# Recruiting lies?



## basrah (24 Sep 2009)

After talking a lot with a friend of mine he was sold on the idea of the army as a career. Initially he wanted to join the infantry, but it appears to be closed. His comments are in quotations.

So, he had a look at some other careers and decided he liked the armoured recce posibility. 

'Oh no, you dont want to do that. The life of an armoured recce det is measured in mere minutes on the battlefield'

Are you kidding me? Mere minutes? Where is this guy getting his info? Yeah, in WW2 I am sure it was a pretty dangerous job, but that was 65 years ago... time to update your books.

In regards to PT:
' You had best start running now, because by the time you finish basic you will be expected to run at least 15km'

15km? I would be shocked if I ran 15km my entire course! While Im sure we can all agree that it is a good idea to work on the PT before one heads off, that is overkill.

With these, and other statements, it seems like this Sgt was trying to get him not to join the military. I am debating calling the recruiting centre, or sending an email.


----------



## ackland (24 Sep 2009)

What city was the recruiting centre in?


----------



## medaid (24 Sep 2009)

Really? You ran less then 15kms your entire course? Your PT mustve been a breeze!


----------



## basrah (24 Sep 2009)

MedTech said:
			
		

> Really? You ran less then 15kms your entire course? Your PT mustve been a breeze!



It was an exageration, aka sarcasm.

The recruiting centre is here in Edmonton. I kinda feel bad for not going down with him in person now!


----------



## Teflon (24 Sep 2009)

Just a thought and by no means an accusation:

Are you sure it was the recruiter that was telling the lies?


----------



## Neolithium (24 Sep 2009)

Mere minutes on the battlefield if you for some reason lay in front of the tires on your own vehicle before it starts moving.  I actually can't quite see any recruiter saying something like that.  Every time I've had a chat with one they were very concerned with checking out any careers I was interested in, and suggesting those that I might not have known about but could be suited to.


----------



## basrah (24 Sep 2009)

Teflon said:
			
		

> Just a thought and by no means an accusation:
> 
> Are you sure it was the recruiter that was telling the lies?



Trust me, I wondered this as well. The thing is, that this guy really knows nothing about the military, and the way he worded it is not the way that a civi who didnt know about the army would word it.

He is also a pretty solid guy, and knows he has no reason to make stuff up like this with me. The only reason he mentioned it to me is because he was concerned with how on earth he was going to train to run 15km, and the prospect of being in an overly dangerous MOC.


----------



## Teflon (24 Sep 2009)

As I said, not knowing anyone involved here, it was just a thought because these satements are quite abit far-a-field of the "do you like hunting and camping?" line of recruiting stories.


----------



## jeffb (24 Sep 2009)

I'm currently in the training system (going on CAP on Monday) and I've heard numerous people say that their recruiter misled them in some way or another. I'm pretty sure that in most cases it can be brought back to people hearing what they want to hear from the recruiter. The most common case of this deals with trade choices and the idea that people should sign up for what they are being offered and do an MOC reassignment once they get to St. Jean. Sometimes I guess this works but most MOC reassignment requests that I've seen with the group of people I'm going through with are getting rejected. I'd be willing to bet that recruiters sometimes communicate information that may not be up to date anymore or are slightly outside their lanes. This is completely natural, it's impossible to expect that any one person is going to be completely up to date with everything going on. I suspect that is why there is such an emphasis in the interview process on the applicants knowledge of the job they are applying for. 

I'm sure that there are some recruiters stretch the limits of reality when they tell applicants what is and is not possible but I am also sure that in the vast majority of cases, applicants are hearing what they want to hear.  :2c:


----------



## basrah (24 Sep 2009)

Teflon said:
			
		

> As I said, not knowing anyone involved here, it was just a thought because these satements are quite abit far-a-field of the "do you like hunting and camping?" line of recruiting stories.



I agree totally with the far a field bit, which is why I made this thread. I am totally shocked that this is something any recruiter would say.

This guy had no idea the difference between a tanker and member of the PPCLI when he went down there, so for him to be coming back talking about armoured recce dets and stuff like that immediately after he went down there is what leads me to believe his side... Also, the fact that he gave me the guys name and asked if I could speak with him is pushing me to believe him as well.

Just wondering what the peanut gallery thinks. I dont want to make a big deal out of this, but I hate to think of someone down at a CFRC filling peoples heads full of lies.

My idea right now is to go down with him on his next appointment, in civis, and state that I am interested as well and see what he tells me. Only problem is, I dont want to turn my friends recruitment into some sort of scandal.


