# Report:  CF Hard Pressed to Recruit 8K



## The Bread Guy (25 Sep 2005)

http://www.recorder.ca/cp/National/050925/n092571A.html

*Military recruitment targets almost impossible to meet, says paper * 
STEPHEN THORNE

OTTAWA (CP) - The Canadian military will be hard-pressed to raise anywhere near the 8,000 additional recruits it hopes to attract over the next five years, says an analysis conducted for Queen's University. 

Defence will have to bring nearly half again that many people into their recruiting centres in the next five years and hope enough are qualified to match the targets set by the federal government last year, says the paper. 

The estimates don't take into account expected attrition in an aging military where net growth has been between 150 and 300 people annually, writes Christopher Ankersen, an Ottawa-based security and defence expert. 

And, regardless of admirable money commitments from Ottawa, any rise in the number of recruits will further stress or overwhelm an already-understaffed training cadre and possibly affect operational capability, Ankersen says. 

"Rapid expansion poses a significant challenge to the Canadian Forces," he writes. "The current personnel situation is not healthy (and) 8,000 new personnel is a very ambitious goal. 

"The Canadian population cannot easily support increased recruiting on such a scale and the existing human resource system is not prepared for such expansion." 

But the head of recruiting for the Canadian Forces says some of Ankersen's premises were wrong and some of the information he used was dated. 

For example, Col. Kevin Cotten said, the military has not been authorized to grow for years and therefore exceeded its mandate by expanding at the nominal rate of between 150 and 300 a year. 

In 2003-04, the Forces only enrolled 60 per cent of all the people it processed as applicants and who qualified for service, he added. 

"We know we can deliver," Cotten said in an interview. "We get high-quality people in numbers that exceed our needs. We've turned away thousands of people in recent years because we don't have jobs to give them." 

The chief of defence staff, Gen. Rick Hillier, has declared that recruiting is his No. 1 priority. 

The federal government has committed more than $3 billion to expand the regular force by 5,000 personnel and the reserves by 3,000 within five years as part of a long-range overhaul of the country's beleaguered military. 

The Forces currently have about 52,700 so-called trained, effective - deployable - soldiers. Last April's defence policy statement aims to have enough to indefinitely maintain at least two full-scale overseas operations. 

Ankersen says years of budget cuts and eroding resources have posed enough challenges without the additional task of convincing significantly more people to consider the military as a career option. 

There are handicaps permanently built into the system. Only about one in six who express an interest in joining the military actually make the grade, Ankersen asserts. 

Cotten says that ratio is closer to two in five among full-scale applicants and one in 10 among so-called "contacts" - people who talk to military recruiters by phone, face-to-face or via e-mail. 

Nevertheless, contends Ankersen, with shortfalls across key trades and among critical demographics, the military would need 48,000 additional people to seek employment in the next five years to even hope to meet targets. 

That's on top of 20,000 that Ankersen says already visit recruitment centres each year. 

"This amounts to expecting a 38 per cent increase in annual traffic through the recruiting centres - a tall order indeed," Ankersen writes. 

"This tall order is even more daunting if one considers the preferences of the potential pool of recruits - that is, the Canadian public." 

While the Forces are perceived favourably by Canadians, relatively few supporters are of an appropriate age or favour them enough to join, he points out. 

Furthermore, defence needs specialized trades that require training and expertise. There are not a lot of options available, Ankersen says. 

"It is distressing to see just how small that pool is," he writes. 

"No more than one out of every eight Canadians between 15 and 39 years old is even 'somewhat interested' in making the military a career of choice." 

This year alone, National Defence is spending $7.7 million on advertising and other promotional programs. But studies suggest advertising's effects are minimal. 

The lack of support and promotional failures make it unlikely that the military can get 48,000 more people into its recruitment centres in the next five years, Ankersen writes. 

He estimates that a modest goal of increasing the trained effective strength to 54,500 is not achievable before sometime in 2012. 

Cotten says it is. 

He said 24,000 people have been coming through military recruiting centres annually in recent years, not 20,000. 

And far exceeding 48,000, he said he wants his staff to reach 100,000 people over the next five years - in classrooms, at job fairs and in recruiting centres. 

Defence is bracing for an exodus of experienced soldiers in the next few years that will boost attrition from its recent annual average of six per cent.


----------



## JasonH (25 Sep 2005)

Not suprising, and the sad thing is there's plenty to blame.

The Government, the DOD.. ugh, sad.  :-\


----------



## Pte_Martin (25 Sep 2005)

i find it great how they want to hire so many soldiers but then to transfer from res infantry to reg force it takes so long


----------



## atticus (25 Sep 2005)

So does this mean that with recruiting quotas not being filled and the recruters having trouble finding good aplicants that the quality of the average recruit is going to go down?


----------



## blacktriangle (25 Sep 2005)

Well I've already talked to a recruiter from a reserve unit in toronto. 

He was very helpful and I told him that I was 100% sure about joining the unit. He then went through a checklist of requirements...

I had intended to hand in an application once I turn 16 (january), but apparently, I have to get my grade ten finished before I can submit it. Sadly, that means I will miss the summer course this year. (school doesn't end until june) I am still going ahead with it, and hope to get onto a CO-OP at the start of 2007...    :blotto:


My point is, You would think that they could of let me join without my credits. I would have had them before training would have started anyways..but rules are rules..

