Forces struggling to recruit...

[Kirkhill]

Way back when the Dead Sea wasn't sick

I seem to remember that day...... Wasn't in the newspapers?

 

[pbi]

I joined the Militia in 1974 under the "good old" system. It was a shambles, and I can tell you from direct personal experience in each case that we got in some people who were:

-mentally deficient;

-under age (and I mean, like, 15 years old...)

-marginally literate;

-had questionable criminal backgrounds; and

-had medical conditions that were not ony blatantly obvious but were debilitating (ie: acne so hideous that the person could not carry a radio set or wear web gear and a small pack without literally dripping pus.)

among others. And this was recruiting in the GTA!! IMHO this rubbish was the direct result of the very poorly done unit-run recruiting, with largely untrained and poorly supervised recruit processing staff, and with HUGE influence exerted by COs on whether or not people got in and then were kept during recruit training. I lived that for eight years: as a recruit, as a recruit instructor, and as a unit recruiter.

The answer IMHO is absolutely NOT to go back into that swamp, ever. The Army Reserve needs and deserves better, and so does Canada.The  answer is to make the system work properly, which it can do. Unfortunately, this requires constant pressure from the highest levels of the Army (I'm talking Area Comd/CLS) on the CFRG, which up until very recently has been a notoriously unresponsive and turf-defending beast. However, if some of these changes come into being, we may be quite surprised, to say the least.

If we want more volunteer first responders, then my suggestion is to spend more money on recruiting and training for the variuos volunteer fire depts, the Red Cross, and maybe consider re-establishing Civil Defense. Don't focus the Army Reserve on that alone. Don't do it.

BTW: from what I understand PersCom will not be "another layer": it will take the existing pers activities, incl CFRG, CDA, CFRS, padres, DCBA, and a bunch of others related to pers admin/pers sp and group them under an actual commander with powers of command, not some loose staff network. The two officers at the top of this, MGen Skidmore and BGen Semianiw, are both Army officers, and pretty sharp characters. It should be most interesting to see what happens.

Cheers

 

[Echo9]

I can back up pbi's claim.  At a former unit, we had a guy who was colourblind, illiterate, innumerate and generally out of shape (although I must say, his bench press was impressive).  This is for an engineer unit.  He got through because the recruiter at the time was corrupt and wanted numbers over quality.

Clearly, with the direction that things are going in, that cannot stand.  Unit level recruiting cannot be successful unless there is a strong quality control element retained by the CFRCs.  The only real gains that you get from unit recruiting is the increase in manpower gained by decentralization, and more importantly, the motivation that comes from knowing that you are responsible for your own destiny, rather than simply being accountable to a faceless target number.  Those are significant, but both have downsides.

Interestingly enough, reading through the RoD from the last CLS review of LFRR, it was noted that the CDS has given the CFRG the following processing targets:
- 30% of applicants completed in 1 week
- 40% in 1 month
- 30% longer than 1 month.

I will be interested in seeing how they do it- it will be a major shock to the system.  Realistically, they'll likely need to bring in some industrial engineering analysis that I'm not sure they currently possess in order to eliminate the queue time that's inherent in the system right now.  (btw, for any CFRG lurkers, I'm an industrial engineer by training- if you want any help, send me a PM).

All of that said, something that I can see so far is that the quality of personnel posted to the recruiting function is getting better- much better, and that I'm actually pretty confident that the results will follow.

 

[Hot Lips]

I can back up pbi's claim.  At a former unit, we had a guy who was colourblind, illiterate, innumerate and generally out of shape (although I must say, his bench press was impressive).  This is for an engineer unit.  He got through because the recruiter at the time was corrupt and wanted numbers over quality.

Clearly, with the direction that things are going in, that cannot stand.  Unit level recruiting cannot be successful unless there is a strong quality control element retained by the CFRCs.  The only real gains that you get from unit recruiting is the increase in manpower gained by decentralization, and more importantly, the motivation that comes from knowing that you are responsible for your own destiny, rather than simply being accountable to a faceless target number.  Those are significant, but both have downsides.

