Thread: Having another STAB at it.

So much easier to slag someone off for having missed the mark than to encourage them to pass it.

Not quite the attitude that's seen in "regular Recruiting" when people are worrying about their history of self harm, their problems at home, their prescription three years ago for an inhaler.....

I haven't seen anything significant in this thread from myself or others asking for the standards to be lowered just comments and questions on how they are interpreted, how recruitment is managed in the TA and how to deal with the various obstacles presented.

If oldies who have a deal of determination are getting disillusioned with the process then how are the fickle youngsters who should be filling most of the slots reacting to this sort of attitude?

Those younger applicants who fail either go away and work on their weaknesses before reattempting, or just jack after failing to meet the standards. There is no reason that you and hellmett can't do the same. If you jack, then you are probably not the sort of person to get through the system anyway. If you retry and are successful then great, but just don't expect everyone to be falling at your feet because you rejoined.

In the Infantry, you realically offer little in the way of utility to your commanders unless you can meet the physical standards of your peers (ie younger Ptes). If you don't meet those fitness standards and the unit you propose to join still does formed unit force protection tours, then there may be a sangar somewhere with your name all over it. However, you would be a potential liability on offensive ops, and so limit the commanders options in terms of deploying your platoon into a manouevre sub unit. In my case, I would remove you from the platoon for other tasks before deploying - which is OK if there is one of you, not so good if there are too many.

You see, after all of the bluff and bluster, it is as simple as that. Failure to meet the standards means you do not start the process. How you respond to failing is up to the individual, and no amount of wailing or gnashing of teeth on Arrse about how it is unfair, and you have so much to offer, or what you used to do counts for anything.

Originally Posted by hellmett

My overall objective is to be deployed and get away from the wife!

Best you take up fishing then.

MSR

The Duke speaketh the truth.

RAuxAF positively encourage everyone who meets the standards to go for RAF Reg. Full-on Infantry training with a heavy emphasis on phys with the knowledge that you are guaranteed to deploy. They then attempt to manage the elderly, feeble and limp-wristed into the Force Protection units as they fail.

My fire-team for our final qualification exercise had the combined age of 187. Two ex Para's, a firearms Plod and me the sprog at 40. We all passed everything that the DS threw at us, with style, panache and a smattering of helpful advice to the carping kids.

I've no illusions about the difference between two weeks in Cumbria and six months in Afghanistan, but I've volunteered to do whatever the CoC sees as fit. If that's sitting in the HQ licking batteries, storming across the pan to fetch the Starbucks or ten-day patrols denying IDF sites, I'm willing and able.

I considered Army Inf and if I'm honest rejected it on the grounds that I'd never be able to live up to the realities, not minimum requirements, of a 'kinetic' tour.

Whatever my comrades like to think, the role of RAF Regt in Afghan is nothing like front-line Infantry, so b0llocks to them.

That said, it's not a soft option, just a different role.

Again, it's realities not requirements that all us has beens have to face.

BTW, don't fcuking bother with the Rockape slagging - it'll only force the hand that's hovering on the flush handle to send this thread to the hole and I've heard it all before. Read wot I rote.

Freedomman,

You make an interesting point in that you will be used to fit your abilities.

Why people think that because they were Inf years ago they have any sort of 'rights' be again, I have no idea. They should be looking at a less physical unit if they are towards the top end of the age band.

Sadly the TA is no longer a broad church, we have moved on from that debate (see threads passim). If these people want to contribute in green then they should look at becoming an ACF instructor.

MSR

Originally Posted by msr

Freedomman,

You make an interesting point in that you will be used to fit your abilities.

Why people think that because they were Inf years ago they have any sort of 'rights' be again, I have no idea. They should be looking at a less physical unit if they are towards the top end of the age band.

Sadly the TA is no longer a broad church, we have moved on from that debate (see threads passim). If these people want to contribute in green then they should look at becoming an ACF instructor.

MSR

I'd certainly consider it if I can't make it back in. It's hardly shameful although it's sometimes suggested on here as though it is.

I still think I've got a lot to offer the TA and the unit in question seems keen to have me once I get this blood pressure issue squared away (and that seems likely right now). If I can't then I shall accept that even if I don't like it.

I don't see though why this thread couldn't exist for the purpose of allowing various older re-joiners from sharing their experience with others who might be interested in doing the same. If my experience is one of failure then it might at least serve to show up some of the pitfalls to others and perhaps help save them from wasting their own and the army's time.

