# CFRG and the broken recruiting system-Split



## Meridian (8 Dec 2004)

Now, everyone knows that every government has at least some red tape....  

My question here is, especially recruiting wise, why does it seemingly take so long for answers on just about anything recruiting wise?

Do other Forces face these same issues, or is this more of the same issue based on neglect from the Feds and not enough manpower/funds to support the recruiting/bureaucratic arm?

Example - I was looking at the Brit Army site the other day, and they mentioned they would ahve a full response to an application package for an oversees applicant within 6 weeks. 

This seems rather fast in comparison to the CF... but maybe not?

For many frustrated by waiting for a simple answer.. why does it always seem to take weeks for someone to simply read two lines on a file and then say "yes, or no". (Obviously its not always this simple, but, for example).

Is it a lack of drive, or are we actually not having recruiting issues, but rather issues with the support echelons that prop up the recruiting front office?


----------



## rmc22208 (9 Dec 2004)

Some insight from the external:
Reasons behind the infinite delays created by the red-tape"

1.  CFRG (the recruiting agency withing the CF), is working fullspin to meet an intake number of about 4400 people a year.  For some reason, beyond my pay scale, (actually, this could be explained by the military's short supply of MDs) the medical standards review board only has 2 medical officers, these are the only one with the delegate authority to "fit" people up in the system.  Enough said...

2.  Security clearance.  CSIS ( the sec clear people) his overrun by requests coming from everywhere, my Level II was up for renewal 7 months ago.... Still no answers.  Recruits needs at the very least an enhanced rel status and Level II is the standard sec clear for Officers.  More waiting....

3.  For officers the HR shop in Ottawa is also involved.  DMILC's (director of military careers)  This is a shop with 1 or 2 people per trade that administers qualified members.  For every trade, they must meet once or twice a year (frequency is trade specific) at CFRG HQ in Borden to select candidates within all the applicants.  If one applies for a trade that just proceeded with a board,   this person must wait at least 6 months before being selected.  Even more waiting...

4.  Re-enrollee and component transfer.  The archive guys, (or the reserve clerks for comp/trans) either at the National Library (5+ year since last day of service) or at DND archives must retrieve information and produce statement of previous services.  Hey what a surprise: more delays!!

These are the big 4, note that the medical gets complicated when people have conditions that requires the advice of external specialists.

In addition to all this current fuss about the system, here is a little "backgrounder" on the state of HR in the CF for the last 20 yrs or so...

An historical perspective:
-===-
Up to the late 90's the military had its own medical system of hospitals, with its own specials and the likes.  It was able to perform most of its medical on its own and thus didn't rely on the speed of external medical consultant to proceed with its recruiting.  When I walked into the recruiting center, I had 1 surgeon, 1 Medical Officer and 1 Medical Assistant waiting for me.   I was processed on the spot and the only thing remaining to the CFRG HQ people to do was to "approve" the paperwork.  I don't think they can afford this kind of thing these days.
-===-

Also, you have to put things in perspective.  The military, in the western world, is only starting to need 'fresh people".  In Canada, DND always had more people than they really needed up to a few years ago.  There was an Force Reduction Plan (FRP) in the early 80's and another one in the 90's, so the recruiting process when from "recruiting in mass" to "selecting a few".  

The culture of the entire recruiting system was most likely affected by these circumstances, just portrait the mindset of a recruiter at that time: "this year the FRP tells us to get ride of 2500 people, so we can't recruit much, in fact we don't need to put EFFORT  into recruiting at all, just the voluntary applications are going to be enough".  Now the ballgame is totally different, babyboomers are retiring soon, and the new world (dis)order just reminded us (just in case: the 9/11 thing...)  that, nations needs military forces to use when diplomacy fails.  It's going to take a while before we get to the level of military personnel that we were a decade or so ago.

Facts are there to support these mindsets, as an example the 1994 white paper calls for a reduction of the number of military bases by more than the 3rd of what we used to have.  Jee, we even got rid of CF Europe.  The recruiting systems was greatly affected by this, here is a table of the before/after the 90's FRP training facilities of the CF

Before FRPs  |  After

Recruit training:                |                

CFRS Cornwallis NS
ERFC Saint-Jean, QC              |CFLRS Saint-Jean, QC

Officer Training:            |

CMR Saint-Jean, QC       |         CFLRS Saint-Jean
RMC Kingston, ON                    RMC-CMR Kingston, ON
RRMC (Victoria) BC
CFOCS (C-Fox) Chilliwack  BC

And this is just the big picture, I haven't include the closure of "trade schools".  Just to give you an example, I was at CTC Gagetown in 1998, I trained as a Phase II - Combat Arms candidate.  Before that it used to be given only to infantry candidates, other trade schools had to give their own infantry training because the number of candidates was too high.  These days the same course is callled Common Army Phase, which includes most of the land officer trades.  Again these are facts illustrating the reduction in training capacity.

All in all, if the system can't train more than a certain amount of people within the same "training block", then recruiting centers despite all the good will they might have DO NOT have the explicit authority to hire people on a waiting list; the hiring must be done at the rate of the training process.  So guys like me, that are waiting to get in an engineering trade of the military, might get other offers (and they actually do get other offers...) in the mean time, and at some point,  won't have the luxury to "wait" for an answer.  Most people have financial obligations to meet.

These are my two cents on the status of the red tape, I hope it gives you a good overview of the reason behind all this delay.  Hopefully, at some point, there will be sufficient institutional will and leadership to reverse the steam and start pouring in candidates.

All in all, the process is much more elaborated than it really needs to be.  Apart from medical fitness, they isn't much else that should forbid the recruitment of well-motivated young and middle-age individual in the Military.

Don't get me wrong, I think 99% of the people in the recruiting systems do their utmost best with the means they have.  I think it's time to change to motto "do more with less" to "you want more, it's going to cost more...".


----------



## Meridian (10 Dec 2004)

im curious about the archival systems and all that.. It seems to put a HUGE damper on the entire military as a whole...

Is there any reason why none of this is computerized? Or is it at least Micro-fiched?  

I can only imagine going through paper copy after paper copy.......  and I know that DND uses SAP (2 systems, as I work as an SAP Analyst for a major govnt contractor) and Ive heard peoplesoft as well..

If the civilian side can use computers, why can't the military?

Granted, govnt implementations are always hugely horrendous, and people dispute the cost...

But would it not make more sense to have everything done via databases? A recruiter could just "call up" a record, rather than call over for a clerk to do it....  The clerks would still be necessary... so this isnt a steal-peoples-jobs thing....

I mean, I know the military loves signatures, but if the rest of the govnt can deal with an "electronic approval" or even printing it out and signing it and filing (for auditing purposes only)..............


And yes, the medical system does sound quite crazy, and as one of those 2 med officers, Id go nuts after seeing file after file all day.


----------



## rmc22208 (10 Dec 2004)

> I mean, I know the military loves signatures, but if the rest of the govnt can deal with an "electronic approval" or even printing it out and signing it and filing



The problem with "e-approval" is that is the non-repudiation of records.  There is nothing that replaices the paper-based signature for legal matters.  And you guess things like release and enrollment cannot be "e-approved", there is an entire legal framework behind the process. 

In fact getting an information-system as productive as paper-based systems is still a research problem.  In short, no electornic IMS is perfect, so eventhough you'd remove (unlikely) all the legal constraints asking for a paper traces, there would still be glitches, hick-ups and "weird" things happening.  The RMS system just need more people, again, this does not sell really well these days at the gov't.

As for the archives, I don't know the details of functioning, but I know for a fact that they have to deal with other agencies than the recruitment.  It's not like archive clerks are waiting for CFRG's request, they got IATP (privacy/info act) requests, VAC's requests and other misc.  I wouldn't be surprised to see them as overwhelmed as the Medical Review people too.  

IN any case, if you are waiting to enroll, keep that part-time/full-time job of yours until you get an offer, cause it will take a while.


----------



## Meridian (10 Dec 2004)

Im expecting a lengthy wait for a VFS... cant start until the Res. Unit reopens in January however... no "real" rush, however, id like to be in for summer....


anyway, this was more about the system anyway...

Im not sure about the whole legality thing.

Again, I work with SAP, and audit/legally wise, signing authorities are a big thing for amounts that go much higher than even a million dollars, and all of these can be done through secure accounts.

Of course nothing is secure secure, but a signature can be forged too.. so... 

This was more for arguments sake.


----------



## kincanucks (8 Feb 2006)

Hello,  For those of you who don't look at profiles, I am an officer working in recruiting and I have been on this site for quite a while trying to help where I can and as one person so eloquently put it "crap on some threads now and then".  If you have applied to the CF in the last few years you have probably had to fill out several surveys both in paper and electronic format so I apologize for asking you take another sort of survey.  The problem is that the results of those surveys are seldom seen by anyone besides the person who receives them so unfortunately we, the ones at the pointy end, don't get see where people are having problems, besides the more obvious ones, and we don't receive any feedback from you the applicant, except when you come and tell us.

So if you have applied in the last three years or so please take a moment to check off where you have applied and had problems and then post a few words about what that problem was and any other specifics you might want to add.  If you have dealt with a Detachment please indicate which one.  Please don't use this as personal rant about how the entire system has pissed you off because you were not accepted due to your asthma or because you have used Ecstasy and don't see what the problem is or you have not been in Canada for ten years, etc..  I want to hear about how long it took and why you think that was, how the CFRC/D screwed up and lost your information, how the staff was rude to you everytime you called, how they told you one thing and you found out that was total BS later, etc.

Now if you have applied and have nothing but praise for the CFRC/D that you have dealt with then I ask that you indicate that in the other poll that I am going to start.  Again tell me why it was such a pleasant experience.  I will take your information and put it some kind of presentable package and send it to the Commander of CFRG HQ because I know he would be very interested in what you have to say.  I thank you for your participation and as always if you have a question about the recruiting process please let me know.  Cheers.


----------



## regulator12 (9 Feb 2006)

I applied to Recruiting Center Kitchener. I reapplied September 2005. When I first went into the recruiting center the recruiters were polite and friendly. I completed the necessary paper work and scheduled my tests. I did my interview in Hamilton and my physical and medical in Kitchener. 
     
      When I did my interview the officer in Hamilton had no access to my information from Kitchener. When i got back to Kitchener to do my medical and physical, the recruiting center had forgotten or did not know that I completed my interview in Hamilton. No communication between the two recruiting centers.
 Next problem was communication to me. The recruiting center in Kitchener told me they would tell me when my VFS was complete. I never got a call from them updating me of that. I had called them only to find out that the VFS was done weeks ago. I was never kept up to date on the status on my file, even when I called, it was poor or they had no information.

       In January I was merit listed. The first week of January after Christmas leave I called the recruiting center everyday for that week because I had to sort out something with them that came back on my credit check. My calling there was not asking questions about my file but was giving them the information that they needed regarding my credit situation. SO it seems like a lot of calling but was justified by the fact that it was documents that they needed for my file and I was getting it and keeping them informed of my situation. The recruiting center told me not to call that many times and they told me that I could call them once a week to check to see if there was anything new. I apologized for calling them that week so much and I toned down my calling to once a week. 

            Just this week when I called again, (it was a week) I called and asked a certain CPL who I dealt with if I was in fact merit listed and if my file was a OK. She told me that everything was OK and I was merit listed and I was suitable. 5 MINUTES later I got a call from DND, only to find out that on the other end was Captain NO NAME. He proceeded to reem me a new *** hole for the next 10 minutes as to why I called the recruiting center and why I am asking these questions. He questioned if I believe them or not, and demanded to know why I am calling and to stop calling. He went on to tell me to not expect a call and not put my life on hold, and that I am an administrative burden, he went on and on. I have a witness to this call and was very upset with it.

          I feel that was unprofessional and uncalled for. I don't see the justification in calling me and reeming me a new one when I have legitimate questions and concerns. Its not like they gave me up to date information from the start. I have been in the dark with a lot of aspects of this process and not given full details. I am taking it upon my self to keep my self informed because they sure don't and didn't. I did call again this week especially when he himself told me it OK TO CALL ONCE A WEEK. Ridiculous, I don't see the need if he is SOO BUSY TO CALL ME AT HOME AND ***** ME OUT FOR ASKING QUESTIONS. I did not call and harass them or yell at them or be rude to them or anything like that, I asked, "I just want to make sure that I was merit listed." "Yes, you are, you didn't believe me the first time?" she said. "OK thanks just wanted to make sure my file is OK." She told me no problems and she understands why i asked, and she jokingly said to me that when i do get a job offer that she won't call me for a week...haha we laughed and that was that. At no time was I rude. I guess i struck a nerve or something because that is when the Captain called me. ( I was excited for a second when i saw the call display, I thought "oh my its the call!!!!!" boy was i wrong!!!!)

           That is my biggest problem with my recruiting experience. It really gets to me that I am not even back into the army yet and i am getting jacked up for asking questins regarding my FUTURE......I am at the point were I don't want to deal with this kind of BS. The Captain in my opinion was unprofessional and was out of line.


----------



## kincanucks (9 Feb 2006)

regulator12 please try to use to paragraphs so that your post is easier to read and understand and please vote.


----------



## dearryan (9 Feb 2006)

This may be a specific issue to a certain member at the RC as opposed to the entire branch, however I have seen it complained about in other threads on this site. My issue with the RC is when a recruiter tells you, "you will know by the end of 2 weeks" or, " just wait another 2 weeks". I have heard that MANY times over my recruiting process. I do not like to call and pester the RC, and avoid it as much as possible (I just pester the Recruiter on this site ;D) However, when I do call them at the end of one of the "2 week" time frames, I am told to wait another two weeks. Come on. Nothing that I have ever been waiting for has ever come back when a recruiter tells me it would. In my opinion it makes them look un-professional.  It is fully understandable for members to give their educated guess as too how long processing takes, however if they don't know they should simply say they don't know. I personally have opted out of training (work), family commitments, and other employment all together due to what I am told by the person on the other end of that phone. 

Other than the previously mentioned I have had nothing but good experiences with the RC staff at the Vancouver detachment.

Ryan

Hey Kincanucks when am I going to be selected????? ;D hahaha


----------



## kincanucks (9 Feb 2006)

In about 'two weeks'. ;D


----------



## regulator12 (9 Feb 2006)

Dearryan.....Very good point. I just wanted to say that they tell you at the recruiting center not to put your life on hold, however its very hard not to when they give you information that suggests your getting somewhere. I know others who have had to turn down job opportunites or they did turn them down because they thought the army was going to call them soon. I would rather them say hey honestly we wont know anything for 2 months call us then. That would be better than leading us on every couple weeks or so.....Hey Kincanucks can i expect my call too in two weeks?????.... ;D ;D


----------



## MikeL (9 Feb 2006)

I've had my file handled by CFRC Vancouver an CFRC/D Edmonton. For the most part, my experiance has been really good. Only negatives is waiting a few weeks to a few months to get dates for the different tests. For my componet transfer, it took me something like 4 months to get CFAT, Physical an Medical done.  Part of the problem was waiting on my Reserve unit to send different files to the CFRC, but I had the same problem when I first applied to join the Reserve in '02.

Other thing, not something that has to do with a CFRC; for Sig Op the Selection board that selected me was held on January 9th, a week later I found out I got accepted an got RSBP. A month later an I'm still waiting, apparently theres other people looking at it now an doing a Prior Learning check? Apparently to say what qualifications I'm taking over to the Reg Force, even though I've been told my basic an driver quals will transfer over. For such a in-demand trade(sig op) it's taking quite awhile to get in. Kinda annoying when I'm told I could get my job offer any day an its being dragged on.. Especially since I started my transfer in November '04.


One other problem/hassle, it seemed like most of the times I called CFRC Vancouver no one picked up the phone, an they rarely return messages.



A better system would be to copy the Americans, since it seems to be a lot quicker. You do all your tests in 1-2 days. An it takes about 2-4 weeks for a Reservist/National Guard too transfer to Active Duty.


----------



## Stauds (9 Feb 2006)

Well.. where to start?? 

I will start with the good, my file manager, Cpl X was very good. He was very nice, went out of his way to see how I was doing and check on the progress of my file, even if it was nothing more than "It's on track.." The people at the CFRC Edmonton were very helpful and nice for the most part. 

I'll start at the beginning. When I first applied for RMC, my application went well, within a month I had done almost everything, from the medical to the CFAT to the interview. I was turned down from RMC, so later on I decided to apply for the reserves for the duration of University which I started next year. 4 MONTHS after my medical I recieved a letter saying I wasn't suitable for employment in the CF, due to an error in the urine test, which was caused by my taking protein supplements. I had another test done, and sent the results in, and 2 MORE MONTHS passed before I recieved a letter saying I wasn't eligible because of Osgood Schlatter's in my knees. I can understand a delay of a month or so for the medical to go through the boards in Ontario, but 3.5 months before I hear from them the first time? Even if they found that error after I applied for the reserves in Mar. '05, that still meant almost 2 months before I heard from them. 

When I sent the letter from my doctor saying I was done with OS, it did not take them long to clear me for the medical.. which was the complete opposite of what I had experienced earlier, so I am happy with that. That was in November '05. 

The other parts of my application for Reg. 031 went well, except for my ERC. It's not a huge issue, but the CFRC had to wait almost 3 weeks to book my interview because they were waiting for the ERC. Again, not too big of a deal, but would it be possible for the ERC check to be verified with an email saying "yes, xxx xxxxxxx passed the ERC" so they can book an interview, then later on recieve the letter??

Finally, I was merit listed Jan. 19, the officer who interviewed me told me I can expect a call within 3 weeks, and that I was a very competitive applicant. I still haven't been called, and it's been exactly three weeks since my interview. My friend had his interview in November and was called in 3 business days.. I don't know what the delay for me is, and when I called last friday, I was told "I missed the Feb 1 selection, but my file was on track and I can expect a call 'soon'". I will call again tomorrow to ask if everything is alright, and if they know what might be delaying it. But it would be nice to have an accurate picture of when I'm getting called, because I'm now out of money, and I have to get a job.. but what am I supposed to tell the employer? "I could be leaving in a couple weeks, but would you like to hire me?" It's just getting very frustrating and I would appreciate them telling me what's taking so long.

Other than those issues though, I was very satisfied with the treatment I recieved from the CFRC staff.


----------



## Guy. E (13 Feb 2006)

if this is going to make some changes, i think that i should make some comments about my experiences about the Winnipeg CFRC.

i have been there 3 times in the last 2.5 years. 

I have had a generally "good" experience for the most part. however with the exceptions of this.

i was called two weeks ago to go finish my testing. because i only had only my PT and interview to complete i deemed a night in Winnipeg was not required (my discression, save the govt a few dollars...) i had a scheduled time to be there at 10 am (i live about 20 min south of Brandon Mb (brandons 2 hours west)). i was there at 9:30 (time appreciation) to my dismay i was waiting there an extra 45 min on top on what i was early. thats right, i was sitting there watching Mr Priminister Harper getting sworn in on TV until 10:45 before i actually did anything. 

another thing i noticed was there was a navy guy there. it seemed his job was solely to hold the font desk up by leaning on it and have a firm grip on his coffee cup. he just leaned there holding his cup talking. in the 4.5 hours i was there, thats all he did.

i particularly felt insulted that they're time appreciation was so off and that they had enough spare time to stand there talking wile I'm sure theres more important things to be doing or found to be done. what does a navy cpl get payed per year to do nothing? i might think about that job. 

that could be why almost every time i called on the phone to ask a question i had a stupid answering machine... ( i hate those things)  sometimes understandably only about 1/4 of the time i actually speak to a person.

another comment, what is quitting time at CFRC Winnipeg? i have called at around 4 or a little later and not a soul in the building. (thats not on a Friday...) so i need to waite the whole weekend to get my question answered or whatever needs done, done.

one more thing, just last week i was called and told that i needed some old cadet paperwork (i am getting it tomorrow night). when asking why they didn't ask me before, they said it was already requested...

i was thinking about making a phone call or writing a letter to someone involved in recruiting,. but since this thread is here, i will use it.

i hope this helps.

Edward Guy


----------



## DJ (13 Feb 2006)

There were a plethora of issues with my application.  The biggest problem was with communication.  I applied during a recruiting freeze and couldn't get ahold of anybody in regards to the freeze because CFRC Vancouver was moving.  I tried to talk to CFRC Victoria but they replied that they couldn't help me at all because I was the responsibility of CFRC Vancouver.  Nobody contacted me when the freeze was over; I found out for myself when I showed up at CFRC Vancouver to investigate.  In my opinion, this was more of a problem with the specific unit's recruiting.  
I was later scheduled for my CFAT and medical.  On that day I managed to finish the CFAT however the medical was cancelled.  I was given a card and told to call back at x time on x day the next week.  Well, I called, (..and called...and called).  I kept getting a machine and kept leaving messages.  I called at that x time on x day for the next few weeks.  Eventually, the school year was over and I went back to the island to find work.  I kept calling and leaving messages but no response.  Finally, uber-frustrated I called and left a rather frank, not-quite but almost impolite message.  Bingo.  Less than 12 hours later there was a message on my machine asking about setting up my medical and physical.  

This is just a tiny segment of my recruitment saga. (Applied Sept 2002.  Enrolled July 2004). However, I think that the communication problems can be easily- given the resources- addressed.  Perhaps there should be more emphasis on returning messages.  Also, when a recruit is told to call a number there should be a person available to take that call.  

One more thing that I found asinine was when I was forced to get all new documents (reference letters, transcripts, eyeglass prescriptions) due to the fact that mine had all expired due to these stalls in my application.  While I understand that the CF should have the most current information it was just one more kick during a rather brutal application process.  From what I've read, this is being alleviated with the shorter timeframe being experienced by new recruits.   


Note:  I experienced none of these problems with my current unit.  

All the power to you Kincanucks in producing any improvements.
Apologies if any rants persisted...this was truly an exercise in editing!


----------



## Stauds (15 Feb 2006)

I couldn't edit my old post for some reason...

When I called in last friday, I had been merit listed for over 3 weeks; I got a hassled a little about why I was calling, but that was just "teasing". The woman checked my file, and found it was CLOSED! For some reason it had to do with me only having one trade (infantry). I don't know, but she said she fixed it and I should get a call this week... I find it very frustrating having to wait this long, only to have been told my file was closed. If they actually had a valid reason to close my file, I think it would have been appropriate to notify me so I can look at other options. If I hadn't called I would have been left in the cold indefinitely...


----------



## kincanucks (15 Feb 2006)

The purpose of this thread is not for you to pose questions about your process or to report on your progress  but to report on your experiences with the system.  Find another thread for your questions.


----------



## MdB (15 Feb 2006)

First of all, my application went fairly smoothly.

Like it's been said, often communication can be a problem. It's weird how CFRC works for multiple tests appointments. To this day, I really don't know what the order is (if there's any, and seems to have changed lately). The last I saw is CFAT, ERC, Medical, Interview, Physical, which makes sense.

My main point would be that: CFRCs have to be more PROACTIVE. At no moment I sensed the CFRC (or the CF they are representing) felt eager to recruit me. I just think they didn't put that in their heads: they are on recruiting market and it's aggressive. If they are to put 5k (or 20k for that matter) more in the CF, they're gonna have to change their attitude. It doesn't have to be the recruit who's gotta be ahead of his things. I deeply think the CF lose MANY candidates simply because of delays and miscommunications (or none...).

That's it for me.


----------



## Private Parts (15 Feb 2006)

I wouldn't describe my experience as "nothing but problems"; however, I had a couple of negative experiences at CFRC Halifax - I was given some very bad (i.e. incorrect) information by a medic (WO Nameless) and was, on one occasion, treated very rudely by a recruiter (Sgt. Nameless)

Having said that, my recruiting experience took about 8-9 months and I have been asked - more than once - who I bribed to get in so quickly.


----------



## kincanucks (3 Mar 2006)

Bump


----------



## Wingman (3 Mar 2006)

Sometimes stereotypes are solidly based on facts so I present "The House of Lies".  I wondered what that meant over 3 years ago; after Basic, I wondered no more.


----------



## kincanucks (19 Apr 2006)

Bump


----------



## Springroll (19 Apr 2006)

The only "complaint" I can think of, in regards to my recruiting process so far with CFRC Halifax, is the lack of communication not only between them and myself but between themselves as well.

My example:
I call about my file and am told by Cpl XXXX that it is still open. I thank her and hang up.

5 minutes later I get a call from Capt XXXX saying that no, it is closed. I have to retake my PT test first and then resubmit everything over again. I call the booking line and book my retest. 

I call up a week later to confirm my appt time and date and get forwarded to Cpl XXXX. She says my file is still open. 
Even today, when I called again to confirm everything for my retest earlier this evening, she said it is still open and that I do not have to resubmit anything. 

One more thing. When someone leaves a message for the CFRC, it is usually a good thing for them to return the call. I almost had to pay for my first PT test because they said they never received my messages to reschedule it. I had left three messages over a week and not one of them was ever returned.

Now, where is that thread where I can post the awesome stuff because my file manager right now is absolutely awesome and she deserves some sort of recognition.


----------



## Zertz (20 Apr 2006)

If this is every CFRC then I suppose its fine, it seems CFRC Winnipeg closes at 3 o clock, which is mildly inconvenient for those going to school in the day without spares. The Master Corporal scheduling clerk does give next day service and is very efficient however, so that does make up for it, but a late shift would be alot more convenient for students.


----------



## Kunu (20 Apr 2006)

Here we go...

I first applied Feb 2003, and everything went rather well and reasonably quick (first visit to the unit, board, CFAT, PT test, second interview, and medical in about <3 months).  However, I had a medical issue which required a year and a half on the waiting list to get an appointment with the right specialist.   During this time, I even tried to get in touch with the RMO to ask if paying for a prompt appointment down south would be acceptable.  I left N messages, and never got a single reply.  The appointment date eventually came up, and the specialist signed off that I was able to meet the standard.  

