Oh, This Shouldnt Cause Any Problems

Discussion in 'Multinational HQ' started by wotan, Oct 26, 2006.

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. Just read on the CTV website (http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20061026/soldiers_fitness_061026/20061026?hub=TopStories) that potential recruits for the Canadian Forces are no longer required to pass a fitness test. They will now be tested once they are enrolled, but not until they commence Recruit Training. Yes, this should make things easier all the way around and encourage more folks to volunteer for instructor positions at the Recruit School.

    Perhaps we can skip the medical as well? That way we could take advantage of all those folks that would like to join, but aren't allowed because of a touch of cancer, tuberculosis, prior drug use, etc. A real trove of potential recruits there!
     
  2. Not knowing the whole situation, in the Canadian Forces' defense, I would say that fitness can be trained. As long as stds are maintained and only those who pass the fitness tests are allowed to pass basic, what is the problem?

    The only argument I can think of against that argument is that you are probably going to get soldiers who are not genuinely keen in the army IE if they really wanted a career in the army, they would have trained for it.
     
  3. Fair comment, but I fear problems will arise. As opposed to not letting them in until they are at least minimally fit, we are making them part of the CF and then trying to sort them out. They can't even commence training until they reach a reasonable level of fitness. For example, if a 350lb guy/girl isn't vetted out for fitness reasons or medical reasons, they are signed up. But, once they arrive at the training school, if they are unable to pass the fitness test, (19 pushups, 35 situps, 75 kg grip test and 2.4 km run in under 12.5 mins), they can't commence training. So, how long until they can commence? Six months? A year? Five years? Never?

    As well, even if we follow the administrative route of Recorded Warning, Counselling and Probation followed by release, that can easily take a year. During this process, the CF must show that we reasonably assisted the soldier to overcome their deficiency. So, how much progress is to be expected in what amount of time? If they drop 10 lbs a month, is that enough? That would take about a year to a year and a half to get them to a reasonable weight.

    I may well be wrong, but I just see it as bad policy that will have worse effects down the road. Just my .02. Hopefully, I am wrong.
     
  4. blue-sophist

    blue-sophist LE Good Egg (charities)

    Wotan, I shed mental tears for you and the CF.

    God bless [in His own way] all politicians who impose such clauses on the military who are trying to run what should be a straightforward system (proven through several centuries of doing the job properly).

    The tragedy of this thread is that nobody with 8 functioning brain cells is likely to [successfully] introduce humour, as the subject is so utterly sad.
     
  5. You are right. Clearly, this is a less than ideal situation, more suited for countries with compulsory conscription than for an Armed Force made up largely of regulars.

    Still, it might not be as large a problem as you might think. Take the 350lbs guys you mentioned. Chances are he would be obese. Obesity is a medical problem and therefore he should be excluded. Hence the system might work reasonably well, albeit not oerfectly, if those with medical problems are weeded out.

    I know from personal experience that you can do alot to the average joe in less than 3 months. This is because I am from a country with compulsory conscription and have gone through the process. We have something called Prep-Training-Phase for conscripts who cannot meet the minimum fitness requirements for Basic (2,4km in 12:20, 5 pullups, ??situps, etc)

    I had to attend this 2 month PTP because I was not able to meet those stds. In less than 2 months, I went from running a 13+min 2.4km to being able to complete it under 11:30. Similarly, I went from 5 pullups to 10, etc. I was by no means very fit, but it shows what can be acheived in a relatively short period of time. By the time I passed out of basic, I had lost about 13kg!

    I am not saying this is not a woeful situation. However, I believe that it can be made to work, provided the CF is willing to put in the effort to make this work. Is recruitment really that bad btw??
     
  6. We've got something similar here in Denmark, Scabster_Mooch.

    It's only just been implemented so I don't yet know how successful it's been, but in my opinion it's a great idea. We need all the recruits we can get, and if a month or two's training will get them up to speed, why not?

    Where are you by the way?
     
  7. I am from sunny (and hazy) Singapore.

    Yea, it can work as long as the military ensures that those who cannot meet the stds are kicked out! Unfortunately, that is not an option where conscription is concerned...
     
