Military struggling to retain troops.

[Machjo]

http://www.ledevoir.com/societe/actualites-en-societe/279661/nouvelle-strategie-pour-retenir-les-militaires

According to this article, though the situation has certainly not reached any kind of crisis level, the military is still being affected by a rise in the number of soldiers leaving the forces early in their career or in mid career.

The military is now studying the possibility of adopting a whole system of incentives to keep its toops. Among the recommendations is to give troops more say in the development of their military career, along with more control over transfers. Certainly this will make the military less efficient in terms of troops putting the needs of the military before their families, meaning a need for more recruits and a further expansion of military recruitment.

According to the article, another big issue has to do with the strains put on the family, and so this would involve providing more services to military spouces especially, such as the military providing daycare services, etc.

[Topaz]

I saw committee meeting on this and it was said the army have lots of people but it was the navy with the shortages because they needed specially training people for the tech section of running the ships etc. everything is high tech now. I'm not surprised of people leaving as one person I know came back from from Afghanistan said, I'm NOT going back I've done my time six years is too much.

[Army Guy]

Military is having people shortages across the board, and the navy is hit hard, but so is the rest of the forces...And ya i heard alot of guys say they're not going back....year after year...yet they're back there time after time,...

[William Ashley]

You need to understand that due to the commissioned non commissioned system and limited promotions, along side the effective age of soilders means that those retiring soilders arn't as effective as potential younger recruits in terms of physique. (There are aging factors that start setting in around 30 and continue until around 50 including overuse (heavy load bearing and running can be detrimental to the body)

While I think there is a definiate benifit of retraining and retraining carear soilders for logistics and support, an absence of marked vacancies could demonstrate a detrement to CF and the defence of Canada, not to mention higher pay, and increased pensions.

Canadian forces are a whole service and retraining is possible, as far as I am aware if there is a demand for that MOS. I am not a spokesperson for the CF as such I really don't know, but this is my presumption.

Edited January 2, 2010 by William Ashley

[Bryan]

I'm always surprised that the military is able to get as many recruits as they get.

I don't mean that as a slight towards the military or anyone who serves, I just have not known very many people who actually aspired to join, and I always wondered where they got enough people from.

[Smallc]

When you think about it though, 100K people is only .3% of the total Canadian population. You wouldn't necessarily know very many of the people.

[William Ashley]

When you think about it though, 100K people is only .3% of the total Canadian population. You wouldn't necessarily know very many of the people.

I've encountered a very large number of forces in atleast 1 weblink away from myself. Although myself someone who started the application process for the reserves, oddly I'm still meeting people who 1 social link away have friends in the Military. I've known reservists and Cadets also, and my father and grandfather were both in the Military at one stage of their lives, so it doesn't strike me as odd at all. As the military has remained more or less something I've came into contact with from time to time. I'm sure for other areas of canada it may not be as common, but the number of times I've been out while military was on exercises is more than once. Oddly though I think I saw as many uniformed soilders in middle of no where Greenstone as I did in KW, oddly I almost never see CAF in uniform in Toronto.

In places like Mexico any major community has an armory. CAF also has armories you just don't see the soilders armed very often.

Also take into consideration while there may be 100000 active members of the military there are also legions with members, and others who perhaps only served actively for a given period of time, likewise many reservists may not be effective strength technically. The total number of "ever been military" is likely much higher than 100000

Edited January 2, 2010 by William Ashley

[Army Guy]

You need to understand that due to the commissioned non commissioned system and limited promotions, along side the effective age of soilders means that those retiring soilders arn't as effective as potential younger recruits in terms of physique. (There are aging factors that start setting in around 30 and continue until around 50 including overuse (heavy load bearing and running can be detrimental to the body)

William thats not true, promotions within the military are at an all time high, movement within the ranks and officer levels is healthy, with lots of room for progression.

As for the effectiveness of those older soldiers you talk about, i say bullshit, speaking as one of them i`m over 40 and have no problem running 10 kms in well under 40 mins, or rucking in the Afghan mountains for weeks on end.... And while my body does feel it, every soldier i`ve seen on the battle field earns his right to be there,,,and conditioning is one of those ways....

The miltary does have an age factor with a lot of it`s members being baby boomers, but this has been a problem for sometime now, and yet we still mange to complete all the tasks assigned to us by our government.

While I think there is a definiate benifit of retraining and retraining carear soilders for logistics and support, an absence of marked vacancies could demonstrate a detrement to CF and the defence of Canada, not to mention higher pay, and increased pensions.

I`ll make it simple William the CF has Standards , can`t make them your out...standards a little higher than your typical civilian job...DND takes these standards very serious and would not allow them to put lives at risk.

Canadian forces are a whole service and retraining is possible, as far as I am aware if there is a demand for that MOS. I am not a spokesperson for the CF as such I really don't know, but this is my presumption.