Taking this to the CFRC, I was told that since it had been so long, I had to hold on to my medical letter and start a fresh application.  After going through all the steps again and submitting the letter during the medical stage, I received another form letter from the RMO stating I did not meet the enrolment standard.  Upon enquiring, I was told that unless the medical evaluation was current, meaning within the last three months, it was not valid.  This apparently important detail was never mentioned until after the fact, and even then it was only verbal.  As a point of constructive criticism, I believe that such crucial details as this be clearly indicated on letters from the RMO, as "current" does not have any specific meaning.  In addition, my reapplication process taking longer than these three months put me in a bit of a catch-22 situation.  

So I was forced to get another appointment, which only took 4 months this time since the specialist knew I was fine and wouldn't take long.  Anyways, things finally did work out this time, and as a matter of fact I got sworn in just a few weeks ago.;D

The way I see it, of the three years it took to get accepted, one was entirely due to bureaucratic problems.  I realize that truly motivated people will stick it out, but at the same time, delays can wreak havoc with scheduling training, etc.  For instance, I'm nearing the tail end of my university program, and it will obviously require greater sacrifices to get in summer courses when I'm done school.  

Kilo Mike


P.S.  I know I'm rambling on, but the story above also involved a standard case of lost paperwork, etc., which has been mentioned by others in these forums.  One particular incident at the CFRC which POed me a bit (no, I didn't show it) occured when I had set up an appointment with Cpl. A.  After heading down and informing Sgt. B at the front desk about it, I was told that Cpl. A was sick and not there that day.  Not five seconds later does Cpl. A come walking out of the room right next to Sgt. B, at which time Sgt. B made an embarrassed retraction of his lie.  I felt quite respected and appreciated at that time. :


----------



## I_Drive_Planes (20 Apr 2006)

When I went through the mill last year (Processed for ROTP) I dealt with CFRC Vancouver and I have to say my experience was excellent all around.  There was no excessive waiting, all of the staff was very friendly and accessible for any questions or issues that I had.  They really made me feel like I was being looked after.  After my eye exam (I was initially being processed for Pilot) I couldn't see well enough to read, so they even had someone read the paperwork to me that I needed to sign.

I am really suprised to see CFRC Vancouver leading the poll.

Planes


----------



## kincanucks (20 Apr 2006)

Kilo Mike said:
			
		

> Here we go...
> 
> I first applied Feb 2003, and everything went rather well and reasonably quick (first visit to the unit, board, CFAT, PT test, second interview, and medical in about <3 months).  However, I had a medical issue which required a year and a half on the waiting list to get an appointment with the right specialist.   During this time, I even tried to get in touch with the RMO to ask if paying for a prompt appointment down south would be acceptable.  I left N messages, and never got a single reply.  The appointment date eventually came up, and the specialist signed off that I was able to meet the standard.
> 
> ...



Which CFRC/D?


----------



## misfit (20 Apr 2006)

Ever since Air Cadets, I wanted to be a CF Pilot. My first experience was applying to RMC in high school. No complaints, just didn't make it. So I tried for reserve Infantry - didn't get in for the summer BMQ. 

So I went away to a civilian university...studying a subject I didn't really care for, holding a sour disposition towards the CF. In my second year, I applied for Pilot. Despite having 20/20, qualifying on the CFAT, decent grades in school, leadership qualities, blah blah, I was counseled out for having admitted to trying pot no more than 3 times that year. Wow. I was told that my drug "habits" were unacceptable in the CF, and I could apply again in 6 months. I walked away from the recruiting center wondering where they were going to find all the applicants that had never tried pot before in their life. Totally discouraged, I never bothered to apply again 6 months later.

So, moving ahead to June 2005, I decided to apply again. Having been frustrated with the Officer application experience, and my vision having deterioted to 20/25, I thought I may be better suited as an Infantry NCM. I contacted a recruiter in Toronto, went in to get the forms - and got super pumped. The Sgt. told me that I had a chance to get for September BMQ! Filled out all the forms right away and gave them to her. Didn't hear anything for 3 weeks. So phoned the Sgt. and she gave me a new number to call. I called that number and they said they needed to get my file from Halifax (where I previously applied for Pilot). Fair enough I thought. 3 weeks go by and I call the CFRD in Toronto. I'm told that they are waiting for Halifax to send my file. 3 more weeks...nothing. So I phone up and ask if I can have the number to the Halifax  CFRD. I phone them up only to hear this "Oh, we never received a request to transfer your file". %$#^%#%$#^%!!!!!!!!

Anyway, it took about 4 months to get my file transferred. When it finally was, I got to do the medical, interview and PT. I must say, the staff at this CFRD were very helpful and friendly. So all that was finished and it was time for me to wait. The only thing holding up my merit listing now is the ERC. It has been over a month since the request was sent out for the ERC, and no word. 

Getting anxious, I started researching other trades that I may be qualified for. When I phone the recruiting center asking if I could add some more trades to my app, I spoke with a VERY helpful 2nd Leitenant, who explained what each trade did. He also mentioned that I may be qualified for ROTP or CEOTP. I was excited. So I switched my application to ROTP and I'm just getting them the appropriate paperwork. 

The only thing I can fault the CFRD for is taking so long to transfer my file. That, and the god awful waiting that everyone goes through.


----------



## SeaRoom (21 Apr 2006)

_"I was counseled out for having admitted to trying pot no more than 3 times that year."_

Hmmm...If you say so.

Problems do occur in recruiting, like any large bureaucracy, but I feel the need for some explanation:

Recruiting staff work 8 hours a day, just like most other office workers in the world. Thing is, we start at 0800, not 0900. That's why after 1600 it's hard to get hold of anyone. The Centre itself is often open until 1700, but only a skeleton crew stays that late; to do basic admin and keep the doors open for walk-ins. If it's an officer or recruiter that you are calling and getting no answer, it's most likely that they are either out of the office (as their duties often require them to be), or in an interview. Your interviewer sometimes has as much as 4 hours worth of interviewing in a day. If you want to be more successful at finding a "real" person, call early, not late. And on that subject, I know lots of career counsellors who make calls on the weekend, on their own time.

Recruiting centres, in fact, have very limited resources, especially in manpower. I'm personally filling two positions at the moment. The file managers work flat out from 0800 to 1600. I couldn't do their job - it's absolutely mind numbing. My centre processes more than 2500 files a year. Recruiting centres also suffer from high turnover of personnel. Many are reserve, and come and go rather quickly, making it difficult to maintain numbers of trained staff. Yet despite the limited financial and human resources, I can think of few organization that go to the extent that the CF does in helping applicants get hired, and indeed providing opportunities to those who'd be in deadend jobs on civy street. 

CF recruitment waiting times are actually less on average than for local police, RCMP, fire services, or other such organizations. The RCMP has actually been studying the CF system because it is more efficient.

Toronto and Vancouver are probably highest on the poll because their populations present the largest number of issue that slow down the system, and generally place strain on the processing power of the centre; generating more paperwork, requiring more phone calls, taking up more man hours, and basically creating complications that affect all the applicants in that area; resulting in more displeasure.


----------



## Fredster (21 Apr 2006)

I wasn't going to post this as a "complaint" because I'm really in no rush to get processed, but I'll post this anyways.  This is with regards to CFRC Toronto.  I signed, dated, and submitted my Forces application (along with all necessary documentation) on January 09, 2006.  I heard nothing from anyone for nearly two months.  On February 28, 2006 I called the CFRC Toronto because I was having cell phone problems, and wanted to make sure they could call me if there was a problem or a date/timing that I needed to know about, so I needed to make sure they knew my home phone number.  When I called them up and had this problem resolved, the recruiter said something along the lines of "Oh, your application is about ready to go...  You should come in and write your CFAT."  This was said as if he was surprised that my application wasn't already being processed, as if someone had forgotten all about me for nearly two months.

When I did my Forces interview the recruiter stated that had I applied back in January, I would probably already have been merit listed, or I might already have received my job offer.  I made him aware that my application was submitted on January 09.

Like I said, I'm really in no rush to get through the process here so I really had nothing to gripe about.


----------



## Kunu (23 Apr 2006)

kincanucks said:
			
		

> Which CFRC/D?



Toronto


----------



## Hot Lips (23 Apr 2006)

Well, only good to say so far for the CFRC in Hali...that is not where the problems have lie that I have experienced.

I started my application 06 June 05 and after 10 months was so frustrated I could have pulled every hair out of my head.  The process involved me chasing down the Unit Recruiter steady for any info or updates...to push for the next phase of the application...sigh.  I wrote email after email and placed calls frequently...

So after the 10 months I decided that I am hell bent on becoming a member of the CF so I contacted the Recruiter @ CFRC in Hali who has been most helpful and empathetic.  Although he could not offer an explanation for the length of time...he did offer me an alternative...

I flipped my application to a Reg application...just started that process...a little over a week ago...all of the testing is complete and paperwork...so we'll see.

His professionalism and the whole experience I have had @ CFRC Hali has been a positive one.

Just gotta hang in there...lol

HL


----------



## VanilaGorilla (25 Apr 2006)

So far so good. I have applied to a Reserve Unit in Toronto and my expereince has been great, so far at least. The night I handed in my application it was given directly to a person working at the CFRC who brought it in person. The next day I had my CFAT booked for the following week. After my test I had my interview and medical booked for the next week. I am impressed with CFRC Toronto, they seem to have their act together compared to some of the other centres listed in the posts. They were well organized and on time. I am extremly happy with CFRC Toronto.


----------



## Springroll (30 May 2006)

I am going to add to my previous complaint.
This is through CFRC Halifax.

I was re interviewed on May 15 and accepted and was told I was going to be put on the merit list. 
I called up on May 25 and was directed to speak to the NCM cell Cpl. I was transferred and left a msg. Today I decided to call back in case I was forgotten. I was met with a nasty attitude, almost a "how dare you call me" type. I asked about how the process is going with my application and I was told that it was transferred to another Capt today after the other Capt had held onto it for 2 weeks. I was then told, and I quote "people in this office have not been in, been on leave, and we are opening a new office, so we do not have the time to get everything done". I asked what the process entails from here and was told that the other Capt will review it, like a quality assurance thing, and then it will be sent to the NCM cell where they will go through it and see what I need to do. I have no clue what else I need to do since I have finished all my testing and passed. 

They are having serious issues with returning phone calls, and the attitude was completely uncalled for.
I am starting to feel like this is nothing but a game to them, and even now my husband has directed me to call the ombudsman about this. 
I told him I will wait a little longer and see if I am met with the same attitude as I was today.


----------



## George Wallace (30 May 2006)

You have been reading (I hope) these forums for some time (with over 600 posts to your credit.) so I hope by now you would have a feel of how the Recruiting Process works and how it varies from place to place, applicant to applicant, and time of day, month or year.  Other factors, such as Course dates, space available, etc. also come into play.  You have just been told that the Center that you are going to, is in the middle of Leave, Postings and a major move.  Just more factors to add to the problems faced with new Recruits and the time involved to process them.  I would advise patience.  I would disregard any advice to call an Ombudsman, just because of these problems and perhaps someone having a bad hair day.  That could make matters worse.  Yes, you may get some answers by using the Ombudsman card, but in the end you may land up screwing your chances as a 'clerk' circle files your file.  If 'husband's advice' is the way he normally operates, he may find that he alienates himself from the people he is supposed to be a "team player" with in the process.  Not a good bit of advice in the long run.


The Ombudsman should only be a Last Resort.


----------



## kanataguy1 (19 Mar 2014)

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/touch/news/Inept+recruiting+system+costing+Canadian+Forces+kinds+candidates/9633356/story.html?rel=825269

Thats an article about how slow the process is.


----------



## DAA (19 Mar 2014)

kanataguy1 said:
			
		

> http://www.ottawacitizen.com/touch/news/Inept+recruiting+system+costing+Canadian+Forces+kinds+candidates/9633356/story.html?rel=825269
> 
> Thats an article about how slow the process is.



Yup, and it's far too kind.


----------



## Goose15 (19 Mar 2014)

Wow. That was a lovely read.


----------



## The_Falcon (19 Mar 2014)

DAA said:
			
		

> Yup, and it's far too kind.



Far Far too kind.


----------



## KerryBlue (19 Mar 2014)

Imagine the reporter found her way to the application process samples and found that it actually takes closer or far over 365 days and not 166.... :facepalm:


----------



## Pinggew (19 Mar 2014)

maybe she meant a year and 166 days... would be a tad more accurate.


----------



## MilEME09 (19 Mar 2014)

So it appears someone with a voice other then us has finally noticed that our recruiting system is indeed broken.



> *Blatchford: Inept recruiting system costing Canadian Forces*
> 
> As the last Canadian soldiers returned from Afghanistan this week, those who would follow them into uniform are being stymied by a woefully inept recruiting system where it takes an average of 166 days to be processed.
> 
> ...



Source: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/life/Inept+recruiting+system+costing+Canadian+Forces+kinds/9635246/story.html


----------



## RCDtpr (19 Mar 2014)

They've proven it can be done a lot faster.....when I went through the recruiting process in early 2007 the date from application to leaving for BMQ was just over a week.


----------



## Rohandro (19 Mar 2014)

RCDcpl said:
			
		

> They've proven it can be done a lot faster.....when I went through the recruiting process in early 2007 the date from application to leaving for BMQ was just over a week.



 ??? Where can I get some of this, who did you bribe and how much did you give them LOL


----------



## SJantzi (19 Mar 2014)

Rohandro said:
			
		

> ??? Where can I get some of this, who did you bribe and how much did you give them LOL



Seconded.. Wow total time so far is 3 years >.>


----------



## KerryBlue (19 Mar 2014)

Rohandro said:
			
		

> ??? Where can I get some of this, who did you bribe and how much did you give them LOL



During the height of Canada's war in Afghanistan this wasn't unheard of. I know a few people who were between a few weeks and a month. Peace time army with budget cuts is what we are in right now..


----------



## verstrat10 (19 Mar 2014)

This is actually mind boggling, My process from start to finish was about ~5 months... and i had to go to Aircrew Selection. It makes me feel awful for the guys who have to wait that long.


----------



## The_Falcon (19 Mar 2014)

Sometimes delays are systemic, other times the fault lies with the applicants.  Hint...if you people can't read or understand the documents you have submitted, or you can't follow simple directions and fill out forms completely, the people handling your file WILL move on, and probably get around to looking at it on a Friday afternoon.  

I saw and experienced both.  As a file manager, the applicants who made my job easier, I moved through faster.  Applicants who made life difficult....went to the bottom of the pile.   Most other recruiters and file managers work the same way.


----------



## Griffon (19 Mar 2014)

Applicants, and the public in general, need to keep a few things in mind when talking about the recruiting process:

1) The economy is weak, while the CAF is simultaneously slowing recruiting.  This means more applications for fewer positions, meaning it will take longer to get in.
2) You are applying for a position in the military, not at Wal-Mart.  There is a significant amount of information goes through for each applicant, and this takes time.
3) The CAF recruits in a manner opposite of most employers: They accept and process all applications regardless of whether they are hiring.  The benefit to the applicant is that you will get processed, but you may have an excessive wait time as a result.
4) For people that say they have had an application for 3 years - is that a single application, or have you re-applied? The average is per application, not per applicant.
5) RMC entry is once per year.  People who apply early will be in the system longer.
6) Aircrew selection, MP boards, MARS boards - all the supplementary selection programs - extend timelines and impose selection windows, much like RMC does.  This extends wait times as well.

Is the system perfect? No.  Can parts of it be fixed? Yes, and I think they are trying to do that while keeping it as fair as possible.  I'm not sure how many thousands of applications are processed each year, but it's expensive, time consuming, and difficult to do in a manner that is fair to all involved.  And as Hatchet Man said, don't expect the RC to help if you can't help yourself...a positive attitude and a show of tempered determination can get you a long way.  

I'm afraid you just have to accept that, due to the nature of the occupation, it's going to take longer to get into the CAF than it'll take to get a job as a pipe-fitter or most other skilled trades.  But if you have the patience to wait out the process, that's just one more positive character trait that the CAF can expect you to bring to the table.


----------



## Jarnhamar (19 Mar 2014)

If we "only accepted the best" we wouldn't need warrior platoon.


----------



## DAA (19 Mar 2014)

Griffon said:
			
		

> Applicants, and the public in general, need to keep a few things in mind when talking about the recruiting process:
> 
> 1) The economy is weak, while the CAF is simultaneously slowing recruiting.  This means more applications for fewer positions, meaning it will take longer to get in.
> 2) You are applying for a position in the military, not at Wal-Mart.  There is a significant amount of information goes through for each applicant, and this takes time.
> ...



To address your comments........

1) Nope.  Recruiting numbers are consistent and based on forecasted attrition rates.  Applications are also steady and don't really fluctuate either.
2) Yes, there is a fair bit of information which is collected but the problem has nothing to do with volume.
3) Nope.  The CF does not process "every" application and some applicants will never be contacted
4) Most applicants, are not entirely "truthful" when they express their "time in the system" dissatisfaction.  There is usually a reason why, they just don't mention that.
5) True.  But people who apply early for ROTP end up having their application "shelved" until a later date.
6) Not a large group to draw conclusions from but yes, those occupations do have additional screening requirements.

They had a reasonable system in place but then decided to change to something else, so the wait times may very well increase or if may go the way of a "noncommittal" type of civilian model, "Thanks for applying and writing our tests.  Don't call us, we'll call you."


----------



## Griffon (19 Mar 2014)

Physical fitness is no longer assessed at the recruiter level, as it was deemed that too many otherwise strong applicants were discarded due to their lack of fitness.  Someone had the bright idea that the CAF could indoctrinate fitness into their lives at the taxpayer's expense.  I do not agree with this opinion.  I believe that an individual's intrinsic motivation to maintain fitness is a positive asset to an applicant, and that blaming the lack of fitness on society as a whole is a cop-out.  I am sure that Warrior Platoon has turned out a number of successful, productive, fit troops. I'm just not sure it was the best idea to remove fitness as a selection criteria, or that Warrior Platoon is really worth its cost.

But I digress.  Warrior Platoon hasn't made it harder to get in, it's made it easier.  Point for those that think it takes too long to get in...


----------



## Griffon (19 Mar 2014)

> Nope.  Recruiting numbers are consistent and based on forecasted attrition rates.  Applications are also steady and don't really fluctuate either.



I was referring more to the comment of how quick it was to get in during Afghanistan c. 2007, and not so much the last two or three years.  The economy has really fallen off since then, and I was under the impression that intake has as well.



> 3) Nope.  The CF does not process "every" application and some applicants will never be contacted



I was of the understanding that applications were never rejected outright, as in no " Sorry, we aren't hiring right now, you can hold on to that piece of paper.  Have a nice day."I am aware that not all applicants are selected for further selection (i.e. CFAT, Medical, Interview), am I mistaken on this?

I do hope that the recruiting system can be made a little more efficient, we'll just have to wait and see what the changes bring us I guess.

Edit: My apologies for jumping in here, I just get frustrated at the lack of perspective many seem to have on what they're signing up for.  It should take longer than two weeks to get in, IMHO.  I'll jump back into my lane now...


----------



## Remius (19 Mar 2014)

CFRG...   :rage:


----------



## DAA (19 Mar 2014)

Griffon said:
			
		

> I was referring more to the comment of how quick it was to get in during Afghanistan c. 2007, and not so much the last two or three years.  The economy has really fallen off since then, and I was under the impression that intake has as well.
> 
> I was of the understanding that applications were never rejected outright, as in no " Sorry, we aren't hiring right now, you can hold on to that piece of paper.  Have a nice day."I am aware that not all applicants are selected for further selection (i.e. CFAT, Medical, Interview), am I mistaken on this?
> 
> ...



Intake did drop a fair bit but we still need in the area of 4.000+ a year, give or take.  Afghanistan really didn't play that big an impact, it was more the accelerated rate of attrition due to a boom in the economy out west that was more attractive to CF members.

The only thing an applicant will get today, is CFAT/TSD testing, nothing more other than, we'll call you.....maybe and even the testing isn't guaranteed.  No customer service that you or I experienced when we joined.  Just a simple "Thanks for showing up."

What frustrates the applicants most, is being told to expect a call and the call doesn't come, we'll send you an email and the email doesn't come, told to call back in x weeks and then told to call back in x months, told they did "well" when they really didn't, told process X will take 2-4 weeks when it's more like 2-4 months and the list goes on and on.

If only an applicant could get a "straight" or "reasonable" answer, it would probably help to solve allot of the problems.  But then again, managing applicants expectations, is not the strong suit of recruiting.


----------



## Jarnhamar (19 Mar 2014)

DAA said:
			
		

> But then again, managing applicants expectations, is not the strong suit of recruiting.



But mangling is  ;D


----------



## JoeDos (19 Mar 2014)

DAA said:
			
		

> Intake did drop a fair bit but we still need in the area of 4.000+ a year, give or take.  Afghanistan really didn't play that big an impact, it was more the accelerated rate of attrition due to a boom in the economy out west that was more attractive to CF members.
> 
> The only thing an applicant will get today, is CFAT/TSD testing, nothing more other than, we'll call you.....maybe and even the testing isn't guaranteed.  No customer service that you or I experienced when we joined.  Just a simple "Thanks for showing up."
> 
> ...



I think I can speak for myself and a few other applicants when I say its fairly off putting to hear, "Oh we'll get back to you within a month or so to schedule x appointment" and when you email your File Manager a month and x amount of days later because you still haven't heard anything and your references haven't been contacted you get the generic response. "we don't have an estimated date, but don't worry you're still being processed." Steward my main trade is in-demand and from what I heard it still has positions open for this fiscal year, but of course the lack of response from my Recruiting Center is frustrating and I can almost bet I probably wont be contacted for a few months. (But trying to keep my hopes up.)


----------



## Transporter (19 Mar 2014)

Many years ago, I considered leaving the CF to join the Australian Defence Force. I was given an ADF recruitment web address by an ADF contact I had met here in Canada and I sent them an email with a bunch of questions about how the enrollment process works, etc. I had a response in less than 24 hrs, complete with explicit guidance on everything I needed to do to make it happen. I was also provided a POC name and phone number should I have any additional questions. I thought that was pretty slick.


----------



## dimsum (19 Mar 2014)

Transporter said:
			
		

> Many years ago, I considered leaving the CF to join the Australian Defence Force. I was given an ADF recruitment web address by an ADF contact I had met here in Canada and I sent them an email with a bunch of questions about how the enrollment process works, etc. I had a response in less than 24 hrs, complete with explicit guidance on everything I needed to do to make it happen. I was also provided a POC name and phone number should I have any additional questions. I thought that was pretty slick.



Unfortunately that isn't always the case anymore, according to a son of a co-worker here.  His application to join the ADF has been over a year with much of the same issues that have been mentioned in this thread.  I think this is a relatively new thing, but I've gathered that the ADF has left Recruiting to another federal department and so has little (if any) control over processing, etc.  There are ADF members in recruiting, but they are basically there to answer questions regarding the military.

Lateral transfers, what little there is these days, may be a different story but even then, those have dried up quite a bit (at least for the RAAF.)


----------



## MacIssac (19 Mar 2014)

My brother joined for ACISS trade in summer 2013 and was in BMQ by September but he was from a rural area, where apparently that's where CAF hires more from, (history aspect compared to inner cities) which gives me hope that maybe its just a backlog of recruits. I applied in Jan, and my file manager said I am on the list to be called after April 1st for medical and interview - I figure its just a slow time as of lately, but cannot speak for those who have had to wait over a year or two.


----------



## KerryBlue (19 Mar 2014)

J_M_J_D said:
			
		

> I think I can speak for myself and a few other applicants when I say its fairly off putting to hear, "Oh we'll get back to you within a month or so to schedule x appointment" "we don't have an estimated date, but don't worry you're still being processed."



This is all you get from recruiters now a day. I was told 2 weeks in October, came back and was told whoops we forgot to do you background check come back in a month. A month later, whoops new process we'll call you. Granted I lost most of January waiting for ROTP. But still I'm goingon 3-5 months  of waiting for an interview and medical, and no I did not require PERSEC or anything else. I'm coming up on one year now, with another 4-5 months at least of waiting.


----------



## x-grunt (20 Mar 2014)

Ach, it wasn't until I read this article and this thread that I realized how bitterly disappointed I still am about my own experience.  
I have to say the reporter was *far* more gentle then I would be.

I was in the recruiting stream for nearly 3 years, then I was mistakenly turned down a few days - days! - before the Basic Officer training I was *already* loaded on. The decision was reversed but no one told me for over a year, after which my file was already closed and my life had taken a different turn. That was 7 years ago now, and at my current age enrolling, while technically possible, would be a joke (I'm 54 now. Who needs a 54 year old officer cadet or private?).

I hope the system has improved, or will be.

edit to add: Sorry, I realize this was a bit of a rant. I feel better now and feel free to ignore it.


----------



## DAA (20 Mar 2014)

x-grunt said:
			
		

> I hope the system has improved, or will be.



I'm sure they're working on it right now.    :facepalm:

fiddle while Rome burns
Fig. to do nothing or something trivial while knowing that something disastrous is happening. (From a legend that the Roman emperor Nero played the lyre while Rome was burning.)

fiddle while Rome burns
to spend time enjoying yourself or doing things that are not important when you should be dealing with a serious problem 
Usage notes: This phrase comes from a story about the Roman emperor Nero, who fiddled (= played the violin) while the city of Rome was burning.


----------



## MacIssac (20 Mar 2014)

When I applied in January - a month had passed and still did not hear back for a CFAT booking, so I decided to email my first contact and within a day, a Cpl had called me and sched. a CFAT booking, another month went by and I had walked into my recruitment center and asked to make sure my trade choices were correct, turns out they had totally different trades down (only because I had made the mistakes of applying as an officer online) instead of NCM. When I called my file manager (which I do not do often) I had told him that I don't want to be "that guy" calling in every week to see an update even though it was my second time contacting him, and we both had a good laugh that there are people far worst then myself calling in everyday asking for an update which makes me feel for what some recruiters or file managers have to go through on a daily basis - he was kind enough to tell me that I was on the list for medical and interview after april 1st (new fiscal year) but to come back in April as he is leaving and his files handed off to someone else. Every situation is different but I think some file managers like to see that applicants take charge when needed to make sure everything is in good shape on their application. Even tho the desk attendant had sched. me an interview and medical that week and it was cancelled the next day, I will wait patiently for April to call back or even go in to see if there is anything I can do to get an interview and medical booked.  

