Untrained BMQ Candidate Alleges Abuse by Directing Staff Sergeant

[George Wallace]

I would think that if a member were injured on basic such that they had to be released, they might still qualify for a pension from VAC. That would still not make them a veteran under VAC's own definition though.

Agreed

 

[The_Falcon]

I would think that if a member were injured on basic such that they had to be released, they might still qualify for a pension from VAC. That would still not make them a veteran under VAC's own definition though.

Does anyone know if that is case for the RCMP as well, since they are also covered by VAC?

Basically my line of thought stems from this

http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/depot/ctp-pfc/index-eng.htm

The Cadet Training Program is an extensive 24-week basic training course, offered in both official languages. The cadet is part of a 32-member troop which is diverse in composition. Upon successfully completing the Cadet Training Program, cadets may be offered employment as members of the RCMP and given peace officer status.

Now anyone who has gone through Depot, and knows how it actually works feel free to correct me, but as I am reading this, since Cadets are not paid a salary at Depot (they get a small allowance which only happened in the last few years) and there is no guarantee of employment at the end (at least according to that statement above), it appears to me Cadets are not "members" of the RCMP, and therefore aren't entitled to any VAC benefits if they get hurt.  If I am correct in my thinking....why can't the CAF do this (or something similar)?

 

[Nudibranch]

Does anyone know if that is case for the RCMP as well, since they are also covered by VAC?

Basically my line of thought stems from this

http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/depot/ctp-pfc/index-eng.htm

Now anyone who has gone through Depot, and knows how it actually works feel free to correct me, but as I am reading this, since Cadets are not paid a salary at Depot (they get a small allowance which only happened in the last few years) and there is no guarantee of employment at the end (at least according to that statement above), it appears to me Cadets are not "members" of the RCMP, and therefore aren't entitled to any VAC benefits if they get hurt.  If I am correct in my thinking....why can't the CAF do this (or something similar)?

It should, IMO. A training contract essentially, before successful completion of which the member is not actually a CAF member, but on a sort of try-out.
Would avoid the issue of untrained Pte recruit/Officer Cadet languishing and drawing a salary for 3 years after failing training, for whatever reason; if reason was medical injury then it would be appropriate for VAC to step in as the WSIB equivalent, but the system could otherwise immediately cut the trg failure loose without any onerous release processes reserved for actual CAF members.

 

[Jarnhamar]

The negative publicity this case is garnering is probably putting a lot of undue (unfair?) attention on recruits with legitimate injuries suffered in basic training.


That said we all know some people join the forces with the intention of getting injured and reaping the benefits, same happens with civilian jobs and the workers-comp crowd.  Guys and girls who aim for the first pot hole they see and have an epic wipe out.

Maybe it's time we start vetting our applicants a bit more thoroughly. Maybe raise the fitness standard up a bit to try and deter people looking for a free ride.

 

[Towards_the_gap]

Maybe raise the fitness standard up a bit to try and deter people looking for a free ride.

How can you raise something that doesn't exist?

 

[PuckChaser]

Maybe raise the fitness standard up a bit to try and deter people looking for a free ride.

You mean like, making people do the FORCE test (not that its a real fitness test) as a condition of receiving an offer? That's blasphemy.

 

[Spimx]

You mean like, making people do the FORCE test (not that its a real fitness test) as a condition of receiving an offer? That's blasphemy.

That could be a pretty good idea.

 

[PuckChaser]

The cost of fitness testing people has to be less than running fat camp at St Jean.

 

[dapaterson]

Actually, that's already done.  You must pass a fitness test to joint the Reserves.

It's only the Regular Fore that has no standard for enrolment.

 

[DAA]

Maybe raise the fitness standard up a bit to try and deter people looking for a free ride.

You mean like, making people do the FORCE test (not that its a real fitness test) as a condition of receiving an offer? That's blasphemy.

The "expectation" is already there ----->  http://www.forces.ca/en/page/training-90#tab3

What's the point, in spending more time, more resources and more money just to "validate" someone's level of physical fitness?  They already know that by seeking employment with the CF, fitness is part of the job, always will be and they already know at what level they need to be at, should a job offer be made.  It's not much different than most jobs in the private sector that list actual job "requirements" should you be hired.

I think the CF already does a pretty good job in outlining these requirements.  It's a matter of whether or not the information is getting through to the people who are actually applying!  And I'm not talking about information being provided but rather, applicants understanding just what will be "expected" of them, which is where the problem may lie.

