Author Topic: Retention vs Recruiting  (Read 10283 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ballz

    ...

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 121,331
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,338
Re: Retention vs Recruiting
« Reply #50 on: May 25, 2018, 20:30:38 »
Well I think you have it partially right.  After their VIE anyone should be allowed to remuster if they can qualify for another trade.

When I was a recruiter 10+ years ago many people up and left because their trade wouldn't let them transfer to something else.   There should be a program that allows people to sign up for any of the grunt jobs (infantry armour, boatswain etc) with the promise that after their VIE and if they can qualify to remuster to another trade (targeted trades could be a consideration).  In fact some trades should go back to being remuster only.  Or sign on for longer in your trade with an educational bonus or re-signing bonus.

When I started my CPA designation, the infantry career manager wanted to put me in a hard Logistics position (in Finance) for 3 years so that I could get the required work experience. The Finance branch was and is hurting for people, they would have been happy to take me on for 3 years.

The infantry would have benefited from this in my opinion, and if more people could do similar things, it would benefit the corps massively. For an Inf O to come back to the infantry corps after having worked 3 years in a position of another trade, they're coming back with far more knowledge than if the had done the typical ERE posting at an RSS position or perhaps in a G3/G5/G7 shop, or perhaps EA / PA to some senior officer, somewhere... doing essentially what they already did before they left the Battalion, and doing exactly what they will be doing when they go back to the Battalion. Bringing back the credential (the designation) in my opinion, is kind of meaningless as its just a credential but for some reason the institution likes those too. Now if you have a host of people doing this, your senior Captains and your Majors in the Units are all bringing back perspectives from having worked in different trades.

This was not doable because our machine is far too rigid, and so the infantry corps lost that opportunity (as did I... that was the preferred route). Only by pure dumb luck was the CAF at large able to retain me (I already had a release in) but it had to be in the Logistics corps... and because of our convoluted OT process, the VOT to Log wasn't even guaranteed despite the fact that the Log corps clearly wanted me to be a Log O and I was leaving the CAF otherwise because there was no way for me to achieve my personal goals. And if not for some serious intervention that honestly defied all normality, it would have been a two-year process to actually get me through the OT gauntlet and trained to OFP.... all for the sake of getting on one silly Powerpoint course. I wasn't staying on for that two-year ride, so luckily it worked out.

For me, the CPA designation is a "must-do" and doing it within the CAF has been more than just a burden. If we're going to lose people because they have personal goals which happen to also benefit the machine as a whole, we're just f**ked from the get go.
« Last Edit: May 25, 2018, 20:36:54 by ballz »
Have you ever danced with the devil in the pale moonlight?

Offline ballz

    ...

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 121,331
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,338
Re: Retention vs Recruiting
« Reply #51 on: May 25, 2018, 20:35:09 »
Basically take the LOTP and beef it up some;  the problem right now is the OUTCAP numbers that are attached to trade health;  2% of a GREEN trades' TES can OT, 1% for AMBER and 0.5% for RED.

Those arbitrary numbers are a huge issue. If someone is in a trade and wants out so they are OT'ing... guess what, they are probably not happy or there is something going on in their trade that isn't allowing them to achieve what they want... if they don't OT, they're probably going to move on to something outside the CAF. The CAF is going to lose them anyway, so just let them OT and perhaps you can focus your recruiting more on the trades that tend to bring people in and chew them up faster.

I think you'd agree based on your other comments that it wouldn't be a bad thing if people were coming in through x, y, z, trades but then staying in because they were able to do a, b, c, trade after a few years. All the better if x, y, z, is one of the "ops focused" trades and a, b, c, are something outside that realm.
Have you ever danced with the devil in the pale moonlight?

Offline SeaKingTacco

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 148,460
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,398
  • Door Gunnery- The Sport of Kings!
Re: Retention vs Recruiting
« Reply #52 on: May 25, 2018, 20:48:02 »
There are three core recruiting messages; each resonates to a different degree with different people.


Learn - people join to get transferable skills.

Earn - people join to make money.

Serve - people join for the camaraderie, and sense of service.


Voila.  Mix those three concepts in differing proportions for different audiences, and you've got your recruiting advertising all done.

