Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to join our community
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site, connect with other members through your own private inbox and will receive smaller adverts!

Army struggle to recruit!! Is this a result of A2020 draw down back to UK??

Quite. Another alternative conclusion can be found here:

Ice Cream Consumption Linked to Shark Attacks

ACTION POINT -> Do you have a link to these recruiting figures? Or do you just mean the standard personnel numbers found here: UK armed forces monthly service personnel statistics: 2017 - GOV.UK

If it's the above, then fine. Not to pick a fight, but you absolutely cannot conclude anything that you suggest above from those figures, because apart from the huge correlation/causation error, they don't show any numbers for the recruiting pipeline (which afaik is only internal data, thus why I asked) nor gross signoff rates. In other words, those personnel figures only show the difference in recruitment/retention once already load-balanced by the system, which removes any fidelity to the data. If, for example, on 10 Sept 2001 the number of applications jumped x 4, but still the same number of people were accepted because the available PIDs recruited for had not changed, then you would see no change in those figures. To demonstrate what you are claiming, you either need to see the gross numbers for applications and signoffs, or have some form of opinion poll which indicates reasoning or intent for joining and leaving (therefore AFCAS).

Which is basically what I expected, but just thought I'd check. So, unless there are some other figures, not a myth, just inconclusive.
.
Yes, I meant those stats, and agreed, inconclusive if all recruit vacancies were filled. As they weren't, though, that's about as conclusive as it gets short of a referendum.

As an aside, I did get shown an internal presentation on the recruiting pipeline figures once many years ago, and they showed an increase in applications during the 2004-2008 period. At that point (2008), the start of the pipeline (gross number of applications) was surprisingly large, much larger than the number of people actually recruited. Officer pipeline was more of a pyramid than the soldier pipeline, but still with the soldiers there was a significant triangle going on. I understand the US saw something similar but much more marked after 2001. One of the hidden but interesting things about the difficulties in recruiting now is that - assuming other factors are broadly equal, like individual dropout and failure rates - either:
  1. A significant majority of that previous application pool were unsuitable for service (failed to meet the academic or medical requirements) and therefore the number of applications was never representative of number of potential recruits. This seems somewhat unlikely: the medical and academic requirements really aren't that stringent, either for soldiers or officers.
  2. There was a huge collapse in the number of applications from 2008-2014 ... given that both Afghanistan and Iraq had been running for a while in 2008, this is unlikely to be anti-war sentiment.
  3. There has been a massive and sudden increase in the national proportion of sickly and uneducated 18-29 year olds since 2008. Highly unlikely.
  4. Some mojo was being done with Commonwealth recruits for which the conditions have changed. This is possible, but doesn't appear to have been the case.
Whatever happened, the Army didn't just lose the ability to recruit 20k odd extra people: it either lost an application pool which was close to 5x larger (again, what I was shown) than the recruit places available, or it is losing so many people through retention failure that such an application pool isn't sufficient to sustain numbers, or a bit of both.

Either way, you get the sense that the scale of the fuckup is slightly larger than just Capita having a duff computer system.
Agreed entirely, but this has all been discussed in a lot more detail already in other threads and by some far more in the know than me. Last year, for example, it took some 80,000 initial applications to get some 7,000 actual recruits.

Of the 80,000 an unknown number were noted in the stats as probably having no intention of joining but due to the requirement for Jobseekers Allowance applicants to show they were actively looking for employment, and others (allegedly some 20,000) being Commonwealth applicants for the 200 residency exempt specialist vacancies who didn't meet the routine residency requirement. (Sorry, I can't give a link to the other thread on the phone but I'm sure it'll come up with a search for 'Commonwealth').
 
In summary there are two schools of thought:
  1. It's all down to changing demographics, raised school leaving age, increased expectations and other options in a new age with social media increasing awareness of any issues.
  2. It's all down to continuing to treat soldiers like sh1t with social media making it impossible to hide such issues.
Nothing to do with A2020 at all.
John, a neat summary of multiple pages and threads! I too don’t believe that A2020 has anything to do with the problem.

It should, however, address a solution. A strategy for a future force structure that can’t be filled isn’t a strategy, it’s a fantasy.

The most obvious manifestation of this is the A2020 rebalance towards the Reserve which appears to have been a number picked out of the ether, a timeline that bore no relation to the scope of the task and no actual plan for delivery.
 
Last edited:
John, a neat summary of multiple pages and threads! I too don’t believe that A2020 has anything to do with the problem.

It should, however, address a solution. A strategy for a future force structure that can’t be filled isn’t a strategy, it’s a fantasy.