----------



## jeffb (24 Sep 2009)

It would seem to me that if you are really worried about your friend being lied to about what various trades do, you are the solution to this problem. Based on your profile I have to imagine that you'll be more then capable of giving him a good idea about what the various trades do (especially the combat arms trades). Once you've worked through it with him, send him down to the CFRC and rely on the recruiters to process this newly informed and motivated applicant.


----------



## basrah (24 Sep 2009)

jeffb said:
			
		

> It would seem to me that if you are really worried about your friend being lied to about what various trades do, you are the solution to this problem. Based on your profile I have to imagine that you'll be more then capable of giving him a good idea about what the various trades do (especially the combat arms trades). Once you've worked through it with him, send him down to the CFRC and rely on the recruiters to process this newly informed and motivated applicant.



This does sound like the safest approach from my point of view, and the best way to stay away from a potentially bad situation. Ive done my best to set him straight, and let him know what sort of trades he may be most interested in.

Thanks for the advice


----------



## FDO (24 Sep 2009)

I find it very difficult to believe that a recruiter would say anything like that. Was it actually a recruiter? We have to take a course to be recruiters. We don't just walk in and start talking. Once we have done the course we have to complete an OJT package. Our information is being constantly updated. I have found that a lot of the time applicants don't hear exactly what is being said. It's mostly because they are bombarded with so much information that it gets kind of mixed up in their heads and when they sort it out it doesn't always come out the way it went in. If the Sgt he was talking to was actually a recruiter and he said those things then your friend needs to launch a complaint with the Centre's CO. That kind of thing is not on!


----------



## Love793 (24 Sep 2009)

FDO- Although I agree with you in theory that it should not happen, I have noticed numerous cases of this occurring while working at or with CFRCs (Dets).  What I've noticed about it is, Unless the Recruiter or Person on the desk is in the trade/group being asked about they have little clue of what they speak (IE, Navy Boatswain type talking about what a Army LCIS guy does). Its not all their fault as there is 100+ jobs in the CF, and no one can answer everything about every trade. However a lot of it can be solved by at least handing off the applicant to someone from that element if not Trade/Group.  
The other thing I've noticed is a lot of times Reservist are working at CFRCs and Dets either on contract with CFRG as clerks or as unit Recruiters pulling a shift at the Centre or Det to ease the work load. In a lot of cases these Recruiters are extremely limited in their out of trade knowledge or being paid by their units to recruit specifically for them and them only. It's very hard to get these recruiters to shift their left and right of arc to the bigger team arcs when their PERs are written by the person who pays them.

Just my $.02


----------



## Jarnhamar (25 Sep 2009)

Your friend could be lying.


----------



## Roy Harding (25 Sep 2009)

Flawed Design said:
			
		

> Your friend could be lying.



I wouldn't necessarily go that far - but it is possible that he wasn't hearing what was being said, and then (innocently) embellishing what he DID hear.

He may also have been subjected to some "in service" humour - which most civilians don't understand.  OR - he may have overheard some "in service" humour from those employed in the background (clerks, etc).

I guess what I'm trying to say is - there are at LEAST two sides to every story - perhaps some quiet, reasoned, non-emotional inquiries may lead you closer to the truth of what actually took place.


----------



## basrah (25 Sep 2009)

Flawed Design said:
			
		

> Your friend could be lying.



Might want to actually read the whole thread before posting.


----------



## Flasbang (25 Sep 2009)

That's pretty extreme. Why do I keep hearing stories about recruiters pushing people away from infantry lately?


----------



## kratz (25 Sep 2009)

Flashbang said:
			
		

> That's pretty extreme. Why do I keep hearing stories about recruiters pushing people away from infantry lately?



Interesting, a searching the site for Infantry closed, brought up this topic and another one discussing that recruiting for Infantry has been closed since August. No mention yet when it will reopen.


----------



## Jammer (25 Sep 2009)

Infantry careers are at 110% for NCM (Reg).


----------



## basrah (25 Sep 2009)

Jammer said:
			
		

> Infantry careers are at 110% for NCM (Reg).



Going off topic for a sec...

I know this is what they are saying, but it just boggles my mind. Without going into exact numbers, Ill say this, our unit is SEVERLY undermanned. From the bottom up we are hurting for guys, and need more, especially with 1-11 vamping up soon, and 3-09 heading over... we all know how many guys get out after a tour.

I would love to see 30 man platoons again, unfortunately the only time that seems to happen is overseas.


----------



## dangerboy (25 Sep 2009)

basrah said:
			
		

> Going off topic for a sec...
> 
> I know this is what they are saying, but it just boggles my mind. Without going into exact numbers, Ill say this, our unit is SEVERLY undermanned. From the bottom up we are hurting for guys, and need more, especially with 1-11 vamping up soon, and 3-09 heading over... we all know how many guys get out after a tour.
> 
> I would love to see 30 man platoons again, unfortunately the only time that seems to happen is overseas.



