# Gen. Hillier pushes plan to boost army enrolment



## Scoobie Newbie (25 Feb 2006)

http://sympaticomsn.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060225/army_enrolment_060225

CTV.ca News Staff

In a bid to boost enrolment in the military, Canada's top soldier is promoting a plan to grant citizenship to landed immigrants who sign up to serve.

General Rick Hillier, the chief of defence staff, also wants to make the military more attractive by offering an extra week of leave for soldiers who sign up a new recruit.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper was elected on a platform that pledged to boost the military by as many as 23,000 new soldiers.

One of the big challenges with that plan is finding the manpower, but Hillier says his ideas could provide the incentive needed to bring in the new recruits.

Hillier said the military provides training, job security, exciting work and good pay, and said he is at a loss to explain why more Canadians don't want to serve



Don't the Americans allow landed immigrants to serve?


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (25 Feb 2006)

Quote,
_In a bid to boost enrolment in the military, Canada's top soldier is promoting a plan to grant citizenship to landed immigrants who sign up to serve._

See, its quite apparent that no one up in the towers reads the horror stories of potential recruits, waiting anywhere from one to 4 years for a security check, that adorn our website.
Just how long would the security check take for a "landed immigrant"?


----------



## fleeingjam (25 Feb 2006)

Does this mean CFRC will finally put PRes back onto the todo list rather than shelving it for another 2 months? or does he mean 23,000 Reg F personnel?


----------



## darmil (25 Feb 2006)

In the states, landed immigrants who serve get citizenship.


----------



## Gunner (25 Feb 2006)

MikeH said:
			
		

> In the states, landed immigrants who serve get citizenship.



Starship Troopers ... service gives citizenship?  Why doesn't the CDS just fix the bureaucratic monstrosity that we have created.


----------



## Kirkhill (25 Feb 2006)

Historically the army took criminals, kitted them out, organized them, disciplined them, put them under command and then hid them from public view.  The only people that had contact, ie communication with the public , were officers.

For a bunch of very good reasons this is no longer the case but.....

Currently the public can communicate with all soldiers regardless of rank, the soldiers are carrying more operational responsibility (the strategic corporal, becoming the strategic private),  "discipline" is looser relying to a greater extent on self-discipline.

The point of this comparison is that in the past the army took all-comers and did what it could with the tools at hand and created a useful force.  Currently, because of higher expectations the selection process seems to require only troops that in other armies would be considered pretty elite.  This has resulted in a very high quality but high "maintenance" (in the sense that my son and daughter are high maintenance) army.

Without resorting to recruiting criminals and employing the crucifixion (Field Punishment Number 1), the lash and the noose, is it possible to move the balance a little so as to restrict the "liberties" of the Pvt/Cpls that are newly joined and learning their trade and put more control in the hands of their Team and Section Leaders?  Would this make it possible to relax the recruiting standards (not the training standards - training would require more effort with "less qualified" recruits) and increase the numbers being accepted?

For example on physical fitness, rather than setting a standard and having people cut off because of lack of ability to meet the standard assess people on their potential to meet the standard and then train them to achieve the standard.  My understanding of the recruiting program in the two world wars was that any warm bodies were accepted and then the system knocked them into shape during their basic training - most of which was about deportment, rules and regs and physical conditioning.

With money to invest in training, with increases in discipline and control, is it possible to reduce the standard required of the recruit in order to increase the number of willing recruits that are being accepted?


----------



## Dirt Digger (25 Feb 2006)

CFL said:
			
		

> General Rick Hillier, the chief of defence staff, also wants to make the military more attractive by offering an extra week of leave for soldiers who sign up a new recruit.



Is this per year, or a one shot deal?

If I manage to press-gang 48 young and immpressionable lads into uniform, will I never have to show up for work again?   ;D


----------



## big bad john (25 Feb 2006)

There has been a similar program with one weeks leave per recruit in the UK for a few years now and it has been successful.  It has only operated sporadically though.


----------



## MikeL (25 Feb 2006)

Landed immigrants who have their green card an join the US Army, but they are restricted to what they can do, since they can't get secruity clearances. Serving in the military helps speed up the process to get citizenship(if thats what you want), I believe serving in a combat theatre automatically qualifies you for citizenship aswell.