DISCLAIMER 
(What I write should not be taken as advise, just stating my own personal experience)


----------



## i_want_a_pmq (20 Mar 2014)

x-grunt said:
			
		

> That was 7 years ago now, and at my current age enrolling, while technically possible, would be a joke (I'm 54 now. Who needs a 54 year old officer cadet or private?).



It's never too late to try, unless you actually reach retirement age (60). I definitely saw a few older folks in Saint-Jean. In the Basic Up: Reloaded series, there was a guy in his 50s going through BMQ.


----------



## ballz (20 Mar 2014)

Couple the terrible recruiting system with the inability to get recruits through their initial MOC training... and it would make a great case study for a Master's level Human Resources class.


----------



## DAA (20 Mar 2014)

ballz said:
			
		

> Couple the terrible recruiting system with the inability to get recruits through their initial MOC training... and it would make a great case study for a Master's level Human Resources class.



It's not exactly rocket science but more like "reverse engineering".

The occupational MA identifies the intake requirements, the TA (ie; trg schools) receive those numbers, plans crses accordingly and then notifies recruiting of the QL3 crse start dates.  Recruiting then enrols by occupation based on TA schedules and BMOQ/BMQ dates.

Offr Occ Trg/QL3 Crse Start Date - Duration of BMOQ/BMQ - 60 days (give or take) = Date of Employment Offer with enrolment a week or two prior to BMOQ/BMQ start.  Atleast that is the way it worked "circa 1980's", before computers and planning that all on paper.

I think this kind of thing is probably taught at the undergrad level as a "basic" HR competency.


----------



## d_edwards (20 Mar 2014)

It appears to me that part of the problem is bottlenecks at the medical file reveiw, and security/background checks.    I just did my file update and now have to provide another list of references.   They will get the same list as before with a similar result, but will still take time to process.  My medical update worries me because I am on the Reserve Supp list.  For some reason the CFRC det has to have my medical done at the base hospital and the wait for an appointment there can, and has been months.   

I am sure things can be done more efficiently but there does not seem to be any incentive or drive to do so.


----------



## TCM621 (21 Mar 2014)

The single easiest thing they could do to speed times up would be to have the candidate hand in his application, walk over to a computer, and do the CFAT. Just like at the DMV. Put the two together and the file moves forward. Not only would it cut down waits by a few weeks to a month, it would give the initial reviewer a way to prioritize cases. If you need a bunch of AVS or Naval electronic techs, you can focus on the applicants with high aptitudes in the required areas.


----------



## DAA (21 Mar 2014)

Tcm621 said:
			
		

> The single easiest thing they could do to speed times up would be to have the candidate hand in his application, walk over to a computer, and do the CFAT. Just like at the DMV. Put the two together and the file moves forward. Not only would it cut down waits by a few weeks to a month, it would give the initial reviewer a way to prioritize cases. If you need a bunch of AVS or Naval electronic techs, you can focus on the applicants with high aptitudes  in the required areas.



Ummmmm, that's pretty much what the process is already.


----------



## Nemo888 (21 Mar 2014)

It's always been like this as far back as I can remember. Generation before sounds a little easier.  Signed a contract, got a wad of cash and just enough time to blow it before you had to show up for basic. Back then you could still ask the judge to sign up instead of jail time. Most of those guys must be 70 at least now. Is it just me or has the military become less fun? My God those guys had stories.


----------



## George Wallace (21 Mar 2014)

Nemo888 said:
			
		

> It's always been like this as far back as I can remember. Generation before sounds a little easier.  Signed a contract, got a wad of cash and just enough time to blow it before you had to show up for basic. Back then you could still ask the judge to sign up instead of jail time. Most of those guys must be 70 at least now. Is it just me or has the military become less fun? My God those guys had stories.



 :

Back then we did not have The "Igor Gouzenko Affair", nor 911, nor the requirement that all members hold a Level II Security Clearance to operate highly technical weapons, communication and electronic systems.  Back in the day, you only had to have one heart, two lungs, two arms, two legs, two eyes and ears, and be able to follow orders.  Back in the day we did not have sophisticated computers tracking our everyday lives.  People actually did outdoor activities.  People actually wanted to work and prove that they could, not just feel that they should be entitled to work.  A high level of education was not required in those simpler times.  Yes, back in the day recruiting was much simpler.  Sorry, but times have changed.  If you don't have the capability to learn, are not in the best of health, and can not attain a Security Clearance, you are not likely to get into the Canadian Armed Forces of today.........And guess what?  It takes time to verify that you are what you claim to be.


----------



## The_Falcon (21 Mar 2014)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> *If you don't have the capability to learn, are not in the best of health, and can not attain a Security Clearance, you are not likely to get into the Canadian Armed Forces of today.........And guess what?  It takes time to verify that you are what you claim to be.*



 :goodpost:


----------



## Goose15 (21 Mar 2014)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> :
> 
> Back then we did not have The "Igor Gouzenko Affair", nor 911, nor the requirement that all members hold a Level II Security Clearance to operate highly technical weapons, communication and electronic systems.  Back in the day, you only had to have one heart, two lungs, two arms, two legs, two eyes and ears, and be able to follow orders.  Back in the day we did not have sophisticated computers tracking our everyday lives.  People actually did outdoor activities.  People actually wanted to work and prove that they could, ]not just feel that they should be entitled to work. A high level of education was not required in those simpler times.  Yes, back in the day recruiting was much simpler.  Sorry, but times have changed.  If you don't have the capability to learn, are not in the best of health, and can not attain a Security Clearance, you are not likely to get into the Canadian Armed Forces of today.........And guess what?  It takes time to verify that you are what you claim to be.



I would almost be inclined to agree with you GW if not for two things in your post. I completely submit to the fact things are more intricate nowadays and this requires applicants to be stronger, more educated and more competitive overall. Also, with the necessity of certain levels if Security Clearance in places which were not (or rarely?) required in previous years, it makes good sense things would take longer.

This is where I have an issue though: 

You are taking the bad eggs who seem to feel entitled and putting a blanket over all of us. Frankly, I know full well (as well as many others including personal friends who are applying/have already applied) the CAF owes me nothing. In fact I should be the one owing the CAF as they are a key factor in my everyday freedom.

Secondly (and more about this particular thread): the fact things take time is understandable, completely 100%. I have worked in jobs where things take time, that is just how it is sometimes. The issue arises when it's not just a time consuming item such as a background check but recruiters and/or file managers losing key information or not contacting you to inform you of a new process or required change in your application. I know that many recruiters like an applicant to take charge so (especially during my ROTP app) with my background checks I would call in every 3-4 weeks to be sure everything was going smoothly with my background checks as I had spent time in the US for college. My file manager appreciating the attentiveness said they were just awaiting a response from the QR&O but everything was just fine. I now have a new file manager and my new file manager informed me no one ever submitted my checks despite having been told they were just waiting to receive word. That is of course ignoring the fact I had to drive an hour to my CFRC multiple times because they lost the BG check multiple times. That is why I became frustrated; not because things were slow as in many other application processes but due to the errors that I believe would be considered intolerable in any workplace. I have full respect for all serving members including those who have operated my file but to say that what occurred is just "a time-consuming process" would be a poor description.


----------



## Emilio (21 Mar 2014)

Goose15 said:
			
		

> *You are taking the bad eggs who seem to feel entitled and putting a blanket over all of us.* Frankly, I know full well (as well as many others including personal friends who are applying/have already applied) the CAF owes me nothing. In fact I should be the one owing the CAF as they are a key factor in my everyday freedom.



Thank you.


----------



## The_Falcon (21 Mar 2014)

Goose15 said:
			
		

> I would almost be inclined to agree with you GW if not for two things in your post. I completely submit to the fact things are more intricate nowadays and this requires applicants to be stronger, more educated and more competitive overall. Also, with the necessity of certain levels if Security Clearance in places which were not (or rarely?) required in previous years, it makes good sense things would take longer.
> 
> This is where I have an issue though:
> 
> ...



Sorry  it cuts both ways.  Do people in recruiting make mistakes and misplace stuff, yes.  They are human not robots.  But I see the same constant griping from each and every applicant on this site, it's ALWAYS recruiting's fault something went astray.  Everyone of you is perfect I guess, and didn't provide incorrect contact information, made sure everything was neat and legible, filled in all applicable boxes on every form etc. 

BULL**** 

If that were the case, why is it in Toronto for example, every single CFAT, either myself or one of the other invigilators had to call 3-5 people aside before EVERY single  test and have them either re-fill out forms, or fill in spots that they missed. 

Or have GARDA contact me at least once a day regarding an applicant because they couldn't get a hold of any of the listed references, or they just plain couldn't read the craptacular handwriting of some people. 

Does the system have issues, yes it does.  But like I said before, sometimes the delays are self-inflicted on the applicants part.  And I guarantee, there are plenty of applicants on this site who share responsibility for their process taking a long time, but they are incapable of actually admitting it. 

So now that you are all going to be butt-hurt by my comments, here is checklist for you to make sure you aren't the problem

1) Have you followed what ever instructions you were given to the letter?
2) Did you fill out any forms you were given COMPLETELY and LEGIBLY using correct sentence and grammar structure for either English or French?
3) Did you submit ALL your paperwork in whatever time frame you were given?
4) Did you research to make sure you have the proper credentials?
4a) Did you submit those credentials?
5) Did you provide correct and current contact information?
5a) Do you actually check that contact information regularly?
5b) Did you provide correct and current contact information for references? 
6) Have you abstained from excessive drug/alcohol use?
7) Have you kept yourself out of legal issues?
8) Have you kept yourself out of credit issues?
9) Are you a healthy and fit person with no underlying medical issues?
10) Did you pick a trade that is currently OPEN?
11) Have you spent your ENTIRE life in Canada?
11a) Has your immediate family spent their ENTIRE life in Canada?
12) When leaving voicemails, or emails can you be understood clearly?

Most of you think that 166 days is not feasible, well it is.   Most of the files I dealt with were in fact processed in about that time frame.  Improvements can definately be made to shorten that gap, but I will say it again, if you are outside that time frame, you need to take a good long honest look in the mirror and that list above, cause I will bet good money, the issue isn't the system it's you.


----------



## KerryBlue (21 Mar 2014)

Hatchet Man said:
			
		

> So now that you are all going to be butt-hurt by my comments, here is checklist for you to make sure you aren't the problem
> 
> 1) Have you followed what ever instructions you were given to the letter?
> 2) Did you fill out any forms you were given COMPLETELY and LEGIBLY using correct sentence and grammar structure for either English or French?
> ...



Well what about those people who can answer yes to all the above questions. Granted I lost some time in between January and February for ROTP application and transferring my file, but I'm still closing in on a year or 10 months if you subtract the ROTP time and I have yet to be contacted for a medical or interview.


----------



## The_Falcon (21 Mar 2014)

You may not be as competitive as you think you are, and people with higher scores, better grades, etc. could have been prioritized ahead of you.  When I was working at Toronto, the Det Commander personally wanted to all the ROTP applicants.  The current one may well be the same.  As such there were limited slots for interviews, and he screened the files himself.


----------



## Goose15 (21 Mar 2014)

Hatchet Man said:
			
		

> ....



PM inbound.


----------



## Goose15 (21 Mar 2014)

Misposted.


----------



## George Wallace (20 Apr 2014)

WOW!  Christie Blatchford is really holding no punches back with this National Post article:

Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.

LINK



> Christie Blatchford: The government doesn’t answer questions about its military recruiting mess
> 
> National Post, Full Comment
> Christie Blatchford | April 18, 2014 7:02 PM ET
> ...



A very sad commentary on the state of affairs in National Defence.

More on LINK.


----------



## GINge! (20 Apr 2014)

She sounds like a petulant child in that article. Paint all of NDHQ with the same brush because she didn't get (in her mind) a timely answer from a PA.


----------



## Strike (20 Apr 2014)

GINge! said:
			
		

> She sounds like a petulant child in that article. Paint all of NDHQ with the same brush because she didn't get (in her mind) a timely answer from a PA.



It's the job of PA to inform in a timely manner.  A week is way too long to respond in ANY way to a reporter, especially when ADM(PA) expects PA to touch base with media within 2 hours of ANY media query, even if it's only to say they are looking into things.  Having the reporter repeatedly call, especially one who is well known is just asking for trouble.


----------



## Zoomie (20 Apr 2014)

IMO she succeeds in achieving her outcome - painting the MND's office in a bad light.  How Mickey Mouse of that office....


----------



## Edward Campbell (20 Apr 2014)

I'm with Strike. Simply courtesy, if nothing else, demands either a reasonable prompt reply or an explanation re: why a delay is likely.

Ms Blatchford is, broadly, a 'friend' to the military and, by extension, to the Department. It's not as though DND and the CF have so many surplus friends that they can afford to insult them.

----

I asked a question of the MND late in 2013; it was, I believe, an informed and polite question on a policy matter. Like Ms Blatchford I got a vacuous bit of PR _pablum_. I sent the question to a mid/high level functionary in the Conservative Party, with a copy of my 2013 donor tax receipt, suggesting that any Canadian, donor or not, was entitled to a better response than the one I received. I got a proper response about a week later.


----------



## TCM621 (20 Apr 2014)

Also she did not contact PA. She contacted the MND who, as an elected official, beholden to the people. She wanted a reply from the ministers office but was sluffed off to military PA.


----------



## The Bread Guy (20 Apr 2014)

Strike said:
			
		

> It's the job of PA to inform in a timely manner.  A week is way too long to respond in ANY way to a reporter, especially when ADM(PA) expects PA to touch base with media within 2 hours of ANY media query, even if it's only to say they are looking into things.  Having the reporter repeatedly call, especially one who is well known is just asking for trouble.


Gotta wonder how many OK's (and how high) were needed to make the response take that long?



			
				Tcm621 said:
			
		

> Also she did not contact PA. She contacted the MND who, as an elected official, beholden to the people. She wanted a reply from the ministers office but was sluffed off to military PA.


DND's not the only department where questions to the Minister get responded to by the public affairs bureaucrats.



			
				E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> I asked a question of the MND late in 2013; it was, I believe, an informed and polite question on a policy matter. Like Ms Blatchford I got a vacuous bit of PR _pablum_. I sent the question to a mid/high level functionary in the Conservative Party, with a copy of my 2013 donor tax receipt, suggesting that any Canadian, donor or not, was entitled to a better response than the one I received. I got a proper response about a week later.


Is that what it takes?  That's sad, but thanks for sharing that.


----------



## Strike (20 Apr 2014)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> Gotta wonder how many OK's (and how high) were needed to make the response take that long?



I hear ya, but that's no reason why someone couldn't have contacted her at least the day later to let her know where they were.  Heck, she called them and let them know she was delaying the article due to the news du jour.


----------



## Tibbson (20 Apr 2014)

It looks like she is getting her answers as quickly as our career managers are getting their budgets for cost moves and those of us due for posting are getting our messages.


----------



## The Bread Guy (20 Apr 2014)

Strike said:
			
		

> I hear ya, but that's no reason why someone couldn't have contacted her at least the day later to let her know where they were.  Heck, she called them and let them know she was delaying the article due to the news du jour.


Assuming the info gets passed up (and I'd bet a loonie it most certainly does), then one has to wonder about the priorities of those higher up (timely response vs. message discipline response that won't cause any waves).

A reminder from the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada:


> ....* Ministers are the principal spokespersons of the Government of Canada*. They are supported in this role by appointed aides, including executive assistants, communication directors and press secretaries in ministers' offices, and by the senior management teams of government institutions, which include deputy heads, heads of communications and other officials.
> 
> *Ministers present and explain government policies, priorities and decisions to the public*. Institutions, leaving political matters to the exclusive domain of ministers and their offices, focus their communication activities on issues and matters pertaining to the policies, programs, services and initiatives they administer ....


----------



## GINge! (21 Apr 2014)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> Gotta wonder how many OK's (and how high) were needed to make the response take that long?



Indeed. I would say all the way to the top slots in the corporation, given that its concerning the DSAB report. 

It was this tough-guy remark from Christie that irked me - "I confess, I barely restrained myself from saying that unless Ms. Quinney was flying one of the CF-18s over to Poland, she should get her *** in gear."

If she's serious, she demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the staff effort (some may say churn) involved in sending the six pack out the door. It's more than just 6 pilots strapping in. 

And then there was the actual title of the article in the National Post which was as fols:

"SOLDIERS AND FLUNKIES. DND's Bumbling bureaucrats are letting our fighters down" and this line: "I also know that the senior command at NDHQ  is riddled with inept flunkies who don’t give a rat’s *** about the average soldier’s or veteran’s lot."

After working in Ottawa, and seeing the hours that the senior staff put in (most of whom have had their fair share of time in a LAV turret / CLP / Sub / Cockpit / trauma bay)  and working with them at my own HQ and CJOC and SJS, Blatchford could not be further from the mark when she accuses them of being 'inept flunkies' who don't give a rat's ass about the troops. 

Her response to have a 1 day / 7 day RFI response time is to deduce that all senior staff are flunkies? C'mon Christie, you're better than that.


----------



## George Wallace (21 Apr 2014)

GINge! said:
			
		

> Indeed. I would say all the way to the top slots in the corporation, given that its concerning the DSAB report.
> 
> It was this tough-guy remark from Christie that irked me - "I confess, I barely restrained myself from saying that unless Ms. Quinney was flying one of the CF-18s over to Poland, she should get her *** in gear."
> 
> If she's serious, she demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the staff effort (some may say churn) involved in sending the six pack out the door. It's more than just 6 pilots strapping in.



If you haven't met or know Christie Blatchford, then it may surprise you that that is how she calls it.



			
				GINge! said:
			
		

> And then there was the actual title of the article in the National Post which was as fols:
> 
> "SOLDIERS AND FLUNKIES. DND's Bumbling bureaucrats are letting our fighters down" and this line: "I also know that the senior command at NDHQ  is riddled with inept flunkies who don’t give a rat’s *** about the average soldier’s or veteran’s lot."
> 
> After working in Ottawa, and seeing the hours that the senior staff put in (most of whom have had their fair share of time in a LAV turret / CLP / Sub / Cockpit / trauma bay)  and working with them at my own HQ and CJOC and SJS, Blatchford could not be further from the mark when she accuses them of being 'inept flunkies' who don't give a rat's ass about the troops.



I can agree with you on some counts, and agree with her on many.




			
				GINge! said:
			
		

> Her response to have a 1 day / 7 day RFI response time is to deduce that all senior staff are flunkies? C'mon Christie, you're better than that.



I don't know where you work, but that doesn't sound unreasonable to me, for a "RFI".  If it were ATIP, then much longer would be expected.  'Flunkies' do have a tendency to screw up the most basic of passage of information.  Would you deduce any differently?


----------



## Edward Campbell (21 Apr 2014)

GINge! said:
			
		

> Indeed. I would say all the way to the top slots in the corporation, given that its concerning the DSAB report.
> 
> It was this tough-guy remark from Christie that irked me - "I confess, I barely restrained myself from saying that unless Ms. Quinney was flying one of the CF-18s over to Poland, she should get her *** in gear."
> 
> ...




I was one of those, many years ago ... 12 hour days were the norm for my boss (a two star) and me (then a three striper). But both he and I recognized that several of the 60_ish_ hours we 'worked' each week were unproductive and a few were even counterproductive. He was often kept for "busy work" that added nothing, except some political _cover_, for the MND or Associate MND or even for a young political staffer.* The DM of the day, Robert Fowler, tried to bring some sense to our system but he was stymied by weak political and military leaders managers. I doubt things are a whole lot better today - if anything the large number of large HQs _suggests_, to me, that things are likely worse.

_____
* Whenever my boss discovered that it was a young staffer, not the MND's COS, who was jerking our chain he retaliated, often cruelly, through the aforementioned Mr Fowler, who seemed to actively enjoy ruining young, power-mad, staffers' lives.


----------



## Strike (21 Apr 2014)

GINge! said:
			
		

> After working in Ottawa, and seeing the hours that the senior staff put in (most of whom have had their fair share of time in a LAV turret / CLP / Sub / Cockpit / trauma bay)...



Ha!  Not in my trade!

And when it comes to media, we live in a 24/7 news hour cycle.  If Ottawa doesn't want to officially reply to an RFI in a timely (ie - usually within 24 hrs) manner, they risk the reporter getting the answer from somewhere else and raising a much bigger shit storm.


----------



## TCBF (21 Apr 2014)

- Considering the GOOD press she has given us over the years, I am left wondering if the spin artists holding the fort were even in puberty when we first deployed to the "Sandbox of Sorrow." Otherwise they would have known of her value.

- Perhaps they are a new generation of assistant who have never read a newspaper, or were told at J school that if they were caught reading the National Post, they could not graduate, and therefore have no idea that some journalists actually LIKE soldiers.

- You can bet Christy has more time 'outside the wire' than the people writing her the form letters.


----------



## observor 69 (21 Apr 2014)

TCBF said:
			
		

> - Considering the GOOD press she has given us over the years, I am left wondering if the spin artists holding the fort were even in puberty when we first deployed to the "Sandbox of Sorrow." Otherwise they would have known of her value.
> 
> - Perhaps they are a new generation of assistant who have never read a newspaper, or were told at J school that if they were caught reading the National Post, they could not graduate, and therefore have no idea that some journalists actually LIKE soldiers.
> 
> - You can bet Christy has more time 'outside the wire' than the people writing her the form letters.



Well said. Points inbound.  :bowing:


----------



## OldSolduer (21 Apr 2014)

I've met Ms Blatchford. 

Formidable.....and quite blunt when she needs to be.


----------



## Dissident (21 Apr 2014)

Ms Blatchford is the only journalist I would willingly talk to. She has a knack of bringing up military topics which concern me, but that I have no control over in order to fix. Recruiting is just one more thing she is tackling that weighs heavily on my mind. The lack of recruits is slowly killing us right now and I am glad (ecstatic?) that she is looking into it.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (21 Apr 2014)

GINge! said:
			
		

> She sounds like a petulant child in that article. Paint all of NDHQ with the same brush because she didn't get (in her mind) a timely answer from a PA.



Disagree.  She called it as she saw it.  The PAO wasn't who the answer was asked to in the first place.  Did you read the article???


----------



## Eye In The Sky (21 Apr 2014)

GINge! said:
			
		

> It was this tough-guy remark from Christie that irked me - "I confess, I barely restrained myself from saying that unless Ms. Quinney was flying one of the CF-18s over to Poland, she should get her *** in gear."
> 
> If she's serious, she demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the staff effort (some may say churn) involved in sending the six pack out the door. It's more than just 6 pilots strapping in.



Or, for some unknown reason, you missed the context and meaning of the comment. 

Look at the steak, not the peas.   

Not sure you will convince the line folks that the desk warrior's have it harder, work longer, etc.   :2c:


----------



## Jarnhamar (21 Apr 2014)

GINge! said:
			
		

> If she's serious, she demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the staff effort (some may say churn) involved in sending the six pack out the door. It's more than just 6 pilots strapping in.


If it takes a week and several phone calls to reply an email I can only imagine how difficult sending jets somewhere would be.



> (most of whom have had their fair share of time in a LAV turret / CLP / Sub / Cockpit / trauma bay)


"Most" seems hard to believe but I wouldn't know.


----------



## Haggis (21 Apr 2014)

Let me put my spin on this from nine years at NDHQ 





			
				GINge! said:
			
		

> After working in Ottawa, and seeing the hours that the senior staff put in (most some of whom have had their fair share of time in a LAV Grizzly turret / have spilled CLP on themselves / eaten a foot-long Sub / Cockpit of a CF101 )



I do take issue with the "inept flunkies" characterization.  Although there are many at NDHQ who are long and far removed from time on the sharp end of anything but a shrimp skewer, there are hundreds of folks, Regular Force, Primary Reserve, CIC/COATS and civilian, toiling long, hard hours in the place where initiative goes to die who are just as frustrated at the glacial pace of work within NDHQ.


----------



## MilEME09 (21 Apr 2014)

Haggis said:
			
		

> Let me put my spin on this from nine years at NDHQ
> I do take issue with the "inept flunkies" characterization.  Although there are many at NDHQ who are long and far removed from time on the sharp end of anything but a shrimp skewer, there are hundreds of folks, Regular Force, Primary Reserve, CIC/COATS and civilian, toiling long, hard hours in the place where initiative goes to die who are just as frustrated at the glacial pace of work within NDHQ.



So basically say we take a group of 100 personal at NDHQ, say 10-15 would be doing the majority of the work to make up for say half not doing anything constructive while the rest do the minimum?


----------



## Edward Campbell (21 Apr 2014)

The fact that one is working hard and working long hours does not mean that the work matters or needs to be done.

Twenty years ago there was a lot of wasted and unproductive work and some, too much, counter-productive work. The people doing the un and counter-productive work were, often, working hard ... but they were doing as much, or even more harm than good.

My guess is that not much has changed since I retired.


----------



## Haggis (21 Apr 2014)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> The fact that one is working hard and working long hours does not mean that the work matters or needs to be done.
> 
> Twenty years ago there was a lot of wasted and unproductive work and some, too much, counter-productive work. The people doing the un and counter-productive work were, often, working hard ... but they were doing as much, or even more harm than good.
> 
> My guess is that not much has changed since I retired.



My guess is that your guess is a good guess.  A ton of work gets done at NDHQ every day.  A large amount of it goes to support the institutional needs of the CAF and the department and to meet the demands placed upon both by Parliament, Treasury Board, PWGSC, OGDs and legislation.  Those demands can be for equipment, infrastructure, personnel, money, information, facts and figures.  Only a small portion of what goes on in ANY national level headquarters actually _directly_ supports the mission.

To re-state what I typed earlier, with a little more emphasis to bring out Edward's point more clearly:

"there are hundreds of folks, Regular Force, Primary Reserve, CIC/COATS and civilian, _toiling_ long, hard hours in the place _*where initiative goes to die*_ who are *just as frustrated* as the rest of us at the glacial pace of work within NDHQ.


