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

[OldSolduer]

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.

Agreed - so that has to be communicated as well.

 

[KevinB]

Service equals citizenship…

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

You hit the nail on the head.

I used to whine and gripe about stupid people being in charge of everything. I thought this was just a phase society was going through- and we would come out of it on the other end having learned a short lived lesson of why, as a society, we should stop appointing obviously stupid people to positions that decide public policy.

I used to complain about that...and still do if something detrimental to our society is done out of pure incompetence...


But once someone (who's fairly well versed in economics and politics) pointed out the actual intention is the agenda of post-nation states, no single family housing, a major demographic shift, and to summarily bankrupt the country and set it on a path of self destruction - it all made perfect sense...

How else do we increase our national debt by a trillion dollars ontop of whatever tax money the government collects?

Why else dramatically ease bail conditions for repeat and/or violent offenders?

(My auto insurance is the most it's been in recent years despite no tickets or accidents, directly because auto theft has skyrocketed due to catch & release...how about you guys?)

Why else pass legislation that literally nobody wanted or asked for? (So they crammed through C-11 and the Online News Act...anybody notice a drastic increase in Canadian content? No? Well that's because despite the LPC claiming the bill was to help enhance Canadians exposure to Canadian made content, the actual bill doesn't mention 'Canadian content' even once...)

(Just wait until the Online Safety Act gets crammed through right before the next election...)


Why support a 'safe supply' program that literally floods an area that's already been devastated by chronic heavy drug use with more, and now free, drugs? (Fentynal, are you f**king kidding me?)

How much is that costing us? I'm sure it isn't just BC taxpayers that are paying for the drugs that are ruining their neighborhoods...


Why else push for the expansion of MAID to include folks who are mentally ill?

As a society we used to strongly discourage people from taking their own life, and as a society we agreed to offer those people counseling services & mental health support in the hopes they would get better.

Now, we're expanding the program to make it easier for ppl who may not be thinking straight to kill themselves.

(As Tucker said, a government that kills 50,000 of its own citizens is usually called genocidal...no wonder they're doing what they can to buy time, and not release the official stats)

Why else kill off the very industries that gave previous governments budget surpluses?

(Even huge opportunities to export LNG have been shunned...)

_________________________________


I could go on & on & on about how much I genuinely hate Justin Trudeau

And lately, I do just that. I apologize. (This thread, being about how popular/unpopular Trudeau is, has been my venting ground)

Thank You for putting up with my rants of late.

He gets my blood boiling, and I think I subconsciously must think that if I just explain to the universe what him & Freeland & WEF are doing to us, in ways we haven't fully recognized, that surely someone within government will do something...

In case you haven't figured it out yet... the agenda of the current Government and its cousin to the South is to create a series of Urban Enclaves and Ghettos that are completely dependent on a Central Authority for their existence. This allows them to capture additional votes and increase their power because everyone is dependent on them.

It's all about political power and control. Canadians have to be amongst the most meek and most passive people in the World and it all goes down for the most part without a hitch.

That's what I love about living up North though. The Central Govts have minimal authority up here and people do as they please. Basic services are provided but that's it and it's self-sufficiency for the most part. We have abundant Natural Resources and and we have people that are skilled in harvesting and moving those resources to markets for the Urbanites to consume.

The Government and the Urbanites need us but we do not really need them. Nobody here is hurting for anything and the problems elsewhere seem very distant.

Everyone's goal in life should be Maximum self-sufficiency and independence.

 

[OldSolduer]

Everyone's goal in life should be Maximum self-sufficiency and independence.

I love this statement. Way too many people depend on government (giverment) to get by.

 

[Aper]

Everyone's goal in life should be Maximum self-sufficiency and independence.

And yet the Govt's plan is for you to be fully dependent of them.

Quebec City ealier last month issued a curfew to everyone owning a fireplace due to ''severe air pollution'' lol.

If shit hits the fan tomorrow, not too many people will have the survival skills to make it, unfortunately.

 

[mariomike]

That's what I love about living up North though.

In case anyone is interested, Cochrane is reportedly selling residential lots for $10.

To keep the dream of home ownership alive.

Small Ontario town to sell off plots of land for just $10

A small town in northern Ontario will offer up plots of land for just $10 in the new year to keep the dream of homeownership alive.

toronto.ctvnews.ca

 

[daftandbarmy]

Everyone's goal in life should be Maximum self-sufficiency and independence.

Meanwhile, in the Infantry

 

[MilEME09]

Cut 3 active battalions. Add 51 reserve companies.

You mean make 51 reserve units actually manned as companies not platoons?

 

[stoker dave]

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.

My experience is decades old and I would generally agree with you, with the caveat that perhaps education / training should perhaps be included in that list.

A military job that is adventurous, dangerous and gives you skills / training to set you up in a career (within the military.... or not) might attract a wider audience.

My experience is that lots of folks joined the military for the training and education opportunities. Is that still somewhat valid?

 

[Furniture]

My experience is decades old and I would generally agree with you, with the caveat that perhaps education / training should perhaps be included in that list.

A military job that is adventurous, dangerous and gives you skills / training to set you up in a career (within the military.... or not) might attract a wider audience.

My experience is that lots of folks joined the military for the training and education opportunities. Is that still somewhat valid?

I suspect everyone's view of why people join is heavily slanted by their occupation. As a stoker you'd see more people joining for skills than in my job, where people join for steady reliable work in a field they find interesting, with the opportunity for some adventure/travel.

This is why CAF recruiting is so difficult, the CAF isn't looking for one particular type of person. We need lots of different types with lots of different motivations. Recruiting campaigns that focus too much on one type of person might drive away people interested in a different job.