----------



## chanman (25 Feb 2006)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> Quote,
> _In a bid to boost enrolment in the military, Canada's top soldier is promoting a plan to grant citizenship to landed immigrants who sign up to serve._
> 
> See, its quite apparent that no one up in the towers reads the horror stories of potential recruits, waiting anywhere from one to 4 years for a security check, that adorn our website.
> Just how long would the security check take for a "landed immigrant"?



Citizenship and Immigration Canada's list of how to become a citizen gives a residency requirement of 3 out of the previous 4 years.  If it's taking that long for recruits to get in, a landed immigrant applicant might qualify for citizenship before they get processed http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/citizen/becoming-howto.html


----------



## George Wallace (25 Feb 2006)

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> Without resorting to recruiting criminals and employing the crucifixion (Field Punishment Number 1), the lash and the noose, is it possible to move the balance a little so as to restrict the "liberties" of the Pvt/Cpls that are newly joined and learning their trade and put more control in the hands of their Team and Section Leaders?  Would this make it possible to relax the recruiting standards (not the training standards - training would require more effort with "less qualified" recruits) and increase the numbers being accepted?
> 
> For example on physical fitness, rather than setting a standard and having people cut off because of lack of ability to meet the standard assess people on their potential to meet the standard and then train them to achieve the standard.  My understanding of the recruiting program in the two world wars was that any warm bodies were accepted and then the system knocked them into shape during their basic training - most of which was about deportment, rules and regs and physical conditioning.


As I read this, I muse over the campaign suggestion of creating a Northern Base.  There you would send all these new Recruits that you are suggesting and put them through all their training in an isolated location, for a period of two or three years before sending them back to locations close to 'society' again.  You would be subtly restricting their liberties and leave them not much choice but to concentrate on their 'Training' and Career Development.  

Just an evil thought after reading your post.   ;D


----------



## Donut (25 Feb 2006)

Aren't we always trying to encourage immigrants to settle outside of the big urban centers?  You don't get much better then Iqaluit to satisfy that criteria!

DF


----------



## Bobert (25 Feb 2006)

This is a good idea, though we also have to allow more immigrants into this country. For one thing in five years the first round of baby boomers will be retiring, which will put a heavy burden on the younger generation. Also alot of jobs will be availbe which will put the CF in a greater competion with the private sector. Offcourse, there will be certain things landed immigrants can't do as in the U.S. as a result of security clearences. Such become an Officer, MP, Intelligence etc.


----------



## Kirkhill (25 Feb 2006)

> Just an evil thought after reading your post.



George:  My wandering mind hadn't wandered that far.....but.....


----------



## Love793 (25 Feb 2006)

Speeding up and stream-lining the medical process, would add more recruits than aiding with them gaining their citizenship.  Also, it would probably help a little, if we spent some money on advertising.  Especially on the 'toon side of the house.


----------



## GDawg (25 Feb 2006)

My phone at work is probably going to explode now!
I don't like how this hit the main stream media before I heard anything about it through the either Comm Res HQ or CFRG.
If I hadn't read this here I'd be spending a considerable amount of time telling potential applicants they are crazy or just plain wrong.
I suspect all this will mean for me is another massive batch of stale files waiting eons for PSCQs to clear.


----------



## Rfn (25 Feb 2006)

You know, I think Gen. Hillier was just the kind of shot in the arm the CF needed, someone that isn't afraid to think outside the box and bring the organization into the 21st century.

But I think he may be falling victim to flippant ideas and gimmickry. This sounds like some sort of PR strategy, engineered for public shock effect: 





> I don't like how this hit the main stream media before I heard anything about it through the either Comm Res HQ or CFRG.


CFRC didn't even know until it hit the News! I wonder if thats an indication of how well thought out and researched this was.
Most CF members realize the troop shortfall is due to delays in the recruitment process, fixing this should be a priority rather than making new problems with radical solutions.


----------



## GDawg (26 Feb 2006)

Rfn said:
			
		

> But I think he may be falling victim to flippant ideas and gimmickry. This sounds like some sort of PR strategy, engineered for public shock effect:
> CFRC didn't even know until it hit the News! I wonder if thats an indication of how well thought out and researched this was.



I'm not saying CFRG didn't know, I'm saying this is the first I've heard of it. I'm sure the details will filter through to the rest of us soon enough.