You made alot of assumptions....

[William Ashley]

William thats not true, promotions within the military are at an all time high, movement within the ranks and officer levels is healthy, with lots of room for progression.

After how many years? How long do you need to serve for a promotion within the officer ranks or otheriwse

"Hence, military employment, training and education opportunities, as well as promotion to higher rank, are carefully structured to progress in a specified order and at a certain rate.5 For example, promotions are given only one rank level at a time, and levels of responsibility cannot be skipped in military employment. To take a simple example, officers cannot expect to command a battalion until they have commanded platoons and companies. "

who is lying to who? Is this what your recruiter told you?

http://www.forces.gc.ca/somalia/vol1/v1c8e.htm

It goes on to state:

"Progression through this highly structured and physically challenging system of professional development takes a lot of time and training. As a result, military careers begin at a relatively young age and involve many years of service before retirement. "

CF states for example A minimum of four years CF Service is required for promotion to Corporal (this varies by trade)

The next promotion requires leadership training - 2 years for rank master corporal. (esentially this is how long it takes for people to get degrees.. eg. bachelors and masters degrees)

meaning to increase two name ranks would require 6 years service

Is this fast for you?

For Sgt it would require another 2 years service

meaning 8 years service 3 name rank that to me is probably half of someones carear. or perhaps a quarter.

warrant officer another 3 year.. which these roles I beleive become more logistical 2 years 2 years...

Promotion is possible but I wouldn't call years of service speedy promotion.

Edited January 2, 2010 by William Ashley

[Army Guy]

After how many years? How long do you need to serve for a promotion within the officer ranks or otheriwse

I;ll break it down for you, Pte to Cpl can be achieved in 2.5 years, Cpl to Mcpl can be as little as 2 years, in the Combat arms trades once your PLQ qual your eligable,...Mcpl to Sgt once again 2 years, Sgt to WO is 3 years, etc etcthere are exceptions to every rule, prove your outstanding and you;ll get promoted faster, step on your dick and well you;ll stay in rank for sometime,...

Same as the officer rank levels 2 and Lt to capt are consider junior officer ranks and as long as you donèt step on your dick and meet all your profomance objectives you ll be promoted each level in 2 to 3 years....At the Maj and above rank level you need specific courses to be promoted.... get the course and you^ll progress, but everything is healthy now....

"Hence, military employment, training and education opportunities, as well as promotion to higher rank, are carefully structured to progress in a specified order and at a certain rate.5 For example, promotions are given only one rank level at a time, and levels of responsibility cannot be skipped in military employment. To take a simple example, officers cannot expect to command a battalion until they have commanded platoons and companies. "

True, but not always so, there are exceptions perhaps time in rank does not allow you to be a section or plt commander, due to unit requirements,,,,then an exception may be made, however training pkgs take this into account and provide you the training you need or required, without actually commanding a section or plt....

who is lying to who? Is this what your recruiter told you

No thats what 29 years experience in the military has told me, And william your link is for the Somalia inquiry, it;s alittle dated donèt you think, try the recruiting link on the DND web

site....

F states for example A minimum of four years CF Service is required for promotion to Corporal (this varies by trade)

This is old minimum time required for promotion is 30 mths from Pte to Cpl

The next promotion requires leadership training - 2 years for rank master corporal. (esentially this is how long it takes for people to get degrees.. eg. bachelors and masters degrees)

This is true however like i said before there are exceptions to the rule, now leadership training once completed could get you promoted....Mcpl is a non commisioned rank does not require any degrees,

meaning to increase two name ranks would require 6 years service

No it could mean 3 promotions in 5 years, or less and yes that is fast, when you think that these guys might be leading you into combat and their skill your life depends on..

Is this fast for you?

For Sgt it would require another 2 years service

meaning 8 years service 3 name rank that to me is probably half of someones carear. or perhaps a quarter.

warrant officer another 3 year.. which these roles I beleive become more logistical 2 years 2 years...

Promotion is possible but I wouldn't call years of service speedy promotion.

I guess when your life is not on the line it may not seem fast, but i;d rather have someone with experience and time in calling the shots would;nt you.

Edited January 2, 2010 by Army Guy

[William Ashley]

I;ll break it down for you, Pte to Cpl can be achieved in 2.5 years, Cpl to Mcpl can be as little as 2 years, in the Combat arms trades once your PLQ qual your eligable,...Mcpl to Sgt once again 2 years, Sgt to WO is 3 years, etc etcthere are exceptions to every rule, prove your outstanding and you;ll get promoted faster, step on your dick and well you;ll stay in rank for sometime,...

Same as the officer rank levels 2 and Lt to capt are consider junior officer ranks and as long as you donèt step on your dick and meet all your profomance objectives you ll be promoted each level in 2 to 3 years....At the Maj and above rank level you need specific courses to be promoted.... get the course and you^ll progress, but everything is healthy now....

