# Whats new in Recruiting?  Gen Hillier's thoughts.  Options for improvement.



## Chief Clerk (15 Jul 2005)

Recruiters - any new happenings on the horizon that will even better our current system?

1.  Is recruiting due for any new changes in CFRG?
2.  The way we currently administer enrollment meds?
3.  Regionalization of CFRCs vice having CFRG?
4.  Possible ways of getting people in quicker?
5.  general stuff?


----------



## mdh (15 Jul 2005)

> Military has to broaden appeal and change how it recruits, says defence chief
> at 14:43 on July 15, 2005, EST.
> STEPHEN THORNE
> 
> ...



Chief Clerk,

Hot off the press for you.  

Cheers, mdh


----------



## Pieman (16 Jul 2005)

> Hillier says the military recently did not fully exploit an opportunity to sell itself at the Calgary Stampede, where organizers gave it prime space free to set up a booth worth up to $90,000 in rent.


I was at the Stampede displays this year, and the year before. There was lots more there this year, but it really just boils down to a few displays of weapons a vehicles. I talked with a few of the soldiers and asked a lot of questions about the equipment which they really understood and had lots of great info for me.

Years ago, when there was a large base in Calgary, me and my family went to see a parade and demostrations on Canada day. The Army put on a demo of a section attack, and had machine guns set up to shoot blanks. It was highly supervised and people were allowed to come up and lie on the ground and pull the trigger a few times. (I can't imagine them allowing something like that now) But it was a great time! 

Would be nice to see them put on some demonstations, of some kind, at the Stampede. Would make the experience more engaging.


----------



## paracowboy (16 Jul 2005)

hmmm, no mention of us barrel-chested, agile as a grey hounds, tough as leather, hard as steel Canadian Paratroopers. You wanna attract people to the Forces? Show us silly buggers doin' really cool stuff. It captures the imagination, if nothing else. Then, people get to the Recruiters, and start thinking logically about what they really want to do. But the "flash" gets them there in the first place.

Plus, it would involve a bunch of us going to Calgary for the Stampede, and it's always a great party! (Dad used to race chuckwagons. Spent a lot of time at the Stampede.)


----------



## Gunner98 (16 Jul 2005)

10:1 target but still hoping to focus on increasing women, aboriginals and minorities...does not compute...Does that mean WASM chosen will be the elite and non-WASM will be first come first serve.


----------



## kincanucks (16 Jul 2005)

_The Forces are attracting between 2.5 and three candidates for every recruit, said Brown. 

Hillier wants that closer to 10 to one, and he wants the army, navy and air force to better reflect Canada's ethnic makeup. _ 

The PAO is saying that it takes 2.5 to 3.0 applicants to produce one recruit (which is true) and the CDS wants it to be 10 applicants to produce one recruit.  Please tell me you copied and pasted that wrong?

The best way to cut down the recruiting process time is to increase the size of every CFRC/D two-fold, especially the med staff, put them all in bigger and better facilities, locate them in accessible and visible areas, give them a budget that is realistic, and let RMC, the CIC and reserves process their own applicants.  That will make it easier and faster for the Reg F NCMs and DEOs to be processed and enrolled.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (16 Jul 2005)

Face it not everyone is cut out for it (esp Cmbt arms).  I just wish they brought back the QL2/QL3, ISCC programs and didn't coddle these candidates so the BN's are screwed in the short term.


----------



## paracowboy (16 Jul 2005)

CFL said:
			
		

> Face it not everyone is cut out for it (esp Cmbt arms).   I just wish they brought back the QL2/QL3, ISCC programs and didn't coddle these candidates so the BN's are screwed in the short term.


not only the BN's. This constant watering down of the standards and challenges in Basic and the Battle Schools isn't fair to the recruits, either. They don't get to realize their full potential.


----------



## GO!!! (16 Jul 2005)

I agree with paracowboy. 

We recruit on the basis of being a fun place to work, with no violence or pain, job security and acceptance for all.

Why don't we start showing $hit exploding, arty firing (and impacting) targets and enemies being blown apart, weapons going rapid fire, ships and boarding parties, jumpers in the air....

Instead, we get a young inuit woman bemoaning her lack of a career.

If we were to concentrate on hiring the young and agressive, of all colors and creeds, we would be served better in the long and short term than hiring those who have failed in the civilian workplace and now require a paycheque and a pension. 

When was the last time you saw a Marine Corps recruiting drive like this? They are hitting their recruiting standards - even now, in the midst of an unpopular war.

Lets put the violence back into war and the people that fight it. We are not civil servants.


----------



## Dare (16 Jul 2005)

I am amazed they are addressing recruiting issues and pleased, as well (minus the suggestion of racial quotas). Common sense at the top.


----------



## canadianblue (16 Jul 2005)

I went on to the Marine Recruiting website today as well as the Canadian Forces Recruiting Website, and after visiting both I would be more likely to go to the Marine Recruiting Center [if Canadian's were allowed to apply] then the CFRC. Here's the thing on the Marine website they immediately hit you with slogans like The Few The Proud, for those who belong, and When I see a marine I see pride and strength, how do I get there, etc. Canada's website plasters you with new pay raises, women in the armed forces, and Aboriginal Entry Programs. What I think we need to change is the politically correct image many see of our armed forces, and instead focus on getting in those applicants who feel that they want to serve their country. Perhaps if on the recruiting website they were to show images of Canadian victories abroad which can evoke pride in any person then more people would be applying. I think that since I've always been interested in the military, and proud of Canada's military accomplishments I went to the Recruiting Center because I felt the need to go there and apply, not because of some pay raise just introduced. 

