The total number of rejections over the last five years was 125,861, with 23,763 Commonwealth applicants turned away due to “lack of vacancies” and 76,187 rejected on medical grounds over the period.
Over the span of the past five years, ‘medical reasons’ have emerged as the foremost cause for rejection in the British Army, with a total of 76,187 applicants disqualified on this basis.
Following closely behind, oddly, the challenge of limited vacancies has notably impacted Commonwealth applicants, accounting for a total of 23,763 rejections during the same period. This considerable figure points to the intense competition for positions available to Commonwealth applicants within the Army, suggesting either an uptick in interest from Commonwealth nations or a reduction in available spots within the Army’s recruitment framework.
Administrative issues, particularly the non-completion of required forms, has also been a significant barrier to entry.
Here’s the data.
Army Application Rejection Reasons by Year
| Reason | RY19/20 | RY20/21 | RY21/22 | RY22/23 | RY23/24 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age – Over Age | 43 | 80 | 39 | 42 | 131 |
| Age – Under Age | 5 | ~ | 6 | 6 | 17 |
| Alcohol | ~ | – | 13 | 19 | 13 |
| AOSB Briefing Failure | ~ | – | ~ | 6 | – |
| AOSB Main Board Fail | – | – | ~ | – | ~ |
| Appeal in Progress | – | – | – | – | – |
| Appeal Outcome | 9 | 11 | 6 | ~ | ~ |
| Assessment Centre Fail | 47 | 23 | 18 | 19 | 20 |
| Attitude/Maturity | 80 | 128 | 106 | 93 | 63 |
| Authority Rejection | 11 | 19 | 137 | 27 | 39 |
| Basic Skills | 8 | 29 | ~ | – | – |
| BMI | 232 | 16 | 20 | 9 | 5 |
| Candidate not selected by APC Glasgow | – | 14 | – | 13 | ~ |
| Clearance – Care Order | – | ~ | 5 | ~ | ~ |
| Clearance – Counter Terrorist Check (CTC) | ~ | ~ | – | – | – |
| Clearance – Crime | ~ | 7 | ~ | 350 | 245 |
| Clearance – Disclosure & Barring Service (DBS) | – | – | ~ | – | – |
| Clearance – Financial Issues | – | – | – | ~ | ~ |
| Clearance – Nationality | 68 | 46 | 15 | 25 | 52 |
| Clearance – Non completion of Forms | – | 2166 | 1360 | 1140 | 1097 |
| Clearance – Piercings | 170 | 127 | 72 | 24 | 35 |
| Clearance – Residency | 186 | 129 | 45 | 20 | 62 |
| Clearance – Tattoos | 143 | 149 | 102 | 252 | 173 |
| Clearance – Visa | 50 | 58 | 77 | 287 | 293 |
| Commonwealth – No current vacancies | 463 | 6207 | 4832 | 4557 | 7707 |
| Commonwealth – Unsuitable for entry | 85 | 222 | 191 | 142 | 39 |
| Consent Form not provided | ~ | 7 | ~ | ~ | – |
| Continuing Education | – | – | – | – | – |
| Criminal Convictions/Crime | – | – | ~ | ~ | ~ |
| Current Operations | – | – | – | 9 | – |
| Delinquency/Crime | 534 | 629 | 336 | – | 39 |
| Discipline | 9 | 5 | 5 | ~ | ~ |
| Drugs | 67 | 11 | ~ | – | ~ |
| Education | ~ | – | ~ | ~ | – |
| Failed Basic Eligibility | 4750 | 279 | 260 | 280 | 179 |
| Failed to Attend Event(s) | 335 | 236 | 199 | 188 | 94 |
| Finance | ~ | – | ~ | – | – |
| Fitness | 19 | 38 | 20 | 19 | 11 |
| Family Origin Questionnaire Consent not given (SCT) | – | – | 25 | 19 | 49 |
| Joining Other Service – Royal Air Force | – | – | ~ | ~ | ~ |
| Joining Other Service – Royal Marines | – | – | ~ | ~ | ~ |
| Joining Other Service – Royal Navy | – | – | – | ~ | ~ |
| Language Ability – English Speaking & Listening | ~ | ~ | ~ | – | ~ |
| Medical | 17443 | 18180 | 13832 | 14656 | 12076 |
| Motivation/Commitment | 110 | 414 | 201 | 116 | 65 |
| No Vacancy Available | ~ | 7 | 176 | 37 | 12 |
| Non-Productive Enquiry/Lack of Contact | – | – | – | – | ~ |
| None | ~ | ~ | – | – | ~ |