Interestingly enough, reading through the RoD from the last CLS review of LFRR, it was noted that the CDS has given the CFRG the following processing targets:
- 30% of applicants completed in 1 week
- 40% in 1 month
- 30% longer than 1 month.
I will be interested in seeing how they do it- it will be a major shock to the system.  Realistically, they'll likely need to bring in some industrial engineering analysis that I'm not sure they currently possess in order to eliminate the queue time that's inherent in the system right now.   (btw, for any CFRG lurkers, I'm an industrial engineer by training- if you want any help, send me a PM).

All of that said, something that I can see so far is that the quality of personnel posted to the recruiting function is getting better- much better, and that I'm actually pretty confident that the results will follow.

How many potential quality recruits do you think are lost due to frustration and the processing times...
If the CDS would like the above mentioned processing times...there would have to be some additional resources put in place would there not?  And if selection boards sit every 6 weeks (I believe that's what Kincanucks reported on another thread) than that would, as well, hinder the process and require change...yes?

HL

 

[GAP]

OK...lets correct some of my misunderstanding...

Pers admin is being split off for CFRA? correct?

Better Timelines for Recruits are being instituted? correct?

There will be two people in charge. One HR one Recruiting. correct?

Standards are not being lowered, just being reevaluated. correct?

what else did I miss? 

 

[tomahawk6]

Look recruiting is not rocket science. Its really a two step process find someone who wants to be in the military and then test/process the applicant. If step two is inefficient then the process gets bogged down. I think the biggest improvement to your system would be to have 1 day of testing both medical/written and then by computer lock in the candidate's schooling dates. One day and most recruits are set to go. The security clearance process is pretty basic and doesnt bog down the system.
Recruits going into sensitive specialties get a more thorough screening as they will be working in a secret environment.

 

[17thRecceSgt]

I do like the idea of CFRG handling the "recruiting" aspect...and this PerCom handling people for CTs and OTs and the like. 

 

[navymich]

The security clearance process is pretty basic and doesnt bog down the system.

I wish T6, I really wish.  I can't speak for certain about the enhanced reliabitlity check for recruiting, but I know that the system itself is extremely bogged down for initial and renewal clearances, especially when you get to Level III.  What kind of timeline is there down your way for them?

 

[tomahawk6]

There are jobs that do not require a security clearance - infantry for example. They will do a criminal background check and if nothing serious pops up the recruit is in. For those requiring Confidential/Secret 1-3 months and Top Secret can take 4-12 months.The more there is to investigate the longer it takes. For a kid out of high school who hasnt traveled abroad it wouldnt take long.

 

[Kirkhill]

pbi and Echo9:

I understand what you are saying about the quality of the recruits and the civil defence concerns. 

But what I feel is being missed in the push to a highly qualified, professional army, focused on expeditionary tasks is the separation of the army from the people.  This has been going on for a long while in Canada.  Some might say it has been the policy of some governments.

I don't think that the current level of interest in Afghanistan is either likely to be long lasting nor does it seem to have created a massive change in the attitude of the population towards joining.  Yes numbers are up, but I still don't see queues outside of CFRCs or outside armouries.

I think you run the risk of suffering the same fate as professional sports.  It used to be people played sports locally and organized local teams.  Their best players formed local all-star teams and took on other towns. Towns banded their best and took on Provinces.  Provinces banded to take on nations.  Everybody in the country had a stake in that team. They knew somebody personally that worked  alongside them or went to school with their sister.  The Nation really got caught up in the game.

The quality of the game was good but not great and the quality of talent in the local recruiting pool too variable so the owners of local businesses start offering jobs to outsiders to attract talent, then cash and ultimately you have a fully professional game.  The quality of the game definitely improved.  But what was lost was that sense of local connection....

