# recruitment ages and mandatory retirement



## marlene (7 Dec 2004)

I'm continually confused as to why the military (and not just the Canadian military) appear to favour such young people joining. Those over the age of 25 (and even older still) generally have far better judgment and clearer goals then young people. Does the military prefer people without good judgment?????!!!! I suppose it is easier to "mold" younger people, however, on the plus side, those older certainly have a better idea (I would think) of: a) what they are getting into; and b) the need for discipline thereby perhaps making them less rebellious of all the authority? 

Merlane


----------



## Infanteer (7 Dec 2004)

merlane said:
			
		

> I'm continually confused as to why the military (and not just the Canadian military) appear to favour such young people joining.



My guess would be to allow the most time to get the "use" out of a person.   If the military is going to invest millions in training, equipping, and sustaining a soldier, it wants to get the most it can out of them.   Recruiting a 45 year old who quits after 5 years is not conducive to a good return on one's investment.



> Those over the age of 25 (and even older still) generally have far better judgment and clearer goals then young people.



That's a pretty broad assumption, isn't it?   I've seen plenty of idiots in their mid-thirties.



> Does the military prefer people without good judgment?????!!!!



I don't see how judgement is correlated with age.   Judgement can be correlated to experience (which is often directly related to age), but this is something to be looked at on a case-by-case basis.



> I suppose it is easier to "mold" younger people,


 
You're probably right.   Gwynn Dyer argues this in his book "War".   Youth are easier swayed by the notions of indoctrination and are easier to "tear down and build up" during the basic training phase.



> however, on the plus side, those older certainly have a better idea (I would think) of: a) what they are getting into; and b) the need for discipline thereby perhaps making them less rebellious of all the authority?



I would argue the opposite.   An older person is more likely to have "been-around-the-block" in the real world.   Often, most recruits have never been independent - they move from depending on their parents to depending on the Army.   As such, it can be harder to convince an older person, who's testosterone levels don't flow like a 20 year old and who has some real world experience with the notion of actions and consequences, to do some of the stupid soldiers are asked to do.

"You want me to jump out of the plane and charge that machine gun bunker?!?"


----------



## Storm (7 Dec 2004)

The CF takes a whole range of ages. I think that the main reason most people joining are younger is because they don't have a career and life established yet, so it isn't as big of a leap. Also, a lot of older people think about the physical side and say "my body just can't do that stuff anymore." 

As Infanteer said though, you can get more time out of a younger recruit (assuming you work on retention issues to have them want to stay in). This means you can take a green 18 year old and turn them into an effective and mature soldier by their early 20's. If you have someone who's 35, then even if it only takes one year (vs. the few for someone younger) to get them up to speed, you still end up with 10 years less potential "effective" service than the younger recruit. I can understand why recruiting would be geared to younger people in light of this, but I haven't heard of any case where a recruiter told someone in their 30's "you're too old," so I don't see the favouritism.


----------



## Inch (7 Dec 2004)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> "You want me to jump out of the plane and charge that machine gun bunker?!?"



Infanteer, I think you got it bang on there. It's been said that war is a young man's (person's) game, I think they're the only ones with enough piss and vinegar to do as you said, "the stupid stuff" that's sometimes required in war.

You know what the cutoff is for USN pilots? 26. I don't think we favour the younger people all that much since I went through flight school with a 44 year old.


----------



## Edward Campbell (7 Dec 2004)

merlane said:
			
		

> I'm continually confused as to why the military (and not just the Canadian military) appear to favour such young people joining. Those over the age of 25 (and even older still) generally have far better judgment and clearer goals then young people. Does the military prefer people without good judgment?????!!!! I suppose it is easier to "mold" younger people, however, on the plus side, those older certainly have a better idea (I would think) of: a) what they are getting into; and b) the need for discipline thereby perhaps making them less rebellious of all the authority?
> 
> Merlane



See J.F.C. Fuller;s _*Generalship: Its Diseases and Their Cure*_ at: http://www-cgsc.army.mil/carl/resources/csi/Fuller/Fuller.asp

There is some debate re: just how far into his cheek Fuller may have buried his tongue; not too far, I think; he was, throughout his long and distinguished military and academic careers, worried about the weaknesses of the elderly - the 40_ish_ and up folks ...