The problem is not that the units don't need the soldiers, I agree with you they do.  The problem is that the schools are maxed out and can't train them.  Right now there is a whole load of troops waiting in PAT Pl here in Wainwright just waiting for us to run a course, I can't speak for LFCA, and LFQA but I suspect they are in the same boat.

 With the BIQ being around 16 weeks (don't quote me on the exact length) and requiring a 4 Sgts, 4 MCpls, 1 WO, 1 Officer plus support pers which the majority come from the Brigade it is not easy getting one off the ground and running.


----------



## dapaterson (25 Sep 2009)

There are other issues as well.  Most units, Reg and Res, have no idea what their establishment is.  There is much anecdote, and historic inertia, but the actual strucutre and entitlement to personnel is usually very different from what COs and RSMs think it is.

Don't confuse the unit's establishment with what deploys, either - TO&Es are constantly (needlessly) being tweaked by desk jockey in Ottawa - people who don't understand that you give a CO resources, then give them tasks - and don't revisit the structure every three days to make minor adjustments - you let the CO be a CO (but I digress).

Overally, the infantryman trade is overborne.  Lots of folks in the training system - but remember as well that that is a snapshot of total personnel vs establishment (on a national level).  It is not looking at specific ranks.  Since the recent intake is all at the Pte-Cpl level now, having a broad pool of too many Cpl-Ptes in the pipeline masks shortages at higher ranks.

Unfortunately, people tend to forget that if you want a Sgt today you had to recruit him ten years ago; force expansion by its very nature will be trailing.  You also need a solid plan, early on - identifying the more senior positions and those requiring longer training and recruiting for those ones first.  Unfortunately, the phasing for this round of force expansion was poorly done - quick hits were done immediately, and the difficult planning was deferred again and again.


----------



## FDO (25 Sep 2009)

We get our numbers from each of the Commands. Navy says they can train this many and it's broken down into exact numbers for each occupation. Army and Air same thing. This year Army said we need "X" number of infantry broken down into RCR, PPCLI and 22nd. We filled the Infantry numbers very early because 1) we got a lot fewer numbers than in previous years. and 2) most people that walk into this office want Combat Arms and specificly Infantry. It's not CFRG or even CMP that gives us direction on this all they say is how many of the number each Centre will have to enrol.  There are a lot of PATs in Borden as well. CFRG is mandated every year to enrol more and more but the training system is taking longer to cope. A lot of the buildings were sold off or shut down and in serious need of repair before anyone can go in. 

 We get our new "numbers" in April. We work on a fiscal year. However, there have been times whe the MOCs have been opened up again through out the year due to different reasons. Like the people we enrolled didn't make it through BMQ or  SQ or DP1 or there was a large release. Any reason could open it back up. I happens but not often. We tell applicants that it's April so they have a "reasonable expecation" That is to say, if I told someone that ther MOC is closed but will open up again in January and it doesn't you can imagine the problems. Where as if I say April and it opens in January the applicant is happy that his/her wait is not as long as the thought. 

 I can also say that I have used some of the "military humour" when a prospect says they want to join the Army, I ask "Why" and then launch into the whole soup, booze on board A/C and comfy bunk routine. I will then get serious and help the them with what they want. It's all in fun and you can usually gage a prospect and how they will react so I don't do it to everyone. 

 As for passing off a prospect to someone who knows the MOC. I have no problem doing that. I can give info an Navy trades. If someone wants more info in anything else I pass them off or go get help. It is quite possible your friend was talking to a Reserve Recruiter. They usually don't do the Recruiter's Course and are very loyal to their unit and less enthusiastic about other regiments.  Reg force is as well but here in the office it's usually kept "in house" and doesn't spill out. 

Bashrah have a talk to your friend and dig deeply into what he heard and when. It could very well be case where he over heard something that should never have been said. Not trying to put the blame on your friend just try to get to the bottom of it. And if it was the recruiter that was inappropriate then he/she needs to be counselled on proper office edicate.


----------



## Jarnhamar (25 Sep 2009)

basrah said:
			
		

> Might want to actually read the whole thread before posting.



I did. And rereading the thread my comment still stands.

Your friend could be full of shit, and I'll tell you why.

Recruiters can be real hammeheads, I've heard some of their BS first hand. I'm the first one to suggest CFRC gets revamped.

