Whats new in Recruiting? Gen Hillier's thoughts. Options for improvement.

[GO!!!]

The "retrain" mindset has some virtue, because you retain a trained soldier, and you know he's a lifer if he's willing to re-muster!

The problem (in my experience) is the long waits associated with a re-muster/LOTP. The problems seem to lie at the unit level, where the paperwork is simply not being done. Troops have waited for appointments with the Career Manager/BPSO for a year plus, and they get punished by their own c of c at the same time for "quitting."

Most 031s I know get out, then back in, because the LOTP process is so painful. (undesireable jobs/postings, no courses (career or otherwise) and the c of c treating you like you are a disease to be removed from their sub unit asap.

The administrative nightmare of broken time is far preferable to the last year before your LOTP comes through.

yes, I know it is wrong, and should not be tolerated, but if you complain, things will only get worse, so the boys suck it up, and spend 6mos as a civy.

This costs the army a whole whack of $$ as the administrative costs pile up to release, then re-recruit someone.

What NEEDS to happen is that a hard-and-fast timeline be established by the LOTP organisers, in order to protect the individuals attempting to switch trades. Make the c of c stick to rule similar to the grievance process, where there are guaranteed response times. If this could be done, I think that the attrition rate would decline, and the re-train rate would rise, as soon as you could convince the troops that they would not be punished for leaving the infantry.

 

[Young KH]

That's exactly what I meant. There are too many UN and other over seas posting to allow for a normal life which should also include advancement and courses. More Ground troops are needed. Many more. but what took government 40 years to cut back to where we are now is not going to be corrected over night. One thing for sure is that if they don't start, it never will.
I believe that there is too much emphasis on education and IQ tests the Army also need some strong back and people that are happy to follow and not to lead. Heck if we had to go through the same process in 1939 the war would have been lost or at least still waiting for us to join.

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

JMHO, but I think the Canadian Armed Forces first needs to fundamentally change the organization to be something that difference makers will want to join, then you tell the public about it.

My quick list:
1)  "Helicopters that don't fly, sub's that don't go underwater, etc." - Few want to join a group/association if they are not going to be supplied with the best possible equipment to do their job.  This is particularly important if you are asking people to put their lives on the line.  Crucially, I think most people rightly assess the government's commitment to its soldiers by looking at its funding.  And since chronic underfunding of the Armed Forces is the norm, I think most people infer from that the politicians do not respect the CF.  Ergo, why would one want to join an organization not even respected by the government that pays the bills.  Bottom Line:  A fancy video or new website will never be enough to overcome this issue.  Either the Government steps up and properly equips the forces, or you can add all the smoke & mirrors you like, but people are going to see through it.  That means you lose the recruits you really want (those that want to make a difference, but more importantly you lose current soldiers (who've just had enough) who are far more valuable than any potential recruit ever could be.

2)  Ban the phrase "Peacekeepers" from any official document or release.  I don't care what you replace it with, but that term has done more harm than its given credit for.  "Why do we need tanks?  We're peacekeepers.  Why do we need jets?  We're peacekeepers."  Replace it with a new edict about values and principles:  "Canada will be a force for good in the world. We will bring all of our forces to bear in any nation where we see ethnic cleansing or genocide.  We have for too long turned a blind eye to individuals in nations that are easy to forget, and allowed lives to be lost.  No more....from this point forward Canada will take a stand and will use every resource at our disposal to ensure there will not be another Rwanda or Darfur in our lifetimes."

3)  Rebrand in a manner similar to the U.S. Forces.  Like "The Proud, The Few, The Marines", I would recommend something similiar to "The New Canadian Armed Forces - Benevolent Warriors".  [of note, I've added the word "new" because I think there needs to be clear definition between the Forces that were hacked & slashed nearly to death by cutbacks and this new organization that Hillier is trying to put back together.  Specifically, in new advertisements the Forces needs to highlight the new investments made in the effort to build a world-class military [which goes back to my first statement - first you build it, then you tell people about it.]

