- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
1. Okay lets start with 24,000 applicants (Officers (all plans) and NCMs (all plans) for 2003/2004 (15,000 Reg F and 9,000 Res F). After processing (CFAT, Drug Screening, Medical, Interview and applicants voluntary withdrawing (3600)) there are 12,300 left with 4600 of those being enrolled (results of selection boards for Officers and NCMs) in the Reg F and 4200 of those being enrolled (some changed their minds) in the Res F.
2. What would be ideal for processing times:
A=complete application received (med docs and prior service records received if applicable).
CFAT A+14 days
Medical 1,2 A+14
Medical 3 A+44
ERC A+28
PT Test A+21
MCC Interview A+14
Selection Board A+47
Offer A+54 to 97
Enrolment A+75 to 188
3. Realty (based on a sampling of three thousand enrolled Reg F files (Officers and NCMs). Res F numbers were lower for obivious reasons:
Processed (CFAT, Medical 1,2, Medical 3, ERC, PT Test, and MCC Interview):
25% < 77 days
50% <129 days
75% <224 days
10% >1 year
From Selection board to offer to enrolment:
25% <42 days
50% <65 days
75% <120 days
3% >300 days
4. Some differences can be attributed to non-standardized processing and improper inputting of completion dates into the recruiting information management system (a big problem with garbage in and garbage out).
5. Overview of all enrolled Reg F and Res F files from CFAT to enrolment:
3% are enrolled in less than 30 days
32% are enrolled between 31 and 90 days
36% are enrolled between 91 and 180 days
24 % are enrolled between 6 and 12 months
5% take more than 12 months to be enrolled.
6. Current initiatives to alleviate wait times and hopefully applicant frustrations:
Processing Standardization:
-Applications will only be accepted when the candidate has provided all relevant documentation.
-Aim to complete the testing, medical, interview and fitness testing within 2-3 visits to CFRC/Ds.
-Standardized the use of processing priority process to reduce the number of applicants in processing and in selection who don't stand a chance of getting the trade that they want. Remember my previous posts about how we assess each application for it's competitiveness for the trade you are applying for against the number of positions available for that trade?
7. So are we doing great?, not really but are we doing as horrible as some people would have you believe?, no. Can we do better? Of course we can. I look forward to answering the many questions that this thread will certainly generate. Cheers.
2. What would be ideal for processing times:
A=complete application received (med docs and prior service records received if applicable).
CFAT A+14 days
Medical 1,2 A+14
Medical 3 A+44
ERC A+28
PT Test A+21
MCC Interview A+14
Selection Board A+47
Offer A+54 to 97
Enrolment A+75 to 188
3. Realty (based on a sampling of three thousand enrolled Reg F files (Officers and NCMs). Res F numbers were lower for obivious reasons:
Processed (CFAT, Medical 1,2, Medical 3, ERC, PT Test, and MCC Interview):
25% < 77 days
50% <129 days
75% <224 days
10% >1 year
From Selection board to offer to enrolment:
25% <42 days
50% <65 days
75% <120 days
3% >300 days
4. Some differences can be attributed to non-standardized processing and improper inputting of completion dates into the recruiting information management system (a big problem with garbage in and garbage out).
5. Overview of all enrolled Reg F and Res F files from CFAT to enrolment:
3% are enrolled in less than 30 days
32% are enrolled between 31 and 90 days
36% are enrolled between 91 and 180 days
24 % are enrolled between 6 and 12 months
5% take more than 12 months to be enrolled.
6. Current initiatives to alleviate wait times and hopefully applicant frustrations:
Processing Standardization:
-Applications will only be accepted when the candidate has provided all relevant documentation.
-Aim to complete the testing, medical, interview and fitness testing within 2-3 visits to CFRC/Ds.
-Standardized the use of processing priority process to reduce the number of applicants in processing and in selection who don't stand a chance of getting the trade that they want. Remember my previous posts about how we assess each application for it's competitiveness for the trade you are applying for against the number of positions available for that trade?
7. So are we doing great?, not really but are we doing as horrible as some people would have you believe?, no. Can we do better? Of course we can. I look forward to answering the many questions that this thread will certainly generate. Cheers.