- Reaction score
- 6,520
- Points
- 1,160
I have heard that they intend to (re) open recruiting centres in smaller communities where they used to be. It seems going after urban youth almost exclusively hasn't worked out as planned.
Canada moves to 2% GDP end of FY25/26 - PMMC
- Thread starter Maxman1
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 7,548
- Points
- 1,190
Quantity or quality? Anecdotally a lot of training failures on RQ Pte/DP1 because of the CFAT loss.
Recruiting will also go up once the economy takes a crap, which is has and we're paying Privates $52K to $60K a year now.
MilEME09
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 7,439
- Points
- 1,210
CFAT was only killed for certain applicants i thought? Any way we always have loss so increasing throughput will still increase the amount who get qualified proportionately
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Fossil
- Reaction score
- 45,076
- Points
- 1,160
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 18,652
- Points
- 1,260
Meanwhile
BZ
That's awesome! Look at that. When was the last time that armory was that packed ? Well done 32!
- Reaction score
- 8,194
- Points
- 1,160
The RN did it, and initially got rid of HTs, and specifically told us to not do that if we went down that route.
The recommendation that went up for approval was amalgamate until QL3s, then split into 3 separate specialisations (mech, electrical and hull), so basically the same as what we had, just with a common feeder. Didn't actually fix anything but I think they hoped more would go mech than we got recruited into stoker.
The throaway COA that was selected dropped the HT specialization all together, because reasons (possibly including 'fuck the stoker mafia'). It was recognized as a huge mistake within about a year, but took years before the decision maker and cronies retired to get it recognized, and still very slowly working it's way through to getting it back.
But essentially we learned the same lesson the RN learned and told us not to do it, but still haven't fixed it, while trying to reduce crews further which makes not having that specialisation even worse from a a damage control and combat survivability perspective, especially when we selected a UK design, crewed and built around a DC assumption that included having competent hull techs leading flood and structural damage repairs/mitigations in an action stations/post combat scenario.
The whole thing is dumb AF, especially when we had data showing why it was a stupid idea.
- Reaction score
- 8,900
- Points
- 1,210
Not anymore. Marine Mechanical Tech, Marine Electrical Tech are the two new trades. Started 1 April IIRC.
I don’t know what I don’t know; does this move make sense?
- Reaction score
- 8,900
- Points
- 1,210
This year the CFRG recruited ~7002 pers. The total SIP (not MOSID specific) was ~6957. Which means we got 45 more new recruits than was asked.
There are still trades that didn't hit SIP. But by and large most trade numbers were good. CFRG SIP two years ago was ~4500, which we didn't hit.
It does. No more common initial Mar Tech training, you go right into your electrical or mechanical training day one. It will reduce the time to fully trained specialist, and it will relieve some of the burden on the training system.
The entire RCN is going to undergo trade revamp to look more US style in many ways. Most trades are going to be operator maintainers like Mar Techs are. The challenge here is going to be training the operators to be techs. The techs are already operators in many cases. Many of the current operators don't have the education/mindset to be maintainers, which of course is why they are operators. Totally different way of thinking.
- Reaction score
- 8,900
- Points
- 1,210
Its entirely money related. Those Centres were closed during the waning years of Harper (2011-12) as recruiting was under the gun with budget reductions.
Now the money is back so we can reopen the smaller community ones if them make sense. Or in Southern Ontario's case open ones in communities that used to be smaller and are now much bigger! Due to virtual processing though physical infrastructure isn't as important as it once was. We barely do in person interviews anymore and the medical part 1 (of 2) is done in person.
CFAT is still written after enrollment during basic training. It was killed as it was a barrier to entry for many people (and by barrier I mean people didn't want to apply because there was test anxiety or whatever). There were a lot of opponents too CFAT as many of us believed it didn't predict success anymore. We have seen plenty of folks who are passing their DP1 with bad CFAT scores and plenty with good CFAT scores failing out. EQ vs IQ perhaps?
However CFAT likely will be coming back for Aircrew selection trades. They need a front facing filter so that we aren't essentially hitting the spam button for Air Factor/Testing. Its expensive and we have had a lot of failures. So we're going to whittle down the applicant pool for them and we'll see what happens. Just saying there is testing will pull out the "what the hell why not?" applicants.
As far as Quantity vs Quality, we'll have to see the numbers. Trade wise the washouts are very specific to different things, and sometimes the education requirements don't line up very well. Ex: From what I've heard the majority of DP1 failures for the Army are fitness related, specifically the infantry. Their CFAT scores are irrelevant.
PrairieFella
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 4,019
- Points
- 1,110
400 new troops in 38 CBG would be absolutely gamechanging. I have no idea why the brigade doesnt try and spread the very successful Thunder Bay coop program brigade wide.Meanwhile
BZ
- Reaction score
- 17,553
- Points
- 1,160
Travelling recruiting teams make sense for rural areas, that and "Pop-up" centres in larger population centres away from the large cities.
MilEME09
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 7,439
- Points
- 1,210
Wpns side failures tend to be one of two things 1. Safety, or 2. problem solving/fault finding which tends to be an issue with spatial/cognitive awareness for picturing the cycle of operating in your mind and understanding how it works quickly. CFAT can help with find candidtes who in theory grasp it better
- Reaction score
- 8,900
- Points
- 1,210
Can help is one thing. I dont think anyone would argue that. But the challenge is that it needs to be predictive more than 70% so that it makes it worth the cost, effort and time. Especially as now we are paying applicants for their mileage to come to in person meetings.
I like CFAT because we got to talk to applicants before their interview and help them fix their paperwork or completely bonkers trade selection. But our intake team is doing a lot of that virtually now. Our paperwork is becoming more of a form filler which also helps.
- Reaction score
- 3,775
- Points
- 1,040
My issue with CFAT is I have met someone who did a trade for a decade successfully (pre CFAT), but got out and when they went to go back in couldn’t get in the same trade because their CFAT score was too low.
It could be leading to good potential troops being kept out of the military.
Same thing civvy side, I saw one apprentice candidate who couldn’t pass their aptitude test but was extremely hands on (and had already passed two years of schooling in the field). He ended up getting a apprenticeship elsewhere, getting his ticket and joining as a ticketed tradesman despite that test saying he was ‘incapable’.
It could be leading to good potential troops being kept out of the military.
Same thing civvy side, I saw one apprentice candidate who couldn’t pass their aptitude test but was extremely hands on (and had already passed two years of schooling in the field). He ended up getting a apprenticeship elsewhere, getting his ticket and joining as a ticketed tradesman despite that test saying he was ‘incapable’.
- Reaction score
- 17,553
- Points
- 1,160
Isn't that about double of previous years intakes?
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 18,652
- Points
- 1,260
Are you at CFRG ?
I am involved, logistically, in the new Naval BMQ that's burgeoning. I think its a great idea and should produce sea going sailors quickly.
What are you thoughts, or point of view from the CFRG ?
- Reaction score
- 39,817
- Points
- 1,210
CFAT is predictive, not perfect. But properly employed it helps steer people to fields where, statistically speaking, they are more likely to succeed.
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 18,652
- Points
- 1,260
I think our more academic trades and occupations may need it, the CFAT. But I suspect most of what we do in the CAF can be learned with some formal training and then an OJT period. Without needing a CFAT level.