| Other non-Military Employment | – | – | – | 24 | 13 |
| Prior Service Check Rejection | 838 | 1374 | 1055 | 671 | 674 |
| Psychometric Test Result | ~ | ~ | ~ | – | ~ |
| Refusal of Parental Consent | – | – | – | – | – |
| Start New Stream | – | – | – | 20 | ~ |
| Terms and Conditions of Service | – | – | – | ~ | ~ |
| Unsuitable at Interview | 16 | 28 | 7 | ~ | ~ |
| Unsuitable for Job Choice | – | – | – | ~ | – |
| Waiver Refused | 7 | 8 | ~ | – | ~ |
| Total | 25750 | 30657 | 23189 | 23100 | 23175 |
Very interesting.
So the problem is really internally created.
I never realised I had asthma so it wasn’t on my medical records. Didn’t stop me being very fit and competing for England in an obscure sport. The problem was that my asthma made my aerobic capacity drop from exceptional to very good…..
There is a big difference between chronic conditions and ones that can be easily managed.
The commonwealth thing is a head scratcher…..that isn’t Gurkhas in the wrong column? If you are short of people you are short of people…….then you take the next cut down……absolute standards make no sense……otherwise the people who are ‘in’ leave from overwork and over deployment.
SB ,I got in the Andrew (Navy) with asthma, and a Penicillin allergy I noticed on the list was Tattoos, I would assume Face and hands and piercings that’s a new one I take it that those candidates were interviewed by non military and not like the old Careers office military personnel
Generally face and hands is off limits, but there’s a degree of case by case judgment. Anything that’s offensive (eg Swastikas) tends to get you disqualified pretty quickly too.
Piercings is baisically “anything that doesn’t look professional.” So you can have a septum piercing just fine, since you can take it out at work, but if you have a massive stretched hole in your earlobe that’s will still be there when you have taken the piercing out, it’s a disqualification (funny story when I was in Phase 1 we had one guy who every week had to have the hole where his piercing was measured to satisfy the army that it was healing shut).
Cheers Dern just watched Forces News ,and the Beard question should they be allowed or not cannot wait for the next one Nail extension painted or plain ?
Honestly why not? If a female soldier wants to paint her nails is that a big deal? I mean it’s hardly more colour than her TRF after all, and much like beards if the colour is that bright CC1 we are deploying on ops only delpy with subdued nail varnish please (most of the time you’re supposed to be wearing gloves anyway).
Allowed Dazzle while serving on a River class.
If I’m on HMS Dragon can I get dragon themed nail art?
They are called rules. Stop trying to change them. You’re supposed to be a soldier not a glamour model.
Oh dear better get my powdered wig then.
Well said
You must be a civi I believe it’s called humour
All i wish i had someone to sponser me i could complete my application..but i know no one in uk🥺
That army and navy are full of troops with tattoos on there hands
I see you cut yourself shaving hence the plaster on you face….etc, etc….
Forces News yesterday was talking about the Beard question should they be allowed or not We were told that you couldn’t get an airtight seal when wearing an AGR so beards were a no no in the Army but neither could us Jack’s but we still kept Our Beards and wore them very odd
Plenty of individuals in the Army are allowed beards: Sikhs, Muslims, Pagans, Pioneer Sergeants, anyone with a shaving chit. All of them manage just fine with beards, even on operations and in respirator confidence training.
