Older Recruits?

[bossdog]

Maybe it's just my trade, but it seems like the privates that we're getting that are coming off of their 3's are getting older and older with every batch. There's nothing wrong with that, it's just strange to see after all these years of having young privates coming in.

 

[Sundborg]

The average age of recruits has gone up over the past decade so it should be expected.

 

[bossdog]

Do you think that has changed the way we try to enforce discipline? Do you think there are higher expectations from older recruits? In my own experience (please keep in mind that this is only my opinion!) the older recruits (40+) have been questioning orders and demanding lower standards.

A few vague examples:

We had a Pte come in and suggested that she be automatically promoted to Cpl based on life experiences. She was stone cold serious about it too. It could just be my crusty attitude but I don't think that a 42 year old who is just figuring what she wants to do with her life should be given anything extra.

Another Pte (39) went on stress leave right after his SQ (which we ran here at the unit) saying that he shouldn't have to perform these ridiculous training sessions at his age.

The trend is becoming greater and greater and it's a little disheartening.

I am not singling anybody out here and I am not attacking older recruits in general - I'm just stating my personal experiences with a few of ours.

 

[canuck101]

If they can not handle the training then they should not have enlisted.If i join i would be 33 and i know you have to be fit to handle the stuff that they throw at you.  I guess they did not understand what the recruiter told them about life in CF.  they should join the Public Service if they can handle the CF.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

In the navy I find its the opposite..older recruits are more mature and can be trusted to get the job done. They tend to have to be told once and if they don't understand they ask and don't bs their way through like most of the younger recruits these days. Maybe its just different enviroments.

 

[Marine837M]

The French Foriegn Legion recruit up until the age of 40.
The younger the recruit..., the better it is for the service as they respond to discipline, a lot quicker... and wont question an order.I will say at the age of 40 I suppose some of the training,and bullsh**,they impose would feel pointless to someone of that age.The Army,Navy,or Airforce cannot drop its standards for anybody.
The military system does not recognise age or life experience if you go to it with world and wisely knowledge.The Armed Forces prizes itself on working as a team regardless of Age and the highly trained personell within it.The only experience the military will recognise is (A) Knowledge (B) Military experience.and even then you have to be top dog for it to be recognised.The fact that a 35 year old has come from civvy street and having worked in Macdonalds is of no use to the military system in basic training and serving burgers is no way life experince that the military can draw on.I hope no one has been offended.... but soldiering I feel is a young man or womens game and should be left to such.

Only a view.....no offence.

Marine837M

 

[Bert]

True, I'd have to agree soldiering is younger persons forte especially the physical
requirements of the combat arms.  Yet, the military is made up of various trades
that require technical or specilaized  knowledge and training.  The cost of
educating a young Private through the initial term of employment is expensive. 
Older recruits in most cases bring education and work experience with them directly
related to the MOC reducing the training time and the money to pay for it. 
There are benefits of recruits young and older.

I'd have to disagree with the generalization that older recruits or more likely to
argue with orders or respond negatively to discipline.  In my experience, that lies
more in the personalities of the individuals. 

 

[Marine837M]

Bert,

Your last paragraph I totally agree with, I was homing in on the point I suppose that the older you are self discipline should already be there wihin yourself. The fact is that an older recruit should already know what is expected of them rather than having to be told all the time and what is expected should come to that person second nature.
However, I am also under the impression that we all need to be told,ordered or even guided...etc... sometimes, and the orders,advice,requests..etc... should in a perfect military world come to the older recruits a little easier and taken on the chin with a smile...but as the old saying goes..."You cannot teach and old dog new tricks".
It remains, I feel a question of maturity and an understanding of the military....and a mere fact that everyone on a team,unit,or on a recce......Gel together.

Marine837M

 

[George Wallace]

In the navy I find its the opposite..older recruits are more mature and can be trusted to get the job done. They tend to have to be told once and if they don't understand they ask and don't bs their way through like most of the younger recruits these days. Maybe its just different enviroments.

Just a point...You yourself know that the discipline in the Navy and back here in the Cbt Arms are two completely different things.   What you are experiencing in the Navy today may not be as acceptable back in the Army that you left.