----------



## mdh (8 Dec 2004)

There's no doubt that the CF is facing some serious demographic challenges.  Here is a recent article from the Maple Leaf that touches on the subject.

Older recruits attracted by career opportunities
Published by Cheryl deLaplante 6/14/2004

Brendan Neil was working as a civilian criminal defence lawyer in Vancouver when his five-year-old daughter asked him what he did for a living. It was a question that caused him some discomfort.  «I had become more and more uncomfortable with the fact that my job was basically getting criminals back on the street » said Mr. Neil. Both of his grandfathers were in the Air Force, and he began to think about applying to the CF to become a military lawyer. Currently in Saint-Jean, Que., on language training, Capt Neil brings 35 years of work and life experience to the CF. He played junior hockey for six years, owned a personal fitness business, and opened a criminal law practice straight out of law school. 

Job security and the prospect of more family time were the main reasons Capt Neil was attracted to the CF.  «For that security, my wife and I were willing to give up some autonomy » he says.  «I had quite a good law practice going, but I was working 17-18 hours a day. Basically we were looking for more family time. People in the Forces look at me like I'm crazy when I say I get more family time now, but I do » He was also looking for a challenge. A former Ironman competitor, he called his wife during basic training to say it was the hardest thing he had ever done. Although he says he wishes he had joined earlier, Capt Neil is still planning on serving 20 years in the CF.  «You take a cut in pay, but you make up for it in terms of quality of life » Both grandfathers are thrilled at his decision.  «The only thing they are upset about is that I'm in a green uniform instead of a blue one » he says. 

A Growing Trend 

Capt Neil is part of a trend. Although 85 percent of new recruits to the CF are 30 or under, individuals in their 30s, 40s and even 50s are increasingly looking to the CF for a military career. It is a trend noticed by the front-line staff at CF recruiting centres across the country. Between 1991 and 1996, the average age of new recruits was 21 years. In 2003, an increase in recruits over the age of 30 caused the average age to rise to almost 25. 

According to Lieutenant-Colonel Mike Zuwerkalow of the Canadian Forces Recruiting Group, there are many factors contributing to the increase in age of new enrolments.  «One factor is plainly the awareness that we are hiring, that we have more than 100 occupations, and that we hire people qualified for positions based on merit, not age » Signing bonuses for qualified people in certain occupations, both officer and non-commissioned members, are attracting people that already have a professional qualification and work experience. 

Another factor is a shift in the demographics of society.  «People now expect to have many jobs during their career. As well, people with more experience in the job market understand the benefits of job security and opportunities for advancement. In contrast, the younger generation are often intimidated by commitments of more than three or five years » said LCol Zuwerkalow. Older recruits see the CF as a long term employer.  «These are people who set objectives for themselves and are in control of their lives. They want enriching jobs with opportunities for personal development and advancement » If the proposal to extend the maximum age of service for the Regular Force and Primary Reserves from 55 to 60 years of age goes ahead, an individual joining the CF at 40 can serve 20 years before retirement. Military support for families valued For Capt Neil and many others, the support systems in place for families are a big attraction to joining the CF. 

Avionics technician in-training Private Debbie Bessette, 42, joined the CF in 2000 for the stability it offered her and her children. Growing up in a military family and having a CF member as an ex-spouse, she was well prepared for military life. Trained as a chemical engineering technologist at Loyalist College in Belleville, she moved to Alberta in search of work after her marriage ended. She worked in a series of contract positions, but found life as a contract worker unstable for a single mother with two children. To Pte Bessette, benefits include the built-in motivation to keep physically fit and the recreational facilities and programs for families.  «If I hadn't had the experience I did working as a civilian, I wouldn't appreciate what the CF has to offer as much »  «It's a lifestyle I enjoyed growing up. I'd recommend it to anyone » said Pte Bessette.
Maple Leaf, 21 April 2004


----------



## ab136 (8 Dec 2004)

mdh...how was basic training in your 40's.  I'm making that assumption from your profile.


----------



## mdh (8 Dec 2004)

Hi Ab136,

I don't know yet. I'm slated to do the weekend basic beginning mid-January followed by CAP-R in the summer.  My main preoccupation right now is to get myself fit.  I'm hardly a pioneeer though there are a few guys who have done it in their late 30s and 40s and have pulled their weight.  This is also going to be a repeat since I did basic years ago as an armoured soldier - albeit before recorded time  . If you need any info don't hesistate to PM me, cheers, mdh


----------



## Michael Dorosh (8 Dec 2004)

Gwynne Dyer's statement, which I liked, was that you can get "older" recruits to endure the same privations in basic training as teenagers, but you will have a much harder time convincing them that they like it.  