As well I disagree with the need to change the ethnic makeup of the forces, my understanding is that aboriginals are right now make up about 5% of the Army, close to the same amount as they make up of the general population. If immigrants feel they need to serve then all they have to do is go down to the recruiting center. 

A question for those of you in the army, what made you decide to serve, for myself I want to go because of the tradition, the pride of the uniform, and the challenge the army has to offer. But it seems for some reason that now Canada's army is starting to get more and more softer with regards to image, etc.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (16 Jul 2005)

Futuretrooper said:
			
		

> A question for those of you in the army, what made you decide to serve, for myself I want to go because of the tradition, the pride of the uniform, and the challenge the army has to offer. But it seems for some reason that now Canada's army is starting to get more and more softer with regards to image, etc.



Go here for your answer:

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/32475.0.html

Let's keep this on track please.


----------



## fleeingjam (16 Jul 2005)

OVER HERE Gen. Hiller look here !!!

They just spent like a million dollars on recruting videos i believe and i think thats a good step in terms of grabbing the publics attention. In the GTA they are even playing on radios.


----------



## rmc_wannabe (16 Jul 2005)

Futuretrooper said:
			
		

> I went on to the Marine Recruiting website today as well as the Canadian Forces Recruiting Website, and after visiting both I would be more likely to go to the Marine Recruiting Center [if Canadian's were allowed to apply] then the CFRC. Here's the thing on the Marine website they immediately hit you with slogans like The Few The Proud, for those who belong, and When I see a marine I see pride and strength, how do I get there, etc. Canada's website plasters you with new pay raises, women in the armed forces, and Aboriginal Entry Programs. What I think we need to change is the politically correct image many see of our armed forces, and instead focus on getting in those applicants who feel that they want to serve their country. Perhaps if on the recruiting website they were to show images of Canadian victories abroad which can evoke pride in any person then more people would be applying. I think that since I've always been interested in the military, and proud of Canada's military accomplishments I went to the Recruiting Center because I felt the need to go there and apply, not because of some pay raise just introduced.




http://www.cbc.ca/greatwar/

Heck, this persuaded me more than the CFRC website ;D


----------



## McG (16 Jul 2005)

Chief Clerk said:
			
		

> 4.   Possible ways of getting people in quicker?


Here is one recent step in that direction:



> CANFORGEN 097/05 ADM HR MIL 020 201321Z MAY 05
> CHANGE TO ENROLMENT MEDICAL PROCEDURE
> UNCLASSIFIED
> 
> ...


----------



## Infanteer (16 Jul 2005)

Well, here is an idea that I've bopped around before - I'm not sure I put it here yet, but I'll throw it up for the sake of discussion:

It seems that the recruiting process is a disjointed and disorganized process that ebbs and flows, leading to frustration among applicants who are tugged along for the ride.

The way I understand it, there needs to be 5 things done for a recruit to be processed:
1) Medical
2) Fitness Assessment
3) Interview
4) Security and Reliability Check 
5) Aptitude Test

Perhaps we need a system like the RM uses, holding a 3-day "Potential Soldier" course at cities around Canada.  Run by a recruiting cell, applicants will come to these things for a 2-night stay and essentially "DAG" into the Forces.  In the 3 days, applicants will be assessed and interviewed by a "Course Officer" - essentially a recruiting Officer, and administered by Recruiting NCOs.

A basic medical should be done at the CFRC when the applicant walks in the door - this should be done to ensure that people with medical conditions are screened before being thrown into a "Indoc Course" which may be a hazard to their health.  Those who have no medical "hick-ups" should be immediately booked into an Indoc Course, which should probably be a bi-monthly or monthly affair.

In the course of the 3 day indoc course, they will be:
-  Given a thourough medical examination (by a contracted civilian physician if need be)
-  Given a basic PT test to ensure they can move on with the training.
-  Assessed in a detailed interview by the Recruiting Officer
-  Fill out the security clearance form for processing
-  Write the aptitude test
-  Be run through a battery of exercises and drill by NCOs to "acclimate" them to military discipline and the demands of a soldier.
-  Be run through a series of lectures on career options, military life, pay, admin, what to expect, etc, etc.

Those who successfully navigate the 3 day "Indoc Course" will be issued a pair of boots to break in and be told when to expect to move onto St. Jean for BMQ (and thus offered a contract) - the onus is now on the training system to sort itself out and handle the influx of processed recruits.  While the recruit is waiting to leave, the detailed background check is being processed -   in the contract would be a condition allows the military an "out" if a potential recruit's background check fails.

Those who fail any aspect will be given the necessary advice on where to improve on and be booked for another "Indoc Course" a few months down the road.  Some will not like the 3-day military experience and simply decline to move on - thus the recruiting end has done its part in screening applicants and saving the training system from having to deal with duds.

Like a Reserve Weekend BMQ, this can probably be run out of a high school gym if necessary (using the field for training), allowing for flexibility in roving recruiting teams to hold "Indoc Courses".  The advantage of using this is that it does a "screens" applicant and groups all their requirements for processing into a single 3 day period.  The CFRC has then done its part of the deal, and it is now the Training systems duty to deal with whatever influx the CFRC gives them (which is another problem and thread altogether).

