# Current Trends in CF Releases



## Journeyman (7 Dec 2012)

There seems to be an increase in troops leaving the CF. I'm seeing fewer soldiers available for exercise and I've heard of one Infantry company being stood down for lack of soldiers. 

Beyond the generic "I joined for the 'adventure' of Afghanistan and that's gone now," I was wondering what may be driving troops to pull the pin and/or what could be done to keep soldiers in.


----------



## The_Falcon (7 Dec 2012)

Are we talking Reg, Res or both?

Personally I pulled the pin a month ago on the reserves, since I had reached my 12 years, was no longer interested in finishing my PLQ, and I landed a lucrative job as a civilian contractor in the sandbox.


----------



## Haggis (7 Dec 2012)

I'm sure that the economy, particularly in the oil patch, has downgraded the CF's status as "employer of choice' in general.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (7 Dec 2012)

Aging out.


----------



## Journeyman (7 Dec 2012)

Hatchet Man said:
			
		

> Are we talking Reg, Res or both?


Both. Having a bizarre notion that we're all on the same team    there may be lessons available for all.


----------



## brihard (7 Dec 2012)

On the reserves side, I've seen some release of SNCOs who've been around a long damn time, but haven't done much in the last five or six years. The new generation of younger NCOs with recent operational tours flooding both the mess and the more senior positions in the regiment has been a bit of a disruption to the social order that the reserves have always had going. I get the sense that in some isntances these guys just don't enjoy it anymore because they ossified in their position ten years back...


----------



## Haggis (7 Dec 2012)

Brihard said:
			
		

> On the reserves side, I've seen some release of SNCOs who've been around a long damn time, but haven't done much in the last five or six years. The new generation of younger NCOs with recent operational tours flooding both the mess and the more senior positions in the regiment has been a bit of a disruption to the social order that the reserves have always had going. I get the sense that in some isntances these guys just don't enjoy it anymore because they ossified in their position ten years back...



That's an unintended consequence of our participation in any protracted major mission, with both a positive and negative side.  The positive side is that a lot of old practises get vailidated or cast aside as a result of "user-testing" in combat.  What emerges is a stronger, more capable and competent force.

The negative side is that if you weren't one of the BTDT generation in the most recent conflict, your opinion and experiences didn't count for much any longer.  It happened after WWII, Korea and the UNPROFOR days in the Balkans.  It's happening now with Afghanistan and it will happen *to* the Afghanistan vets after the next big conflict wraps up and they aren't part of the BTDT guys..


----------



## Colin Parkinson (7 Dec 2012)

12 years from now the young guys will be moaning about the old guys still claiming to have sand in their boots.


----------



## brihard (7 Dec 2012)

Haggis said:
			
		

> That's an unitnended consequence of tour participation in nay protracted major mission, with both a positive and negative side.  The positve side is that a lot of old practises get vailidated or cast aside as a result of "user-testing" in combat.  What emerges, is a stronger, more capable and competent force.
> 
> The negative side is that if you weren't one of the BTDT generation in the most recent conflict, your opinion and experiences didn't count for much any longer.  It happened after WWII, Korea and the UNPROFOR days in the Balkans.  It's happening now with Afghanistan and it will happen *to* the Afghanistan vets after the next big conflict wraps up and they aren't part of the BTDT guys..



Yup. Please know that I'm not trying to make value judgments here or anything- just calling it how I've seen it in a few instances. Afghanistan set the highest tide seen in a while. Of course it'll be surpassed at some point in the indeterminate future. In the interim we will continue to see unexpected second and third order effects.


----------



## BrendenDias (7 Dec 2012)

Hmm, perhaps this could create more opportunities for new recruits and enlisters.. unless the budged gets slashed next spring i guess. :-\


----------



## kratz (7 Dec 2012)

B.Dias said:
			
		

> Hmm, perhaps this could create more opportunities for new recruits and enlisters.. unless the budged gets slashed next spring i guess. :-\



Why does this 17 year old's post remind me of our old RCN mess toasts?

"A Bloody war or a sickly Season"   >


----------



## fake penguin (7 Dec 2012)

I think canada not being in a combat role has a hugh effect on why soldiers are leaving. I was told during war the line up for recruitment is long, but gets shorter as chance for combat dewindles. I know some guys are staying in because they keep saying " another combat tour may show up, and i like to keep their foot in the door". Still some quit because they are sick of the same exercises year after year. To do fun stuff like a jump course cost money. People do not want to sit around battalion lines wasting time playing cards or on a tuesday sitting around for 45 minutes wainting for an O group.


----------



## Popurhedoff (7 Dec 2012)

Hatchet Man said:
			
		

> Are we talking Reg, Res or both?
> 
> Personally I pulled the pin a month ago on the reserves, since I had reached my 12 years, was no longer interested in finishing my PLQ, and I landed a lucrative job as a civilian contractor in the sandbox.



Where are you working at in the sandbox?  I am in Kabul, if your close by, maybe we could hook up or a coffee.

Cheers
Pop


----------



## Snaketnk (7 Dec 2012)

From the RegF infantry side, I've seen the majority of the people I came through with leave in the last two years or so; their tour was done, and they feel like they're wasting their life sitting around Bn lines waiting for courses that never seem to come. A lot of them just want to get out of Gagetown as quickly as possible, and for a lot of them the only option for that is release.

I've had freinds on the ResF side of the fence say that now that Afghanistan has wound down, the peace-time garrison BS has already taken hold and they see no reason to put up with it anymore.


----------



## kratz (7 Dec 2012)

For those who find challenges and interest in the job now, those will be the leaders in a few years.

Back in the late 90s, I knew many people who are now departing the CF, often at higher ranks.
I was instructing one course and had one individual walk into my course in uniform (civvies authorized).
First comment out of my mouth in front of everyone was, "what they hell is that on your shoulder?"
Shake his hand, congratz ect...but the damage was done. I knew him as a MS and he was a CPO2 then
now a CPO1.

My point is that for those who remain and are worth their salt, there is not much need to worry about the rate of releases.


----------



## Jarnhamar (7 Dec 2012)

Snaketnk said:
			
		

> From the RegF infantry side, I've seen the majority of the people I came through with leave in the last two years or so; their tour was done, and they feel like they're wasting their life sitting around Bn lines waiting for courses that never seem to come. A lot of them just want to get out of Gagetown as quickly as possible, and for a lot of them the only option for that is release.



As far as courses that never seem to come that must be a geographical thing. Recently we've run/sent guys on;
Helicopter Insertion Instructor, Conduct After Capture Instructor, Close Quarters Combat, Close Quarters Combat Instructor, recce patrolman, sniper, pathfinder, multiple in-house jump serials, drivers courses, basic and intermediate comms course (advance comms, freefall and arctic adviser coming up). 