The most obvious manifestation of this is the A2020 rebalance towards the Reserve which appears to have been a number picked out of the ether, a timeline that bore no relation to the scope of the task and no actual plan for delivery.
I'm flattered. What appears on the cards from CGS (he said so!)is a major d1cking of the reg res who have no option unlike the 'res res' who can do what they like. Hardly added incentive to join if rather than four years you're facing a near lifetime commitment even when you think you've left.
 
Last edited:
I'm flattered. What appears on the cards from CGS (he said so!)is a major d1cking of the reg res who have no option unlike the 'res res' who can do what they like. Hardly added incentive to join if rather than four years you're facing a near lifetime commitment even when you think you've left.
You couldn’t make it up really, could you? D1ck people around until they leave because they are threaders then order them back for more. And, no doubt, treat them as second class citizens when you call them back. Meanwhile destroying any goodwill left in a group who should be your best advocates.

It’s not an idea that has really been thought through and properly planned.
 
You couldn’t make it up really, could you? D1ck people around until they leave because they are threaders then order them back for more. And, no doubt, treat them as second class citizens when you call them back. Meanwhile destroying any goodwill left in a group who should be your best advocates.

It’s not an idea that has really been thought through and properly planned.
Yup, think of what'll really p1ss off those leaving to ensure they pass on why they left. Then confirm it publicly!
 
Yup, think of what'll really p1ss off those leaving to ensure they pass on why they left. Then confirm it publicly!
Like making people redundant/encouragement to leave and then a few months/years trying to get them to join the reserves.

If they needed reservists it should have been highlighted before they left while still (at least semi) engaged with the MOD
 
John, a neat summary of multiple pages and threads! I too don’t believe that A2020 has anything to do with the problem.

It should, however, address a solution. A strategy for a future force structure that can’t be filled isn’t a strategy, it’s a fantasy.

The most obvious manifestation of this is the A2020 rebalance towards the Reserve which appears to have been a number picked out of the ether, a timeline that bore no relation to the scope of the task and no actual plan for delivery.
To me two separate issues but intertwined

The Government needs to decide the military capabilities it and the force structure to deliver it. They then need to resource it with personnel and equipment. In the case of personnel that means “the offer”.

That obviously all has to be balanced against what is realistic.
 
I wonder how much blame Capita can take?

Each person who gets fed up with the process will tell at least 1 other person (potential recruit) etc
 
I wonder how much blame Capita can take?
IMHO they are an easy scapegoat especially given their name and the ease with which they can be called Crapita. Sure, the contract has been fraught with issues but many of those were self-inflicted. End of the day, no-one knows if Capita have made the situation worse or better than it would have been under the old system because there was no beta test. Two up, bags of smoke......

But you can’t polish a turd. The main stream media is dominated by bad new stories; Harrogate and Deepcut, hounding of people 15 years after Iraq. Meanwhile FYB dominates the social Army’s media space rarely in a positive way.

Meanwhile corporate HQ has singularly failed to deliver a cohesive vision or even really explain what the Army is for, let alone how it is truly relevant 21st Century Britain.

It is findametally a leadership issue. Leadership in its wider meaning, not the functional leadership model that exists I. The green bubble.
 
Like making people redundant/encouragement to leave and then a few months/years trying to get them to join the reserves.

If they needed reservists it should have been highlighted before they left while still (at least semi) engaged with the MOD
They're not "trying to get them to join the reserves" - they're already IN the regular reserve, as CGS pointed out recently, with an unavoidable long term call up liability they can't get out of ... a real incentive to pass on the good word ...
 
They're not "trying to get them to join the reserves" - they're already IN the regular reserve, as CGS pointed out recently, with an unavoidable long term call up liability they can't get out of ... a real incentive to pass on the good word ...
Volunteer reserves
 
They're not "trying to get them to join the reserves" - they're already IN the regular reserve, as CGS pointed out recently, with an unavoidable long term call up liability they can't get out of ... a real incentive to pass on the good word ...
Strictly speaking it isn’t unavoidable; “just” go and live overseas; call up papers aren’t enforceable in another legal jurisdiction. If you really want to avoid, ask for a letter of exemption, but that means joining someone else’s Army! It all back in as soon as you go back to the UK though.

More seriously, I think Carter’s idea of using the Regular Reserve is barking. It’s fraught with the potential for claims. What happens when a five-year out “soldier” who’s lost service career has been spent at a desk has a heart attack? I’m not thinking that many would pass medicals and fitness tests?
 
Top