RFT abolished?

[King Elessar]

Of course not. If you want to have a frank discussion, thats fine by me. That being said, this is the CF and i would not accept an "earful" from you. If you have a problem with the CF rank structure and the proper way to adress senior ranks, you have the ability to seek other employment......or experience the CF justice system ....in case you ever decide to give the wrong person an "earfull".

i have no problem with the rank structure, i know how to address superiors properly. just ask the Sgt that sits next to me, he thought it was funny that you actually pulled rank on me on the internet. but if you think you can say what you want because you're a higher rank than me, if it offends me, i will let you know, and i will follow proper procedures and rank structure to make sure it doesn't happen again.

I have done no such thing....ever. I disagree with the RFT program, that is all i said. We have standards for a reason and those standards must be maintained. One of those standards is the expres test. You cant pass, i dont belittle anyone, i follow the established process to put the member on remedial and to have him/her retested and , if required, released.

i never said you belittle people. but a lot of people do and poke fun at people who are on or was on RFT, and it's not right, and you saying "just try and give me an earful" comes off as you can say whatever you want because you're a higher rank than me isn't right either.

last time i checked the CF was desperate for new recruits. if we abolish the RFT program how many people do we lose? if we can give some people the chance to prove to the CF that they want the job then why not give them the chance? we give members who are already established a second chance if they fail, why not new members? could easily lose out on good soldiers if we let them go.

And all I want to know is that if these men and women are going into this program that they are seeing results and that they are not just taking the system for a "joy ride" per say.

if anyone on RFT tries to take the system for a "joy ride" they get their ass chewed out bad, saw it quite a few times. my staff at the time used to workout with us in the gym. so we had our instructors and psp staff watching us to make sure we worked out to our full potential. 90% of the people, when i was on RFT, never took advantage of the system. we were thankful to have a second chance to prove ourselves.

What are your guys plans when you have to feed yourselves,life gets stressful,and PT is something you have to squeeze into your lives by using precious time after supper instead of with your families?

i'll never let myself go again. i will do whatever it takes to keep myself in shape. i hit the gym 5 days a week, and i will continue to, and it doesn't take much to keep yourself in shape. if you can't find 1 hour a day to do some PT there is something wrong.

 

[Drag]

CDN Aviator was not pulling rank, just stating fact the dos and don'ts of addressing superiors.  Your subsequent posts show a total lack of military experience and maturity.  Giving a superior an "earfull" with the attitude that you have displayed here will get you acquainted with various disciplinary measure the military has to offer.
 

FYI: Being counselled by a superior in a stern manner does not constitute harassment.

 

[gcclarke]

The minor spat about tone of conversations aside, this boils down to the effectiveness of the program, and how good it is at furthering the goals of the Canadian Armed Forces. We need more people. I'm fairly certain everyone here agrees with that. So, this gap needs to be bridge by both increasing our efforts to recruit and train new personnel, and to convince more of the people that we already do have to stick around for longer.

Some of the people who get recruited are, at the time of their enlistment, physically unfit for service. Some of these people may be a lost cause. Some of them may be able to get into shape in a reasonable time frame. And some might have the capability to get into shape within a reasonable time frame, but are unwilling to put in the effort required to do so.

Clearly, the first and the last of these three groups are a drain on resources, which could have otherwise been allocated towards another priority. Could more sophisticated testing be done to help filter out those who we just cannot get into shape? Probably.

But, the question remains, do the people who can and are successfully brought up to standard outnumber the people who aren't? I'm dead certain that the CFLRS staff are closely tracking these statistics, as well as the resources (Not only monetarily, but time spent by instructors who could have otherwise been devoted towards a BMQ or BMOQ platoon) being allocated towards this initiative.

In the end, it's likely up to the commandant to decide. Yes, there are going to be people there who abuse the system. This is hardly a factor unique to the WFT program. But there are also going to be people who move on from this program to become valued members of the CF. Personally, I think that our manning issues outweigh our funding issues to such a degree that this program is completely worth it. If a few people take the system for a ride, and it does seem to be a fairly small percentage who do, so be it. But again, that's a decision that's slightly above my pay grade.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

And to Eye: How are you sure those weren't desired results? Put it this way, I went from incredibly morbidly obese to a positionin which i can now get my self to a suitable level for the CF. If it can do that for me, imagine what it does for people that are >this< close to passing?

RFT was created because of a 'need' that was produced with the elimination of PT testing at the Recruiting phase.  CFRG created the problem;  CFLRS had to produce *something* to deal with it.  Enter RFT.

How do I know what the desired results of training are for CFLRS and the like?  Well, from spending 13'ish years as an instructor at various schools/units in the CF (the last of which was...you guessed it, CFLRS.  I was there as staff in B Div before you were set foot thru the Green Doors)

 

[Eye In The Sky]

ahhh the old pull rank. is this where i go " yes Sgt, no Sgt, sorry Sgt"?

doesn't matter what rank you are, harrasment is a no-no, and it's unbecoming of a soldier to belittle a group of people because they can't pass the fitness test. some example we set. "sorry you're too fat to join, so piss off!"