That's just off the top of my head.



> I've had freinds on the ResF side of the fence say that now that Afghanistan has wound down, the peace-time garrison BS has already taken hold and they see no reason to put up with it anymore.


I don't see the reserves having ever left the peace-time garrison BS. They've sent soldiers on operations who've returned to reserve world and have had to deal with being reservists again.

I've noticed a huge sense of entitlement with full time infantry soldiers. An hour of PT an hour of "work" and if it's Friday and 10 minutes after 1 their bitching and crying about why they're still at work.

I don't think our young fresh out of school and into the uniform soldiers have an idea about just how hard working at a civilian job can be.


Lots of people did join for the prospect of fighting in a war and now that it's over they've lost interest.


----------



## Haggis (7 Dec 2012)

ObedientiaZelum said:
			
		

> Lots of people did join for the prospect of fighting in a war and now that it's over they've lost interest.



Look around the world.  Another war will be by soon enough.


----------



## BrendenDias (8 Dec 2012)

kratz said:
			
		

> Why does this 17 year old's post remind me of our old RCN mess toasts?
> 
> "A Bloody war or a sickly Season"   >



Hey.... c'mon now... at least I'm interested in the military, politics, and global conflict.... etc. unlike the many around my age that are only interested in say..video games or getting body kits placed on cars.  :2c:
Respectfully,


----------



## bLUE fOX (8 Dec 2012)

Just out of curiosity, what's the average service life expectancy for a reg force or PRes type? as a CIC officer, I had heard it said we average five years before "swallowing the anchor." thoughts?


----------



## Occam (8 Dec 2012)

For me, getting out was the result of a combination of factors.  Without getting into the details, lack of recognition for work done, and a timely opportunity to take a public service position with more responsibility and a higher rate of pay made leaving the CF a done deal.


----------



## mariomike (8 Dec 2012)

For what it is worth.

Retention 

Retaining trained personnel at later stages in their careers remains a priority. Initiatives include better career management and greater support to CF families – such as improved deployment, reunion and relocation programs, expanded child care, enhanced mental health care, and better alignment of CF and Veterans Affairs Canada services. This has contributed to a reduced rate of attrition.

http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/news-nouvelles/news-nouvelles-eng.asp?id=3792

2012-10-02


----------



## George Wallace (8 Dec 2012)

ObedientiaZelum said:
			
		

> I don't think our young fresh out of school and into the uniform soldiers have an idea about just how hard working at a civilian job can be.



That is one thing I remember well over the years.  How many have you seen depart the Regiment for a civilian job, only to be walking back through the front gate a year later having rejoined the CF?

There are a lot who leave looking for those greener pastures on the other side of the fence, only to return after finding that they weren't so green after all.  Many of the points have already been covered, such as the Medical and Dental benefits, but others are the camaraderie and 'family'.


----------



## The_Falcon (8 Dec 2012)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> That is one thing I remember well over the years.  How many have you seen depart the Regiment for a civilian job, only to be walking back through the front gate a year later having rejoined the CF?
> 
> There are a lot who leave looking for those greener pastures on the other side of the fence, only to return after finding that they weren't so green after all.  Many of the points have already been covered, such as the Medical and Dental benefits, but others are the camaraderie and 'family'.



This past year I spent in recruiting, I saw many files coming through that were people trying to get back in.


----------



## garb811 (8 Dec 2012)

mariomike said:
			
		

> For what it is worth.
> 
> Retention
> 
> ...


"For what it is worth" indeed.  As we've seen in the last year, most of the changes to these areas have resulted in roll backs instead of enhancements.  

I have yet to feel any lovin', at any point in my career, that has been specifically directed at retaining my skills and knowledge.  Yet I have watched many, many people get rewarded for leaving and then coming back through incentives such as FRP, recruiting bonuses and PLARs granting them the rank they left at...


----------



## Towards_the_gap (8 Dec 2012)

mariomike said:
			
		

> For what it is worth.
> 
> Retention
> 
> ...




That's great, but I've seen none of that.

For me, the decision to begin the process of release was driven, overall, by basically what is a cost/benefit analysis. It is costing my family too much, for a job where my ability to make a difference is hampered at every turn by those who lack the imagination or 'think-outside-the-box-ness'. Moreover, 95% percent of my career has been in a time of war. This period of peace certainly has it's challenges, but the kicker is the general insistence that 'stupid rules', no matter how ridiculous, must be followed for no other reason than 'we have always done it this way'. There is also a general tendency for things to get blown way out of proportion based solely upon an urban-myth like belief that some regulation somewhere promises drastic measures if not followed, yet when you actually take the time to look it up, said regulation doesn't exist or is in fact for something completely different. Finally, all this takes place in an organisation which lacks the ability to critically and objectively examine itself and correct deficiencies/find efficiencies. How many times have you heard 'we're the best army/squadron/regiment/company and this exercise was great'? Vice 'this exercise did not do what we planned it to, and revealed a startling number of shortcomings, we need to get alot better'. I've NEVER heard the latter. Just imagine, what would happen if an OC, on a level 5 RTHR exercise, at the end said ' My company is not ready, do not send us overseas'?

In short, I find my family/personal life suffering so that I can do a job much like Sisyphus. Hence, I'm peaceing out.


----------



## Towards_the_gap (8 Dec 2012)

kratz said:
			
		

> For those who find challenges and interest in the job now, those will be the leaders in a few years.
> 
> Back in the late 90s, I knew many people who are now departing the CF, often at higher ranks.
> I was instructing one course and had one individual walk into my course in uniform (civvies authorized).
> ...



Sadly, it's the ones worth their salt that I have seen leaving, leaving the mediocre/dregs behind.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (8 Dec 2012)

mariomike said:
			
		

> For what it is worth.
> 
> Retention
> 
> ...