The Respirator Seal is entirely a excuse various dinosaurs hide behind because they know the real reason they don’t want it sounds a bit pathetic: They don’t like how it looks. (Even if it was an issue you’d just issue a order that you’re going into a CBRN threat and you must shave now. I know it takes less time to apply a pair of beard clippers than find the CBRN qualified bloke in Battalion and get your respirator seal checked and new ancils issued).
A soldier used to rub brasso in his face to get a an excused shaving chit for rashes to piss off the Sergeant Major, they called the SM moses and ayatollah due to the mass exodus after his promotion. While guiding vehicles at night on exercise they used to try and run him over. Funny how power goes to some peoples heads !
On the other end of the spectrum I’ve seen CSM’s ask their medics to go on a No Shaving Chit spree when OM’s on exercise complained that their troops where unshaven.
Beards are a Senior Service tradition unfortunately the 50 year experiment gone wrong (raf) has taken it up, the Marines and Army tradition is having a mustache. Anyone can have a beard due to medical issues.
I had an SM who tried to AGAI me because there was a bullet hole in a range I was RCOing. OC fucked him off immediately.
Cheers Dern yeah the Army hierarchy needs too realise that ,in the Navy if you wished to discontinue Shaving put in a chit turn up Clean shaven and then you had 28 days if did the Beard didn’t meet requirements there’s even a Regulation on that you had to remove it
I know, it’s not like there isn’t a perfect set of rules the Army could just crib. But as usual they’ve turned a nice easy “win” into agony.
It’s got too be signed off in triplicate placed in the must do tray where it will gather dust until the question is raised again by another Government and the reply will be ” we are looking into this pressing matter” .
I know a potential recruit who has been rejected for spurious medical reasons. A single episode of a skin rash which just happened to appear days before he attended selection. Subsequent dermatological testing revealed a previously unknown allergy to nickel and a balsam food spice. He worked at a restaurant chain as an assistant manager. His fellow employees ALL developed a rash when they used one particular type of elbow length heat resistant glove. That have now been reported and replaced.
The lad is well into his 20’s but remains keen to join the army for all the right reasons. Despite being fit as a lop, with not a single recurrence of the old skin rash. They keep rejecting him. It’s madness. If he had aggressive recurring dermatitis it would be understandable but he remains symptom free. I can’t understand it. If the RAMC were conducting the medicals, he would be a serving soldier. Quite likely a junior NCO or even a senior. His management skills are that good, with numerous awards for leadership in what is a high pressure working environment.
Do you have any suggestions.
Sorry, medical rejections is not something I have much experience of from either side of the equation. Even if I did, trying to do so off a second hand account would probably be a bit irresponsible.
Maybe talk to your GP and see what they say?
Well, thanks for taking the time to respond. It is appreciated. I’m suggesting he takes it to his GP and local MP. While seeking a second opinion from a consultant dermatologist/immunologist. Possibly as a last resort, involving a journalist who has reported on the recruiting problem.
No the seal is extremely important hence why the no beard’s rule. As has been shown in the Ukrainian with Russia’s use of chemical warfare. A none complete seal can on the lightest take you out of combat temporarily, at worst you can become incapacitated or dead! Breathing in even small amounts of certain chemicals will mean damaged lungs and discharged from the army as you are disabled for the rest of your life.
We also have a culture where there is a duty of care from the employer, as is being shown on a current legal challenge from commandos who state they were exposed to asbestos during two exercises in 2018 & 2019 with the MOD being aware the buildings they were sleeping in were know to have white asbestos dust in them.
So the MOD knowing that part of the job could involve incidents of exposure to chemical warfare then the need for a tight seal is mandatory. As part of training you used to have to go into a room where tear gas was let off and you then had to take your mask off. After that you made damn sure your mask was a good seal.
It’s the same in the NHS beards do stop a perfect seal.
It’s definitely time for an in-depth review of what medical conditions really stop you being a modern soldier.