Well, that's my 30-seconds of input for this evening. 

Cheers all,


Matthew. 

 

[paracowboy]

3)   "The New Canadian Armed Forces - Benevolent Warriors".  

I don't like that either. There's no need for 'benevolent'. It's redundant, and waters down the message.

Best recruiting tool I ever saw was a poster with a little girl crouched in the ruins of her home. The wording said something along the lines of "She's just seen her home burnt & her family killed by stange men. The last thing she needs to see is another man."
There's a split in the poster, and the adjacent photo shows a Royal Marine reaching into the debris (from her perspective), with her arms going towards him, and the words "Not just another man".
Gave me chills.

 

[Matt_Fisher]

Increased focus by the CDS on the recruiting efforts of the CFs is good, however as discussed, I wonder about the '10:1' ratio he mentioned.  It seems that a big problem with CFRC is the processing times in that a qualified candidate has moved on in life by the time they're offered an enrollment package.

Medical processing and security background check times seem to drag the recruiting process out to to lengths that force potential recruits to lose interest in the CFs.  Streamline and make these processes more efficient and timely.

Also, impose more focus on CFRC staff to get qualified recruits into the system ASAP.  Some sort of quota/bonus system should be put in place.  Essentially recruiting is HR Sales, much the way that a headhunter works.  Some sort of bonuses should be given to recruiting staff that meet and exceed their quotas (ie. extra leave, pay bonuses, etc.)

 

[Edward Campbell]

I'm told there was a very high 'through the door' ratio when I joined - maybe 10:1.   There was a mini-recession in the late '50s (see the graph at: http://policyresearch.gc.ca/page.asp?pagenm=v7n1_art_12 ) and jobs were scarce or, in the words of my recruit platoon sergeant: "All the garbage cans are frozen over, eh Campbell.   Is that why you're 'ere, you lazy bloody sod, pretending to be soldier?â ?

In any event we were processed pretty quickly.   My recollection is:

"¢ In the front door of the Recruiting Office - early/mid August;

"¢ In the PD for three or four days of   medical/dental exams, tests, interviews, etc - mid August, just a couple of days after I signed an application;

"¢ Received a letter accepting me as a recruit - the week before Labour Day;

"¢ Started Recruit Training - early October, after a month of LWOP.

I suspect the really big difference was: security.   Infantry recruits (maybe all recruits) were cleared to rumour.   Even the regimental signallers and   company clerks were only cleared to Confidential - only real Signals guys and people like regimental clerks and officers and senior NCOs needed a Secret clearance which took several months (six, maybe?) to process.

I am fairly sure that the decision to accept or reject each of us was made by an officer - a captain, I think, maybe a major - at the PD (Personnel Depot - there were a dozen, plus, across the country).   I recall an elderly (well, he seemed old to me then) captain telling me that I was certain to be accepted and that I would be assigned to The RCR which needed men and had a recruit class filling up right then.   I'm quite certain I got the letter within three or four days - it can only have come from the local PD.   (The thing sticks in my mind because my mother was in shock - I was giving up my university vacancy, etc, etc, etc to run off and join the circus, wooops army.   The high drama in our house is not something I would forget.)

Security aside, I am prepared to bet that almost all the impediments to a speedy recruiting process are self-inflicted wounds and the CDS (maybe the minister for about half of 'em) can cure the system when they decide to do so.

 

[Old Sweat]

I support Edward Campbell's take on the recruiting process. My experience was similar to his, except that I was sworn in at the PD on the fourth day and left for the RCA Depot in Shilo ten days later.

The security clearance is probably the major bug bear. A friend from high school enlisted in the RC Sigs, but later was deemed unsuitable during recruit training because a pre-enrolment court appearance resulted in his failing the vetting process. However, he transferred to the infantry and served honourably and well in a rifle company for the rest of his three year enlistment.

I don't have any easy answers; come to think of it, not any hard ones either.