You know, I find the people who say "pull the rank thing" are the ones who never have any.  Harassment is a no-no?  What harassment?  Are you a qualified HA/HI?  (I am so I wondering where the harassment is here).

A soldier who cannot pass a fitness test belittles THEMSELVES.  They/you are the ones responsible for their fitness or lack thereof.  NOT the CF.  You might want to take a gander at the applicable CFAO (seeing as you know so much about the CF, I am assuming you know what they are and how to find them....)

I'd say, being that you haven't been in the farkin' CF as long as my gitch has, you might want to suck back some, and listen to those who know.

(You aren't in the "those who know" crowd yet, to be clear).

 

[Eye In The Sky]

I'd like to see the stats for the # of people showing up at CFLRS who get sent to RFT against the # of people in each environment who failed the EXPRES test.  While I am not a fan of the RFT concept, I am also aware of the fact that there are serving members who cannot pass the EXPRES test (not the ones who can't for valid medical reasons). 

Well, I didn't target the NCR specifically but thats kinda where I was trying to go.... ;D

 

[Pea]

When a recruit fails a PO check on course, do they get booted from the CF? No, they generally get a recourse and sit on PAT platoon waiting for the next course, and then get another shot at that trades course. What happens when they fail again? They generally get offered to switch to another trade. So they sit around some more waiting for that trades course, and then they are finally posted to a unit IF they pass that course. There are many people who get posted to their first unit with "hooks". So they were paid a salary for 3 years because they kept failing their trades course.

Meanwhile a recruit shows up for BMQ and they fail to meet the entrance standard by .5 of a level on their beep test, and we should just boot them right then & there? I honestly don't see much of a difference here between those that fail a different PO Check.

If you look at my RFT time I was paid an extra 2 months in St.Jean since I had to do the month cycle, and then had to wait on PAT platoon for the next course. However when I got to my next posting to await my QL3 training I arrived to see everyone from my original BMQ platoon sitting there waiting for our course to start. They sat there for 2 months waiting for the course, and we graduated from the same QL3 course together. So really, I wasn`t paid any extra months. I still graduated my 3`s and was posted on the same date I would have been if I hadn`t missed that beep test by .5 of a level.

As for the comment about what happens when these troops get posted to a unit and don`t have mandatory PT time worked into their schedule? Well as a Med Tech I have very rarely had PT time since arriving at my posting this past year. Working sick parade in the morning and being on course after course doesn't really allow for that. So what do I do, well I work out in my evenings, on "my time". I've never been so embarassed as I was the day I failed that express test in St.Jean, and I will NEVER fail another. I've worked damn hard to get where I am now, and I won't let that go to waste.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Question then...where does the CF draw the line on lowering standards?  It doesn't seem like it can go much lower.  However, I am waiting for the "environment specific" PT program and testing to come out.

MediPea, you are the best example I've seen/heard of that supports the existance of RFT. 

However...if you'd done the test at the CFRC and not passed, you'd of been asked to 'try again later' sort of thing...I bet you would have worked just as hard to get in the CF as you did on RFT. 

Therein lies the difference.  The real difference is "when" the CF is testing new mbrs on PT (and, I remind everyone, we are talking MINIMUM standards here).

 

[Pea]

Question then...where does the CF draw the line on lowering standards?  It doesn't seem like it can go much lower.  However, I am waiting for the "environment specific" PT program and testing to come out.

MediPea, you are the best example I've seen/heard of that supports the existance of RFT. 

However...if you'd done the test at the CFRC and not passed, you'd of been asked to 'try again later' sort of thing...I bet you would have worked just as hard to get in the CF as you did on RFT. 

Therein lies the difference.  The real difference is "when" the CF is testing new mbrs on PT (and, I remind everyone, we are talking MINIMUM standards here).

I actually did the PT test at the recruiting centre during my application process. I passed the step-test no problem. Obviously it wasn't quite the same as the beep test.

 

[Kat Stevens]

I actually think the CF should have a permanent fat farm, staffed by all ex CABC instructors.  Anyone fails the PT test, 30 days to get in shape on your own to pass it.  Fail again, off to the farm for 30 days, PT test on completion of day 30.  Pass the test, no carreer implications.  Fail it, another 30 days, pass the test, noted on PER.  Fail, gone.  Everyone only gets one free visit to the farm in a carreer.  Fail again, gone.  Medical reasons exempt, of course.

 

[PMedMoe]

I actually think the CF should have a permanent fat farm, staffed by all ex CABC instructors.  Anyone fails the PT test, 30 days to get in shape on your own to pass it.  Fail again, off to the farm for 30 days, PT test on completion of day 30.  Pass the test, no carreer implications.  Fail it, another 30 days, pass the test, noted on PER.  Fail, gone.  Everyone only gets one free visit to the farm in a carreer.  Fail again, gone.  Medical reasons exempt, of course.

They might as well locate it in Ottawa, then. 