As you said, some conditions like asthma can be managed and shouldn’t immediately exclude anyone, but also how many roles don’t require absolute peak fitness? Every soldier should be fit enough to fight if need be, but logistics and support arms don’t need the same rigorous standards as close combat troops
I have heard that applicants can get failed for having broken a bone in childhood or having had acne.
I served 1975-2009. There was then no relaxation of standard for logistics and support arms for either the 6-monthly Basic Fitness Test (BFT) or the annual APFA. the matra we had in REME was: you are a soldiers first, tradesman second. All had to be fit to fight.
Combat Fitness Test (CFT) was different – Infantry did have a tougher time target.
When I joined in 2014 the actual JOINING starndards for CS and CSS where lowered, but when the PFA time came rolling around there wasn’t a different standard based on cap badge, as you said CFT Infantry was different (I think they had more weight though not a faster time target) Now the SCR is universal, but the RFT has slightly different standards depending on Cap Badge and Job Role.
Thanks mate. Good to have the latest info.
Got me thinking about APWT – we had iron sight on SA80 in REME – I guess there was therefore a different standard to achieve?
Is APWT the old version of the Annual Combat Marksmanship Test? We still had iron sights in Phase 1, and when I did my PNCO and one of my Jungle Exs we got given iron sights, but otherwise everything was SUSAT, ACOG, LDS and others magnification sights, never had a different shooting standard applied, even when going down ranges with different cap badges, so I guess that got changed?
Making me feel old! I’ve never heard of ACMT. Seems like it replaced Annual Personal Weapons Test (APWT) from 1 Jan 2010. Got some lines from ARRSEpedia, as my memory fails me on the details of APWT:
“APWT is a test that every soldier should take once a year and reach a certain standard.
Shots are fired from a variety of ranges and firing positions, (100,200,300m)and in the case of the infantry (using the SA80) 400m. For the standard test 50 rounds are used, those with iron sights need to obtain a score of 39/50 to pass, those with SUSATs 42/50″
Another extract from ARRSE:”On 1st January 2010 the Army will introduce a new shooting
policy which will introduce a number of improvements to
raise marksmanship. The Army Combat Marksman Test (ACMT) has replaced the AnnualPersonal Weapons Test (APWT) and the Annual Weapons Assessment (AWA) for all personal weapons, ensuring that there is a single standard irrespective of whether it is an individuals primary or secondary weapon. For instance, the ACMT for SA80 requires soldiers to close with the target and will….”
Huh, seems like the firing from 400m was dropped but we do a few shoots from 50m and I think (I shoot a lot so I might be getting mixed up here) from 25m.
I’m guessing there was a APWT for GMPG, Pistol, whatever came before the Sharpshooter, 40mm UGL etc too?
There was an APWT for everything that was a Personal Weapon. As an officer I usually did mine on 9mm Browning. But going to Afghan in Nov 2008, I did a SA80 APWT as that was my pers weapon over there.
Don’t know about annual APWT tests on GPMG, UGL etc.
Lucky. I’m supposed to do at least 5 or 6 ACMTs every year (which is why I struggle to remember what shoots are on each one). Plus mandatory LFTT’s and then the odd CQB range thrown in.
Thanks. Why are there so many ACMTs per year?
Usually aren’t. But I have to do mine on L85, Sharpshooter, GPMG, Glock, and UGL
Thanks mate. Great to get up to date info on all this.
Just to clarify most personnel won’t have to do that many ACMT’s, my job role is an exception since we kind of expect everyone to be able to jump onto any weapon system.
That’s true mate, read my dit I posted, my daughter had a bad back when young, no broken bones even just soft tissue damage, got chinned off a few times for the reserves because of it!
Have an old troopy of mine telling me his son who plays Rugby Union at a fairly high level has been turned down for Reserves because he had Kidney Stones 4 years ago. WTF.?
Crazy nonsense mate for sure!
Aww so its this serious 🥺
CFT should be repeated day after to give a meaningful result
Very true,R.E.M.E tradesmen were trained to be both infantry and trade. Fitness was always to be proved regularly,especially if you end3d up instructing at an apprentice college as I did.