			
				Towards_the_gap said:
			
		

> That's great, but I've seen none of that.
> 
> For me, the decision to begin the process of release was driven, overall, by basically what is a cost/benefit analysis. It is costing my family too much, for a job where my ability to make a difference is hampered at every turn by those who lack the imagination or 'think-outside-the-box-ness'. Moreover, 95% percent of my career has been in a time of war. This period of peace certainly has it's challenges, but the kicker is the general insistence that 'stupid rules', no matter how ridiculous, must be followed for no other reason than 'we have always done it this way'. There is also a general tendency for things to get blown way out of proportion based solely upon an urban-myth like belief that some regulation somewhere promises drastic measures if not followed, yet when you actually take the time to look it up, said regulation doesn't exist or is in fact for something completely different. Finally, all this takes place in an organisation which lacks the ability to critically and objectively examine itself and correct deficiencies/find efficiencies. How many times have you heard 'we're the best army/squadron/regiment/company and this exercise was great'? Vice 'this exercise did not do what we planned it to, and revealed a startling number of shortcomings, we need to get alot better'. I've NEVER heard the latter. Just imagine, what would happen if an OC, on a level 5 RTHR exercise, at the end said ' My company is not ready, do not send us overseas'?
> 
> In short, I find my family/personal life suffering so that I can do a job much like Sisyphus. Hence, I'm peaceing out.





			
				garb811 said:
			
		

> "For what it is worth" indeed.  As we've seen in the last year, most of the changes to these areas have resulted in roll backs instead of enhancements.
> 
> I have yet to feel any lovin', at any point in my career, that has been specifically directed at retaining my skills and knowledge.  Yet I have watched many, many people get rewarded for leaving and then coming back through incentives such as FRP, recruiting bonuses and PLARs granting them the rank they left at...



Exactly. Just another self serving Government link.

Walk the walk before you try talk the talk.


----------



## jwtg (8 Dec 2012)

As an OCdt, I don't pretend to have a whole lot of experience to base opinions on.  I do have the benefit of having been an army brat, so I have experienced first hand the 'military family lifestyle' from the child's perspective, and have been lucky to have met many members of the CF of all ranks through friends, friend's parents, my parents' coworkers, and now, my own first steps in the CF.

One thing I find to be a recurring theme, both in conversations I have now, have had in the past, or witness here on the forums, is the problem of vague promises.  The CF is committed to retention, so here's all these great things we're going to do to keep skilled members <insert praise of some program here>.

Or, the CF is committed to families, so here's all the ways we're going to help your family <another list of programs and funding>.

Why not say, the CF is committed to families so we're going to let you stay where you're posted (service needs obviously permitting)?  I've read stories on here of people having very good personal reasons for wanting to stay somewhere, and having very good reasons to believe that their needs matched up with service needs.  Instead, they were shipped off somewhere else, sold their house, uprooted their families, and filled similar positions on different bases for the sake of variety in their career.

I'm not saying that everyone should be allowed to be sedentary and never move; I'm saying that there has to be a way for people to look at a family situation and see that it just makes sense for the sake of that members family to keep them where they are for another year or two, if the service needs permit, and then have them move off into another position.  Maybe I'm optimistic, but I would hope that discretion could be exercised in order to see when this kind of situation is valid.

I don't mean to derail the thread, or project the image that I think whining about postings is ok (I'm more than ready to relocate as I'm directed, the same way I did as a child when my dad got posted); I'm just looking to see if there's a connection between vague promises based on funding direction, and real, tangible promises which can improve the life of a service member, thereby potentially increasing the longevity of their career.


----------



## mariomike (8 Dec 2012)

recceguy said:
			
		

> Exactly. Just another self serving Government link.
> 
> Walk the walk before you try talk the talk.



Not taking your bait.

They were not my words.

It was a quote from the Canadian Forces:

"Retention 

Retaining trained personnel at later stages in their careers remains a priority. Initiatives include better career management and greater support to CF families – such as improved deployment, reunion and relocation programs, expanded child care, enhanced mental health care, and better alignment of CF and Veterans Affairs Canada services. This has contributed to a reduced rate of attrition.

2012-10-02"


----------



## Towards_the_gap (8 Dec 2012)

And that quote is BS. Because nothing of that sort is actually happening at the coal face. 

one of the lesser known 'peace dividends' in the 90's was the large scale recruitment of Pravda staff to serve in the dnd PR machine.


----------



## Nemo888 (8 Dec 2012)

I don't know about anywhere else but Ottawa was releasing about 100 soldiers a month this fall. If that rate of release is part of a larger trend in military towns we are shrinking at an impressive rate.  Some of my seniors say they can't take the bu(($%it anymore. 

Are other military towns shrinking as fast as Ottawa?


----------



## Shamrock (8 Dec 2012)

Towards_the_gap said:
			
		

> And that quote is BS. Because nothing of that sort is actually happening at the coal face.
> 
> one of the lesser known 'peace dividends' in the 90's was the large scale recruitment of Pravda staff to serve in the dnd PR machine.



I concur.  There are a lot of top-driven initiatives that are intended to be of benefit at the lower levels.  Implemented properly, they would likely be of great benefit to the members and the CF.  Unfortunately, between the top and the bottom are layers of poor leadership who, through lack of knowledge, lack of effort, or lack of goodwill, work contrary to the intent.


----------



## Kat Stevens (8 Dec 2012)

jwtg said:
			
		

> As an OCdt, I don't pretend to have a whole lot of experience to base opinions on.  I do have the benefit of having been an army brat, so I have experienced first hand the 'military family lifestyle' from the child's perspective, and have been lucky to have met many members of the CF of all ranks through friends, friend's parents, my parents' coworkers, and now, my own first steps in the CF.
> 
> One thing I find to be a recurring theme, both in conversations I have now, have had in the past, or witness here on the forums, is the problem of vague promises.  The CF is committed to retention, so here's all these great things we're going to do to keep skilled members <insert praise of some program here>.
> 
> ...



We already have that, it's called Gagetown.


----------



## PPCLI Guy (8 Dec 2012)

Nemo888 said:
			
		

> I don't know about anywhere else but Ottawa was releasing about 100 soldiers a month this fall. If that rate of release is part of a larger trend in military towns we are shrinking at an impressive rate.  Some of my seniors say they can't take the bu(($%it anymore.
> 
> Are other military towns shrinking as fast as Ottawa?



First of all, Ottawa is not a military town by any stretch.  It is a government town with military HQs, an SF element, and a few Reserve units.  Mind you, there are more military personnel in Ottawa than in any other location....

Edmonton is taking it hard.  I have heard that 1 CMBG has already had over 400 releases this calendar year, and there are another 400 in the hopper.  Given that the established strength of the Bde is just over 4600, with a posted strength of about 4100, the Bde is losing 10% of its people each calendar year, roughly split 2/3 combat arms (predominantly infantry) arms and 1/3 CSS.


----------



## Sig_Des (8 Dec 2012)

ObedientiaZelum said:
			
		

> As far as courses that never seem to come that must be a geographical thing. Recently we've run/sent guys on;
> Helicopter Insertion Instructor, Conduct After Capture Instructor, Close Quarters Combat, Close Quarters Combat Instructor, recce patrolman, sniper, pathfinder, multiple in-house jump serials, drivers courses, basic and intermediate comms course (advance comms, freefall and arctic adviser coming up).