The scary part for me is, I haven't even had a chance to have my files lost, course cancelled etc...

Though as the recruiter said, the CF isn't going anywhere (praying here) So I guess they will have this ONE soldier eventually. If anything, I think I will be even more enthusiastic and hard working...

 :blotto:


----------



## aesop081 (25 Sep 2005)

ShawnSmith said:
			
		

> My point is, You would think that *they could of let me join * without my credits. I would have had them before training would have started anyways..but rules are rules..



Maybe when you have your credits you will be able to figure out what is wrong with this !!


----------



## WannaBeFlyer (26 Sep 2005)

I agree with Aeosop081,  I am glad the CF stands by its standards. 

While I agree that the CF is going to have a hard time attracting the skilled applicants they require, I don't think they should say "I guess this is it, let's pick from what is available and make do. Gotta make our numbers."

It is not the CF's fault, nor do I think it is a lack of campaigning on the part of those responsible for attracting new recruits. They could come up with a recruiting slogan that is more catchy than "Be...all that you can be", develop the most amazing recruiting posters, jingles, advertisements and videos but; I don't think the numbers are going to change. I think it is more reflective of the times we live in and the attitude of the public toward a career in the CF. While you and I are proud to be or want to be in the CF, not everybody shares that attitude and it seems to be a large percentage of the population.

What I can not stand is the "poor me" or "how dare they not chose me" attitude. Find out why, fix it and re-apply. There I vented - I have seen it too many times in here.

 Let the fire come to me.


----------



## COBRA-6 (26 Sep 2005)

Gotta disagree with you on one point MG, I think our recruiting message could be a whole lot better! With the right type of ads you could have people lining up at the door, and people who want to be soldiers, want a challenge, not join team superfriend...

My favorite ones were for the Royal Marines: "Do you have the strength of mind to be a Royal Marines Commando?" then there was a picture of a recruit doing pull-ups, in a leg cast, staying fit for the next serial...


----------



## Springroll (26 Sep 2005)

I think what gets me(and a couple other people I know as well) is that they have these huge goals of recruiting X amount of people, but they are taking their time in making the calls or scheduling the testing. 

If they want people, then they need to be willing to revamp how they do their recruit testing(CFAT, PT etc) so that it is all done within a decent amount of time and that you don't have people waiting 6months to a year to get in. Even those that got out and want back in are having to wait longer than what you would typically expect.


----------



## George Wallace (26 Sep 2005)

I know a lot of you wing nuts would like to see the PT standards and Knowledge Threshold tests a lot easier, perhaps even non-existant.  I know you don't think Security Checks of your background are important.  You are very naive to think all that.  The CF PT standards are too low as is.  The knowledge required to do the basic jobs in the CF is much higher than it was ten years ago.  Security is what this job is all about.  

Today, Cbt Arms soldiers require to be fit.  They are required to be intelligent and able to follow instructions and work with little or no supervision.  The modern Cbt Arms soldier is using very sophisticated equipment in the performance of his/her duties.  We are in a War on Terror and you will find that many Cbt Arms soldiers have higher Security Classifications than most CF members, due to the sophisticated equipment they are required to operate.  This is not a job for weaklings and dummies.  The entrance requirements must be high to get the best and not waste money trying to train people incapable of making it.  The CF is not a program for the unemployed to gain stamps for their next bout of unemployment and Pogey Cheques.  Give you head a shake.

Even the 'lesser' trades require higher standards to be set.  Lowering the standards to get trash is not what the CF needs.  So sorry Springroll.


----------



## Springroll (26 Sep 2005)

If any of your post was in response to mine, let me clarify. I do not think the standards should be any lower. Not at all!!! You have to weed out the crappy people, and that is what the testing does. What I meant by revamping, is instead of having people do each test individually(as seems to be the case with me), why not book them for the day and do it all at once? Or a couple tests per day? Get the new possibles through those hoops as quickly, but throughly, as possible and get their applications through to whomever gets them next so you don't have people waiting for a phone call for a year.

In my mind, that is a good way to lose potentially valuable recruits.


----------



## Pte_Martin (26 Sep 2005)

ShawnSmith said:
			
		

> I had intended to hand in an application once I turn 16 (january), but apparently, I have to get my grade ten finished before I can submit it. Sadly, that means I will miss the summer course this year. (school doesn't end until june) I am still going ahead with it, and hope to get onto a CO-OP at the start of 2007...    :blotto:



I'd ask your recruiter again. i don't think you have to have grade ten completed to sign up i think you just have to have grade 10 to do course or if not they should let you sign up and as long as you complet grade 10 before course starts


----------



## Monsoon (26 Sep 2005)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> I know a lot of you wing nuts would like to see the PT standards and Knowledge Threshold tests a lot easier, perhaps even non-existant.  I know you don't think Security Checks of your background are important.  You are very naive to think all that.  The CF PT standards are too low as is.  The knowledge required to do the basic jobs in the CF is much higher than it was ten years ago.  Security is what this job is all about.


I agree with you about the increased knowledge requirements, but the CF PT threshold is one that applies to everyone, CBT and non-CBT, so it's necessarily just a gauge of general health.  The trades that require higher standards (divers and infantry, for example) have higher test standards.  You shouldn't need to be able to do fifty pushups in one go to be a storesman at an Air Force base.  Would it be nice if everyone in the CF was in the top 10% of the country's most fit people?  Sure, but that's not a realistic goal.