----------



## FJAG (21 Apr 2014)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> The fact that one is working hard and working long hours does not mean that the work matters or needs to be done.
> 
> Twenty years ago there was a lot of wasted and unproductive work and some, too much, counter-productive work. The people doing the un and counter-productive work were, often, working hard ... but they were doing as much, or even more harm than good.
> 
> My guess is that not much has changed since I retired.



It hasn't as of four years ago when I retired and I'd put a lot of money on the fact that it hasn't as of today.

The issue that is at the heart of this story is that there have been many people within recruiting over the last twenty years who have been working hard. Despite there efforts however the system is irrevocably dysfunctional and needs to be overhauled from the ground up starting with a metric requiring that recruits are enrolled into the CF within a set time frame (and here I'm talking weeks, not months). We were able to achieve that in the days of carbon paper and Gestetners; it boggles the mind that it can't be done in the networked computer age.

As an aside, when a reporter as soldier-friendly as Christie has demonstrated herself as being, can't get an answer in the reasonable time lines she expressed then heads should roll--both high and low. My guess is that the military bureaucracy responsible for recruiting knows that it has no reasonable answers to give so would rather burn a good media contact than engage in a public debate about their ineptitude.

:facepalm:


----------



## MilEME09 (21 Apr 2014)

Burn enough bridges and eventually you cant get out. If this keeps up this will snow ball for DND and lead to a much bigger issue, though maybe we need that to figure out why it takes an average of 10 months to recruit someone.


----------



## PPCLI Guy (22 Apr 2014)

MilEME09 said:
			
		

> So basically say we take a group of 100 personal at NDHQ, say 10-15 would be doing the majority of the work to make up for say half not doing anything constructive while the rest do the minimum?



Exactly like every single line unit, reg or res, Canadian or otherwise, that I have ever served in.


----------



## Osotogari (22 Apr 2014)

Perhaps, instead of worrying about who Ms Blatchford has inadvertently or purposefully insulted in her column, the real focus should be what is a problem which has existed for decades and is so pervasive and irretrievably broken.  Basically, no one can say what exactly is wrong with recruiting because no one can really say for certain how it actually works, apart from the fact that it doesn't, much less why it takes so long.  Not to mention the ongoing disdain and disinterest that the reserve component faces from recruiting for the reserve force.  
  
I don't know what is systematically wrong with recruiting, but one thing I can't see changing is the fact that the NCOs on recruit courses end up being the main screening mechanism.


----------



## MilEME09 (22 Apr 2014)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> Exactly like every single line unit, reg or res, Canadian or otherwise, that I have ever served in.



Unfortunately I cannot disagree with that fact one bit



> but one thing I can't see changing is the fact that the NCOs on recruit courses end up being the main screening mechanism.



I see more and more recruits being pushed through to meet quota's or because some NCO doesn't want to do the paper work to fail a candidate then I should, I don't know how it is for the reg force but I see it heavily in the reserves which leads to career courses being the actual filter which wastes the army's money.


----------



## OldSolduer (22 Apr 2014)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> Exactly like every single line unit, reg or res, Canadian or otherwise, that I have ever served in.



I agree with that.


----------



## Phoenix80 (22 Apr 2014)

A great article by a good Canadian journalist. It's a sad state of affairs it seems. I e-mailed her to tell her about the lengthy process that some have to go through for various unnecessary reasons.


----------



## George Wallace (22 Apr 2014)

MilEME09 said:
			
		

> I see more and more recruits being pushed through to meet quota's or because some NCO doesn't want to do the paper work to fail a candidate then I should, I don't know how it is for the reg force but I see it heavily in the reserves which leads to career courses being the actual filter which wastes the army's money.



I can agree and disagree with your assessment.  It is next to impossible with current policies in some of the Schools, to fail students.  I have witnessed candidates on a couple of courses placed before a PRB more than once and still pass the crse; not due to the instructors not completing the proper documentation, but due to the PRB deciding to give them a second and third chance to pass.  End result was a Sgt and a Capt on two of these courses landed up passing, when perhaps they should have failed.  They no doubt went on to discredit the Branch/Corps on their next Postings and Operations (I know the Sgt did.).


----------



## PuckChaser (22 Apr 2014)

Phoenix80 said:
			
		

> I e-mailed her to tell her about the lengthy process that some have to go through for various unnecessary reasons.



Using your vast experience in the CF recruiting system no doubt? Please go ahead and detail all those unnecessary reasons you emailed her about, so that when they show up in a news article we know where the misinformation came from.


----------



## Journeyman (22 Apr 2014)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Please go ahead and detail all those unnecessary reasons you emailed her about.....


                    :goodpost:

I was going to post the same thing, but since I'd already picked on him for his _massive_ operational experience regarding General McCrystal,   :

.....I just gave it a pass.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (22 Apr 2014)

I see the massive amount of energy that goes into media response these days and not surprised at all, the vast number of hands and approvals to crawl up the line and rejigging by people that know little about the issue, which then causes it to go back to get re-clarified and then through legal and then to the MO hopefully in time. Also each MO are not equal, I seen responses to letters take a year to get through under one minister and the next MO office staff is sharp and on the ball and things work smoothly. It would be interesting to see how well the current Minister ran their office in the other ministries. I am glad see was blunt, to much farting around happens. Remember that story about how long a twitter response takes? The current information response system is broken and run by people that are completely risk adverse.


----------



## Remius (22 Apr 2014)

There is plenty wrong with the recruiting system.  The key is to know what is.  Applicants think that since their process was so long that it was problematic when in fact the reason it took so long is because the system worked the way it was supposed to in some/many cases.

The CF recruiting system isn't designed for the benefit of the applicant.  Applicants need to realise this.  The system has to benefit the organisation (the benefit for the applicant is a side effect of a beneficial system).

Right now the organisation is not benefiting.  The system is broken and needs an overhaul.

And I am speaking from extensive experience with the system.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (22 Apr 2014)

I know nada about the system or the issues, but I suspect triaging the current applicants, get the ones you want started, say no early on to the others. Yes you may get some losers and may miss some winners. Regional Depots where prospective recruits can be sent and "test driven" to determine whether they are worth keeping?


----------



## dapaterson (22 Apr 2014)

One issue she touched on in her article, lack of quota for Army Reserve units, is not a recruiting system issue.

Rather, quotas are now set by looking (nationally) at the strength of units.  So the many units that try to keep up appearances and fail to clean the books of those releasing in fact torpedo themselves; holding those who do not parade and participate means the unit will not get to recruit to fill the positions.

Having spent half a decade tracking Army Reserve numbers I regularly saw how many units held dozens of folks who did not parade for months on end - yet they never took the actions required to declare them NES.  Lazy unit personnel admin is a huge problem in many Army Reserve units, but it is rarely rectified by their chain of command.


----------



## daftandbarmy (22 Apr 2014)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> One issue she touched on in her article, lack of quota for Army Reserve units, is not a recruiting system issue.
> 
> Rather, quotas are now set by looking (nationally) at the strength of units.  So the many units that try to keep up appearances and fail to clean the books of those releasing in fact torpedo themselves; holding those who do not parade and participate means the unit will not get to recruit to fill the positions.
> 
> Having spent half a decade tracking Army Reserve numbers I regularly saw how many units held dozens of folks who did not parade for months on end - yet they never took the actions required to declare them NES.  Lazy unit personnel admin is a huge problem in many Army Reserve units, but it is rarely rectified by their chain of command.



Hear hear  :nod:


----------



## OldSolduer (22 Apr 2014)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> One issue she touched on in her article, lack of quota for Army Reserve units, is not a recruiting system issue.
> 
> Rather, quotas are now set by looking (nationally) at the strength of units.  So the many units that try to keep up appearances and fail to clean the books of those releasing in fact torpedo themselves; holding those who do not parade and participate means the unit will not get to recruit to fill the positions.
> 
> Having spent half a decade tracking Army Reserve numbers I regularly saw how many units held dozens of folks who did not parade for months on end - yet they never took the actions required to declare them NES.  Lazy unit personnel admin is a huge problem in many Army Reserve units, but it is rarely rectified by their chain of command.



Not in 38 Bde, at least in my units.

The Bde Comd has set strict criteria on those who enrol but for whatever reasons fail to complete DP1 within a reasonable time.

Those that don't measure up are released.


----------



## KerryBlue (22 Apr 2014)

Phoenix80 said:
			
		

> A great article by a good Canadian journalist. It's a sad state of affairs it seems. I e-mailed her to tell her about the lengthy process that some have to go through for various unnecessary reasons.






			
				Phoenix80 said:
			
		

> Just got my citizenship last week and I thought it is best to let the forum members know I have started the CF application. Gotta study a bit, do some mental and physical tests and tasks, work hard and submit my app.
> 
> Please wish me luck.
> 
> Thanks




Tell us all again the long  process you have been going through....for all of a month or so...dingbat


----------



## McG (22 Apr 2014)

KerryBlue said:
			
		

> ...dingbat


Let's keep the tone civil.


----------



## Jarnhamar (22 Apr 2014)

If we're really serious about fixing our recruiting issues maybe we _should_ be listening to the applicants and new recruits about the problems they run/ran into trying to join, at their level,  instead of some PAFO's canned response.

Identifying  that applications are getting lost & forgotten about or people are waiting months and months for a phone call only to tell them they are missing a signature seems more effective than hearing about how every application is sure darn important and hey let me tell you about national woman's month and the new red sweaters we want to buy our rangers because our sovereignty in the North is important.

Can't see many officers and NCOs sticking their hands up and admitting to being a part of the problem.


----------



## KerryBlue (22 Apr 2014)

ObedientiaZelum said:
			
		

> I
> Identifying  that applications are getting lost & forgotten about or people are waiting months and months for a phone call only to tell them they are missing a signature seems more effective than hearing about how every application is sure darn important



My experience with this started after my CFAT. I was told by CFRC Ottawa that they're a bit behind, come back in two weeks to book a interview/medical. Came back two weeks later(Nov 6) was told "whoops we forgot to start you reliability screening, can you come back in a month?" I came back a month later, and was told "oh well we finished but theirs a new application process and your file which was supposed to be finished because it was under the old system kinda got lost, so now you have to wait it out." And basically it has been a "we'll call you when were ready for you to be further processed, it could be anywhere from a few months to a few years." 

I transferred my file to Toronto at the beginning of April and was told by the recruiter that my file was marked in Ottawa to be called for further processing since February, and the entire time I was told by them "we don't know when you will get a call". So now I have been waiting exactly 6 months since my CFAT, where I was told "come back in two weeks" to book a medical and interview. All in right now my file is a year old and will probably be closer to a year and a half by the time I'm hopefully merit listed.


----------



## MilEME09 (22 Apr 2014)

ObedientiaZelum said:
			
		

> If we're really serious about fixing our recruiting issues maybe we _should_ be listening to the applicants and new recruits about the problems they run/ran into trying to join, at their level,  instead of some PAFO's canned response.
> 
> Identifying  that applications are getting lost & forgotten about or people are waiting months and months for a phone call only to tell them they are missing a signature seems more effective than hearing about how every application is sure darn important and hey let me tell you about national woman's month and the new red sweaters we want to buy our rangers because our sovereignty in the North is important.
> 
> Can't see many officers and NCOs sticking their hands up and admitting to being a part of the problem.



This could go a long way to solving issues, one idea that came up recently with my unit when we had a open discussion about recruiting is getting our unit in contact with people applying for trades in our unit so that we can internally poke CFRC when needed and keep the applicant interested.


----------



## DAA (22 Apr 2014)

ObedientiaZelum said:
			
		

> Can't see many officers and NCOs sticking their hands up and admitting to being a part of the problem.



Well maybe not that far up but probably no higher than shoulder level, so they can at least point at someone else.     :rofl:


----------



## PanaEng (22 Apr 2014)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> Not in 38 Bde, at least in my units.
> 
> The Bde Comd has set strict criteria on those who enrol but for whatever reasons fail to complete DP1 within a reasonable time.
> 
> Those that don't measure up are released.



We actually had more trained ppl who, after a while, got busy with a new job, moved away, family, etc. and never showed up again. In the last couple of years we cleaned up and are getting the spots filled quite nicely.

Chimo!


----------



## Jarnhamar (22 Apr 2014)

Kerry, I noticed one of the trades you're interested in is infantry.  Bit of a tangent but I know a guy who's been up in Meaford for a couple of months in PAT platoon waiting to do his infantry course.  He was just told that he wasn't placed on the next infantry serial being run 9along with 20+ others) and instead will be doing ceremonial guard this summer and _should_ be placed on the next infantry course being in January 2015.

Lots of waiting.


----------



## Jarnhamar (22 Apr 2014)

MilEME09 said:
			
		

> This could go a long way to solving issues, one idea that came up recently with my unit when we had a open discussion about recruiting is getting our unit in contact with people applying for trades in our unit so that we can internally poke CFRC when needed and keep the applicant interested.



I would start charging CF members involved in recruiting that loose applications and paperwork for starters.  Hit them with on their PDRs and PERs too.

For recruiters streamline the process. If they have to chase around an applicant for a signature or they change their contact info without letting anyone know then cut them loose and close their file.


----------



## MilEME09 (22 Apr 2014)

ObedientiaZelum said:
			
		

> I would start charging CF members involved in recruiting that loose applications and paperwork for starters.  Hit them with on their PDRs and PERs too.
> 
> For recruiters streamline the process. If they have to chase around an applicant for a signature or they change their contact info without letting anyone know then cut them loose and close their file.



To use an example from my experience getting in, it took seven months for them to process my apllication only to tell me my eye sight wasnt good enough for combat engineer, I quickly picked weapons tech over the phone with the recruit and he resubmitted my package. I was sworn in a month later, which i found fast but my file also changed hands between recruiters during that time as well and it was the new recruiter who called me and gave me my options.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (22 Apr 2014)

ObedientiaZelum said:
			
		

> I would start charging CF members involved in recruiting that loose applications and paperwork for starters.  Hit them with on their PDRs and PERs too.
> 
> For recruiters streamline the process. If they have to chase around an applicant for a signature or they change their contact info without letting anyone know then cut them loose and close their file.



There are a few nifty little tools we have to deal with folks who have unacceptable conduct and performance, and I've seen them work.  The problem is, the superiors who are in charge of the people who aren't carrying their weight are ones who have to initiate these things.  If they are too lazy to properly supervise their subordinates (if they were, they likely wouldn't have people who are working like 'tards IMO), are they going to get off their arse and follow thru with the DAODs?  So, round and round we go...

http://www.admfincs.forces.gc.ca/dao-doa/5000/5019-0-eng.asp

http://www.admfincs.forces.gc.ca/dao-doa/5000/5019-4-eng.asp


----------



## TCM621 (22 Apr 2014)

The problem is the process doesn't benefit anyone, applicant or CF. The long wait means you get two types of people, the truly dedicated to join the CAF and the ones with no other prospects. We miss out completely on the vast majority of top candidates because they have other options that will give them a job in weeks not months (or sometimes more than a year).

Here are a couple of things that could help solve the problem.
1. Require candidates to apply with a criminal record check completed. This could serve as a place holder until a security screening is complete. 
2. Don't book CFATs. Candidate drops off completed application and goes in to a room to complete a computer based test. Results get printed and attached to his application.
3. Next the candidate fills out a medical questionnaire which he takes to a med tech. The med tech checks vitals, asks amplifying questions and requestions any tests required.

You have just cut a month or two off the wait.


----------



## George Wallace (22 Apr 2014)

Tcm621 said:
			
		

> The problem is the process doesn't benefit anyone, applicant or CF. The long wait means you get two types of people, the truly dedicated to join the CAF and the ones with no other prospects. We miss out completely on the vast majority of top candidates because they have other options that will give them a job in weeks not months (or sometimes more than a year).
> 
> Here are a couple of things that could help solve the problem.
> 1. Require candidates to apply with a criminal record check completed. This could serve as a place holder until a security screening is complete.
> ...



1.  Criminal Record Checks take time.  What may be done for one prospect in a month, may take another several months or years.   You do not hear the prospects who breezed through the Criminal Record Checks in a matter of days complaining.
2.  CFAT has to be booked when the facilities, equipment, and a capable operator are available to administer it. 
3.  Medicals are booked when medical personnel are available to administer interviews and testing.  Gone are the days when you can be accepted with "one eye, one lung and one kidney".  

Since 911, security is a greater concern than prior to.  Unless you want to start accepting habitual liars into the CAF, on just their word that they are upstanding citizens, cursory security checks will need to be done.   Those also take time.  

We, as a whole, agree that the process is long and should be sped up; but the factors involved in 'clearing' a prospect for admission into a job that now requires a Lvl II Clearance do take up time.  The world has changed a lot in the last century.  Even with modern technology, we conduct more testing and evaluation towards whom is acceptable into the CAF and it all takes a lot more time than in previous decades.   What is unacceptable is the incompetence or negligent performance of some of the personnel who unintentionally or intentionally throw extra roadblocks into the equation.


----------



## MilEME09 (22 Apr 2014)

As much as i hate to suggest it because it will create more bureaucracy and overhead, perhaps we need some type of oversight of recruiting, that could do random checks on CFRC's and ask the needed questions of why a application is taking so long


----------



## DAA (22 Apr 2014)

I don't think the CF got into the recruiting business just yesterday, which makes me ask just how did they get to where they are now.

You surely just can't say that these problems suddenly popped up over night, now can you?


----------



## MilEME09 (22 Apr 2014)

DAA said:
			
		

> I don't think the CF got into the recruiting business just yesterday, which makes me ask just how did they get to where they are now.
> 
> You surely just can't say that these problems suddenly popped up over night, now can you?



I would suspect its actually a symptom of a greater issue within the bureaucracy within the CF as a whole, I over heard this past summer that there is a back log of 5-10 years for security clearances, no idea if its true but if it is that is a big problem


----------



## Rifleman62 (22 Apr 2014)

My Niece's son started in Sept and had his Med last week. He wants to join the RWpgRif, but will probably end up in a kilt, if he ever gets in.

The CO of CF Recruiting Gp years ago invited all the CBG G1's to the two, in his tenure, CO's Conferences in Borden. Good interaction. Several of the CFRC CO's I knew personally as they had been RSSO's with our Res Units so they were well aware of the problems. There was also CL C within the CFRC. The Reserves were well represented.

Our Bde did Total Force recruiting in our outreach, Reg F and P Res. Lots of coordinating with the three CFRC's. We had a Reg F Capt as G1 Recruiting and Cl B Recruiting staff in all the major locations.

We just kept our head above water. A constant battle. Lots of internal reporting as to where candidates were in the process. In spite of all our efforts, including CF Recruiting Gp, processing was slow.  I would honestly state everyone did their best.

At the time there was only one MD in Borden to review the files. Eventually they got a part timer to assist. Apparently at the time there was a Doctor shortage in the area.

It is not a normal job a candidate is applying for. We hoped for Provisional Enrollment prior to security clearance. Can't remember what happen to that chestnut.


----------



## TCM621 (22 Apr 2014)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> 1.  Criminal Record Checks take time.  What may be done for one prospect in a month, may take another several months or years.   You do not hear the prospects who breezed through the Criminal Record Checks in a matter of days complaining.
> 2.  CFAT has to be booked when the facilities, equipment, and a capable operator are available to administer it.
> 3.  Medicals are booked when medical personnel are available to administer interviews and testing.  Gone are the days when you can be accepted with "one eye, one lung and one kidney".
> 
> ...



1.  have that be a requirement for applying. It costs 25 dollars and a lot of companies require it, the CF should be no different. 

2. There doesn't need to be any facilities or operators. Just a computer. I have done very comprehensive aptitude, IQ, Skill exams, etc. that required nothing more than a computer with flash support (which probably discounts DWAN).

3. Post a ql5 med tech at the recruiting center. they can administer the tests and send them up to be reviewed by a PA or doctor. 

all of this could be done in a day (applying with completed check) and at least help cut down on the applicants that are not suitable, saving time on their  files.


----------



## Tibbson (22 Apr 2014)

Here's my 2 cents for what its worth.

Its my understanding, when it comes to reserve recruiting, that there is another side of the coin that some may not factor in.  A few years ago my brother was looking after recruiting for his reserve regt and it got to the point where he had plenty of recruits but he couldn't process any.  The reason being that there was alreadyquite a number of prior members awaiting release and until those files were cleared off he had no positions to hire new recruits into.  Those release files were sitting in a pile somehere higher in the system doing nothing other then creating a recruiting bottleneck and ticking off soon to be ex members waiting for their final payments and fkrmal release.  Perhaps both processes need to be examined and streamlined.


----------



## McG (22 Apr 2014)

Tcm621 said:
			
		

> Post a ql5 med tech at the recruiting center. they can administer the tests and send them up to be reviewed by a PA or doctor.


From where do we rob the positions and qualified Med Techs?


----------



## DAA (22 Apr 2014)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> 1.  Criminal Record Checks take time.  What may be done for one prospect in a month, may take another several months or years.   You do not hear the prospects who breezed through the Criminal Record Checks in a matter of days complaining.
> 2.  CFAT has to be booked when the facilities, equipment, and a capable operator are available to administer it.
> 3.  Medicals are booked when medical personnel are available to administer interviews and testing.  Gone are the days when you can be accepted with "one eye, one lung and one kidney".



1.  3-4 day turn around time.  Unless the applicant has "foreign implications" but then we talking about maybe 10% of applicants subject to the long term and this is a top end guess.....  The what happens when an applicants process takes longer than expected and the criminal record check expires, make them pay again?
2.  Already done on computer.  But there is alot of paperwork after the fact.  Remember, these tests and scores, are controlled and must be accounted for, even when done on computer.
3.  Sounds simple, but what do you do about people who receive the test in the afternoon?  If you say, just CFAT in the morning, then you are further limiting your CFAT testing and then what are the Med Techs doing in the morning when applicants are writing the CFAT?  You can't keep telling applicants come back tomorrow.....come back tomorrow.

Reserve Force Recruiting, is a whole different issue.  As far as I understand it, CFRC's core business is Regular Force Recruiting not Reserve Force Recruiting.  So maybe another question to be asked, is what are the 100+ Army Reserve Force Class B Recruiters recently hired currently doing to resolve this problem?


----------



## TCM621 (22 Apr 2014)

MCG said:
			
		

> From where do we rob the positions and qualified Med Techs?


Create the positions. Use class B to replace med techs until numbers raise. Now, I can't find how many recruiting centers we have off hand, so it is possible that I am vastly underestimating the required but it can't be a huge number. Certainly, it could be filled in a few years due to the greater efficiency of the recruiting system.
You could even start small with only major centers like van, tor, mtl, etc.


----------



## TCM621 (22 Apr 2014)

DAA said:
			
		

> Reserve Force Recruiting, is a whole different issue.  As far as I understand it, CFRC's core business is Regular Force Recruiting not Reserve Force Recruiting.  So maybe another question to be asked, is what are the 100+ Army Reserve Force Class B Recruiters recently hired currently doing to resolve this problem?



When I was RSS at a reserve unit, I spent a lot if time on this issue. All the reserve recruiters can do is assist in getting the application completed. The application is then sent to CFRC, where they handle the rest. In victoria, the hand one guy who did reserve files and when all the class B got cut he wasn't even full time. All the army units on the Island had 2 or 3 times our allotment of recruits waiting yet but it wasn't uncommon to have unfilled positions come year end.


----------



## DAA (22 Apr 2014)

Tcm621 said:
			
		

> When I was RSS at a reserve unit, I spent a lot if time on this issue. All the reserve recruiters can do is assist in getting the application completed. The application is then sent to CFRC, where they handle the rest. In victoria, the hand one guy who did reserve files and when all the class B got cut he wasn't even full time. All the army units on the Island had 2 or 3 times our allotment of recruits waiting yet but it wasn't uncommon to have unfilled positions come year end.



So when it comes to Reserve Force Recruiting, the question best asked is "Why are our files not being given due consideration and processed in a timely manner to assist in meeting our quotas?"

In which case, the response will most likely be "The core mandate of CF Recruiting is for the Regular Force not the Reserves."

You can't win this one, unless the Army wants to throw more money at it......

PS - in case you haven't noticed, the CF just went through through the PRECS (Primary Reserve Employment Capacity Study/Survey) which took away probably 140-160+ Class B posns out of Recruiting, if not more.  Good luck getting those back.


----------



## McG (22 Apr 2014)

Tcm621 said:
			
		

> Create the positions. Use class B to replace med techs until numbers raise.


The size of the CAF is externally constrained.  You cannot just create a position; it must come from somewhere.
So, what do you cut to have a Med Tech to hang-out in every CFRC?


----------



## George Wallace (22 Apr 2014)

DAA said:
			
		

> So when it comes to Reserve Force Recruiting, the question best asked is "Why are our files not being given due consideration and processed in a timely manner to assist in meeting our quotas?"
> 
> In which case, the response will most likely be "The core mandate of CF Recruiting is for the Regular Force not the Reserves."
> 
> ...



It has only been in the last decade or so that the "Unification" in Recruiting took place.  Prior to that, Primary Reserve units did their own recruiting, processing and enrolling of prospects.  Then in someone's wisdom, all recruiting was to be passed through the CFRG and CFRCs.  This was no doubt a "good idea faerie's" suggestion to save monies and control all recruiting and processing.  We now see the results.


----------



## Journeyman (22 Apr 2014)

DAA said:
			
		

> In which case, the response will most likely be "The core mandate of CF Recruiting is for the Regular Force not the Reserves."


Maybe the Recruiters just need the right motivation.  I was RSS in a large, ugly city and parking was $$.  We provided the CFRC people free parking access at our Armouries, near their office.  They were generally quite prompt in actioning our applicants.   >


I know, I know....."extortion"  "bribing people to do their job"  :dunno:


----------



## Jarnhamar (22 Apr 2014)

Removed a lack luster story :0


----------



## dapaterson (22 Apr 2014)

DAA said:
			
		

> So when it comes to Reserve Force Recruiting, the question best asked is "Why are our files not being given due consideration and processed in a timely manner to assist in meeting our quotas?"
> 
> In which case, the response will most likely be "The core mandate of CF Recruiting is for the Regular Force not the Reserves."
> 
> ...



