• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Recruits of the last half decade: Fatter, dumber and less motivated than before.

UnwiseCritic

Member
Reaction score
0
Points
160
I thought that diversity thing was a myth!?

Call me crazy but isn't true equality when everyone is held to the same standards. Regardless of sex or race? Do we not want the most qualified people? O sorry I forgot. Our government views us as a social welfare program that they can abuse to further their political agendas.
 

BeyondTheNow

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Mentor
Reaction score
6
Points
530
ObedientiaZelum said:
I think this is a great example of what is wrong with our recruiting.  Our system is bogged down because of this.

Seeing comments like these makes me wonder if there are any available statistics related to applicants who drop the recruiting process and/or refuse job offers because they were able to find alternative employment, which met their needs in the mean-time? While I in no way think of myself as being any different than any other 'special snowflakes' out there, I do know that I'm very capable. But it's definitely very difficult waiting 2, 3+ years for a position, as some applicants have. I'm sure some excellent candidates have been lost. While I assume the numbers would be quite low and probably wouldn't greatly affect the issues surrounding the initial article for the better, it's too bad that persons not suitable for the job are holding processes up for others.
 

dapaterson

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
7,176
Points
1,090
There are not quotas - a quota would be "You must meet this level".  Recruiting had goals - to encourage them to seek out under-represented groups.

With Canadian demographics shifting, it's only common sense for the military to reach out to everyone.  As in many organizations, though, the military tends to go with what's always worked, more or less.  Goals to increase the number og women, visible minorities and aboriginals help steer the CF towards long-term recruiting success.

Note that anyone recruited still has to meet the same standards.  It's not a lowering of standards to get people in; it's looking beyond white, rural Canada for recruits.
 

Grimey

Member
Reaction score
67
Points
380
dapaterson said:
There are not quotas - a quota would be "You must meet this level".  Recruiting had goals - to encourage them to seek out under-represented groups.

With Canadian demographics shifting, it's only common sense for the military to reach out to everyone.  As in many organizations, though, the military tends to go with what's always worked, more or less.  Goals to increase the number og women, visible minorities and aboriginals help steer the CF towards long-term recruiting success.

Note that anyone recruited still has to meet the same standards.  It's not a lowering of standards to get people in; it's looking beyond white, rural Canada for recruits.

Demographics may be changing, but the same people are joining, at least in naval technical occupations.  During the last occupation working group I did a quick "scientific" poll based solely on ID snapshots.  Based on 3 yrs of QL3 intake into Mar Eng over what appeared to be the most concerted recruiting drive in decades, out of 212 students, 3 where female, 4 where from obvious minority groups.

The face of Canada is changing but we are not selling the CF to the people changing it.
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
11,414
Points
1,160
Grimey said:
Demographics may be changing, but the same people are joining, at least in naval technical occupations.  During the last occupation working group I did a quick "scientific" poll based solely on ID snapshots.  Based on 3 yrs of QL3 intake into Mar Eng over what appeared to be the most concerted recruiting drive in decades, out of 212 students, 3 where female, 4 where from obvious minority groups.

The face of Canada is changing but we are not selling the CF to the people changing it.

Similar issues in the UK military with similar percentages: http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2009/mar/01/military-race
 

Grimey

Member
Reaction score
67
Points
380
daftandbarmy said:
Similar issues in the UK military with similar percentages: http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2009/mar/01/military-race

interesting.  I imagine that once the Fijians are factored out the Army stats come more in line with the RAF/RN percentages.  My old man was in 7 RHA during the early 60s during the first Fijian recruiting drive and had one in his troop who, in line with times, was nick named "Chalky". I doubt that would fly nowadays.

Some of those fellas went far (Mirbat and "the balcony").
 

armyvern

Army.ca Myth
Mentor
Reaction score
34
Points
530
DAA said:
Remedial measures may be warranted in some cases but what we are missing, is supervisors rotating people in and out of positions to make them more efficient, productive and knowledgeable of their occupation.  Far too often I have seen sub-performers shuffled from one menial task to another, intentionally overlooked for more progressive/knowledge enhancing jobs and never given the opportunity to do something more challenging, with the core intent of broadening their occupational knowledge to make them better.

Why would I want to try and be "better" when I am only going to be assigned to the same type of task, over and over again?

As I said, sounds like a leadership issue.  I'm busy as shit here and I still rotate my staff through different Sqns and sections at least once a year.
 

Emilio

Member
Reaction score
0
Points
210
I don't understand this thread? I have read on this sight, and spoken with CAF members that jobs in the CAF are very competitive. That only the best applicant will be selected for the few openings which happen every year.
 

Pusser

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1
Points
430
Emilio said:
I don't understand this thread? I have read on this sight, and spoken with CAF members that jobs in the CAF are very competitive. That only the best applicant will be selected for the few openings which happen every year.

This is true, which makes one shudder to think about the ones we reject (actually we don't reject anyone - they just fail to make it to the top of the list to whom we make offers).

Just because we only recruit the best of those who apply, doesn't mean that the pool of applicants is particularly deep.
 

The_Falcon

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
0
Points
410
Pusser said:
Just because we only recruit the best of those who apply, doesn't mean that the pool of applicants is particularly deep.