I dunno about the geographical thing. Out West, in my troop in the last 3 months, I've completed a CQCI course, one of my troops (a Sig) has completed his Basic Para, and another troop (non-inf) has completed his Basic Recce.

As far as government retention programs, it's kinda hard to put stock in that when you have articles here that let you know what's happening:

http://www.fortsaskatchewanrecord.com/2012/11/14/cfb-edmonton-faces-50-budget-cut

Yes, Afghanistan for all intents and purposes is over. For a lot of the people who joined for that adventure, they won't get their kick at the can. Many have had their tour(s), and without the prospect of something similar right now, they have lost interest. Especially when training tempo is so high, without an actual op in the future.

Without the public support for the military as we've had in the past (and I mean actual support, not lip service), we're an easy target for the government scalpels. 

It doesn't take reading tea leaves to see what's coming up. Huge budget cuts, talk of LDA changing, talk of PLD changing, no official fight in the near future, you have a lot of people looking elsewhere. Especially here out west. I've got friends who got out to work in the oil patch with the same quals as me, and they make 80+ a year, not to mention the truck _given_ to them.

Some people have different mentalities as far as releases. Some have the "disloyalty, selfishly abandoning the service", some will stay because they know there'll be a fight somewhere, others see the military just taking away. Everyone has their reasons, but one thing is for sure. There definitely is a current trend in CF releases, and the CF is not able to stem the flow right now.


----------



## jollyjacktar (8 Dec 2012)

mariomike said:
			
		

> Not taking your bait.
> 
> They were not my words.
> 
> ...



That may be their words,  but I too believe they're not interested in retention "yet".  That may come, but they don't seem to care quite frankly past making some guys stay 6 months now if they've asked to leave for other employment and don't have the ejection seat option available.

A couple of years ago I took the Admiral to task at one of his "Town Hall" briefings.  He went on at length about all the programs to attract fresh new blood, yadda yadda yadda.  In the question phase, I said that it was great and fantastic to have a desire and plan to get all these young sailors into the Fleet, but what was their intention and plan to stop the bleed out of the experienced personnel?  He asked me what I wanted to see.  I said to him, "Make me want to stay, perhaps sweeten the pension options such as the USN have whereas they see a 50% pension at 20 years, and it only gets better".  His reply to me was that "I think getting a 70% pension after 35 years is a great deal" and that was that, no further ideas or consideration on retention.  I thought  to myself that "sure, 70% of your pension would be just frigging ducky too mate" , but being a later joiner I'll never be able to see a full pension as I'll age out.  My thought at the time then was well if I can't reach that kind of goal, ever, then while I'm still under the 50 year mark it might be better to go somewhere where I would be able to work past 55 and make a decent salary if the opportunity arises.

Nowadays, it seems as if the nasty 90's are going to come back with all the ensuing cuts or worse to many of the other Snr NCO's I know, and I'm hearing lots of angst among the lower decks too.  If you're on ship and going over there it's months and months of working your guys and guts out for small potatoes before, during and after the mission.  On a Force Generation platform?  It's likely you'll see repeated workups with a large chunk of the crew changed out to put fresh faces in the mix.  The ships coming out of refit now are not getting their SDA back for months after TP.  Yes, SDA is not connected with duty watches but it rankles the crews to see this "entitlement" cut back as had not been done previously.  The IR fiasco.  It seems to be a death by a thousand cuts and both the kids and oldsters are getting sick of it.  

There are other opportunities out there such as the oil patch and it becomes increasingly attractive to many.  The CF is to many no longer the employer of choice.  I'm sure there will be those who see the complaints from the sailor types as whining, and it may indeed be in the grand scheme of things.  But, it is a burr under the saddle blanket and fair or not it is pissing folks off so they're looking for an exit.


----------



## eurowing (8 Dec 2012)

In my case, it was a shift from being able to make decisions at a M/Cpl level in the 80's to have to call Ottawa as a WO in a risk free Air Force. Pension income splitting also made it much easier to walk out the door.  I left in 08, but friends still have the same issues.


----------



## garb811 (8 Dec 2012)

Shamrock said:
			
		

> I concur.  There are a lot of top-driven initiatives that are intended to be of benefit at the lower levels.  Implemented properly, they would likely be of great benefit to the members and the CF.  Unfortunately, between the top and the bottom are layers of poor leadership who, through lack of knowledge, lack of effort, or lack of goodwill, work contrary to the intent.


Uhh...I'm at a loss to identify any recent "from the top" initiatives in the last year or so which are supposed to benefit the troops which have been negated by those of us working to support the troops and families.  The only announcements recently have resulted in troops losing out, not gaining.  I'm just waiting for someone to roll out the old mantra, "We need to do more with less" and then I know "that" decade has returned.

I guess I am a bit pessimistic though, there was the introduction of a Gucci fur hat and winter boots to Logistiks Unicorp with that new DEU parka soon to be here.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (8 Dec 2012)

mariomike said:
			
		

> Not taking your bait.
> 
> They were not my words.
> 
> ...



No baiting involved. It's about lanes. We won't argue with you about how to drive a meat wagon, don't try tell us what happens in the military.

Everyone knows the quote is bullshit, but you posted the link anyway, because that's what you do, whether relevent or not.

If you'd have walked the walk, you would have known it was a bullshit statement and wouldn't have posted it.

At least the others here have an inkling of the problems because they live(d) it. You didn't\ don't, which is why I took umbrage to you posting, another, useless link.


----------



## observor 69 (8 Dec 2012)

It's at times like this that I get very concerned about the direction all our new equipment programs and the military in general will take. Demands for new trucks, new ships and new planes in this time of government austerity and a low public military profile leads me to fear a return to the bad old days. This weeks news that the F-35 is just one of the contenders for CF-18 replacement feels like the start of a slippery slope.

This guy does a much better job of summerizing my argument:

 Defence procurement problems run deeper than the F-35

Read more: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Defence+procurement+problems+deeper+than/7663899/story.html#ixzz2EYmqZhHj


----------



## MusclesGlasses (8 Dec 2012)

recceguy said:
			
		

> Everyone knows the quote is bullshit, but you posted the link anyway, because that's what you do, whether relevent or not.



So true. Just looking at his post history, nothing but links with no value added to the discourse.

Cheers


----------



## jwtg (8 Dec 2012)

MusclesGlasses said:
			
		

> So true. Just looking at his post history, nothing but links with no value added to the discourse.
> 
> Cheers


I fail to see what, exactly, the quoted post adds to the discourse.