The process shouldn't take more then a month to complete from the time a recruit walks into a door to the time that he is deemed suitable to be loaded onto a basic training course.

Here is a page explaining the Potential Royal Marine Course that the RM recruiters use:
http://www.royal-navy.mod.uk/static/pages/2654.html


----------



## Michael Shannon (16 Jul 2005)

While it's good to hear the medical portion of res recruiting is being improved it's worrying that it took the better part of a decade.

Now if only the decade long effort to apply physical fitness standards to Class A res will come up with something.

Next step. Enrolling pers with former service in less than a year.


----------



## Dare (16 Jul 2005)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> Well, here is an idea that I've bopped around before - I'm not sure I put it here yet, but I'll throw it up for the sake of discussion:
> 
> It seems that the recruiting process is a disjointed and disorganized process that ebbs and flows, leading to frustration among applicants who are tugged along for the ride.
> 
> ...


Good stuff, Infanteer. I would add a few more occupational related tests as well, to test beyond Grade 10 and basic English/pattern recognization (not necessarily for Pass or Fail, but to be more accurate in choosing amongst the 10:1). Also, I think something needs to be done with regards to the Privacy Act. Paying one government department to get some paper (ie. transcripts) to give to the CF when they're just going to verify it anyways on the backend, seems redundant. A pipeline should be opened.


----------



## Young KH (17 Jul 2005)

Recruiting isn't the first thing that needs to be tackled in the Canadian Military. 

(1) The first and foremost problem is to keep the already trained soldiers in the Military if for no other reason then to train new recruits.

(2) This will only be accomplished by making the Soldier on the ground feel important and appreciated. 

(3) A serving Soldier must never feel that if he is hurt that he becomes a throw away, no longer useful and we will try and jip you out of a pension person.

(4) Canada has to beef up its Infantry to a point that it can do the job that the Government of Canada has set out for it, and to the point where a soldier can still have a personal life. 

(5) Canada must be able to Transport and equip their own troops at any given time to anywhere that they are sent.

(6) Canadian troops need the best equipment that is available and not hand me downs. Training is great but having the right tool for the job is preferred.

(7) Salaries must reflect the job. You can't expect soldiers to like being at shot at for less then a truck driver is paid.

Once you have the troops happy you can then start with a recruiting program.

(1) Recruiting offices should start to do their jobs. I called one only to get an answering machine to call some one else. When I did I got another message to call the first one.

(2) Maybe make the serving soldier look better with some glitz, medals and so on. I know that that seems like window dressing, but have you ever looked at a house with no curtains or without a paint job?

(3) Incentives to join such as a college scholarship after 5 years of regular service, and promotion to Officer after college with no loss of time served.

(4) Better benefits. Let's face it here in Canada there are no discounts for Regular Military personal, as in many other countries. Air and train fairs as an example.

Well, enough said there are plenty of ways to up the Military count.


----------



## Gunner98 (17 Jul 2005)

ADM HR(Mil) motto - "Look after our people, invest in them and give them confidence in the future."

Not exactly a highly motivating mission/vision statement.  You would think these three issues would be implicit in serving your country.

There is a new campaign to encourage soldiers who have served 48 months to consider the opportunity challenges associated with changing jobs - is better than to re-train than lose people.  I think so, however, wherewhen do you draw the line?


----------



## GO!!! (17 Jul 2005)

The "retrain" mindset has some virtue, because you retain a trained soldier, and you know he's a lifer if he's willing to re-muster!

The problem (in my experience) is the long waits associated with a re-muster/LOTP. The problems seem to lie at the unit level, where the paperwork is simply not being done. Troops have waited for appointments with the Career Manager/BPSO for a year plus, and they get punished by their own c of c at the same time for "quitting." 

Most 031s I know get out, then back in, because the LOTP process is so painful. (undesireable jobs/postings, no courses (career or otherwise) and the c of c treating you like you are a disease to be removed from their sub unit asap. 

The administrative nightmare of broken time is far preferable to the last year before your LOTP comes through.

yes, I know it is wrong, and should not be tolerated, but if you complain, things will only get worse, so the boys suck it up, and spend 6mos as a civy. 

This costs the army a whole whack of $$ as the administrative costs pile up to release, then re-recruit someone.

What NEEDS to happen is that a hard-and-fast timeline be established by the LOTP organisers, in order to protect the individuals attempting to switch trades. Make the c of c stick to rule similar to the grievance process, where there are guaranteed response times. If this could be done, I think that the attrition rate would decline, and the re-train rate would rise, as soon as you could convince the troops that they would not be punished for leaving the infantry.


----------



## Young KH (17 Jul 2005)

That's exactly what I meant. There are too many UN and other over seas posting to allow for a normal life which should also include advancement and courses. More Ground troops are needed. Many more. but what took government 40 years to cut back to where we are now is not going to be corrected over night. One thing for sure is that if they don't start, it never will.
I believe that there is too much emphasis on education and IQ tests the Army also need some strong back and people that are happy to follow and not to lead. Heck if we had to go through the same process in 1939 the war would have been lost or at least still waiting for us to join.


