Reconstitution

[KevinB]

As someone who grew up in a small mining town, there’s not much for kids to do except drink, do drugs, fight and f@&$.

Competitive sports.
But yeah when the logging evaporated it was the only employer for a lot of the area near Pet (Chalk River being the outlier) other than the base.

 

[RangerRay]

Competitive sports.

I keep hearing this. But where I grew up, the athletes were the worst perpetrators of all four activities!

 

[Eaglelord17]

How does that square with integrating the military with the surrounding community. If part of the argument is to have bases near - but not in- urban communities, does the convenience of the member sentence their spouses and kids to the long commute?

To be 100% honest with you the military is not and never will be a family friendly career much in the same way working a fly in camp or other remote/job that requires a lot of movement will never be good for a family.

The military shouldn’t be a lifelong career for most people, the frontline is better served by young fit soldiers than old and worn out ones.

If the member chooses to have a family they will have to choose to make sacrifices. Be it commutes, location, job options for spouses, deployments, distance from family, etc. My family has made those decisions several times, some of them choosing their career, others choosing their family. It is simply the nature of the beast.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Problem for all those industries is that people are voting with their feet and they are chronically short of the trained people they need.

 

[Quirky]

Seems like a waste of energy hating people who don't even know you exist outside a chat room.

Who said anything about people?

Don't trigger so easily.

 

[Furniture]

To be 100% honest with you the military is not and never will be a family friendly career much in the same way working a fly in camp or other remote/job that requires a lot of movement will never be good for a family.

The military shouldn’t be a lifelong career for most people, the frontline is better served by young fit soldiers than old and worn out ones.

If the member chooses to have a family they will have to choose to make sacrifices. Be it commutes, location, job options for spouses, deployments, distance from family, etc. My family has made those decisions several times, some of them choosing their career, others choosing their family. It is simply the nature of the beast.

That's taking a rather narrowly combat arms focused view of the CAF.

There are many jobs that people into their 40s and 50s can do that are needed in the CAF. Making conditions of service unpalatable for them is partly how we got here in the first place. We shouldn't be asking skilled technicians, pilots, etc., to choose between their family and their career.

 

[quadrapiper]

I keep hearing this. But where I grew up, the athletes were the worst perpetrators of all four activities!

See: Hockey Canada in the Government Crosshairs

 

[Eaglelord17]

That's taking a rather narrowly combat arms focused view of the CAF.

There are many jobs that people into their 40s and 50s can do that are needed in the CAF. Making conditions of service unpalatable for them is partly how we got here in the first place. We shouldn't be asking skilled technicians, pilots, etc., to choose between their family and their career.

You are saying we shouldn’t yet I don’t see a alternative option. It is the nature of what the military and military service is.

Trying to make the military just another job is what got us here. Because the more it is just another job the less people will want to work it as you can get paid more and treated better elsewhere.

 

[Edward Campbell]

That's taking a rather narrowly combat arms focused view of the CAF.

There are many jobs that people into their 40s and 50s can do that are needed in the CAF. Making conditions of service unpalatable for them is partly how we got here in the first place. We shouldn't be asking skilled technicians, pilots, etc., to choose between their family and their career.

You're right, there are many jobs that men and women in their late 30s, 40s and 50s can do and, as someone else (KevinB?) suggested, maybe at least some of those jobs ought to require a couple of years of service in the combat trades as an "entry" ticket.

Do we really need, just as an example, junior sailor/private/aviator electronics technicians? Maybe all those electronics techs and even some of the log trades should start their trade training after they have completed recruit and PI2 or even PI3 training as armoured, artillery, combat engineer or infantry soldiers and being their "careers" as PL5A members of whichever service needs them. The combat arms get the youngsters it really wants; the support trades get men and women who have made a career choice and who have some solid training behind them.

 

[Furniture]

You are saying we shouldn’t yet I don’t see a alternative option. It is the nature of what the military and military service is.

Trying to make the military just another job is what got us here. Because the more it is just another job the less people will want to work it as you can get paid more and treated better elsewhere.

Lots of alternatives have been posted in this thread.

Treating people poorly, moving them unnecessarily, and excusing it with "it's the military, release if you don't like it" is what has gotten us here far more than a loss of mess/base culture.

Like I said earlier, I'm not opposed to increasing base housing for both families and single members, I'm also not opposed to fixing messes to make them more appealing to members. What I am opposed to is doubling down on the bad parts of CAF service because of the idea that it's somehow what makes service "special" compared to other jobs.

