Current Trends in CF Releases

[mariomike]

For what it is worth.

Retention

Retaining trained personnel at later stages in their careers remains a priority. Initiatives include better career management and greater support to CF families – such as improved deployment, reunion and relocation programs, expanded child care, enhanced mental health care, and better alignment of CF and Veterans Affairs Canada services. This has contributed to a reduced rate of attrition.

http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/news-nouvelles/news-nouvelles-eng.asp?id=3792

2012-10-02

 

[George Wallace]

I don't think our young fresh out of school and into the uniform soldiers have an idea about just how hard working at a civilian job can be.

That is one thing I remember well over the years.  How many have you seen depart the Regiment for a civilian job, only to be walking back through the front gate a year later having rejoined the CF?

There are a lot who leave looking for those greener pastures on the other side of the fence, only to return after finding that they weren't so green after all.  Many of the points have already been covered, such as the Medical and Dental benefits, but others are the camaraderie and 'family'.

 

[The_Falcon]

That is one thing I remember well over the years.  How many have you seen depart the Regiment for a civilian job, only to be walking back through the front gate a year later having rejoined the CF?

There are a lot who leave looking for those greener pastures on the other side of the fence, only to return after finding that they weren't so green after all.  Many of the points have already been covered, such as the Medical and Dental benefits, but others are the camaraderie and 'family'.

This past year I spent in recruiting, I saw many files coming through that were people trying to get back in. 

 

[garb811]

For what it is worth.

Retention

Retaining trained personnel at later stages in their careers remains a priority. Initiatives include better career management and greater support to CF families – such as improved deployment, reunion and relocation programs, expanded child care, enhanced mental health care, and better alignment of CF and Veterans Affairs Canada services. This has contributed to a reduced rate of attrition.

http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/news-nouvelles/news-nouvelles-eng.asp?id=3792

2012-10-02

"For what it is worth" indeed.  As we've seen in the last year, most of the changes to these areas have resulted in roll backs instead of enhancements. 

I have yet to feel any lovin', at any point in my career, that has been specifically directed at retaining my skills and knowledge.  Yet I have watched many, many people get rewarded for leaving and then coming back through incentives such as FRP, recruiting bonuses and PLARs granting them the rank they left at...

 

[Towards_the_gap]

For what it is worth.

Retention

Retaining trained personnel at later stages in their careers remains a priority. Initiatives include better career management and greater support to CF families – such as improved deployment, reunion and relocation programs, expanded child care, enhanced mental health care, and better alignment of CF and Veterans Affairs Canada services. This has contributed to a reduced rate of attrition.

http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/news-nouvelles/news-nouvelles-eng.asp?id=3792

2012-10-02

That's great, but I've seen none of that.

For me, the decision to begin the process of release was driven, overall, by basically what is a cost/benefit analysis. It is costing my family too much, for a job where my ability to make a difference is hampered at every turn by those who lack the imagination or 'think-outside-the-box-ness'. Moreover, 95% percent of my career has been in a time of war. This period of peace certainly has it's challenges, but the kicker is the general insistence that 'stupid rules', no matter how ridiculous, must be followed for no other reason than 'we have always done it this way'. There is also a general tendency for things to get blown way out of proportion based solely upon an urban-myth like belief that some regulation somewhere promises drastic measures if not followed, yet when you actually take the time to look it up, said regulation doesn't exist or is in fact for something completely different. Finally, all this takes place in an organisation which lacks the ability to critically and objectively examine itself and correct deficiencies/find efficiencies. How many times have you heard 'we're the best army/squadron/regiment/company and this exercise was great'? Vice 'this exercise did not do what we planned it to, and revealed a startling number of shortcomings, we need to get alot better'. I've NEVER heard the latter. Just imagine, what would happen if an OC, on a level 5 RTHR exercise, at the end said ' My company is not ready, do not send us overseas'?