  8. Mmmmhhh....good points and I will certainly concede that with a motivated soldier it could work. Our recruitment (to my limited knowledge) isn't that bad off, but we are suffering the effects of poor manning policies from the 80's and especially the 90's. After the fall of the Wall and the USSR, a lot of folks were clamoring for their "peace dividend", but forgot that Canada never made the investment by which to reap said dividend. That said, a lot of stupidity went on (and some still does), but we are no undergoing the effects of the FRP (Force Reduction Program) that saw us drop from some 85,000 troops (all three elements) to about 52,000 troops, of which only about 45,000-50,000 were of any real use. We lost a lot of experience and now about 1/3 of the NCM corps is eligible for their 20-year pension. Most are voting with their feet.

    Hence, the government wants more folks in uniform (not so hard to get), but still hasn't quite grasped that when a Sergeant or Warrant Officer leaves, we are losing some 20+ years of experience (very hard to get). Yes, we can promote someone behind them, but I have recently seen folks in the support trades with as little as 10 years experience going into these positions. No matter how good a soldier is, a deficit of 10 years experience will eventually show. With one soldier in a unit, it may not be so noticeable. With a third or more of your senior NCOs lacking this amount of experience, it is as noticeable as a sledgehammer to the nuts.

    Again, just my perspective. Perhaps the big, giant heads know something that I don't. At least I sure hope they do.
     
  9. I guess theese regulations must be fairly new. I managed to get an administrative release during my 7th week of basic training.
     
  10. I agree with your first statement. A lot of young guys may not have the time and/or knowledge on how to train correctly. Doesn't mean they will be bad soldiers by any means. We were given a test at the beginning of basic training where passing wasn't a requirement but it gave the drill sergeants a gauge of everyone's level of fitness. Passing at the end of basic training was a prerequisite of graduation of course.
     
  11. Fair point, but no, the regs aren't new. You see, this exposes one of the contradictions that can come up. In your case, you attempted training and regardless of the reason, were ceased training and released. Current regs allow for this and have done so for some time in the CF. But, these new folks would not even be at the stage of attempting the training, hence they cannot be ceased training or be considered a training failure because they aren't undergoing training. They are awaiting training until such time as they are fit enough to attempt the training.

    See how silly it can get? You try, maybe get hurt, are CT'd and released. They mill about for a year, never attempt training and are still employed because they are "working on" getting ready for training. And this is just one possible scenario. I dread to think of some of the other possibilities.

    * Edited because my fingers refuse to obey me.
     
  12. I would have said that method was a very expensive way of doing business. In the worst case, you could have a soldier "preparing" to train for a year (or two), and then "fail". And what happens if the CDF injures the fat knacker beyond repair? Does the Govt pay compensation and a disability pension?

    My father (ex-RCAF) will have a real moan about that one!

    Litotes
     
  13. Litotes,

    You have hit the nail on the head again. If the CF causes the soldier to be injured and suffer a permanent disability, they would be eligible to file a claim with Veterans' Affairs Canada for a disability claim in relation to their service. As well, if they are released for medical reasons and the cause is an injury attributable to military service, they would also be eligible for a pension under the CFPF.

    These are just some of the possible repercussions for enrolling these folks and then getting them ready for training. But, not my train set, not my rules.
     
  14. I called today to see about getting back into the infantry and I'm still bound to the terms of my last interview.

    It really pisses me off because I am fit and meet all the qualifications and wanted to be in the infantry in the first place and now I find out that all the garbage that they were telling me actualy made it onto my file.

    It says that I am unfit which is an outright lie just a couple of hours ago I did the 2.4km run and clocked a time of 9:05. It also says I need to go to school for 2-3 years but I have a high school diploma and aced the apptitude test. Also I have to find steady employment for 8-9 months even though I held a down a steady full time job for longer than that and quit it to join the army.

    So if you guys hear some smashing and screaming in the distance that's me kicking in my TV set when the next Canadian Forces commercial comes on.
     
  15. I joined the CF in '79. I didn't do a fitness test until the 3rd day of basic, to establish the overall fitness level of the whole course. Tested again week 6, and week 12. Any failures were recoursed 2 weeks. Fitness testing at the CFRC has not been around that long, so this is hardly a major setback, IMHO.