“Applicants can get failed for having broken a bone in childhood or having had acne.”….they can get deferred for these. But unlikely to be rejected.
Thanks. Deferment usually means the applicant will pursue another career, particularly if they have already left school and need to earn.
A fractured lower shaft tib and fib from a sporting accident will do it. They were right it did cause a serious problem, but not for 20 years.
Not always quite true, I am ex Royal Signals, there is a reason that our stable belt is dark green, dark blue and light blue. By Land, by sea and by air. We supported not only the land forces but the RAF, RM,SAS and Paras , sometimes also the RN. I did P Company/ RN and Diver training became a Master Diver Royal Signals and was also offered my commission in the RN. Which I did find funny as I was constantly in conflict with my WRAC OC in charge of a combat sig squadron and saw so many STAGS and ROPs it was normal. So the idea that the support arms do not need to be of the same physical fitness as combat troops not true. Not only do they need to carry combat kit but also tech kit
I always find it kind of funny when people say that, because you don’t actually know where a CS or CSS soldier might end up. Yes a Medic in a Med Reg can probably get away with being a bit fat, but their career might take them to the MSU where they can not. A logie might be counting blankets or they might be going on supply runs through insurgent infested hinterlands to FOBs. A Gunner… well they always have to be fit don’t they, humping and dumping shells, but they might end up being a Forward Observer, embedded with infantry calling in strikes.
I’m ex sigs, (RTG) and thought exactly the same. The Signals standards were incredibly high compared to other arms of the forces.
Hi RTG, Just out of interest where did you do your training. I’m ex-Harrogate.
Hi Ron, I was Harrogate too. 82C. The RTG thing is my initials and trade, which was funny at the time.
What about yourself?
Rawson Sqn 79B TeleMech.
Go into a gas tent with asthma and you’ll find out why you aren’t selected
People with Asthma work in toxic atmospheric pollution every day in civi street with respirators, which is why the army is issued with them as well. The gas hut/tent is only to imprint on the squadie the need for getting the gas mask on quickly and to show its benefit. The gas in the tent is the same for all people, asthmatics are not effected any differently, CS gas does the same to everyone. Also these days Athma can be controlled by simple medication, its no different to somone who is short sighted and needs to wear glasses.
Also, I have never heard of an enemy assembling CS gas tents for our brave boys to charge into, because our Lads would avoid the CS gas by not going in the tent!?
Sense and sensibility, you are so right! Modern day armed forces do not need 100% Rambo style personnel. On the contrary!
So someone who is in logistics or support is ‘Never?????’ going to find themselves in a combat situation? An ammo dump or logistics hub never gets over run by enemy soldiers?
Even military bands persons train as combat medics and in firearms (SA80) In my day. We also still had to complete the fitness tests for runs, rifle shoots to the accepted standards. Otherwise you had to redo it.
Should you wanting to be in the military have pride in yourself and feel confident that your colleagues will have your back no matter what happens. The only real exemption for beards is the SAS when operating overseas depending on the mission.
My understanding has always been that there’s a limited % of the army that can be Foreign and Commonwealth at any point. So not specific pids, stand fast Gurkhas, but as in if more than 15% of the army is FC they’ll stop hiring FC to prevent the mercenary-fication of the armed forces. This is from the Army Jobs website:
Double posting because I included a link to the relevant website and that got it into admin hell:
My understanding has always been that there’s a limited % of the army that can be Foreign and Commonwealth at any point. So not specific pids, stand fast Gurkhas, but as in if more than 15% of the army is FC they’ll stop hiring FC to prevent the mercenary-fication of the armed forces. This is from the Army Jobs website:
Here here, refemeber on of my training Staffies from Harrogate, a Fijian a huge MF briliant at rugby and someone who us apprentice traidsmen trusted. All round good guy. So here to the Commonwealth troops.
Blooming spell checks.
