Recruits of the last half decade: Fatter, dumber and less motivated than before.

[McG]

The press has stumbled upon what many from this site have been saying for a few years.

Canada’s military forced to accept fatter, less educated recruits as demographics change, audit reveals
Lee Berthiaume,
The National Post
17 August 2013, 1:06 AM ET

Canada’s military is having to accept new recruits who are fatter, less educated and harder to motivate than previous generations because quality applicants are in dwindling supply, an internal Defence Department audit has concluded.

Despite an end to combat operations in Afghanistan and deep budget cuts, officials say the military needs more than 4,000 new recruits each year to offset attrition and keep 68,000 full-time troops in uniform.

According to the audit conducted last year but only recently made public, Canadian military recruiters are expected “to encourage dedicated individuals, who are mentally and physically fit, towards military service as a career of choice.”

However, the department’s auditors found that “recently, this has been an increasingly difficult challenge.”

The Canadian Forces has historically drawn heavily on young, white males from rural communities to fill its ranks, but the auditors cited recent census data showing that “traditional pool” has been steadily shrinking.

“Factors such as increased levels of education, an aging workforce, a labour pool increasingly made up of immigrants, and the changing expectations regarding the nature of work among the 17- to 29-year-olds have also been contributing to challenges in recruiting,” they added.

The result? The auditors found that “fitness and educational levels of recruits in the last five years have been slightly lower than in the past,” while “compared to previous generations, recruits of today are described as harder to motivate.”

Despite this, they warned “raising the quality line” could backfire by making it even harder to find new recruits, and instead noted a number of initiatives such as sending out-of-shape recruits to fat camp before basic training has had positive results.

The audit was conducted before the military rolled out a new fitness test earlier this year that it says more closely reflects the actual tasks the country’s soldiers, sailors and air force personnel must be able to accomplish such as carrying sandbags.

It’s unclear what impact the new test will have on recruiting, if any, but auditors concluded the military has been able to “cope with differences observed with this slightly less fit and educated generation of recruits.”

Auditors noted the budget for military recruiting has been slashed from $38.6 million in 2009-10 to $25.6 million this year, which has resulted in the closure of several recruiting centres.

However, they do not draw a link between those cuts and the declining quality in recruits.

The audit report also noted Defence Department officials have looked at following the United Kingdom and Australia in privatizing military recruitment, but that the costs outweigh the benefits at this time.

Royal Military College professor Christian Leuprecht, who has researched military demographics and recruiting for years, felt the audit report was as much a statement about the military’s failure to adapt to changing circumstances as anything else.

Leuprecht noted the absolute number of youth in Canada continues to grow, meaning there is still a substantial and growing population to recruit from. He questioned whether the military has continued to rely too heavily on its traditional recruit pool and old training methods.

“We just need to work harder with the people who may be interested in joining but perhaps don’t have all the attributes that we need,” he said.

“Is what the organization is trying to make these kids do really what the organization needs for the 21st century? And is that perhaps why the kids themselves are a little bit disenchanted with what they’re being asked to do because they’re questioning how in the world this is possibly relevant?”

http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/08/17/canadas-military-forced-to-accept-fatter-less-educated-recruits-as-demographics-change-audit-reveals/

 

[kevincanada]

While this reply be taken as opinion only and NOT factual.  It is not hard to see.  I now in my 30's when I was a kid my area had hmm one Mcdonalds, one KFC.  No Tim Hortons, no internet. no cell phones.  Coffee? you had to go in sit in a restaurant and order it.  No drive through.

Growing up for me it was GET OUT OF THE HOUSE.  I don't want to see you until dinner.  Boy I was trim and fit.  Eat out? Drink coffee? Never happened.  There was maybe 2 obese kids in high school and a few over weight.  Everyone else was thin.  No vending machines.  Cafeteria had a daily limit on junk food and when it sold out that was it no more.

Now I just finished up work on a construction site (BMQ here I come in a week) At least 1/4 of the guys are over weight,  10% probably obese, and Iestimate 50% of the workers eat out daily, Burgers, Street meat, Extra large triple triple coffee twice daily.  My youth lunches? Peanut butter sandwich, apple and some kind of healthy drink.  If lucky I got a cookie lol.

Recreation of a youth now? Video game on the internet.  Recreation of my youth? Play football then go crying to parents for bandages and ice in a towel.

I can see why we are all fat and out of shape.

My 5cents rounded up from 3.