In short, I find my family/personal life suffering so that I can do a job much like Sisyphus. Hence, I'm peaceing out.

 

[Towards_the_gap]

For those who find challenges and interest in the job now, those will be the leaders in a few years.

Back in the late 90s, I knew many people who are now departing the CF, often at higher ranks.
I was instructing one course and had one individual walk into my course in uniform (civvies authorized).
First comment out of my mouth in front of everyone was, "what they hell is that on your shoulder?"
Shake his hand, congratz ect...but the damage was done. I knew him as a MS and he was a CPO2 then
now a CPO1.

My point is that for those who remain and are worth their salt, there is not much need to worry about the rate of releases.

Sadly, it's the ones worth their salt that I have seen leaving, leaving the mediocre/dregs behind.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

For what it is worth.

Retention

Retaining trained personnel at later stages in their careers remains a priority. Initiatives include better career management and greater support to CF families – such as improved deployment, reunion and relocation programs, expanded child care, enhanced mental health care, and better alignment of CF and Veterans Affairs Canada services. This has contributed to a reduced rate of attrition.

http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/news-nouvelles/news-nouvelles-eng.asp?id=3792

2012-10-02

That's great, but I've seen none of that.

For me, the decision to begin the process of release was driven, overall, by basically what is a cost/benefit analysis. It is costing my family too much, for a job where my ability to make a difference is hampered at every turn by those who lack the imagination or 'think-outside-the-box-ness'. Moreover, 95% percent of my career has been in a time of war. This period of peace certainly has it's challenges, but the kicker is the general insistence that 'stupid rules', no matter how ridiculous, must be followed for no other reason than 'we have always done it this way'. There is also a general tendency for things to get blown way out of proportion based solely upon an urban-myth like belief that some regulation somewhere promises drastic measures if not followed, yet when you actually take the time to look it up, said regulation doesn't exist or is in fact for something completely different. Finally, all this takes place in an organisation which lacks the ability to critically and objectively examine itself and correct deficiencies/find efficiencies. How many times have you heard 'we're the best army/squadron/regiment/company and this exercise was great'? Vice 'this exercise did not do what we planned it to, and revealed a startling number of shortcomings, we need to get alot better'. I've NEVER heard the latter. Just imagine, what would happen if an OC, on a level 5 RTHR exercise, at the end said ' My company is not ready, do not send us overseas'?

In short, I find my family/personal life suffering so that I can do a job much like Sisyphus. Hence, I'm peaceing out.

"For what it is worth" indeed.  As we've seen in the last year, most of the changes to these areas have resulted in roll backs instead of enhancements. 

I have yet to feel any lovin', at any point in my career, that has been specifically directed at retaining my skills and knowledge.  Yet I have watched many, many people get rewarded for leaving and then coming back through incentives such as FRP, recruiting bonuses and PLARs granting them the rank they left at...

Exactly. Just another self serving Government link.

Walk the walk before you try talk the talk.

 

[jwtg]

As an OCdt, I don't pretend to have a whole lot of experience to base opinions on.  I do have the benefit of having been an army brat, so I have experienced first hand the 'military family lifestyle' from the child's perspective, and have been lucky to have met many members of the CF of all ranks through friends, friend's parents, my parents' coworkers, and now, my own first steps in the CF.

One thing I find to be a recurring theme, both in conversations I have now, have had in the past, or witness here on the forums, is the problem of vague promises.  The CF is committed to retention, so here's all these great things we're going to do to keep skilled members <insert praise of some program here>.

Or, the CF is committed to families, so here's all the ways we're going to help your family <another list of programs and funding>.

Why not say, the CF is committed to families so we're going to let you stay where you're posted (service needs obviously permitting)?  I've read stories on here of people having very good personal reasons for wanting to stay somewhere, and having very good reasons to believe that their needs matched up with service needs.  Instead, they were shipped off somewhere else, sold their house, uprooted their families, and filled similar positions on different bases for the sake of variety in their career.

