A Leaky Sieve: Retention in the ADF

[Colin Parkinson]

I had undiagnosed ADHD as a kid, I certainly got better treated as a recruit in the Reserve system than I ever did in school by my "peers" or teachers. I knew a lot of misfits that did well in the military, carrying a dummy artillery shell or rifle over your head around the parade square a few times did wonders for your focus. The boundaries and expectations were clear and allowed you to grow and develop.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

I give very simple orders, how my subs perceive those simple orders is up to them. 50% of them are able to put their head down and do their jobs, like I did when I was in their shoes. The other half have varying degrees of mental breakdowns because of all the distractions, which they have zero control over, that keep them from completing basic trade related tasks. The problem with the CAF in many regards are the negative attitudes from the 50% who can't cope and infect the strong workers, who also have to pick up the slack for the poor performers. They run off to mental health get their insane VAC payout from emotional feelings and parade it around the units like it's some trophy.

I agree we need culture change in the CAF, we need a better mechanism to release (fire) poor performers quicker before they drag down the moral of units.

You only need to ask one question:

Is what the organization doing improving or hindering performance?

I don't see any quantifiable evidence that things are improving. Rather, the CAF gives off the appearance of a Potemkin Village.

You're wasting your breath arguing about it though as the pendulum has swung hard left and all the malingerers have been empowered. Plus anyone who wants to go anywhere in the organization has to be 100% in support and they know it, so we've now got a motley crew of Senior Pers who are what I call "enthusiastic cheerleaders" of performance mediocrity.

Best thing I did was leave the organization and go elsewhere, my mental health has improved significantly just by not being part of the Potemkin Village.

In the real world, people who go on disability for mental health usually don't come back. It's called career suicide in the private sector for a reason and is a pretty clear indication to the business that you couldn't handle the job and are unsuitable for the position you are occupying.

I had undiagnosed ADHD as a kid, I certainly got better treated as a recruit in the Reserve system than I ever did in school by my "peers" or teachers. I knew a lot of misfits that did well in the military, carrying a dummy artillery shell or rifle over your head around the parade square a few times did wonders for your focus. The boundaries and expectations were clear and allowed you to grow and develop.

The tough training I received in the CAF and some of the things I did prepared me well for the private sector. Especially when it comes to being a manager in a blue collar work environment.

You use kid gloves in the blue collar World or in any business where the goal is profit, you're going to get walked all over. Also, It will be you and not them that's getting walking papers when the job didn't get done.

 

[dimsum]

In the real world, people who go on disability for mental health usually don't come back. It's called career suicide in the private sector for a reason and is a pretty clear indication to the business that you couldn't handle the job and are unsuitable for the position you are occupying.

So, being specifically vague here, should it be a "one and done" thing for the CAF? If someone had a particularly tough posting and went on stress leave, does it mean they're not suitable for another posting or anything further?

It just seems weird to me that we talk about needing folks to be able to make mistakes and learn from them, but then we also say this.

You use kid gloves in the blue collar World or in any business where the goal is profit, you're going to get walked all over. Also, It will be you and not them that's getting walking papers when the job didn't get done.

Agreed, but the goal in a military is not profit.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

So, being specifically vague here, should it be a "one and done" thing for the CAF? If someone had a particularly tough posting and went on stress leave, does it mean they're not suitable for another posting or anything further?

It just seems weird to me that we talk about needing folks to be able to make mistakes and learn from them, but then we also say this.

At a minimum, no further promotions or career advancement and more than likely a reversion in rank/responsibility.

That doesn't mean you can't eventually overcome that difficulty and move on to something else but the chances are good that isn't going to happen. It will also be 10x harder than it was before because you've now got a negative reputation.

Agreed, but the goal in a military is not profit.

What is the Goal of the Military? This is where I see the big disconnect between what the supposed "enlightened" are saying vs the reality.

The screwed up thing is that everyone here is attacking @Quirky and saying it's somehow his fault that his employees aren't accomplishing any work. If they aren't able to accomplish any work, maybe they are also just bad employees?

