# CFRC- Reorientating letter



## Jamzes (15 Aug 2014)

So my recruiter called me today to follow up on my file. She told me that my three choices were not approved for me (Pilot,  Controller etc.). I passed the aptitude test for Officer and met the education requirements, obviously to be considered for those careers. During my reading of this site I have not encountered this subject so can anyone offer any insight in to what this means? I asked the recruiter who told me that I would be given other options including other career choices or how to make my file more competitive. 

Is this generally a positive occurrence? It certainly is better than a flat out "no" for which I am grateful. I am still waiting for the email/letter so in the meantime I thought I would elicit some information to assist me.


 James Dickerson


----------



## PuckChaser (15 Aug 2014)

Your recruiter told you what you basically need to know. Your file wasn't competitive enough for the other occupations, but they feel its going to be competitive for others. So they want to sit down with you, explain what you would qualify for and answer questions on those trades for you to make an informed choice.

Get prepared by researching some other officer occupations that may interest you, through threads here or the forces.ca website.


----------



## DAA (18 Aug 2014)

Jamzes said:
			
		

> Is this generally a positive occurrence? It certainly is better than a flat out "no" for which I am grateful. I am still waiting for the email/letter so in the meantime I thought I would elicit some information to assist me.



Simple answer, NO, it is not a "positive" occurrence and if your recruiter is giving you this information, then you should already have the email as I don't think you are going to get a letter but I could be wrong.



			
				PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Your recruiter told you what you basically need to know. Your file wasn't competitive enough for the other occupations, but they feel its going to be competitive for others.



PuckChaser is on the right track.  But it would probably have been more proper to just say "Your file wasn't competitive enough".

Good luck!


----------



## northbound23 (22 Aug 2014)

Jamzes said:
			
		

> So my recruiter called me today to follow up on my file. She told me that my three choices were not approved for me (Pilot,  Controller etc.).
> 
> 
> James Dickerson



And you didn't ask her why? If you don't care, why should they?


----------



## Jamzes (25 Aug 2014)

Northbound23, try reading the rest of the post. I indicated that I asked her but she does not have the information which is why I must wait.


----------



## northbound23 (26 Aug 2014)

You never wrote that.maybe you should reread it.


----------



## DAA (26 Aug 2014)

Jamzes said:
			
		

> Northbound23, try reading the rest of the post. I indicated that I asked her but she does not have the information which is why I must wait.



Yes, your Recruiter does have the information and your not getting a letter either.  Now how long did you plan on waiting?


----------



## Jamzes (3 Sep 2014)

I did get a letter and was contacted by a recruiter. I have received a list of occupations that I am competitive for.

Northbound23, your ability to read and understand is severely lacking.

DAA. The Cpl. that spoke with me was not a recruiter as I originally thought which is why she was unable to offer me more information. Also, please learn the difference between "your" and "you're".


----------



## Fishbone Jones (4 Sep 2014)

Jamzes said:
			
		

> I did get a letter and was contacted by a recruiter. I have received a list of occupations that I am competitive for.
> 
> Northbound23, your ability to read and understand is severely lacking.
> 
> DAA. The Cpl. that spoke with me was not a recruiter as I originally thought which is why she was unable to offer me more information. Also, please learn the difference between "your" and "you're".



3 posts and you're a rock star?

Reign in the attitude.

---Staff---


----------



## DAA (4 Sep 2014)

Jamzes said:
			
		

> I did get a letter and was contacted by a recruiter. I have received a list of occupations that I am competitive for.
> 
> DAA. The Cpl. that spoke with me was not a recruiter as I originally thought which is why she was unable to offer me more information. Also, please learn the difference between "your" and "you're".



Anyhow, it was my understanding that the information was to have been provided by email only and not mailed to you. Can't see that list having much on it.

The Cpl has access to the same information that everyone else does.