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt (17 Jul 2005)

JMHO, but I think the Canadian Armed Forces first needs to fundamentally change the organization to be something that difference makers will want to join, then you tell the public about it.

My quick list:
1)  "Helicopters that don't fly, sub's that don't go underwater, etc." - Few want to join a group/association if they are not going to be supplied with the best possible equipment to do their job.  This is particularly important if you are asking people to put their lives on the line.  Crucially, I think most people rightly assess the government's commitment to its soldiers by looking at its funding.  And since chronic underfunding of the Armed Forces is the norm, I think most people infer from that the politicians do not respect the CF.  Ergo, why would one want to join an organization not even respected by the government that pays the bills.   Bottom Line:  A fancy video or new website will never be enough to overcome this issue.  Either the Government steps up and properly equips the forces, or you can add all the smoke & mirrors you like, but people are going to see through it.  That means you lose the recruits you really want (those that want to make a difference, but more importantly you lose current soldiers (who've just had enough) who are far more valuable than any potential recruit ever could be.

2)  Ban the phrase "Peacekeepers" from any official document or release.  I don't care what you replace it with, but that term has done more harm than its given credit for.  "Why do we need tanks?  We're peacekeepers.  Why do we need jets?  We're peacekeepers."  Replace it with a new edict about values and principles:  *"Canada will be a force for good in the world. * We will bring all of our forces to bear in any nation where we see ethnic cleansing or genocide.  We have for too long turned a blind eye to individuals in nations that are easy to forget, and allowed lives to be lost.  No more....from this point forward Canada will take a stand and will use every resource at our disposal to ensure there will not be another Rwanda or Darfur in our lifetimes." 

3)  Rebrand in a manner similar to the U.S. Forces.  Like "The Proud, The Few, The Marines", I would recommend something similiar to "The New Canadian Armed Forces - Benevolent Warriors".  [of note, I've added the word "new" because I think there needs to be clear definition between the Forces that were hacked & slashed nearly to death by cutbacks and this new organization that Hillier is trying to put back together.  Specifically, in new advertisements the Forces needs to highlight the new investments made in the effort to build a world-class military [which goes back to my first statement - first you build it, then you tell people about it.]

Well, that's my 30-seconds of input for this evening.  

Cheers all,


Matthew.


----------



## paracowboy (18 Jul 2005)

Cdn Blackshirt said:
			
		

> 3)   "The New Canadian Armed Forces - Benevolent Warriors".


I don't like that either. There's no need for 'benevolent'. It's redundant, and waters down the message.

Best recruiting tool I ever saw was a poster with a little girl crouched in the ruins of her home. The wording said something along the lines of "She's just seen her home burnt & her family killed by stange men. The last thing she needs to see is another man."
There's a split in the poster, and the adjacent photo shows a Royal Marine reaching into the debris (from her perspective), with her arms going towards him, and the words "Not just another man".
Gave me chills.


----------



## Matt_Fisher (18 Jul 2005)

Increased focus by the CDS on the recruiting efforts of the CFs is good, however as discussed, I wonder about the '10:1' ratio he mentioned.  It seems that a big problem with CFRC is the processing times in that a qualified candidate has moved on in life by the time they're offered an enrollment package.

Medical processing and security background check times seem to drag the recruiting process out to to lengths that force potential recruits to lose interest in the CFs.  Streamline and make these processes more efficient and timely.

Also, impose more focus on CFRC staff to get qualified recruits into the system ASAP.  Some sort of quota/bonus system should be put in place.  Essentially recruiting is HR Sales, much the way that a headhunter works.  Some sort of bonuses should be given to recruiting staff that meet and exceed their quotas (ie. extra leave, pay bonuses, etc.)


----------



## Edward Campbell (18 Jul 2005)

I'm told there was a very high 'through the door' ratio when I joined - maybe 10:1.   There was a mini-recession in the late '50s (see the graph at: http://policyresearch.gc.ca/page.asp?pagenm=v7n1_art_12 ) and jobs were scarce or, in the words of my recruit platoon sergeant: "All the garbage cans are frozen over, eh Campbell.   Is that why you're 'ere, you lazy bloody sod, pretending to be soldier?â ?

In any event we were processed pretty quickly.   My recollection is:

"¢	In the front door of the Recruiting Office - early/mid August;

"¢	In the PD for three or four days of   medical/dental exams, tests, interviews, etc - mid August, just a couple of days after I signed an application;

"¢	Received a letter accepting me as a recruit - the week before Labour Day;

"¢	Started Recruit Training - early October, after a month of LWOP.

I suspect the really big difference was: *security*.   Infantry recruits (maybe all recruits) were cleared to rumour.   Even the regimental signallers and   company clerks were only cleared to Confidential - only real Signals guys and people like regimental clerks and officers and senior NCOs needed a Secret clearance which took several months (six, maybe?) to process.

I am fairly sure that the decision to accept or reject each of us was made by an officer - a captain, I think, maybe a major - at the PD (Personnel Depot - there were a dozen, plus, across the country).   I recall an elderly (well, he seemed old to me then) captain telling me that I was certain to be accepted and that I would be assigned to The RCR which needed men and had a recruit class filling up right then.   I'm quite certain I got the letter within three or four days - it can only have come from the local PD.   (The thing sticks in my mind because my mother was in shock - I was giving up my university vacancy, etc, etc, etc to run off and join the circus, wooops army.   The high drama in our house is not something I would forget.)