Now, to add to the discourse, I think our infamous link-poster is on to something.  Whether or not he endorses the links he posts is irrelevant, and whether they really inform the discussion in this thread is obviously up for debate- what is relevant is that he is basically quoting the CF and putting forward their stated position on the issue.  They make me think is that the CF keeps saying it's supporting the troops, but obviously the troops feel differently.

I posit that it's because of ambiguous promises paired with tangible cuts.  How about some tangible promises, like direction to COs on a particular course of action they are to take, rather than the euphemistic 'CF cares about you, really' kind of rhetoric we keep seeing.


EDIT: for clarity/typos.


----------



## Journeyman (8 Dec 2012)

jwtg said:
			
		

> .....rather than the euphemistic 'CF cares about you, really' kind of rhetoric we keep seeing.



You mean this isn't doing it?







How about if we included "Train to Excite" on all the PowerPoints?


----------



## Shamrock (8 Dec 2012)

garb811 said:
			
		

> Uhh...I'm at a loss to identify any recent "from the top" initiatives in the last year or so which are supposed to benefit the troops which have been negated by those of us working to support the troops and families.  The only announcements recently have resulted in troops losing out, not gaining.  I'm just waiting for someone to roll out the old mantra, "We need to do more with less" and then I know "that" decade has returned.
> 
> I guess I am a bit pessimistic though, there was the introduction of a Gucci fur hat and winter boots to Logistiks Unicorp with that new DEU parka soon to be here.



You're not wrong.  I can think of no policies or programs to come out in the past 365 that have pointedly said "CF Retention Plan."  

I can think of several bungles to existing retention incentives, however.  Occupational Transfers, promotions, leave and benefits...


----------



## ArmyRick (8 Dec 2012)

I have a gut feeling and thats all, that the reason there is not a valid and real effort (not some token paper or half hearted gesture, the CF done that before) to retain experienced soldiers is frankly its not the top's priority right now.


----------



## kratz (8 Dec 2012)

Hell, NavRes town halls have been telling us since this summer that at the rates of release we have vice recruiting levels, by 2017 nobody will be around to turn off the lights.  :gottree:


----------



## Towards_the_gap (8 Dec 2012)

The only officialstance I have heard recently was a CWO stand in front of a large crowd and say 'you want out? Fine, there's a line-up of people waiting to get in, don't let the door hit you on the way out' 


There is a lot of smart, tough, experienced NCO's who are leaving right now. I think we had a moment in 2010-2011 where a radical change in how we do business could have occurred, that window has closed and, barring another shooting match, we won't have that chance again.


----------



## McG (8 Dec 2012)

I think the CF has a history of focusing on recruiting to fix manning shortfalls.  This manifests itself in recruiting bonuses being offered for occupations where we are short Sgts and Majs, but never there being any re-signing bonus/incentive.  As an organization, we need to do a better job of deliberately targeting retention the same way we target recruiting.


----------



## PuckChaser (8 Dec 2012)

Beadwindow 7 said:
			
		

> I dunno about the geographical thing. Out West, in my troop in the last 3 months, I've completed a CQCI course, one of my troops (a Sig) has completed his Basic Para, and another troop (non-inf) has completed his Basic Recce.



I gotta get out west... been waiting 2 years in MITE for a CQCI.


----------



## Jarnhamar (8 Dec 2012)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> I gotta get out west... been waiting 2 years in MITE for a CQCI.


PM Inbound.


----------



## daftandbarmy (9 Dec 2012)

kratz said:
			
		

> Hell, NavRes town halls have been telling us since this summer that at the rates of release we have vice recruiting levels, by 2017 nobody will be around to turn off the lights.  :gottree:



Here's to Thursday's 'traditional' toast then:  http://www.readyayeready.com/tradition/naval-toasts-of-the-day.htm


----------



## DirtyDog (9 Dec 2012)

ObedientiaZelum said:
			
		

> As far as courses that never seem to come that must be a geographical thing. Recently we've run/sent guys on;
> Helicopter Insertion Instructor, Conduct After Capture Instructor, Close Quarters Combat, Close Quarters Combat Instructor, recce patrolman, sniper, pathfinder, multiple in-house jump serials, drivers courses, basic and intermediate comms course (advance comms, freefall and arctic adviser coming up).
> 
> That's just off the top of my head.
> ...


Yep.  I constantly have to remind soldiers just how lucky they are to be making $50K+ to work out and shoot guns, many with barely a high school education.  The sense of entitlement makes me sick.

On the other hand, yep, many, many people having trouble being interested now that the prospect of combat operations is pretty much gone and an encroaching amount of lame BS.


----------



## Tank Troll (9 Dec 2012)

Talked with a friend of mine who is a SSM in the Strathcona's, they have about 100 release in. It is a cycle it happened in the 90s and it will happen again. I got out because I finally had enough of the crap it wasn't any one big thing but a bunch of little things. The final straw being a Major at the Armour school telling me well if you don't like it Sgt then you can always get out. I said you're finally right about something today Sir. Went back to my desk put in my 30 day notice.


----------



## brihard (9 Dec 2012)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> I gotta get out west... been waiting 2 years in MITE for a CQCI.



There's one running in Meaford in the new year. Being on 'course waitlist' in MITE often may not mean anything unless ops keeps nominating you for new individual sessions; at least such has been my experience working ops in the reserves- 'course waitlist' in MITE is more of a ghost machine than anything the way we're managed. I need to nominate each individual for each individual course session.


----------



## Sig_Des (9 Dec 2012)

Tank Troll said:
			
		

> Talked with a friend of mine who is a SSM in the Strathcona's, they have about 100 release in. It is a cycle it happened in the 90s and it will happen again. I got out because I finally had enough of the crap it wasn't any one big thing but a bunch of little things. The final straw being a Major at the Armour school telling me well if you don't like it Sgt then you can always get out. I said you're finally right about something today Sir. Went back to my desk put in my 30 day notice.



And that's another issue. To be realistic, as much as it's a problem that we lose Pte's and Junior Cpls at the end of their VIE, it's a manageable problem. Realistically, a lot of them will get out, and the next thing will kick up, we'll need numbers, and they'll start coming back.

But it seems to me that we're losing MCpls and Sgts at an alarming rate. And yeah, the mentality of a lot of Senior NCO's and Officers is "You don't like it, get out, there's plenty of people at the door." Well, it's not an idle threat. You know who the companies out here love? Management experienced guys, with a whole bunch of safety and technical courses, who are relatively young and fit. And those new guys who are just knocking at the doors? Well how long until those people have the same experience and knowledge level of those MCpl's and WO's? Who's going to train them?