The same could be said about the knowledge threshold test - someone who scrapes through just above the threshold isn't going to be offered a place as a communicator or a MARS officer, they're going to become a cook or steward and will likely be more than intelligent enough to do those jobs adequately.  You can make a case that certain trade thresholds should be higher, but aptitude testing is a dubious science as it is.


----------



## ExistancE (26 Sep 2005)

Just my 2c on the above posts regarding the need for a change in the style of advertisement. I used to make fun of our forces and never considered joining them because of the way I percieved them, mostly through the news media and the "team superfriend" advertising. Then a couple of my friends joined, spent a year or two in the reserves and told me many things that surprised me. Long story short I was just sworn in. Had I had the impression of the forces I have now I would have done this much sooner. Maybe the forces should look at presenting itself in a new light to the public.


----------



## Part-Timer (26 Sep 2005)

CPL said:
			
		

> I'd ask your recruiter again. i don't think you have to have grade ten completed to sign up i think you just have to have grade 10 to do course or if not they should let you sign up and as long as you complet grade 10 before course starts


15 High School Credits (for Ontario - equivalent number of credits in other provinces and territories). In order to apply. Minimum. Period. End of story.


----------



## kelly874 (26 Sep 2005)

I have to say that I haven't had any problems with the recruiting system yet - I handed my application in on a Friday, and got called for my testing on the next Monday and went for the CFAT, interview and medical on Wednesday, so I haven't had the same experience as some of the other people on this site. I'm not sure that the present recruiting system is really the problem - no system is perfect. And a lot of the delays people have should be blamed on our healthcare system, not recruiters. Having to wait to see a specialist to get the all clear isn't a fault of recruiting, like I was told "If you're not deployable, you're not employable". All steps of the recruiting process are important, and if people hit snags (as I have), it takes time to resolve issues.   It's no different than if you applied to the RCMP or a local police force or fire department.  There's procedures that need to be followed and standards must be maintained. The biggest challenge for recruiters is increasing the CF's appeal, and appealing to the Canadian public's dormant sense of patriotism.


----------



## blacktriangle (26 Sep 2005)

CPL said:
			
		

> I'd ask your recruiter again. i don't think you have to have grade ten completed to sign up i think you just have to have grade 10 to do course or if not they should let you sign up and as long as you complet grade 10 before course starts



Well that's what I was told at one point, however a unit recruiter told me bluntly. He says that the best I can do is hand in my application when I'm done grade ten, and maybe I can get on course in september.


Maybe I will have changed my mind in a years time...  :'(


----------



## Part-Timer (26 Sep 2005)

Don't change your mind just because you don't meet the minimum eligibility requirements.....yet. Finish your Grade 10 (you will need it for the rest of your life, anyway), and spend the next year getting everything else in order. If you really want something, then go and get it!


----------



## ThatsLife (26 Sep 2005)

You know what? That article is full of it. There's a message that people are getting when it comes to the Canadian military. The message is "America is better than Canada." Everytime I talk to somebody about our army, they ALWAYS say "yeah, but America has better guns, but america has better tanks, but america this and that."

I've conviced 11 of my friends to join the army, my girlfriend doesn't like the idea that i'm joining so she's says "are you recruiting the whole school!? it's not bad enough you're joining the army, you have to take everyone in the school down with you?" She was just joking around but I noticed something. The friends that I talked about the army too..they thought we still used the old olive camo..they thought everything we used was really old, they thought you had to be 18 to join the army reserves, and they thought that Canadas military sucked. I told them about that team of Canadian snipers (yes yes the whole world record shot), I told them about how we developed CADPAT and that the U.S. Marines liked our idea and made their own version of it called MARPAT. When they heard this, they had opened eyes and said "Really?"  I showed them pictures of our soldiers in action, our soldiers training...This is what sent them to the recruiting office. I took some of my friends there, sometimes 1-2 times a week  and the recruiter there said "Don't you have a home? (as a joke)"  

What we need is to make a new recruiting video...not that cheesy one recruiters are showing people who are interested in joining the army a video from the dark ages. We need a recruiting video that shows pride, strength, technology, training, action. Kicking down doors, explosions, pushups, sit ups,  shooting, team work...we need a video that will actually make people quit their job flipping burgers for $6.50 and do something with their lives. 

I swear i've watched that recruiting video at the regiment with my friends atleast 4 times...and everytime I watched it, I noticed that everyone was kind of just sitting there sitting with blank faces. 

Everyone at schools knows about me joining the army and they all ask me why, they ask "doesn't our army suck?" and I tell them everything that I tell everyone. And they end up wanting to join...so if there's any recruiters here...maybe you should bring something up about making a new recruiting video.


----------



## Cyr (26 Sep 2005)

Well I do have to admit that they have or need to change the recruiting process. For example here I am 31 years of age passesed all of the required testing, blew the physical fitness test out of the water and have now been told that I am wait listed to go to the MPAC for a MP. Now this process has been going on for almost a year now. Oh yeah did I mention that I have had 3 update interviews where as the one interviewer that I had screwde up and said that I HAD done crack cocaine.. When in fact I have never ever used drugs in my life. Just my example of how well my interviwere really listened to me, my paper work and my medical exam. Oh yeah did I mention to that I have been in corrections for the past 3 years and am on the centre emergency response team and looking to get a slot on the provincial tatical team. So I ask you what exactly is the problem and why is the recruiting process taking so long when you have someone like myself that has more training more experience that perhaps half of the people applying to be an MP get in. Oh yeah by the way from the MP's I've also talked to and my interviewer and other recruits they have told me that I am over qualified with all my training and that they cannot see a reason why shouldn't selected. So here's the million dollar question whats the hold up? I hate to say it my friends but the recruiting process is the problem. Just take a look at how they do the recruiting for municipal police forces and learn from them. 

