# CAN Border Gd Use of Force Trainers Getting Psych Testing



## The Bread Guy (4 Jan 2007)

You'd think this would make sense, but funny how a pretty-high-up element of this story is how it was quickly sole sourced -- anything to accentuate the negative, I guess.   Shared in accordance with the "fair dealing" provisions, Section 29, of the Copyright Act.

*Government orders psychological testing for trainers of armed border guards *
Bruce Cheadle, Canadian Press, 2 Jan 07
Article Link - MERX notice

 Canadian border guards who want to train their colleagues in the use of weapons will have to pass a test of their own later this month - to see if they're psychologically fit to handle a gun.

*A hurried contract tender worth $74,000 was posted this week with a sole-source provider in mind due to what the tender calls "tight timeframes" for getting the Conservative government policy underway by July.*

The contract's objective: "to evaluate psychological readiness to carry a side arm of candidates who have applied for a . . . Use of Force Trainer position."

Up to 110 such candidates, spread across Canada, are to be tested for medical and personality disorders Jan. 15-31, with followup interviews and evaluations completed by Feb. 15.

"In order to meet the tight timeframes required to staff trainers and commence implementation of the training and arming of CBSA (Canada Border Services Agency) employees by July 2007, there is a requirement to engage highly knowledgeable and experienced psychologists," says the tender notice.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced last August that Canada's border guards would be armed for the first time, starting this year.

"We're going to take action and get things done," Harper said at border crossing photo opportunity in Surrey, B.C.

The government hopes to have at least 150 border guards armed and on the job by March 2008, with hundreds more added in each of the following years.

But the guards must first be trained in how to handle weapons and when to use them, so creating an in-house staff capable of providing that training is a priority.

The potential trainers are being screened for psychological problems. The tests are to include the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory and Sixteen Personality Factor, along with stress and clinical interviews.

The government notice says it intends to award the contract to Wilson Banwell Human Solutions of Calgary, because it says the company is the only firm capable of doing the work.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (5 Jan 2007)

From my contacts with the CBSA guys, there is much foot dragging in the upper brass of the organization over getting the guns.  They are all Liberal-era types, and they really don't care too much what the PM wants.  Remember, they are being run by an ex-weather man.  There have been all sorts of time wasting, fact finding missions such as "what kind of gun to get" etc.  The general feeling is the upper ech of CBSA is going to waste as much time as possible in the hopes that an election comes up and a new Liberal leader dumps or "re-evaluates" the arming of the guards. 

That being said, the MMPI is a basic test in law enforcement.  900-odd true and false questions on all kinds of crazy stuff:

T or F  I would certainly like to plant a garden

T or F  Sometimes I get angry at the things I see

T or F  I frequently have trouble starting and controlling bowel movements  

By the end of it, your head it buzzing.  I think if you had any tendencies towards crazy before the test, they come out during it.  God help you if you get your bubble card marks out of order.   
I have no idea how they analyze it though.  Must be someone around here with a psych degree.


----------



## The Bread Guy (5 Jan 2007)

Hazy memories from Psych 101....

Scoring on 10 scales -- Depression, Hysteria, Psychopathology, Masculinity-Femininity, Paranoia, and Schizophrenia are the ones that come to mind ( I think Grumpy, Sleepy, Dopey and Doc are the last ones), with cross-references to things like "how many scores contradict other scores?", a rating for how many answers are REALLY rare, and how much it appears the test taker is trying to fudge or answer what s/he thinks he wants them to say.

Here's the different scores/combinations and what they (might) mean.  (.pdf)

In terms of validity, I think the biggest non-clinical critique of this and other tests are:
1)  you should judge someone by MORE than just one set of test scores;
2)  need to know about the person's background/history to make the most sense; and
3)  there doesn't seem to be any link between test scores and job performance.

In a public sector context, I'd worry (an an employee) about where ELSE the info can be used, and (as someone in the system, as well as the taxpayer) reliability -- how good a job has this screening regime done in other jurisdictions?


----------



## zipperhead_cop (5 Jan 2007)

milnewstbay said:
			
		

> In a public sector context, I'd worry (an an employee) about where ELSE the info can be used, and (as someone in the system, as well as the taxpayer) reliability -- how good a job has this screening regime done in other jurisdictions?



Ah, I wouldn't worry about what happens with the info.  There is doctor/client privilege issues with giving out the info.  Plus, if it could be used to preclude some people from getting promoted, I wouldn't expect to be working for some of the clowns that I do.   
As far as reliability...that is debatable.  Certainly it would screen out the window lickers, but I also have seen a number of people who got in and really aren't suited to the job.  Same will apply for Customs.  What will be tricky is when they start testing the entire employee population, and someone fails the test.  By and large, though, I still feel that firearm usage is a training issue, not a big psychological one.