 

[Gunner98]

Regional quotas suck because if your not buying what there selling then you don't get in.  Couple that with a recruiting staff tied up to weed out 9/10 of the people.  Sounds pretty bureaucratic.  Perhaps we should get the Employment centres to do the pre-screen of 9/10 of the people, then the recruiting process handles 1/10 of the workload.  If the employment centres also advertised the quotas available in the regions, they would be the front man.

I think many Employment centres have kiosks as well.  Another idea might be to allow on-line applicant submissions like the dreaded public service.  Then hire a contractor to screen. 

The recruiting centres could become processing centres and cut-out the unnecessary workload caused by 9/10 of the people.

When I joined in 1983 I tried to be processed in Toronto and Kingston - I lived in Belleville and went to school in Waterloo.  Toronto was my idea to broaden the quota opportunities that would not exist in Kingston or Waterloo.  21 years later I have never had a chance to be the Log Officer I was university trained to become.  Moot point now, I say again regional quotas suck.

 

[BDTyre]

Years ago, when there was a large base in Calgary, me and my family went to see a parade and demostrations on Canada day. The Army put on a demo of a section attack, and had machine guns set up to shoot blanks. It was highly supervised and people were allowed to come up and lie on the ground and pull the trigger a few times. (I can't imagine them allowing something like that now) But it was a great time!

Would be nice to see them put on some demonstations, of some kind, at the Stampede. Would make the experience more engaging.

Back in March, the Seaforths had an open-house with a weapons simulator set-up.  I tried, and didn't end up doing too poorly.  Sure was fun, though.  Of course it brings to mind that scene in Aliens:
"How many drops is this for you Lt?"
"38...simulated."
"How many real ones?"
"2, including this one."

There was also a section attack and urban warfare demonstration, both of which I unfortunately missed.

 

[kincanucks]

My two cents:

Recruiting booths at large venues whether they be sporting events, rodeos, car or home shows do not work as a method to get people to apply to the CF.  However,  large information set-ups with hands on displays and prominently displayed posters and banners do help to attract interest in the CF and perhaps get people to think about the CF as a future employer.  But to think that by setting up a recruiting booth at large venues you are going to get scores of people wanting to pick up a job application is not a good use of limited resources.  Recruiting resources should be used solely for the processing of the applicants and the rest of the CF should be used to attract potential applicants.

 

[Matt_Fisher]

I'll disagree with you on that one Kincanucks.

When used PROPERLY, recruiting booths can be a tremendous resource.  A recruiting booth at a large public event such as the Calgary Stampede is much like exhibiting at a trade show. 

When I work a trade show with my civilian job, I'm canvassing those that approach my booth and ensuring that I get their contact details before they leave so I can hit them with follow up calls.  If I were to rely solely on people calling me to place orders, I'd be not making my sales quota and would be fired and replaced with someone who performs.  Those 'warm leads' that I get from a trade show are some of my best prospects.

In a recruiting environment, the same should apply.  Instead of just answering questions about the CFs and handing out brochures and hoping that you'll get some people calling the recruiting center to arrange their enrollment into the CFs, the recruiters manning the booth should get the contact details of those who stop by and then hit them up with phone calls, emails, mailings over the next few weeks to develop that interest and hopefully get the person to sign up.

Events such as the Calgary Stampede are excellent in that they give recruiters access to a wide cross-section of the public in the 18-30 year old range.  Other events such as job fairs, high school events where colleges and universities have their booths at are great, not just for recruiting ROTP candidates, but for also getting those interested in trades schools or who may be looking to spend a few years growing up before they go to university.

In general the public image of the CFs needs to be elevated through the use of tv, radio, newspaper and magazine ads as well as banners/advertising space and sponsorship of sporting events.  Could you imagine the presence that would be generated if the CFs were to sign a sponsorship deal with Hockey Night In Canada?  Combine that media coverage with a proactive recruiting force that became involved with high school guidance counsellors and also focused on students attending community colleges, universities and trade schools and you'd soon have those 5000 new bodies, plus.

Home shows, I don't know why the CFs would bother...the demographics involved in that target audience are much too old to generate significant numbers of recruits from.