Well anyhow that's my little rant about the recruiting process and that it truely does need to be changed...
 >


----------



## Donut (26 Sep 2005)

Hmmm, Cyr, I've never heard of ANY municipal forces that will take someone without a PC background and allow them to bypass their assessment center. And don't try to tell me that corrections is the same, because it isn't.

Besides that, there are lots of things you can get away with in joining a muni/provincial or federal LEO force that you can't have in a soldier, from health conditions to background checks.  And that's what you want to be, right? A soldier, who happens to be an MP?  Not someone who wants to be a cop, and decides that the army is one way to get in to that?

I won't argue that CFRETS needs a little kick in the bum, but don't go around saying "I'm so damn good, the army should just let me walk in because I've held a job that's kinda like what I want to do in the army."

DF


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (26 Sep 2005)

Quote from Cyr,
_Oh yeah did I mention to that I have been in corrections for the past 3 years and am on the centre emergency response team and looking to get a slot on the provincial tatical team? So I ask you what exactly is the problem and why is the recruiting process taking so long when you have someone like myself that has more training more experience that perhaps half of the people applying to be an MP get in. Oh yeah by the way from the MP's I've also talked to and my interviewer and other recruits they have told me that I am over qualified with all my training_

Well Cyr, I have over 16 years Corrections and 10 on the ICIT teams and I don't think for a second, nor should anyone, that I would be over qualified to do MP work.


----------



## jmnavy (26 Sep 2005)

I agree that a lot of the application process is too slow.  I submitted my component transfer to go from nav res to air force reg about 2 weeks ago.  I was told that the paper work isn't going to go through in time for me to make the october board so I won't be able to do botc until september 06.  I've been told they won't let a deo onto the summer botc.  I'm totally sticking it out but this kind of thing can turn off a lot of applicants.  On the other hand, I'm guessing there's more of a need for ncms than officers.  How many times have I heard someone comment 'too many chiefs, not enough indians'?

I do agree with one point that ThatsLife made; word of mouth seems to be much more effective for recruiting than commercials, posters or anything else.  Ever notice how easy it is to get someone interested in the cf when you start telling them stories about what it's actually like?


----------



## Pte_Martin (26 Sep 2005)

i agree that word of   mouth is one of the best tools for recruiting, I know that when   a couple of guys and i go out after training for a beer and some food, we always get asked at least a couple of times why were in uniform and questions about the army. If we got paid a percentage of people we get to join th CF i think I'd be doing alright


----------



## blacktriangle (26 Sep 2005)

ThatsLife said:
			
		

> You know what? That article is full of it. There's a message that people are getting when it comes to the Canadian military. The message is "America is better than Canada." Everytime I talk to somebody about our army, they ALWAYS say "yeah, but America has better guns, but america has better tanks, but america this and that."
> 
> I've conviced 11 of my friends to join the army, my girlfriend doesn't like the idea that i'm joining so she's says "are you recruiting the whole school!? it's not bad enough you're joining the army, you have to take everyone in the school down with you?" She was just joking around but I noticed something. The friends that I talked about the army too..they thought we still used the old olive camo..they thought everything we used was really old, they thought you had to be 18 to join the army reserves, and they thought that Canadas military sucked. I told them about that team of Canadian snipers (yes yes the whole world record shot), I told them about how we developed CADPAT and that the U.S. Marines liked our idea and made their own version of it called MARPAT. When they heard this, they had opened eyes and said "Really?"   I showed them pictures of our soldiers in action, our soldiers training...This is what sent them to the recruiting office. I took some of my friends there, sometimes 1-2 times a week   and the recruiter there said "Don't you have a home? (as a joke)"
> 
> ...




People always tell me that I can do better then the army. 

Funny, I don't see to many things giving me the same opportunity. The attitude is alot different when I talk to teachers and cops, firefighters etc..

One police officer was talking to me outside a chinese food place and mentioned how the police chopper pilots had military backgrounds. He then mentioned that his department will happily give time off so one can train with the militia...

I don't need to do any better then that. ;D


----------



## Cyr (27 Sep 2005)

What I was saying is that the recruiting process takes way way too long and needs to be revamped. But at the sametime the CF is looking for qualified people to do the job and that alot of people do give up and move on due to the fact that the recruiting process takes so darn long. Or your mistakes get made in the process on the part of the CF. Just wondering why they don't have it together ? Also yes I am going in to become a soilder first and for most. Sorry if I rustled some feather in my comments.   Just trying to figure out why the process is so lonf when everything gets done in about 2 months or so?


----------



## Haggis (27 Sep 2005)

Cyr said:
			
		

> Just trying to figure out why the process is so long when everything gets done in about 2 months or so?



One of the reasons that the process is so long is staff shortages.  There's not enough recruiters/clerks/military career counsellors to go around.  To increase these numbers you have to rape the battalions, squadrons, ships etc.  To attract good quality applicants you need high quality recruiters, people who talk the talk and walk the walk and look like professionals.