When your local team is filled with Russians and Ghanaians, Indians and Dutchmen, none of whom live in your community, they are effectively mercenaries, while you may admire their skills you don't see yourself on the field with them.  This ultimately leads to declining attendance at sporting events, indicating a loss of support by the community.  It also leads to a reduction in the talent pool so eventually the quality of the recruit to the system decreases.

The cost of maintaining a viable sports franchise is engaging people at a young age, and having them play, regardless of skill levels.  As they grow older then they find outlets to play at different levels of skill.  The best players go to "elite teams".  But they all are connected within the community.  The entire community is invested in their games.  The entire community shows up at their games to support them.

The cost of running a successful franchise includes running a successful farm system.  A farm system that not only includes Jr As that will send some players to the NHL but also Sr As for players that couldn't make the NHL or didn't want to make that much of a commitment.

The more that you withdraw into a cadre of NHL superstars, the more you run the risk of declining attendance and a reducing pool of recruits.

You may not want the army to be associated with Civil defence and out of condition volunteers however that will expand the recruiting pool.  Don't separate yourselves from the first responders.  Integrate those people inclined to support the community into the ranks.  Encourage them to get into condition to meet more challenging tasks.  Expand the numbers that understand and support the institution of the army, that will sell the institution.

Otherwise you risk becoming "Them" not "Us".

Yes it is a cost, an expensive cost.  But if you don't create such a system then you leave too great a jump for out of shape, peace-loving, Nintendo playing civilians to contemplate when you are looking for volunteers for Afghanistan.  You need to create a ramp with a number of stops along the way where many can see themselves in uniform, contributing in manners that they find appropriate and that allow you to make the best use possible of them.  Out of that number you will more likely find increased numbers of motivated and trusting individuals willing and able to sign up for Regular duties.

But first you have to engage and accept the support from the community that the community wants to give you - no matter if he is an earnest 16 year old with pus dripping down his back.  It may not have been sightly but he sure was demonstrating a degree of commitment that is hard to find and difficult to create.  Acne comes and goes.  Is that radioman still carrying a radio?

 

[Hot Lips]

I wish T6, I really wish.  I can't speak for certain about the enhanced reliability check for recruiting, but I know that the system itself is extremely bogged down for initial and renewal clearances, especially when you get to Level III.  What kind of timeline is there down your way for them?

Mich I don't think that is the only log jam here though in our system do you?
There seem to be a number of issues that seem to slow the process...
I went ten months and hadn't gotten into a Res unit...I had to chase the recruiter down all the time for the next phase of the process...finally I got fed up and flipped my application...I am not getting any younger and I do feel I am qualified (civilian) to do the job I seek...don't know...still trying to wait patiently

HL

 

[navymich]

No HL, definitely not the only log jam at all.  Clearances are just my own little bone of contention (or one of them anyway). 

For some, clearances are the log jam, for others they aren't.  Nobody seems to have the same problems as someone else, some have them all, and the lucky ones have none.  But hang in there, and keep a stiff upper (hot) lip.    Patience is good (as opposed to the patients that you are used to working with...LOL).  And, just to add one more cliche, good things come to those who wait...and wait....and wait.....

 

[Hot Lips]

Yes, my sentiments exactly
Oh and another cliche...waiters get good tips 
I have been nothing but pleased so far with my application when I flipped it Regs (albeit still waiting for "the call")
My frustrations were with the Res application, that I had had in previously.

HL

 

[pbi]

Kirkhill: you are right to be concerned about the increasing demands being placed on the Army Res over the last decade. I lived this 2002-2005 in 38 CBG, where I was amazed and quite in awe of what we are now asking of Res soldiers, esp the leaders (esp the senior leaders), if they try to do all that is set before them. We are not alone: I know that about two years ago the COS (appointment title...?) of the US ArmyRes expressed similar concerns about the impact on his force, and I have heard the same from some of the folks in 34ID (USARNG).