Hmm...  They are called the CANADIAN FORCES Recruiting Group, not the REGULAR FORCE Recruiting Group.  Seems some staff are incapable of basic comprehension.  And one role of the Reg F is to support the Reserves.

Simple solution to this conundrum is to close all the CFRCs, move the people and functions into the Reserve armouries across the country, and to impose performance standards.  Plus, were I king for the day, I'd put the Recruit school under CFRG as well - so that one General is accountable for ensuring that the folks he recruits graduate training - if personnel production falters, there's one person to hold accountable.  Right now, with CFRCs and CFLRS under different organizations, that accountability is more difficult.

Another, more realistic way to address some problems would be to set up a simple website to track progress.  Just a series of checkmarks that Bloggins can look at - has all his paperwork been submitted?  If not, he'll know and can take action.  What further steps are there - not in detail, to reduce risk of loss of personal data, but generic things so Bloggins knows where things stand.


----------



## DAA (22 Apr 2014)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> It has only been in the last decade or so that the "Unification" in Recruiting took place.  Prior to that, Primary Reserve units did their own recruiting, processing and enrolling of prospects.  Then in someone's wisdom, all recruiting was to be passed through the CFRG and CFRCs.  This was no doubt a "good idea faerie's" suggestion to save monies and control all recruiting and processing.  We now see the results.



Nope.  PRes still do their own Recruiting, including attractions, processing (to a certain extent) and also enrolments , hence the Army adding Full Time Class B PRes Recruiters to do that job.  CFRG and CFRC's never ever took over the process, they merely provide "spare/specialized" capacity, nothing more and then turn the files right back over to the Bde/PRes Unit.  At one time, it was proposed that CFRG take over "Army" PRes recruiting but that came with a PY cost, that the Army wasn't prepared to provide, so it was squashed.


----------



## MilEME09 (22 Apr 2014)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Hmm...  They are called the CANADIAN FORCES Recruiting Group, not the REGULAR FORCE Recruiting Group.  Seems some staff are incapable of basic comprehension.  And one role of the Reg F is to support the Reserves.
> 
> Simple solution to this conundrum is to close all the CFRCs, move the people and functions into the Reserve armouries across the country, and to impose performance standards.  Plus, were I king for the day, I'd put the Recruit school under CFRG as well - so that one General is accountable for ensuring that the folks he recruits graduate training - if personnel production falters, there's one person to hold accountable.  Right now, with CFRCs and CFLRS under different organizations, that accountability is more difficult.
> 
> Another, more realistic way to address some problems would be to set up a simple website to track progress.  Just a series of checkmarks that Bloggins can look at - has all his paperwork been submitted?  If not, he'll know and can take action.  What further steps are there - not in detail, to reduce risk of loss of personal data, but generic things so Bloggins knows where things stand.




One problem that has come to my units attention is that the majority of recruiters where I am only knew about the reg force and couldn't provide information as to how the Reserves work and how training went.


----------



## DAA (23 Apr 2014)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Hmm...  They are called the CANADIAN FORCES Recruiting Group, not the REGULAR FORCE Recruiting Group.  Seems some staff are incapable of basic comprehension.  And one role of the Reg F is to support the Reserves.
> 
> Simple solution to this conundrum is to close all the CFRCs, move the people and functions into the Reserve armouries across the country, and to impose performance standards.  Plus, were I king for the day, I'd put the Recruit school under CFRG as well - so that one General is accountable for ensuring that the folks he recruits graduate training - if personnel production falters, there's one person to hold accountable.  Right now, with CFRCs and CFLRS under different organizations, that accountability is more difficult.
> 
> Another, more realistic way to address some problems would be to set up a simple website to track progress.  Just a series of checkmarks that Bloggins can look at - has all his paperwork been submitted?  If not, he'll know and can take action.  What further steps are there - not in detail, to reduce risk of loss of personal data, but generic things so Bloggins knows where things stand.



Yes, they are called that.  But what you are forgetting, is that our Reserve Forces, do NOT fall under the same umbrella and are "environmentally" managed.  You have the Army Reserve, Air Reserve, Naval Reserve, Health Care Reserve and CIC/COATS.

CAF Recruiting was never meant to attract people into the "reserves" but rather the "Regular Force".  That's what it is all about, filling the Regular Force ranks.  Along the way, came "piggy backing" so to speak but nothing official.

Last I checked, Recruiting (CFRG and it's CFRC's) and the the Recruit School were under the same Command, which is CMP.

They are able to track progress, it's called CFRIMS.  But like any software, it's susceptible to the "GIGO" factor.

The tools are there.......


----------



## Journeyman (23 Apr 2014)

Well, another short-cut solution is to appoint the site owner as Director of Online Recruiting.  

For all the whiney, crippled, illiterate, drug-addled, not-_remotely_-medically-fit, excuse-laden people we have posting here, who always draw the response "go see a Recruiter" (because, let's face it, we're all too polite to say "you haven't a freakin' chance in hell!!").....give Mike the authority to reject these people from the system _before_ they can waste the Recruiters' time.

 :nod:

.....in exchange for some CFRG subscription money.   ;D


Hell, even _I_ may spend some time amongst the lepers wannabees      >


----------



## DAA (23 Apr 2014)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> Well, another short-cut solution is to appoint the site owner as Director of Online Recruiting.
> 
> For all the whiney, crippled, illiterate, drug-addled, not-_remotely_-medically-fit, excuse-laden people we have posting here, who always draw the response "go see a Recruiter" (because, let's face it, we're all too polite to say "you haven't a freakin' chance in hell!!").....give Mike the authority to reject these people from the system _before_ they can waste the Recruiters' time.
> 
> ...



I second that!

But I believe that it needs some sort of "official" presence, which probably requires higher level approvals of some sort or hoops to jump through that are near impossible.

Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if you see the forces.ca website disappear shortly as a result of the GoC and TBS imposed "common look and feel" approach.


----------



## Phoenix80 (23 Apr 2014)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Using your vast experience in the CF recruiting system no doubt? Please go ahead and detail all those unnecessary reasons you emailed her about, so that when they show up in a news article we know where the misinformation came from.



So basically 1-2 yrs of wait time to go through the recruiting process is okay with you then? 
Well since it is not your life/time that gets wasted I can see how you may not be able to understand my point of view.
I have a friend (born in Canada of British parents) who had to wait for more than 2+ years for 'her' background/reliability checks to be completed. That's a waste of time. I am told the reason is lack of staff who do the checks. There are a handful of them in Canada. 
Wasting peoples' time/energy/life should be unacceptable. And this is the same process I have embarked upon and I am worried it is going to take years for me too. It'd be great if you could put yourself in my shoes for a moment ((guessing you know nothing about me)) and see how that eventual wait time can be very stressful and unproductive.

thx


----------



## Fishbone Jones (23 Apr 2014)

Phoenix80 said:
			
		

> So basically 1-2 yrs of wait time to go through the recruiting process is okay with you then?
> Well since it is not your life/time that gets wasted I can see how you may not be able to understand my point of view.
> I have a friend (born in Canada of British parents) who had to wait for more than 2+ years for 'her' background/reliability checks to be completed. That's a waste of time. I am told the reason is lack of staff who do the checks. There are a handful of them in Canada.
> Wasting peoples' time/energy/life should be unacceptable. And this is the same process I have embarked upon and I am worried it is going to take years for me too. It'd be great if you could put yourself in my shoes for a moment ((guessing you know nothing about me)) and see how that eventual wait time can be very stressful and unproductive.
> ...



OK, you've had your rant.

How about answering the question.

Better yet, how about just posting the email you sent her?


----------



## Remius (23 Apr 2014)

Phoenix80 said:
			
		

> So basically 1-2 yrs of wait time to go through the recruiting process is okay with you then?
> Well since it is not your life/time that gets wasted I can see how you may not be able to understand my point of view.
> I have a friend (born in Canada of British parents) who had to wait for more than 2+ years for 'her' background/reliability checks to be completed. That's a waste of time. I am told the reason is lack of staff who do the checks. There are a handful of them in Canada.
> Wasting peoples' time/energy/life should be unacceptable. And this is the same process I have embarked upon and I am worried it is going to take years for me too. It'd be great if you could put yourself in my shoes for a moment ((guessing you know nothing about me)) and see how that eventual wait time can be very stressful and unproductive.
> ...



Not necessarily acceptable but as some people have mentioned, it can be an unfortunate necessity.  I don't know what your situations is but most of the time, delays like that are attributable to various outside factors.

Here are a few:

- You travelled to Saudi Arabia to teach for 6 months.  Good for you but now a pre-security clearance needs to be done that will take time.  Why?  The security folks do security clearances for everyone.  Potential applicants are not priority.  Priority goes to actual soldiers that need it for deployment, jobs, postings etc etc.  They'll get to you when they get to you and even then, if the country you visited isn't on good terms with us it could take a while.

- You have a medical issue we need your doctor to confirm or follow up on.  You go see your doctor.  He says no problem.  But it takes him 3 months to get the CFRC the necessary information.

- Same medical info now has to go to a MO.  Likely the only MO who does this nationally. Might take time.

- Maybe you applied for one of those trades you hear about in fairy tales and legends and it takes a few years to actually open 1 spot.

Many factors that are outside the recruiting realm affect intake and the ones I listed are outside CFRG or even CMP's control.  Now they can certainly lobby for more priority, MOs etc etc.  But guess what, so is everyone else.

But ask yourself how long it takes to get into the PS, a police force or say a fire department.  

CFRG has many things it can control and needs to fix but some things are out of their control.


----------



## PuckChaser (23 Apr 2014)

Phoenix80 said:
			
		

> So basically 1-2 yrs of wait time to go through the recruiting process is okay with you then?
> Well since it is not your life/time that gets wasted I can see how you may not be able to understand my point of view.
> I have a friend (born in Canada of British parents) who had to wait for more than 2+ years for 'her' background/reliability checks to be completed. That's a waste of time. I am told the reason is lack of staff who do the checks. There are a handful of them in Canada.
> Wasting peoples' time/energy/life should be unacceptable. And this is the same process I have embarked upon and I am worried it is going to take years for me too. It'd be great if you could put yourself in my shoes for a moment ((guessing you know nothing about me)) and see how that eventual wait time can be very stressful and unproductive.



Your process is delayed because you were a member of a foreign military (see, I know something about you). That means checks are done to see if you're actually discharged (honourably), or to confirm you're not AWOL. As well, seeing as how you list your rank as PFC, and have 2 years experience, you've lived outside Canada for at least 2-3 years and probably in the US. Now your ERC security check is exponentially more complex as they're going to have to search through US databases. You're also not a Canadian citizen, which adds more wait time even if you have permanent resident status, not to mention more time to the security check because you've more than likely lived outside Canada for more than the 2-3 years listed above, ERC goes back 10 years. Finally, considering your question about criminal records and "petty charges", I'm willing to bet there's something thats going to come up on a US background check, delaying your process further, despite your assurance that the charges were dropped. 

So, please tell me again how I know nothing about you?

Background/reliability checks are contracted out, unless you need a pre-security screening because you've lived outside the country. Then you sit in the same boat with the rest of us waiting for security clearances, who are actually serving in the CF and need their clearances for operational reasons (yes, there is a priority system for deployments). The security screening system besides ERCs is completely outside the CFRG, and does clearances for everyone from MPs to CF members to RCMP people. Thats a lot of workload even if they have more staff.

If you want stressful and unproductive, just wait till you're actually in (if you get in). I've had times that are stressful, unproductive, or stressful because what I'm doing is unproductive. Welcome to the Canadian Forces.



			
				Phoenix80 said:
			
		

> thx



No problem, don't mention it.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (23 Apr 2014)

It's been 36 years now and I'm still waiting for NASA to get back to me..............I'm starting to think that they're just wasting my time.  Maybe I should come up with alternate plans just in case??

No, I'm sure they'll call,....it's just incompetence on their part.


----------



## Jarnhamar (23 Apr 2014)

Phoenix80 said:
			
		

> So basically 1-2 yrs of wait time to go through the recruiting process is okay with you then?
> Well since it is not your life/time that gets wasted I can see how you may not be able to understand my point of view.



I'm actually in your corner and I think you and people like you have a better idea on how messed up the recruiting system currently is over us guys and girls who had to deal with it 10, 15 and 20 years ago. You need to make your voice heard and you need to help change the system because the future of the Canadian Forces is people like you.

On the other hand before you go bitching and insinuating we don't know what it's like to have our time wasted grab your head and shake it really hard because we've all dealt with it and had our time wasted by the system. Dare I say some of it is more significant than waiting a year to join. 

If you want to make shoe wearing references yours are brand new and shiny, ours are worn down and our 9th pair.

 :2c:


----------



## PMedMoe (23 Apr 2014)

Crantor said:
			
		

> Potential applicants are not priority.  Priority goes to actual soldiers that need it for deployment, jobs, postings etc etc.



My understanding is that it's the complete opposite.  New applicants are the priority because those of us already in have had at least one security check done.  My last security update was submitted in 2006 and (finally) updated on EMAA in 2010.


----------



## George Wallace (23 Apr 2014)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> My understanding is that it's the complete opposite.  New applicants are the priority because those of us already in have had at least one security check done.  My last security update was submitted in 2006 and (finally) updated on EMAA in 2010.



Roughly, the highest priority was placed on those Deploying, then those requiring Special Access, then those in the Recruiting system, then those doing upgrades, and lastly those doing updates.  Priorities are subject to change of course.  Also remember that those applying to join are for the most part not doing Security Clearances, only Security Checks.  Two completely different things.  The Security Checks were contracted out to a private firm, Back Check.  (I am not sure whether or not they still do or not.)  

On the note of "References", it takes time for a small staff to contact the number of References of all the prospects who are applying, as well as finding those References at home or work when contact is attempting to be made.


----------



## Remius (23 Apr 2014)

Unless it has changed but I doubt it. 

The brand new infantry private who just joined does not have his Level 1 initiated until he's in.  Anyone needing upgrades for specific postings or job requirements or deployments.  DPM(Sec) also does all civy employees as well. Those are priority.  So you may have level 1 but you need level 2 for the job you will be doing next summer for example.

New security clearance applictions for members are priority but Canadian forces applicants who need pre-security clearances were not.  Yours was likey an update and not an upgrade.

If things have changed then I'll stand corrected.   Someone in that world DPM (Sec) would have better knowledge of this as I am going by the briefings I received when I was in recruiting and more recently here where I work now.


----------



## PMedMoe (23 Apr 2014)

Okay, I see the difference now.  Check vs. update.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (23 Apr 2014)

Tcm621 said:
			
		

> Create the positions. Use class B to replace med techs until numbers raise. Now, I can't find how many recruiting centers we have off hand, so it is possible that I am vastly underestimating the required but it can't be a huge number. Certainly, it could be filled in a few years due to the greater efficiency of the recruiting system.
> You could even start small with only major centers like van, tor, mtl, etc.



IIRC, Res Med Techs (Med As?) don't get the same quals as Reg Force Med Techs, so you'd be looking at 6A or 6B qual'd Res ones to do perform the tasks a Reg Force 5s qual'd Med Tech can do.  I could be off, but I've heard something along that line before.

Assuming that is close to true, where do you get all the qual'd Res ones at?  Who pays for it; if you recall, full time Reserve positions have been drastically cut recently.


----------



## PMedMoe (23 Apr 2014)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> IIRC, Res Med Techs (Med As?) don't get the same quals as Reg Force Med Techs, so you'd be looking at 6A or 6B qual'd Res ones to do perform the tasks a Reg Force 5s qual'd Med Tech can do.



Air Reserve Med Techs do the same training as Reg F Med Techs.  Not sure about the Naval Reserve ones.  The Army isn't the only one with Reserves.


----------



## TCM621 (23 Apr 2014)

There are a lot comments along the lines of "who is paying" and "who is going to lose PYs" etc. For this to work the government would have to create the positions and fund them. 

Even if they did nothing more than invest in a technological solution for CFATs, they could cut weeks off the wait time. There is no real reason why you need to book times and have invigilators for CFATs. A CBT could do it faster and better. You could even reappropriate the PYs allocated for CFAT administration to other bottlenecks.


----------



## TCM621 (23 Apr 2014)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> IIRC, Res Med Techs (Med As?) don't get the same quals as Reg Force Med Techs, so you'd be looking at 6A or 6B qual'd Res ones to do perform the tasks a Reg Force 5s qual'd Med Tech can do.  I could be off, but I've heard something along that line before.
> 
> Assuming that is close to true, where do you get all the qual'd Res ones at?  Who pays for it; if you recall, full time Reserve positions have been drastically cut recently.


Many PRes med techs are better qualified than their regular force equivalents due to their civilian employment. And if I can be treated at the MIR by reservists on Class B then I would think qualifications would be similar.


----------



## DAA (23 Apr 2014)

Tcm621 said:
			
		

> There are a lot comments along the lines of "who is paying" and "who is going to lose PYs" etc. For this to work the government would have to create the positions and fund them.
> 
> Even if they did nothing more than invest in a technological solution for CFATs, they could cut weeks off the wait time. There is no real reason why you need to book times and have invigilators for CFATs. A CBT could do it faster and better. You could even reappropriate the PYs allocated for CFAT administration to other bottlenecks.



CFAT is already CBT and has been for sometime.  That's why it's called the "e-CFAT".  There are no paper answer sheets, point and click.

It's an "exam" you are mandated to have invigilators and CFRC's are only allowed to have a limited few as it is "controlled testing material".


----------



## TCBF (23 Apr 2014)

Phoenix80 said:
			
		

> So basically 1-2 yrs of wait time to go through the recruiting process is okay with you then?
> Well since it is not your life/time that gets wasted I can see how you may not be able to understand my point of view.
> I have a friend (born in Canada of British parents) who had to wait for more than 2+ years for 'her' background/reliability checks to be completed. That's a waste of time. I am told the reason is lack of staff who do the checks. There are a handful of them in Canada.
> Wasting peoples' time/energy/life should be unacceptable. And this is the same process I have embarked upon and I am worried it is going to take years for me too. It'd be great if you could put yourself in my shoes for a moment ((guessing you know nothing about me)) and see how that eventual wait time can be very stressful and unproductive.
> ...



- If it was me setting policy, I would severely ration the amount of time and expense clearing new hires. For the most part, unless they possess some esoteric skill set your bog standard fourth or tenth generation Canadian peasant does not have, it is just too much effort. Fairness be damned, we are bleeding people and have to focus our budget on the possible.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (23 Apr 2014)

Tcm621 said:
			
		

> Many PRes med techs are better qualified than their regular force equivalents due to their civilian employment.



Do those civie qual's = "can perform this task/procedure in uniform as a Reservist"?



> And if I can be treated at the MIR by reservists on Class B then I would think qualifications would be similar.



I think if you talk to a Med Tech, you will find out a Army Reserve QL5 and a Reg Force QL5 do not have the same POs etc.  I am not a Med Tech, and don't play one on TV, but I've known lots and this is how a Med Tech PO2 (reg Frce) explained it to me once.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (23 Apr 2014)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> Air Reserve Med Techs do the same training as Reg F Med Techs.  Not sure about the Naval Reserve ones.  The Army isn't the only one with Reserves.



Doh!  Seen...any thoughts on the Reg Force vs Army and/or Navy Res Med Tech courses equiv's?


----------



## Eye In The Sky (23 Apr 2014)

Tcm621 said:
			
		

> For this to work the government would have to create the positions and fund them.



Which would in turn, come out of the CAF budget.  I'd rather see the $ go to ops & trg.

Sometimes, the solution to the problem isn't throwing money at the problem.  It is possible to make the people in the system fix the system.  It just takes focus and resolve, and people not being resistant to change.


----------



## PMedMoe (23 Apr 2014)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> Doh!  Seen...any thoughts on the Reg Force vs Army and/or Navy Res Med Tech courses equiv's?



I think _all_ reserve training should be the same, regardless of element.  

[rant on]

Not to mention, that call outs for Class B/C should be to all reservists, again, regardless of element.  Obviously, for the trades that are strictly Army/Navy/Air, this is not an issue, but I can tell you, it used to irk the hell out of me (as a ARAF Tfc Tech) to see the Army Reserve get a full time Class B call out for an RMS clerk, who eventually got employed at CMTT, doing the job of a Tfc Tech. 

[/rant off]

Back to your regularly scheduled thread....


----------



## Phoenix80 (23 Apr 2014)

ObedientiaZelum said:
			
		

> I'm actually in your corner and I think you and people like you have a better idea on how messed up the recruiting system currently is over us guys and girls who had to deal with it 10, 15 and 20 years ago. You need to make your voice heard and you need to help change the system because the future of the Canadian Forces is people like you.
> 
> On the other hand before you go bitching and insinuating we don't know what it's like to have our time wasted grab your head and shake it really hard because we've all dealt with it and had our time wasted by the system. Dare I say some of it is more significant than waiting a year to join.
> 
> ...



Hence the emailing, and my letter to the MND.


----------



## Phoenix80 (24 Apr 2014)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Your process is delayed because you were a member of a foreign military (see, I know something about you). That means checks are done to see if you're actually discharged (honourably), or to confirm you're not AWOL. As well, seeing as how you list your rank as PFC, and have 2 years experience, you've lived outside Canada for at least 2-3 years and probably in the US. Now your ERC security check is exponentially more complex as they're going to have to search through US databases. You're also not a Canadian citizen, which adds more wait time even if you have permanent resident status, not to mention more time to the security check because you've more than likely lived outside Canada for more than the 2-3 years listed above, ERC goes back 10 years. Finally, considering your question about criminal records and "petty charges", I'm willing to bet there's something thats going to come up on a US background check, delaying your process further, despite your assurance that the charges were dropped.
> 
> So, please tell me again how I know nothing about you?
> 
> ...



I have not lived in the US. Don't know where you got that. I've actually lived in Canada for more than 10+ years. I was honorably discharged from my country of birth's military service for which I have proper documents to present if asked. No problem. And I can still say that you sir know nothing about me. My petty charge was with respect to a silly incident on the campus of a university where I thought standing up for others meant something in this country. But believe it or not, I got that charge withdrawn and then had the RCMP to destroy the record. I have no debt, no legal obligations and I am okay with the ERC going through my past.

I have NO issue whatsoever with the verification process or the way it is done. In fact I think it is important for the government and the CF to ensure 'foreign' agents or bad guys can't get in. My issues are 1- The lack of concern among the recruiters about the applicants' time/energy/life and treating potential soldiers (in effect people who'd lay down their lives for their country) as mere numbers or files. It is not right. One can expect that treatment in a municipality when getting a permit or in a medical office (not even there) but not when it comes to an organization that is known (and should be) efficient and productive. I'd rather get the 'NO' answer now than to wait months and years to hear that while I am basically putting all this money and energy and enthusiasm to go through the recruiting process. 2- My other issue is the time it takes to do it. 

I spent some time working for a parliamentarian a year ago in Ottawa and when I talked to the MND's office about a few issues I had in mind, I was basically told the issue of ERC being so lengthy and horrendous is that there are only a handful of people working on dozens and dozens of applications and the issue is 'staffing' and lack of funds to expand that unit that does the ERC. Now I'd like to ask you, would it hurt to write to the MND and email the said journalist and tell her where the issue lays? I believe these are valid concerns. 

Have a good one!


----------



## CombatDoc (24 Apr 2014)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> Air Reserve Med Techs do the same training as Reg F Med Techs.  Not sure about the Naval Reserve ones.  The Army isn't the only one with Reserves.


I do not believe this is true, since the issue of training discrepancies between Res and Reg F medical qualifications often arises.  That is why, for example, there are a Reserve "Medical Assistants" and Regular "Medical Technicians".  Reservists often lack the Primary Care Paramedic (PCP) qualification which limits how they can be employed.  IIRC, the Naval Reserve got rid of integral medical support years ago and converted those positions into hard sea trades.


----------



## PMedMoe (24 Apr 2014)

ArmyDoc said:
			
		

> I do not believe this is true, since the issue of training discrepancies between Res and Reg F medical qualifications often arises.  That is why, for example, there are a Reserve "Medical Assistants" and Regular "Medical Technicians".  Reservists often lack the Primary Care Paramedic (PCP) qualification which limits how they can be employed.  IIRC, the Naval Reserve got rid of integral medical support years ago and converted those positions into hard sea trades.



If things haven't changed in the last few years, ARAF people do Reg F courses.  The discrepancy (at least in my experience) is with the _Army_ Reserves.  As far as ARAF types getting PCP, I don't know.  But I never had it as a Reg F Med Tech either.   :dunno:


----------



## kratz (24 Apr 2014)

[Thread Tangent]

[quote author=PMedMoe]
Air Reserve Med Techs do the same training as Reg F Med Techs.  *Not sure about the Naval Reserve ones.*  The Army isn't the only one with Reserves.    [/quote]

NavRes lost (gave up) all medical trades in the mid-1990s consolidation. 
Generally speaking, NavRes attempts to meet RegF training standards whenever/wherever possible.
As others have noted, some deltas are unable to be met.
[/Thread Tangent]


----------



## The_Falcon (24 Apr 2014)

Phoenix80 said:
			
		

> I have not lived in the US. Don't know where you got that. I've actually lived in Canada for more than 10+ years. I was honorably discharged from my country of birth's military service for which I have proper documents to present if asked.


Prior service in another nations military will cause delays. 



> My petty charge was with respect to a silly incident on the campus of a university where I thought standing up for others meant something in this country.


That's your opinion, and quite frankly your opinion of whether a charge is serious or not is irrelevant. 




> I have NO issue whatsoever with the verification process or the way it is done. In fact I think it is important for the government and the CF to ensure 'foreign' agents or bad guys can't get in. My issues are 1- The lack of concern among the recruiters about the applicants' time/energy/life and treating potential soldiers (in effect people who'd lay down their lives for their country) as mere numbers or files. It is not right. One can expect that treatment in a municipality when getting a permit or in a medical office (not even there) but not when it comes to an organization that is known (and should be) efficient and productive. I'd rather get the 'NO' answer now than to wait months and years to hear that while I am basically putting all this money and energy and enthusiasm to go through the recruiting process.