Where is your focus group and flashy kagillion dollar consultant report?

Thought not... ;)

Offline dapaterson

    Mostly Harmless.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 462,120
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 16,774
Re: Retention vs Recruiting
« Reply #53 on: May 25, 2018, 20:56:55 »
Where is your focus group and flashy kagillion dollar consultant report?

Thought not... ;)

Please.

It's focus groups.  All held in locations where for some reason other entertaining things to do are occurring at the same time.  Spaced out over several years.  With a final report that states that further study is warranted.
This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 248,470
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,875
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Re: Retention vs Recruiting
« Reply #54 on: May 26, 2018, 01:44:43 »
Where is your focus group and flashy kagillion dollar consultant report?

Thought not... ;)

If it's not PowerPoint, it's not consulting :)
"The most important qualification of a soldier is fortitude under fatigue and privation. Courage is only second; hardship, poverty and want are the best school for a soldier." Napoleon

Offline Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 208,605
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,758
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: Retention vs Recruiting
« Reply #55 on: May 26, 2018, 10:46:58 »



I don't know how to define longstanding, but when I enlisted (1960) there was no citizenship requirement for other ranks and officers had to be 'British subjects.' We had some excellent officers and downright superb non-commissioned officers from a variety of countries and backgrounds ... including recent (15 years ago, then) enemies.

In 1973 two things happened.

Ted Heath took the UK into the EC.
Pierre Trudeau created Canadian Citizenship.

Canada and Britain turned their backs on each other and British Subjects lost rights in Canada and Canadians lost rights throughout the Commonwealth and in Britain.

God save Ted and Pierre. [cheers]

Tangent ends.
"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

Offline jib9022

  • Guest
  • *
  • 130
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7
Re: Retention vs Recruiting
« Reply #56 on: May 26, 2018, 11:17:46 »
When I started my CPA designation,

I was wondering if you were able to continue with CPA program? are you still in military as infantry officer?

I was in military too but got out and started/finished CPA program and went back again as LogO

CF pays for people to their CPA but do not pay for annual membership after, which is odd
« Last Edit: May 26, 2018, 11:21:09 by jib9022 »

Offline ballz

    ...

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 121,331
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,338
Re: Retention vs Recruiting
« Reply #57 on: May 26, 2018, 13:59:34 »
I was wondering if you were able to continue with CPA program? are you still in military as infantry officer?

As of 10 days ago I'm a Log O. It's not been easy and hindsight being 20/20, I probably should have just went civie side to complete it. It's unlikely I would have gotten back in afterwards though.

I was in military too but got out and started/finished CPA program and went back again as LogO

Here's a good example, this does not speak very well for the machine IMO.
Have you ever danced with the devil in the pale moonlight?

Offline Humphrey Bogart

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 119,779
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,202
Re: Retention vs Recruiting
« Reply #58 on: May 26, 2018, 15:34:21 »
However, the reality is that we currently train people for these great jobs, but they actually then end up scrubbing pots and doing cleaning stations a good part of the time anyway.  In my plan, at least we're up front about it and then dangle a significant carrot at the end.  Right now, we see a lot of folks leaving at the end of their BEs and taking their expensive training with them.  Perhaps, if we expose them to the military lifestyle, before we invest heavily in training, then better decisions can be made and the ones who stay for the later training will be more inclined to make a career of it.

I realize I speak heresy, but it's not like the current system is working so well that there's no room for different ideas.

PS:  I believe the Royal Australian Navy has a "gap year" program that does something similar to what I've described.

The problem with this Pusser is you are in effect creating a form of "National Service".  Again, I go back to my point earlier on what do we want from our Armed Forces:  A force based around mobilization where the large body of minimally trained individuals fall in on kit and rapidly prepare for war when the Balloon goes up or, a completely professional force that is rapidly deployable and designed to meet the threat(s) and fight what's put in front of us?

Either way, you still need to cloth, feed, house and pay these people so I don't see how your idea is any better than what we already do?

Continental European Armies have largely followed the anglosphere lead of completely professionalizing their Armed Forces for the simple fact that conscripts aren't particularly great soldiers when up against the professionals and the costs associated with a conscript army just doesn't make sense. 

