Recruit school bypass

[RocketRichard]

So?  You are a Recruiter as well?  Or, perhaps, and instructor on any of the topics you just mentioned? 

A FN C1 and C2 were not C-7 or C-8 rifles.  The C-5 GPMG is not a C-6, nor a C-9.  Sorry, but I will call BS on a rifle is a rifle.  Same goes for driving different vehicles.  Nav may change very little, but so many didn't learn to Nav in the first place, nor are many familiar with changes to Nav Systems being used.  Comms...Skill fade in using current Comms equipment starts within days of non-use.

Again, I will say it; if you are not involved in Recruiting, or the Training System, your input is not required and only muddies the waters.

PM sent

 

[RedcapCrusader]

So?  You are a Recruiter as well?  Or, perhaps, and instructor on any of the topics you just mentioned? 

A FN C1 and C2 were not C-7 or C-8 rifles.  The C-5 GPMG is not a C-6, nor a C-9.  Sorry, but I will call BS on a rifle is a rifle.  Same goes for driving different vehicles.  Nav may change very little, but so many didn't learn to Nav in the first place, nor are many familiar with changes to Nav Systems being used.  Comms...Skill fade in using current Comms equipment starts within days of non-use.

Again, I will say it; if you are not involved in Recruiting, or the Training System, your input is not required and only muddies the waters.

Since the early 2000's we have not had a change in weapons systems or drill.

Pips and Crowns aside, our ranks have not changed; the insignia has. That doesn't take 14 weeks to learn.

By your logic George, we shouldn't be handing out Recruit School bypasses to ANYONE with prior service that have been out for more than a year. Do you know how many senior members of my unit and trade would not be here today with the invaluable skills and experience they have, if they were told they had to redo Basic training again?

We took them through a 1-day refresher on drill, nav, Weapons; and even then we didn't need to. A repetitive action becomes habit, and a habit doesn't usually go away.

I don't need to be a recruiter to know that little has changed in the last 5-10 years and that useful Comms is not taught on Basic, driving is not taught on basic, and nor is the Clerk's pay system.

I've had better training at the unit level than I did through BMQ. It's the reason we have IBTS, we don't need to be sending everyone back through Basic Training again.

And yes, with the exception of Driving, I teach all of the above. Nav, Comms, Drill, Weapons.

Edit: for spelling

 

[George Wallace]

Actually, if the OP had even bothered to look up this question, we would not be having this discussion.  The answers have been given in that thread. 

The facts about Recruit School By Pass have nothing to do with previous Trades or PLQ (CLC, or whatever other name it was called by over the years)  Just because you had a PLQ, doesn't give you a Recruit School By Pass.  Having to redo Basic does not necessarily mean you have lost those Quals.  Those Quals would be evaluated in a PLAR and credited if deemed current to the candidate.  If the candidate was out for two to five years, they usually were granted a Recruit School By Pass.  Over five years, and definitely over ten, they would normally have to redo Recruit School to catch up to any changes over those years; but would also be able to retain previous Quals according to the results of the PLAR.

As an Instructor, you will know that the CTPs are in constant flux, some changing annually, some almost daily.  The equipment that is used is also changing...Do you still use a PLGR to navigate?  What changes have been made to it?  CANOPS Code or CANFORNA Code will only bring questioning looks from anyone who has less than 15 years in.  Drill, may have remained the same for you since you joined, but don't count on it not changing with a new weapon.  Weapons Drills have changed several times over the years, on the same weapon, with changes to/mods to that weapon.  Field Craft has changed.  All Drills that you can name, have with time and changes to equipment, technology, delivery systems, detection systems, and a whole list of other changes depending on what the Drill is for, will result in new Drills or modification of current Drills. 

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Vehicles... Driver Wheeled;  not BMQ.
Comms... ATCIS and various comes courses; not BMQ.
Weapons... Sure, but I easily learned a new weapons system in 3 days through unit training.

Pay system... That would also not be BMQ training... It would be Trades.

Therefore, he's not far off and you easily give someone a Recruit School Bypass if they've been out 5 years... Hell even 10.

Drill, Dress, rank systems etc. Doesn't change much even over 50 years, much less over 5.

ALL military skills are perishable.  Discipline a la military stype included.  PT abilities included.

Sorry, I have to agree with the longer than 5 years, back thru basic you go.  5 years as a civie and...well you're a civie again, previous service or not.

 

[DAA]

RSBP is determined/granted by using the Leadership Qualification Matrix (ie; CDA 12/01 or something like that) which is available on the CDA Website (DWAN Only - search for CDA Leadership Qualification Matrix PLAR).

Summed up as.... non-OFP qualified, BMQ is valid based on time served (ie; 14 months in the CAF, BMQ is valid for 14 months post release), OFP qualified (post 2006ish), BMQ is valid for life.

Whilst the matrix does use the term "valid for life", applicants rejoining the CAF at anytime will be subject to an RSBP PLAR which will determine their status prior to being made an offer of enrolment.  General rule of thumb for OFP qualified (ie; DP1/QL3 completed), out for less than 5 years, the qual will be granted.  Out for between 5-10 years, it's a coin toss and out for more than 10 years, start preparing to redo Basic Training.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Is the OFP part actually trade-related OFP and  not some generic "initial Occ trg"?  Example my trade OFP is QL5 Wings grade at this point and will likely be moving to post "aircraft specific qualification" (MOAT, OTU) in the relatively near future.

