# Who REALLY knows best?



## ttlbmg (28 Sep 2011)

Quick question for any recruiters on this site...

I currently have my application into the forces, and I know that the trades I want come up few and far between, so I have no delusions that I will get in quickly, I know it is a waiting game. However, I would like some opinions on this. Who is the best source to speak with in terms of the trades open currently in the CF? I have heard multiple answers from many different recruiters, and I would really like to know. Who has the best info? National recruitment center? Local centers? People within the trade in the CF? The forces.ca website? Opinions? Experiences?


----------



## Pusser (28 Sep 2011)

Not to put too fine a point on it, the guy who knows best is the one who calls you to say that the CF is now ready to enroll you.  The status of any occupation is very fluid and can change daily.  In my opinion, there really is no better answer.


----------



## ttlbmg (28 Sep 2011)

My reasoning behind this question is that I am currently considering other occupations other than the ones that I had chosen, and I don't want to, I guess, "miss the boat" on one of the trades that I am looking into, other than the ones listed. I know that in regards to the trades that I have chosen, if there is EVER anything open, they will call. My other concern, for lack of a better term, is that there seems to be a lack of organization with the process. I have heard so many different answers. Any offering to that?


----------



## Michael OLeary (28 Sep 2011)

As Pusser said, the situation for any trade is fluid and any information on available vacancies is volatile. While you may see that a trade has "X" number of openings, what you do not also see is that there are already "2X" (or more) completed and merit listed files. So, by the time you see the first number and go to the CFRC, they can already be saying the trade is closed again. There is no answer anyone can give you that will establish a correlation between an announced number of vacancies in any trade and a realistic expectation of then starting your recruiting process, choosing that trade and completing your application process in time to be merit listed for that group. Any time trade vacancies are announced, you can be pretty sure that anyone being selected for them has already been in the system and waiting for months, if not longer. All you can do is choose the trades you want, complete the process and be patient.


----------



## ttlbmg (28 Sep 2011)

Okay, this is going to sound like a ridiculous question, but would anyone have any information on what trade might have MORE openings to it in the coming year? I am considering changing one of my options to MP officer. I wanted to have my app in, but now I am considering changing an option. I have just found it slightly frustrating trying to find solid answers, but maybe that's just my personality, rather than recruitment! I also understand that at this point, I will be waiting until at minimum the next fiscal year.


----------



## Maxadia (28 Sep 2011)

ttlbmg said:
			
		

> My other concern, for lack of a better term, is that there seems to be a lack of organization with the process. I have heard so many different answers. Any offering to that?



It's not that it is disorganized.  It's just that there's almost 36 million people in this country (not all candidates, of course), and they're having things submitted all over the country at once.  It's actually quite remarkable that they can even manage the application process with the amount of items coming in across the country.


----------



## Michael OLeary (28 Sep 2011)

ttlbmg said:
			
		

> Okay, this is going to sound like a ridiculous question, but would anyone have any information on what trade might have MORE openings to it in the coming year?



You can see here what the "in -demand" trades are: http://www.forces.ca/en/jobexplorer/browsejobs-70

Anything other information you might receive would be only a guess. As I stated above, the number of openings is relative to the number of waiting file-completed applicants.

There could be 100 vacancies for Infantry, with 300 waiting applicants. At the same time there could be 10 openings for Marine Engineering Mechanic, but only 5 ready applicants. So, even with ten times as many Infantry vacancies, your chances of a (relatively) faster enrollment as a MEM are much better in such a scenario.

*The bottom line is that there is no simple piece of information that anyone can give you that will help you "beat the system" on applying and waiting for the trade you want. *Consider also, that most people here, including me, will advise you not to take a trade you're not seriously interested in joining just to get through the door. You will not be happy if you do and you may never have an opportunity to transfer from that trade to the one you want.


----------



## Pusser (29 Sep 2011)

I would like to reiterate what Michael O'Leary has said.  DO NOT, DO NOT, DO NOT, enroll in an occupation in which you are not truly interested.  You will be miserable and you will make everyone around you (including those who control your career, especially in the early stages) miserable.  Creating misery does not a successful or happy career make.


----------



## jeffb (29 Sep 2011)

Pusser said:
			
		

> I would like to reiterate what Michael O'Leary has said.  DO NOT, DO NOT, DO NOT, enroll in an occupation in which you are not truly interested.



I know someone who joined as an artillery officer to "get his foot in the door". 3 years later he's not qualified as an artillery officer and is facing release for being an administrative burden after repeated requests for an occupational transfer, amongst other things. 

Stay patient and think long and hard about what you want to do. Getting through phase training is hard enough and almost impossible if you hate the trade that you have been hired into.


----------



## Pusser (29 Sep 2011)

jeffb said:
			
		

> I know someone who joined as an artillery officer to "get his foot in the door". 3 years later he's not qualified as an artillery officer and is facing release for being an administrative burden after repeated requests for an occupational transfer, amongst other things.