The parallel I would draw is somewhat different: I compare it to the volunteer firefighter as Canada's population grows and pushes out into the "ru-burban" areas that encircle most of our cities today, out beyond the immediate suburban zone. (Most fire fighters and fire depts in Canada, like the US, are either wholly or partly volunteer) As the population goes up, so does the number of shopping malls, industrial plants, gas stations, hospitals, car accidents, medical calls and hazmat incidents. The VFDs must respond effectively to all these situations, as quickly as possible, with enough training and experience that they do not become liabilities themselves. But, they have only a very limited time to train (often less than a typical Res unit). As well, as commuting suburbanites replace the local folks, the sense of community and the desire to serve as VFFs declines and it becomes harder and harder to recruit.How do they beat this dilemma?

The sad fact is that they usually don't, and gradually, growing municipalities are forced to bring in career firefighters to take over. A very fine and honourable tradition thus bites the dust, one VFD at a time.

But nobody suggests that standards be lowered: either VFDs can protect their communities or they can't. They may be great community organizations, but if they cannot do what is required they are a waste of money as far as the town is concerned. And here is my point: this is the same principle with the Army Res: it exists primarily to fulfil a military need. Other stuff is important, but secondary. Now, IMHO the Army Res (and, in fact, the Army in general...) does a much better and more proactive job of keeping in touch with  Canadians than we did when I was a Res soldier back in the 1970s.  We can still do that, but we can't make the perceived need to have more local citizens involved somehow take priority over a Res that has military utility. And, again IMHO, our Res today has much greater military utility  than it did when I joined it in 1974. In those days we really were off on our own, with no real place in the nation's military planning.

So, I go back to my earlier point: fix the system, in as draconian a manner as necessary. Use smart ideas, and contract out functions where makes sense. But don't try to turn back the clock to some imagined "golden days". I served eight years in those "golden days", and IMHO they weren't.

Cheers

 

[Kirkhill]

I understand you pbi, and I agree about "golden days".  I lived 4 years of those days and ultimately made the opposite decision to yourself as a result of those lumps and bumps. 

One of the biggest complaints that I had was that as a junior subby I was given a class in MOI and then immediately tasked with conducting hygiene and adm lessons.  I instructed my first class on the Browning 9mm before I put my first 9mm round down range.  The first time that I did a complete strip and assemble on an FNC1 for time was on my Proficiency in Weapons Training Test.  In four years in the Reserves I may have put a total of 400 rds down range in all calibres, and this included time on MITCP courses and an interrupted Phase III course at Gagetown (interrupted by my Father's death).  I also did my share of administration, orderly officer, manning recruiting stations and conducting a recruit platoon.  I am fully aware of the lack of gold in those days.

I said on another thread that with 2 weeks and 1000 rounds I guessed that would be sufficient to create a useful rifleman.  I was challenged on that point.  That amount of attention is a darn sight more than it ever got in my time in and judging from the reports from other posters it seems little has changed for many units.

Having said that, I learned enough of weapons handling skills I am comfortable I could still strip and assemble an FN C1, prepare a lesson plan, find my way through CFAOs, prepare orders using SMESC format (I still rely on that for planning in my professional life), operate an FM radio and remember proper Voice Procedures, drive a vehicle across country and conduct first halt maintenance on it.  And this after damnear 25 years out. 

This is not a plea to reinstate fat old duffers like myself.  This is to point out that the training sticks.  And even if bodies don't parade on a regular basis there are occasions in the life of the community where people CAN'T live their normal lives, WANT to get things back to normal as soon as possible and are looking for direction and to be organized.  If they have some training and know where to congregate then they can be put to use for as long as the crisis lasts.  And the more hands that you can organize and put to use the sooner the crisis will past and the community can get back to its normal non-military life.