1) those are some pretty sweeping generalizations, that display a profound lack of knowledge and experience with the inner workings of the recruiting world.  For starters recruiters (at most of the larger centres) are only involved in applicant files up until they get to a CFAT, after that they have no more involvement.  Your opinion's are those of someone whom seems to be a whiner.  Do you have any actual thoughts, ideas or suggestions as to how to improve the system?  Unless you have actual CONSTRUCTIVE COMMENTS OR CRITIQUES, then I suggest you just keep your yap shut.  NO ONE likes whiners. 



> 2- My other issue is the time it takes to do it.



Surprisingly people who are actually able to follow directions, fill in paperwork legibly, don't have poor marks and/or have recommended education credentials, don't have a history of drug use/criminality/serious debt issues, haven't extensively traveled (especially to less than friendly countries) and/or have immediate family living in other countries, tend to get through rather quickly. 



> I spent some time working for a parliamentarian a year ago in Ottawa and when I talked to the MND's office about a few issues I had in mind, I was basically told the issue of ERC being so lengthy and horrendous is that there are only a handful of people working on dozens and dozens of applications and the issue is 'staffing' and lack of funds to expand that unit that does the ERC. Now I'd like to ask you, would it hurt to write to the MND and email the said journalist and tell her where the issue lays? I believe these are valid concerns.



There are several issues, however having people such as your self who are ignorant of what is actually going on internally, writing pissy letters to journalist and the MND won't solve them.  For people who do know and/or work in recruiting, there is this little thing called the Chain of Command, which is the correct way to bring up issues and address them.  The "chain" also tends to get a little testy when people do an end run around it.  As well no matter how much an attempt to stream line the process is, so long as we are such a free and open society, and as long as travelling all over the world is relatively cheap and easy to do, a large number of applicants will require lengthy background checks, which will skew average processing times, and bog down the system.

But by all means CSIS is hiring Security Analysts, https://www.csiscareers.ca/en/jobs/screening-analyst instead of whining, apply to that position or encourage others to do so, so that there are more people clearing up the backlog.


----------



## Remius (24 Apr 2014)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> Sometimes, the solution to the problem isn't throwing money at the problem.  It is possible to make the people in the system fix the system.  It just takes focus and resolve, and people not being resistant to change.



This was an issue when I was there.  CFRG at that time rarely listened to the CFRC COs, Prod Os and Attraction officers.  They had plenty of good ideas but CFRG preferred its own ideas.  Which didn't always mesh with the realities of frontline recruiting.  They were also incredibly Torontocentric.  The problem is recruiting in Toronto is not the same as recruiting in Calgary or BC or whereever.

Our three most successful centres; Quebec City, Ottawa and Halifax would get criticised for innovative thinking because they didn't follow the CFRG model to their satisfaction yet they were able to consitantly deliver their quotas year after year.

The problem is also change.  Like changing something that does not need fixing.  Like when e-cfat came into effect.  Made our jobs easier but it limited how many people we could process.  We went from being able to test 30 people a day to 15 because of space and IT limitations.   We got test results faster and the computer did the corrections but it cost us. 

E-recruiting also created tons of issues because of empire building.  Good concept, poor execution.  

It wasn't all bad though.  Having their own multi media unit and being able to by-pass public affairs was a good initiative.  Allowing PAs to risk manage healthy candidates (ie enroll before the MO would approve the medical) was another.  Moving component transfers out of recruiting was also a good move.

But recruiting has many many issues that still need fixing and I could go on.  

Full disclosure though is that although I am still in touch with that world I have been out of CF recruiting for a few years now and as those that have or still work there, things change almost daily there.  I'm only passing off my experience which was both local and national.

And to everyone who is complaining about length etc etc, remember this:

The Government is downsizing (that includes the CF).  The war is over. We are not growing.  The economy still isn't on its feet.  We have have sick soldiers that need help.  We still don't have any real focus.  We have equipment problems, training problems and overall people problems.  Despite what you might hear we've been cut in various spots.

Your waiting issues are the last things most of us (me at least) are worried about.


----------



## KerryBlue (24 Apr 2014)

Hatchet Man said:
			
		

> Surprisingly people who are actually able to follow directions, fill in paperwork legibly, don't have poor marks and/or have recommended education credentials, don't have a history of drug use/criminality/serious debt issues, haven't extensively traveled (especially to less than friendly countries) and/or have immediate family living in other countries, tend to get through rather quickly.



Maybe surprising to you seeing as you are no long involved in CAF recruiting is that their is a new system being placed in which no one seems to be getting passed the CFAT. Is that a generalization? Yes absolutely, but take a look at the application process samples page. Do you really think that all these people being stuck post CFAT is because they incorrectly filled paperwork, travelled to much etc.. Maybe, but it seem's like a mighty big coincidence that all of a sudden, new system comes in and boom people seem to be stuck waiting being told "oh we will call you when we are told to you have been selected for further processing." Funny thing is no one seems to know who is in charge of deciding, or when these calls will go out. 

I was told by my recruiter when moving my files from Ottawa to Toronto that my file was marked to be called for a medical and interview booking back in February. Well from that time till the beginning of April when I moved my file back to Toronto, I was told by CFRC Ottawa "Oh we don't know when things will happen" while for two months my file was marked to be further processed. So maybe I'm just an anomaly that has fallen through the cracks, but their seems to be a fair amount of people doing the CFAT, then being stopped.


----------



## Remius (24 Apr 2014)

KerryBlue said:
			
		

> Maybe surprising to you seeing as you are no long involved in CAF recruiting is that their is a new system being placed in which no one seems to be getting passed the CFAT. Is that a generalization? Yes absolutely, but take a look at the application process samples page. Do you really think that all these people being stuck post CFAT is because they incorrectly filled paperwork, travelled to much etc.. Maybe, but it seem's like a mighty big coincidence that all of a sudden, new system comes in and boom people seem to be stuck waiting being told "oh we will call you when we are told to you have been selected for further processing." Funny thing is no one seems to know who is in charge of deciding, or when these calls will go out.
> 
> I was told by my recruiter when moving my files from Ottawa to Toronto that my file was marked to be called for a medical and interview booking back in February. Well from that time till the beginning of April when I moved my file back to Toronto, I was told by CFRC Ottawa "Oh we don't know when things will happen" while for two months my file was marked to be further processed. So maybe I'm just an anomaly that has fallen through the cracks, but their seems to be a fair amount of people doing the CFAT, then being stopped.



Kerry Blue, I took your advice and looked at the last three pages of samples page and I didn't see what you are saying here.  I've seen an interesting combo of success and waiting.  Some infantry guys getting in quick (ie applied in Dec/Jan and getting offers) and some much more competitive trades like pilot and firefighter waiting (go figure eh?).  Or are you talking about the few people that wrote the CFAT a few weeks ago?

Please elaborate a bit more on this new system since you are in the know.   When exactly was this put in place?  And how does it work?  Beyond what you wrote above.  Please enlighten the forum.

Reading what you wrote it seems you originally applied in Toronto, then transferred to Ottawa then back to Toronto?  I'm also confused because it would seem you transfered your file in April to Toronto?


----------



## George Wallace (24 Apr 2014)

???


It looks like part of the e-CFAT ( or whatever it is now ) should include questions on the use of:


THERE, THEIR, THEY'RE


----------



## KerryBlue (24 Apr 2014)

Crantor said:
			
		

> Please elaborate a bit more on this new system since you are in the know.   When exactly was this put in place?  And how does it work?  Beyond what you wrote above.  Please enlighten the forum.
> 
> Reading what you wrote it seems you originally applied in Toronto, then transferred to Ottawa then back to Toronto?  I'm also confused because it would seem you transfered your file in April to Toronto?



I applied last year hoping that by September I would be processed to the point of merit listing, however that didn't happen and I continued on with my university career. I moved to Ottawa, found a reserve unit I liked and requested my file transferred here. Long story short by the time my file was transferred(3 requests, the first two were "misplaced") and I was booked to write the CFAT, the unit filled the spots. So switched to Reg force, as right now school just doesn't feel right for me. I was told after my CFAT to come back in two weeks to schedule my Med/Interview. Came back two weeks later, and it was "whoops we forgot your background check" come back in a month. Well long story short, those two weeks have turned into 6 months. I'm moving back to toronto tomorrow after my final exam, but earlier in the month had to go home for family related stuff so I thought while I'm home might as well move the file. Makes it easier seeing as I have full time summer employment in Toronto. So that's why the bouncing. 

The new process I will try to explain to the best of my understanding, DAA could probably chime in here and fully explain. 

When applicants now apply online, CFVRC North Bay now doesn't require your documents sent to them like they used to, instead the files within a few days are redirected to the applicants nearest CFRC. At which point they are supposed to contact the applicant to come in, bring the source documents(birth cert, transcripts etc.) and book them for CFAT's. All applicants now get at the bare minimum the ability to write the CFAT, whereas before I'm pretty sure your file could be killed before you even got started. 

After the CFAT is where it get's messy. Essentially you need to be "selected" for further processing by RC's. No longer does everyone get a medical/interview. Their is apparently(according to recruiters from Ottawa and Toronto) a list with applicants who have been chosen to be further processed. It's supposed to take the weight of RC's because instead of processing everyone, they only take those who have decent potential. However the problem seems to be certain RC's don't know how to further process, or select these individuals. 

DAA summed it up nicely in this thread I think -------> http://army.ca/forums/threads/114129.0 




			
				DAA said:
			
		

> I'd love to chime in but the little voice in my head tells me other wise but I will do it anyhow.
> 
> I will say, your first comment is far too kind.  The ball hasn't been dropped, in fact, it's not even been picked up.  The only answer an applicant gets today is "We'll be in touch."
> 
> ...



Hopefully DAA can come along and give a far better explanation then me, but their are a fair number of people who have written the CFAT and are now sitting. Maybe a few of them from the forums can chime in.


----------



## The_Falcon (24 Apr 2014)

KerryBlue said:
			
		

> Maybe surprising to you seeing as you are no long involved in CAF recruiting is that their is a new system being placed in which no one seems to be getting passed the CFAT. Is that a generalization? Yes absolutely, but take a look at the application process samples page. Do you really think that all these people being stuck post CFAT is because they incorrectly filled paperwork, travelled to much etc.. Maybe, but it seem's like a mighty big coincidence that all of a sudden, new system comes in and boom people seem to be stuck waiting being told "oh we will call you when we are told to you have been selected for further processing." Funny thing is no one seems to know who is in charge of deciding, or when these calls will go out.
> 
> I was told by my recruiter when moving my files from Ottawa to Toronto that my file was marked to be called for a medical and interview booking back in February. Well from that time till the beginning of April when I moved my file back to Toronto, I was told by CFRC Ottawa "Oh we don't know when things will happen" while for two months my file was marked to be further processed. So maybe I'm just an anomaly that has fallen through the cracks, but their seems to be a fair amount of people doing the CFAT, then being stopped.



I still know people in recruiting, so I am actually aware of what is going on thank you very much, but it's always nice to assume stuff right?  As well, this new system, has only been in operation for a few months, so to suggest it is responsible for people being processed for a year+ is fallacy.  And I guess you also missed the sentence where I said RECRUITERS DO NOT PROCESS FILES BEYOND THE CFAT.  At most if you call a recruiter, they will check CFRIMS to see what is going on. Also did you not read what Crantor wrote?  There are limited positions, and limited people to process files.  Combine that with what I said previously (hell just look through the recruiting forums, and you will see, it seems many people applying can't get dressed without someone holding their bloody hand, let alone follow simple instructions), and things get ground down to a halt.


----------



## The_Falcon (24 Apr 2014)

KerryBlue said:
			
		

> When applicants now apply online, CFVRC North Bay now doesn't require your documents sent to them like they used to, instead the files within a few days are redirected to the applicants nearest CFRC.* At which point they are supposed to contact the applicant to come in*, bring the source documents(birth cert, transcripts etc.) and book them for CFAT's.



The bolded is incorrect, I have a copy of the auto-email, APPLICANTS are to make contact with their CFRC, after applying online, not the other way round.  Many, many people need to work on their reading comprehension is it is quite clear.

Edit to add, it also says this right on the forces.ca website

http://forces.ca/en/page/applynow-100

STEP TWO: MAKE AN APPOINTMENT
Once your application has been received and verified, we will send you an email *asking you to contact your local recruiting center to make an appointment to take the aptitude test.*

In the email, we will also remind you to bring the following documents with you to your appointment:

Birth Certificate
Government Issued Photo Identification
Proof of your education (transcripts)
Personnel Screening, Consent and Authorization Form
Personal Data Verification Consent Form
If you are not able to provide all of these documents on the day of your test, we may not be able to continue to process your application.

*Once you have contacted your local recruiting center and made an appointment,* you will be sent a follow-up email confirming your scheduled appointment.

Emphasis mine, but really the same instructions are in the email, and on the OFFICIAL site.  The instructions are pretty simple as well.  If people can't follow them, that's their problem. 




> CFAT is where it get's messy. Essentially you need to be "selected" for further processing by RC's. No longer does everyone get a medical/interview.


 More or less, which is the way it should IMHO.  Limited positions begets that only those who have high potential should be moving along in the process, no different than any other large employer.


----------



## Winter727 (24 Apr 2014)

I see both sides of the situation... Although I've been waiting for the call for a while only due to priority of filling positions (ie. recently only support, tech, ROTP and some french speaking infantry have been getting offers) I actually ran through the process fairly quickly. I'll chalk it up to bad timing as to why I'm still waiting. I also did receive an offer for Weapons Tech but turned it down to wait for infantry. So there are recent issues maybe... but as some individuals have said, there are controllable issues at hand when it comes to long wait times, on the side of the applicant that is.


----------



## KerryBlue (24 Apr 2014)

Hatchet Man said:
			
		

> I still know people in recruiting, so I am actually aware of what is going on thank you very much, but it's always nice to assume stuff right?



Apologies for assuming, however is it any different from senior members on here assuming all applicants are whinny, and over entitled. I have read the vast majority of posts dealing with special little snowflake syndrome, not being owed a job etc etc. 



			
				Hatchet Man said:
			
		

> As well, this new system, has only been in operation for a few months, so to suggest it is responsible for people being processed for a year+ is fallacy.  And I guess you also missed the sentence where I said RECRUITERS DO NOT PROCESS FILES BEYOND THE CFAT.



I understand the new system has only been around for a few months, but it seems and from above DAA seems to be in agreement with me that so far it is not off to a good start. And yes recruiters do not deal with files beyond the CFAT, however I guess I am over generalizing the usage of the word recruiter meaning anyone who works at a CFRC. Be it file managers, recruiters what have you, I just use (incorrectly obviously) the term recruiter. 



			
				Hatchet Man said:
			
		

> The bolded is incorrect, I have a copy of the auto-email, APPLICANTS are to make contact with their CFRC, after applying online, not the other way round.  Many, many people need to work on their reading comprehension is it is quite clear.



Duly noted, and apologies for the incorrect information. 



			
				Hatchet Man said:
			
		

> More or less, which is the way it should IMHO.  Limited positions begets that only those who have high potential should be moving along in the process, no different than any other large employer.



Well my CFAT had me qualified for most officer positions available, so not really sure what to say to that. 

I understand the joining the military takes time, however waiting over a year without the prospect of even a medical or interview any time soon seems to me a bit absurd.


----------



## Remius (24 Apr 2014)

KerryBlue said:
			
		

> Well my CFAT had me qualified for most officer positions available, so not really sure what to say to that.
> 
> I understand the joining the military takes time, however waiting over a year without the prospect of even a medical or interview any time soon seems to me a bit absurd.



There's more than just the CFAT that determines what makes a file competitive.

Is the wait frustrating?  Yep. Is it absurd?  Depends on how you look at it and why you are waiting.  RCMP process is 7-18 months.  OPP is 6-8 months.  The public service won't even look at you if you even forget to cross a T or dot an I.

And just an FYI.  A complete application with nothing missing and no hiccups was the exception more than the rule.  I suspect that is still the case.


----------



## KerryBlue (24 Apr 2014)

Crantor said:
			
		

> There's more than just the CFAT that determines what makes a file competitive.
> 
> Granted, but I'm no slouch. I've been a youth group leader since 15, worked as a camp administrator,  graduated from a private high school honour roll, played football for 8 years even playing for Team Ontario, have 2 years of uni under my belt etc...
> 
> ...


----------



## The_Falcon (24 Apr 2014)

KerryBlue said:
			
		

> Apologies for assuming, however is it any different from senior members on here assuming all applicants are whinny, and over entitled. I have read the vast majority of posts dealing with special little snowflake syndrome, not being owed a job etc etc.



Most in real life aren't like this.  Most that show up here, are. 



> I understand the new system has only been around for a few months, but it seems and from above DAA seems to be in agreement with me that so far it is not off to a good start. And yes recruiters do not deal with files beyond the CFAT, however I guess I am over generalizing the usage of the word recruiter meaning anyone who works at a CFRC. Be it file managers, recruiters what have you, I just use (incorrectly obviously) the term recruiter.



DAA though has worked in the recruiting realm for a while, so his comments have that crucial thing called experience and first hand INSIDE knowledge.  If you go back several years in the recruiting threads, you will see that griping and bitching about delays (self inflicted or otherwise) is nothing new from applicants, regardless of how things are processed behind the curtain.  And yes being specific about whom told you what information is helpful to any discussion (and this applies to anyone else reading this).  Different people have different roles and functions, and that will colour whatever information they are telling you. 



> Well my CFAT had me qualified for most officer positions available, so not really sure what to say to that.


And you may have just barely squeaked by, or been in the 99th percentile.  As well (and it's been said numerous times), CFAT is not the only metric.  



> I understand the joining the military takes time, however waiting over a year without the prospect of even a medical or interview any time soon seems to me a bit absurd.



No it's not.  Corrections, CBSA, RCMP, many large police services, large fire services are all known to take up to a year+ for applicants, and those are just public entities. I have applied to jobs in the private sector as well, were it was well over 6 months later when I heard back after an application.  If people want to apply for a job and get hired on the spot, find a fast food joint.


----------



## Jarnhamar (24 Apr 2014)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> ???
> 
> 
> It looks like part of the e-CFAT ( or whatever it is now ) should include questions on the use of:
> ...



Why?


----------



## KerryBlue (24 Apr 2014)

ObedientiaZelum said:
			
		

> Why?



Probably because I used their, there or they're incorrectly.


			
				Hatchet Man said:
			
		

> Most in real life aren't like this.  Most that show up here, are.
> 
> DAA though has worked in the recruiting realm for a while, so his comments have that crucial thing called experience and first hand INSIDE knowledge.  If you go back several years in the recruiting threads, you will see that griping and bitching about delays (self inflicted or otherwise) is nothing new from applicants, regardless of how things are processed behind the curtain.  And yes being specific about whom told you what information is helpful to any discussion (and this applies to anyone else reading this).  Different people have different roles and functions, and that will colour whatever information they are telling you.
> And you may have just barely squeaked by, or been in the 99th percentile.  As well (and it's been said numerous times), CFAT is not the only metric.
> ...




Granted. With that said I will disengage, and continue waiting and trying to contact my file manager.
If anyone would like to judge my application quality on more the just my CFAT, attached is my most recent resume so for anyone interested.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (24 Apr 2014)

Phoenix80 said:
			
		

> I spent some time working for a parliamentarian a year ago in Ottawa and when I talked to the MND's office about a few issues I had in mind, I was basically told the issue of ERC being so lengthy and horrendous is that there are only a handful of people working on dozens and dozens of applications and the issue is 'staffing' and lack of funds to expand that unit that does the ERC. Now I'd like to ask you, would it hurt to write to the MND and email the said journalist and tell her where the issue lays? I believe these are valid concerns.
> 
> Have a good one!



I'll throw this out to you;  you're likely right in that there are problems with the recruiting system, in that it can be improved.  But here are a few facts IMO that make it so it won't likely happen with any amount of real focus.

1.  our numbers a strong and we always have or seem to have people waiting at the door to get in.  There is a supply for the CAF demand for recruits. 

2.  The #1 focus of the CAF is operations, etc not recruiting.  You can only focus people and $$ resources in so many directions.  

3.  As pointed out, the CAF is facing budget cuts.  If sailing, flying and field exercises are all being cut back, do you really think there is going to be a big focus on recruiting system improvements by the top of the chain of command?

I'll suggest, and hope, the answer to that is "no".


----------



## DAA (24 Apr 2014)

Crantor said:
			
		

> This was an issue when I was there.  CFRG at that time rarely listened to the CFRC COs, Prod Os and Attraction officers.  They had plenty of good ideas but CFRG preferred its own ideas.  Which didn't always mesh with the realities of frontline recruiting.  They were also incredibly Torontocentric.  The problem is recruiting in Toronto is not the same as recruiting in Calgary or BC or whereever.
> 
> It wasn't that CFRG didn't listen, they did and 9 out of 10 times the "idea" had been presented or used in the past and it didn't work.
> 
> ...



Comments above in YELLOW.

The CF is not downsizing, as a matter of fact I believe the SIP increased this year.

Will applicants end up waiting?  Yes, some will and some won't.  The problem is that those who are waiting, aren't being told anything, except for "Don't call us, we will call you."  They're not being counselled and their not being given straight answers and in some cases, they're not being given any answer.  It's not hard to say "We're sorry but we won't be processing your application any further but thank you for applying." heck, even the private sector has the courtesy to do that, even "e-Recruiting" did that.  For those that don't wait very long, my guess would be because CFRC's aren't following the new model and doing whatever they want to do.

But now that the processing model has changed, you may very well see wait times increase and or semi-skilled applicants kicked to the curb.  Who knows but time will tell.


----------



## Remius (24 Apr 2014)

DAA said:
			
		

> Comments above in YELLOW.
> 
> The CF is not downsizing, as a matter of fact I believe the SIP increased this year.
> 
> ...



DAA, I could address everyone one of those points in yellow but I'll refrain from derailing as it is a matter of perspective from frontline to HQ.  During my time the relationship between CFRG HQ and its centres was dysfunctional.  I can't comment on how it is now but speaking to those I know that are still working there it is still a mess.  

The CF is downsizing, lets not quibble over semantics.  You and I know both know that an increased SIP does not automatically equate to growth.  Trying to go from 12000 class b to 4000 might not technically mean a personnel cut but I doubt your increased SIP can fill that gap.  I'm sure you are aware of the class b cuts that happened in the recruiting centres or the closures of certain detachments.  That is downsizing.  Or the 200 or so positions at 202 workshop.  Civies sure but Civies that directly supported the CF.   My boss where I'm at isn't being replaced by another civie after he left.  They moved a senior officer into that spot to temporarily fill that gap and someone else needs to fill hers and both could be doing better things but holes need to be plugged but were just creating more holes.

A lot of people here can attest to the direct effect a 2 billion dollar reduction to the budget is having on training and ops.

And I couldn't agree more with you about your last two paras.


----------



## pbi (24 Apr 2014)

DAA said:
			
		

> Will applicants end up waiting?  Yes, some will and some won't.  The problem is that those who are waiting, aren't being told anything, except for "Don't call us, we will call you."  They're not being counselled and their not being given straight answers and in some cases, they're not being given any answer.  It's not hard to say "We're sorry but we won't be processing your application any further but thank you for applying." heck, even the private sector has the courtesy to do that, even "e-Recruiting" did that.  For those that don't wait very long, my guess would be because CFRC's aren't following the new model and doing whatever they want to do.
> 
> But now that the processing model has changed, you may very well see wait times increase and or semi-skilled applicants kicked to the curb.  Who knows but time will tell.



As DAA already knows, my adult daughter recently attempted this process, as a skilled applicant. It was much as Crantor describes. Although I never had a particularly high opinion of some aspects of the Recruiting system when I was in the Army (and less and less the higher up I got and the broader view of its workings I had), I was taken aback and then angered by the apparent attitude and treatment she received. I was restrained  (by her) from getting involved (which probably would have been a dumb idea on my part anyway...), but suffice it to say that my daughter, who is nobody's little Tinkerbell, was utterly turned off, and is moving on with her civilian career. 

She summed it all up by saying "Dad: I thought they were supposed to recruit people, not turn them away". 

This bad attitude and strangely incompetent dealing with the public may be tolerable (barely) if the CAF are sitting on top of fat applicant lists and have reduced intake needs, but in the longer term it will be absolute poison. Word of mouth is the most powerful form of advertising, good or bad.


----------



## Jarnhamar (24 Apr 2014)

The CF should hire "mystery shoppers" of a sort.  Hire  civilians to apply to the CF and track how the civilians and their files are treated by the various recruiting centers across the country and when the recruiting centers mess up piss around or drop the ball, start punishing incompetent people.


----------



## Remius (24 Apr 2014)

ObedientiaZelum said:
			
		

> The CF should hire "mystery shoppers" of a sort.  Hire  civilians to apply to the CF and track how the civilians and their files are treated by the various recruiting centers across the country and when the recruiting centers mess up piss around or drop the ball, start punishing incompetent people.



It's been done before.  Not to mention the eyes of other departments and agencies.


I'm going to likely take flak for this but some people spend way to much time in class b contracts at CFRCs.  I know some that have or have had 10, 12, 15 and in some cases 20 years on class b time in the recruiting system.  Complacency, indifference and a low GAFF does exist.  While not the only problem it can create issues.


----------



## Shamrock (25 Apr 2014)

There's a certain hilarity to all of this.

I recruited shortly after the World Wide Web came into being.  There was no automation.  Everything was done analog, in person or over the phone.  From me entering the recruiting centre to my getting an offer was less than 8 weeks.  Since then, cultural expectations have shifted.  We are very much entrenched in our instant gratification mindset, and computers enable that.  Indeed, we brought computers in to lessen our paperwork and accelerate our administration.  And yet here we are, expectations of instant gratification, the historical ability to hire quickly, and allegedly all the tools to enable it.  

