# Army Reserve Recruiting Trial



## NMPeters (7 Jun 2004)

Here is a message that went out recently regarding a new recruiting trial for the Army Reserves. It's pretty straight forward and will last for a year. It started 1 Jun 04 so will affect anyone whose medical is booked after that date. Don't hesitate to ask me any questions about this but for those of you that are unfamiliar with the military acronyms, don't get wrapped around the axel over them. Just take in the gist of the message. For unit recruiting officers, pay particular note to paragraph 6. Hope this clears things up for some.

SUBJ: ARMY RESERVE (ARES) RECRUITING TRIAL

1. SITUATION. RECRUITING HAS BEEN THE SINGLE MOST
PERSISTENT DISSATISFIER IN THE ARES. THE PERCEPTION IS THAT
RECRUITING IS OVERLY BUREAUCRATIC AND THAT THE PROTRACTED
PROCESS IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE LOSS OF MANY APPLICANTS WHO
SEEK ALTERNATE EMPLOYMENT BEFORE THEY CAN BE ACCEPTED FOR
ENROLMENT

2. AIM. THE PURPOSE OF THIS MESSAGE IS TO ANNOUNCE A ONE-
YEAR TRIAL IN ARMY RESERVE RECRUITING, STARTING 1 JUNE 04,
THAT WILL PERMIT MORE RAPID ENROLMENT OF QUALIFIED
APPLICANTS. THIS MESSAGE ALSO PROVIDES GUIDANCE FOR ARES
UNITS

3. DISCUSSION. ON 10 DEC 03, CDS ORDERED ADM (HR-MIL) TO
CONDUCT THIS ONE-YEAR TRIAL. INSTRUCTIONS TO CFRG AND THE
CFRC S ARE IN THE FINAL STAGE OF PREPARATION AND WILL BE
PROMULGATED SHORTLY. CFRG IS ALSO PREPARING A PAFF
ANNOUNCEMENT

4. THERE IS NO CHANGE IN ENROLMENT STANDARDS. THE KEY
CHANGE IS THAT APPLICANTS WHO ARE DEEMED TO MEET THE
ESTABLISHED STANDARDS FOR ENROLMENT MAY BE ENROLLED
IMMEDIATELY THAT THEY HAVE BEEN SO DETERMINED BY A CFRC.
THE NATIONAL-LEVEL, OR CFRG, VERIFICATION OF THE PROCESSING
DONE BY THE CFRC WILL STILL BE CARRIED OUT BUT WILL NOT
DELAY ENROLMENT

5. IT IS KNOWN THAT APPLICANTS FOUND BY A CFRC TO MEET
ENROLMENT STANDARDS, ARE GENERALLY CONFIRMED BY THE CFRG
VERIFICATION PROCESS. IN THE UNLIKELY EVENT THAT CFRG
VERIFICATION RAISES A QUESTION, THE RECRUIT MAY BE REQUIRED
TO PROVIDE FURTHER INFORMATION. WHILE AWAITING THE
PROCESSING OF THIS ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, THE RECRUIT MAY
BE RESTRICTED FROM SPECIFIED TRAINING OR REQUIRED TO CEASE
TRAINING. IF A RECRUIT, UPON FURTHER VERIFICATION, IS FOUND
TO NOT MEET ENROLMENT STANDARDS, THEY MAY BE RELEASED UNDER
QR&O 15.01 RELEASE ITEM 5(e) IRREGULAR ENROLMENT. RECRUITS
WILL SIGN AN ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF THIS SITUATION AT THE TIME
OF ENROLMENT. THIS QUOTE STATEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING UNQUOTE
WILL BE PROVIDED BY THE CFRC