Even the Russians have gone about professionalizing their Armed Forces because as was proven in Chechnya and Georgia, conscripts just aren't that effective.  The modern Russian Army is basically centred around 6 or 7 Divisions of Guards Armoured and Motor Rifle Brigades, Marines and VDV Airborne Brigades with a large expansion of Spetsnaz and Internal Ministry SOF. 

For how the Canadian Armed Forces is used, it makes way more sense to have a small professional force as we basically spend our entire time participating in Neo-colonial conflicts.

For the record, I think the Navy and CANSOF are the best structured elements of the CAF.  The Navy had six ship deployed for the month of April (2xfrigates and 4xMCDVs).  About 600 pers out of 13,600 total strength.  They deployed Chicoutimi earlier in the year and they obviously have other ships in workups.  Needless to say, the Navy is actually fairly busy as is the Air Force as they both have numerous standing commitments that keep them continuously occupied. 

I hear the Navy is crying for people all the time?  The Army is vastly overstrength for what it actually does and most people spend the majority of time simply trying to administer themselves and the organizations they work for, in other words, doing keep busy work.  Too many half strength units with no kit and personnel who are slaves to CFTPO.

Offline Infanteer

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 176,780
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,316
  • Honey Badger FTW!
Re: Retention vs Recruiting
« Reply #59 on: May 26, 2018, 16:25:21 »
I always thought these ads covered all the bases:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snYeEMRXt2o
"Overall it appears that much of the apparent complexity of modern war stems in practice from the self-imposed complexity of modern HQs" LCol J.P. Storr

Offline Humphrey Bogart

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 119,779
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,202
Re: Retention vs Recruiting
« Reply #60 on: May 26, 2018, 16:59:20 »
I always thought these ads covered all the bases:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snYeEMRXt2o

Doing awesome crap while drinking on Fridays? This would not hit any of the kinder and gentler metrics we are trying to target!

jollyjacktar

  • Guest
Re: Retention vs Recruiting
« Reply #61 on: May 26, 2018, 18:31:48 »
Not only that, we don't have any flying bars that cater to the hip crowd and jump companies.

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 297,331
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,957
Re: Retention vs Recruiting
« Reply #62 on: May 26, 2018, 19:39:58 »
We should take platoons or companies of combat arms soldiers (80/20 reg-res) and deploy them around the world for short missions either doing force protection or training/training with local militaries.

2-4 month trips.

Our soldiers NCOs and officers need real world experience.
« Last Edit: May 27, 2018, 00:25:40 by Jarnhamar »
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline dapaterson

    Mostly Harmless.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 462,120
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 16,774
Re: Retention vs Recruiting
« Reply #63 on: May 26, 2018, 22:27:33 »
Not only that, we don't have any flying bars that cater to the hip crowd and jump companies.

Clearly, you've never had an ACSO make you coffee in an Aurora.


ACSO: For people who can't spell GPS.
This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

jollyjacktar

  • Guest
Re: Retention vs Recruiting
« Reply #64 on: May 26, 2018, 22:44:21 »
Clearly, you've never had an ACSO make you coffee in an Aurora.


ACSO: For people who can't spell GPS.

I'm thinking now, sadly, l don't.

Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 248,470
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,875
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Re: Retention vs Recruiting
« Reply #65 on: May 27, 2018, 00:17:47 »
We should take platoons or companies of combat arms soldiers (80/20 reg-res) and deploy them around the world for short missions either doing for protection or training/training with local militaries.

2-4 month trips.

Or soldiers NCOs and officers need real world experience.

So, like, you just kind of described my 8 years in the British Army.

There were definitely pros and cons. But I thought it was mainly 'pro'.
"The most important qualification of a soldier is fortitude under fatigue and privation. Courage is only second; hardship, poverty and want are the best school for a soldier." Napoleon

Offline Tango2Bravo

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 50,785
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,804
  • All your base are belong to us.
Re: Retention vs Recruiting
« Reply #66 on: May 27, 2018, 08:59:01 »
We should take platoons or companies of combat arms soldiers (80/20 reg-res) and deploy them around the world for short missions either doing force protection or training/training with local militaries.

2-4 month trips.

Our soldiers NCOs and officers need real world experience.