----------



## portcullisguy (18 Jan 2007)

As a border officer who has thrown my name in the hat for the use of force trainer job, I have a huge interest in what happens with the arming initiative, and what is going on with the whole process of selection.

On the topic of psych testing, I have a few comments.

First, the CBSA should have been doing psych testing all along.  I have done the MMPI twice in my life (as far as I am aware, I had no problems... I got the job in the first case, and in the second I never found out as I failed the physical).  The MMPI is a standardized test, and it's been around for decades, in one form or another.  As was explained to me the first time I wrote it, the purpose to was assess my reliability and suitability for a job involving confidentiality and securing high value assets, etc.  I'ld have to check with my cop friends, but I am pretty sure they all wrote one to get on with the police.  The nature of our duties as border officers, involving confidential information, criminal records, drug smuggling intelligence, Crown assets, etc., suggests that this test would be appropriate for employment _anyway_.

Second, I do not believe that psych testing is the end all be all answer to fitness to carry a firearm for duty.  The army never gave me a psych test, yet I am qualified to be armed with most infantry small arms, all of which can do a helluva lot more damage than a .40 cal pistol.  Some people I work with believe psych tests are an absolute must before arming anyone ... usually with the common refrain, "There are all kinds of people here I'd be scared to work with if they had a gun!"  Well, I understand part of this is just lame attempts at cynical humour, but the reality is it is insulting to the 6,000 fellow border officers across Canadam to suggest that giving any of them a gun makes them automatically untrustworthy and unbalanced to the point that you don't feel safe working with them.  If they are that bad, why are they working there in the first place?  These officers are already armed -- with batons and pepper spray, and access to vast amounts of information that can do almost as much harm as a firearm if misused.


For those of you watching this whole subject closely, as I am, you will be very interested in the developments coming up, if my sources are correct (they usually are).

The psych testing will happen very quickly, once they have identified a contractor.  The appointments for trainers will happen very quickly, and they expect to have them training by March (if I am one of them, this might kiss my chances at finished PLQ goodbye again for the second year in a row!).  The government is adamant that armed border officers will start appearing at border crossings by the end of the summer.  This is the Minister's timeline.  The CBSA is now in the process of making it happen.


----------



## portcullisguy (28 Jan 2007)

Well, I just did my interview last week.

Although I cannot disclose many of the details, I can say that it was fairly cookie cutter, and the interview board included an RCMP trainer.  It seemed to cover a wide range of details, and reminded me of a police initial hiring interview (i.e. competency-based).

The selection board informed me that the psychological screening contract has been awarded, and that it was very likely that testing and screening interviews would take place in Ottawa in February, and that there would probably only be very brief notice given to candidates, due to short timelines.

The instructor training will be 6 weeks in length, total, likely broken up into 2 segments:  3 weeks of firearms training (including 1 week of instruction techniques), and 3 weeks of use-of-force and defensive tactics (now called "Controlled Defensive Tactics" I believe) training, again with instruction techniques thrown in.  All instructor training will be at an RCMP facility in Ottawa, not at Depot as previously rumoured.

For those of you in public-service-land, the AS-4 Use of Force Trainer position will be reclassified into the new "FB" group, although the board was unable to confirm what the job description would be and at what level it would be classified.  Classification for all FB jobs should be announced sometime in February.

That was about all I was able to get out of them...

Wish me luck!


----------



## zipperhead_cop (28 Jan 2007)

Good luck, brother!  I happen to know there is another member here who also had an interview.  Hopefully you both get it.  (don't ask, not tellin'  )


----------



## The Bread Guy (28 Jan 2007)

Best of luck - let us know (as much as you can) how it's going!


----------



## medaid (29 Jan 2007)

Good luck indeed!  It will be a tough job for a while.


Just wandering, what's the likelihood that the SBSG program will be continued? I've heard a lot of mixed feelings, and most of it is leaning towards its termination. Any thoughts?


----------



## zipperhead_cop (31 Jan 2007)

MedTech said:
			
		

> Just wandering, what's the likelihood that the SBSG program will be continued? I've heard a lot of mixed feelings, and most of it is leaning towards its termination. Any thoughts?



What does that stand for?


----------



## medaid (31 Jan 2007)

oh hahaha Student Border Services Guards I forgot the official designations now... back when it was just Student Customs Inspectors


----------



## J.J (1 Feb 2007)

To quote the CBSA Intranet site in the firearms initiative Q&A...

_Will there still be a place for students working as border service officers in the CBSA?

The presence of students in locations that will be armed will be phased out over time. Students will be replaced by part-time, fully-trained and equipped border services officers._

Some of the best Officer's that work here are students, who have been around for years, but I will be happy to see them go. More so than not they are more of a liability than a benefit. I know they are hiring about 100 for the Windsor/St Clair region this year, but it is supposed to be the last year. An educated guess would say that several of the current  students will just be "bridged over" to a regular Officer and receive the training they should have in the beginning.