I think it sums it up nicely.


----------



## ab136 (8 Dec 2004)

;D Nice! ;D


----------



## marlene (8 Dec 2004)

I imagine that Gwynne Dyer's comments hold true for most "older" recruits but there's always exceptions - same as there are exceptions with regard to my comments on younger people. Indeed - I know 20 year olds with better judgment than 50 year olds. As for me personally - I am in my 40's and have applied - still need to do my medical but all else is done. If I get in - it may sound ridiculous but I'm looking forward to basic training. I've been told by friends that are already in that I'll be pushed but have also been told by these same friends -  likely not much more then they've watched me push myself. Possibly I'm just the odd man out.

merlane


----------



## Infanteer (8 Dec 2004)

Despite the fact that we rode him hard on another thread, I liked Gwynne Dyer's chapter entitled "Anybody's Son Will Do".  It is an excellent sociological look at basic training and the military as a total institution.

Sure, ol' Gwynne may try do his best to paint the social/psychological mechanisms of the military as "politically incorrect" or "barbaric" but they work, and they ensure that we are able sleep peacefully in our beds at night.



> I imagine that Gwynne Dyer's comments hold true for most "older" recruits but there's always exceptions - same as there are exceptions with regard to my comments on younger people.



Sure, there is always exceptions - but for the large part the military cannot build and sustain an institution of thousands of people on exceptions - it has to stick to the norms.  Although happy to take those who are (positive) exceptions, the Army must stick to the center of the bell curve.


----------



## ramy (8 Dec 2004)

merlane said:
			
		

> I'm continually confused as to why the military (and not just the Canadian military) appear to favour such young people joining. Those over the age of 25 (and even older still) generally have far better judgment and clearer goals then young people. Does the military prefer people without good judgment?????!!!! I suppose it is easier to "mold" younger people, however, on the plus side, those older certainly have a better idea (I would think) of: a) what they are getting into; and b) the need for discipline thereby perhaps making them less rebellious of all the authority?
> 
> Merlane



Also, when you are in your 20s for example you are probably in the best shape of your life.


----------



## Infanteer (8 Dec 2004)

Actually, if you look at the US Army Physical Fitness tests, the "hardest" scoring level is for 29 year old males.


----------



## mdh (8 Dec 2004)

This may sound paradoxical coming from an older guy, but I think that it's pretty much indisputable that younger recruits make better material for soldiers - especially from a physical standpoint.   But I do think we need to make some distinction between the Combat Arms and other elements in the CF. Sailors and airmen don't have the same physical demands placed on them since a lot of their MOCs are technical in nature (there are some exceptions of course so please don't see this as a inter-service flame thrower contest).

So I don't see any issue with older recruits in the navy and airforce unless they happen to be very expensive training MOCs (pilot being the obvious one) where the investment requires a significant payback in time served. In the Combat Arms I think the older recruit is almost invariably the exception to the rule - at least in the regular force. In contrast, I think the reserves are an excellent place for older recruits to make a contribution and reserve forces have traditionally been repositories for older military demographics.

Overall though I don't think it's a pressing issue - the number of guys want to sign up in their late 30s and 40s ( a very self-selecting group) is probably too small to be a factor in future recruiting efforts. Which is why the CF will continue to have a major challenge ahead in fighting the war for talent as its traditional target demographic continues to shrink.


----------



## Edward Campbell (8 Dec 2004)

This is, certainly, a wee tiny bit off topic but, in the spirit of debunking myths like 50 years olds are, somehow, smarter than twenty _somethings_ or 20 years olds are more fit that thirty _somethings_, look at this which I dragged off the BBC's web site:



> Sniffing out bomb danger
> 
> Lance Corporal Jenny Chester, 19, and her dog Bonnie are leading the Black Watch's defence against suicide bombers.
> 
> ...



The item, on the BBC's web site, has photos of a cute young girl, er lance jack, and her dog and a fit looking young, albeit peg legged, corporal.   I, personally, do not advocate either young women or young cripples in F echelon, but ...


----------