While I get what you are saying, the military must be a servant of government policy and not the other way around. We deploy on such missions that the government deems we need to deploy on to serve the interests of the nation.
Well-trained, older Panzer crews are the decisive factor for success...It is preferable to start off with fewer Panzers than to set out with young crews who lack combat experience.

 - Verbal report of Gen Balck 1943

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 297,331
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,957
Re: Retention vs Recruiting
« Reply #67 on: May 27, 2018, 09:15:17 »
While I get what you are saying, the military must be a servant of government policy and not the other way around. We deploy on such missions that the government deems we need to deploy on to serve the interests of the nation.

I wonder if there is a distinction to be made between serving the interests of the nation and serving the interests of the government? Ie sending soldiers to train kurds will make Kurdish-Canadian voters happy.

Is Imbedding platoons or companies with allied nations an option, realistically speaking? Say a low intensity one.
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline Dimsum

    West coast best coast.

  • Mentor
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 182,740
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,378
  • I get paid to travel. I just don't pick where.
Re: Retention vs Recruiting
« Reply #68 on: May 27, 2018, 10:33:22 »
Clearly, you've never had an ACSO make you coffee in an Aurora.


ACSO: For people who can't spell GPS.

Funny - I've only seen pilots break out their personal Aeropress/espresso maker while onboard. 

I think the catchphrase for ACSO (at least in the LRP/MH world) is more correctly "we don't navigate s***."  But I digress.
Philip II of Macedon to Spartans (346 BC):  "You are advised to submit without further delay, for if I bring my army into your land, I will destroy your farms, slay your people, and raze your city."

Reply:  "If."

Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 248,470
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,875
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Re: Retention vs Recruiting
« Reply #69 on: May 27, 2018, 11:06:45 »
I wonder if there is a distinction to be made between serving the interests of the nation and serving the interests of the government? Ie sending soldiers to train kurds will make Kurdish-Canadian voters happy.

Is Imbedding platoons or companies with allied nations an option, realistically speaking? Say a low intensity one.

It's always 'low intensity' until an 18 year old private comes home in a body bag, as a result of anything from a GSW to a car crash. Then there'd better be a strong alignment to a really sound national interest being served in some way, or else.
"The most important qualification of a soldier is fortitude under fatigue and privation. Courage is only second; hardship, poverty and want are the best school for a soldier." Napoleon

Offline ballz

    ...

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 121,331
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,338
Re: Retention vs Recruiting
« Reply #70 on: May 27, 2018, 16:19:58 »
I always thought these ads covered all the bases:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snYeEMRXt2o

There are definitely some good recruitng ads out there and we were missing the mark for a while. We seem to have gotten better with our recruiting ads in the past few years, even if there can still be some improvement...

The retention part comes down to follow-up on those ads. We promise a lot in those ads, and you're not in the mix for very long before you realize you've been duped. Tours/deployments etc aside (because those are largely out of our control), we don't do exciting training, we don't do OUTCAN training nearly enough, we don't offer advanced quals to often enough, etc.
Have you ever danced with the devil in the pale moonlight?

Offline donaldk

  • Member
  • ****
  • 4,955
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 105
Re: Retention vs Recruiting
« Reply #71 on: May 27, 2018, 18:53:55 »
I fully endorse the sentiments expressed by HB in his last post.

I just wish to particularize a few naval point, if I may.

First, the naval reserves actually have a lot of the equipment for "expeditionary" if in that you include support of civilian authorities. Witness the Winnipeg floods around the turn of the millennium. About 75% of the deployed boat assets came from the NAVRES, and nearly 45% of personnel to operate also.

But it remains true that the naval reserves, just like the militia, remains organized on model based in World War era's view of augmentation and with a primary purpose of "being visible" in their community.

Well, they are not anymore. Who in Montreal, Halifax, Ottawa, Vancouver, Calgary or Toronto even knows anything about the activities of Naval reserve Divisions located there?

The year I left the reserves to go on SRR, I had put up a paper on what I felt was the necessary re-organization of NAVRES to fulfill the upcoming role of manning the MCDV's. These were much more sophisticated vessels than the old Gate Vessels, and thus, more advanced training, individual and team, would be required, and extensive use of simulators would be required. For me, any time a reservist spent doing "admin" nights stuff was a waste of training time, as even the higher ranks needed to keep their training up.