Before our last Summer leave, like a few days before, we had 8 MCpls from the same Sqn put in 30 day releases.


----------



## Popurhedoff (9 Dec 2012)

When I submitted my release, there were 600+ pers going through the release section in Petawawa in Dec 2011... I retired on a 19 day release and bypassed those 600.  The RMS clerks and civilian in the release section were amazing, they went out of their way to expedite my release with their workload of which I can say seemed insurmountable.

I served 32 years and I retired with the good fortune of being extremely happy with my health and career with no regrets.  I finished my career in a great unit, I had a great team which I helped develop, and I know I left them capable and willing to continue the good work and to be good leaders,  I had done my job and it was my time to go, my time to pass the torch.

I had many deployements throughout the years, I spent lots of time away in remote parts of the world but the real strength of ones character is the ability to keep positive, keep motivated, and to keep the others doing the same when its back to the homefront in peacetime. 

I have found through the years, that a lot of the exceptional, the gifted, the ones that had that drive to succeed that tended to release early in the face of an outstanding career to persue new careers, not just a paycheck.  Of course I have seen many that just had enough, couldn't handle it, or didn't want to be in the Military anymore.

The releases seem to be in cycles, but the one thing that remains the same is that there are always people to fill the vacancies, to work harder, and to take up the slack.

Its been over a years since I came to Kabul as a civilian, and I run into Canadian troops every now and then and I always enjoy chatting with them, its almost like a family reunion.  I have no regrets and I am enjoying life and my other career.

Cheers
Pop


----------



## Eye In The Sky (9 Dec 2012)

I'll add:

- things like the change to IR that is going to likely be implemented before or starting FY 13/14;
- no more severance;
- talks about PLD being ceased completely, with a 0.5% payraise to compensate ($24/month for the avg Cpl);
- being told pension contributions are going to increase 50-70% in the next few years.

Add all of those to the (real or perceived) lower morale in the units, overall budget cuts that means less money to do the training and the "Employer of Choice" idea quickly begins to fade away...

Personally, I won't leave but I see the negative changes equalling low or negative GAFF and thats hard to defeat.  What things IMO tend to help feed a low GAFF?  This PIL stuff is one that comes to mind.  Announce severance ends in April, election period to end at the end of the FY with no payment before then, etc etc etc.  Then, give ppl no set date when they will receive partial or full payment, etc.  Try to tell them "its not big deal".  Then find out the RCMP already have theirs in the bank.  Thats one example.

Overall, the PIL, pension increases, etc etc etc likely translate in alot of mbr's minds to "you don't matter as much, so we won't take care of you as well as before".

Now, add to that the prospect of fewer courses, fewer deployments, less $ for training, and lots of time sweeping floors and checking drip pans, and all of a sudden its the early 90's again.


----------



## Tank Troll (9 Dec 2012)

That is exactly it right there. Again as in the 90s we are down sizing and this is a cheap way to get rid of personal. The higher ups do not care because by the time the next big thing rolls around the soldiers that filled the the places of the ones that left will be up to speed (hopefully). They promote the lower ranks to replace the ones that got out and replace the lower ranks with new recruits everything continues as normal, except for the loss of experience it works perfectly. Then they will use words like, trimmed, smaller but more efficient, leaner but well trained, all those catch phrases that came out in the 90s will be back and up dated. 

While they are pushing the Northern Angle as our next big mission (which is needed) other than getting the troops up there it is cheaper than most exercises (no need for AFVs or the fuel and maintenance cost that goes with them) LOSV courses are cheaper than AFV driver and gunners courses and it looks good in the press to the general public that we are doing more to protect our sovereignty.


----------



## MikeL (9 Dec 2012)

Tank Troll said:
			
		

> While they are pushing the Northern Angle as our next big mission (which is needed) other than getting the troops up there it is cheaper than most exercises (no need for AFVs or the fuel and maintenance cost that goes with them)



The Patricias brought up their LAVs on a northern exercise sometime around Jan/Feb 2012?


----------



## Tank Troll (9 Dec 2012)

-Skeletor- said:
			
		

> The Patricias brought up their LAVs on a northern exercise sometime around Jan/Feb 2012?



How many LAVs and how far north?


----------



## Old EO Tech (9 Dec 2012)

Tank Troll said:
			
		

> How many LAVs and how far north?



Ex Arctic Ram, a 1CMBG northern Ex, it was not Alert or anything that far north,, but Operating a full mechanized brigade plus RCAF and RCN elements in the Yellowknife Area, is no small feat of logistics and tactics.

http://www.army.gc.ca/lfwa/ex_ar_backgrounder-eng.asp

Believe me 1 Svc Bn was stretched to the limit over a 1600km MSR.

Jon


----------



## MJP (9 Dec 2012)

Tank Troll said:
			
		

> While they are pushing the Northern Angle as our next big mission (which is needed) other than getting the troops up there it is cheaper than most exercises (no need for AFVs or the fuel and maintenance cost that goes with them) LOSV courses are cheaper than AFV driver and gunners courses and it looks good in the press to the general public that we are doing more to protect our sovereignty.



The north is not cheaper by any stretch of the imagination.  It costs way more to support a Northern Ex than just the savings from reduced "fuel and maint costs".  The fuel costs alone for aircraft are usually pretty excessive depending on the size of the supported element.  Saying it is cheaper than LAV/tank exercises is a misnomer at best


----------



## Infanteer (9 Dec 2012)

Ex ARCTIC RAM was the 1 PPCLI Battle Group, HQ 1 CMBG and a few other bits and pieces.


----------



## Jarnhamar (9 Dec 2012)

Rumor has it we narrowly escaped a 2 month ex in the arctic over xmas due to budget cuts. I'm sure that would have been popular with troops and their families.


----------



## Nfld Sapper (9 Dec 2012)

Tank Troll said:
			
		

> That is exactly it right there. Again as in the 90s we are down sizing and this is a cheap way to get rid of personal. The higher ups do not care because by the time the next big thing rolls around the soldiers that filled the the places of the ones that left will be up to speed (hopefully). They promote the lower ranks to replace the ones that got out and replace the lower ranks with new recruits everything continues as normal, except for the loss of experience it works perfectly. Then they will use words like, trimmed, smaller but more efficient, leaner but well trained, all those catch phrases that came out in the 90s will be back and up dated.
> 
> While they are pushing the Northern Angle as our next big mission (which is needed) other than getting the troops up there it is cheaper than most exercises (no need for AFVs or the fuel and maintenance cost that goes with them) LOSV courses are cheaper than AFV driver and gunners courses and it looks good in the press to the general public that we are doing more to protect our sovereignty.