 

[DAA]

Is the OFP part actually trade-related OFP and  not some generic "initial Occ trg"?  Example my trade OFP is QL5 Wings grade at this point and will likely be moving to post "aircraft specific qualification" (MOAT, OTU) in the relatively near future.

OFP (Operationally Functional Point) is strictly trade related.  OFP is usually considered as post QL3 or DP1 qualified.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

OFP (Occupation Functional Point) is strictly trade related.  OFP is always considered as QL3 or DP1 qualified.

Operationally Functional Point now, isn't it?  ;D

OFP is not always defined as QL3 or DP1 though.  For my trade, OFP is QL5, our IAQC (Intermediate AESOP Qual Course).  Before 2009, OFP was MOAT (for Aurora types) or OTU (for MH types) and there is serious discussion about moving OFP back to post MOAT/OTU.  A newly winged AESOP out of Winnipeg shows up to their Sqn, they are still unqual'd on their actual airframe and therefore not 'operationally functional'.

Seems like not everyone is singing from the same song sheet?

 

[DAA]

Operationally Functional Point now, isn't it?  ;D

OFP is not always defined as QL3 or DP1 though.  For my trade, OFP is QL5, our IAQC (Intermediate AESOP Qual Course).  Before 2009, OFP was MOAT (for Aurora types) or OTU (for MH types) and there is serious discussion about moving OFP back to post MOAT/OTU.  A newly winged AESOP out of Winnipeg shows up to their Sqn, they are still unqual'd on their actual airframe and therefore not 'operationally functional'.

Seems like not everyone is singing from the same song sheet?

We should be but sometimes their are varying "interpretations" of what OFP actually is. 

DAOD 5031-8 ( http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/about-policies-standards-defence-admin-orders-directives-5000/5031-8.page )

7.1 Note – CM progresses from DP 1 to DP 2 upon achieving the applicable OFP. The OFP occurs when an NCM completes all qualifications required for first employment in the military occupation. At that point, an NCM is posted off the basic training list to a trained effective strength position. The OFP for each military occupation is contained in the military occupation specification maintained by the DPGR.

 

[SigMar]

Hi guys, a specific question about recruit school bypass.

I have been out for 5 years. I was out in march of 2013 and have re-applied in july 2018.

At the time of release from the reserves I had been in for just under 10 years and went as far as becoming a QL5 qualified sig op.

What are the chances of successfully getting an RSBP for re-enlistment just months over 5 years?

5 years, 3 months to be exact on the time of release to submitting new application. Re-enlisting as a Nav Res Mar Tech.

Thanks for the help.

 

[SigMar]

Since this is for the reserves I work full time, with a family and am simply trying to formulate a plan here on things that will need to be planned long in advance. Such as daycare, looking at shift options and being respectful to my employer.

DAOD 5031-1, Canadian Forces Military Equivalencies Program, doesn't exactly go over the exact process for RSBP.

I’ll ask the question re-worded as to be even more specific.

Has anyone, who has personal experience with this level of recruiting, seen situations in the reserves recently, whereby an individual was granted RSBP being more than 5 years released?

Thank you for your help in advance.

 

[Deleted member 89807]

Since this is for the reserves I work full time, with a family and am simply trying to formulate a plan here on things that will need to be planned long in advance. Such as daycare, looking at shift options and being respectful to my employer.

DAOD 5031-1, Canadian Forces Military Equivalencies Program, doesn't exactly go over the exact process for RSBP.

I’ll ask the question re-worded as to be even more specific.

Has anyone, who has personal experience with this level of recruiting, seen situations in the reserves recently, whereby an individual was granted RSBP being more than 5 years released?

Thank you for your help in advance.

I never had near your amount of experience in the reserves, it was only in a couple years and I wasn't even QL3 qualified when I released, just BMQ and BMQ-Land (formerly SQ). When I reapplied 9 years later (this year), into a different trade and element (Navy) in the Reg Force I was still granted a RSBP. I\'m currently sitting in PAT Platoon and there are a number of use who re-enlisted, two after 20 years and 12 years, they were also bypassed from Basic.

 

[SigMar]

Thank you for the info. That's really good to hear.

 

[RocketRichard]

I never had near your amount of experience in the reserves, it was only in a couple years and I wasn't even QL3 qualified when I released, just BMQ and BMQ-Land (formerly SQ). When I reapplied 9 years later (this year), into a different trade and element (Navy) in the Reg Force I was still granted a RSBP. I\'m currently sitting in PAT Platoon and there are a number of use who re-enlisted, two after 20 years and 12 years, they were also bypassed from Basic.

Interesting. I know individual who was REG force and PRes. Released as a MCpl and had to do BMQ after being out for 15 years. As someone who did basic in the early 90’s and recently instructed on a BMQ almost nothing has changed. Certainly no need for an individual to redo the whole course.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SPowell]

Does it happen often that the recruiter tells you one thing, regarding where you are going after basic and time off in between and then being told differently in basic? Do they juat change things that much, just not know or are recruiters telling you what you want to hear?

 

[PuckChaser]

Does it happen often that the recruiter tells you one thing, regarding where you are going after basic and time off in between and then being told differently in basic? Do they juat change things that much, just not know or are recruiters telling you what you want to hear?

How would you know what the recruiter said and what basic is saying? It's your son in the CAF. There's many reasons why information could have changed, the goal of the training system is to get your son to occupational function point as soon as possible. Sometimes that means changing plans as opportunities for training come up, or disappear.

 

[SPowell]

Obviously my son told me what the plans were as told to him. So we prepared for one thing only to be told something else