I'm not saying that everyone should be allowed to be sedentary and never move; I'm saying that there has to be a way for people to look at a family situation and see that it just makes sense for the sake of that members family to keep them where they are for another year or two, if the service needs permit, and then have them move off into another position.  Maybe I'm optimistic, but I would hope that discretion could be exercised in order to see when this kind of situation is valid.

I don't mean to derail the thread, or project the image that I think whining about postings is ok (I'm more than ready to relocate as I'm directed, the same way I did as a child when my dad got posted); I'm just looking to see if there's a connection between vague promises based on funding direction, and real, tangible promises which can improve the life of a service member, thereby potentially increasing the longevity of their career.

 

[mariomike]

Exactly. Just another self serving Government link.

Walk the walk before you try talk the talk.

Not taking your bait.

They were not my words.

It was a quote from the Canadian Forces:

"Retention

Retaining trained personnel at later stages in their careers remains a priority. Initiatives include better career management and greater support to CF families – such as improved deployment, reunion and relocation programs, expanded child care, enhanced mental health care, and better alignment of CF and Veterans Affairs Canada services. This has contributed to a reduced rate of attrition.

2012-10-02"

 

[Towards_the_gap]

And that quote is BS. Because nothing of that sort is actually happening at the coal face.

one of the lesser known 'peace dividends' in the 90's was the large scale recruitment of Pravda staff to serve in the dnd PR machine.

 

[Nemo888]

I don't know about anywhere else but Ottawa was releasing about 100 soldiers a month this fall. If that rate of release is part of a larger trend in military towns we are shrinking at an impressive rate.  Some of my seniors say they can't take the bu(($%it anymore.

Are other military towns shrinking as fast as Ottawa?

 

[Shamrock]

And that quote is BS. Because nothing of that sort is actually happening at the coal face.

one of the lesser known 'peace dividends' in the 90's was the large scale recruitment of Pravda staff to serve in the dnd PR machine.

I concur.  There are a lot of top-driven initiatives that are intended to be of benefit at the lower levels.  Implemented properly, they would likely be of great benefit to the members and the CF.  Unfortunately, between the top and the bottom are layers of poor leadership who, through lack of knowledge, lack of effort, or lack of goodwill, work contrary to the intent.

 

[Kat Stevens]

As an OCdt, I don't pretend to have a whole lot of experience to base opinions on.  I do have the benefit of having been an army brat, so I have experienced first hand the 'military family lifestyle' from the child's perspective, and have been lucky to have met many members of the CF of all ranks through friends, friend's parents, my parents' coworkers, and now, my own first steps in the CF.

One thing I find to be a recurring theme, both in conversations I have now, have had in the past, or witness here on the forums, is the problem of vague promises.  The CF is committed to retention, so here's all these great things we're going to do to keep skilled members <insert praise of some program here>.

Or, the CF is committed to families, so here's all the ways we're going to help your family <another list of programs and funding>

Why not say, the CF is committed to families so we're going to let you stay where you're posted (service needs obviously permitting)?  I've read stories on here of people having very good personal reasons for wanting to stay somewhere, and having very good reasons to believe that their needs matched up with service needs.  Instead, they were shipped off somewhere else, sold their house, uprooted their families, and filled similar positions on different bases for the sake of variety in their career.

I'm not saying that everyone should be allowed to be sedentary and never move; I'm saying that there has to be a way for people to look at a family situation and see that it just makes sense for the sake of that members family to keep them where they are for another year or two, if the service needs permit, and then have them move off into another position.  Maybe I'm optimistic, but I would hope that discretion could be exercised in order to see when this kind of situation is valid.

I don't mean to derail the thread, or project the image that I think whining about postings is ok (I'm more than ready to relocate as I'm directed, the same way I did as a child when my dad got posted); I'm just looking to see if there's a connection between vague promises based on funding direction, and real, tangible promises which can improve the life of a service member, thereby potentially increasing the longevity of their career.

