards - in particular to the non-regular forces. The regulations have, however, been somewhat simplified by the introduction of the VRSM. The old system - with maybe the exception of the 'one-size-fits-all' Air Efficiency Award - was rather anachronistic and reflected the nation's status at the time of the awards' inception. The regulations had to be complicated to cover a wide array of application eventualities: transferred service, aggregated service, broken service, overseas auxiliary service, commissioned service etc. Subsequent amendments to the regulations and warrants as the Empire shrank made them slightly easier to understand, but pouring through the small print is still an eye-watering ordeal.

I have some sympathy with the clerks. Half the people serving on awards committees don't have a bloody clue as to precedence and form, never mind the shiny arses! I once met an old & bold stacker at my brother's old squadron. Despite over thirty years' service, he only had his Efficiency Medal and one clasp and seemed quite baffled as to my inquiry regarding 'the rest'.

[Michael Johnson]

I have a bit of a puzzler. Years ago my aunt gave me her husband's medals: CVSM, War Medal, 1953 Coronation, and Canada Decoration, GVIR issue.

Later I applied for his service record, and was somewhat astonished to see that he was entitled to an Efficiency Medal, back in the 1930s, when he was in an Auxiliary Squadron of the RCAF. He volunteered for the Active Force RCAF in 1939 (new number) and post-war joined the Regular RCAF (new number again). He was killed in an accident while on leave shortly before he would have retired.

My aunt said she remembered a green and yellow ribbon, but knew nothing about another medal.

Now as I recall, the date for the EM was 1934, which meant that his previous service with the Queen's York Rangers (Militia) must have been counted. Here's the problem - on one set of enlistment papers he shows the QYR, but on a second it is modified by "Cadets".

He was born in 1908, so unless he joined the Militia aged 14, he could not have had enough service to qualify for the EM in 1934. I'm sure Cadet service wouldn't count.

But his CD suggests that they counted his service from 1939 - otherwise he would have qualified for the EM when he had 12 years in, and then he would have either been working on a 10 year clasp to the EM or the CD. He would have had enough time to qualify for both medals.

Edited September 18, 2007 by Michael Johnson

[Tony Farrell]

I'm not sure I'm reading this right. 1934? You might have misread the entitlement. As a pre-war auxiliary in the RCAF he would have been eligible for the Efficiency Medal regardless of subsequent transfer to the regular RCAF and would have received the medal at close of play by default of double time war service. His CD probably covers his extra service upon re-enlistment. The devil is in the detail here. Need more info: dates, age, etc. I'm pretty sure (don't have regs handy) that cadet service was inadmissible. 1934 sounds more like an enlistment in the RCAF Aux.

[Michael Johnson]

Tony, I'll have to dig out his file, but the notation for the EM is definitely mid 30s, as I was speculating whether he would have received a GVR or GVIR issue.

I believe Bill was an original with 10 Sqn., (raised 1932 - now 400 Squadron).

If he was awarded the Medal in error, one would think there would be a corresponding entry cancelling it. And he definitely had the ribbon at one point.

[iansenior]

I am curious to know if this officer would be, in terms of time requirement, eligible to qualify for the tfem.

Service in the Territorial force from 20-11-1912 to 26-08-1920.

17th birthday 18-05-1913.

Embodied for WW1 service 5-08-1914...served in France , then Palestine & Egypt

Disembodied 26-06-1919.

Resigned commission 26-08-1920.

Should anyone be knowledgible re this particular case,& how it matches the criteria -12 years service with wartime service counting double-, kindly inform by way of a reply post

[Herman]

Hello fellow GMIC collectors,

I recently bought at e-bay a medal set of 6 of Major George N.F. Powell.

His service details are (mostly from the London Gazette)

25 july 1912 promoted to Lieutenant in the 6th (City of London) Battalion, The London Regiment (Rifles), Territorial Force (LG 4 oct 1912)

5 august 1914 promoted to Captain still serving in the same unit. (LG 15 sept 1914)

15 oct 1915 Mentioned in Despatches (LG 1 jan 1916)

1 april 1916 promoted to Major, still serving in the same unit as above, dtd 8 march 1917 (LG 13 apr 1917)

1 april 1918 granted a temporary commission as Captain (RAF, Administration branch) and to be Honorary Major (LG 1 july 1919)

18 june 1919 relinquishes his commission on acc of ill-health caused by wounds and retains the rank of Major in the 6th Bn London Regt. (LG 18 june 1919)

23 june 1921 Major (late 6th Bn Lond. R.) in the General List, Infantry. (LG 22 june 1921)

9 oct 1926 resigns commission in the General List, Infantry, appointed to the Res. of Off. (LG 8 oct 1926)

9 oct 1926 Res. of Off., to be Major (Kings Royal Rifle Corps) with seniority 22nd sept 1923.

11 sept 1945 (Army Serial Nr. 111098), having exceeded the age limit of liability to recall, relinquishes his commission, retaining the rank of Major KRRC (regular Army Reserve of Officers, Infantry). (10th Volunteer Battalion, the Kings Royal Rifle Corps)

I enclose a picture of his six medals. From left to right: 1914-15 star, British War Medal, Victory medal with MiD, Defence Medal 1939-1945, War Medal 1939-1945 and the Jubilee medal 1935.

I am a bit new to this subject. So I have a question:

With abovementioned service in years, is major George Powell entitled to a TD, VD or ED?

Can the experts please enlighten me.

Lots of thanks in advance,

Herman