The stupidest part about the CAF right now is how the leadership will blatantly disregard what leaders at the coal face (with years/decades of experience in some cases) are saying just because it doesn't suit their narrative.

If a very Senior NCO who has been doing a job for years were to tell me that they are having issues with a couple of subordinates, my first reaction wouldn't be to dismiss what they are saying and tell them it's them who are the problem.

Yet that's exactly what is happening in the CAF.

 

[dimsum]

At a minimum, no further promotions or career advancement and more than likely a reversion in rank/responsibility.

That doesn't mean you can't eventually overcome that difficulty and move on to something else but the chances are good that isn't going to happen. It will also be 10x harder than it was before because you've now got a negative reputation.

Ok - so if I'm reading this correctly, "second chances" due to mental health are off the table. I understand that in some instances (e.g. wartime action) that is appropriate.

If that is the official stance, then folks who aspire to continue on will just hide whatever is causing the issue out of fear that they'll be sidelined. Bottling stuff like that up is never a good thing. Also, again being specifically vague here, there are extenuating circumstances that could impact why that person had MH issues - if some of those are relieved, then the MH issues may go away.

What happened in situation A doesn't necessarily translate to situations B and onward.

What is the Goal of the Military? This is where I see the big disconnect between what the supposed "enlightened" are saying vs the reality.

The screwed up thing is that everyone here is attacking @Quirky and saying it's somehow his fault that his employees aren't accomplishing any work. If they aren't able to accomplish any work, maybe they are also just bad employees?

The stupidest part about the CAF right now is how the leadership will blatantly disregard what leaders at the coal face (with years/decades of experience in some cases) are saying just because it doesn't suit their narrative.

If a very Senior NCO who has been doing a job for years were to tell me that they are having issues with a couple of subordinates, my first reaction wouldn't be to dismiss what they are saying and tell them it's them who are the problem.

Yet that's exactly what is happening in the CAF.

I'll take a line from Flight Safety - it is rarely a single-point failure. As they love to say, the holes in the swiss cheese need to line up.

I'm not picking on anyone in my responses. I'm saying that maybe people aren't communicating what they think they're communicating, and what seems simple to an experienced person may not be simple to a new person. And sure, maybe they are just bad employees but what are the chances of half of them being pumps?

If 50% of them are pumps, then isn't it part of the leader's job to help them become less...pump-y?

 

[Quirky]

If 50% of them are pumps, then isn't it part of the leader's job to help them become less...pump-y?

When the pumps don’t show any initiative, do the bare minimum and would barely hold down a high school job at a grocery store, you eventually need to cut the fat. Not everyone will be suited for their trade or be good performers. In the real world the employer will fire poor techs, we hang onto them and give them jobs where they can’t do any damage while your top performers make the same $$ and get worn down from picking up the slack.

 

[Furniture]

When the pumps don’t show any initiative, do the bare minimum and would barely hold down a high school job at a grocery store, you eventually need to cut the fat. Not everyone will be suited for their trade or be good performers. In the real world the employer will fire poor techs, we hang onto them and give them jobs where they can’t do any damage while your top performers make the same $$ and get worn down from picking up the slack.

Doing the minimum is doing the job... If the minimum isn't enough, raise the minimum.

If people are unsuited to their trade, the better option than "cutting the fat" is moving them into a trade they are better suited to. If I have a Met Tech who is a garbage at public speaking, but is suited to FSA work, the CAF is farther ahead moving them to FSA, rather than forcing them to release because they suck at, and hate their job.

In the "real world" people are treated as expendable, because they come in trained for the job. Of course, a lot of those "real world" employers are now struggling to fill positions because treating people as expendable resources means people don't want to work there.

 

[GR66]

When the pumps don’t show any initiative, do the bare minimum and would barely hold down a high school job at a grocery store, you eventually need to cut the fat. Not everyone will be suited for their trade or be good performers. In the real world the employer will fire poor techs, we hang onto them and give them jobs where they can’t do any damage while your top performers make the same $$ and get worn down from picking up the slack.