On a slightly different track, but somewhat related, should we be promoting people to the rank of Cpl right off of their TQ3/(or whatever it is now) just so that they can have more 'authority' or respect as is the case now with the MP Trade?  It has had the opposite effect on many, in that they now don't have any respect for a MP Cpl, as they now think he may be a rookie as opposed to an experienced NCM.

GW

 

[brin11]

GW,  I think that's a good point.  Although, they've been doing it for years in the UK.  Perhaps some of our resident Brits can tell us their experiences with it.  It would make you wonder how long a Cpl had been around for.

What would the rate of promotion be now for MPs?  Would you not expect any promotion (MCpl) for 7+ years?

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

George while I am sure it happens in the navy, my point is I have never seen an older recruit act in the manner that Jimmy listed above iun fact its always been the opposite.

 

[bossdog]

Hopefully it's just a case of a few bad apples. Now that I think of it, we do get a few younger privates that didn't have their piss and vinegar strained out in basic but they are easier to sort out - they don't go running to the spiritual warfare department everytime they don't get their way.

 

[Marine837M]

Spiritual warfare department....very good...I like that and will remember it...fantastic...ha.ha.ha.ha.

 

[mdh]

This is an interesting topic, and I suspect that militaries all over the western world are facing one of their most daunting challenges - demographics.  

The reality is that there is a smaller and smaller pool of 19 and 20 year olds to draw from.   I think the CF recognizes this which is one of the reasons why it recently highlighted an article about older recruits in the Maple Leaf.   Opening up the age limits on certain trades may be more than just a "human rights issue" - it may be another important source of future manpower. This is only going to get worse with time and I would be interested to see if the UK and US recruiting establishments are facing the same kinds of demographic pressure.

The question is can older recruits be as effective in the field as younger ones? Of course it probably depends on the environment.   Older recruits may have trouble in the combat arms, but may be better suited to non-combat trades.   On the other hand there are some very physically capable older recruits in their 30 & 40s.  

We've heard a lot of anecdotal stuff on this site about older soldiers, but I suspect that the CF has little hard evidence that points to a definitive answer either way, and that this is still uncharted territory.   Certainly our social attitudes about aging are changing rapidly as the demographic reality hits us head-on.  

I am somewhat conflicted on the issue myself.   I think it's wholly appropriate to have older guys/gals in the reserve force in combat arms (and I wish we had more of them to provide more stable leadership) but I'm less sure about it in the regular force combat arms.   In the sea and air elements I don't see it as an issue - and as Ex-Dragoon points out, it could be an advantage.

Overall, I suppose it could be something a red herring anyway since I doubt many recruits in their late 30s/40s/50s are really flocking to the CFRC to sign up for the CF and as a percentage of total intake they are still quite small.

 

[Bert]

MDH
" I think it's wholly appropriate to have older guys/gals in the reserve force in combat arms
(and I wish we had more of them to provide more stable leadership) but I'm less sure about
it in the regular force combat arms."

Reading the past posts, I think Ex-Dragoon was being general about the military and not specific to the
combat arms.  We don't have recruitment statistics exactly to show the ages of recruits and their
MOCs of choice.

Another thing to consider is military demographics as MDH wrote.  During the 1980s and into the 1990s, the
government brought in policies that allowed a downsizing of the military.  The senior ranks were
affected greatly and knowledgable people left leaving many MOCs.  These MOCs later would
be reduced to critical levels.  In a recruitment campaigne starting in 2001 I believe, the military
focused on acquiring trades people, various technicians, IT professionals, and medical professionals
for Army, Navy and Air.

One demographic type they were seeking from 2001 to 2004 were educated/skilled people to
fill certain NCO and Officer MOCs.  Recruits with university or college education and work experience
(and therefore typically older) would help fill the knowledge void created by the military downsizing.
It is hoped they'll continue with a career in the Forces and maintain the knowledge base.

Since 2004, the critical MOCs are filling up and people are in the training system.  The Forces will
likely look at or focus on other demographics as new challenges are forecasted or appear.  The
typical charateristics of the recruit including age changes from decade to decade.

 

[CF104Starfighter]

In the navy I find its the opposite..older recruits are more mature and can be trusted to get the job done. They tend to have to be told once and if they don't understand they ask and don't bs their way through like most of the younger recruits these days. Maybe its just different enviroments.