----------



## MdB (26 Feb 2006)

It does not add to the complexity of the recruiting problem. It adds other workable options. It's true enough that landed immigrants will have endless pre-security clearance, which in turn would discourage them from joining. The other option is present in the UK military with 500£ when a recruit is brought up by a military member. It's good and will encourage spreading the word from the CF's basic resource, military people.

Still, it's just sidetrack solutions in my mind.

Strealining the process and putting out there more ads (and more interesting ones) are the bulk of it. This way, people will know better about the Forces and won't be hired by another company because it lagged somewhere/somehow during the recruiting process. If the recruiting personnel would show interest (obvious interest) in recruiting the guy/gal in front of them (I speak for myself only), it'd be rather like a private company who seek the best. Because, after all, the CF are in competition with all companies out there and need as bad as them these candidates.


----------



## Rfn (26 Feb 2006)

Also, isn't there a historical parallel to this? I seem to recall reading somewhere that the Romans adopted a program in which they accepted non-Roman citizens into the army to help fill out the ranks of their legions. Because the life of the legionnaire was tough and was spent mostly on the dangerous frontiers of the Empire, an army career was less and less attractive to citizens and the strength of the legions' were increasingly foreign, usually Germanic tribes.

This worked very good for a while, fewer Romans were burdened with military service, and less advanced tribes living inside and outside the Roman empire secured employment that they were happy to have.

This was one of the factors that eventually led to the end of the empire. When the army started to identify more and more with the strong, brave, noble and clean living barbarian peoples hungrily lurking in the dark forests outside the frontier and less with the decadent, corrupt, effete and soft city-dwelling citizens, the Roman empire was in serious trouble.

If someone is more knowledgable about this, please leave a comment...

Point being, it's sometimes dangerous to get somebody else to fight your battles.


----------



## a_majoor (26 Feb 2006)

If Gen Hillier can apply the same "roto-rooter" to the recruiting bureaucracy as he is doing to the procurement system, then we wouldn't be having this discussion. I speak with the 31 CBG recruiters (especially when they are coming back to the HQ to scrounge needed kit to do recruiting) and their horror stories are just astounding.

I can't imagine the sort of person who will willingly wait so many months or even years to get a job offer, when they could walk around the block near CFRC and probably find 3 or four places hiring right now....


----------



## Armymatters (26 Feb 2006)

From my view, perhaps a Canadian version of the French Foreign Legion? Accept foreigners in a seperate part of the military, and after so many years of service, give them Canadian citizenship? Of course, strong background checks will be required, but it can work. The upper officer corps will consist of Canadians from the regular armed forces, so they will be lead by Canadians, even though the members may not be Canadian citizens.


----------



## warrickdll (26 Feb 2006)

All I see are generic numbers. Anyone seen any specifics about how these numbers break down - even by element? If a lot of numbers are going into hard pressed service trades then perhaps recent immigrants (of those willing to join the CF) would be poorly suited.


----------



## MdB (26 Feb 2006)

Rfn said:
			
		

> This was one of the factors that eventually led to the end of the empire. When the army started to identify more and more with the strong, brave, noble and clean living barbarian peoples hungrily lurking in the dark forests outside the frontier and less with the decadent, corrupt, effete and soft city-dwelling citizens, the Roman empire was in serious trouble.


The problems started when the Senate decided to abolish the conscription/mandatory service in the Roman army. From there onwards, the Romans (hear people) have been more and more disconnected with the army and it's purpose (see links with contemporary situation?). The other thing is that military leadership has been accepted in the Senate, which opposed civil senators with military leaders become senators, the unity was broken. And thereafter, Romans were fighting each others instead of guarding the Empire against extra-Roman Empire ennemies. Kinda lost in the process...

As for the citizenship, it was a privilege to be citizen in the Roman empire: it means that you have not only the right to vote, but also a piece of land that you can live upon. Others had basically no rights and/or were slaves. Thus, when promising citizenship to non-Roman 'national', it meant a piece of land to make a living opposed to be crushed by some legion or years of war/raids.



			
				Rfn said:
			
		

> Point being, it's sometimes dangerous to get somebody else to fight your battles.