And if you want Engineer support everything has to come from the south and would need a very large logistics train....... and our Heavy Equipment dislikes the extreme cold....


----------



## daftandbarmy (9 Dec 2012)

NFLD Sapper said:
			
		

> And if you want Engineer support everything has to come from the south and would need a very large logistics train....... and our Heavy Equipment dislikes the extreme cold....



Being a country with most of it's territory above the permafrost line, that does not give me a warm fuzzy!


----------



## Nfld Sapper (9 Dec 2012)

I know......


----------



## SupersonicMax (9 Dec 2012)

Shortchanging your people will make them leave.  Money talks.  Even in the military.  When you post people to Cold Lake, where buying a house is prohibitively expensive and PMQs are falling apart for 1000$+ a month, people don't really want to stick with the military.  Heck, they can't even take care of their families.  Now, add a very lucrative job just next door and you have a recipe for a mass exodus.  Which is exactly what is happening in Cold Lake right now.  

Take care of your people, don't shortchange them.  The higher ups need to put things into perspective....  I normally burn roughly 15 000$ of fuel every day.  Heck, the other day I had to DUMP 10 000$ worth of fuel because I had an emergency and had to come back.  A trivial decision like making 1 more landing pattern because I feel like it, it's Friday and it's fun (and get some training out of it) could save 1000$ right there.  And that's not including maintenance costs!!  Now multiply that by 75 operational pilots in the units... You probably see where I am going.  I would rather the higher ups make slight cuts to the Yearly Flying Rate budget (did I say SLIGHT?) but see them keep or improve the financial aspect of being in the CF.  The announcements in the last months just destroyed morale.  We have to pay more into our pensions, no more severance, IR cuts, move benefits cuts.....  All that to save pennies in the big picture.


----------



## smale436 (9 Dec 2012)

You hit the nail on the head perfectly with your comments about Cold Lake. I'm awestruck, even though I have  ccntemplated releasing myself, at the number of releases going on in the last six months. Especially at the gun squadron here. There are a lot of younger guys (and gals) who decline to renew their initial engagement and head straight into NDT or oilfield related work.


----------



## jollyjacktar (9 Dec 2012)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> This PIL stuff is one that comes to mind.  Announce severance ends in April, election period to end at the end of the FY with no payment before then, etc etc etc.  Then, give ppl no set date when they will receive partial or full payment, etc.  Try to tell them "its not big deal".  Then find out the RCMP already have theirs in the bank.  Thats one example.



As I understand CBSA will have theirs shortly too if not already.  The members I was talking to were gobsmacked it might take upwards of 3 years to see us taken care of.  Mind you, if it was done in a reasonable amount of time, I'd really be (more) suspicious of being screwed somewhere.


----------



## Drag (9 Dec 2012)

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> I would rather the higher ups make slight cuts to the Yearly Flying Rate budget (did I say SLIGHT?) but see them keep or improve the financial aspect of being in the CF.



You hit the nail on the head right there...  I had some peripheral involvement with the Strat Review back when I was in Ottawa last year and it seemed like the RCAF had YFR as a sacred cow where it was priority over just about anything else.


----------



## Towards_the_gap (9 Dec 2012)

The fact that no one has come into this thread with a totally opposing point of view is saying something in itself. The writing sure is on the wall.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (9 Dec 2012)

The only counterpoint I would make is, I don't think that there is one "magic bullet" solution or policy to solve attrition.  People leave the CF for many reasons- hell we need attrition (to a point) to make the system work (can any of you imagine a CF where everyone served 30 years?).

It is a complex problem, that I don't have any magic solutions for.


----------



## brihard (9 Dec 2012)

ObedientiaZelum said:
			
		

> Rumor has it we narrowly escaped a 2 month ex in the arctic over xmas due to budget cuts. I'm sure that would have been popular with troops and their families.



I call B.S. No way they'd ever be that abysmally stupid. Besides, there's already a month up north planned for the brigade in February, and that's been in the books for quite some time now.


----------



## Shamrock (9 Dec 2012)

Towards_the_gap said:
			
		

> The fact that no one has come into this thread with a totally opposing point of view is saying something in itself. The writing sure is on the wall.



I was in Ottawa a couple of weeks ago. The word I got from them was the intent is to maintain the CF ~68k.


----------



## CombatDoc (9 Dec 2012)

ObedientiaZelum said:
			
		

> Rumor has it we narrowly escaped a 2 month ex in the arctic over xmas due to budget cuts. I'm sure that would have been popular with troops and their families.


There is no substantiation to this rumour, it is rumour only with no basis in reality.  We already have two Arctic exercises - Nanook in the balmy season (e.g. August) and Nunalivut in high arctic winter.  There is neither the planning effort, nor the $$, that have gone into sustaining a two month Arctic ex over Christmas.  Don't forget that the "those people" who plan these things also have families with whom they want to spend the holidays.   :gottree:


----------



## brihard (9 Dec 2012)

Shamrock said:
			
		

> I was in Ottawa a couple of weeks ago. The word I got from them was the intent is to maintain the CF ~68k.



That number refers solely to the reg force, I assume?


----------



## Grimey (10 Dec 2012)

From my perspective and back ground (Mar Eng), the CF is fighting demographics and will lose.  My peer group joined up in the early-mid '80s and decided to stay in when FRP decimated the trade and recruiting froze.  My peer group now has 25-30 yrs service.  When opportunity knocks (and it's been knocking hard in Victoria over the last 18 months) the decision has to be to stay til 35 or go.  We have lost approx 20 CPO1/2s over the last 14 months or so and an increasing number of PO1s who don't like how the future looks.  Most of these guys are walking into jobs with similar wage scales and benefits as the CF offers.

As a few posters have alluded too, for all the talk of retention initiatives, i don't remember one tangible policy that has come out over the last 10 yrs or so that would have sweetened the deal for the numbers of senior rates above (myself included) to stick it out.  For the majority of policy announcements from both the centre and locally since the summer, i'd say the complete opposite is more accurate.


----------



## Sporadic E (10 Dec 2012)

I think there is a natural ebb and flow between the operational training and operational deployments of the CF. There is something to be said with one comment about "aging out". I have been in the reserve for nearly 20 years (which is an anomaly in the reserve world). I am starting to feel that this stuff is getting a bit old and that I have nothing else to contribute. Having said that, this may play in TPTB hands for any force reduction that may be in the works. I predict that there will be a mass exodus once the reserves receives the payment in lieu of severance. 