 

[MilEME09]

I suspect everyone's view of why people join is heavily slanted by their occupation. As a stoker you'd see more people joining for skills than in my job, where people join for steady reliable work in a field they find interesting, with the opportunity for some adventure/travel.

This is why CAF recruiting is so difficult, the CAF isn't looking for one particular type of person. We need lots of different types with lots of different motivations. Recruiting campaigns that focus too much on one type of person might drive away people interested in a different job.

You mean the square block doesn't fit in every hole? Say it ain't so!

 

[YZT580]

I suspect everyone's view of why people join is heavily slanted by their occupation. As a stoker you'd see more people joining for skills than in my job, where people join for steady reliable work in a field they find interesting, with the opportunity for some adventure/travel.

This is why CAF recruiting is so difficult, the CAF isn't looking for one particular type of person. We need lots of different types with lots of different motivations. Recruiting campaigns that focus too much on one type of person might drive away people interested in a different job.

if you want to do something about retention then you have to start with dealing with the time away from home base., Young people don't mind being transient for a little while but when the spouse starts mentioning the problems with junior that you weren't there to handle or that your beloved daughter cries herself to sleep because she misses the one who is away and when you finally return home it is only to start marking the calendar with the number of days before your flight leaves once more then the adventure is finished. First and foremost you need to keep families together as much as possible. Instead you have set it up so no one is away long enough to claim family benefits in travel. No wonder people quit.

 

[Aper]

This is why CAF recruiting is so difficult

They should start to focus on why it sometime takes a year to offer a prospect an offer. I understand the whole screening process (which has a lot of useless steps IMHO), but taking a year and sometimes more isn't really helping recruiting new members. The bureaucratic is so heavy and complex these days that potential recruits hang their hats and apply elsewhere; only a minority will patiently wait for ''the call''.

Also, they should put in place people with actual knowledge of the trades and the procedures; I recall asking the same question to 3 different people and got 3 different answers. This drives away people even more than focusing on only a few trades.

 

[Furniture]

You mean the square block doesn't fit in every hole? Say it ain't so!

It's one of those obvious things, that can be hard to see some days. We all have our own biases and blind spots, and one of the most common ones is assuming that "you"* are the average.

*you as in every single one of us tends to assume our experiences are "normal" and anything outside of that experience is the outlier. Obviously when you sit down and seriously consider things you can see past it, but it happens all the time when we aren't stopping to seriously consider things.

 

[Haggis]

They should start to focus on why it sometime takes a year to offer a prospect an offer. I understand the whole screening process (which has a lot of useless steps IMHO), but taking a year and sometimes more isn't really helping recruiting new members. The bureaucratic is so heavy and complex these days that potential recruits hang their hats and apply elsewhere; only a minority will patiently wait for ''the call''.

M'eh..one year is nothing. I have recruits in my agency that have been in the process for four plus years (COVID caused some delays, but not all). The belief of some hiring managers is that if the applicant has to wait an inordinate amount of time, they must really want to succeed in the job.

But, we also lose applicants to agencies with more streamlined recruiting processes and higher schoolhouse capacity, where they can train more recruits than we can. What's left at our schoolhouse door is not necessarily the best and brightest, but those who persevered through a ridiculously long process, or who no other agency - or the CAF - would hire.

 

[Aper]

M'eh..one year is nothing. I have recruits in my agency that have been in the process for four plus years (COVID caused some delays, but not all). The belief of some hiring managers is that if the applicant has to wait an inordinate amount of time, they must really want to succeed in the job.

But, we also lose applicants to agencies with more streamlined recruiting processes and higher schoolhouse capacity, where they can train more recruits than we can. What's left at our schoolhouse door is not necessarily the best and brightest, but those who persevered through a ridiculously long process, or who no other agency - or the CAF - would hire.

If I applied for a job that would take 4 years before getting in, trust me, I would be long gone. Unless you're giving me a career of a lifetime where I can start at 200K with tons of benefits; surely i'll wait. But unfortunately, this is the CAF. And with all the bad press that we've been having the last few years, i'm pretty sure it's not the employer-of-choice of several people.

I don't mind waiting a year; I applied for PRes and still have my full 40+ hours career job. It's just that in the last 20 years, nothing really changed as for recruiting as I waited 1.5 years before getting in the Reg forces back in the days.

 

[QV]

Taking over a year to hire any person is unacceptable. Just another example of a broken system that needs complete overhaul.

The CAF should be able to bring people on inside 4 months.

 

[Haggis]

Taking over a year to hire any person is unacceptable. Just another example of a broken system that needs complete overhaul.

The CAF should be able to bring people on inside 4 months.

Agreed, to an extent. For a fully completed application, with no security or medical complications, yeah. But, in the CAFs defence (and I did three stints as a recruiter, so I saw this first hand), there are always a not so small number of applicants that are missing info, missing source docs and needing to reschedule appointments and testing repeatedly, or are simply hard to track down once initial contactis made. So not all delays are the CAFs fault.

 

[QV]

Agreed, to an extent. For a fully completed application, with no security or medical complications, yeah. But, in the CAFs defence (and I did three stints as a recruiter, so I saw this first hand), there are always a not so small number of applicants that are missing info, missing source docs and needing to reschedule appointments and testing repeatedly, or are simply hard to track down once initial contactis made. So not all delays are the CAFs fault.

Extenuating circumstances aside, if the CAF can't get a normal recruit on boarded to start basic recruit training inside 4 months then they're doing something wrong and should probably burn the process to the ground, re-think this, and make necessary changes to be able to do that.

 

[DBNSG]

Taking over a year to hire any person is unacceptable. Just another example of a broken system that needs complete overhaul.

The CAF should be able to bring people on inside 4 months.

Ten weeks Max. That is what it is in real life and how long it took me to get my present job last Summer. It would have been quicker but Summer Vacations delayed final decisions.