True, but not always so, there are exceptions perhaps time in rank does not allow you to be a section or plt commander, due to unit requirements,,,,then an exception may be made, however training pkgs take this into account and provide you the training you need or required, without actually commanding a section or plt....

No thats what 29 years experience in the military has told me, And william your link is for the Somalia inquiry, it;s alittle dated donèt you think, try the recruiting link on the DND web

site....

This is old minimum time required for promotion is 30 mths from Pte to Cpl

The next promotion requires leadership training - 2 years for rank master corporal. (esentially this is how long it takes for people to get degrees.. eg. bachelors and masters degrees)

This is true however like i said before there are exceptions to the rule, now leadership training once completed could get you promoted....Mcpl is a non commisioned rank does not require any degrees,

No it could mean 3 promotions in 5 years, or less and yes that is fast, when you think that these guys might be leading you into combat and their skill your life depends on..

Is this fast for you?

For Sgt it would require another 2 years service

meaning 8 years service 3 name rank that to me is probably half of someones carear. or perhaps a quarter.

warrant officer another 3 year.. which these roles I beleive become more logistical 2 years 2 years...

Promotion is possible but I wouldn't call years of service speedy promotion.

I guess when your life is not on the line it may not seem fast, but i;d rather have someone with experience and time in calling the shots would;nt you.

More lies.. the second half was from Ammo Specialist from the recruiting site -- which has progression 1 year faster than the average progression.

What type of snake are you?

seen here:

http://recruiting.forces.gc.ca/html/ammunitiontechnician_reg_en.aspx?sm1=2

http://www.forces.ca/html/ammunitiontechnician_reg_en.aspx

now is forces.ca a gc website?

It appears to be...

Domain name: forces.ca

Domain name status: EXIST

Domain number: 241706

Approval date: 2001/02/22

Renewal date: 2011/02/22

Updated date: 2007/07/13

Registrar name: DomainsAtCost Corp.

Registrar number: 45

Registrant name: Department of National Defence

Registrant number: 13381

Registrant description:

Administrative contact

Name: Claude Lindsay

Job title:

Postal address: DND

DIMTPS 2-4-2-3, 101 Col By Drive

Ottawa ON K1A0K2 Canada

Phone: 613-991-1174

Fax: 613-991-5323

Email: [email protected]

Technical contact

Name: Claude Lindsay

Job title:

Postal address: DND

DIMTPS 2-4-2-3, 101 Col By Drive

Ottawa ON K1A0K2 Canada

Phone: 613-991-1174

Fax: 613-991-5323

Email: [email protected]

Name servers:

DNS 1 hostname: ns1.gpnet.dnd.ca 131.137.255.2

DNS 2 hostname: ns2.gpnet.dnd.ca 131.137.252.252

DNS 3 hostname:

DNS 4 hostname:

DNS 5 hostname:

DNS 6 hostname:

Edited January 2, 2010 by William Ashley

[Moonlight Graham]

Maybe a good strategy for our gov't to retain more troops would be to AVOID JOINING AND ESCALATING STUPID, UNWINNABLE WARS.

Just a thought.

[Army Guy]

More lies.. the second half was from Ammo Specialist from the recruiting site -- which has progression 1 year faster than the average progression.

What lies William, show me the lies,,,below is a copy of the Infantry job discription taken from the same link, don;t they contradict each other...which one do think moves faster Infantry or Ammo Tech...Did the recruiter tell you how many are in the AMMO trade and how slow it can be in then upper ranks....guess not..ask him about the Infantry,,,

nfantry Soldiers enjoy excellent opportunities for advanced training and promotion, and advancement can be faster for Infantry Soldiers with agile intellect, good leadership ability and a positive attitude than for CF members in other occupations. Employment opportunities for Infantry Soldiers exist across Canada and on deployed operations around the world.

What type of snake are you?

Im not a snake william, just a guy with 29 years service, who has corrected you on a few military matters...thats all.... you want to post something about the military, then aleast have your facts right,

[capricorn]

Maybe a good strategy for our gov't to retain more troops would be to AVOID JOINING AND ESCALATING STUPID, UNWINNABLE WARS

Maybe we shouldn't have any troops at all. That would sure please the anti-militarist and anti-war crowd in this country. Canada is such a peace loving country that no foreign force would think of invading us to plunder our resources or to inflict harm upon us. Not us. Not Canada, the mother of peacekeeping. We are immune from and contemptuous of conflicts outside our borders regardless of the cause. That's it! We will become a model to the rest of the World! Peace at any cost!

What a nation of wimps we have become.

[William Ashley]

which one do think moves faster Infantry or Ammo Tech...

I dunno you tell me. What would you rather do?

[maple_leafs182]

Maybe a good strategy for our gov't to retain more troops would be to AVOID JOINING AND ESCALATING STUPID, UNWINNABLE WARS.