You're right, there are many jobs that men and women in their late 30s, 40s and 50s can do and, as someone else (KevinB?) suggested, maybe at least some of those jobs ought to require a couple of years of service in the combat trades as an "entry" ticket.

Do we really need, just as an example, junior sailor/private/aviator electronics technicians? Maybe all those electronics techs and even some of the log trades should start their trade training after they have completed recruit and PI2 or even PI3 training as armoured, artillery, combat engineer or infantry soldiers and being their "careers" as PL5A members of whichever service needs them. The combat arms get the youngsters it really wants; the support trades get men and women who have made a career choice and who have some solid training behind them.

I agree, it also helps people understand how good their trade really is.

It would also help with what @Eaglelord17 was getting at earlier with comradery, since there is far more in the combat arms than in most support trades.

 

[Navy_Pete]

You're right, there are many jobs that men and women in their late 30s, 40s and 50s can do and, as someone else (KevinB?) suggested, maybe at least some of those jobs ought to require a couple of years of service in the combat trades as an "entry" ticket.

Do we really need, just as an example, junior sailor/private/aviator electronics technicians? Maybe all those electronics techs and even some of the log trades should start their trade training after they have completed recruit and PI2 or even PI3 training as armoured, artillery, combat engineer or infantry soldiers and being their "careers" as PL5A members of whichever service needs them. The combat arms get the youngsters it really wants; the support trades get men and women who have made a career choice and who have some solid training behind them.

On the flip side there are a lot of people who would be useless at being combat arms (myself included) who are really good technicians (not me) who would never join if they had to go combat arms first. Different strokes for different folks and all that.

Lots of options for VOTs out of combat arms, and pretty common to see INF, ARM etc in peoples MPRRs, but making it mandatory for other trades (especially ones that are already red/black) will just make recruiting harder, and with retention being bad already, it's a coin toss if people choose to just walk away after OFP when their contract runs out.

We need all kinds of people, and frankly a platoon of hackers can cause far more strategic impact than an infantry platoon, so with things generally being in shambles, may be a good time to look at things like that a lot more closely. We likely need both, but it's a lot faster to generate some capabilities than others, and if someone is hacking our banking system/infrastructure etc it's too late.

 

[Halifax Tar]

You're right, there are many jobs that men and women in their late 30s, 40s and 50s can do and, as someone else (KevinB?) suggested, maybe at least some of those jobs ought to require a couple of years of service in the combat trades as an "entry" ticket.

Do we really need, just as an example, junior sailor/private/aviator electronics technicians? Maybe all those electronics techs and even some of the log trades should start their trade training after they have completed recruit and PI2 or even PI3 training as armoured, artillery, combat engineer or infantry soldiers and being their "careers" as PL5A members of whichever service needs them. The combat arms get the youngsters it really wants; the support trades get men and women who have made a career choice and who have some solid training behind them.

Making everyone come through a combat arms trade is a absolutely ridiculous idea.

Every time this comes up I roll my eyes. Just more examples of how the CAF needs to break away from this constant Army spin on things.

If the Army to wants to do that, fill yer boots. But the rest of CAF shouldnt have to do something because one element has an overwhelming inferiority complex.

 

[TCM621]

Lots of alternatives have been posted in this thread.

Treating people poorly, moving them unnecessarily, and excusing it with "it's the military, release if you don't like it" is what has gotten us here far more than a loss of mess/base culture.

Like I said earlier, I'm not opposed to increasing base housing for both families and single members, I'm also not opposed to fixing messes to make them more appealing to members. What I am opposed to is doubling down on the bad parts of CAF service because of the idea that it's somehow what makes service "special" compared to other jobs.

I agree, it also helps people understand how good their trade really is.

It would also help with what @Eaglelord17 was getting at earlier with comradery, since there is far more in the combat arms than in most support trades.

While to a certain extent people complaining about being yelled at, being posted or working late hours make me wonder just what organization they thought they were joining, no one is saying we should double down on those things. The problem is that the military is an inherently shitty job. The bottom line for every military member is that you could be ordered into a situation that is almost certain death. Even if you are a chair warrior you could be ordered to keep working until a misslr hits your office space. We ask people to do things no other employer asks people to do, we have mechanisms to enforce that that aren't legal in any other area of employment.

There is no way we can make the military working experience as nice as a unioned job site or corporate office. I'm not saying don't change anything because all organizations need to grow or become stagnant. However, I am saying that banking on being a new friendly military isn't the way to make people join and or stay.