Well, immigration policy in Canada is to mitigate the very low birth rate. Otherwise, the population numbers would sink. So, there's people from around the world in Canada, which is an advantage considering we're a trading country that create its wealth from exportations. Now, when you say 'get somebody else to fight your battles', who are you refering to exactly? In my mind, there's no such thing as 'somebody else' in Canada given the fact we count on immigration to keep growing AND that there's already a significant part of Canada that recently (hear past 20-40 years) came to Canada. I don't remember the percentage of the population, but it's something like 20-25%. So, it's just a matter of time before these immigrants enter the Parliament and really start to be represented politically and in public/media life. Another thing not to forget, ever since Upper Canada and Lower Canada (and even before that), Canada has always accepted people around the world and from 1850 onwards been actually composed from people from around the world. Umm, no such thing as 'somebody else' here.

Get somebody else would be other allies for example (US, UK, etc.). THAT would be a major threat to Canada's sovereignty much more than accepting people in our armed forces. Anyway, they refer themselves as Canadians too.

Now, that's not a reason to throw anybody in. As it has been said, limited access/responsability would be really effective. As I see it, candidates should be able to enter the CF even if the pre-security clearance isn't already finished. They would have only limited access to informations. As an example, I don't think the basic training contains such sensitive informations to have them already cleared. It would be a ladder progression in clearance/responsability/position. Now, yeah you can say that could be a waste of resources, but still I think we would have the person already in in the case the person is cleared and wouldn't lose it to another company/to waiting boredom.


----------



## Bobert (26 Feb 2006)

MdB said:
			
		

> The problems started when the Senate decided to abolish the conscription/mandatory service in the Roman army. From there onwards, the Romans (hear people) have been more and more disconnected with the army and it's purpose (see links with contemporary situation?). The other thing is that military leadership has been accepted in the Senate, which opposed civil senators with military leaders become senators, the unity was broken. And thereafter, Romans were fighting each others instead of guarding the Empire against extra-Roman Empire enemies. Kinda lost in the process...
> 
> As for the citizenship, it was a privilege to be citizen in the Roman empire: it means that you have not only the right to vote, but also a piece of land that you can live upon. Others had basically no rights and/or were slaves. Thus, when promising citizenship to non-Roman 'national', it meant a piece of land to make a living opposed to be crushed by some legion or years of war/raids.
> 
> Well, immigration policy in Canada is to mitigate the very low birth rate. Otherwise, the population numbers would sink. So, there's people from around the world in Canada, which is an advantage considering we're a trading country that create its wealth from exportations. Now, when you say 'get somebody else to fight your battles', who are you refering to exactly? In my mind, there's no such thing as 'somebody else' in Canada given the fact we count on immigration to keep growing AND that there's already a significant part of Canada that recently (hear past 20-40 years) came to Canada. I don't remember the percentage of the population, but it's something like 20-25%. So, it's just a matter of time before these immigrants enter the Parliament and really start to be represented politically and in public/media life. Another thing not to forget, ever since Upper Canada and Lower Canada (and even before that), Canada has always accepted people around the world and from 1850 onwards been actually composed from people from around the world. Umm, no such thing as 'somebody else' here.



That is 100% accurate. You make a valid point. As far as foreigners in military service in histroy goes, all empires that lasted for a long time did. Britain did with the Gurkha's, France with the French Foreign Legion, Alexander the Great did, even the Mongols who used Korean soldiers in the two failed invasions of Japan, and Ottoman Turks with Janissary's. As stated before earlier the U.S.A. are doing it again. (This was done during the Civil War with immigrants mainly from Ireland coming to escape the potato famine) Though the idea of putting foreigner's in a single unit(s) similar to the French Foreign Legion will with Officer who are citizens might not work for Canada, since it seems to exclude people and throughout it's history the French Foreign Legion have always been put in suicidal situations. I know we can't compare Canada to the Empires listed above, however as the States we are a nation of immigrants.


----------



## warrickdll (26 Feb 2006)

The problem with examples of the FFR or immigrants in the US civil war, are that they only really speak to shortages of mainly bayonet and saber roles, while these are probably not where the current shortages are. And *if* the expansion does increase the number of bayonets and sabers, is there really any expected shortfalls in citizen recruits?