Sadly the CF does more screening and testing for suitability than most employers. You'd like to think that with all that effort they would have a reasonably high success rate.

 

[btrudy]

Sadly the CF does more screening and testing for suitability than most employers. You'd like to think that with all that effort they would have a reasonably high success rate.

I would argue that we do have a reasonably high success rate. Frankly, the results that Quirky is quoting seems like an aberration to me. The degree to which that's the luck of the draw can of course be debated.

Where we end up failing is starting people right off the bad marking time, waiting months or years until they go on their initial occupational training, often times with long gaps in between various phases. All that's doing is destroying morale from the get go. Folks who are at the end of their VIE shouldn't be as salty as a dude hitting CRA, but if they are we can't blame them.

If folks are unmotivated as a result, I'm not surprised. Unfortunately, it then becomes the role of their immediate chain of command to try and fix the problem, and no, trying to get them fired is not the proper way to go about doing that.

 

[Quirky]

It's not my job to motivate people to do their jobs, I don't have enough hours in the day for that. If they are salty because of a long recruiting and training system, didn't get their posting or fleet of choice, generally hate their lives, then boo hoo, quit and move onto something else. Stop dragging down the rest of unit moral with their negativity. I'm actually looking forward to the PRs making their way into operational units, maybe we will see an increased work ethic and better attitudes from people who are actually grateful for what they have. I don't know why the CAF still has so many people who don't want to be there.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

It's not my job to motivate people to do their jobs, I don't have enough hours in the day for that. If they are salty because of a long recruiting and training system, didn't get their posting or fleet of choice, generally hate their lives, then boo hoo, quit and move onto something else. Stop dragging down the rest of unit moral with their negativity. I'm actually looking forward to the PRs making their way into operational units, maybe we will see an increased work ethic and better attitudes from people who are actually grateful for what they have. I don't know why the CAF still has so many people who don't want to be there.

If you have anything over a maple leaf on your sleeve, it is most certainly your job to motivate people to do their jobs. In fact, it is probably the most important part of your job.

If you cannot or will not, I would suggest that you are the one that needs to leave the CAF- not your subordinates.

 

[Navy_Pete]

In Ottawa the wait times for mental health if you're not in crisis is about a year... So we tell people to get help, then tell them to wait while things get worse.

I totally agree with your last para as well, people want to talk to a human, not talk on the phone/Teams/Skype.

I didn't realize it until tried to get it myself. 6-8 weeks for screening, another 3-4 months to talk to someone to get an appointment. I haven't somehow gotten less burnt out in the interim. It's significantly slower than seeing a doctor for a physical issue, and MH sick parade is really only if you are having a major crises (thinking of suicide etc). All directly driven by overwork due to massive personnel shortages and life safety issues not covering themselves. It's okay though, we are tracking 'HR shortages' as a risk item so will sort itself out.

The only plus side is that CFMAP can get you counseling sessions immediately for a limited number of them (6-8?) so would highly recommend that route to anyone, as it's a good option while waiting for the CAF limited resources.

 

[Halifax Tar]

In Ottawa the wait times for mental health if you're not in crisis is about a year... So we tell people to get help, then tell them to wait while things get worse.

I totally agree with your last para as well, people want to talk to a human, not talk on the phone/Teams/Skype.

NS enters the chat

In NS we close hospitals for weekends because we don't have staff. And whole ridings of the province go with out ambulatory coverage because there is none.

 

[dimsum]

The only plus side is that CFMAP can get you counseling sessions immediately for a limited number of them (6-8?) so would highly recommend that route to anyone, as it's a good option while waiting for the CAF limited resources.

It's an initial 6-8. It can be extended.