 

[Kat Stevens]

Kinda where I was going.  Everyone's keen to throw junk out of the basement, but no one wants to haul all that heavy crap down from the top floors.

 

[benny88]

  It doesn't seem like it can go much lower.  However, I am waiting for the "environment specific" PT program and testing to come out.

      What about trade specific? You say that we're desperate for bodies, true, yet a trade like pilot has far more applicants than slots. I think you should be able to work on your PT as long as you want, provided there's not someone itching to take your spot. The more competitive the trade, the less time you have to get yourself together on RFT.

 

[beach_bum]

As I've said time and time again.  You should have worked on your fitness prior to joining.  If I want to get a job as a lawyer, I need to get a law degree PRIOR to being hired.  Being fit PRIOR to applying is basically the same thing. 

 

[King Elessar]

You know, I find the people who say "pull the rank thing" are the ones who never have any.  Harassment is a no-no?  What harassment?  Are you a qualified HA/HI?  (I am so I wondering where the harassment is here).

A soldier who cannot pass a fitness test belittles THEMSELVES.  They/you are the ones responsible for their fitness or lack thereof.  NOT the CF.  You might want to take a gander at the applicable CFAO (seeing as you know so much about the CF, I am assuming you know what they are and how to find them....)

I'd say, being that you haven't been in the farkin' CF as long as my gitch has, you might want to suck back some, and listen to those who know.

(You aren't in the "those who know" crowd yet, to be clear).

didn't know i had to be qualified to know what harrassment is, i've had my share directed at me, and i never said anyone here is harrassing me or anyone else. but peoples opinions can be interpreted as being harrassment, it's just how someone looks at it. nowadays you have to watch what you say, stuff can be interpreted many ways. opinions are fine, but don't call RFT a drain or a waste of resources in the CF.

i hate myself for failing that test, i remind myself almost everyday. it keeps me going to keep my fitness levels up where they should be. but i don't need to be belittled by someone else because of it, and i have. even by instructors, whether they realized it or not.

oh by the way, i work with people who have a lot of years in the CF. so you could say i am in the "those who know crowd".

@beach_bum

there are people who only failed the express test by .5 on the run or because they tripped or their shoe lace came untied. hell i almost failed my second test in BMQ because i got a major cramp while doing my situps because of an injury.

i'm not trying to pick fights here(even if that's how i come off as trying to do), just stating what i feel and trying to open some eyes on this whole RFT/WFT or whatever the hell it's called now issue. but hey i'm just a no hook private with very little experience in the CF. i'm just getting sick of trying to show people that RFT is a good thing for the CF, and it would be nice if those of us who have gone through it didn't get looked down upon by everyone else.

 

[aesop081]

opinions are fine, but don't call RFT a drain or a waste of resources in the CF.

RFT is a drain and waste of resources in the CF. Thats my opinion and i am entitled to it.

oh by the way, i work with people who have a lot of years in the CF. so you could say i am in the "those who know crowd".

No....but thats funny though.

i'm just getting sick of trying to show people that RFT is a good thing for the CF,

Obviously there are people who disagree with you. Just because i dont share your opinion, it doesnt make me wrong. I got here without RFT because there were standards and i met them as required.

 

[blacktriangle]

As I've said time and time again.  You should have worked on your fitness prior to joining.  If I want to get a job as a lawyer, I need to get a law degree PRIOR to being hired.  Being fit PRIOR to applying is basically the same thing.

I'm going to agree with this for the most part, we want motivated people that will take the initiative to get fit on their own time and dime.

However, I do think that the physical fitness issues in the CF run much deeper then RFT... proper examples of fitness need to be set at all levels, which is not currently the case.

 

[George Wallace]

However, I do think that the physical fitness issues in the CF run much deeper then RFT... proper examples of fitness need to be set at all levels, which is not currently the case.

And what should they be?

Do you remember the 5BX?

Perhaps you can tell us all what PSP were teaching PT Instructors two years ago on their PLQs and what they are teaching now?  What were PSP teaching four years ago?  Was what PSP endorsed in Petawawa, the same as what they were endorsing in Edmonton?  Seems to me that everytime I turn around there is a new list of what Exercise and what Warm Up/Cool Down was the best for you. 

So what is the "Proper Example of Fitness" anyway?

 

[blacktriangle]

That's a good question, and the answer needs to be defined.

I would also say that PLQ alone does not transform a person into one who is both fit and knowledgeable about fitness. To me it seems like more of a formality really...

 

[MJP]

That's a good question, and the answer needs to be defined.

I would also say that PLQ alone does not transform a person into one who is both fit and knowledgeable about fitness. To me it seems like more of a formality really...

A bit off topic but considering they do a grand total of two days on PT, one of them being student led practicals I certainly agree.  We get out what we put in when it comes to fitness.  Ask for a fairly low standard and enforce that with little training at all rank levels and you will get poor PT training across the board. 

Even when the PLQ had a 5 day Mod 1 it was poorly thought through.  A day and a half of theory and then shown different classes PSP has to offer doesn't add much to a young soldiers repertoire.