 

[The_Falcon]

Perhaps if the CAF started up a entrance PT test for Reg F applicants, we could solve one of the problems.  As for the other part....based on the post in the recruiting forums, and from my time in a CFRC, the number of applicants who are quite frankly inept is astounding (and one wonders how anyone managed to figure out the steps to joining prior to the advent of the internet.....oh wait I know they would actually make contact with the organization itself).  Perhaps if the CFRG started acting like every other employer and started trashing applications that are junk (incomplete, missing info, wrong info, illegible etc.), it would help sort out the cruft.  I wasn't allowed to trash these file (and people who worked with know that I tried my hardest to get crappy applicants tossed), so I just made them my absolute lowest priority. 

 

[George Wallace]

The "No one Fails" philosophy crept into our lives in the mid to late '90s.  There where many a crse passed through the CTC with 100% pass rates.  This only meant that the Units had to retrain what the Schools had sent them.  A totally BS way to operate.

 

[Retired AF Guy]

"[n]ew recruits who are fatter, less educated and harder to motivate than previous generations."

Isn't that something ALL trades are experiencing these days, not just the military?

 

[Kat Stevens]

I love the "less educated = dumb" inference.  I signed on the line in 1979 with a grade 11 education.  While I'm not the most educated sapper ever to lift an MGB bank seat beam, I'm pretty sure I'm not dumb.  Opinions may vary, but in hour 16 of a bridge build, most guys agree that a Doctorate in Medieval Scandinavian Literature wasn't much use.  My masters in Repeatedly Lifting and Carrying Heavy Shit was pretty handy though.

 

[The_Falcon]

I love the "less educated = dumb" inference....

Perhaps they meant less educated in the school of reality?

 

[McG]

I love the "less educated = dumb" inference.  I signed on the line in 1979 with a grade 11 education.

In your day, the world did not expect that minimum highschool education and heading off early into the workforce was not so discouraged.
Today, it is easier to finish school.  There are plenty of safety nets, and leave no kid behind attitudes.  The idea that everyone needs highschool is much more uniformly inculcated.
In your day, quitting school did not mean dumb but you were at the end of that era.  Somewhere into the '80s or very early '90s that changed.  If we are currently seeing a wave of applicants with an increasing number who chose not to have highschool, those individuals made a dumb choice somewhere - that choice reflects upon them.

 

[Journeyman]

I think some people are just too harsh and demanding of our recruits.





:rofl: 
I slay me sometimes.

 

[Infanteer]

Caesar complained about his recruits being useless.  It's what you do with the clay that matters.  No story here.

 

[Kat Stevens]

In your day, the world did not expect that minimum highschool education and heading off early into the workforce was not so discouraged.
Today, it is easier to finish school.  There are plenty of safety nets, and leave no kid behind attitudes.  The idea that everyone needs highschool is much more uniformly inculcated.
In your day, quitting school did not mean dumb but you were at the end of that era.  Somewhere into the '80s or very early '90s that changed.  If we are currently seeing a wave of applicants with an increasing number who chose not to have highschool, those individuals made a dumb choice somewhere - that choice reflects upon them.

Without going into specifics, there are plenty of reasons other than being dumb to get away from school and out earning, and your generalizing it as such is insulting. Not everyone is suited to an academic environment, that doesn't make them dumb. Why do we need to send someone with an expensive education of to kill people, or die in some highly dramatic fashion?  I don't get how much more complicated a soldiers job is now, other than carrying ever more increasing amounts of crap on their backs, that requires a post secondary, or even secondary for that matter, education.  Plenty of people in the army can calculate the square root of a jar of pickles to seven decimal places, but can't get the lid off.

 

[Nudibranch]

"[n]ew recruits who are fatter, less educated and harder to motivate than previous generations."

Isn't that something ALL trades are experiencing these days, not just the military?

Sure. CAF draws recruits from the population. The population has gotten fatter and more sedentary *shrug*

 

[garb811]

Continuing the "less educated" issue, less educated compared to when? 

I know when I got in in 85, nobody had post secondary...or if they did, they sure didn't let anyone know, and as Kat pointed out, there were folks coming in who hadn't completed HS.  Fast forward to FRP and from 94-95 until about 02, recruiting slowed to a crawl as the Forces downsized and adjusted to the colossal imbalances among ranks and trades that the mismanagement of FRP produced.  During those years I certainly recall an increase in the required education level to be competitive and get through the door simply because the the intake of recruits was so low, especially in the purple trades where it seemed OTs became more prevalent, if not the norm, as opposed to direct entries.  Hell, I remember going on course in Borden in 99 and it was a virtual ghost town as very few courses were being run anywhere.  So if it is "those years" they are using to bench mark, of course there has been a lowering of the education level as the CAF adjusted back to its normal recruiting patterns.