If the British Army (indeed armed forces) have dreams of maintaining an Anglo-Saxon look it’s deluded. War in Europe is on the horizon, turning away able bodied volunteers, Commonwealth or whatever, is plain wrong. Reference the French Foreign Legion or some other International Brigade.
Wow. Okay.
So not what we’re talking about.
This isn’t about keeping a “Anglo Saxon look.” This is about keeping a army that is British Nationals rather than Mercenaries. Nobody is being turned away for being “brown” or “ethnic” or just “not having the Anglo-Saxon look”. But Pakistan spend the last twenty years actively supporting the Taliban, South Africa is pro-Russian, a large portion of Indians are nationalists who *hate* the UK. All of these are Commonwealth Countries. That is why there is a cap of Foreigners entering serive into the UK.
Even mentioning the FFL is a point against you: The FFL by it’s very nature is a small minority of the French Armed Forces. There are 9,000 Legionnaires, that’s about 7% of the French Armed Forces that are Foreign. Meanwhile in Britain the Brigade of Gurkhas alone makes up 5% of the entire Army, add in Foreign soldiers in regular pids and if you don’t cap the number at some point you have an army that might ultimately not be loyal to Britain.
The FFL a point against me? Pah!
The British Army sorely needs a unit similar to the FFL. Highly motivated, fit for a fight, no wokes in their ranks. Contrast the woke infestation of the British armed forces, low morale, low esprit de corps, shabby readiness levels, self inflicted low recruiting numbers, and you have a recipe for disaster. The disaster is already very visible.
Yes, I get you on undesirable elements, but the quest for bespoke recruitment, is just as undesirable.
Thank you for not bothering to read, makes you look pretty silly.
Is that because they have just had an intake if Ghurkas fly into the UK a couple of days ago.
They are fantastic and dedicated people. My old headmaster was an ex colonel of the Ghurka regiment and our school sponsored the building and ongoing financing of a school in Nepal. He was also supportive of me joining the TA as a bandsboy. I also had the good fortune to meet Ghurkas on a number of occasions. A very quiet and humble people, but boy could they move quietly. It is there level of dedication we need in all branches of our military.
Commonwealth countries… No vacancies. Really, so all the advertised positions are filled are they?
No they won’t be they just don’t have enough personal to train new people especially training Ukraine troops and going on exercises around the world to train more with NATO there not looking after our country and don’t care if we go war and no longer exist even though they’ve been moaning for months our army is not big enough and we need to build it up when they get the offer and alot more people to join there just saying no to basically all of them the country has gone way down hill we don’t even have houses to help the ex military people that are actually living on the UK’s streets but yet they can house foreigners straight away this country is an absolute joke and probably deserves to be blown up because that’s where we’re heading all our money goes everywhere else around the world they do not care at all
Must be a cap on non Brits joining the forces I guess. Bizarre that it’s so low though as way to many are being rejected for it.
No. There’s a certain % of the Army that Foreign and Commonwealth soldiers can fill up (I don’t know what it is off the top of my head), after that they start getting rejected so that the army doesn’t become a foreign mercenary force essentially.
They’re Commonwealth! They should be allowed to join with no restrictions as long as they’re up to the remaining physical and psychological standards.
No. They should not. Commonwealth or not (And being in the Commonwealth certainly does not mean that a Nation is on “Our Side”) they are still foreign Nationals and the Army should remain majority British citizens.
Well then don’t complain when you can’t recruit enough ‘majority British citizens’.
No? There two seperate issues and both can be complained about and resolutions sought. Are you even real?
National service! However everyone in national service doesn’t have to carry a weapon system. After training in a trade they can carry on into society instead of importing labour.
Loius and Dern,
Two reports have been leaked this week. One is the British Army Race Action Plan which deals with what to do with recriutment by race and the other on understanding diversity in the workplace. Both are MOD issued instructios. Have a read and then wonder at why people are not joining up.
If you have ab argument to make why not make it instead of asking me to imagine what your position is?
I have no idea what you’re talking about. I merely pointed it out as it might have been of interest. Evidently not.
