Canada doesn’t matter to the rest of the world - and it’s our own fault

[Quirky]

What do you mean, "retention is shit"? Is ~8% terrible?

And I take it you work in the recruiting system and have access to the applicant file demographics? Or are you pulling that out of your ass?

You're right, the CAF has plenty of people.

 

[GR66]

The retention rate as an overall metric might not be bad but if you're losing people disproportionately in certain trades or losing them at the point in their career development when they are at the peak of their contribution to their trade then it is an issue. And from various discussions in these Forums that definitely appears to be the case.

 

[Kirkhill]

Soldiering has always been a controversial profession - not often a preferred trade.

Johnny's Gone For a Soldier (Version 1)

Music, Lyrics and Information to Johnny's Gone For a Soldier

www.contemplator.com

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Is that the metric we are going by, our retention is shit, but at least it isn't as bad as country X?

This whole recruiting thing is hilarious, the CAF has alienated it's core demographic base - the white Caucasian male, (rural or uban doesn't matter), and visible minorities and women aren't exactly flooding to the recruiting centers. When they do get there, they are faced with a massively long wait, which hasn't improved in years, where they ultimately find nothing much of value.

Now you are conflating retention with recruiting.

And maybe, just maybe, if all NATO allies have an attrition rate in the 6-11% range, there might be some validity in the data our allies provide? And if we are attrition below the average our allies are, we might be doing some things right?

I am not saying attrition isn’t higher or concerning in certain critical occupations- I am speaking globally.

But, of course, you know better.

 

[dimsum]

You're right, the CAF has plenty of people.

We are overborne in some trades and highly underborne in some others. Short of wartime, non-conscription countries do not have enough people because most civilians aren’t looking to join the military, period.

I will bet money that in 1960, CAF members were bemoaning that we didn’t have enough people compared to WWII or Korea levels. Now, we’re looking fondly at 1967 levels.

This brings us to @Brad Sallows point - we need to figure out the required force structure for Canada (which is not the same as traditional Canadian military ORBAT) before we figure out how to retain people.

Before worrying about the size of the recruiting base, the first question is how large a recruiting base is needed to maintain a force as small as Canada's. Chasing people disinclined to show up in the first place is a waste of resources if they aren't actually needed

Maybe we don’t need to retain as many Infantry soldiers, but we need to retain as many AVN/AVS techs and stokers as possible. But all that has to start with what we actually need to defend Canada and contribute to our alliances.

 

[Kirkhill]

Maybe we don’t need to retain as many Infantry soldiers, but we need to retain as many AVN/AVS techs and stokers as possible. But all that has to start with what we actually need to defend Canada and contribute to our alliances.

And maybe the civilian supply chain needs to be brought further forwards with military technicians being trained to do less in the field - more power pack and systems replacements rather than field repairs?

 

[OldSolduer]

We are overborne in some trades and highly underborne in some others. Short of wartime, non-conscription countries do not have enough people because most civilians aren’t looking to join the military, period.

I will bet money that in 1960, CAF members were bemoaning that we didn’t have enough people compared to WWII or Korea levels. Now, we’re looking fondly at 1967 levels.

This brings us to @Brad Sallows point - we need to figure out the required force structure for Canada (which is not the same as traditional Canadian military ORBAT) before we figure out how to retain people.



Maybe we don’t need to retain as many Infantry soldiers, but we need to retain as many AVN/AVS techs and stokers as possible. But all that has to start with what we actually need to defend Canada and contribute to our alliances.

I will agree to a certain extent. The infantry is far more "techy" now than it was even 10 years ago. To feed the hopper to make Sgts, WOs etc you need new troops constantly. I am not sure how we could cut the infantry (maybe lose 3 battalions?) but the current state of affairs is not desirable either.

 

[FJAG]

Maybe we don’t need to retain as many Infantry soldiers, but we need to retain as many AVN/AVS techs and stokers as possible. But all that has to start with what we actually need to defend Canada and contribute to our alliances.

I sometimes wonder whether with technicians we have cut the numbers back to the point where every tech needs to be all-singing, all-dancing and becomes virtually indispensable. I'm strongly in favour of more techs (of all natures) and a structure which uses basic trained ones as labour and more experienced ones more as supervisors and quality control inspectors.

I will agree to a certain extent. The infantry is far more "techy" now than it was even 10 years ago. To feed the hopper to make Sgts, WOs etc you need new troops constantly. I am not sure how we could cut the infantry (maybe lose 3 battalions?) but the current state of affairs is not desirable either.