In order to immigrate to Canada you need to achieve a certain point score based on such items as education, language, etc. The recent immigrants I work with (or my family members for that matter) were not sitting around overseas somewhere flipping through CF recruiting brochures and then decided to make the move. Educated landed immigrants in Canada came here to live and work as civilians (as most Canadians do), and do not find the 3 year wait for citizenship arduous. I see no incentive for most of them.

That leaves a few categories open though:

1)	Landed immigrants with lower educations (who might possibly have fewer job opportunities).
2)	Landed immigrants with unrecognized educational qualifications (who might possibly have fewer job opportunities, especially in the fields they were formerly employed in).
3)	Questionable refugee claimants (who might possibly have fewer job opportunities, and may not ever achieve landed immigrant status).

Looking at each:

1)	Landed immigrants with lower educations would be less useful in the technical fields we are most lacking in. We would be better off with promises of civilian certification and/or apprenticing for Canadian Youth.
2)	Landed immigrants with unrecognized educational qualifications are probably the best bets, but we may not have enough people with Canadian qualification to monitor and recertify them?
3)	Questionable refugee claimants… Well that’s just a bad, bad, bad idea.

The French have some - less than ideal - posting assignments that they won't assign conscripts, and the US has real numbers problems when it comes to recruiting (that they continuously must meet). I wonder if the CDS was just thinking out loud when this was put out there. Maybe he doesn't actually think there will be a problem but is just prepping everyone in case one develops (beyond not having enough funds for recruiting and training).


----------



## M Feetham (26 Feb 2006)

What worries me most about bringing in immigrants is the language barrier, already we are a country somewhat divided by language ( french/english) what happens when more and more immigrants start joining the forces. Some immigrants never learn english or french, how are instructors supposed to teach. Are we going to instill rules like the FFL that state that all commands and orders will be in one or the other of the official languages( FFL only work in french, all applicants must learn or take one in the teeth). Yeah that will fly.( in case you missed it, LOADS of sarcasm in the last statement). Just my thoughts, if any one has anything to add please do.
Thanks Marc


----------



## chanman (26 Feb 2006)

> 1)   Landed immigrants with lower educations would be less useful in the technical fields we are most lacking in. We would be better off with promises of civilian certification and/or apprenticing for Canadian Youth.
> 2)   Landed immigrants with unrecognized educational qualifications are probably the best bets, but we may not have enough people with Canadian qualification to monitor and recertify them?
> 3)   Questionable refugee claimants… Well that’s just a bad, bad, bad idea.



2) - one of my neighbours is a dentist from Taiwan - took him about a decade to get his credentials recognized.  It seems like people in the point 2 section would already have spent years getting their quals/getting here, and might not be too eager to sign up for a few more years.

Perhaps you could make enlistment worth x amount of points in the point system so that service time would allow them to get in when they otherwise could not?


----------



## warrickdll (26 Feb 2006)

It’s a nice idea, however, you be may be surprised by how poorly other nations feel about another nation actively doing military recruiting in theirs.


----------



## Bobbyoreo (26 Feb 2006)

Yea..you can post them to all the nice bases miles away from anything good. Shilo..Petawawa..Dundurn...lol...Id feel for them!!!


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (26 Feb 2006)

does that mean I get to leave xxx?


----------



## MountainRunner (26 Feb 2006)

Want to boost enrolment?
Perhaps we should reconsider mandatory military service (as in Switzerland). http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Conscription

"Switzerland has the largest militia army in the world (220,000 including reserves). Military service for Swiss men is obligatory according to the Federal Constitution, and includes 17 weeks of basic training as well as annual 3-week-refresher courses until a number of service days which increases with rank (260 days for privates) is reached. Service for women is voluntary, but identical in all respects. Conscientious objectors can choose 450 days of community service instead of military service. "

Imagine this scenario: kids graduate from highschool.  They join for 1 - 2 years.  In return, they are given the opportunity to go to university or technical college for free. 

*Benefits: * 
1. A more highly _educated and trained civilian population _ that has an understanding and _appreciation of the role of the military and service _ to country.
2. Manpower -_ "For a small country, the only way to raise a sizable army is to put every able-bodied man under arms. This is how Switzerland managed to stay independent despite repeated attacks throughout history." _  http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Conscription


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (26 Feb 2006)

Yeah conscription would really put a positive light on the CF. :


----------



## R031button (26 Feb 2006)

Iterator said:
			
		

> 1)	Landed immigrants with lower educations would be less useful in the technical fields we are most lacking in. We would be better off with promises of civilian certification and/or apprenticing for Canadian Youth.
> 2)	Landed immigrants with unrecognized educational qualifications are probably the best bets, but we may not have enough people with Canadian qualification to monitor and re certify them?
> 3)	Questionable refugee claimants… Well that’s just a bad, bad, bad idea.



