STREAMLINING THE RECRUITING PROCESS / CARENER LE PROCEDE DE RECRUTEMENT
- Thread starter mstorey
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 60
Two more thoughts.
- Speeding up officers recruiting would be nice. I learned today that at best I could start my BMQ in September 2006. For someone who has been in the recruiting process for 10 months, it's kind of a downer. (To phrase it politely)
- If you have time/money, online application tracking would also be nice. I'm thinking of a web site where you could see your application status, your test dates, missing documents, next selection board dates, etc. Many universities have things like this. You would know where you are, what you need to do next and within what time frame.
- Speeding up officers recruiting would be nice. I learned today that at best I could start my BMQ in September 2006. For someone who has been in the recruiting process for 10 months, it's kind of a downer. (To phrase it politely)
- If you have time/money, online application tracking would also be nice. I'm thinking of a web site where you could see your application status, your test dates, missing documents, next selection board dates, etc. Many universities have things like this. You would know where you are, what you need to do next and within what time frame.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Streamline the recruit process and solve some BIG problems in the Army at the same time.
ISSUE: 9 Reg Force Infantry Battalions that are all woefully understrength; 3 Armoured Regiments all understrength (mine doesn't even have a standing 'C' sqn. and A, B & D are ALL undermanned save and except overseas deployments when the Squadrons rape each other for personnel) 3 Artillery Regiments & 3 Combat Engineer Regiments all undermanned.
SOLUTION: This is where it should be so easy. Don't give new recruits off the street the option to be a mechanic, RMS Clerk, Supply Tech or any other trade the Army has. Give them the option of one of the 4 combat arms and train them to be a SOLDIER first. After the've given 3 years of service in one of these trades, only THEN should they be allowed to OT to a support trade. Exceptions should be made to civilians who already possess skills applicaple to their chosen Army trade, i.e a civilian Dental Assistant wants to be an Army dental assistant, fine. But someone who has no prior training or work experience in the trade should not be given the option to do that in the Army until they've given 3 years service in a combat trade. This would make things alot simpler and help rectify manpower shortages throughout the combat arms.
As well, this would ensure that our support trades personnel have some real soldier skills, rather than going to the range once a year with their C7 and firing off their PWT I rounds and thats it for another year. They would get the benefit of having served in a Unit that instills them with soldier skills, camaraderie & a daily PT regimen. It wouldn't kill anyone to serve their Country for 3 years in a combat trade before switching to a support trade.
ISSUE: 9 Reg Force Infantry Battalions that are all woefully understrength; 3 Armoured Regiments all understrength (mine doesn't even have a standing 'C' sqn. and A, B & D are ALL undermanned save and except overseas deployments when the Squadrons rape each other for personnel) 3 Artillery Regiments & 3 Combat Engineer Regiments all undermanned.
SOLUTION: This is where it should be so easy. Don't give new recruits off the street the option to be a mechanic, RMS Clerk, Supply Tech or any other trade the Army has. Give them the option of one of the 4 combat arms and train them to be a SOLDIER first. After the've given 3 years of service in one of these trades, only THEN should they be allowed to OT to a support trade. Exceptions should be made to civilians who already possess skills applicaple to their chosen Army trade, i.e a civilian Dental Assistant wants to be an Army dental assistant, fine. But someone who has no prior training or work experience in the trade should not be given the option to do that in the Army until they've given 3 years service in a combat trade. This would make things alot simpler and help rectify manpower shortages throughout the combat arms.
As well, this would ensure that our support trades personnel have some real soldier skills, rather than going to the range once a year with their C7 and firing off their PWT I rounds and thats it for another year. They would get the benefit of having served in a Unit that instills them with soldier skills, camaraderie & a daily PT regimen. It wouldn't kill anyone to serve their Country for 3 years in a combat trade before switching to a support trade.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
It is an intriguing idea, but how would you address shortages in support trades? There have been severe shortages in a number of them over the last several years. The sentiment is a good one and I agree that the Combat arms should be fully staffed, but wouldn't everyone wanting a trade then first opt for the navy or airforce? I don't believe that forcing everyone to be all they can be in the combat arms first is entirely workable - some folks just aren't cut out for the sharp end. As well, wouldn't a three stint likely cause there to be a shortage of junior leaders in the combat arms as folks get their ticket punched and then head out to be a wrench puller, or supply clerk, or MP, or whatever else.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
I just wondered if anything had come of this effort to streamline the process?
Loch Sloy!
Jr. Member
- Reaction score
- 22
- Points
- 330
I have personally been waiting over 18 months for a security clearance. This was triggered by working overseas; 6 weeks on holiday in Scotland. I could understand if I had been working in an unfriendly nation or even for many years. I am also a past employee of the RCMP- not a shady character. My situation should not trigger an extensive sercurity check IMHO. What a waste of resources!
Incidentally when I was in Scotland I was told I could join the British Army. Total time from inquiry to training for the British reserves: 1 week. Seriously.
Surely we could do better.
One positive is that the staff at CFRC have been patient with my requests to see how the security clearance is going. However it did occur to me; could more civilian staff be employed for clerical duties? A secretary would probably be cheaper and just as effective (in some limited jobs) than a Master Corporal and the money could be used for training or even an faster security check?
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
18 months for a six week vacation? That is shocking. I have just finished a wait of just over two years for security clearance, but I lived in the UK for a year...which still shouldn't require a two year wait (on top of the year it took security clearance to commence and other testing, which now has to be redone because it expired, to finish). The system needs drastic changes. Good luck and hang in there, hope it finishes up soon.
Similar threads
