Defence Cut Impact On Officer Recruitment?

Discussion in 'Join the Army - Regular Officer Recruiting' started by dario, Apr 4, 2011.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. As a wannabe officer, i'm both concerned and ignorant about the impact of these announcements. Army size is set to reduce by 6.5% in 3 years. To me this means that the army is looking for less officers. This means that either:

    a) RMAS is now a more competitive process
    b) AOSB will pass less candidates

    Is this a fair assumption? Is there something i'm missing? Is there actually no real impact?
  2. In all honesty, I don't think that you'll see any tangible difference in recruiting terms at this stage. The redundancies do not even include officers (or soldiers) in their first few years of service and I my understanding from the instruction is that the recruiting tap will remain open, in order that we are not just left with a bunch of middle ranking and senior officers and no junior ones (and the equivelent for soldiers).

    Bottom line, if you meet the standard then you'll get in, if you don't then you won't. Competition only really becomes a factor when competing for spaces in the popular regiments.
  3. Echoing Brave-Coward - I don't think you'll see any change to recruiting. The cuts will be made higher up.

    For example (because it's the area that could affect me), Tranche 1 of redundancies (there will be 4 tranches) is looking at 14 RA Majors with 19 years service or more. So next to nobody I know is affected, because to still be a Maj at that point means you're probably holed up in some cushty number waiting for your pension and have dipped out on promotion to Lt Col a few times already. This is not to say they are useless or unworthy, but those are the areas decided to be the target.

    Tranches 2, 3 & 4 may have different targets, but no DE Capts and below and no-one in their first 2 years of rank or within 2 years of completing their engagement.
  4. Brotherton Lad

    Brotherton Lad LE Reviewer

    I agree. Perversely, it may be easier to join because others decide not to apply. The cuts in the early 90s had that effect because prospective recruits and their parents 'felt' that the Army didn't need recruits. The resulting hole in recruit intake took alot of work to correct. Even a smaller Army will always need new entrants.
  5. There WILL be a reduction of officer slots though. You don't downsize by 7,000 and keep Officers to command men who aren't there. So I would imagine a few 2lt/Lt and Capt slots to heal over. The current incumbants will move up, or will move out (ie Capts not picked up for regular commisioning).

    There have been Capts listed ont he DIN too. DE and LE.

    So I would imagine you will see a slight decrease in the numbers passed in, and consequently (tied in with a slower civvie job market for thrusters) AOSB will be a bit stiffer.

    To th eOP, if those two things bother you... you may want to re-think your career. Or dip your head, dig deeper and give it all you've got.
  6. If you're not physically losing Companies or Batteries (can't speak for Inf, but RA is not losing sub-units), then there will be no change to the numbers of Tp/Pl comds needed.

    The decision points will be tightened up - from SSC to IRC and as importantly for selection to Beige list. By constricting the number of IRCs, you reduce the numbers eligible to run to Beige. By being more selective at beige, you lose a few more.

    IMHO, you will find RegCs becoming very hard to get - why hand them out, when you can limit who gets to 16 years and THEN look beyond that (at least that wuol dbe the sensible view).
  7. I wouldn't say those things bother me. I was just curious to see if it was a major issue for recruitment. I'd like to know if my chances of becoming an SAS ultra-commando general are still intact.

    A little more effort now seems like the sensible precaution.
  8. I'd also imagine tightening CEA rules will lead to a few leaving.

    RA may not be losing batteries, but the sheer numbers of troops leaving must indicate someone somewhere will lose at least a coy/sqn/bty.

    If we are losing SO3 slots, then that will mean Lts stay in post longer, leading to a knock on for recruitment.
  9. Brotherton Lad

    Brotherton Lad LE Reviewer

    I'd say your chances remain exactly the same. Recruitment is a very fickle and sensitive beast. The system may well decide to shave off a percentage of the intake as a 'dividend' but the squidgy humans choosing whether to join or not will generally conspire collectively to prove the planners wrong.