Originally Posted by hellmett

Do the powers that be want TA recruits or not?

Considering that Shamrock Challenge is over subscribed by 200+% and that units have budgets only for a certain % of establishment.

Comd 38 Irish Bde gave direction - "quality not quantity now."

I've not had my medical yet as my B.M.I is a tad on the wrong side, but i'm no quitter as my brain can't entertain the thought of quitting. I totally agree with the likes of the Duke and his comments. I can't understand why people come on here and moan because they have failed a medical or been sent home from selection weekends. There time would be best served putting right their failings and then in a few weeks come back and post that they have past and have rejoined the T.A...

I'm working my butt of to meet the requirements working out at least 3 to 4 hours a day and the way i'm going i might fail my medical for being below the required weight lol...

So for all the negative people get a grip and if you want it that bad like i do then you do more working out and less moaning unless 3cm's was bullshit and was really more like 8cm's...

Originally Posted by morganic

I've not had my medical yet as my B.M.I is a tad on the wrong side, but i'm no quitter as my brain can't entertain the thought of quitting. I totally agree with the likes of the Duke and his comments. I can't understand why people come on here and moan because they have failed a medical or been sent home from selection weekends. There time would be best served putting right their failings and then in a few weeks come back and post that they have past and have rejoined the T.A...

I'm working my butt of to meet the requirements working out at least 3 to 4 hours a day and the way i'm going i might fail my medical for being below the required weight lol...

So for all the negative people get a grip and if you want it that bad like i do then you do more working out and less moaning unless 3cm's was bullshit and was really more like 8cm's...

I could not care if it was 3mm.

There is a standard. Meet it or f**k off. The TA (as with life in general) does not owe anyone a job.

MSR

A major point with such "standards" (and they certainly don't seem to be standard from one unit to the next or in some cases from one week to the next) is that recruits don't know what half of them are.

It's not as if potential recruits are given a form saying:

You must not suffer from any of the following conditions: ****
Your eyesight must be better than XXX
You must fit the weight ranges in this table: *****
You must be able to run this distance in this time: ***
You must have a waist measurement not exceeding those shown in this table.
Etc etc.

I certainly wasn't given anything of this nature, I was just told "run 1.5 in under 12:30 - if you can't do it keep coming back till you can."

Perhaps if this type of information was provided from the off, people might have a better chance of knowing what standard they are supposed to be attaining beforehand. I certainly wouldn't have gone in unable to do the run, wouldn't have dreamt of it.

Originally Posted by EX_STAB

Perhaps if this type of information was provided from the off, people might have a better chance of knowing what standard they are supposed to be attaining beforehand. I certainly wouldn't have gone in unable to do the run, wouldn't have dreamt of it.

http://www.armyjobs.mod.uk/howdoijoi...s/default.aspx

Not meaning to sound like a turncoat, BUT, there is a new ruling coming in regarding medicals and "waistlines"
In the latest issue of Soldier, there is a 2-page spread with a BMI table.
As of October 2009, waistlines will be measured.

Quote"An armed forces Weight Management Policy is to be introduced in October 2009. All personnel will have their Body Mass Index (BMI) and Waist Circumference measured annually to check for obesity related health risks" Unquote

The fact that it's being used now just shows that some medical centres have started early, much like when they trialled medicals on selection weekend last July at Ripon.

This is also why i didn't go back for Infantry, too damn hard. I'll settle for my tin can.

Originally Posted by msr

Originally Posted by EX_STAB

Perhaps if this type of information was provided from the off, people might have a better chance of knowing what standard they are supposed to be attaining beforehand. I certainly wouldn't have gone in unable to do the run, wouldn't have dreamt of it.

http://www.armyjobs.mod.uk/howdoijoi...s/default.aspx

Well to be honest all that says is: "Successful completion of:
GP Questionnaire and a full
Army Medical"

It doesn't mention any standards at all and that's assuming that anyone had found it in the first place.

I'm sure that handing out such a document on a Potential Recruit's first visit to the TAC would be in everyone's interests. Other details were handed out such as nationality requirements so why not?

I will speak to our recruiting team about this on Tuesday.

MSR

Originally Posted by msr

I will speak to our recruiting team about this on Tuesday.

MSR

Gosh, perhaps this thread has served a purpose! ;)

Seriously, from what I've experienced myself and from what I've heard on here there is a lot about TA recruiting procedure that could be heavily improved on for the benefit of all involved, irrespective of the "old cold war warrior" argument.