I've been playing around with just that - in an attempt to see if we could form a 30/70 based force with one less RegF brigade. The answer is yes we could except for infantry where the rock bottom lay at 21 RegF rifle companies (ie 2 battalions' worth less). The only force which was grossly out of whack and needed a lot more folks was logistics/maintenance That needed close to doubling in strength.

 

[Kirkhill]

I will agree to a certain extent. The infantry is far more "techy" now than it was even 10 years ago. To feed the hopper to make Sgts, WOs etc you need new troops constantly. I am not sure how we could cut the infantry (maybe lose 3 battalions?) but the current state of affairs is not desirable either.

Cut 3 active battalions. Add 51 reserve companies.

 

[Good2Golf]

Cut 3 active battalions. Add 51 reserve companies.

...oh, you were serious?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

If you really, really want diversity that reflect the make up of the country, then have conscription for EVERY Adult over 18, you define the number of slots you have every year. Then you you divide those slots up in a percentage to match the country's diversity percentage. Then you have a lottery draw for each of those groups, till you fill up the slots plus a bit for medical dropouts. Also make PR's eligible so immigrants won't wiggle out that way.

I really want to see the Woke crowd try to argue that is racist.....

 

[dimsum]

If you really, really want diversity that reflect the make up of the country, then have conscription for EVERY Adult over 18, you define the number of slots you have every year. Then you you divide those slots up in a percentage to match the country's diversity percentage. Then you have a lottery draw for each of those groups, till you fill up the slots plus a bit for medical dropouts. Also make PR's eligible so immigrants won't wiggle out that way.

I really want to see the Woke crowd try to argue that is racist.....

That just brings up the question of whether conscription is needed in Canada or not, and whether it’s better to have a lot of people who may not want to be there vs far fewer people who, at least initially, want to be there.

Putting that aside, if we went that way, then we best make sure that every single trade is also subdivided into those slots. If, for example, Asians are overrepresented in cooks while Caucasians are overrepresented in clerks, then yeah there will be some issues of “fairness”.

 

[FJAG]

Cut 3 active battalions. Add 51 reserve companies.

The number is actually 30 but that could be upped with 4-company battalions.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

That just brings up the question of whether conscription is needed in Canada or not, and whether it’s better to have a lot of people who may not want to be there vs far fewer people who, at least initially, want to be there.

Putting that aside, if we went that way, then we best make sure that every single trade is also subdivided into those slots. If, for example, Asians are overrepresented in cooks while Caucasians are overrepresented in clerks, then yeah there will be some issues of “fairness”.

The Italians are the MP's, the British descended are the cooks, the Germans are the drivers, etc, etc

 

[Kirkhill]

The number is actually 30 but that could be upped with 4-company battalions.

How about if more of the companies are intended for detached employment?

 

[jaxhades94]

The Italians are the MP's, the British descended are the cooks, the Germans are the drivers, etc, etc

Idk, I would be worried about the British descended as cooks and their ability to distinguish flavour that isn't mayonaisse or salt and pepper (speaking as a British descendant myself hehehe).

 

[Aper]

Idk, I would be worried about the British descended as cooks and their ability to distinguish flavour that isn't mayonaisse or salt and pepper (speaking as a British descendant myself hehehe).

Heck, they're still eating the same way they used to when Germans were flying overhead ...

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Heck, they're still eating the same way they used to when Germans were flying overhead ...

The only country where nutrition rates improved when rationing was introduced.

 

[OldSolduer]

That just brings up the question of whether conscription is needed in Canada or not, and whether it’s better to have a lot of people who may not want to be there vs far fewer people who, at least initially, want to be there.

Putting that aside, if we went that way, then we best make sure that every single trade is also subdivided into those slots. If, for example, Asians are overrepresented in cooks while Caucasians are overrepresented in clerks, then yeah there will be some issues of “fairness”.

Conscription is not needed at this point. What is needed is a coherent vision for what the CAF is for and that has to be communicated to the public - mostly to young males. Its cool, its adventures and it can be dangerous - things that young men like.

 

[dapaterson]

Conscription is not needed at this point. What is needed is a coherent vision for what the CAF is for and that has to be communicated to the public - mostly to young males. Its cool, its adventures and it can be dangerous - things that young men like.

Look at forces.ca for "in demand" occupations - many are not the pointy end, but rather some of the more technical support occupations. The communication with the public needs to do market segmentation, because not everyone who joins the CAF wants to be in the infantry - nor does the CAF only need people who want to join the infantry.