Likewise, once people are recruiited, they have to be properly trained.  Again it comes to staff shortages. They have to come from somewhere and if you want good quality recruits coming out of St. Jean, you need good quality trainers. That means you should take the fittest, keenest and most skilled members from the line units to train the new recruiits.

Got any ideas of how to get around this?


----------



## Bert (27 Sep 2005)

And it wouldn't stop there.  The training system would require additional
instructors and resources for post-BMQ members from QL3 to QL5.  The
problem isn't specific to BMQ/QL2.

Haggis, your second paragraph makes sense to find the creme de la creme
of front line units to perform instructor duties.  However, not all would want
to instruct and those you do will fall out of their unit for a time.

The creme de la creme you do pull out have to go through instructor courses
and spend a period of time posted to a training centre.  Remembering back to
my BMQ, the instructors ranged from highly experienced to the 
not-so-experienced.  Yet they all performed their jobs and each one was able
to impart, forcibly or not, their own professionalism and necessities of the
course material.  The learning experience not only comes from the instructors, but
the course content and what the platoon does to overcome their challenges.
Looking back I have great respect for my instructors... all of them.

In my view, refinements to the BMQ course material focusing on "soldier first"
content, creating a core group of experienced front-line NCOs dispersed into 
the platoons with other instructors, dispersing training centres, considering
a separate training streams for combat arms and support trades, refinements to the 
post-BMQ process where members are quickly loaded on QL3 and later posted to 
their gaining units.


----------



## nd.07 (27 Sep 2005)

Back in elementary and even now in my 10th grade, the Canadian Armed Forces are presented as peace keepers handing candy to children. The last CF commercial I remember is the '' Strong. Proud. Today's Canadian Forces.'' with sailors in a sub or a craft of some sort, and that was 3 years ago. I became interested in the military a few years back and seriously considered joining this year, however I intend to finish my grade 12. I speak of it to my friends and many of them have no idea of the what the CF actualy does. All this to say that the message has to get across especialy to young people such as myself that the CF is more than what the media portray it as, that it is a serious career and a challenging one. Just my 2cents.


----------



## The Bread Guy (27 Sep 2005)

Haggis:  On the paperwork lag, would it be sacreligious to suggest, wait for it....

privatizing JUST the paper processing elements of the process.  You need warriors to train warriors, but there might be a case to be made that you don't need a bayonet to process paper, no?

Thoughts?


----------



## WannaBeFlyer (28 Sep 2005)

On the other hand of recruiting, I heard on the news this morning that once again, Recruiters south of the border are going to meet with parents because the parents are P.O.'d about how aggressively they are targeting high school students. I have to remember to watch that tonight. 

Please understand that I am not suggesting that Canadian recruiting efforts are timid nor am I suggesting they should examine the US practices by any means (before I get slammed).  I am just pointing out what can happen if recruiting drives seem over aggressive and the attitudes of a percentage of the general public toward their son or daughter joining the Military.


----------



## kincanucks (28 Sep 2005)

_privatizing JUST the paper processing elements of the process._

Interested to hear just what part(s) of the "paper processing elements"  you think should be privatized.


----------



## Part-Timer (28 Sep 2005)

MG said:
			
		

> On the other hand of recruiting, I heard on the news this morning that once again, Recruiters south of the border are going to meet with parents because the parents are P.O.'d about how aggressively they are targeting high school students. I have to remember to watch that tonight.



There's a story in Vanity Fair called "The Recruiter's War" that talks a lot about this sort of recruiting practice (esp the USMC and Army). I'll try to find it and post the link.


----------



## S McKee (28 Sep 2005)

This whole recruiting drive is a Liberal shell game to make it look like they're doing something for the military. It'll take years to get numbers we want. I'm a firm believer that we should focus on quality rather than quantity. If I had my way, the days of the grade 10 high school dropout would be over.


----------



## RCD (28 Sep 2005)

If they get the equipment first , then it will make recruiting easier.
An  re-look at the service contracts that we sign or re-up.


----------



## S McKee (29 Sep 2005)

It's not a matter of getting new equipment, after all if your not trained on it you can't use it right? It all boils down to inadequate staffing for both recruiting and training cadres. TOS have already been changed for new recruits.


----------



## PJ D-Dog (29 Sep 2005)

MG said:
			
		

> On the other hand of recruiting, I heard on the news this morning that once again, Recruiters south of the border are going to meet with parents because the parents are P.O.'d about how aggressively they are targeting high school students. I have to remember to watch that tonight.
> 
> Please understand that I am not suggesting that Canadian recruiting efforts are timid nor am I suggesting they should examine the US practices by any means (before I get slammed).   I am just pointing out what can happen if recruiting drives seem over aggressive and the attitudes of a percentage of the general public toward their son or daughter joining the Military.



Meeting with parents of potential recruits is part of the recuiting philosophy (winning of hearts and minds), practice and policy in the US.  It has been going on for years.  If the applicant has the support of their family when joining the military, it makes it easier on the recruit when going through boot camp.

Canada should adopt a more aggressive recruiting approach.  One of the many problems with CF recruiting is that is it designed to attract applicants as opposed to finding applicants.  The CF will never get all the numbers they need if they continue to promote the CF in the way that it does.  They need to take a few good lessons from the Marines in how to go out there and FIND the recruits needed.