You said that after 8 years you decided you had had enough and joined the Regs.  Why didn't you join the Regs in the first place?  Why did you join the Reserves? From my stand point the system worked.  It attracted both you and me into the system via the Reserves (I had actually previously been turned down for MARS because of V4 eyesight - I understand they wanted me to be able to see where I was going when steering the boat - Who knew?).  In your case you discovered that your attachment to the profession was great enough that you decided to move onwards and upwards and make it your career.  Great.  In my case you got 4 years service out of me - I trained, poorly perhaps, I can't answer that but the candidates passed their required proficiency tests, 20 more troops - perhaps some of them decided to go Reg as well - and you got a life time supporter of the military that now is trying to figure out how he can assist again.   

And I can guarantee that if somebody had come calling saying "we need your services", there would have been no hesitation.

I say that the system worked.

Keep in mind that even those much derided Boy Scouts started out as a means of using available un-trained manpower on military taskings at he siege of Mafeking.  They continued as a way to bring street urchins into the military fold, give them a sense of themselves and some discipline and set them up for a military career if they chose it.  Some went to the Regs and then the Reserves.  Some went to the Territorials.  But ultimately you had a military friendly society that joined in large numbers to fight WWI, where people saw themselves as soldiers, as opposed to the days of Lobsterbacks and "Chuck 'im out the brute". 

There wasn't much wrong with that system.  In fact the problem is that the opponents of military forces, the people that saw lives lost in massive numbers in WWI, fear the replication of that system most of all.  They fear recreating those conditions that lead to that loss of life.  But that is to blame the saw, not the carpenter, the rifle, not the shooter.  In losing that system we have also lost the connection of the citizen to the state, and the army.

That rotten system that you lived through found you the army and the army found you.  A fact that I am grateful for.

Cheers, sir.

 

[pbi]

I instructed my first class on the Browning 9mm before I put my first 9mm round down range.  The first time that I did a complete strip and assemble on an FNC1 for time was on my Proficiency in Weapons Training Test.

Ha. Sounds very familiar. The first time I ever saw a Karl G was when in 1975, as a Pte, I was required to prepare an MOI period on it as part of my JNCO course.

I think I understand your position. My suggestion would be that we make better use of the SupRes, but I really don't know how this could be made to work: up until now IMHO the SupRes system  has been a shambles of limited use to anybody.

I still fear the results of an over-emphasis on domestic operations on our Army Res: I see it as a slippery slope, with the Res once again ending up utterly marginalized by the rest of the Army, and a couple of decades of slow and painful progress down the tube.

But I respect your point of view.

Cheers

 

[Echo9]

Kirkhill- Something else that you should be aware of that should put a bit of a damper on the concept of a lesser tier recruiting system for reserves is that the CDS has also given the order that the CT process be streamlined.  What I've heard is that the CT essentially becomes little more than writing up a posting message.  With that kind of mobility, the drive for comparable standards is going to get stronger and stronger.

 

[17thRecceSgt]

Maybe the directive is to MAKE the CT process that simple, but it sure isn't there at this point (currently undergoing a CT).

 

[Kirkhill]

I guess what I am getting at Echo 9 is, wouldn't it be possible to build the security wall Inside the Armouries rather than Outside.  By all means maintain the same standards to cross that wall, fitness, security clearances, etc so that CTs by qualified Militia/Reservists were simplified.

The people I am really getting at are those people that show up at the Armouries or the CFRC expressing an interest.  Rather than leave them cooling their heals for a few months and risk losing them why not bring them in immediately and keep them engaged doing Basic Training. They'll find out if they like it.  The army'll find out if they like them. 

At the end of this local training, after they have passed their proficiency tests, they will also find out if they have passed their medicals and security clearances and be allowed to advance to the next level and gain admission to the ranks and to the JRs mess.  I understand it would cost money to train washouts - but it doesn't really take that much more effort to instruct 30 than it does to instruct 10.  Teacher's unions notwithstanding.  .

 

[Kirkhill]

And pbi - you are right.  Trying to figure out how to make better use of the Sup Res system is likely to be effective in the long term.