----------



## J.J (9 Feb 2007)

The Psych testing procedure for the trainers has come out.


Assessment Procedure:

1)	Assessment Stage 1

a)	Candidates will be administered the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory – 2 (MMPI-2) and the Sixteen Personality Factor (16PF). The MMPI-2 is administered to assist in the identification of any psychopathology and the 16PF is intended to provide normal trait descriptors of the candidate. These will be administered by clinical psychologists. 

b)	All of the foregoing formal assessment information will be reviewed and interpreted in order to prepare a Stage 1 Assessment Report.
  
2)	Assessment Stage 2

a)	Each candidate will be interviewed individually. Based on the Stage 1 Assessment Report, a clinical interview will be conducted with the purpose of investigating further any specific areas of concern or investigation identified in a Stage 1 Assessment Report. This clinical interview will address specifically the identification of any psychopathology and any relevant trait predictors, particularly the candidates concern for safety, self-control and assertiveness.

b)	A Structured Stress Interview will be administered. The Structured Stress Interview is an interview process which investigates the candidate’s stress tolerance and stress coping style. It allows for the evaluation of a candidate’s ability to deal with stress as well as the candidate’s stress coping style and the ability to maintain appropriate judgment under stress.

3)	Assessment Report

The results from Assessment Stage 2 will be combined with the results from Assessment Stage 1 and a report for each candidate will be prepared.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (10 Feb 2007)

So basically, some firm has a friend that is highly placed at the CBSA, and got an open ticket contract to do a ridiculously over achieving battery of tests in order to line their own pockets.  Nice.


----------



## marshall sl (10 Feb 2007)

I'm a Firearms instructor with the Correctional Service of Canada.No Pyschological test for us.We have a few officers seconded to the RCMP trg Academy in Chilliwack.No test there either.


----------



## J.J (11 Feb 2007)

With the CO's I have met in the past, in my opinion, the psych testing would be a lost cause... ;D

I seriously think the department's standard is a bit of overkill, they are being overly cautious, mainly for "CYA". The last thing they want is any doubt or accidents to happen (which will happen) and the managers to be accused they did not do enough.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (12 Feb 2007)

Man, I can only imagine the hand wringing and panty twisting the first time you guys end up actually having to use a firearm.


----------



## J.J (12 Feb 2007)

I would imagine the CBSA would react the same as your department would. In the investigation of use of force incidents, the investigating officers are BSO's and they are enforcement minded . Unlike with what you have to deal with, you have the SIU trying to hang you guys. We do not have an organization to oversee us, we do "in-house" investigations


----------



## portcullisguy (19 Feb 2007)

Well, did my psych interview on Friday.  Apparently quite a few names from GTA also doing it, although I was not privy to the list.

And yep, it followed that formula.  MMPI-2 followed by PF-16, two common battery tests.  Followed by a structured stress interview, which involved the candidate (me) talking about a stressful incident in recent memory, how I was feeling about it before, during & after, what I was thinking, and what I was doing.  Two stressful incidents is better.

Sounds very much like the standard psych testing that most of my friends went through getting on to various Ontario police services.

I was told I was suitable, so I can only assume I'm waiting for a phone call at this point.

The reclassification is also due out soon, and they have already released a list of new job titles.  It looks like the Use of Force Trainers will be in the FB classification group, so I would imagine that if I did take the job, but still didn't like it, I could weasel my way back to my home port somehow.  It would be a bit more difficult if they remained under the AS group and didn't get moved to the FB group.

The big headache for me personally right now is that I just started back on a PLQ course this weekend, and I intended to finish the weekend mods before going away for mod 6 this summer.  If I get the use of force trainer job (and accept it) then I would have to go off the PLQ (again) and finish the mods some other time.  Might take me years to get the !@#$ course done at my rate!


----------



## zipperhead_cop (22 Feb 2007)

portcullisguy said:
			
		

> Well, did my psych interview on Friday.  Apparently quite a few names from GTA also doing it, although I was not privy to the list.



So how did it go?  I know the job reclass is out now.  How did you make out?


----------



## portcullisguy (24 Feb 2007)

Got my official email today... I am going to Ottawa for three weeks on March 5th to do the next phase of the training.

Just looking over the pre-course info now.

Looks like there's no fooling around here, the standards are as high as you would expect -- 225/250 minimum score on the RCMP firearms practical test, for starters.  Lots of extra practice time built in to the schedule, I'm looking forward to getting there and getting stuck in.

I haven't seen the reclass for the position yet, but I am told it will be at FB-04, which is equal to the intel officers, and between the line officers and the superintendents.


----------