That said some people go to the recruiters hear what the army has to offer, aren't interested but feel weak (etc..) for not being interested so they come up with any number of excuses as to why they didn't join instead of just saying they don't wanna play.
"Oh the recruiter said infantry is closed, I want frontline combat! and he said only clerk positions are available so I said no".
"They said only the navy is hiring and I want army!"
"They said I was too agressive"

So it can be one of two things, Basrah. The recruiter could be out to lunch or your friend for whatever reason could belying or embellishing.
"My friend said this" is quite anecdotal.


----------



## MARS (25 Sep 2009)

When I joined I heard a similar statistic about Armoured Corps survival times.  It was explained to me as some sort of WWIII calculation based on a NATO vs. Warsaw Pact armoured engagement - possibly incorporating a tactical nuclear strike.

Reserve recruiters at CFRCs - yep, that sounds about right.  My second recruiter is embedded at CFRC(Toronto).  His TOS is clear that his primary responsibility is to recruit specifically for my unit - as someone who is intimately familiar with the Naval Reserve and specifically the MOS in the NR and can thus provide expert advice.  Since we have so few NR MOS relative to RegF Navy MOS (not to mention army/AF MOS that we very rarely ever operate or train with) it should come as no surprise to anyone working there that he would not have any SA into say, NESOP, let alone...armoured recce.

Now, waaaaay down on the second or third page of his TOS it does say that, when not recruiting for the NR, he will be employed to recruit for the wider CF.  Thankfully my guy is switched on and I think quite capable of doing this without getting out of his lanes.  And thankfully, up until a few months ago, the CO at CFRC(T) was a Navy LCdr and a good friend, so NR recruiting was not neglected.  However, the number of applicants walking in to the RC looking for NR employment pales in comparison to the number of applicants looking other employment, so I am not surprised that he probably spends more of his time doing the latter.  I suppose that even helps him grow professionally.  But it is incumbent on his supervisor to be aware of his TOS ( developed in conjunction with CFRG and mandated by our HQ last year - is this a NR-only thing?) and his limitations and thus to ensure that whatever applicant he is speaking with is getting the correct advice.

It is too bad that some reserve recruiters do not the get the course.  It is a requirement for the NR "second-recruiters" (each NRD has 2 recruiters now - one at the Unit and one embedded in their CFRC) to have the course or get it within 6 months of starting the job.  I remember doing it - it was a valuable course.

Cheers,

MARS

edited to add:  after re-reading my post, I don't want anyone to think that I am slagging CFRC Toronto.  Their outstanding support to my recruiter enabled my Unit to recruit some 70+ recruits last year - the most of all the NR Divisions in the country.  I was just making a general comment about the real limitations of reserve recruiters in relation to the title of this thread re: "lies".


----------



## SoldierInTheMaking (26 Sep 2009)

I was also lied to by the recruiters and it's no little lie, it's actually a big deal for me....
I was sworn in july 23rd and was suppose to leave august 15th for basic. Two days after my enrollment ceremony i dislocated my thumb training so i was taken off that course. When i told the recruiters what happened they specifically said that my file wont be released but just put aside till it was healed. A month passes and i call the recruiting center just to make sure my file was still kicking around and it was. I was told there was a note in my file stating that it was not to be released and just put on hold. 4 weeks later(yesterday) i called the recruiters because my thumb is now back to 100 percent so i was looking to set up an appointment to redo my medical and be recoursed....once the recruiter new it was me he says "well first off i want to apologize, apparently they sent out a release on my file august 14th the day before i was suppose to leave. So basically i was lied to and stabbed in the back. Now he says since your file has been released it usually takes 4-6 months to even be able to start my application over, so i have to do everything over again that took me a year to do in the first place....I first started my application last december so almost a year ago....
I really don't agree with this at all and i want to do something about it....they told me something and did different...they lied to me....if that isn;t the case then they made a mistake and they should fix that mistake.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (26 Sep 2009)

Johnson101 said:
			
		

> I was also lied to by the recruiters and it's no little lie, it's actually a big deal for me....
> I was sworn in july 23rd and was suppose to leave august 15th for basic. Two days after my enrollment ceremony i dislocated my thumb training so i was taken off that course. When i told the recruiters what happened they specifically said that my file wont be released but just put aside till it was healed. A month passes and i call the recruiting center just to make sure my file was still kicking around and it was. I was told there was a note in my file stating that it was not to be released and just put on hold. 4 weeks later(yesterday) i called the recruiters because my thumb is now back to 100 percent so i was looking to set up an appointment to redo my medical and be recoursed....once the recruiter new it was me he says "well first off i want to apologize, apparently they sent out a release on my file august 14th the day before i was suppose to leave. So basically i was lied to and stabbed in the back. Now he says since your file has been released it usually takes 4-6 months to even be able to start my application over, so i have to do everything over again that took me a year to do in the first place....I first started my application last december so almost a year ago....
> I really don't agree with this at all and i want to do something about it....they told me something and did different...they lied to me....if that isn;t the case then they made a mistake and they should fix that mistake.