Seems to be a pretty simple solution, "Here's your job offer.  This is the expected fitness level you need to be at when you arrive at Basic.  If you don't meet this level, bye bye....."  And far as I know, the CF no longer pays for "return" travel if you are RTU'd (ie; trg failure or voluntary) out of St Jean.  Unless things have changed yet again......

The cost of fitness testing people has to be less than running fat camp at St Jean.

Don't quote me on this but I'm thinking $100+ and then you have to think about just how many of these tests will need to be done and just when.

 

[Jarnhamar]

What's the point, in spending more time, more resources and more money just to "validate" someone's level of physical fitness?  They already know that by seeking employment with the CF, fitness is part of the job, always will be and they already know at what level they need to be at, should a job offer be made.  It's not much different than most jobs in the private sector that list actual job "requirements" should you be hired.

What I mean though is someone who has no real intention of a career in the CF but rather is looking to join the CF for as long as it takes for them to "hurt themselves" and ride benefits train can join with abysmal fitness and still get their foot in the door.  They don't need to pass a fitness test to start getting paid at St-Jean, if they fail the fitness test then they're on warrior platoon for X weeks or months. They know that during their remedial training they can hurt themselves (since their foot is already in the door) then they can get money and benefits.

I think by reimplementing a fitness standard to join we would deter some people looking for freebies.  Not everyone would be detered but at least we would make them work a little harder for their epic shin-splits payout.

 

[The_Falcon]

Why not implement a system (in conjuction with what I already mentioned) where an applicant has to pay for the fitness test themselves, and maintain it's validity until they are at St. Jean, same as how, every police, fire dept in the country works.

 

[Jarnhamar]

I think that could be a great idea Hatchet Man.

 

[X Royal]

I've stayed out of this thread until now.
And what would happen if those applying had to pay for fitness/medical testing?
Our past history has shown that quite a few recruits come out of area's which have the poorer economies within our country.
When I joined I wouldn't be surprised if over 50% of our recruits came out of the east coast area due to lack of other options.
Many became quite good service members.
Making new potential recruits to pay for this would hamper recruiting some potentially good prospects.
As per: the RCMP system (far less pay during training) it also makes it far more easier for those who have a better financial history to become recruits.
I for one don't believe those with a better financial situation should be given an easier route or that they will necessarily be better members in the long run.
Without some sort of family support how would anyone short of a young person with family support let alone one with family commitments be able to join?
As for the OP's original post (and we are only getting one side of the story) if he was injured during basic VAC benefits should be paid.
If (big if) his instructor ignored a medical chit that instructor should be held responsible.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Those are very valid points X-Royal.

To counter what you're saying a bit you mentioned how many service members may hypothetically have been turned away by having to pay for a fitness test.  How many possibly stellar service members have we lost because our recruiting system is so bogged down?  Our system is full of people putting in half-effort to recruit or get most of the way through the recruiting process then just decide to quit. Never return the recruiters calls or really just went through the system because they thought it's what they wanted but pull out.  There's enough examples on army.ca. Wouldn't a fitness test to join, that applicants have to pay for, also weed out people who are less than serious about the whole thing?

Pros and cons for both options for sure.

 

[MAJONES]

Why not implement a system (in conjuction with what I already mentioned) where an applicant has to pay for the fitness test themselves, and maintain it's validity until they are at St. Jean, same as how, every police, fire dept in the country works.

Apples and oranges.  Police and fire departments have far more applicants than they have positions.  The CF doesn't.  We have a hard enough time attracting people for the tech trades as it is. 

 

[PPCLI Guy]

Apples and oranges.  Police and fire departments have far more applicants than they have positions.  The CF doesn't.  We have a hard enough time attracting people for the tech trades as it is.

Nope.  300,00 applicants per year for an annual output of less than 5K Reg F and slightly more than 5K Reserves.

 

[X Royal]

But do the forces want the best or only those who can afford to be the best?

 

[PuckChaser]

That's why we make it free,  as part of a conditional offer of employment. That way you're only testing a relative few, with probably 10% extra to cover off any failures. Then we're also reducing the time needed to test at CFLRS, no more fat camp, etc. We don't have to nickle and dime recruits, but if they fail FORCE, application is shredded and they start all over again 6 months later. FORCE is supposed to be able to stand up to legal challenge against UoS, so there's no reason not to withhold offers based on failures.

 

[George Wallace]

But do the forces want the best or only those who can afford to be the best?

Young High School graduates can fill both those criteria.  They are educated, and have as they are just entering the work force, any reasonable wage is welcome income.  As they will have all their basics covered; housing, food, clothing, etc. they would be facing no real financial hardships.