Mile wide and an inch deep.
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
11,414
Points
1,160
Hatchet Man said:
Mile wide and an inch deep.

I dunno, I've always been impressed by the quality of the 'kids' coming through these days. Thinking back to the 'good old days' when I joined, I find them smarter, more responsible, more worldly and more professionally committed in many ways than me and my peers ever were.

Of course, as a result, it's the leadership that has to step up their game to work with these people, rarely the other way around.  ;)
 
J

jollyjacktar

Guest
They are different.  I don't know if "smarter" is the right phrase though.  They will think through what's being demanded of them and they will question it if it doesn't meet with their sniff test of logic.  They have a better sense of the world and what's going on than many of us did at that age and that might be attributed to the internet with it's instant connectivity around the world to people, events and things.  Kids today do have, however, a higher expectation or sense of entitlement than before.  That may both be due to the instant gratification of today's society and the higher levels of education/life experiences they come to us with.  They expect more from us, sooner, than we did.  If they don't feel fulfilled, they'll leave.  In my present unit we're starting to see a number of releases coming from these kids in the engineering world.  And it's the bright one's not the thuds.
 

pbi

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
0
Points
410
daftandbarmy said:
I dunno, I've always been impressed by the quality of the 'kids' coming through these days. Thinking back to the 'good old days' when I joined, I find them smarter, more responsible, more worldly and more professionally committed in many ways than me and my peers ever were.

Of course, as a result, it's the leadership that has to step up their game to work with these people, rarely the other way around.  ;)

I'm getting stale-dated now, but I agree with daftandbarmy here. When I joined the Militia in 1974, I served with  some soldiers who were borderline illiterate (yes, even in the GTA!) and at least three I can think of who were either mildly retarded or had very low IQs.  Then when I transferred to the Regular Army in 1982, and started Regtl duty, I found some of the same kind of people. I don't think these people would even get through the CFRC today.

Contrary to what some people fondly think about the "good old days" (whenever those where...), I don't think that in the kind of Army we have, and considering the kind of missions the Army must be able to do, that there is much room any more for people who can't even finish high school. IMHO in an Army as small as ours every soldier should be a potential NCO, and that is how he should be recruited, trained, and treated. If he has no potential, give him one engagement and then do not "re-up". The old idea that we need a bunch of old soldiers around to run kitshops, work in messes, or in trade pioneers, or hide in QM, is a relic of the past.

That said, I am in full agreement with the idea that this is really a leadership and training challenge. Our Army (like every Army in history) has always had to work with what it got. Just for historical perspective, look at the very low medical and physical condition of many British Army recruits in WWI and WWII: many barely made the physical, largely due to the bad social conditions that so many of them came from.

As far as "working with the clay", my grandfather served in the British Regular Army before, during and after WWI. Although Britain had already had free public education for many years, there was such a high percentage of troopers who were functionally illiterate that the Regiment conducted school classes as part of stables routine. Army school certificates were required for promotion up the ranks. The British Army (hardly a liberal "social laboratory"...) realized that the "clay" was weak and did something about it. Our Army can, too, if senior leadership is actually willing to accept that a problem exists.
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
11,414
Points
1,160
pbi said:
As far as "working with the clay", my grandfather served in the British Regular Army before, during and after WWI. Although Britain had already had free public education for many years, there was such a high percentage of troopers who were functionally illiterate that the Regiment conducted school classes as part of stables routine. Army school certificates were required for promotion up the ranks. The British Army (hardly a liberal "social laboratory"...) realized that the "clay" was weak and did something about it. Our Army can, too, if senior leadership is actually willing to accept that a problem exists.

They still do deliver educational upgrading, mainly for ORs, that are requirements for promotion, via these guys/gals:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Army_Educational_Corps

I recall working with my NCOs to help them study for their exams, sometimes following patrol debriefs in NI! It's a big deal for them. And I am glad that I didn't have to do their exams, they were pretty tough maths, English tests etc
 

Pikache

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
486
Points
980
daftandbarmy said:
I dunno, I've always been impressed by the quality of the 'kids' coming through these days. Thinking back to the 'good old days' when I joined, I find them smarter, more responsible, more worldly and more professionally committed in many ways than me and my peers ever were.

Of course, as a result, it's the leadership that has to step up their game to work with these people, rarely the other way around.  ;)
I'm in general agreement with this post.

Having taught a lot of BMQs, I find that an avg recruit is smart, but has short attention span, generally needs more PT and has a bit of self entitlement attitude (even some of the best ones). Once they learn that army is for real, and that they can't treat their staff like their high school teachers (meaning, no respect), I find a lot of the new recruits to be a pleasure to teach. And after few 'corrective training', they learn teamwork real fast.

Now there are thuds who can't be motivated and lazy and out of shape, and I wish the training system makes it more easy to punt these guys, but such is the military we work in.
 

gettingthere

Guest
Reaction score
0
Points
10
I'm applying as soon as I can and I'll be in good shape. In addition I'm a white male from a somewhat rural community. I was worried that maybe they wouldn't be accepting new recruits because they have too many. After reading this I'm a little comforted. This is all I've wanted to do as a career and I was worried I wouldn't be accepted. I'm soon hopefully to be training in the infantry and I know I'll be ready mentally and physically.
 
Top