References Superthread [Merged]

[Otis]

It means that if you're 17, then you can put down someone who's known you only for 1 year (from when you turned 16), instead of 5 years.

Same for the security clearance papers, you only need to go back to when you were 16. So instead of putting down addresses for the last 5 years, you only need to put down addresses from the day you turned 16.

Martin

Sorry Martin, you are right about the references, incorrect about the addresses.

From a CF Recruiter:

We require references that are - 18+ , unrelated and have known you five years. If you are a younger applicant, we will allow people that have known for for less than five years if nessesary, but we prefer them to be trustworthy people (teachers, lawyers, police officers, priests etc) ... this does not exclude people that have known you longer, nor does it exclude people who have known you prior to the age of 16 (so YES, if someone's known you since you were 14, they can be used)

With Regard To the addresses though, we DO require five years. You must have lived somewhere and you have to tell us where. As I have said in this forum before, we can and DO check criminal records prior to age 16, so we need to have addresses for five years back minimum (more if there are extenuating circumstances, like you still have immediate relatives living outside of Canada)

If you have any more questions, I recommend you ask your local CFRC. You can call the toll free number at 1-800-856-8488

Good Luck!

Otis

 

[martr]

I re-read the forms, it seems it's changed since back in the days!
You are correct, 5 years of addresses.


I didn't mean you only need to list those after 16. Of course it's better if someone has known you for more time.

 

[mellian]

Five 5+ years references can be a pain when majority of those that can vouch for your character are anti-military or/and anti-war, and the rest reluctant. It is like suggesting have to be associated with people that are supportive for a period of time.

It would also mean, in my case, if enlisted, will mean I will have to be in the closet essentially.  

"What do you do for a living?"

"Umm, work for the government."

"Oh? Doing what?"

"...analyst. Hey, whats over there?"

 

 

[KodyN202]

I have sent my application in 2 days ago and am awaiting a reply for my tests to be scheduled. For one of my reference spots my Aunt who was a SGT in the air force insisted that I put her down for one of my references. So my question is will they accept this? I understand that it says no family, but I figured since she would know more about it then me, that it would be fine? Thanks in advance. Kody   

 

[George Wallace]

Have another Reference ready, should they tell you that she is not eligible as a Reference.  Be prepared.

 

[Miko]

Have another Reference ready like GW said.
For future reference, "Any adult, who is not immediate family or a relative, can act as a reference."
This is found on Part 3 "Back Check" of the Source Documentation for the Application to the CF, the recruiter should have given you.

 

[josh54243]

If your aunt isn't in the same household, I dont think she would be considered immediate family.

 

[PMedMoe]

If your aunt isn't in the same household, I dont think she would be considered immediate family.

But she is a relative.  I like the wording: "Any adult who is not immediate family or a relative."  Immediate family aren't relatives?  ??? 

 

[josh54243]

But she is a relative.  I like the wording: "Any adult who is not immediate family or a relative."  Immediate family aren't relatives?  ??? 

Oops, didn't see the relative part. I should read things more carefully!

 

[PMedMoe]

The point I was trying to make is that immediate family are relatives.  So why the redundancy?

 

[Otis]

The point I was trying to make is that immediate family are relatives.  So why the redundancy?

The redundancy is because not everyone's first language is English.

Someone asked me the other day if their spouse was "immediate family". Their reasoning was that their spouse wasn't a blood relative ... it makes sense in a way if you think about it. So, for the purposes of clarity, it doesn't cost anything to write a slightly longer sentence on the form.

 

[PMedMoe]

Understood.  I guess it also helps those who are intellectually challenged. 

 

[traviss-g]

My friend had his grandfather as a reference and the recruiter said it was fine that they would just use one of his other references.

 

[George Wallace]

My friend had his grandfather as a reference and the recruiter said it was fine that they would just use one of his other references.

:

First off, the Recruiter should know better, and not have said that, or you have made up a story or quoted a rumour.

Second:  It is quite clear who you can and can not use as a Reference, in "Black and White" on the BackCheck forms.  Remember, it is BackCheck who checks the References, not the Recruiter.

Third:  When it comes time for a Security Clearance, DPM Secur 2 is very strict as to who is listed as a Reference, and will reject an application if it is not completed correctly.

 

[traviss-g]

Well I was present when it happened so I am sure it was not a rumor. The recruiter was the one who pointed it out when he went through our applications and said "who's this" and my buddy said "my grandfather, should I change it, I can just use Travis (me)" the recruiter responded with "no, it is ok we will just use one of the others."

It was only 8-9 months ago so I don't think my memory is that bad, but it may be. Any way I guess it is not supposed to happen so if you want to delete my previous post (and maybe this one with the story in it) please do, so other people do not read it and get the wrong idea. Sorry for the confusion!

Thanks,
Travis

 

[KodyN202]

Well they won't accept it (Figured that anyways). And that my recruiter can't fill the info in for me so now I am another week behind  :'(. I called in a couple days ago to find out how my application was progressing and it turned out that he had my app. in his hands  . Then he went on the tell me he was going to have to send it back to me ( I live about 2 hours away from any CFRC) because of that little problem. I asked if I could just give him the info and potentially save myself a week of doing this again but he said that he is not allowed to do that. So now I am still waiting to get it in the mail and then send it back and blah blah blah....   

 

[ouch]

Are brother-in-law, sister-in-law considered relatives?
They are 'relatives' by marriage, so does that count them out as a reference?

Would 'relatives' are defined by blood?

 

[Otis]

Are brother-in-law, sister-in-law considered relatives?
They are 'relatives' by marriage, so does that count them out as a reference?

Would 'relatives' are defined by blood?

In-laws are considered relatives if they are actually married. Common-law relatives are not considered relatives for the purposes of References ... so says FDO (I went and asked him and stole his answer)

Otis

 

[George Wallace]

Are brother-in-law, sister-in-law considered relatives?
They are 'relatives' by marriage, so does that count them out as a reference?

Would 'relatives' are defined by blood?

What Otis is saying is: 

1.  If you are married, then In-laws are considered relatives (If you want to use your "relatives are defined by blood" then they are--they are blood relatives of your spouse.)

2.  If you are Common Law, then they are not considered relatives, but acquaintances........until such time as you get married.  Then they fall under point 1.

 

[FDO]

Let me clarify. If you want to use your in-laws as references you can. What we look for are "professionals". IE Doctors, Lawyers (I know), Religious leaders, Engineers, Teachers, Professors, etc. This is because of the status they hold in society. Former employers or co-workers are also good as they have probably seen you at your best and worst. We don't like to use family because there is a perceived view that they will give a glowing reference. In-laws, you hope, will give you the same glowing reference.

Hope this clears it up a bit.