 

[kincanucks]

I'll disagree with you on that one Kincanucks.

When used PROPERLY, recruiting booths can be a tremendous resource.   A recruiting booth at a large public event such as the Calgary Stampede is much like exhibiting at a trade show.  

When I work a trade show with my civilian job, I'm canvassing those that approach my booth and ensuring that I get their contact details before they leave so I can hit them with follow up calls.   If I were to rely solely on people calling me to place orders, I'd be not making my sales quota and would be fired and replaced with someone who performs.   Those 'warm leads' that I get from a trade show are some of my best prospects.

In a recruiting environment, the same should apply.   Instead of just answering questions about the CFs and handing out brochures and hoping that you'll get some people calling the recruiting center to arrange their enrollment into the CFs, the recruiters manning the booth should get the contact details of those who stop by and then hit them up with phone calls, emails, mailings over the next few weeks to develop that interest and hopefully get the person to sign up.

Events such as the Calgary Stampede are excellent in that they give recruiters access to a wide cross-section of the public in the 18-30 year old range.   Other events such as job fairs, high school events where colleges and universities have their booths at are great, not just for recruiting ROTP candidates, but for also getting those interested in trades schools or who may be looking to spend a few years growing up before they go to university.

In general the public image of the CFs needs to be elevated through the use of tv, radio, newspaper and magazine ads as well as banners/advertising space and sponsorship of sporting events.   Could you imagine the presence that would be generated if the CFs were to sign a sponsorship deal with Hockey Night In Canada?   Combine that media coverage with a proactive recruiting force that became involved with high school guidance counsellors and also focused on students attending community colleges, universities and trade schools and you'd soon have those 5000 new bodies, plus.

Home shows, I don't know why the CFs would bother...the demographics involved in that target audience are much too old to generate significant numbers of recruits from.

Well after five years of military recruiting and manning a few recruiting booths, I guess I don't know what I am talking about then.  Fortunately, we don't recruit like the US military by ambushing people in shopping malls and demanding that schools give us the contact information for of age males or hounding them by phone and mail.  Your points of more advertising and sponsorship are valid, however, while all those at the top like to cry about how a poor job that we in recruiting are doing they are very reluctant to put up the money.  I happen to believe that career fairs and skilled trades fair are excellent venues for recruiting because people are actually there looking for jobs and not more interested in whether their favourite team wins or who wins the chuck wagon race.

 

[Old Sweat]

In the really bad old (pre-TV) days, the Canadian army used to sponsor the second period of HNIC. At that time, only the second and third period were aired on Saturday night, so it was major exposure.

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

Just a suggestion, but I think we start recruiting people too late. 

I think you need to plant the seed at the point where kids are in the "I wanna be a _____ when I grow up" phase.

That means at the latest you need to make first contact prior to kids to leaving elementary school.

If it were me, I'd tie-in Rememberence Day as an unofficial recruiting tool.  Specifically, at as many schools as possible arrange that every November 11th, there is an assembly with veterens and current soldiers with frank conversation with why Rememberence Day is important, a moment of silence, and then have the vehicles parked at the school until the end of the day so that curious students can come up to the personnel manning the vehicles and ask questions.




M. 

 

[Kal]

Best recruiting tool I ever saw was a poster with a little girl crouched in the ruins of her home. The wording said something along the lines of "She's just seen her home burnt & her family killed by stange men. The last thing she needs to see is another man."
There's a split in the poster, and the adjacent photo shows a Royal Marine reaching into the debris (from her perspective), with her arms going towards him, and the words "Not just another man".
Gave me chills.

    Now, what if you made that into a short commercial/film for advertising in the movie theatres?  Maybe some weak explosions and weapons fire in the distance and have the combat equipped troop there in the rubble as the 'hero'.  Would be appealing to a lot of people.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

Just a suggestion, but I think we start recruiting people too late.  

I think you need to plant the seed at the point where kids are in the "I wanna be a _____ when I grow up" phase.