Now, for my trade, there has certainly been an increase in the level of education due to it a 2 year diploma becoming mandatory for direct entries (and plenty of shining examples of edumication =/= smrt); still have the problem of fatter and less motivated though.

 

[cjette1]

Alright here goes,

I am speaking this opinion from a 21 year old white male youth. Here are a few things I can speak on about my generation (especially in relation to military standards).

I see one main problem as being that my generation is being raised and shown a "Hollywoodized" depiction of the military. We are raised believing ourselves to be gods because we continually buy into the hyped up video games and movies showing that it's cool to be a super baddass. But they seldom show the emotional and physical stress one would ultimately have to deal with to succeed within the military. Sure you can "own noobs at Call of Duty", but could you realistically pull the trigger to defend your brothers, sisters and own life in a split second? You don't need to be fit, smart or motivated to buy a movie ticket or play a video game. You just need to be interested. And I see some of my generation take that "interest" too far and try to enlist because it's "cool".

No I don't know a thing about recruiting a certain "type" of person or how to combat this new epidemic. But what I can say is that as long as Hollywood and other mainstream outlets pump out over hyped garbage not much will change. The quality of recruits will continue to drop and some drastic measures might be introduced. But the truth is, you will never be able to remove the human element of the military. It's ultimately up to said military what fills that human element, be it fat and dumb, or fit and motivated.

Now this is quick insight into my personal situation and mostly pertains to the baby boomers and the topic at hand.
Whenever I tell baby boomers of my career choices, I usually get the same reaction.
"Do you plan on going to school soon"?
"Not yet, I'm actually planning on enlisting and seeing where it goes"
I then get the long drawn out "ohhhh, well how nice and noble" (often times with undertones of "you silly impressionable boy")

I would be without fingers for the amount of times this exact situation has occurred. And I feel it ties in with the whole fatter, dumber, less motivated topic. There is still a sort of stigma attached to the armed forces. The stereotype of "uneducated meat head" is still regularly associated with the military. And when, your 17-25 and your friends are going to be pulling in 80K a year with a decent education, would you want to be is the "meat head soldier" of the bunch. With this said, I feel like it's becoming harder to sell the profession of arms as a viable option in the 21st century.

Long story short, if you're motivated, educated and given a choice, would you rather become an engineer in some civil firm or become a combat engineer and possibly one day risk making the ultimate sacrifice? Well, one has about double the salary as the other, stability, and comfort.

Back to my original point, after the above choice is made, it's more possible to be the person who "saw it in a video game" that would choose the latter.

Anyways, sorry about the rambling and if I darted across the map on this one. I just feel very strongly about the topic and had quite a few ideas swimming around. My  :2c:

 

[ballz]

I think "less educated" was a poor word choice. Not only does it imply that less formal education = dumber, it also means that we have recruits with less formal education than we used to, and I don't believe that for a second. I very much doubt we have more high-school drop-outs getting sworn-in than we used to, and I definitely think we have more people with post-secondary getting in that we used to.

But the fact is, with the state of today's formal education, graduating high school does not necessarily mean you can read or write coherently. And I think that's what they were getting at. Basic skills such as literacy and arithmetic seem to escape your average 16-20 year old these days. It's not that they have less formal education, it's that they have never been held to a standard throughout their education that we used to expect.

 

[Eaglelord17]

No I don't know a thing about recruiting a certain "type" of person or how to combat this new epidemic. But what I can say is that as long as Hollywood and other mainstream outlets pump out over hyped garbage not much will change. The quality of recruits will continue to drop and some drastic measures might be introduced. But the truth is, you will never be able to remove the human element of the military. It's ultimately up to said military what fills that human element, be it fat and dumb, or fit and motivated.
I would be without fingers for the amount of times this exact situation has occurred. And I feel it ties in with the whole fatter, dumber, less motivated topic. There is still a sort of stigma attached to the armed forces. The stereotype of "uneducated meat head" is still regularly associated with the military. And when, your 17-25 and your friends are going to be pulling in 80K a year with a decent education, would you want to be is the "meat head soldier" of the bunch. With this said, I feel like it's becoming harder to sell the profession of arms as a viable option in the 21st century.