So I proposed disposing of all the NAVRES units and to create five Regional Reserve Training Centers (Halifax for the Atlantic provinces, Esquimalt in the West, and then Quebec City for Quebec (already half built as NAVRES HQ and CFFS Qc, then Hamilton for Ontario (kick the Army out of the base at water's edge - it used to belong to the Navy before unification) and then either the Peg or Calgary for the prairies) These training centre would concentrate the regular forces resources currently assigned to support reserve units and they would be the ones doing all of the support administration for reservists for their region and providing the instructors/standards. The reservists would do their basic at St- Jean, like everybody else, and after passing basic, would be contacted by their Training Centre for further administration of their career. All reservist from the given region would basically receive, once a year, a schedule telling him or her which week-end (one every month) to report to the training centre and what training he/she would do on that week-end, and then, when he/she would be expected to report for two weeks full training. Any other assignment would also be coordinated by those centre.

It's basically the US system. This way, you pool and make the Reg force support more efficient, the Training centres would concentrate and use efficiently the expensive training simulators required, and make it possible to dispose of most NAVRES units.

I don't know what happened to this paper (other than the C.O. sent it up to Quebec with a less than enthusiastic cover letter - then I retired before learning of the results, though it's obvious by now it wasn't implemented.  ;D

OGBD - I'd be interested in said paper if you had a copy - current structure of NAVRES is a crap show with most NRD's RSS rendered impotent due to lack of manning and post ins (D Mil C appears to be giving a discrete big FU to NAVRES support billets - they either post in way to junor unqualified pers or are leaving billets unfilled).  Some NRDs have nil Reg F within their lines (e.g. HUN, PVO, CAR) and recently a couple major central region NAVRES training (NRETS) events got shut down over shoddy Admin orders (term OP ORD isn't used anymore to avoid the requisite SECRET classification required).  I never had to dabble with CFTPOs until my current posting and now am tossing them out left right and centre just to have some sort of barely functional 'RSS' at my NRD.

Offline Lumber

  • Donor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 59,784
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,103
Re: Retention vs Recruiting
« Reply #72 on: May 27, 2018, 22:49:22 »
OGBD - I'd be interested in said paper if you had a copy - current structure of NAVRES is a crap show with most NRD's RSS rendered impotent due to lack of manning and post ins (D Mil C appears to be giving a discrete big FU to NAVRES support billets - they either post in way to junor unqualified pers or are leaving billets unfilled).  Some NRDs have nil Reg F within their lines (e.g. HUN, PVO, CAR) and recently a couple major central region NAVRES training (NRETS) events got shut down over shoddy Admin orders (term OP ORD isn't used anymore to avoid the requisite SECRET classification required).  I never had to dabble with CFTPOs until my current posting and now am tossing them out left right and centre just to have some sort of barely functional 'RSS' at my NRD.

PVO has a RegF AdminO, but I get what you're saying.
"Aboard his ship, there is nothing outside a captain's control." - Captain Sir Edward Pellew

“Extremes to the right and to the left of any political dispute are always wrong.”
― Dwight D. Eisenhower

Death before dishonour! Nothing before coffee!

Offline Tcm621

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 13,375
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 761
Re: Retention vs Recruiting
« Reply #73 on: May 28, 2018, 00:24:43 »
There are definitely some good recruitng ads out there and we were missing the mark for a while. We seem to have gotten better with our recruiting ads in the past few years, even if there can still be some improvement...

The retention part comes down to follow-up on those ads. We promise a lot in those ads, and you're not in the mix for very long before you realize you've been duped. Tours/deployments etc aside (because those are largely out of our control), we don't do exciting training, we don't do OUTCAN training nearly enough, we don't offer advanced quals to often enough, etc.

That's the kicker for me. Nothing like being turned down for advanced course because the unit can't spare you. We really under deliver on coursing. I would argue the Canadian Military is "well trained" any more, at least not in the sense we used to be. Just enough, just in time is the CAF training philosophy these days. It used to be more training makes a better soldier/sailor/airman.