Security aside, I am prepared to bet that almost all the impediments to a speedy recruiting process are _self-inflicted wounds_ and the CDS (maybe the minister for about half of 'em) can _cure_ the system when they decide to do so.


----------



## Old Sweat (18 Jul 2005)

I support Edward Campbell's take on the recruiting process. My experience was similar to his, except that I was sworn in at the PD on the fourth day and left for the RCA Depot in Shilo ten days later.

The security clearance is probably the major bug bear. A friend from high school enlisted in the RC Sigs, but later was deemed unsuitable during recruit training because a pre-enrolment court appearance resulted in his failing the vetting process. However, he transferred to the infantry and served honourably and well in a rifle company for the rest of his three year enlistment.

I don't have any easy answers; come to think of it, not any hard ones either.


----------



## Gunner98 (19 Jul 2005)

Regional quotas suck because if your not buying what there selling then you don't get in.  Couple that with a recruiting staff tied up to weed out 9/10 of the people.  Sounds pretty bureaucratic.  Perhaps we should get the Employment centres to do the pre-screen of 9/10 of the people, then the recruiting process handles 1/10 of the workload.  If the employment centres also advertised the quotas available in the regions, they would be the front man.

I think many Employment centres have kiosks as well.  Another idea might be to allow on-line applicant submissions like the dreaded public service.  Then hire a contractor to screen.  

The recruiting centres could become processing centres and cut-out the unnecessary workload caused by 9/10 of the people.

When I joined in 1983 I tried to be processed in Toronto and Kingston - I lived in Belleville and went to school in Waterloo.  Toronto was my idea to broaden the quota opportunities that would not exist in Kingston or Waterloo.  21 years later I have never had a chance to be the Log Officer I was university trained to become.  Moot point now, I say again regional quotas suck.


----------



## BDTyre (19 Jul 2005)

Pieman said:
			
		

> Years ago, when there was a large base in Calgary, me and my family went to see a parade and demostrations on Canada day. The Army put on a demo of a section attack, and had machine guns set up to shoot blanks. It was highly supervised and people were allowed to come up and lie on the ground and pull the trigger a few times. (I can't imagine them allowing something like that now) But it was a great time!
> 
> Would be nice to see them put on some demonstations, of some kind, at the Stampede. Would make the experience more engaging.



Back in March, the Seaforths had an open-house with a weapons simulator set-up.  I tried, and didn't end up doing too poorly.  Sure was fun, though.  Of course it brings to mind that scene in Aliens: 
"How many drops is this for you Lt?"
"38...simulated."
"How many real ones?"
"2, including this one."

There was also a section attack and urban warfare demonstration, both of which I unfortunately missed.


----------



## kincanucks (19 Jul 2005)

My two cents:

Recruiting booths at large venues whether they be sporting events, rodeos, car or home shows do not work as a method to get people to apply to the CF.  However,  large information set-ups with hands on displays and prominently displayed posters and banners do help to attract interest in the CF and perhaps get people to think about the CF as a future employer.  But to think that by setting up a recruiting booth at large venues you are going to get scores of people wanting to pick up a job application is not a good use of limited resources.  Recruiting resources should be used solely for the processing of the applicants and the rest of the CF should be used to attract potential applicants.


----------



## Matt_Fisher (19 Jul 2005)

I'll disagree with you on that one Kincanucks.

When used PROPERLY, recruiting booths can be a tremendous resource.  A recruiting booth at a large public event such as the Calgary Stampede is much like exhibiting at a trade show.  

When I work a trade show with my civilian job, I'm canvassing those that approach my booth and ensuring that I get their contact details before they leave so I can hit them with follow up calls.  If I were to rely solely on people calling me to place orders, I'd be not making my sales quota and would be fired and replaced with someone who performs.  Those 'warm leads' that I get from a trade show are some of my best prospects.

In a recruiting environment, the same should apply.  Instead of just answering questions about the CFs and handing out brochures and hoping that you'll get some people calling the recruiting center to arrange their enrollment into the CFs, the recruiters manning the booth should get the contact details of those who stop by and then hit them up with phone calls, emails, mailings over the next few weeks to develop that interest and hopefully get the person to sign up.

Events such as the Calgary Stampede are excellent in that they give recruiters access to a wide cross-section of the public in the 18-30 year old range.  Other events such as job fairs, high school events where colleges and universities have their booths at are great, not just for recruiting ROTP candidates, but for also getting those interested in trades schools or who may be looking to spend a few years growing up before they go to university.

In general the public image of the CFs needs to be elevated through the use of tv, radio, newspaper and magazine ads as well as banners/advertising space and sponsorship of sporting events.  Could you imagine the presence that would be generated if the CFs were to sign a sponsorship deal with Hockey Night In Canada?  Combine that media coverage with a proactive recruiting force that became involved with high school guidance counsellors and also focused on students attending community colleges, universities and trade schools and you'd soon have those 5000 new bodies, plus.

Home shows, I don't know why the CFs would bother...the demographics involved in that target audience are much too old to generate significant numbers of recruits from.


----------



## kincanucks (19 Jul 2005)

Matt_Fisher said:
			
		

> I'll disagree with you on that one Kincanucks.
> 
> When used PROPERLY, recruiting booths can be a tremendous resource.   A recruiting booth at a large public event such as the Calgary Stampede is much like exhibiting at a trade show.
> 
> ...