We already have that, it's called Gagetown.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

I don't know about anywhere else but Ottawa was releasing about 100 soldiers a month this fall. If that rate of release is part of a larger trend in military towns we are shrinking at an impressive rate.  Some of my seniors say they can't take the bu(($%it anymore.

Are other military towns shrinking as fast as Ottawa?

First of all, Ottawa is not a military town by any stretch.  It is a government town with military HQs, an SF element, and a few Reserve units.  Mind you, there are more military personnel in Ottawa than in any other location....

Edmonton is taking it hard.  I have heard that 1 CMBG has already had over 400 releases this calendar year, and there are another 400 in the hopper.  Given that the established strength of the Bde is just over 4600, with a posted strength of about 4100, the Bde is losing 10% of its people each calendar year, roughly split 2/3 combat arms (predominantly infantry) arms and 1/3 CSS.

 

[Sig_Des]

As far as courses that never seem to come that must be a geographical thing. Recently we've run/sent guys on;
Helicopter Insertion Instructor, Conduct After Capture Instructor, Close Quarters Combat, Close Quarters Combat Instructor, recce patrolman, sniper, pathfinder, multiple in-house jump serials, drivers courses, basic and intermediate comms course (advance comms, freefall and arctic adviser coming up).

I dunno about the geographical thing. Out West, in my troop in the last 3 months, I've completed a CQCI course, one of my troops (a Sig) has completed his Basic Para, and another troop (non-inf) has completed his Basic Recce.

As far as government retention programs, it's kinda hard to put stock in that when you have articles here that let you know what's happening:

http://www.fortsaskatchewanrecord.com/2012/11/14/cfb-edmonton-faces-50-budget-cut

Yes, Afghanistan for all intents and purposes is over. For a lot of the people who joined for that adventure, they won't get their kick at the can. Many have had their tour(s), and without the prospect of something similar right now, they have lost interest. Especially when training tempo is so high, without an actual op in the future.

Without the public support for the military as we've had in the past (and I mean actual support, not lip service), we're an easy target for the government scalpels.

It doesn't take reading tea leaves to see what's coming up. Huge budget cuts, talk of LDA changing, talk of PLD changing, no official fight in the near future, you have a lot of people looking elsewhere. Especially here out west. I've got friends who got out to work in the oil patch with the same quals as me, and they make 80+ a year, not to mention the truck given to them.

Some people have different mentalities as far as releases. Some have the "disloyalty, selfishly abandoning the service", some will stay because they know there'll be a fight somewhere, others see the military just taking away. Everyone has their reasons, but one thing is for sure. There definitely is a current trend in CF releases, and the CF is not able to stem the flow right now.

 

[jollyjacktar]

Not taking your bait.

They were not my words.

It was a quote from the Canadian Forces:

"Retention

Retaining trained personnel at later stages in their careers remains a priority. Initiatives include better career management and greater support to CF families – such as improved deployment, reunion and relocation programs, expanded child care, enhanced mental health care, and better alignment of CF and Veterans Affairs Canada services. This has contributed to a reduced rate of attrition.

2012-10-02"

That may be their words,  but I too believe they're not interested in retention "yet".  That may come, but they don't seem to care quite frankly past making some guys stay 6 months now if they've asked to leave for other employment and don't have the ejection seat option available.

A couple of years ago I took the Admiral to task at one of his "Town Hall" briefings.  He went on at length about all the programs to attract fresh new blood, yadda yadda yadda.  In the question phase, I said that it was great and fantastic to have a desire and plan to get all these young sailors into the Fleet, but what was their intention and plan to stop the bleed out of the experienced personnel?  He asked me what I wanted to see.  I said to him, "Make me want to stay, perhaps sweeten the pension options such as the USN have whereas they see a 50% pension at 20 years, and it only gets better".  His reply to me was that "I think getting a 70% pension after 35 years is a great deal" and that was that, no further ideas or consideration on retention.  I thought  to myself that "sure, 70% of your pension would be just frigging ducky too mate" , but being a later joiner I'll never be able to see a full pension as I'll age out.  My thought at the time then was well if I can't reach that kind of goal, ever, then while I'm still under the 50 year mark it might be better to go somewhere where I would be able to work past 55 and make a decent salary if the opportunity arises.