Not only is this guy not getting what he really wanted, it is unlikely that he will ever get it now.  Folks released under these circumstances are seldom re-enrolled, even if their desired occupation opens up.  The other thing to think about is the pure selfishness of this individual.  Who now waits to become an artillery officer, but can't because this guy is taking up space?


----------



## PJGary (29 Sep 2011)

Pusser said:
			
		

> I would like to reiterate what Michael O'Leary has said.  DO NOT, DO NOT, DO NOT, enroll in an occupation in which you are not truly interested.  You will be miserable and you will make everyone around you (including those who control your career, especially in the early stages) miserable.  Creating misery does not a successful or happy career make.



x2

I have said this before too, from watching a couple of my friends attempts; if you think the recruiting process is an administrative nightmare, just _wait_ till you try to VOT once you're in. Fight for what you want! in the CF you make your own luck.


----------



## ttlbmg (30 Sep 2011)

It is not that I DON'T want the trade, I am waffling between two trades, and if I have a better chance at getting in with one more so than the other, that is where my question on open trades. I have been told by recruiters that the website doesn't accurately reflect the opportunities. I was told by a recruiter to go in for anything, then OT. I don't even want to try that, zero desire to "do time" to get what I want. God knows how long that could take...


----------



## Pusser (30 Sep 2011)

ttlbmg said:
			
		

> It is not that I DON'T want the trade, I am waffling between two trades, and if I have a better chance at getting in with one more so than the other, that is where my question on open trades. I have been told by recruiters that the website doesn't accurately reflect the opportunities. *I was told by a recruiter to go in for anything, then OT.[/u]* I don't even want to try that, zero desire to "do time" to get what I want. God knows how long that could take...




A recruiter told you this?  Or is that what you think you heard?

I was soundly admonished when I first joined this forum by both a recruiter who posts here and a Mod for accusing recruiters of saying things like this.  I said words to the effect that this was a recruiter's favourite *lie* at which I was informed in no uncertain terms that recruiters were not told to lie to candidtates and that I should be ashamed of myself for even suggesting it.  Sadly, this comment and those I've heard from some of my subordinates in the past indicate that I was not so far off the mark....

Now, before the dogpile starts, I do not now, nor have I ever believed that recruiters are routinely expected to lie in order to get people to sign up.  In fact, I'm willing to bet that the recruiting course specifically instructs recruiters NOT to lie or attempt to mislead.  I also realize that eager candidates frequently employ selective hearing and hear only what they want to hear (ignoring any caveats that don't fit the model they've created in their minds).  However, I can't help but think that there is a modicum of truth in what I've heard.


----------



## ttlbmg (1 Oct 2011)

He did say, that I could enter an officer trade, such as artillery (this or logistics was suggested to me by the recruiter) would accept any degree. I could enter applying for these trades, finish the training, spend a year or two within that trade, then transfer into the trade of my choice. He explained that as long as I did not mind "doing time" in something else, that I would then be able to more easily get into my trade. I don't think it is a lie, I am a suitable candidate for that position, and there is a possibility to transfer once one is in. (regardless of the fact that it might be a slim to none chance) The man has to recruit for something, and when looking possible quotas to fill my desired trade, it is somewhat competitive. Why not recruit someone for something needed, and let them know their options? He had also explained to me the competitive nature of my trade. I don't think he tried to dupe me into signing for something, he just threw it out as an option.

I don't want to be an artillery, armoured, infantry, or logistics officer. (for the most part, these trades will accept any degree) These are not my choices, so I didn't sign up for any of them. The choices I made either required my degree, or were chosen after researching the trade. And I am not saying that the recruiter lied. It is might not be letting me in on the total package that comes with trying to OT, but he didn't lie.


----------



## Pusser (1 Oct 2011)

ttlbmg said:
			
		

> He did say, that I could enter an officer trade, such as artillery (this or logistics was suggested to me by the recruiter) would accept any degree. I could enter applying for these trades, finish the training, spend a year or two within that trade, then transfer into the trade of my choice. He explained that as long as I did not mind "doing time" in something else, that I would then be able to more easily get into my trade. I don't think it is a lie, I am a suitable candidate for that position, and there is a possibility to transfer once one is in. (regardless of the fact that it might be a slim to none chance) The man has to recruit for something, and when looking possible quotas to fill my desired trade, it is somewhat competitive. Why not recruit someone for something needed, and let them know their options? He had also explained to me the competitive nature of my trade. I don't think he tried to dupe me into signing for something, he just threw it out as an option.
> 
> I don't want to be an artillery, armoured, infantry, or logistics officer. (for the most part, these trades will accept any degree) These are not my choices, so I didn't sign up for any of them. The choices I made either required my degree, or were chosen after researching the trade. And I am not saying that the recruiter lied. It is might not be letting me in on the total package that comes with trying to OT, but he didn't lie.