Hmm...Just as an example...My sister's 20 years old, and she just finished BOTC.  She did quite well, in fact, she did better than a previously serving CF member who was in her late 20's to early 30's.  I'm not undermining you, just saying that the generalization you've made is unfair.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Well since I haven't done BOTC with your sister (or any other BOTC) and have worked with both younger and older newbies the statement is very fair its what I have seen since I remustered to the navy in '94 time and time again.

 

[mdh]

Hello Bert and Ex-Dragoon,

Excellent points raised - but I am curious about Bert's comments regarding the CFRG switching its emphasis to another demographic at another time.   Is this a realistic prospect?

The only future swing I can foresee would be another drive to push down the age bracket to younger recruits, but we still have that demographic issue at play.  

Increased immigration might be a solution over the long run - but (as been pointed out in this forum before), that can be a tough sell to some cultures who may view the military as an instrument of state repression rather than a more progressive institution offering great career paths.

Again it would be interesting to see if the US or UK is facing a similar issue.    Any Brits out there care to comment?

CF104Starfighter,

Not sure what point you are making but it doesnt' obviate Ex-Dragoon's decade's worth of personal observations. Since I'm something of an old recruit myself I have an instinctive sympathy with the wizened and grizzled. 8)

 

[Bert]

"Excellent points raised - but I am curious about Bert's comments regarding the
CFRG switching its emphasis to another demographic at another time.   Is this a
realistic prospect?"

First of all, I cannot speak for the CF or the CFRC.   The information I used making
the statement was from the CFRC during my application process, news from
the media over the years 2001 to 2004, and comments from CF members.

My interpretation of this is like a hockey team.    The CF or a military in
general can be described as the mass use of manpower and equipment as
an organization focused on objectives as directed by governing body.   Like a
hockey team, you want to recruit the skill sets, the knowledge, the ability,
in order to make it all work.   Over a duration of time, the CF may need
a characteristic demographics like medical education to fill shortages of
doctors, nurses, or technicians or aircraft mechanics as what happened in
the last few years.   Just speculating, the future may show the CF deficient
in another demographic and they may have to recruit to get numbers up.  

You may want to check out past news items in the Maple Leaf or on the
CF recruiting www site and get on context on recruiting strategies.

 

[Padraig OCinnead]

In my opinion older recruits entering the system is generally not a healthy thing. I spent half my time in at one end or the other of the fighting machine. This was not an issue at the pointy end but seems to be a bit more prevalent in the not so pointy end. In peace time the rigours of hard tactical training (exercises with combat arms and not the "hard" St-Jean 7 days in the field) can be very taxing on soldiers. The younger and more fit you are the easier it is to carry on after 4-5 days of little sleep and comfort. After 6-7 days the body begins to break down. A young hard charger can make it through these gruelling trials whereas the older privates and cpls have a bit harder go.

War fighting and its demands go without saying. As expected they are much more intensified.

Now, I really do understand certain circumstances such as life's trial and tribulations will allow older people to dig down and bash on  (look at some of the worlds top athletes such as Ironman competitors, marathon runners and Tour de France. Here in the Forces there is an older Patricia in 1 Bde who won several Mountain man competitions and is in his 30's.

This is just touching the physical aspect. I believe that your average 18-23 year old recruit is best suited for the molding that is a crucial factor in the military training system. They are still very immature (not in the bad way) and require leadership and mentors to replace their parents that they just left. A tremendous amount of psychological influence is (or should be) exercised by his new found mentors and his mind and personality is most flexible at this early stage in adulthood.
Now in your older recruit, this person has already gone through this stage and is a bit  more rigid in their thinking and outlook, some are even ossified. However, I think that they might be more ready mentally for the head games that accompany earlier training as the big bad instructors don't seem like the bogeyman that they did to me as a 19 yr old recruit. If all war could be won mentally then this is not a problem.

But they aren't. They are being fought in sweltering, dusty, hot, scorching, crappy, stinky places with very very few creature comforts.

Having said this I am sure that there will be incoming from several folks. I'll take it and smile. Here is a little peace offering to them in the form of humour. It's something I saw on another site ref sending old men to war.
http://forums.military.com/1/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=78919038&f=828197221&m=895107561

Slainte,


edited by Paddy the bog trottin mic due to grammatical error.