The military has always had 2 primary motivators, 2 motivators which we are sorely lacking. The first is adventure. People join the military to see the world, meet interesting people and shoot them or stop others from shooting them. The second is we would take damn near anyone and make something out of them. No one cared if you grew up in a shitty environment, no one really cared what your were before as long as you pulled your weight. If you stuck around, you learned skills or attitudes employers want and you could come out of the military a changed person and rewrite your future. We suck at both of those right now. We have no money, no equipment and no political will to be actively engaged around the world so people can go their entire BE and never see anything more exotic than Wainwright or Cold Lake. At my current job the wait list for the opportunity to deploy or travel is measured in years. As for the second aspect, people used to hire military members because they could get shit done in terrible conditions and we tend to keep the complaining to a minimum. Now we reward complaining and we are attempting to cover all the sharp corners of the military so people feel safe. I have to be honest, the ameof people I know who try to do as little as possible, while bitching about having to do that much grows every year. Soldiers have always bitched but we tended to do it at our rank level (or one higher) then head out to do the job anyway. We also are incredibly selective of our soldiers despite the fact that we are dying for people. We only want certain applicants partially for political reasons and partially because our training system can no long handle the kind of people who used to join and get the rough edge knocked off them in Basic and their trades training.


If we can get back to offering adventure or personal growth as the primary attraction of the CAF, you will see more recruits and less people leaving pissed off. You may see a few more 5 year and out types but I'm willing to bet we would see a lot less rage quits at 10-12 years or despair quits at 20+.

 

[Kirkhill]

You're right, there are many jobs that men and women in their late 30s, 40s and 50s can do and, as someone else (KevinB?) suggested, maybe at least some of those jobs ought to require a couple of years of service in the combat trades as an "entry" ticket.

Do we really need, just as an example, junior sailor/private/aviator electronics technicians? Maybe all those electronics techs and even some of the log trades should start their trade training after they have completed recruit and PI2 or even PI3 training as armoured, artillery, combat engineer or infantry soldiers and being their "careers" as PL5A members of whichever service needs them. The combat arms get the youngsters it really wants; the support trades get men and women who have made a career choice and who have some solid training behind them.

Do you really need a uniformed tech for those jobs at all?

I've had people fixing control systems by modems for over 30 years. Loggies? Do they need to be military at all? Those people in "managerial" roles - could we strike them from the 60 or 70,000 reg force PYs and add them to the civvy rolls at NDHQ, or even as consultants.

And, as you note, spare the uniforms for the short term youngsters.

 

[CBH99]

Seems like a waste of energy hating people who don't even know you exist outside a chat room.

If you can't do anything to release it in the real world, impotent rage just seems like a way to develop an ulcer.

Ironically, the government of Alberta has an advertising campaign to attract Ontario people to come live and work in that province.

So I don’t want to wag my toe in this water at all…

But we’re advertising life in Alberta because we need workers, and owning a home here in Alberta is cheaper than in Ontario. Supposedly…

($250-300,000 can get you an entry level family home with a smaller yard, in a nicer new subdivision. But for a throwing family you’re still looking in the $400K range…)


The idea is that people can sell their home around the GTA or Ottawa (any overpriced market there) and use that money as a substantial downpayment on a home here.

Sounds good in theory. I think the next year or two will cause a lot, and I mean a LOT, of broken spirits across the country in regards to people’s longer term plans — but that’s a huge thread derail I’ll spare us from.

______


I dont think he’s saying he hates everyone in Ontario.

But as a westerner, I have similar feelings… I hate the idea of living in Ontario

Some beautiful areas, absolutely. Truly. Probably substantially more than here in Alberta once one gets away from the Rockies.

But the bald-ass prairie has a gritty charm to it that just feels like home. I get to Ontario & see all the trees, and feel actual moisture in the air, and am instantly turned off from ever moving there…

 

[Eaglelord17]

Do you really need a uniformed tech for those jobs at all?

I've had people fixing control systems by modems for over 30 years. Loggies? Do they need to be military at all? Those people in "managerial" roles - could we strike them from the 60 or 70,000 reg force PYs and add them to the civvy rolls at NDHQ, or even as consultants.

And, as you note, spare the uniforms for the short term youngsters.

They do when we send them overseas and make them work alongside the forces we have there. We also need to build experience for our overseas capable support trades which means more in uniform than strictly necessary.