 

[childs56]

It's not my job to motivate people to do their jobs, I don't have enough hours in the day for that. If they are salty because of a long recruiting and training system,

we have lost to many people who spent their first BE sitting in the shacks in Borden/ Other bases awaiting training, being treated like crap and left to figure out things on their own.

didn't get their posting or fleet of choice, generally hate their lives, then boo hoo, quit and move onto something else.

Yup those people left also mainly due to poor work and opportunities for their spouses/ family.

Stop dragging down the rest of unit moral with their negativity. I'm actually looking forward to the PRs making their way into operational units, maybe we will see an increased work ethic and better attitudes from people who are actually grateful for what they have. I don't know why the CAF still has so many people who don't want to be there.

To be honest nobody really ever wants to work, I don't know many people in the Oilpatch that want to go away from home two or three weeks at a time working in crappy weather, dealing with dangerous work, being cold, hot, wet, muddy at the same time. Go home for a few days and repeat. But they do because the money outweighs the cons. You have to work to get anything unless your thief. The pay draws people to the work and the friends keepem there.
The military has forgotten the social aspect of the job. That includes the members and their families.

Nobody wants to be there in reality. We would rather be on a beach somewhere, in the woods, on the ocean, lake or river anywhere but work. Motivation of the people around you is a pretty good incentive to go to work.

 

[Kat Stevens]

Leadership: The art of influencing human behavior in order to accomplish a task in the manner desired by the leader. I must have slept through the part on CLC where motivating troops wasn't part of that. I mean, it's entirely possible, I slept through a lot of it, but that doesn't ring any bells for me.

 

[Quirky]

But they do because the money outweighs the cons. You have to work to get anything unless your thief. The pay draws people to the work and the friends keepem there.
The military has forgotten the social aspect of the job. That includes the members and their families.

At least the money makes it worth it. The CAF has major issues with recruiting and retention that’s already been discussed over and over. There isn’t enough motivation and leadership noises from the lower levels to make any sort of difference. If people are truly unhappy with their careers it’s the individual responsibility to fix, no town halls or speeches will fix it. No one should be holding their breath for any pay increase or change in posting policy to make the CAF more attractive, I know I’m not.

 

[childs56]

At least the money makes it worth it. The CAF has major issues with recruiting and retention that’s already been discussed over and over. There isn’t enough motivation and leadership noises from the lower levels to make any sort of difference. If people are truly unhappy with their careers it’s the individual responsibility to fix, no town halls or speeches will fix it. No one should be holding their breath for any pay increase or change in posting policy to make the CAF more attractive, I know I’m not.

The Military makes decent money and decent benefits. The problem is the perception actual and perceived that the Military is not a good career. Honestly we need to be looking at high school/ university/ trade school students, Get them in the door Part time/ full time while going to school. Pay them a good wage, set them up for success for the future. Employ them for 5-10 years. There is 2.8 million students enrolled in Universities in Canada. If we could tap 10,000 of those for full time service that would be awesome, if we could employ 30,000 of those for 5-10 years that would be even better.
Then we need to be looking at the 30 plus year old group. Who has a decent career but looking for something new. They have experience in their job and can full fill many of the technical jobs we offer that are not filled or not filled with trained competent people. That's all ranges of training, experience and backgrounds. The CF seems to miss the point every time you turn around they spend money trying to recruit a demographic who is not interested. Their latest recruiting video is a great video but not for recruiting people into the Military.

 

[Quirky]

Agree with everything, but the military in general just isn’t an attractive employer, not just in Canada. But especially in Canada.

 

[btrudy]

If people are truly unhappy with their careers it’s the individual responsibility to fix, no town halls or speeches will fix it. No one should be holding their breath for any pay increase or change in posting policy to make the CAF more attractive, I know I’m not.

If a person is unhappy with their career, then it's their individual responsibility to deal with.

But this isn't a single person. Individuals are not responsible for fixing systemic issues. Because they're systemic. They literally cannot, on their own, fix the problem. The entire system as a whole, including (especially including) their supervisors are responsible for doing so.

If supervisors are washing their hands of any responsibility to do so, then that's just shitty leadership.