 I definitely agree with all of these, especially point 1, which links well with point 2. The Canadian Forces needs to be able to accredit it's own technical and medical specialists in order to recruit them. If I'm a respiratory therapist, or some other highly trained medical technologist, I have a damned good civilian career out look, making 60-80,000 a year, and being able to live in some of the best cities in the world, or at least in Canada. If the Forces wants to try and attract these professions, they need to have a benefit, a draw, and something more then just serving your country, your helping your fellow man by just doing your job for those people. The most obvious, and beneficial in my mind, is a system or apprenticeship and certification for medical and technical specialists done through the military. This would build interest in the opportunities available through the military and therefore increase the amount of recruits we have, especially in the CSS department.


----------



## Armymatters (27 Feb 2006)

R031button said:
			
		

> I definitely agree with all of these, especially point 1, which links well with point 2. The Canadian Forces needs to be able to accredit it's own technical and medical specialists in order to recruit them. If I'm a respiratory therapist, or some other highly trained medical technologist, I have a damned good civilian career out look, making 60-80,000 a year, and being able to live in some of the best cities in the world, or at least in Canada. If the Forces wants to try and attract these professions, they need to have a benefit, a draw, and something more then just serving your country, your helping your fellow man by just doing your job for those people. The most obvious, and beneficial in my mind, is a system or apprenticeship and certification for medical and technical specialists done through the military. This would build interest in the opportunities available through the military and therefore increase the amount of recruits we have, especially in the CSS department.



There is something similar for dentistry I remember... I think was that current dentistry students in university can join the CF in an apprenticeship, and have their education paided by the CF. You then have to obviously be a member of the CF for a certain amount of time before you are allowed to leave.


----------



## yoman (27 Feb 2006)

Armymatters said:
			
		

> There is something similar for dentistry I remember... I think was that current dentistry students in university can join the CF in an apprenticeship, and have their education paided by the CF. You then have to obviously be a member of the CF for a certain amount of time before you are allowed to leave.



http://www.recruiting.forces.ca/engraph/enrollment/index_e.aspx?id=6


----------



## MdB (1 Mar 2006)

Here's an interesting article from the CBC Viewpoint section.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/viewpoint/vp_robertson/20060228.html


> *VICKI ROBERTSON:Making a difference*
> CBC News Viewpoint | Feb. 28, 2006
> 
> _Vicki Robertson grew up in the Halifax area, with close ties to the military. After traveling for many years, Vicki and her husband Alan settled in Bedford, Nova Scotia. While working full-time in the IT industry, she satisfies her curiosity about life and her love of education by attending Mt. Saint Vincent University as a part-time student._
> ...



The men and women of the CF are truly the brand of our armed forces. Making a difference should be the main drive of any recruiting campaign.

Many who join the military tought about it since their tender youth. Now for those who hadn't and feel like to promote our values and make a difference where it counts, I think a campaign could stir something up IF they have a glance at the possibilities the CF have to offer.

Misinformation, uninformation, myths are our enemies. The CF have a long way to go to renew his relationship with Canadians.

This testimony is one option and a great one.


----------



## MountainRunner (1 Mar 2006)

Michel, excellent article.  Thanks for posting it.


----------



## Koenigsegg (1 Mar 2006)

Very Good article.
Something I picked up on while reading it:
"selfless, dedicated and strong. "
That wouldn't be too bad for a slogan, eh?


----------



## MountainRunner (1 Mar 2006)

"Selfless, dedicated, and strong."  That's good!

I can't get this article out of my head.  I was thinking about it while doing a weight workout.  

Isn't it interesting that the American pitch is egocentric - "Be all that you can be" while the Canadian pitch - "Duty with honour," appeals to a military ethos - a belief system somewhat removed from most of the civilian population.

Perhaps that is the disconnect for our youth.  They need the direct sell.  ie. How does this benefit ME?
Although I prefer appealing to people's higher natures, maybe it just doesn't grab their imagination.