Suggests that I should automatically share your opinion on it, and that you’d want me to? If it’s just an interest piece fine but it felt like you wanted a specific conclusion to be drawn.
It would also suggest that if I recommended a magazine article to you I am asking you to agree with me on it’s content, no matter how outlandish the comment might be. Why would I? I’m sure you’re more intelligent than to be thus lead without forming your own opinion.
Put it this way:
If you want to discuss it, tell me your opinions and then I can tell you if I disagree with them, or agree with them, and explain why I do. If you just show me an article then I’ll read it, but if you do not advance an opinion on it I’m not going to try to imagine your position.
Edit: And it would be foolish of me to try to imagine your position; since it would be uncharitable to assume we disagree, and perhaps pretentious to assume we’d have the same opinion.
Okay, I think. 🙄
Shame I’m glad I dodged a bullet when I applied at nineteen the rate of pay is about the same as someone flipping burgers at macdonalds
Apparently, returning military personnel to recruitment offices has been cited as boosting applications of late.
Amazing – none us on here would have guessed that…..no never.
Thing is yiu don’t need to improve % at each stage if pipeline much and rates of processing to make dramatic changes.,
Are they homeless , seems to be a lot of ex-forces living on streets !
Sad too say yes Portsmouth South MP had a wobblie about that very same Question Pete and he is a Labour MP who can see it with his own eyes
What, the applicants – or the military personnel found inside the centres? Either way, I wonder if any are adapt at push starting warships😌
Glad this has been highlighted and very interesting reading. The Medical standards are to high. We lose to many young lads for very silly reasons. At least if we keep these medical standards we wont have to worry about being conscipted.
Attitude, delinquency, weight, failed basic eligibility, crime, convictions. Etc etc etc It reads like a list of prime British manhood. Oh woe is the UK
Hmmm…anyone willing to wager whether artificial recruiting constraints will be revised/eliminated, once hostilities commence? 🤔😉
I wonder how many “british” citizens would try to scarper back to their original homelands once hostilities commenced to avoid fighting for this country
They will never leave, too many benefits. Will be a stream of lawyers waiting to tell us how it offends them, or is a breach of their human rights to fight for a foreign nation.
Can we just do it the old fashioned way, careers office, test, if passed test three days at a recruitment center, more tests including medical, results and then the offer if good enough. For me yes it was found I had an issue with my skin so RCT or REME VM was not possible instead AAC Harrogate and became a telemech. Great fun traveled the world and as a civie traveled even more leading $100+ million projects. Good training good possibilities. Remember meeting some guys from the French Foriegn Legion, they did some really bad things in earlier life, one was even ex SS, they were given a chance and many of those guys were really good at their job.
So here is an idea, for some people who have a low level criminal record, rebuild a Pioneer Corps. These persons sign a six year contract, if after two years of good service they can then go to a line Regt. If after nine years of good service the criminal record is wipped. People make mistakes some by being young and stupid, some by accident and some are just down right criminal.
It’s funny so many people get turned away but they are lacking capacity and was on about calling up civilians but I’m guessing if they had medical issues or wasn’t fit they would be turned away still ?
I’m 33 years old and have always been interested in the forces and wanting to be part of it but because I lost my left eye about 10 years ago to glaucoma I have no chance of getting in even tho my right eye is so strong which has been confirmed by doctors still no chance.
Even tho there completely under it and constantly looking for recruits hardly anyone has a chance.
I would give 100% as much as the next person but nope there not interested.
Army navy raf needs to be sorted out if you ask me there’s plenty of people out there willing to risk everything for our country but they refuse to take us.
Prior Service Check Rejection ?? Are we now rejecting people who have previous service ??
People do mature with age so someone who had issues when serving previously may just have needed a break to “grow up”
I think if someone has been discharged and told their service is no longer required that should really be a barrier to re-entry.
Depends on why!