6. GUIDANCE TO ARES UNITS. THIS PROCESS WILL WORK BEST
WHEN THE UNIT TAKES A PROACTIVE ROLE IN MENTORING
APPLICANTS. APPLICANTS WHO INQUIRE AT THE UNIT OR ARE REDIRECTED
FROM A CFRC, SHOULD BE TAKEN IN HAND BY UNIT
ATTRACTION AND RECRUITING PERSONNEL. APPLICANTS FILES
SHOULD BE COORDINATED BY ASSIGNED UNIT PERSONNEL TO EMULATE
THE MODEL FILE AS DEFINED BY THE CFRC. THIS WILL GREATLY
FACILITATE CFRC PROCESSING AND MINIMIZE INCONVENIENCE AND
DELAYS FOR THE APPLICANT. ONCE A MODEL FILE IS SUBMITTED TO
A CFRC, IT SHOULD BE THE NORM THAT DETERMINATION OF THE
APPLICANT AGAINST RECRUITING STANDARDS IS MADE WITHIN ONE
WORKING WEEK

7. AS ABOVE, APPLICANTS WHO ARE DEEMED BY THE CFRC TO MEET
THE ESTABLISHED STANDARDS FOR ENROLMENT MUST BE ENROLLED
IMMEDIATELY. APPLICANTS OF WHOM THERE IS A QUESTION THAT
CAN ONLY BE DETERMINED AT CFRG, MUST BE CLEARLY INFORMED OF
THE NATURE OF THE ISSUE AND KEPT INFORMED OF THE PROGRESS
OF THEIR FILE. THIS INFORMATION WILL BE AVAILABLE FROM THE
CFRC

8. CFRG WILL GATHER STATISTICS TO MEASURE THE EFFICACY OF
THIS TRIAL

SIGNED MGEN JHPM CARON, CHIEF OF THE LAND STAFF


----------



## Andyd513 (7 Jun 2004)

Sounds awesome, this would have made my application process about 2 mths shorter.


----------



## BDTyre (7 Jun 2004)

I am in the process of appealing a medical decision, so unfortunately, I doubt this will help me at all.


----------



## mkymk (7 Jun 2004)

So in theory, somebody with a Medical scheduled after June 1 is more likely to make it to BMQ than someone who had their medical in May? Is this 'trial' retroactive?


----------



## NMPeters (7 Jun 2004)

The trial is not retroactive. I can't answer questions on the BMQ because that is out of my area of expertise. However, those applicants whose medicals are scheduled after Jun 1, and are deemed fit by the CFRC, get their testing done immediately, and bring in all the necessary paperwork that is asked of them, can, in effect, be enrolled within one week.

Unfortunately, those medicals that were already sent to Borden prior to the trial starting, will have to await the results from there, as far as I have been informed.


----------



## phalen (7 Jun 2004)

i was told this near the end of may. I had finished all my tests in the beggining of may, but had to get a note from my family doctor relating to a sports injury years back. My family doctor is backed way up because of a stike going on at his office and couldn't get a appointment until june 9th. I was feeling down about not being allowd in, thats when i was told about these new rules that were to be made official june1, good to know they went thru. This has really saved me


----------



## Northern Touch (7 Jun 2004)

Just a quick question.

Who in the CRFC actually determines whether or not the applicant can meet the enrolement standards.  The doctor giving the actual medical test, or someone else?


----------



## Donut (7 Jun 2004)

Every CF medical category is assigned by one MO or PA, and then endorsed "concurred to" by a second MO, so to answer your question, yes and yes.

AFAIK, this concurrence always takes place in Borden, which is where the backlog has tended to develop.

This change seems to indicate that the Physician Assistant (PA) working at CFRC will assign a medical category, which will be accepted as valid pending review by CFRG.  The member can now be enrolled before that second signature is on the medical.

Hope this helps


----------



## Northern Touch (8 Jun 2004)

ParaMedTech said:
			
		

> Every CF medical category is assigned by one MO or PA, and then endorsed "concurred to" by a second MO, so to answer your question, yes and yes.
> 
> AFAIK, this concurrence always takes place in Borden, which is where the backlog has tended to develop.
> 
> ...



Yup, helped a lot.  My application has been done for a while, I was just curious because the msg just said the CFRC in a generic way and never really specified a specific person..
I have no idea what AFAIK means tho. :-\


----------



## Donut (8 Jun 2004)

As Far As I Know 

Damn abreviations!


----------



## Yard Ape (8 Jun 2004)

Generally sounds good.  I imagine that any med-file that raises any level of concern will still travel through the same slow process, but for the majority of people this will be a good thing.