----------



## Koenigsegg (1 Mar 2006)

I noticed that too, The Americans seem to need a lot of incentives to join.  Such as a very well publicized subsidized education.  That is one reason the US Army seems a little "newbish" in Iraq in my opinion.  They have a lot of young guys and girls who only joined for money for college.  So says an "American History" teacher( he used to be in the Navy, a little soggy around the midsection now though...), when he said that, I thought, "well, that would make sense".  
Every friggen commercial the US Army has out now revolves around getting a further education, or joining the Army to something other than to Fight (are they trying to hide the main theme, and history of the military?).
However, here in Canada the forces are not advertised too much, and the first I read about the subsidized education was on the Forces website.  Canada is more professional because people join to serve Canada a profession, not themselves. Same with the Brits.
I greatly prefer the "Duty with honour" approach, Maybe it is because I prefer to serve, benefit others, and do something.  I feel that our slogan evokes more pride, and in some cases emotion.
I'm 16, so I know I am not as knowledgeable in the military arena as many of the people on this site, But I do not want to join the CF only for myself, I want to serve.  Of course a subsidized education is good, and I could make use of it, but it is not my primary source of draw to the Forces.
I have wanted to join since I was knee high to a grasshopper, but unlike some kids it was not because I wanted to have a gun and shoot people, for me it is almost an indescribable thing.  I have a hunch there are several people here who feel the same thing.

Anyway, back to the topic... I would love to see more enrolments, and more advertising, But that may require more people joining now to dignify putting more money into the system.  But then again, with out advertising, we are missing quite a few opportunities...Hmmmm... A possible dilemma, no?
Take a pro-active stance and risk it, or wait for a opportunity and probably risk even more.  I choose Pro-Active.
Hows aboot Operation PEEP (Pro-active Enrolment Encouraging Program)?


----------



## SigOpDraco (9 Mar 2006)

MountainRunner said:
			
		

> Isn't it interesting that the American pitch is egocentric - "Be all that you can be" while the Canadian pitch - "Duty with honour," appeals to a military ethos - a belief system somewhat removed from most of the civilian population.
> 
> Perhaps that is the disconnect for our youth.  They need the direct sell.  ie. How does this benefit ME?
> Although I prefer appealing to people's higher natures, maybe it just doesn't grab their imagination.



I told my co-workers in Wendy's, many of whome are actually adults, that I was joining the army. Their first reacions was "The American?"

When I say know they let out a sort of pathetic chuckle and sense of disbelief. 

Not particularly an uplifting story, but I think this underlines the problem with alot of people. I just signed up for the CF, and only have to wait for my phonecall now to start BMQ. Most of my life was talking to my family(including relatives) about what they did in the CF through the ages. There are a few things I might understand more and know more about that many of my co workers and other people on the street just don't get. The commitment just seems lost on them, and many don't have any idea as to how many things the CF does. When you say army, most people will probobly think of the 'grunt in mud'; meaning the poor soul being stitched in those "realistic" movies. (Then again, digging into this crummy little town for any sign of knowledge or common sense is lost.)

I'm not going to lie, alot of people I talk to think the Canadian army is non-existent. What dosn't help is the lack of advertising. While I've seen more updated commercials and more ads running, they're not as common or as edgy as the American ads that sometimes falls into the cable channels. 

While I agree, "Duty with Honour" is a great approach, it's not really selling to alot of would-be service members. While it's not exactly the best source of bodies, teenagers need to be impressed and then given the idea that the military will jump-start their career towards a more profitable future. The commercials now do that, but at the same time they fall short on presentation. If the CF needs to increase the number of recruits and servicemen, then a more aggressive stance on marketing and advertising I believe is needed. I see ads in the newspaper, but I don't know many teens or even adults that bother reading into many newspapers past the front page. 

We could always do what the Americans do: Have two recruiters patrolling the town, cornering people and nearly manipulating them into joining. Heck, they even have exercises and 'show-and-tell' in the schools. My brother was pushed into giving a marine recruiter his name and phone number; and almost as soon as he got home the guy was trying to shove him into marine training. 

"Good to go" was the line I remember hearing alot from that particular individual, especially when he thought I was my brother on the phone in one particualer evening.