When I worked at CFRC we waited around all day for people to call or walk into the office.  Attraction efforts were aimed at showing off the colors as opposed to actually walking up to people and asking them about their interest in a military career.  When I recruited for the reserves, I used a more aggressive approach since our budget was directly tied to the numbers we could produce.

In the Marines, the number of recruits you get is directly tied to job performance and career advancement.  Most of the recruiters I have spoken too tell me how many young people want to join the military but their parents are generally opposed to it and try and convince them otherwise.  So the selling job shifts from selling the idea of a military career to the applicant to selling the idea of having a son or daughter in the military to the prospective recruit's parents.  This changes the dynamic and makes the recruiter's job that much more challenging.

PJ D-Dog


----------



## enfield (29 Sep 2005)

Some ideas, all of which have been mentioned before on previous threads.

-Install quotas for recruiters and recruiting centers. 

-Make a stint at Recruiting (and instructing) a requirement for promotion past a certain rank. 

-Slim down the process, so that not as much is required and the bottlenecks are opened up. The medical screening at Borden is one that comes to mind.

-Institute a short (3-5) day "Potential Soldiers Course" (or Sailor, or whatever). Take potential recruits away for a bit, and run them through everything - interview, medical, etc - while giving them a taste of the real thing. 

-Change the recruiting advertisements -- this is the fault of the government and the civilian federal department that oversees such things, not the military itself. The ads, I believe, are ineffectual in content, and do not achieve sufficient coverage - I'm an average young male in a fair sized city, and I can count on my hand the number of recruiting ads I've seen in the past few months. 

-Fix the Component Transfer process, and make it easier for people to re-enter the Forces. Why does going from Res to Reg mean you have to re-join the army? 


It _has_ to be possible to recruit soldiers faster, we've done it in the past (before the age of information technology) and other countries are doing it today.  

The other bottleneck is, of course, the training side - even if CFRC pushes through the bodies, can we train them?


----------



## AcornsRus (29 Sep 2005)

I would agree we have to be more aggressive in regards to finding instead of attracting recruits.   We need to be more visible to the public - get out to the Malls, Schools, etc. Definitely part of "winning the hearts and minds" of our own country folk.

That being said, there is a fine line to toe. Aggressive, but not in-your-face.  I saw a show following a couple of US Marine recruiters. They stood outside a Wal Mart and really got in people's faces. In one instance they lied to a guy - telling him he _*had * _ to give his name and phone number so they could take him off the recruiting list!  .... but .... they ... ran into him in the parking lot.


----------



## Jaxson (29 Sep 2005)

"Institute a short (3-5) day "Potential Soldiers Course" (or Sailor, or whatever). Take potential recruits away for a bit, and run them through everything - interview, medical, etc - while giving them a taste of the real thing"

Tell me, Would you like to front the bill for all those people? exspecially if someone gets hurt, or if during the 3-4 day course they turn up medically unfit, and problems arise from it, lets think about saving the money (or increasing) the CF gets instead of throwing it into a burning pile of ****.


----------



## enfield (29 Sep 2005)

Jaxson said:
			
		

> Tell me, Would you like to front the bill for all those people? exspecially if someone gets hurt, or if during the 3-4 day course they turn up medically unfit, and problems arise from it, lets think about saving the money (or increasing) the CF gets instead of throwing it into a burning pile of ****.



Have them show up with a doctors note, sign a waiver, and do a physical exam first off. And don't do anything too crazy with them. 

Its not that crazy - its standard recruiting procedure for the British Army and Royal Marines. 

The bill would be minimal. The military already owns space, and pays staff. Everyone shows up at a local base. Do a medical exam. Then spend a few days being yelled at, doing PT, basic drill, weapons familiarization, lectures, testing, etc. Better spend the money early, then have them drop out later. And, have the opportunity to ram through all the required testing immediatley. 

I'll admit this is more of a means to ensure that quality material is recruited than increase basic quantity, but I think it could be an opportunity to check off a lot of boxes.


----------



## Bert (29 Sep 2005)

Enfield

The idea of a pre-BMQ processing is a valid idea.  However, looking back, only one person in my
BMQ platoon VR'd.   Likely would have been picked-up in pre-BMQ processing.  A good
portion of my platoon (30%) never made it past QL3.  There are several common reasons for it (medical issues
in BMQ and SQ, long wait for trades training, family issues) but none of it (except the one VR) in my opinion 
would have been identified during a pre-BMQ process.

It might be worthwhile getting some statistics on 100 random applicants and following them from
the application process, thru BMQ, to QL3, and finally to their first posting.  I suspect we'd see a
number of problems in the bigger picture.


----------



## PARAMEDIC (30 Sep 2005)

If they amalgamated the security check into the DND and not shuffled it out to a third party serivce provider like CSIS: (thats if we consider CSIS not part of the DND)
it would probably hasten the rate at which potential recruits could become qualified soldiers hence fulfilling their quota/goal.
CSIS has enough on their plate as is or they just make it look that way..lol

1) If they are worried of potential terrorist or sleeper cells infiltrating the CDN army well, that possibility could have been fullfilled pre 9/11, so when i get ppl telling me that oh because your background is from a scheduled country and we need to verify that your not part of any terrorist organisations, its valid and ludacris at the same time.

2) Being a first generation Canadian doesnt count for crap no matter   how many years you live here. If rumor is correct then the stipulation of having to wait till you have lived in country for a period of 10yrs ..3 yrears as an immigrant and 7years as   Canadian citizen only verifies some peoples notion that they will always be considered a second class citizen because they were born in a country that has bad relations with Canada, but the Canadian government still allows citizens from that country to flow in because economy benefits from these intelectual and general labour imports.