How is it becoming harder to sell the profession of arms? We currently have a surplus of applicants for a limited number of positions. More and more people are considering it as a viable career when they learn of all the benefits, pay rates, and stability the military has (especially considering its one of the few places that doesn't require x degree or diploma to get in). Also considering in approximately as a Corporal 1 (something you get after 4 years in) your making about $56,000 (pulled of the Forces website) that's not to shabby (especially when you add in sea/field/spec/whatever pay).
I personally take offence to being called fat, dumb, and less motivated. Some people getting in are, but so are some people in higher ranks. So what if I only have a high school education, it so far hasn't affected my job (the military teaches me everything I need to know to do the job anyways). The way I see it I'm ahead of many of the people who have gone to university for (insert useless degree here). It will cost them approximately $20,000 per year for that education which I doubt they will find a decent stable well paying job with. I'm already in a stable well paying job at age 18, so why would I ever need to get a degree? Fitness wise I can see that being a problem but if the Forces are unwilling to place at least a initial fitness test when joining of course there is going to be a fitness drop (also society in general isn't quite the at the fitness level of yesteryear, the Forces are only a representation of society).

 

[The_Falcon]

But the fact is, with the state of today's formal education, graduating high school does not necessarily mean you can read or write coherently. And I think that's what they were getting at. Basic skills such as literacy and arithmetic seem to escape your average 16-20 year old these days. It's not that they have less formal education, it's that they have never been held to a standard throughout their education that we used to expect.

Bingo

All one has to do is go through recruiting forums here to see this in action (or if they are slightly masochistic/insane do a stint in the recruiting realm).  Lack of detail to grammar and spelling.  People fretting over Grade 10 math and English (ie the CFAT), and some of them have degrees. 

Sort of  in the same vein (re education or lack thereof), my brother just found out he has been rated on "ratemyprof" (he is an English instructor at U of A), apparently the gripes are, he actually makes students do work, and you should avoid his classes if you are just looking for something to boost your GPA.  Now shopping around for easier profs/courses is not new, but it is much easier to do now, and with cases of profs/teachers in some places getting sanctioned or out right fired, for giving poor little snowflakes a failing grade....well, things are going to be a mess when all the social engineers finally retire, and the world is entrusted to the "no one is left behind" generation. 

 

[armyvern]

I have been told recently that my High School Diploma from way-back-when (hi Kat - no worries on you!!) is the equivelant to today's BA.

Education has apparently been dumbed down (no fail right??) at the same rate Canadians have beefed up.

Someone's already said it, "no story here".

 

[ballz]

Sort of  in the same vein (re education or lack thereof), my brother just found out he has been rated on "ratemyprof" (he is an English instructor at U of A), apparently the gripes are, he actually makes students do work, and you should avoid his classes if you are just looking for something to boost your GPA.  Now shopping around for easier profs/courses is not new, but it is much easier to do now, and with cases of profs/teachers in some places getting sanctioned or out right fired, for giving poor little snowflakes a failing grade....well, things are going to be a mess when all the social engineers finally retire, and the world is entrusted to the "no one is left behind" generation.

I loved ratemyprof... having a conversation with the best prof I ever had, the only prof that tried to force students to learn a concept and *apply it* to an "unknown" problem, he brought up ratemyprof and how he is crucified on there for making students learn. Luckily, he's one of the few left that cares too much about actual education to "change," and he doesn't care what consequences there are for it. He even gave me a *wink wink nudge nudge* hint that indicated to me that a part of the professors compensation is tied to how they score on their "end-of-course reviews" which are filled out BY THE STUDENTS... talk about the tail wagging the f**king dog!!! Heartbreaking to know that the best profs (who actually care about the students and want them to learn and succeed after their degree program) are being hurt financially, while the worst ones who pander to the students and try to be their "friend" are being rewarded financially for it.

 

[Navy_Pete]

I think this cartoon sums up what's wrong with education/society today;

I spoke to someone recently who had an applicant bring their parent with them to a job interview at an engineering firm.  Oddly they didn't hire them, as their mom was answering questions for them.

Shortly before we left Nova Scotia, there was a report by someone saying that the functional literacy rate of high school grads was around 80%; those 'no one left behind' policies are really successful at setting people up for failure in life.