----------



## GAP (4 Sep 2014)

Jamzes said:
			
		

> Also, please learn the difference between "your" and "you're".



wringing your neck in a bit with the grammar Nazi attitude with someone who has more time in the CF than you have walking this green earth might be wise..... :


----------



## Journeyman (4 Sep 2014)

Jamzes said:
			
		

> I did get a letter and was contacted by a recruiter. I have received a list of occupations that I am competitive for  for which I am competitive. [Apparently someone is "severely lacking" in the use of sentence-ending prepositions]
> 
> Northbound23, your ability to read and understand is severely lacking.
> 
> DAA. The Cpl. that spoke with me was not a recruiter as I originally thought*,* [if the use of the comma preceding "which" is too onerous, use "that"; it does not require a comma]  which is why she was unable to offer me more information. Also, please learn the difference between "your" and "you're".


If you're going to be a douche about someone else's grammar, maybe it's best not to fuck it up yourself.


----------



## Jamzes (4 Sep 2014)

Ending a sentence with a preposition is perfectly normal. I.e. "What did you put that there for?". Sentences ending in prepositions are more natural in passive structures or relative clauses which is how I used it. There is no rule against prepositions as long as it is not awkward.

The second portion of that sentence that occurs after "which" does not require a comma preceding it as it is a restrictive clause. It gives information that is necessary for the first part of the sentence to be understood. Using a comma before "which" is appropriate if the the proceeding sentence was superfluous to understanding the first part.

+600 Milpoints

Maybe I came on too strong but the forums are chalk full of people complaining about grammar and punctuation etc.. I thought that's what you do here to fit in.


----------



## Jamzes (4 Sep 2014)

DAA said:
			
		

> Anyhow, it was my understanding that the information was to have been provided by email only and not mailed to you. Can't see that list having much on it.
> 
> The Cpl has access to the same information that everyone else does.



Well if she did have that information it would have made my life easier. Instead, I had to talk to a "recruiter", so I don't know what her role was. Thanks for your insight though.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (4 Sep 2014)

Jamzes said:
			
		

> Ending a sentence with a preposition is perfectly normal. I.e. "What did you put that there for?". Sentences ending in prepositions are more natural in passive structures or relative clauses which is how I used it. There is no rule against prepositions as long as it is not awkward.
> 
> The second portion of that sentence that occurs after "which" does not require a comma preceding it as it is a restrictive clause. It gives information that is necessary for the first part of the sentence to be understood. Using a comma before "which" is appropriate if the the proceeding sentence was superfluous to understanding the first part.
> 
> ...


----------



## Jamzes (4 Sep 2014)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

>



I love that guy.


----------



## Scott (4 Sep 2014)

Jamzes said:
			
		

> Maybe I came on too strong.



You should have just left it at that. But you then double down on the original attitude with the rest. You'll find that people will help here - not so much when treated in the manner you've laid out.



> but the forums are chalk full of people complaining about grammar and punctuation etc.. I thought that's what you do here to fit in.



Don't play that game with me.



> Ending a sentence with a preposition is perfectly normal. I.e. "What did you put that there for?". Sentences ending in prepositions are more natural in passive structures or relative clauses which is how I used it. There is no rule against prepositions as long as it is not awkward.
> 
> The second portion of that sentence that occurs after "which" does not require a comma preceding it as it is a restrictive clause. It gives information that is necessary for the first part of the sentence to be understood. Using a comma before "which" is appropriate if the the proceeding sentence was superfluous to understanding the first part.



I suppose you could be forgiven for not knowing who you're going back and forth with. I do. And I know their credentials. 

*Lastly, do not bother me, or waste my time, with a reported post for someone being "rude" to you if you plan to reply to it anyway.*

Tread carefully if you wish to reply.

Scott
Staff


----------



## Jamzes (10 Sep 2014)

Thank you Scott.


----------



## DAA (10 Sep 2014)

Jamzes said:
			
		

> I did get a letter
> 
> Also, please learn the difference between "your" and "you're".



You never did answer this properly.  So did Canada Post deliver "the" letter or was it a "generic" email kind of thing?

All grammar stuff aside, I still gave you some good advice via PM, so now I'm wondering why you never took it?

If you want to PM me back, the door is open........


----------



## Jamzes (12 Sep 2014)

The letter was delivered via email and personnel selection officer was not an option.


----------