Well after five years of military recruiting and manning a few recruiting booths, I guess I don't know what I am talking about then.  Fortunately, we don't recruit like the US military by ambushing people in shopping malls and demanding that schools give us the contact information for of age males or hounding them by phone and mail.  Your points of more advertising and sponsorship are valid, however, while all those at the top like to cry about how a poor job that we in recruiting are doing they are very reluctant to put up the money.  I happen to believe that career fairs and skilled trades fair are excellent venues for recruiting because people are actually there looking for jobs and not more interested in whether their favourite team wins or who wins the chuck wagon race.


----------



## Old Sweat (19 Jul 2005)

In the really bad old (pre-TV) days, the Canadian army used to sponsor the second period of HNIC. At that time, only the second and third period were aired on Saturday night, so it was major exposure.


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt (19 Jul 2005)

Just a suggestion, but I think we start recruiting people too late.  

I think you need to plant the seed at the point where kids are in the "I wanna be a _____ when I grow up" phase.

That means at the latest you need to make first contact prior to kids to leaving elementary school.

If it were me, I'd tie-in Rememberence Day as an unofficial recruiting tool.  Specifically, at as many schools as possible arrange that every November 11th, there is an assembly with veterens and current soldiers with frank conversation with why Rememberence Day is important, a moment of silence, and then have the vehicles parked at the school until the end of the day so that curious students can come up to the personnel manning the vehicles and ask questions.




M.


----------



## Kal (19 Jul 2005)

paracowboy said:
			
		

> Best recruiting tool I ever saw was a poster with a little girl crouched in the ruins of her home. The wording said something along the lines of "She's just seen her home burnt & her family killed by stange men. The last thing she needs to see is another man."
> There's a split in the poster, and the adjacent photo shows a Royal Marine reaching into the debris (from her perspective), with her arms going towards him, and the words "Not just another man".
> Gave me chills.



    Now, what if you made that into a short commercial/film for advertising in the movie theatres?  Maybe some weak explosions and weapons fire in the distance and have the combat equipped troop there in the rubble as the 'hero'.  Would be appealing to a lot of people.


----------



## rmc_wannabe (19 Jul 2005)

Cdn Blackshirt said:
			
		

> Just a suggestion, but I think we start recruiting people too late.
> 
> I think you need to plant the seed at the point where kids are in the "I wanna be a _____ when I grow up" phase.
> 
> ...



     I couldn't agree with you more. I remember 3 years ago, at my elementry school, the word "Army" or "Trade" were always shot down immediately by my guidence counsellor and teacher. The only push somewhat military we ever got was when the local cadet corp made a presentation at our school (which itself was strictly for those people interested. I think we had about 10 people or so).

    Like Cdn Blackshirt said, if we plant the seed earlier, we'll get a better crop of recruits when the time comes.


----------



## canadianblue (19 Jul 2005)

> If it were me, I'd tie-in Rememberence Day as an unofficial recruiting tool.  Specifically, at as many schools as possible arrange that every November 11th, there is an assembly with veterens and current soldiers with frank conversation with why Rememberence Day is important, a moment of silence, and then have the vehicles parked at the school until the end of the day so that curious students can come up to the personnel manning the vehicles and ask questions.



I think thats a great idea, but I'm not sure if some of the school administrators would go for it. Back at my elementary/junior high school every single Rememberance day was along the lines of peace this, peace that, and would often involve singing of One Tin Soldier, etc. You get the idea it was very anti-war. I was also really interested in the army at a young age as well, hell whenever my family would take a trip to Hawaii I was in the US Military museum close to the beach more then I was out in the water.


----------



## Jaxson (21 Jul 2005)

i remember when i was just entering high school they did the army as a half or full year of co-op i forget which it was but i knew you could do it, in grade 11 when i applied for it the counsellor said the program was not offered any more because the school didnt like the idea of being used as a "recruiting centre"  i was so pissed.... i had to do co-op at a damn pizza place


----------



## Britney Spears (21 Jul 2005)

After reading all these recruiting threads and the comments from the older members, it seems to me that we do not at all lack for volunteers to begin the proccess, but rather our recruiting proccess takes an unreasonable amount of time, such that most people either say no thanks or give up half way. Isn't this the REAL issue?  Variously it seems two of the proccesses, the medical and the security clearances, seem to be bunging up the whole system. I probably would not be in the army today if not for a huge fsuckup on the part of the security clearance folks, which inspires very little confidence in me as far as catching REAL Al-Qaeda infiltrators is concerned. Now the older guys tell me that the security clearance proccess was much simpler in the old days. Why is this and can we do anything about it?


----------



## GDawg (22 Jul 2005)

Britney Spears said:
			
		

> After reading all these recruiting threads and the comments from the older members, it seems to me that we do not at all lack for volunteers to begin the proccess, but rather our recruiting proccess takes an unreasonable amount of time, such that most people either say no thanks or give up half way. Isn't this the REAL issue?  Variously it seems two of the proccesses, the medical and the security clearances, seem to be bunging up the whole system. I probably would not be in the army today if not for a huge fsuckup on the part of the security clearance folks, which inspires very little confidence in me as far as catching REAL Al-Qaeda infiltrators is concerned. Now the older guys tell me that the security clearance proccess was much simpler in the old days. Why is this and can we do anything about it?