Will training restrictions be uniform on all applicants enrolled this way (possibly no field or range time until Borden is done with the file, but drill & classroom are okay?), or will restrictions be unique to applicants?


 8) Yard Ape


----------



## NMPeters (9 Jun 2004)

The training restriction applies only to a recruit who has been enrolled and has started their training and then Borden finds something irregular with the medical file. As to what the restriction will be will also be determined on a case by case basis.

So once a person is enrolled, there is no restriction on training unless Borden informs that there is a problem with the medical.


----------



## ags281 (9 Jun 2004)

Definately should cut down on some frustration - I like it. I remember being more than a little bit miffed   :sniper:   waiting for Borden to get around to reading my file. 

Out of curiosity, anyone have an official place I can give as a reference on this policy? (I know a couple guys who are thinking of joining and would want to check this out)


----------



## Tracker (10 Jun 2004)

All we've talked about here is medical problems.  What about VFS and CRNC?  Is there any talk about extending this to include Regular applicants if the trial is a success?


----------



## NMPeters (10 Jun 2004)

I have the CANLANDGEN and the signed policy directive, however, these are internal documents and are usually not published and/or distributed publically. The policy is in place. There's no need for recruits to "check out" the policy. I also don't think it will garner any favourable impressions with the recruiting staff for an applicant to arrive at the recruiting office spouting references to internal documents.

This trial affects only the Army Reserve. If it's a success, CFRG will consider expanding it. As for the VFS process, I know that there are some people looking into that. Where they are and what the progress is, is anyone's guess.


----------



## casing (10 Jun 2004)

Tracker said:
			
		

> What about VFS...



I think the VFS issue is getting sorted out nicely.  When I applied, they had my VFS in a matter of days (could have been minutes but they didn't actually try to get it for a few days) because it was in the computer system. This is for former service from '91 to '94. The VFS was my biggest concern when I applied, but it ended up being the simplest aspect (actually, my whole process was very smooth).  So if the candidate's VFS is in the system there shouldn't be a problem getting it. The only question would be if that candidate's file had been entered in yet or not.


----------



## Garbageman (10 Jun 2004)

My VFS took about 8 months!     :threat:   Like was said though, it must depend if you've been entered into the computer system or not.   I've got a weird combo of prior service though, so I may be a special case.   My Mom says I'm special anyway.


----------



## Tracker (10 Jun 2004)

I may be wrong, but if you chose to be placed on the Supplimentary Reserve List at the time of your release, VFS happens much quicker.


----------



## Garbageman (10 Jun 2004)

My problem is that I'm still in the system (CIC).  You think that would make things easier (they could just look me up in Peoplesoft!), but apparently not.


----------



## space_sldr (11 Jun 2004)

They should've done this earlier, its too late for most of us...


----------



## NMPeters (11 Jun 2004)

But it's not too late for those coming in now. Yes, this should have been done sooner, but if you think the administrative process with recruiting is slow, you should try the administrative process of the headquarters in general. Things do not move quickly. It's both big P and little P political. This particular trial had a lot of big P political influence as well. Another problem we had is that the Navy and Air Force were not generating the same complaints about the length of the recruiting process which is why this is being trialled only within the Army Reserve for now. 

It's very easy to sit back and say this should have been done sooner. There are a lot of new policies that have been or will be developed that should have been done sooner. However, until you've been in for a while and can fully understand the mechanisms of the organization you are now a part of, you will be saying that a lot. I am now in my 25th year and I still sit back sometimes and say "this should have been done sooner". Yes, it should have. Let's just be happy that it's happening now.


----------



## space_sldr (11 Jun 2004)

Very True....
Sooooooooo, that means, whoever applied after June 1st 2004, their medical should take one week instead of 3-4?


----------



## Garbageman (11 Jun 2004)

space_sldr said:
			
		

> Very True....
> Sooooooooo, that means, whoever applied after June 1st 2004, their medical should take one week instead of 3-4?


Space_sldr - you should re-read the original post.  This doesn't mean that your medical will be processed quicker, but rather that your file will be able to proceed before medical results return.  In short, the overall processing time for medicals will remain the same, but the Recruiting Centre can proceed with your file a little quicker.


----------