So, you're saying you were sworn in, a full member of the CF. Dislocated your thumb. The Recruiting Centre released you?

Something here isn't adding up.


----------



## CFR FCS (26 Sep 2009)

Johnson 101,
I'm sorry that you were caught in the LWOP trap. CFRC's are only allowed to grant up to 30 days LWOP before course start dates. The Commander Mil Pers (CMP) can grant up to 60 days, that's the max. We are not allowed to pay you if you can't work. 
Some file managers didn't know this and they didn't know enough to ask. That has been corrected. 

PM me when you are ready to go and I'll do what I can for your file.


----------



## kratz (26 Sep 2009)

Johnson101, 

You should be more accurate when you post a similar stories online and say that recruiters lied to you. Between the two stories you have posted, in the above Milnet post  you say you were sworn in, the FB post  states you were supposed to go, but neglects to mention being sworn in. As CFR FCS notes above, if you indeed were sworn in, the military has a policy on LWOP that must be followed even if in the unfortunate event, your recruiter was not aware of that policy.


----------



## Jarnhamar (26 Sep 2009)

CFR FCS said:
			
		

> Johnson 101,
> I'm sorry that you were caught in the LWOP trap. CFRC's are only allowed to grant up to 30 days LWOP before course start dates. The Commander Mil Pers (CMP) can grant up to 60 days, that's the max. We are not allowed to pay you if you can't work.
> Some file managers didn't know this and they didn't know enough to ask. That has been corrected.
> 
> PM me when you are ready to go and I'll do what I can for your file.


This kinda mentality is what recruiting and the CF as a whole needs.


----------



## SoldierInTheMaking (27 Sep 2009)

recceguy said:
			
		

> So, you're saying you were sworn in, a full member of the CF. Dislocated your thumb. The Recruiting Centre released you?
> 
> Something here isn't adding up.



Yes, July 23rd, 2009 I was officially sworn in. An official member of the Canadian Forces. I was set to leave for basic training August 15th and start on the 17th.





			
				kratz said:
			
		

> Johnson101,
> 
> You should be more accurate when you post a similar stories online and say that recruiters lied to you. Between the two stories you have posted, in the above Milnet post  you say you were sworn in, the FB post  states you were supposed to go, but neglects to mention being sworn in. As CFR FCS notes above, if you indeed were sworn in, the military has a policy on LWOP that must be followed even if in the unfortunate event, your recruiter was not aware of that policy.



Sorry next time I will be more accurate. But for every... i was sworn in and i was specifically told that my file was not going to be released. There was a notation on my file saying this file is not to be released but just put aside till my thumb was healed. So that said one thing but did another, and if it was a mistake then they should fix it.


----------



## 4Feathers (27 Sep 2009)

Flawed Design said:
			
		

> Recruiters can be real hammeheads, I've heard some of their BS first hand. I'm the first one to suggest CFRC gets revamped.
> "My friend said this" is quite anecdotal.



Harsh! Did you know CFRG has the same establishment they had when they were recruiting half as many personnel 6 years ago? I guess you must since you seem to be an expert on the matter. Recruiters and MCC's go through a thorough screening process before they can even be posted into recruiting. I would invite you to try a posting as a recruiter, or even sign up to be a recruiter for day, if you have not already. And my experience (not anecdotal) with personnel in recruiting is that they are some of the finest personnel I have met.
Finally, is it CFRC you would like to revamp, or CFRG? One works for the other.


----------



## FDO (27 Sep 2009)

PM me and I'll see what I can do to help. No guarantees though. I've seen this before.


----------



## SoldierInTheMaking (28 Sep 2009)

I just want to say thank you for everyone's help and getting me through this....if i have to wait out that 4-6 months just to start over, that's fine. Of course it would be nice to start sooner but I guess i really don't have a choice in this matter. I will take this time to better prepare myself for my training and also spend more time with my girlfriend, because we all know that is one of the hardest things we have to do is leave them. But this is my dream and I'm not giving up on this one, many of you have helped me throughout my process and are still helping me and i appreciate everything, so thank you! I will indeed keep you all informed and updated on how my process goes from here on.

Cheers everyone!

Dylan


----------



## the 48th regulator (28 Sep 2009)

And with that note, this topic is locked.

dileas

tess

milnet.ca staff


----------