Look,
I'm not going to go say that I understand and that I know what the true meaning behind being a CF member is; seeing as that I'm just waiting for a BMQ call. Just that, from the experience handed down from my family has allowed me a more 'pro' look into our military that alot of other people in my position don't have. Again, when I say military alot of people I know have silly images painted in their heads about what the job requires. Many don't realize the benefits in being a member and that there are literally 100's of jobs from pecker-checkers to bin-rats. 

Ignorance seems to be the basic enemy of the CF. A lot of people can identify an american soldier right away, and see them a lot more on TV than Canadians. In any case, I think a more proactive advertisement campaign and a more aggressive image might help shake a few unwanted myths and also grab the attention of youngsters. While I'm sure quite a few of my fellow 18-20 year olds are looking for a good education, a lot are still kids at heart and will yell out "Holy sh**, that's cool!" when they see some of the stuff that the CF does. 

Might not be as well funded as the Americans; but I still think the CF is a good career option that I'm proud of signing up into. With a bit of advertising, some flag waving, and maybe a harder push into the younger generations might fill up the ranks that the DND is looking for. Sure, many teenagers today have that long rebellious streak that even I dislike, any sort of discipline by the military might set them straight and I'm sure quite a few would make good servicemen.


----------



## Caleix (9 Mar 2006)

Just remember, those co-workers at your current job.....their "Civilians", your joining the forces, doing something for your country, that makes you a citizen  .....just how i see it. I think someone had actually brought this up a while back, its from the book (NOT THE MOVIE) star ship troopers....its worth the read.

Caleix


----------



## jc5778 (9 Mar 2006)

CFL said:
			
		

> does that mean I get to leave Shilo?



Nah, I'm pretty sure you love it there!  With all that snow and cold and.........flatness............who wouldn't love it there  ;D


----------



## orange.paint (9 Mar 2006)

In my opinion allowing immigrants into the CF is great...but (theres always a but) as it was alluded to earlier security checks.My wife was in the CF regular force for four years.Her parents are immigrants from wales who came over on a Russian boat and landed in Montreal.Her security clearance was a nightmare taking over nine months.Also she had family living in weird exotic locations which they actually check up on.Now even though her family were immigrants they were part of the commonwealth, imagine how long it would take for someone outside of the commonwealth to get in.

Her father actually joined the reserve force as a landed immigrant got his citizenship and entered the regs shortly after,so is this really something new? (1975)

And as for mandatory service I don't believe it would work in this society.Kids today are smarter,lazier and fatter than ever.Imagine the starbuck hippies in a uniform!If they would get rid of human rights for the military maybe it would work,but with the lack of discipline in our CF you would have a bunch of conscripts bitching and or in club ED.

If they want to get people in make it easy,walk in sign up do testing that day,then your called after a expedited security check.
Run courses back to back.There are poor troops on PAT platoon for some trades with their hooks.I'm not sure if thats a new thing but I know I did basic then battle school with a one week break in between for Xmas.

MAKE IT WORTH WHILE TO REMAIN! We lose so much knowledge and really good troops every year because they are bored with the job.Put money into our training,make it realistic.Ive seen many reserve exercises with simunition drama students as op-for etc,expand that into EVERY exercise reg and res.Some of the best soldiers I've ever worked with are now out and doing well on civi side because they got sick of the bullshit.

I see no problem with the language barrier with immigrants entering the army.Plus as a  added bonus a section also has an interpeter for different languages as we work on the multinational level.Plus he can always tell you if your interpeter is not saying what your telling him.

If they have any ties to ANY terrorist organisations or ever have or their family has or had it should be a stop drop on them getting in. Remember the Afghani who grenaded his own section in their sleep?


----------



## RangerRay (9 Mar 2006)

IIRC, the UK accepts citizens from any Commonwealth country and New Zealand accepts anyone with military experience from the UK, US, Australia and Canada.  We should look at something similar...maybe accepting applicants from the US, UK, Australia and New Zealand?


----------



## Pencil Tech (9 Mar 2006)

RangerRay said:
			
		

> IIRC, the UK accepts citizens from any Commonwealth country and New Zealand accepts anyone with military experience from the UK, US, Australia and Canada.  We should look at something similar...maybe accepting applicants from the US, UK, Australia and New Zealand?



That's a great idea and would take a bit of the strain off the training training aspect of recruitment.


----------