I know, it's not so simple.  There are quite a few working parts involved in recruiting a person, the least of which being our ability to train the new hire.  And nowadays, we've got less training resources to deal with an undiminished demand.  But the potential applicants need to be apprised of this.  They need to be told it's not like civvy life that publishes its positions when it is ready to hire, and that hires are typically able to come right into the work force.  We have to sync everything up to get them trained up and on the front, and offers will only begin at date X, boards will sit around Y, and training will begin around Z.  We have the ability to have an all-informed net.  Perhaps the failure to communicate is where we should focus our attention.

And really, Ms. Blatchford's article is about our failure to communicate.  We have an entire organisation whose raison d'etre is communicating, and one of our strongest supporters fighting to get information from them - which will, in turn, support us more.


----------



## Phoenix80 (25 Apr 2014)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> I'll throw this out to you;  you're likely right in that there are problems with the recruiting system, in that it can be improved.  But here are a few facts IMO that make it so it won't likely happen with any amount of real focus.
> 
> 1.  our numbers a strong and we always have or seem to have people waiting at the door to get in.  There is a supply for the CAF demand for recruits.
> 
> ...



well put. I agree with you.


----------



## Journeyman (25 Apr 2014)

Shamrock said:
			
		

> From me entering the recruiting centre to my getting an offer was less than 8 weeks.


I too sit on the sidelines with this.  From the time my Dad dropped me at the Recruiters (after I announced I'd quit highschool following Gr 11 football season) to Cornwallis was 5 weeks.

After several years' in I quit, and spent a few months wasting "return of contributions $."  Went to the Recruiting Centre and announced that I wanted _any_ Combat Arms.  The MCpl said "take Armour and I'll have you on the next flight to Gagetown."  I left a note on the fridge, packed some things (with instructions to sell anything I'd left and enjoy the profits), and was at the Armour School that night.  I've been told _repeatedly_ that that could never happen, but I assume phone calls were made and the paperwork eventually caught up.  


There was a Res Armd transfer also hanging around the Armd School's HQ Sqn racking up all the driver wheeled courses as well as we awaited a QL3 course..... I mention that only because we were both 6'(+) and our QL3 MCpl was Bob Lescombe (for the..._experienced_....black hatters....)


----------



## MJP (25 Apr 2014)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> ???
> 
> 
> It looks like part of the e-CFAT ( or whatever it is now ) should include questions on the use of:
> ...



I get emails all the time from some pretty senior folks that mix this kind of chicken shit all the time.  Are they retards unable to operate in a military?  

I don't disagree that an understanding of the language is needed but seriously?  Must be be my Dunning Kruger effect kicking in or my inherent dislike of the RMS trade amalgamation umpteen million years that I can't let go of kicking in but man I wish I could nit pick useless points all day.


----------



## pbi (25 Apr 2014)

Shamrock said:
			
		

> There's a certain hilarity to all of this.
> 
> I recruited shortly after the World Wide Web came into being. ...A  We have an entire organisation whose raison d'etre is communicating, and one of our strongest supporters fighting to get information from them - which will, in turn, support us more.



Shamrock: your points are all good, but what I'm on about is not so much about systems or procedures (bad as those might be) but about the human factors of attitude, competence and GAFF.

Now: I am going to offend the decent, honorable and capable people who work in the recruiting system: sorry in advance, but I'm not talking about you.

My view when I was in the Army was that, very much unlike (let's say...) the USMC, the business of filling jobs in the CFRCs was not given much profile, despite occasional bursts of enthusiasm and rhetoric. There were, IMHO, far too many people (Class B or RegF: it's really immaterial) who should not have been employed within 100 miles of any recruiting centre. They were quite clearly "parked".

Now, you will immediately tell me that we can't fill all our jobs from the top 10% of the merit lists: got it. And I will tell you that if you are going to deal with the public in order to sustain an armed forces that is totally reliant on volunteer service, you better get the best people you can get in that job. You don't have to be a marksman or a really good bosun or a fighter ace: but you have to be able to deal effectively with people, to work hard, and to be flexible to deal with the needs of your "customer". 

Oh, and don't lie to people. (My own CFRC interview  contained "information" that, had I not already been an experienced Res NCO, I would not have recognized for what it was. I have heard so many similar stories from many soldiers over the years that I doubt it was just me).

I don't think that these systemic problems in the recruiting system are really all that new: they just seem to be getting uglier.


----------



## George Wallace (25 Apr 2014)

pbi said:
			
		

> Shamrock: your points are all good, but what I'm on about is not so much about systems or procedures (bad as those might be) but about the human factors of attitude, competence and GAFF.
> 
> Now: I am going to offend the decent, honorable and capable people who work in the recruiting system: sorry in advance, but I'm not talking about you.
> 
> ...



Good points.  They sound just like the points being made about the calibre of the personnel units are sending, vise should be sending, to the Schools.

I remember vaguely, way back when, that at the end of my recruiting process at a CFRC having a document handed to me to sign, stating that the CFRC had not lied to me in any way.  As I came from a military background, I already knew what I was getting into, so I went through the formality of signing the absurd document.  Really?   How can a recruit, with not knowledge of the military, know whether or not a Recruiter lied to them until they had entered the Training process and posted to a unit?


----------



## Remius (25 Apr 2014)

The human problems that we had and likely still do.

-*People didn't want to work there. *  Some people viewed a posting at a CFRC as a career killer
For a while, and I'm not sure it still is, the CDS directed that a tour at Recruiting be viewed as being as important as an operational tour and be taken into account for merit boards etc etc.  I'm not sure that did much to help the perception.  But most guys/girls that have left recruiting were promoted or sent on their leadership courses.  Part of the issue was being out of trade for 3-5 years and very few leadership opportunities (a big complaint from the MCCs and recruiters).

*-Class B types that spent way too long in recruiting*.  Some of them as I mentioned have been there for far too long.  This makes change harder, concentrates the corporate knowledge too much, creates complacency.  Some that I  know have been there so long that their original trades don't even exist anymore.  one was a radio teletype operator that hadn't served with in any signals capacity since the 90's and a supply tech NCO that hadn't been in trade since the 90's as well.  Many of them cannot do their own trades anymore because of the time away from their trade and being on the PRL.  Some had never fired a C-7 until the mid 2000s.  These are some of the people advising applicants...

Edit: Pressed the post button too fast. Corrected.


----------



## pbi (25 Apr 2014)

I mentioned the USMC approach to recruiting earlier: I'll expand on it a bit. When I attended USMC C&SC at Quantico in 97-98, I was told that because of  the standard of recruit the Marines wanted, they needed good people in recruiting. I understood from my classmates that while a recruiting billet was very high pressure: produce numbers or suffer, career-wise; the reward was that a Marine leaving a recruiting centre was given preferential treatment for choosing their next billet. They were also very keen on staffing the recruiting centres with Marines who projected the right image (but then that wasn't as much of a problem for them: they had very few worn-out, overweight  sloppy sad sacks to palm off.)

I recall the CDS initiative that Crantor refers to: having sat on a few Regimental merit boards I never heard recruiting duty mentioned, and I don't know any infantry officer who asked for it (unless it was to get to a particular geographic location for some other reason). It was never discussed on any board I sat on as a good and useful option for anybody showing promise. So, I guess, you could say that we were the creators of our own problem.

But, I have to ask looking back, why did we think that way? Why didn't we see recruiting as a good career path?


----------



## Tibbson (25 Apr 2014)

pbi said:
			
		

> I mentioned the USMC approach to recruiting earlier: I'll expand on it a bit. When I attended USMC C&SC at Quantico in 97-98, I was told that because of  the standard of recruit the Marines wanted, they needed good people in recruiting. I understood from my classmates that while a recruiting billet was very high pressure: produce numbers or suffer, career-wise; the reward was that a Marine leaving a recruiting centre was given preferential treatment for choosing their next billet. They were also very keen on staffing the recruiting centres with Marines who projected the right image (but then that wasn't as much of a problem for them: they had very worn-out, overweight  sloppy sad sacks to palm off.)
> 
> I recall the CDS initiative that Crantor refers to: havig sat on a few Regimental merit boards I never heard recruiting duty mentioned, and I don't know any infantry officer who asked for it (unless it was to get to a particular geographic location for some other reason). It was never discussed on any board I sat on as a good and useful option for anybody showing promise. So, I guess, you could say that we were the creators of our own problem.
> 
> But, I have to ask looking back, why did we think that way? Why didn't we see recruiting as a good career path?



There used to be a time when our training schools were viewed as a place to hide the deadwood.  Thankfully that attitude, for the most part, has been replaced with one whereby the calibre of instructor has been raised considerably.  Perhaps its time for the same approach to our CFRC pers.


----------



## Journeyman (26 Apr 2014)

Schindler's Lift said:
			
		

> ....schools were viewed as a place to hide the deadwood.  Thankfully that attitude, for the most part, has been replaced with one whereby the calibre of instructor has been raised considerably.


     :rofl:   You _must_ be posted to a school.



OK, to be fair, I do know of some competent people who have asked for a school posting, but ONLY because they'd heard the alternatives were NDHQ/subordinate HQ posting.

Leaving a Regimental posting, I asked for an RSS job....only because I was told going _back_ to NDHQ was in the cards, and I figured that I could do some academic upgrading in a real city on a Reserve posting -- much the same as a 9-to-5 CFRC pers, if they wished.


----------



## Towards_the_gap (26 Apr 2014)

Absolutely agree with JM, I saw nothing but the true crud of my rank generation sent to the schools, I mean people who were known, throughout the corps, as borderline imbeciles.


----------



## pbi (27 Apr 2014)

Towards_the_gap said:
			
		

> Absolutely agree with JM, I saw nothing but the true crud of my rank generation sent to the schools, I mean people who were known, throughout the corps, as borderline imbeciles.



OK...I think we might be going a bit over the top here. While I was nevber posted to school cadre, I knew some very squared-away folk who were on permanent staff at the Infantry School, who can't be dismissed like that.

That said, I am also aware of some wretched people who were "parked" in school jobs, just as we often used RSS or recruiting as "parking spots" (not to say "dumping grounds"...)

I asked for RSS on my first ERE in 1986. The Adjt called  me in and said "_WTF is the matter with you? Are you a f****g idiot? This will ruin your career!_" In those days, and again from time to time in later days, RSS was very definitely seen as a refuge for the unwanted, drunken and incompetent. I did both a unit RSS tour (1986-89) and a COS Res CBG tour (2002-2005) and I know that while that was an exaggeration overall, there was a depressing amount of truth in it.

To me it goes back to what I saw as a  fundamental aversion to a simple approach of "fix or fire". Instead, we too often preferred to "park, hide and forget". I don't know if this is still going on, but I suspect it is deeply embedded in our military culture.


----------



## Towards_the_gap (27 Apr 2014)

You're right, it was an over-simplification and painted sone good people with the moron brush. That being said, there was a lot of dross that f'd up in the unit somehow, then found themselves promoted and posted to the school. Never to return to the field army....


----------



## Journeyman (27 Apr 2014)

pbi said:
			
		

> OK...I think we might be going a bit over the top here.....


....and then you reaffirmed what a couple people said.

But I _also said_ I know of some competent school/RSS people....some of whom actually asked for those postings.  

With some however, their Regimental families are content to have them 'go away'  -- Capt, Maj, LCol.


----------



## OldSolduer (27 Apr 2014)

I was posted to CFRS Cornwallis for three years. In my time there I observed some very good instructors, some very poor ones and everything in between. I met some very good human beings and some very poor excuses for human beings.

I did take a section through Wainwright TQ3 in 94, the Pl WO was Billy. Anyone who is PPCLI Or Airborne, CSOR etc will know of whom I speak. Very unorthodox, but we turned out good soldiers.
It was the same story for Wainwright - some good, some bad, most in between.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (28 Apr 2014)

Enough Gentlemen.
Thank you,
Bruce


----------



## The_Falcon (28 Apr 2014)

Removed the derailing comments, and merged the "Recruiting is Inept" with "The Government doesn't answer questions" as they are related.  Keep it civil and related to the discussion(s), or people start going up the warning system.

HM


----------



## Colin Parkinson (28 Apr 2014)

pbi said:
			
		

> OK...I think we might be going a bit over the top here. While I was nevber posted to school cadre, I knew some very squared-away folk who were on permanent staff at the Infantry School, who can't be dismissed like that.
> 
> That said, I am also aware of some wretched people who were "parked" in school jobs, just as we often used RSS or recruiting as "parking spots" (not to say "dumping grounds"...)
> 
> ...



Guess I was lucky for the most part our RSS staff were excellent leaders and made a real difference.


----------



## George Wallace (28 Apr 2014)

Colin P said:
			
		

> Guess I was lucky for the most part our RSS staff were excellent leaders and made a real difference.



I would go with the 50/50 chance of getting excellent people in; RSS, the Schools, Recruiting, etc.  


(In some cases, the uneducated/less than knowledgeable/inexperienced will think that their instructor/RSS/etc. may be excellent and knowledgeable when in fact they only have the gift of gab and can sling the bovine excrement in a convincing manner.  It is only later in life, after gaining experience, that you may learn that they were not as excellent as you thought.   > )


----------



## my72jeep (28 Apr 2014)

On the Cadet side we are 70/30 when Reg/Res get assigned to us. Of the 30% good, 10% wanted to be there and will what it takes. Of the 70% it's pot luck as to what you get out of them. My.02$


----------



## PanaEng (1 May 2014)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> I would go with the 50/50 chance of getting excellent people in; RSS, the Schools, Recruiting, etc.
> 
> 
> (In some cases, the uneducated/less than knowledgeable/inexperienced will think that their instructor/RSS/etc. may be excellent and knowledgeable when in fact they only have the gift of gab and can sling the bovine excrement in a convincing manner.  It is only later in life, after gaining experience, that you may learn that they were not as excellent as you thought.   > )



 :goodpost:


----------



## The Bread Guy (2 May 2014)

Coming all the way back to the Public Affairs angle of the OP, it's not just DND that's less than prompt or forthcoming with information for reporters.

Methinks we may be seeing more such stories following Christie Blatchford's "crack in the dam".


----------



## Edward Campbell (2 May 2014)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> Coming all the way back to the Public Affairs angle of the OP, it's not just DND that's less than prompt or forthcoming with information for reporters.
> 
> Methinks we may be seeing more such stories following Christie Blatchford's "crack in the dam".




Thanks for dragging this back on to the real topic.

I am no great fan of the media, despite having a couple of friends in it, but I accept that they fill an absolutely vital role in a democratic society: _informing_ and _influencing_ public opinion. 

There is, often, an unhealthy, even faintly incestuous relationship between the parliamentary press gallery (and its provincial and local equivalents) and ministers, MPs, officials and mayors and so on. They need each other, each for her or his own reasons, and they feed off one another. But, in the end, governments and political parties need to _inform_ and _influence_ the public and the media is how we, the public, receive our information and it is the primary source of influence on our opinions.

Relations between departments and the media were always rocky, in my opinion. I don't have any idea about how the minister felt but _officials_, including those in uniform, often (usually, in my _opinion_) mistrusted the media, thinking it was, broadly, ill-informed, narrow minded, superficial and biased against the military. My _sense_ was that the media, generally, thought we were 'Colonel Blimp_ish_' dinosaurs who were in bed with industry and so on.


----------



## TCM621 (2 May 2014)

As much as we have to acknowledge media bias, without their digging, all we would have for info are govt press releases which are often little more than reelection campaign speeches


----------



## FJAG (2 May 2014)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> . . . But, in the end, governments and political parties need to _inform_ and _influence_ the public and the media is how we, the public, receive our information and it is the primary source of influence on our opinions.
> 
> . . .  those in uniform, often (usually, in my _opinion_) mistrusted the media, thinking it was, broadly, ill-informed, narrow minded, superficial and biased against the military. My _sense_ was that the media, generally, thought we were 'Colonel Blimp_ish_' dinosaurs who were in bed with industry and so on.



All too true.

During my service I attended several seminars to teach us how to deal with the media.

The key lessons coming out of those were:

1.   Media generally have never been soldiers. Their preconceptions about the military generally come from whatever milieu they grew up in and can vary widely--mostly its apathy and lack of knowledge;

2.   Media generally will not report on an issue unless there is something newsworthy about it which usually means that there is some controversy;

3.   Media deadlines are short and the average reporter will not have the time or inclination to become educated in the subject matter. Instead they will try to get sound-bites from each side of the controversy and present those.

Our training response was to do the following:

1.   Recognize that media seeks both sides and that they have short deadlines and therefore you must respond in a timely manner so that your version makes the initial broadcast;

2.   "No comment" is a not good enough. You must state your case;

3.   Formulate what is the thrust of the message that you want out there. Make it short - for video no more than eight seconds (that's all you'll get on screen). Repeat your message over-and-over regardless of the question the media asks so that your message is all that they have to report. (If you wander off topic you increase the risk of your message not being reported.)

Needless to say that it helps if there is rapport between yourself and the reporter however only very rarely will there ever be an opportunity to develop that -- this is where the public affairs folks come in.

I remember one operation where I thought we really had things right. That was the Winnipeg Floods where I worked in the Div legal cell. The HQ there was organized with our legal cell and the public affairs cell in the same office room right across the hall from the Div Commander and the Chief of Staff's office. Whenever there was an issue we could hold an impromptu meeting within a few seconds and a half a dozen steps so that the commander/COS was able to rapidly formulate the combined operational/legal/public affairs response.

(I always thought it was cute that PA's shoulder title "veritas" and ours of "justitia" came out as "truth and justice". Two thirds of the way to the old Superman motto - all we needed was an "and the American way".)

 :cheers:


----------



## Rifleman62 (3 May 2014)

ERC: 





> There is, often, an unhealthy, even faintly incestuous relationship between the parliamentary press gallery (and its provincial and local equivalents) and ministers, MPs, officials and mayors and so on.



Surely you jest. The parliamentary press gallery hates the Conservative brand, and detest PM Harper. I would even say the parliamentary press gallery creates fluff, attempting to bring down the Conservatives. The useless CBC leads, with English/French TV, English/French Radio, English/French electronic print, Newsworld, Katty O'Malley and her type, etc. How many is that, daily manufacturing, distorting the truth?

Compared to the good olde USA, the WH press gallery, the major media producers are firmly in Obama's pocket, including being invited to state diners. Even with the recent Benghazi WH email revelations, it did not get one second on ABC, NBC, CBS, and MSNBC. The WH correspondents for the major media have finally twigged they have been continuously lied to, asked some questions, but their reports did not get air time.


----------



## The_Falcon (3 May 2014)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> ERC:
> Surely you jest. The parliamentary press gallery hates the Conservative brand, and detest PM Harper. I would even say the parliamentary press gallery creates fluff, attempting to bring down the Conservatives. The useless CBC leads, with English/French TV, English/French Radio, English/French electronic print, Newsworld, Katty O'Malley and her type, etc. How many is that, daily manufacturing, distorting the truth?
> 
> Compared to the good olde USA, the WH press gallery, the major media producers are firmly in Obama's pocket, including being invited to state diners. Even with the recent Benghazi WH email revelations, it did not get one second on ABC, NBC, CBS, and MSNBC. The WH correspondents for the major media have finally twigged they have been continuously lied to, asked some questions, but their reports did not get air time.



I guess you forgot that Pamela Wallin and Mike Duffy were both "journalists" and both appointed to the Senate as Conservatives.


----------



## Edward Campbell (3 May 2014)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> ERC:
> Surely you jest. The parliamentary press gallery hates the Conservative brand, and detest PM Harper. I would even say the parliamentary press gallery creates fluff, attempting to bring down the Conservatives. The useless CBC leads, with English/French TV, English/French Radio, English/French electronic print, Newsworld, Katty O'Malley and her type, etc. How many is that, daily manufacturing, distorting the truth?
> 
> Compared to the good olde USA, the WH press gallery, the major media producers are firmly in Obama's pocket, including being invited to state diners. Even with the recent Benghazi WH email revelations, it did not get one second on ABC, NBC, CBS, and MSNBC. The WH correspondents for the major media have finally twigged they have been continuously lied to, asked some questions, but their reports did not get air time.




Nope, I am not kidding; I'm not even being a bit hyperbolic. It's true that some journalists, especially some TV 'stars' actively dislike Prime Minister Harper both because they disapprove, vehemently, of his polices and politics but also because he makes it harder for them to get "air time," but other CPC folks - ministers - show up in the lobby and provide the cherished (and professionally *essential* (for TV reporters)) 10 second sound bites. I have, personally, seen and spoken with ministers and journalists who were, congenially, sharing a drink together at a local pub, not too far from the hill. They are, of necessity, _colleagues_: they need one another. If you don't like _"incestuous"_ then call the relationship symbiotic.


----------



## The Bread Guy (3 May 2014)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> Surely you jest. The parliamentary press gallery hates the Conservative brand, and detest PM Harper. I would even say the parliamentary press gallery creates fluff, attempting to bring down the Conservatives. The useless CBC leads, with English/French TV, English/French Radio, English/French electronic print, Newsworld, Katty O'Malley and her type, etc. How many is that, daily manufacturing, distorting the truth?


As someone who spent ~7 years fielding media calls (between 2 and 8 calls per week, with peaks gusting well above that) during Liberal and Conservative governments, I can tell you I didn't field _*any*_ "hey, way to go, guys!" calls from Ottawa-based or other media.  

Having worked the other side of the microphone as well, if one were to paint reporters with a broad brush, they tend to be generally ranging from "skeptical about government" to "anti-_government_" in outlook (or, put another way, rooting for the underdog).


----------



## Griffon (13 Jun 2014)

The slow process experienced by many applicants has been covered by the subject of this thread, so I won't try to beat a dead horse here, but I think the RCs often forget that the recruiting process is two-way; if an applicant has a negative experience with the recruiting process, the CAF will have failed their part by driving highly qualified, competent, and driven individuals away before they even get in.

In our particular case, my wife has tried to get information on the progress on her application since her medical _15 weeks ago_, both over the phone and more recently through email, but no progress has been made on her file since her medical.  Phone calls are no longer answered or returned, and emails are replied with responses to the effect of "It all looks good, she's ready for her interview, call the Recruiting Centre".  But they won't answer the phone or reply to voicemails...

With all that being said, and seeing that I will not receive any information on why my wife cannot get in touch with the local RC on this forum, I will ask this question instead: who monitors the Recruiting feedback email address (recruitingoutreach@forces.gc.ca), and what actions do they take with the feedback given on applicants' experience?


----------



## Vell (30 Jun 2014)

I was in the same boat. Was told I would be contacted within the next few weeks for my CFAT in my case, and I never heard from the recruiting center again (I applied in September of 2013, my file was lost, spent months phoning around to get information about where my file is and finally got a hold of someone in December of 2013). In January 2014, I was finally told that my CFAT would be scheduled but I never heard back despite an email and phone message every month, and a failed call attempt or two every day. 

Eventually I went hunting around for some tactics on how to talk to a live person and last week I finally got a hold of someone. In my case (Toronto recruiting center) I was told that they are currently working on something that is keeping them away from efficiently processing files and that they will finally be able to get back to my application within a month or two. I do wish I would get just a small two line long email heads up about stuff like that, but all we can do is be patient and hope to get contacted. 

While on one hand I agree, they are probably losing potentially great recruits as they become tired of waiting or lose confidence in the administration and organization of their potential future employer, on the other hand, those who do not wait perhaps do not have the will to be members of the CAF.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (15 Jul 2014)

Under a liberal government near the end the ability of the press to call a regional office became less and less. Under the current government managing the message has gone to extraordinary lengths to the point where it becomes a weight dragging everyone down. Both sides are to blame, MSM for trying to blow everything into a scandal and the government thinking everything will blow up on them.


----------



## OldSolduer (15 Jul 2014)

Maybe now that CMP is a LGen maybe he can get CFRG to answer media inquiries......just sayin....


----------



## RocketRichard (2 Jul 2016)

Hopefully we can get this sorted soon. http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/edmonton/despite-unemployment-rate-military-can-t-seem-to-hire-in-alberta-1.3661886


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Teager (2 Jul 2016)

Aside from the issues with the recruiting system I'm willing to bet people are more aware of the issues with veterans. Many are probably aware of the Equitas lawsuit and are hearing the government argue that they have no Sacred Obligation or Social Contract with those that serve. 

If I was a civi thinking about joining and hearing all the issues with veterans I might second guess that decision.


----------



## marinemech (2 Jul 2016)

Several issues daunt the CF nowadays, Lack of Funds - which leads to other issues, Lack of Proactive Recruiting (old days you could just walk in and ask to enlist - not the fill out this online application). Some of these could be fixed ( increasing DND budget to 2% from 1% of GPD ( it was last 2% back in 1988) so the nearly 30 years of losing 1% likely robbed the Forces of Hundreds of Billions of Dollars that could have been spent of Equipment, Personnel and Training rough budget in 1988 would be likely 1 Billion Dollars roughly compared to roughly 18 Billion in 2014 (at 1% vs roughly 36 Billion at 2%) if wwe were able to bring it up .25-.50 % more that would help our tired and worn services


----------



## FSTO (2 Jul 2016)

When I joined in 1989 there was no internet or cell phones. Walked into the recruiting office at the Brandon MB Armoury in January and got off the bus in Chilliwack at the end of August of the same year. During the 8 months I had surgery for a hernia, did the Naval Officer's Selection Board in Halifax and did a couple of interviews in Winnipeg. I also did not have the cleanest of records with the RCMP as a young adult (mostly booze and driving issues). I have no idea why it is so difficult today.


----------



## brihard (2 Jul 2016)

One of the biggest problems is the SIP. Reserve regiments are only allowed to hire X number of people per trade in a given fiscal. While this makes obvious sense for the regs, it's strangling reserve units. I was my regiments' recruiter for about a year and a half, and it was brutal. Empower reserve units to hire up to their establishment. Plan a year out, and fire staff who cannot prioritize and develop those plans. Put the onus on the divisions to ensure the courses are run, to be delegated where possible to the CBGs. If a unit or city can run a unit or city level BMQ or other course, let it. It may be that the regs will need to leave the reserves a bit more alone for a couple years to achieve this, but the reserves are struggling, and our viability long term depends on fixing this.