That means at the latest you need to make first contact prior to kids to leaving elementary school.

If it were me, I'd tie-in Rememberence Day as an unofficial recruiting tool.   Specifically, at as many schools as possible arrange that every November 11th, there is an assembly with veterens and current soldiers with frank conversation with why Rememberence Day is important, a moment of silence, and then have the vehicles parked at the school until the end of the day so that curious students can come up to the personnel manning the vehicles and ask questions.

M.    

    I couldn't agree with you more. I remember 3 years ago, at my elementry school, the word "Army" or "Trade" were always shot down immediately by my guidence counsellor and teacher. The only push somewhat military we ever got was when the local cadet corp made a presentation at our school (which itself was strictly for those people interested. I think we had about 10 people or so).

    Like Cdn Blackshirt said, if we plant the seed earlier, we'll get a better crop of recruits when the time comes.

 

[canadianblue]

If it were me, I'd tie-in Rememberence Day as an unofficial recruiting tool.  Specifically, at as many schools as possible arrange that every November 11th, there is an assembly with veterens and current soldiers with frank conversation with why Rememberence Day is important, a moment of silence, and then have the vehicles parked at the school until the end of the day so that curious students can come up to the personnel manning the vehicles and ask questions.

I think thats a great idea, but I'm not sure if some of the school administrators would go for it. Back at my elementary/junior high school every single Rememberance day was along the lines of peace this, peace that, and would often involve singing of One Tin Soldier, etc. You get the idea it was very anti-war. I was also really interested in the army at a young age as well, hell whenever my family would take a trip to Hawaii I was in the US Military museum close to the beach more then I was out in the water.

 

[Jaxson]

i remember when i was just entering high school they did the army as a half or full year of co-op i forget which it was but i knew you could do it, in grade 11 when i applied for it the counsellor said the program was not offered any more because the school didnt like the idea of being used as a "recruiting centre"  i was so pissed.... i had to do co-op at a damn pizza place 

 

[Britney Spears]

After reading all these recruiting threads and the comments from the older members, it seems to me that we do not at all lack for volunteers to begin the proccess, but rather our recruiting proccess takes an unreasonable amount of time, such that most people either say no thanks or give up half way. Isn't this the REAL issue?  Variously it seems two of the proccesses, the medical and the security clearances, seem to be bunging up the whole system. I probably would not be in the army today if not for a huge fsuckup on the part of the security clearance folks, which inspires very little confidence in me as far as catching REAL Al-Qaeda infiltrators is concerned. Now the older guys tell me that the security clearance proccess was much simpler in the old days. Why is this and can we do anything about it?

 

[GDawg]

After reading all these recruiting threads and the comments from the older members, it seems to me that we do not at all lack for volunteers to begin the proccess, but rather our recruiting proccess takes an unreasonable amount of time, such that most people either say no thanks or give up half way. Isn't this the REAL issue?  Variously it seems two of the proccesses, the medical and the security clearances, seem to be bunging up the whole system. I probably would not be in the army today if not for a huge fsuckup on the part of the security clearance folks, which inspires very little confidence in me as far as catching REAL Al-Qaeda infiltrators is concerned. Now the older guys tell me that the security clearance proccess was much simpler in the old days. Why is this and can we do anything about it?

Agreed. Regarding the medicals and the security clearance, some measures have been taken to speed things up. I've been the unit recruiter since April and my fastest enrollment to date was about 86 or so days from a completed file in my hand to a bible in their hand.

A double pronged approach must be taken to salvage the system, a new PA/recruiting effort targeting the whole demographic and a streamlining of the enrolment process.

You can attract all the bright young go getters you want, but if you can't put them in a uniform in a reasonably short amount of time they will find somewhere else to work.

This is where a newly designed ad campaign would come in handy, appeal to patriotism rather than $$$. The CF pays pretty good, but you could certainly make more civie side, so why fight that uphill battle against the private sector?

Sure you can make more money in the oil patch, but can you defend peace and security on the rigs? Thats where we have the edge.