I admit the government of my previous country aren't   speed demons when it comes to processing paperwork...not untill the gears have been greased.
so pls dont try to point out the obvious to me as to why my security is taking so long, if you can facilitate the process then im interested if not keep those obvious comments on the private messages. Im just venting and these 2 points is what gets me rilled up every time I think about my application and the Incredible amount of time its taking for it to come to a conclusion.

Then again I could be bitter about the process because I applied in 2002 and still currently waiting for my security check to be completed...
phew ...that was building up for a while ....starting to feel better already. :cheers:

In the mean time best of luck to all waiting for the call 

cheers


----------



## George Wallace (30 Sep 2005)

PARAMEDIC

If you are concerned that CSIS has too much on their plate to do Security Clearances, who do you propose should do them?  The RCMP used to do them, but I imagine they too have too much on their plate to do it.  The MPs don't even have a plate, so it is way too much for them to do it.  I suppose we can have everyone just sign a Statutory Declaration that they are honestly and truly 100% Canadian Citizens with no Criminal Records, etc and then we can just open up those flood gates.....


----------



## Zarathustra (30 Sep 2005)

Check this guys. From the Senate Committee report on Defense. (http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/35115.0.html)

"The Perfect Candidate

According to the Canadian Forces, the system has been refined to the point that a
"perfect" candidate for the Regulars or Reserves can be processed in 30 days. That
recruit is someone who provides all the necessary documentation (identity,
citizenship, education and medical), has no medical issues, has a clean and easily
verifiable background, is physically fit and is applying for a military trade that has
vacancies both in the occupation and on the training courses required. *Sadly,
Canadian Forces statistics show that only about three per cent of applicants fall
into this category*".


----------



## PARAMEDIC (1 Oct 2005)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> I suppose we can have everyone just sign a Statutory Declaration that they are honestly and truly 100% Canadian Citizens with no Criminal Records


...lol

hey George with the current perception of us Canadians, wouldnt that make it the Canadian thing to do..haahahaha ;D



			
				George Wallace said:
			
		

> If you are concerned that CSIS has too much on their plate to do Security Clearances, who do you propose should do them?



but on a more serious note what I was eluding to, was that responsibility should lie in the hands of each department if you will. eg army/air force/navy
having a dedicated department for a specialized purpose, its never gonna happen but it does'nt hurt to dream 
we are all to familiar with MPs taking their families and secretaries on unsantioned feild trips on our expense. Those resources could be better used to set up liasons with the applicants country of origin, to facilitate the recruiting process.
Iam by no means saying we should eliminate CSIS from the recruting process, in fact the brand new department would be in constant conversation with CSIS so as to prevent potential threats from gaining acess to sensitive information about our armed forces.
This would benefit "CLEAN" candidates who just had the misfortune to be born in a country that has bad relations with Canada or are on Canada's scheduled list from being treated as terrorist, guilty until proven innocent i guess. 

but knowing my rant on here is not gonna change anything in   restructuring   command. I can sigh depressingly and keep doing what i need to do until i get the call. Having vented my frustration on the previous post I'm spent, so its back to my cubical till frustration builds up again and i have to come visit around here once more...lol ;D


----------



## Acorn (1 Oct 2005)

What's old is new, I guess. The CF used to have clearance background checks done by SIU. It was decided that CSIS should do it in order to centralize it, and to reduce the load on the Security Branch (there were probably other reasons). What doesn't appear to have been taken into account is the number of clearances that need to be processed, and CSIS hasn't seen an increase in manpower to deal with the backlog.

As for immigrants, you don't require 10 years in Canada to apply. The 10 years just makes it easier to do the background checks for certain clearance levels. If you want into the CF quickly, pick a trade that only requires an enhanced reliability check.

Acorn


----------



## kincanucks (1 Oct 2005)

Ahhh more misinformation:

_As for immigrants, you don't require 10 years in Canada to apply. The 10 years just makes it easier to do the background checks for certain clearance levels._

Any applicant who is a Canadian citizen and has not resided in Canada for a continuous 10-year period immediately prior to application requires a (Pre-Enrolment) Security Clearance Pre-Assessment.  The only exception to this is you are out of the country for less than six months at a time.

_If you want into the CF quickly, pick a trade that only requires an enhanced reliability check._

The minimum required for any trade in the CF is Level I Confidential.


----------



## Springroll (1 Oct 2005)

kincanucks said:
			
		

> Ahhh more misinformation:
> 
> 
> Any applicant who is a Canadian citizen and has not resided in Canada for a continuous 10-year period immediately prior to application requires a (Pre-Enrolment) Security Clearance Pre-Assessment.   The only exception to this is you are out of the country for less than six months at a time.



To add to that, if you have resided outside of the country for over 6 months due to a CF or government posting(spouse, parent etc), you are not required to do the Security Clearance Pre-Assessment.


----------



## kincanucks (1 Oct 2005)

Springroll said:
			
		

> To add to that, if you have resided outside of the country for over 6 months due to a CF or government posting(spouse, parent etc), you are not required to do the Security Clearance Pre-Assessment.



Yes thank you.