Agreed. Regarding the medicals and the security clearance, some measures have been taken to speed things up. I've been the unit recruiter since April and my fastest enrollment to date was about 86 or so days from a completed file in my hand to a bible in their hand.

A double pronged approach must be taken to salvage the system, a new PA/recruiting effort targeting the whole demographic _and_ a streamlining of the enrolment process.

You can attract all the bright young go getters you want, but if you can't put them in a uniform in a reasonably short amount of time they _will_ find somewhere else to work. 

This is where a newly designed ad campaign would come in handy, appeal to patriotism rather than $$$. The CF pays pretty good, but you could certainly make more civie side, so why fight that uphill battle against the private sector?

 Sure you can make more money in the oil patch, but can you defend peace and security on the rigs? Thats where we have the edge.


----------



## Acorn (22 Jul 2005)

In the "old days" the SIU did the interviews and investigations for security clearances. Now that CSIS does it all, for all gov't departments, the backlog is huge. Medicals used to be done by locally contracted Drs near each recruiting office.

Acorn


----------



## Krazy-P (22 Jul 2005)

if they do have soldiers goin to schools to talk about the army, just make sure they dont have ptss, or ptsd or whatever it is. they had one guy gome to our highschool and he just got back from one of the early bosnia tours, he was a mess,  i met him before he went overseas, totally different man, hard as nails too.  not sure where im going with this so i will stop typing.lol


----------



## Chief Clerk (23 Jul 2005)

kincanucks said:
			
		

> The best way to cut down the recruiting process time is to increase the size of every CFRC/D two-fold, especially the med staff, put them all in bigger and better facilities, locate them in accessible and visible areas, give them a budget that is realistic, and let RMC, the CIC and reserves process their own applicants.  That will make it easier and faster for the Reg F NCMs and DEOs to be processed and enrolled.



Totally agree Reserves should recruit and process reserves - let the Reg recruit its own this would cut down and back on alot of paperwork and time.  Winnipeg has a fairly modern CFRC which was a pleasure to visit on many occasions - very modern in comparison to some hole in the walls- too bad other Centres were not the same.  And it would be nice to give us guys (Bases with a few Hard Army units) some monies to spend on AF Day.  We had a good one in Brandon and many people showed up and YES We even let them play with the weapons (pull the trigger, etc) and we had a Kiddy Commando (Excellent - get them while they are young) set up - we could have done much more with a little $
Oh yes thanks KinCanucks for the help in the past WRT my sons enrollment - I was a little frusterated with the system (still am) but your points were very valid - just sometimes hard for us old (seen better days, slighly jagged) guys to swallow.  Someday we will actually take our past (toughness, esprit-de-corps, etc) and combine it with our future (technology, pay increases, QOL) - abd DAMN will things be good!


----------



## Young KH (23 Jul 2005)

Now this is a question not a comment.

Is it still possable to set up Military colleges, like in the 50's?


----------



## silentbutdeadly (23 Jul 2005)

i think missions would help with the problem. When the 3rd BN PPCLI went to kandahar the first time there was alot of new troops in the Reg and army after that because they saw it on the news. Maybe news coverage helps, but that can be a double edged sword ref. marines in iraq, shooting fighter in mosque. but i also agree the system needs to move quicker.


----------



## Gunner98 (23 Jul 2005)

YKH - perhaps if I was alive in the 50's I might understand your question?  There is only one Military College left RMC Kingston - CMR and RRMC are more civilian than military institutes, other than prep year at CMR/the Mega.

YKH said, "Is it still possable to set up Military colleges, like in the 50's?"  *Huh? Say, again over, you are broken and distorted!*


----------



## paracowboy (24 Jul 2005)

silentbutdeadly said:
			
		

> i think missions would help with the problem.


amen!



> When the 3rd BN PPCLI went to kandahar the first time there was alot of new troops in the Reg and army after that because they saw it on the news.


 yup, and now we're losing many of those young troops, because the action they were looking for ain't around.


----------



## Young KH (24 Jul 2005)

Not sure but I believe that the movie was called "STRIPES" that is the kind of Military school I meant. Run by an older EX Military Officer and run like an Army base. It was a threat used by parrents when we didn't behave, that they would send us to Military school.

Sorry if this is foreign to you but it did get a lot of young people all Gong Hoo, and even better had them mostly trained when they joined up. Shefferville Que. was one that I know of and they took From Grades 5 to 11 or the Ont 12, but alas that was then and this is now.


----------



## Gunner98 (24 Jul 2005)

The Movie "TAPS" with Sean Penn, Tom Cruise, Timothy Hutton and George C. Scott was filmed at Valley Forge Mil Academy and released 1981.

"Stripes" was a an outrageous comedy with renegade soldiers Bill Murray and John Candy.

Maybe "Cadet Kelly" with Hillary Duff at George Washington Military Academy is more approp. to the discussion. 

If you search for the Forum thread on "Robert Land Academy", you would find:   http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/32499.15

Army High Schools was also discussion in thread: http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/31715/post-236312

This is not a new concept to the Forum but perhaps after reading the discussions you could provide us a few suggestions.   I can find no record of a military school in the northern Quebec area of Schefferville - many native training schools.   Dated or inaccurate info?