Imagine trying to order civilians to work overseas. ‘I refuse to work there and talk to my union rep if you don’t like that answer’. ‘Do you have a work order to go pick up that broken down lav 3?’ ‘I am not working overtime to get this done, I don’t care if you need it now, thats a you problem not a me problem.’ ‘I quit here is my two weeks notice’.

 

[FJAG]

Making everyone come through a combat arms trade is a absolutely ridiculous idea.

Every time this comes up I roll my eyes. Just more examples of how the CAF needs to break away from this constant Army spin on things.

If the Army to wants to do that, fill yer boots. But the rest of CAF shouldnt have to do something because one element has an overwhelming inferiority complex.

Vitriol aside, I agree. I'd go further in fact. There is no need for a common BMQ. It wastes time and increases costs. IMHO recruits should be funneled directly into Army, Navy and Air Force streams and start training within their services environment. If that means three separate recruit schools, then so be it.

My BMOQ was done at CFOCS Venture in Victoria and it impressed me with what the Navy was. A young sailor shouldn't spend the better part of their first year inland in classes having nothing to do with the Navy. BMQ and even language training should be given in a Navy environment, and, if possible, blended with Navy specific skill training so that they are properly developed in their formative year with a sense of belonging to the Navy. The same for the Air Force and the Army. Have sailors train sailors, soldiers train soldiers and aviators train aviators from the get go.

The residual problem is the purple trades. That said, we already have them select uniforms so let's make that stick by having them actually take their initial training in that environment. Let the cooks and the like do their BMQ and language training within their chosen environment and then come together at Borden for trades training but then return them to their environment for the bulk of their service. That might be complicated in some cases but it will work for the vast majority.

But as a westerner, I have similar feelings… I hate the idea of living in Ontario

Some beautiful areas, absolutely. Truly. Probably substantially more than here in Alberta once one gets away from the Rockies.

But the bald-ass prairie has a gritty charm to it that just feels like home. I get to Ontario & see all the trees, and feel actual moisture in the air, and am instantly turned off from ever moving there…

Hoo-Boy. Where to start.

After growing up in Toronto but spending almost all of my adult life in Manitoba (where I met my wife) we moved back to Ontario around 15 years ago. I think I can say that with a kid in Ontario and one lived in Alberta and now in BC I can fairly say I've got my foot in both places and can honestly say that each has their pluses and minuses.

My point is that most young people these days do not start off with the idea that they want to live elsewhere. They want a job, they want opportunities, they want to stay connected with family, they want some stability and if there is a chance to visit new places and do new things then so much the better.

I can't help but believe that if we can offer a person from Winnipeg a career which let's him remain in Manitoba lets say for 10 years, or a person from Vancouver a chance to stay in BC then we'll do better in recruiting. Currently only people from Quebec, while not having such a promise, have the odds in their favour of a career in their home province.

Do we even have statistics on what today's youth really want?

 

[RangerRay]

So I don’t want to wag my toe in this water at all…

But we’re advertising life in Alberta because we need workers, and owning a home here in Alberta is cheaper than in Ontario. Supposedly…

($250-300,000 can get you an entry level family home with a smaller yard, in a nicer new subdivision. But for a throwing family you’re still looking in the $400K range…)


The idea is that people can sell their home around the GTA or Ottawa (any overpriced market there) and use that money as a substantial downpayment on a home here.

Sounds good in theory. I think the next year or two will cause a lot, and I mean a LOT, of broken spirits across the country in regards to people’s longer term plans — but that’s a huge thread derail I’ll spare us from.

______


I dont think he’s saying he hates everyone in Ontario.

But as a westerner, I have similar feelings… I hate the idea of living in Ontario

Some beautiful areas, absolutely. Truly. Probably substantially more than here in Alberta once one gets away from the Rockies.

But the bald-ass prairie has a gritty charm to it that just feels like home. I get to Ontario & see all the trees, and feel actual moisture in the air, and am instantly turned off from ever moving there…

Alberta is too far east for me!

 

[daftandbarmy]

Vitriol aside, I agree. I'd go further in fact. There is no need for a common BMQ. It wastes time and increases costs. IMHO recruits should be funneled directly into Army, Navy and Air Force streams and start training within their services environment. If that means three separate recruit schools, then so be it.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

Barracks life CAN save money, but all it did in my Petawawa and Calgary days was give me MORE drinking money…
Moving out made me actually manage my money, and be less self destructive.

Petawawa was great for Friday night benders. Roll out of work at 1400 on Friday and start drinking at the mess with the boys! Those were the days!