----------



## Acorn (2 Oct 2005)

kincanucks said:
			
		

> Ahhh more misinformation:
> 
> _As for immigrants, you don't require 10 years in Canada to apply. The 10 years just makes it easier to do the background checks for certain clearance levels._
> 
> Any applicant who is a Canadian citizen and has not resided in Canada for a continuous 10-year period immediately prior to application requires a (Pre-Enrolment) Security Clearance Pre-Assessment.   The only exception to this is you are out of the country for less than six months at a time.


Which means what? You don't have to have resided in Canada for 10 years in order to apply for the CF. If you have those 10 years, it is easier to do the clearance (pre-screening not required, no involvement of FAC).

Explain what is wrong with that statement (other than crappy grammar and wording).



> _If you want into the CF quickly, pick a trade that only requires an enhanced reliability check._
> 
> The minimum required for any trade in the CF is Level I Confidential.



I'll admit my knowledge of that may be dated. When did this come into effect?

Acorn


----------



## kincanucks (2 Oct 2005)

Sorry I just thought it might give the wrong impression by not including the pre-sec requirement.  The level I has been in effect for the Reg F for a few years now. Cheers.


----------



## S McKee (3 Oct 2005)

Acorn said:
			
		

> What's old is new, I guess. The CF used to have clearance background checks done by SIU. It was decided that CSIS should do it in order to centralize it, and to reduce the load on the Security Branch (there were probably other reasons). What doesn't appear to have been taken into account is the number of clearances that need to be processed, and CSIS hasn't seen an increase in manpower to deal with the backlog.
> 
> 
> Acorn



The SIU stopped doing background security checks because the unit, for some nebulous reason, was disbanded, by then Provost Marshal Pat Samson, (it was rumored that she had a personal vendetta against the SIU). Security checks were then handed over to CSIS. The SIU by the way, actually conducted a thorough security check, visiting schools speaking to the neighbors and friends etc of the applicant. By virtue of it's limited mandate the SIU was by far, more efficient than CSIS.


----------



## Monsoon (4 Oct 2005)

Jumper said:
			
		

> The SIU by the way, actually conducted a thorough security check, visiting schools speaking to the neighbors and friends etc of the applicant.


CSIS still does the same things for Level II and III clearances, to the best of my knowledge.


----------



## teddy49 (4 Oct 2005)

ExistancE said:
			
		

> Just my 2c on the above posts regarding the need for a change in the style of advertisement. I used to make fun of our forces and never considered joining them because of the way I percieved them, mostly through the news media and the "team superfriend" advertising. Then a couple of my friends joined, spent a year or two in the reserves and told me many things that surprised me. Long story short I was just sworn in. Had I had the impression of the forces I have now I would have done this much sooner. Maybe the forces should look at presenting itself in a new light to the public.



Here in lies the double edged sword or the "unintended consequence" of having the Brass on TV saying how bad the pay is, and how the equipment is all falling apart, and everybody is burned out.  Potential recruits look at that, and say to them selves, "Why should I join that circus, look how bad it is."  We all know that it's true, but making it as public as it has become, can't be having a positive effect on recruiting.


----------



## Haggis (4 Oct 2005)

teddy49 said:
			
		

> Here in lies the double edged sword or the "unintended consequence" of having the Brass on TV saying how bad the pay is, and how the equipment is all falling apart, and everybody is burned out.   Potential recruits look at that, and say to them selves, "Why should I join that circus, look how bad it is."   We all know that it's true, but making it as public as it has become, can't be having a positive effect on recruiting.



True, in a way.   Whenever I talk to civvies about what I do, I am met by admiration.   Yes, I said "admiration".   Both for the job we do and how little we get by on.   In some cases it borders on pity.   I have had some parents say they'd never let their child join an organization as run down as the CF.   That being said, I think our people are our best recruiters as they (mostly) embody the traits that civvies find admirable in the CF.

Flashy videos and ads only get you so far.   A lot of people take a pee or get a beer during commercials but they will stop at a mall display.   Talking to a real live soldier sailor or aviator who's "been there, done that" goes much further than TV ads ever could.


----------



## Springroll (4 Oct 2005)

Haggis said:
			
		

> True, in a way.   Whenever I talk to civvies about what I do, I am met by admiration.   Yes, I said "admiration".   Both for the job we do and how little we get by on.



By how little, are you talking about the size of the paychecks?

If you are, I do not know of many jobs where you can join with nothing more than a high school diploma and can be making upwards of $50K+/- per year with less than a decade under your belt. Yes, they have to be willing to put their lives on the line, but they also benefit by not having to pay taxes on the income they make while they are deployed to dangerous areas. My mother actually thought that CF members never paid income tax, until she did ours a couple years back and nearly gagged at how much is taken in the way of taxes. People who are having issues with how much they make tend to have issues with the way they spend their money, and that is not the CF's fault. People go and rack up credit everywhere. Not everyone does it, but many do, especially new recruits with very little life experience and no family to support(in the way of dependants).

Now back onto topic....


----------



## Haggis (4 Oct 2005)

Springroll said:
			
		

> By how little, are you talking about the size of the paychecks?



No, I meant equipment, public and government support, infrastructure and community footprint.  All our Reg F Army is concentrated in "super garrisons" in or near major centres.  Remember that if it wasn't for the Reserves, most Canadians outside of Fredricton, Ottawa, Pembroke, Toronto, Winnipeg and Edmonton would never see a soldier close up.

We need to get out more....


----------