Nowadays, it seems as if the nasty 90's are going to come back with all the ensuing cuts or worse to many of the other Snr NCO's I know, and I'm hearing lots of angst among the lower decks too.  If you're on ship and going over there it's months and months of working your guys and guts out for small potatoes before, during and after the mission.  On a Force Generation platform?  It's likely you'll see repeated workups with a large chunk of the crew changed out to put fresh faces in the mix.  The ships coming out of refit now are not getting their SDA back for months after TP.  Yes, SDA is not connected with duty watches but it rankles the crews to see this "entitlement" cut back as had not been done previously.  The IR fiasco.  It seems to be a death by a thousand cuts and both the kids and oldsters are getting sick of it. 

There are other opportunities out there such as the oil patch and it becomes increasingly attractive to many.  The CF is to many no longer the employer of choice.  I'm sure there will be those who see the complaints from the sailor types as whining, and it may indeed be in the grand scheme of things.  But, it is a burr under the saddle blanket and fair or not it is pissing folks off so they're looking for an exit.

 

[eurowing]

In my case, it was a shift from being able to make decisions at a M/Cpl level in the 80's to have to call Ottawa as a WO in a risk free Air Force. Pension income splitting also made it much easier to walk out the door.  I left in 08, but friends still have the same issues.

 

[garb811]

I concur.  There are a lot of top-driven initiatives that are intended to be of benefit at the lower levels.  Implemented properly, they would likely be of great benefit to the members and the CF.  Unfortunately, between the top and the bottom are layers of poor leadership who, through lack of knowledge, lack of effort, or lack of goodwill, work contrary to the intent.

Uhh...I'm at a loss to identify any recent "from the top" initiatives in the last year or so which are supposed to benefit the troops which have been negated by those of us working to support the troops and families.  The only announcements recently have resulted in troops losing out, not gaining.  I'm just waiting for someone to roll out the old mantra, "We need to do more with less" and then I know "that" decade has returned.

I guess I am a bit pessimistic though, there was the introduction of a Gucci fur hat and winter boots to Logistiks Unicorp with that new DEU parka soon to be here.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Not taking your bait.

They were not my words.

It was a quote from the Canadian Forces:

"Retention

Retaining trained personnel at later stages in their careers remains a priority. Initiatives include better career management and greater support to CF families – such as improved deployment, reunion and relocation programs, expanded child care, enhanced mental health care, and better alignment of CF and Veterans Affairs Canada services. This has contributed to a reduced rate of attrition.

2012-10-02"

No baiting involved. It's about lanes. We won't argue with you about how to drive a meat wagon, don't try tell us what happens in the military.

Everyone knows the quote is bullshit, but you posted the link anyway, because that's what you do, whether relevent or not.

If you'd have walked the walk, you would have known it was a bullshit statement and wouldn't have posted it.

At least the others here have an inkling of the problems because they live(d) it. You didn't\ don't, which is why I took umbrage to you posting, another, useless link.

 

[observor 69]

It's at times like this that I get very concerned about the direction all our new equipment programs and the military in general will take. Demands for new trucks, new ships and new planes in this time of government austerity and a low public military profile leads me to fear a return to the bad old days. This weeks news that the F-35 is just one of the contenders for CF-18 replacement feels like the start of a slippery slope.

This guy does a much better job of summerizing my argument:

Defence procurement problems run deeper than the F-35

Read more: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Defence+procurement+problems+deeper+than/7663899/story.html#ixzz2EYmqZhHj