Only an institution like the CAF could manage to be so ineffective at getting enough 17 or 18 years olds to play with guns and go camping...


----------



## mba2011 (6 Jul 2016)

An interesting Article from Christine Blatchford on one man's attempts to join. I cannot speak for the Recruiting Center but if I got an email in all caps with that message, I probably wouldn't be to impressed either.

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/christie-blatchford-mans-kafkaesque-fight-to-enlist-in-the-canadian-forces

Thoughts?


----------



## chrisf (6 Jul 2016)

The headline is wrong... Should read "man assumes he's entitled to a job"

The cf recruiting system desperately needs streamlining, but I'm not sure what the issue is here?

If there's no openings, there's no openings.

Heck he was given an offer and turned it down?


----------



## Lightguns (6 Jul 2016)

I love the CYA, you didn't say "living in Kingston"!  Oiy Vey!


----------



## Nuggs (6 Jul 2016)

Brihard said:
			
		

> Only an institution like the CAF could manage to be so ineffective at getting enough 17 or 18 years olds to play with guns and go camping...



Funny because unfortunately it's so true.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk


----------



## Inspir (6 Jul 2016)

From intelligence officer, to pilot, then to marine engineer. He's going to be even more surprised when he finds out that trade will no longer exist after Christmas.


----------



## George Wallace (6 Jul 2016)

That this guy took this to the media raises a few questions/spider senses.  He told the CFRC that he was in Kingston, not that he had "MOVED" to Kingston.  The staff at the CFRC are not mind readers.  He could have been visiting for all they knew.  He supposedly has an education and should have done some research and then had his File transferred to Kingston if he knew he was moving.  Most of his complaints are a result of his actions, not the CFRC.  

If he, by chance, had visited this site, all of his current problems have been discussed by numerous site members over the years.  

All the previous posters in this thread have made numerous valid points.  Whining to the media that you can't join, or failed in your attempt to join, the CAF is rediculous.  He should hide in shame for this childish act.


----------



## mariomike (6 Jul 2016)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Whining to the media that you can't join, or failed in your attempt to join, the CAF is rediculous. He should hide in shame for this childish act.



Not meant as advice, because it could be wrong.  But, this is what I was led to believe, and still do,

Never, _never_  admit that the institution you work for, or hope to work for, has done anything wrong.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (6 Jul 2016)

Email any head hunter, company HR people, etc in civie land with that tone/message and you will likely find yourself off a short list as well.  If your primary residence is listed officially as BC, the Kingston CFRC won't have your file.  When I CTd, I moved during processing and with one quick phone call, my file was transferred to the local CFRC.  Easy peasy.

Sure, there are problems in the recruiting system, but this article smells more like another "I'm a special snowflake  :tempertantrum:" story that is becoming more accepted in our society as 'valid'.  It even points to him not being available for things the CFRC had tried to schedule him for.

IMO.


----------



## Remius (6 Jul 2016)

There is more to this story. Unfortunately CFRG can't and won't reveal anything due to the privacy act.


----------



## mariomike (6 Jul 2016)

Remius said:
			
		

> Unfortunately CFRG can't and won't reveal anything due to the privacy act.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (6 Jul 2016)

While there is likely more to this story, it's painfully clear the recruiting system is broken. The timeframes are unrealistic and going by what I can see in the Public Service, is we have added all that is bad from the PS onto all that is bad in the military side. I suspect the internal frustrations of many a recruiter is quite high.


----------



## PuckChaser (6 Jul 2016)

Shame Christie Blatchford bought this guy's story hook line and sinker. He screams administrative burden to me.

Maybe Blatchford would like to do an article on the CT/OT process, where members are advised it'd be faster for them to release completely and reapply. After a 2+ year wait, that's exactly what one friend had done, even quitting a long term Cl B to do so.


----------



## George Wallace (6 Jul 2016)

Colin P said:
			
		

> While there is likely more to this story, it's painfully clear the recruiting system is broken. The timeframes are unrealistic and going by what I can see in the Public Service, is we have added all that is bad from the PS onto all that is bad in the military side. I suspect the internal frustrations of many a recruiter is quite high.



Well.  We do live in dangerous times.  Security checks are more necessary today than they were several decades before, and then there are the raised Education and Health requirements.  In a more complex world, the recruiting process is also made more complex.  We already have enough trouble weeding out possible "problem children"; opening the floodgates would only exacerbate problems.


----------



## PuckChaser (6 Jul 2016)

We're not giving everyone a secret security clearance, background checks don't have to take forever. 30 days is more than enough time to complete physical health, mental health (I added this step), interview, CFAT, FORCE (added step) and put that person on a merit list. The recruiting center has to get certain trades on certain courses at specific times, why there is not a national time appreciation done each year, with fixed dates for merit board and BMQ determined, I have no idea. Someone should be able to be told that when they're merit listed, the board will sit on this date, for BMQ starting this day.


----------



## mariomike (6 Jul 2016)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> In a more complex world, the recruiting process is also made more complex.



It may also have something to do with the increase in the average age of applicants over the years? 

How much "baggage" - all of which must be sorted out during the application process - has an individual who applies later in life accumulated compared to when s/he was 16 or 17?


----------



## ueo (6 Jul 2016)

400+ days and the process is still ongoing. Really, but without seeing the file its difficult to comment rationally.


----------



## runormal (6 Jul 2016)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Shame Christie Blatchford bought this guy's story hook line and sinker. He screams administrative burden to me.
> 
> Maybe Blatchford would like to do an article on the CT/OT process, where members are advised it'd be faster for them to release completely and reapply. After a 2+ year wait, that's exactly what one friend had done, even quitting a long term Cl B to do so.



 :nod:

I've toyed with it. CFRC told me to, DMCPG-5 told me to. 

I don't mind waiting a bit (2-3 years) because there aren't spots in the CF or because there are stronger applicants in front of me. Honestly I'd wait longer if required, or fix whatever deficiencies I have. But being told that you can't apply for this trade for 5 years because you are a reservist doesn't make any sense. Yet the military is sending people to RMC for it and taking DEO's.. 

The reason I haven't released, is quite frankly I enjoy being in the reserves. It also seems pretty stupid to waste 1-2 years (guess) of time as an applicant. I'd much rather wait as a reservist. Perhaps once I get a solid plan for the short term I'll pull the pin..


----------



## mariomike (6 Jul 2016)

ueo said:
			
		

> Really, but without seeing the file its difficult to comment rationally.



 :goodpost:


----------



## MeinBob (6 Jul 2016)

I don't know the actual particulars of this case, it may be he is the "one guy" that is a problem, but I doubt it.  I do know from first hand experience the brutal problems we are having with recruiting. Recruiting has become an infuriating problem. We have many that want in my Battery, but they can't, because recruiting is FUBAR.

It does not take three months to do a basic security screening of applicants. It takes minutes to do the search on the police database. It does not take months to do a medical, it takes minutes to do it. It does take months and even years to process applicants when the system is so administratively complex and broken.

In 1988 it took me less than three weeks to apply and then be on my basic infantry course. In 2006 when I joined back up, it took three months, and my application was viewed as being exceptionally quick! Remarkable, given that when I applied in 1988 there was no internet to send files, and few local computers to process information. Somehow with all of our technology and databases we can't move a file faster than an Ox wagon could.  

We have had several files in my unit that have taken years to process. Most, if done quickly take an average of six months to process. We have not had one enrollment in five months, and we have over 40 files waiting to be finished, most have been in "process" for over six months. With over 100 files in the system and 40 that are just waiting to be "finished", it is obvious that things are right off the rails, and any defense of the status quo can only be made with complete ignorance of the current situation.  

I can't imagine a more efficient way to destroy a Battery. We have remarkable retention, we have the lowest NES rate in the Brigade, and one of the highest participation rates in Brigade training events, but we can't grow our unit without any recruits. This is shameful, and I am beginning to think that it might not just be incompetence and inefficiency that has caused all of this. Heads need to roll.


----------



## mba2011 (6 Jul 2016)

MeinBob said:
			
		

> It does not take three months to do a basic security screening of applicants. It takes minutes to do the search on the police database. It does not take months to do a medical, it takes minutes to do it. It does take months and even years to process applicants when the system is so administratively complex and broken.




I don't work in a CFRC or in the recruiting system at all, but I do have some insight into the Security Clearance side of things. Even for Enhanced reliability, they need to go through the office in Ottawa, which deals with All Security clearances for the CF. For Enhanced reliability status its more than just searching CPIC, and signing off on it. Does it take months to do (ignoring the backlog and information problems), no. But its not as simple as just running the name through CPIC (which does take mins). Based on the article he was applying for Reg Force, so they would do Criminal Record, Credit, Family and a few other checks, in Ottawa. 

As far as the medical, that process is FUBAR for everyone. As far as I know, not all recruiting centers have a MO in house anymore, meaning that a base MO has to be tasked to do the Recruit Medicals, and with a shortage of MOs and a significant strain on the system as is, the recruit medicals get prioritized below current serving soldiers and their medical needs. 

Not saying you are wrong or that the system works, just clarifying the reality of that part of the process.


----------



## medicineman (6 Jul 2016)

After reading the article, I have a few things to say...first off the guy in the picture should be next to the DSM-V definition of narcissistic personality disorder, just looking at him.  First impressions are everything - I don't get a warm and fuzzy from him.  Second, I've worked in the Vancouver CFRC before - I'd be willing to bet better than 3:1 odds he didn't notify anyone of his decision to got to Kingston, much less "to be closer to Trenton for ASC" (paraphrasing there).  I've heard of some weird shyte in my day, but that takes the cake - not sure if something was lost in translation between him and the reporter or what, but something smells funky.  Third, aircrew stuff takes more time than many other occupations simply because of ASC set up, medical reviews prior to being sent there, etc ad nauseum.  

Yes the system sucks, but when you have a bazillion people applying for a finite number of jobs, things don't happen as fast as people like.  Our society today expects everything to happen when they want it to.  They want things now, whether or not they should have it  Frig, my current civilian job didn't have me getting an interview until 2 months after the job posting expired - I was applying to another place when they interviewed me, and even then had to wait almost a month before they offered me the job.

MeinBob, the Reserve Recruiting side of things is pretty messed up - it should be go to the CFRC, say I want to try for whatever jobs there are in the area that I'm interested in, and get processed like any other applicant.  At certain times of the year, the process should be expedited or have things planned so that Reserve Recruiting is front loaded in winter for summer BMQ's, sort of like ROTP stuff - if it's handled by the unit, things can get FUBAR'ed honestly, expecially with the complexity of how things are done now.  I joined the PRes in '86 - saw the unit recruiter, processed the paperwork and had the medical done and was getting my kit for basic within 3 weeks...in  '88 when I joined the Reg Force, I did my testing and interviews in Feb, was told was an 18 month wait for my trade, got an offer in Apr and was in Cornwallis in Aug.  There were more people in the Forces then, those CFRC's were held much more accountable for their actions or inactions then, and we had less competition for jobs than there are now.

In this guy's case, I'd have to say that yes, there is a problem in the Recruiting system...however, a lot doesn't jibe with me, so I suspect there is a lot more going on than what is being told.  There are three sides to every story - his, her's and what really happened.  The unfortunate thing is this guy might in fact end up with a ministerial inquiry because it hit the papers, whether he actually deserves it or not.

MM


----------



## jollyjacktar (6 Jul 2016)

An MI is not necessarily a bad thing.  If one were to be held, it might shake some of the shit loose that is hobbling the system by means of identifying what's broken and compelling a repair job.


----------



## medicineman (6 Jul 2016)

No argument there...just as long as it points out the likelihood that this guy was hoist by his own petard as well.  Kharma is pretty funky that way sometime.

MM


----------



## TCM621 (6 Jul 2016)

Recruiting is one of the biggest problems we have had in the last decade. A lot of the press is focused on our aging equipment, and rightly so but even if we got brand new stuff tomorrow we would have a hard time finding the people to use them. 

Remember when the government  promised to increase the reg force by 5000 people back in the early 2000s? Vice admiral Buck stood up in the Senate and had to tell the government we couldn't do it. It is even worse now. I would argue that almost all the problems are of our own making. If we keep it up all the Gucci kit in the world won't help us. 

The one thing we have always have had going for us was  the quality of our people and training. Yet we are chasing away the most qualified people away with increasingly ridiculous wait times. Our training has suffered for lack of instructors and cost cutting measures such as learning how to use tools or weapons through CBT. 

Something has to change and I don't see it happening until someone of sufficient rank stands up and publicly states we can no longer meet our basic commitments.


----------



## George Wallace (6 Jul 2016)

:goodpost:


----------



## Eye In The Sky (7 Jul 2016)

I think people may place more hope that a MI will fix recruiting; the _expected_ vice actual results don't necessarily line up nicely.  I would expect it would be CFRG and perhaps several CFRCs that do the initial staffing of the draft.

The letter back to the applicant would acknowledge that timelines are indeed long for some people and then go on to point out all the details the news article doesn't, as well as the ones that posters here have noted (official residence in one province, living in another one).


----------



## Jarnhamar (7 Jul 2016)

Almost 500 days and 200 emails (or pages of emails? ).   

Well done CFRC. 

I stopped trying to get people to join the CAF (and I was awesome at it)  after I finally got embarrassed enough and fed up with the stupidity from CFRC.  

I've said it before,  I lose someone's memo and Im (rightly) hammered for it.   Whole personal files go missing over there not only endangering peoples persec  but causing people to waste their most valuable resource; time.  Do they get disciplined?   Considering the frequency of mistakes I doubt it.


----------



## a_majoor (8 Jul 2016)

It should not be so difficult.

I recall that I was 2I/C for a co-op course 5-6 years ago where we had a cap of 30 candidates for all the units in London. When I spoke to one of the high school counselors, she told me that that her one school alone had 100+ applicants for the program.  So the pool of possible applicants is out there, but *we* are hamstrung in our ability to take advantage of these opportunities.

Stop and think: if one school has 100 willing applicants for Reserve employment, then all the schools in London together probably have enough applicants to fill every reserve unit (1H, 4RCR, 31 SVC BN, 705 Comms) not only to their current reserve establishment strength, but to a full unit establishment (say a 550 man battalion in the case of the Infantry). Since many reservists go on to the Regular Forces, this is a spectacular recruiting pool for them (see Infanteer's comments of 3VP being vastly undermanned in another thread), plus a means of making the Reserves relevant. If we believe that only 1 in 3 Reservists are able and willing to step up to the plate outside of parade nights, then 1/3 of 550 _still_ allows you to realistically carry out tasks like forming a TDB in a Brigade, or man an Arctic Response Company, or do all the other things which *we* say need to be done.

True there are many other issues that would need to be addressed (training facilities and supplies, equipment and O&M for a full battalion, leadership), but the point is we are killing ourselves and strangling both the Regular and Reserve forces by this constant penny pinching and bureaucratic red tape.


----------



## dapaterson (8 Jul 2016)

A few thoughts:

One hundred interested candidates does not translate into one hundred folks who are willing to follow through, or one hundred who will pass the physical, medical and aptitude testing.

The authorized strength of the Reserves is less than the establishments of all Reserve units.  Therefore, there is no requirement to fill units.  Therefore, there needs to be prioritization to ensure the proper capability mix is maintained - and not necessarily the sustainment of the existing Order of Battle.

Units are not all of equal value.  Different types of soldiers should be prioritized; if the CAF Reserve is short of basket-weavers, then we should be recruiting basket-weavers, and not trying to fill the Hip-Hop Dancing positions just because they are easier to recruit.  Meaning that the Glorious 76th Bn, Royal Hip Hop Regiment of Burlington ON may not get as large a SIP as the 19th Independent Basket Weaving Platoon of Wadena SK, regardless of their battle honours from the Windsor Dance-Off of 1996.


----------



## runormal (8 Jul 2016)

Thucydides said:
			
		

> Since many reservists go on to the Regular Forces, this is a spectacular recruiting pool for them (see Infanteer's comments of 3VP being vastly undermanned in another thread), plus a means of making the Reserves relevant.



There have been several potential applicants who have posted on here that "I'm in grade 11/12 whatever and I want to join unit XYZ and then transfer to the reg-f shortly thereafter". Several people (myself included), have told these people not to waste their time because the amount of time it would take to get qualified, and then CT they might as not apply because they will be further ahead applying off the street. Even as an INF -> INF transfer. 

I agree that the reserves is a _very_ good recruiting ground. You essentially get to assess someone, get them some courses and hopefully get some ROI if they stay in the same trade/element. Even if they want to change elements after trying it, you have someone who "knows" what they are getting into and hopefully will stay longer than the initial contract. 

However if you want to recruit the reg-f from the reserves, you need to be able to hire reservists in weeks and the reserves need to understand needs to be structured in such a way that they will be able handle loosing more people to the reg-f. Likewise CT's need to processed much quicker (should vacancies exist) because if the reg-f won't take them someone else will. I know lots of reservists who want to go reg-f and are waiting on CT's. I also know several who just said screw it, found another a job and released. 

I've loved my time in the reserves and met down with several young highschool students (my mom works in education) and I've told them all about the reserves, I try to be as neutral as possible, but I would *never* tell someone to join the reserves to "try" the army unless they plan on doing full time post-secondary education on the side. 

Edit: see strike out


----------



## expwor (8 Jul 2016)

Back when I joined the Militia (1979) the Canadian Forces had a program called SRTP (Summer Recruit Training Program) It was targeted at high school students.  I applied May 1979, went through aptitude testing, security screening and PT testing. End of June got told to show up at the Armouries to swear in.
Raised my right hand and took the oath (btw no big ceremony) After swearing in, told the date (before SRTP started) we needed to show up at the Armouries. We were all loaded in vehicles, went to CFB Kingston, and got our kit (web gear 51 pattern) went back to the Armouries and were told how to wear it, including how to shape and wear our berets.
If memory serves, the first Monday after the July 1st holiday we were working...and contrary to the recruiting ads, we worked at least part of our weekends too. We came out of SRTP with GMT (General Military Training) and TQ1 (Trade Qualification 1) Infantryman. 
Most members of our SRTP group stayed with the PWOR (Princess Of Wales Own Regiment)
Some joined the Regular Force and who knows, if life hadn't thrown me a curve, I'd likely have joined the Regular Force too 
Anyhow posted for whatever it's worth.

Tom


----------



## Dale Denton (11 Oct 2018)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> Perhaps with a modern fleet that is well equipped and a government that makes joining the navy an attractive proposition as a career and at the same time recognises and honours its military establishment the manpower shortage will disappear.



Agreed. Plus, more public exposure = more awareness of issues = more money.

Why I secretly think Haida should be sail-worthy again...


----------



## Halifax Tar (11 Oct 2018)

Lumber said:
			
		

> Huh? We have 7 of 12 Frigates, Asterix, and 4 MCDVs all at sea right now. Tell me again how we can't crew our ships, or that we have very little demonstrable maritime power?



We cannot sustain that tempo with our current availability of fit sea personnel.  Right now pier head jumps are keeping those hulls deployed. 

At a very recent divisions one of our Flag Officers stated that we (the RCN) are 700 people short.  That's 3.1 CPF crews manned at 225 pers (as per wikipedia). 

That also does not include our staggering amount of unfit sea / unfit alongside yard stanchions holding down shore postings.  That number was hinted at being about the same as the above statistic.


----------



## MilEME09 (11 Oct 2018)

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> We cannot sustain that tempo with our current availability of fit sea personnel.  Right now pier head jumps are keeping those hulls deployed.
> 
> At a very recent divisions one of our Flag Officers stated that we (the RCN) are 700 people short.  That's 3.1 CPF crews manned at 225 pers (as per wikipedia).
> 
> That also does not include our staggering amount of unfit sea / unfit alongside yard stanchions holding down shore postings.  That number was hinted at being about the same as the above statistic.



So in theory you need more then 700 probably more like double that?


----------



## FSTO (11 Oct 2018)

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> We cannot sustain that tempo with our current availability of fit sea personnel.  Right now pier head jumps are keeping those hulls deployed.
> 
> At a very recent divisions one of our Flag Officers stated that we (the RCN) are 700 people short.  That's 3.1 CPF crews manned at 225 pers (as per wikipedia).
> 
> That also does not include our staggering amount of unfit sea / unfit alongside yard stanchions holding down shore postings.  That number was hinted at being about the same as the above statistic.



This is a direct result of a broken recruiting system. A system that seems to be unable to get out of its own way and a double wammy of focusing recruiting on groups of people who seem to have no desire to join in great numbers. I have no idea how to get more women, first nations and POC's through the door that isn't already been done. Unless we get Michael Bey to make a movie about our Navy fighting aliens (hey we could get HMCS HAIDA off the wall just like USS MISSOURI!) off the Toronto waterfront. That might spur some recruitment! Who knows? None of our other campaigns seem to work. :rofl:


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (11 Oct 2018)

FSTO said:
			
		

> This is a direct result of a broken recruiting system. A system that seems to be unable to get out of its own way and a double wammy of focusing recruiting on groups of people who seem to have no desire to join in great numbers. I have no idea how to get more women, first nations and POC's through the door that isn't already been done. Unless we get Michael Bey to make a movie about our Navy fighting aliens (hey we could get HMCS HAIDA off the wall just like USS MISSOURI!) off the Toronto waterfront. That might spur some recruitment! Who knows? None of our other campaigns seem to work. :rofl:



My brother has been waiting months to get in to the Navy as a NESOP.  He is 30 years old, supremely fit and wants to get stuck in.

The recruiting centre had some issues with a couple of tattoos he has and have been giving him the run around with waivers for the past four months.

It is absolutely unacceptable and I'm considering making a phone call to someone.  He is getting fed up and is probably going to look elsewhere soon if he doesn't hear.


----------



## donaldk (12 Oct 2018)

FSTO said:
			
		

> This is a direct result of a broken recruiting system. A system that seems to be unable to get out of its own way and a double wammy of focusing recruiting on groups of people who seem to have no desire to join in great numbers. I have no idea how to get more women, first nations and POC's through the door that isn't already been done. Unless we get Michael Bey to make a movie about our Navy fighting aliens (hey we could get HMCS HAIDA off the wall just like USS MISSOURI!) off the Toronto waterfront. That might spur some recruitment! Who knows? None of our other campaigns seem to work. :rofl:



Oh the internal bullshit within CFRG is absolutely nigh which was showcased with their stupid ever changing qualification policies for their post-in positions (which apply equally to NAVRES NRD recruiting positions upon post-in).  It was news to me when I suddenly found out yesterday that the coursing/OJT omnibus TD for a potential File Manager was no ******* good without a lengthy 2-3 month OJT at a CFRC det (closest one 700km away).  This essentially led to one of my PRes mbrs pulling the pin on taking a 3 yr contract in any recruiting position ever due to CFRG's ineptness with it's training program.  Shortly thereafter, I nominated him for an upcoming vacancy in my RSS pool since he is a VERY hard worker that didn't deserve the ******* around he got from CFRG (and raised my three fingers in the direction of Borden and Toronto for them to 'read between the lines').  Someone at CMP needs to wake up to the morning coffee and take the damn hint that when both major PRes orgs (CA and NAVRES) have or are implementing measures to make CFRG obsolete they should just chop the head off the dying horse that is CFRG/MILPERSGEN. As for someone's staffing suggestion that came out-of-line from the south end of the province...  I will enjoy my popcorn when PCC Quebec goes grenadier on the originator  :Jedi: 

Back to the thread topic on CSC... crewing concept wise, yes, certain recruiting intake projections are in the project scope for its analysis phase but my rant and the others above mine specific to CFRG issues might need to be split into another thread...


----------



## Czech_pivo (12 Oct 2018)

A lot of talk has been about low crew levels and inability to staff the current (larger?) fleet size.  Out of curiosity, what, if anything, would an across the board 10% pay raise in the navy (and entire armed forces) for all ranks below, say Captain (or say Colonel in the Army/Air Force).  Would this do anything at all in addressing low recruitment numbers and retention.  I read a lot about creating new opportunities and better accommodations on the new ships coming online in the future, but nothing at all about salary/compensation.  Interested in knowing if this would address the issue of not enough crew.


----------



## dapaterson (12 Oct 2018)

CAF has better retention than most allies.  Problems are mostly with training pipeline to OFP, not with recruiting (some occupations excepted).


----------



## blacktriangle (12 Oct 2018)

Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> My brother has been waiting months to get in to the Navy as a NESOP.  He is 30 years old, supremely fit and wants to get stuck in.
> 
> The recruiting centre had some issues with a couple of tattoos he has and have been giving him the run around with waivers for the past four months.
> 
> It is absolutely unacceptable and I'm considering making a phone call to someone.  He is getting fed up and is probably going to look elsewhere soon if he doesn't hear.



Really? If I may ask, is it location or content they have an issue with? It's not like there are no NES Ops with tattoos...


----------



## Halifax Tar (12 Oct 2018)

MilEME09 said:
			
		

> So in theory you need more then 700 probably more like double that?



More than likely. 

I am not sure why my post was moved out of its original thread.


----------



## kratz (12 Oct 2018)

[quote author=Halifax Tar]
I am not sure why my post was moved out of its original thread.
[/quote]

Discussions are fluid and not always easy to split smoothly, without also editing posts.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (12 Oct 2018)

Spectrum said:
			
		

> Really? If I may ask, is it location or content they have an issue with? It's not like there are no NES Ops with tattoos...



content but it is nothing, it is a bunch of numbers written on his chest.  They have been trying to say it is gang related.  It is not a gang tattoo LOL

It is also covered and cannot be seen when he is wearing a shirt.  Quite honestly, I find the whole thing all a bit ridiculous, especially when I see gangs of sailors and soldiers driving around with motorcycle cuts acting like they are members of SOA.


----------



## blacktriangle (12 Oct 2018)

And what gang exactly is that? Are the folks at the CFRC gang experts? I wouldn't even call them recruiting experts. 

Tell him to hang on. Sounds like he's being discriminated against almost.


----------