----------



## McG (24 Jul 2005)

I don't see civilian paramilitary highschools as a recruiting solution.  The recruiting centres are the first choke point, but even there we seem to bring in recruits faster than the trg system can turn them into soldiers (just look to the size of some PAT platoons).


----------



## Young KH (24 Jul 2005)

Also just a question.

Would there be any point of putting the training (Depot) back to the own battalions as in the 60's? Wolsey Barracks use to run a depot Course each time it got Platoon Strength of recruits.


----------



## Young KH (24 Jul 2005)

Gunner98 said:
			
		

> The Movie "TAPS" with Sean Penn, Tom Cruise, Timothy Hutton and George C. Scott was filmed at Valley Forge Mil Academy and released 1981.
> 
> Taps is correct.
> 
> ...


----------



## silentbutdeadly (24 Jul 2005)

yeah (paracowboy) we need to keep the training progressive enough to keep them interested thats for sure! but our hands are so tied , it freakin pisses me off! if you want to do any kind of good traing with your troops we need to go through 10 Officers to get them to tell you No!


----------



## Gunner98 (24 Jul 2005)

Young KH said:
			
		

> Also just a question.
> 
> Would there be any point of putting the training (Depot) back to the own battalions as in the 60's? Wolsey Barracks use to run a depot Course each time it got Platoon Strength of recruits.



Yes YKH there is a thread on that issue as well with pros and cons found @ http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/31840.0.html


----------



## Chief Clerk (25 Jul 2005)

yeah (paracowboy) we need to keep the training progressive enough to keep them interested thats for sure! but our hands are so tied , it freakin pisses me off! if you want to do any kind of good traing with your troops we need to go through 10 Officers to get them to tell you No!

Got to agree, here in Shilo I here many Snr NCOs saying the same thing - even to do trg (that does NOT require $) you need to jump through Battalion or Regt beaurcracy (Officers) to do anything.  What the hell happened to the days of the good old WO or Sgt takin the boys out for a day to do something/anything! We need to take back control (Snr NCOs).


----------



## paracowboy (25 Jul 2005)

silentbutdeadly said:
			
		

> yeah (paracowboy) we need to keep the training progressive enough to keep them interested thats for sure! but our hands are so tied , it freakin pisses me off! if you want to do any kind of good traing with your troops we need to go through 10 Officers to get them to tell you No!


roger that. Although 3 VP seems less restricted that way than any other unit I've seen. When the troops are getting antsy, it seems that a WO or a jack muckles onto them and they're doing something productive. Knot training, a day at the rappel tower, map and compass review, something.


----------



## Jagd (31 Jul 2005)

Chief Clerk said:
			
		

> And it would be nice to give us guys (Bases with a few Hard Army units) some monies to spend on AF Day.   We had a good one in Brandon and many people showed up and YES We even let them play with the weapons (pull the trigger, etc) and we had a Kiddy Commando (Excellent - get them while they are young) set up - we could have done much more with a little $



The demonstration in Brandon was good, I went to check it out while at the airshow with my dad. I looked at all the displays and the soldier with the C7 showed me roughly how to use it. It's to bad they didn't have more of these shows, it was the first time i'd ever seen any military displays, other than a few LAVs driving around the streets since 2 PPCLI moved into Shilo. I also saw the kiddy commando thing but figured i was a little to old for that lol.


----------



## GDawg (1 Aug 2005)

This sounds like a pretty good PA victory.
 They managed to do something important, they reinforced their link to the community at large (the west) through heritage and tradition, and they were also able to demonstrate their modern capabilities by bringing a Coyote.
 They may not attract many new recruits, but they've made the public aware of their existence and undoubtedly established a sense of appreciation and pride  in those who attended or viewed the event on TV.

http://www.armee.forces.gc.ca/lf/English/6_1_1.asp?id=602


Strathcona's form 100-soldier honour guard at Spruce Meadows

Friday, July 22, 2005

The Strathcona Mounted Troop

CALGARY, Alberta â â€ Members of the Lord Strathcona's Horse (Royal Canadians) [LdSH (RC)] participated in the Spruce Meadows internationally acclaimed North American competition involving world-class horse jumpers. More than 150 soldiers entertained riders and spectators from July 7 to 10.

To help celebrate Alberta's 100th and welcome The Honourable Norman L. Kwong, Lieutenant Governor of Alberta, LdSH(RC) formed a 100-man honour guard.

The troops completed a parade march past and were able to watch a display of show jumping.

Connecting with Canadians
In addition to the 100-soldier honour guard and the Strathcona Mounted Troop, the Strathcona Historic Vehicle Troop visited Spruce Meadows for the first time.

The Historic Vehicle Troop attracted many children wanting a seat in Catherine, a restored Sherman Tank, and Dieppe, a Ferret. A Coyote, set up in the middle of the riding grounds, provided the crowd an opportunity to look at the surveillance package.

Spruce Meadows and the Strathcona's have developed a close relationship over the past 30 years.

Spruce Meadows helped the Regiment recreate and develop the Strathcona Mounted Troop, which was initially established between 1923 and 1939 and re-established in 1974.

The troop participates in mounted musical rides throughout Alberta and Western Canada as part of preserving cavalry and Western heritage.

Article by Lieutenant Alastair McMurachy
Photos by Lieutenant Alastair McMurachy and courtesy of Lord Strathcona's Horse (Royal Canadians)


----------