Just a thought.

agreed. If I was a soldier I would refuse to fight in Afghanistan.

[Guest TrueMetis]

agreed. If I was a soldier I would refuse to fight in Afghanistan.

You wouldn't have to soldier only go if they volunteer.

This is only an anecdote but out of my class of just about 100 people 8 want to join the military many of them through RMC. Doubt that that is the trend in other places though. Lots of competition.

[William Ashley]

You wouldn't have to soldier only go if they volunteer.

This is only an anecdote but out of my class of just about 100 people 8 want to join the military many of them through RMC. Doubt that that is the trend in other places though. Lots of competition.

RMC is a pretty big privelege. It is probably one of the best options if you want to be a career officer.

Of course there are other things that are potentially higher paying routes like Medical. Also of course non RMC officers also though any post secondary or specialty training.

[Army Guy]

I dunno you tell me. What would you rather do?

William thats a question you should ask yourself, any trade in the CF has it's good points and bad, but at the end of the day we all serve we, are one team.

I do have one question though william, for a man who is considering joining the reserves you have a big chip on your shoulders, why is that ? I mean judging from all your posts i would not put you as a military friendly person. I would not peg you as a military type personality, but rather an anti military type...

Who knows perhaps some military training is just what you need, it might even get that chance to change what ever it is that makes you seem so anti military. seeing it first hand is always the best medicine....

[Army Guy]

agreed. If I was a soldier I would refuse to fight in Afghanistan.

It's easy to make those decisions sitting in your chair behind your computer....It's a whole different world when your a soldier, and when a huge majority of soldiers really believe in this mission. They look past all the media and all the false PC shit going on in ref to this mission they here it direct from other soldiers mouths....that here we are making a difference in the world, be it one person or an entire village, but Canadian soldiers are making a difference, and most soldiers want to be a part of that..

Beats sitting on some UN mission watching war crimes happen in front of your position and not have the power to do anything. except report it so the UN can keep score...No thanks, i believe our lives are worth more than that, i believe our flag and nation deserves more than that. I also believe the people we were sent to help need more than help....

[August1991]

I`ll make it simple William the CF has Standards , can`t make them your out...standards a little higher than your typical civilian job...DND takes these standards very serious and would not allow them to put lives at risk.

I'm going to take the same approach. The article states that the Canadian Forces recruited about 7000 new soldiers last year and about 2000 will quit in the first year.

I would encourage recruiters to better sell their wares but the army is a business where it is difficult to know whether it's a good match until someone is in it.

[Army Guy]

I'm going to take the same approach. The article states that the Canadian Forces recruited about 7000 new soldiers last year and about 2000 will quit in the first year.

I would encourage recruiters to better sell their wares but the army is a business where it is difficult to know whether it's a good match until someone is in it.

I don't think the story is revieling the whole truth, Yes the say 2000 will quit in the first year, but in those numbers are attrition from basic training which is designed to weed out large numbers. That and the fact that the long waiting times to start trades training which follows right after basic are some major hurdles that in todays Military are just a fact of life. And until we increase training infra structure, housing, places for them to work that and get more instructors that will not change...

Believe it not but it used to be a higher number sometimes as high as 50%, when hiring practices, training practices, and human rights where toned down for the Military and RCMP. it was these tough training standards that produced a better all round recruit, i mean after going though all that a person really either wanted to be there, and had that career picked out or was weeded out really early. But i think it had more to do with that generation in which recruits where chosen, todays kids are smarter, but really need to be forced into doing something physical, and well the military is very physical...

[Bugs]

Why is this a problem?

My feeling is that the armed forces are an excellent opportunity for the development of a lot of skills. It's as it should be that they move often move out of the armed forces as they top off their careers.

Not only that, but it also gives some excellent leadership training. There's never too much leadership in the world, folks.

I would prefer to have an expectation that well trained military personnel will often build on their skills to make careers in the private economy. What is wrong with that?

Turnover, up to a certain point, is good for organizations. If people leave, and take a job in the private sector, they will be contributing to the nation just as surely as if they are soldiers because they probably will be paying a lot of taxes.

I understand that the people in our military might not like it, but there are other considerations. The real problem is probably that we can't afford to train enough people to allow for attrition, which ought to be rectified, in my book.

[Army Guy]

Why is this a problem?

Sorry Bugs i'm not sure i understand what your ref to.

[Wilber]

I'm going to take the same approach. The article states that the Canadian Forces recruited about 7000 new soldiers last year and about 2000 will quit in the first year.

I would encourage recruiters to better sell their wares but the army is a business where it is difficult to know whether it's a good match until someone is in it.

You are speaking of a job where others will depend on you for their lives on a daily basis. The standards should be high and when that sinks in, I don't think a 25% attrition rate in the first year is unreasonable.