OK, so he wasn't "lying," but by even suggesting that OT was a viable option I would argue that he was certainly misleading you.  Yes, OTs are possible, but they can take a long time and it an be very difficult.  One important thing to keep in mind is that your current occupation has to be willing to let you go (darn near impossible in a stressed occupation) and your chosen occupation has to be willing to take you in (unlikely if you're not performing well in your current occupation, which is difficult if you don't like it).


----------



## Michael OLeary (1 Oct 2011)

ttlbmg said:
			
		

> .... as I did not mind "doing time" in something else.....



There's no coincidence why this phrase fits the situation. Those who grasp at that low probability option and think they'll just suck it up for a few years and then get to transfer just by asking are often very dissatisfied with their first trade, and that leads to being an unlikely candidate to make selection for occupational transfer. Hard trades to enroll in can often also be the hardest to transfer into, when they do have openings they are usually looking to fill the trade from the bottom.


----------



## ttlbmg (1 Oct 2011)

That was my thought as well. Like I said, my first choice trade, I believe, is a competitive trade, and a trade that isn't readily available. (at least from from what I have heard from the recruitment side) I am just trying to weigh my options better. I know that the CFAT defines the aptitude for a trade, but are there any other programs within recruitment or the CF that might offer more insight as to what might be better suited for me? I just want to ensure that I am on the right track. 

I do have a small understanding of the LONG and arduous process that is involved in an OT; I have some friends currently in the CF that I have spoken with. My goal is to get into the CF, hopefully sooner rather than later, into an officer position that I will be adept at.


----------



## aesop081 (1 Oct 2011)

Pick the trades you will apply for as if you are going to be doing that for 25 years. My remuster took over 10 years to happen and i was lucky it did.



			
				ttlbmg said:
			
		

> but are there any other programs within recruitment or the CF that might offer more insight as to what might be better suited for me?



You are the only person who can decide that. The CFAT is a tool to determine aptitude but only through doing research and talking to recruiters and other CF members will you determine what you may be suited for.


----------



## Michael OLeary (1 Oct 2011)

Your best indicator you can have is through studying everything you can find on all stages in the careers of the trades you might like, and then focus on the ones you can see yourself doing personally satisfying work in. Just because the CFAT shows you have the base aptitudes for a trade doesn't mean you will not find it mind-numbingly boring or otherwise unsatisfying. The CFAT is less to determine what trade "fits" you, then it is to eliminate people from the trades that, based on the CF's experience, they will not be able to meet expectations in one or more developmental or training areas. After the CFAT narrows your choices (or not, depending on how you score), the trick is to choose one of the trades you will be happy in.


----------



## ttlbmg (1 Oct 2011)

Okay now, piggyback question to that, is there a way that I can take my CFAT and go through that process prior to picking the desired trades? That way that portion is done, and I can be merited? Also, is there anything that I can include within my application or add to my application that might merit me higher in the selection?


----------



## aesop081 (1 Oct 2011)

ttlbmg said:
			
		

> Okay now, piggyback question to that, is there a way that I can take my CFAT and go through that process prior to picking the desired trades?



No. Do your homework first...pick a trade...apply for that. CFAT and everything comes afterwards.


----------



## ttlbmg (1 Oct 2011)

I feel like I have researched a lot, but I will ask if there are any MP officers out there that could tell me a little more about how they feel about their positions. This is the trade that I am really taking into consideration as a choice, and replacing another choice. Any MP officers? 

Also, if there are any TDOs that could tell me about their experiences with recruitment, it would be of great assistance as well. This is my number 1, the ideal. From what I have been told however, very competitive, and the chances of a position coming up is about as likely as finding a unicorn...


----------



## jeffb (2 Oct 2011)

Michael O'Leary said:
			
		

> There's no coincidence why this phrase fits the situation. Those who grasp at that low probability option and think they'll just suck it up for a few years and then get to transfer just by asking are often very dissatisfied with their first trade, and that leads to being an unlikely candidate to make selection for occupational transfer. Hard trades to enroll in can often also be the hardest to transfer into, when they do have openings they are usually looking to fill the trade from the bottom.



Due to this dissatisfaction it is also just as likely that they will not be successful on their phase training and find themselves out of the CF. Phase training takes a long time, 1.5 - 2 years for Artillery Officers for example. In that time you have to complete BMOQ, BMOQ-L, DP 1.1 and DP 1.2 for a total of about 44 weeks of training. If you are just marking time in a trade waiting for a potential OT, are you really going to be motivated to put in all the effort to be successful in the trade that you are "doing time" in? Lots of people do not make it through phase training and in my estimate 80% of those cases are due to the individual either quitting or passively quitting by not putting in the required effort. 

It's been said already but I'm going to be blunt. If you don't want to be an Artillery Officer, Infantry Officer, etc... please don't enroll as such. The last thing we need is someone taking up space and getting in the way of people who love their job and their vocation.


----------