I really don't know what I am going to do in this case. My personal dynamic has certainly changed since I first got in; I have a family, full time job, and the kids activities.  After a while the 90%/10% syndrome really wears on you and your family. I find that I am responding to more army email at my civilian job than the stuff I should be working on. However, there is that strange sense of loyalty that keeps biting me from the back of my head. Not to the CF, branch , or unit, but to all the troops I will leave behind.

It is a tough one to chew on, but we all have our reasons for getting out. Conversely, we all have our reasons for staying in.


----------



## PPCLI Guy (10 Dec 2012)

Sporadic E said:
			
		

> It is a tough one to chew on, but we all have our reasons for getting out. Conversely, we all have our reasons for staying in.



Perhaps the Army should be focusing its efforts on why people stay in instead of why they get out?


----------



## daftandbarmy (10 Dec 2012)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> Perhaps the Army should be focusing its efforts on why people stay in instead of why they get out?



If (the most) senior leaders in the private or other parts of the public sector we're seeing these kinds of loss rates under their watch, they'd be fired.

Why should we accept anything else for the military? We shouldn't, of course....


----------



## medicineman (10 Dec 2012)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> Perhaps the Army should be focusing its efforts on why people stay in instead of why they get out?



You may be on to something...be careful though as some Good Idea Fairy might wisk it away to DRDC to commission a 10 year, multi gazillion dollar study which none of us will hear the results of  ;D

Having said that, I`d say that would be a much more worthwhile survey to take than the last workplace diversity one I got sent recently.

Edited for grammatical oops.

MM


----------



## Shamrock (10 Dec 2012)

Anyone with improved awareness of the occupational status matrix care to rhyme in on this?  I look at it and see quite a bit of green but a projected TES of 58k (96% of the PML).  Quite a few trades are in the green and few are in the red.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (10 Dec 2012)

In my experience, that matrix is a bit of blunt tool.  Sure, an occupation may show as green in overall numbers, but how healthy is it really if it is all new Privates, with huge shortages at the MCpl and Sgt (for example) rank level?


----------



## jollyjacktar (10 Dec 2012)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> In my experience, that matrix is a bit of blunt tool.  Sure, an occupation may show as green in overall numbers, but how healthy is it really if it is all new Privates, with huge shortages at the MCpl and Sgt (for example) rank level?



Bingo!  The WEng trade is awash with hoards of untrained and under trained re-musters.  They have so many green apples it looks like the produce department at Sobey's.  Sure they have warm bodies to count, but they're a long bloody way from being fully trained and usable.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (10 Dec 2012)

Yes, it only measures TES to PML ratio / %.  Anyone not at OFP shouldn't be recorded under TES (but it has happened).


----------



## SeaKingTacco (10 Dec 2012)

OFP in some occupations is fairly arbitrary and does not necessarily mean that they are capable of combat operations, just because that point has been reached.

I have watched some occupations make themselves green from red literally overnight, because they adjusted downward the OFP.


----------



## NMPeters (13 Dec 2012)

Shamrock said:
			
		

> Anyone with improved awareness of the occupational status matrix care to rhyme in on this?  I look at it and see quite a bit of green but a projected TES of 58k (96% of the PML).  Quite a few trades are in the green and few are in the red.



Yes, I'm going to weigh in here but I speak only from the perspective of the Army.

I'm hearing (or reading, as the case may be) a lot of "the sky is falling" based on anecdotal evidence of "my brother's cousin's dog's groomer said...." yet, in all honesty, the numbers do not support that. Attrition in the Army as a whole is at historic lows as it is within the CF. And the statistics support that statement.  In 2008, Army Officers had an attrition rate of 7.6% and NCMs 10.5%. This year, the officer attrition rate is at 4.5% and NCMs at 5.9%. That is a drop in attrition of 3.1% and 4.6% respectively. And when we're talking 20 some-odd-thousand people, that is a huge difference. Now, of course each MOSID has different rates, but overall, the Army is in really good shape. And from what I understand, the other elements are also in pretty good shape _overall_. The Army, Navy and Air Force are manned to about 95% of their PML (preferred manning level) which is incredible considering the shape we were all in 3 or 4 years ago. And now I have to caveat these statistics. Infantry, for example, as a Branch is doing well at 102% TES (trained effective strength) to PML. However, when one breaks this down by unit, there is a definite problem out West. And the same holds true for the Armoured. Geographically, particularly in the west, we are seeing high attrition which can probably be attributed to their close proximity to the Oil Sands. But it's also getting difficult to get people to accept a posting out west, so there's something else going on there which will need to be researched in the new year.

Now, to get into the numbers at the different rank levels. We have lower manning levels (between 90-95%) at the ranks of Major, WO, and Sgt and critical (below 90%) at the MCpl levels. Four years ago these ranks as well as Capt/Lt and MWO were all critical. We cannot recruit at these rank levels so it does take a few years to correct, which we are seeing now. But the ranks of Cpl/Pte, MWO, CWO Capt/Lt LCol and Col are all manned between 96-105%. And for those of you wondering, no, it's not the Col rank that is at 105%. In fact, they are the 96%. Cpl/Ptes are manned to 105%. And as I said earlier, each MOSID is different. The situation is better within the Combat Arms trades than the technical trades and that is mostly because of training times. But things are looking a lot better than they were four or five years ago. There is no such thing as a quick fix when it comes to improving the senior rank levels.

I think I covered everything and hopefully didn't confuse anyone.

Cheers!


----------



## McG (13 Dec 2012)

NMPeters said:
			
		

> ... Attrition in the Army as a whole is at historic lows as it is within the CF. And the statistics support that statement.  In 2008, Army Officers had an attrition rate of 7.6% and NCMs 10.5%. This year, the officer attrition rate is at 4.5% and NCMs at 5.9%. That is a drop in attrition of 3.1% and 4.6% respectively.  ... I have to caveat these statistics. Infantry, for example, as a Branch is doing well at 102% TES (trained effective strength) to PML. However, when one breaks this down by unit, there is a definite problem out West. And the same holds true for the Armoured. Geographically, particularly in the west, we are seeing high attrition ...


Do the statistics that show attrition is relatively consistent regardless of the type of unit (ie. release rates are the same regardless if one looks a a field unit/ship/flying unit, an HQ, a CF school,  a base, or something else)?  Alternately, do we know if there is a difference in release rates between pers who have been in operational jobs as compared to those who have been staying in _institutional_ jobs?


----------



## NMPeters (14 Dec 2012)

I don't have the trends on that yet. There are a bunch of studies that I want to conduct in the new year but right now my ideas are all over the map so I need to sit down with these thoughts and ideas and make them more cohesive so that the studies are relevant. I'll get back to you on this once I have an idea where I'm going with all this.

Cheers


----------