I have seen good people with service no longer required because they stood up to the OC or CO for trying to do things with equipment that should never been done. I have seen SSMs leaving under the no longer required because his men were being pushed beyond tiered.I even saw once a Regt loosing over 30% of the man power from either buying themselves out or causing themselves to be discharged due to an officer trying to prove a point and a CO backing up the officer. I have even seen the following, a squaddie brought up on a charge in front of the OC, said squaddie refussing punishment and requested a court martial, brought up in front of the CO. CO refused the request, RSM totally confussed, seven days glass house, RPs had no idea what was going on. The reason this squaddie was told to stay on base at night when he was married with private quaters, no married quaters available and he went home after duty to his pregnant wife.
So as I said depends on why they were discharged.
Sure, but also people are discharged for drug abuse, for violence, etc etc. If you’re “getting yourself discharged” I think that’s pretty silly instead of signing off tbh. But each to their own.
I agree, drug abuse, violence etc should not have the possibility to rejoin but to say that ‘servicies no longer requried’ is a general no go might be wrong. Sometimes other reasons happens.
It does seem an unusually high figure of ex-service applicants being rejected – they can’t all have been SNLR psychos! 🤔
What on earth is this list of nonsense
Commonwealth – No current vacancies
23,763 Commonwealth applicants turned away due to “lack of vacancies”
Silly list of excuses that’s all
If you want perfection ask the “model” agencies
We need people who want to join and help people and yes fight if need be
Sexy looks and the ability to do press-ups is not a battle-winner
Let’s end this “Be the Best” recruitment rubbish
I’m ashamed of the way our armed forces are!
So you’ve decided not to bother reading the comments I take it?
Certainly have read the comments!
“discharged for drug abuse, for violence” etc.. fair enough
The rest are just silly and the definition of what makes a soldier, sailor, etc is being lost
Clearance – Piercings
Sorry Sir is my nose ring going to get in the way of pulling that trigger 🤔
And other stuff on that list is a pile of BS
Makes me sick to read daily about the armed forces being ruined
So thanks for confirming that you haven’t bothered to read the comments since if you’d had you’d have seen the bit where I specifically pointed out why there are no vacancies for Foreign and Commonwealth Soldiers and you’d have seen specifically the point where I said that a Nose Piercing is not something you’re application would be rejected for.
This one you mean –
And its still a load of BS
Its makes no sense at all to limit to what you say is 15%
” My understanding has always been that there’s a limited % of the army that can be Foreign and Commonwealth at any point. So not specific pids, stand fast Gurkhas, but as in if more than 15% of the army is FC they’ll stop hiring FC to prevent the mercenary-faction of the armed forces. This is from the Army Jobs website:
I’m from the Commonwealth
Commonwealth soldiers are, and always will be, an important and valued part of the fabric of the British Army.
Due to an unprecedented number of applications for a limited number of jobs, we are no longer inviting applications from Commonwealth nationals at this point but will keep the situation under review.
We thank all Commonwealth candidates and their sponsors for their patience and commitment in these uncertain times.”
End of the day we have an armed force’s that needs to be modernized, yet it riddles with way too many traditional nay-sayers, wokeness has crept in, and a lack of vision
What other excuse is next.. reverse the Women in the armed forces? sorry girls have to the sink at home is it..
These silly barriers and lists like the above of silly rejections need to be removed so we can
I don’t care if you are black, gay, and half-blind
Feel free to join up, proud of you for doing so👍
So you’ve copied and pasted it, but you’ve not bothered to engage with what I’ve said (And I suspect you’ve only read it now that I’ve specifically called you out on it and are now trying to retroactively justify yourself): Having too many foreign soldiers in the Army is, for obvious reason, a National Security risk and so it’s policy to keep a certain ratio of British to Foreign troops.
That is not a BS reason, it’s a very valid National Security Reason.
But tbh I don’t think you care about the reasons, you’re just looking for a reason to be Angry, and looking for straw man arguments to troll with.
BTW I refuse to believe you actually think half blind people should be in the armed forces, and if you do I suspect what you want isn’t actually in the national intrest.
Edit: The Hilarity of your “wokeness” comment while at the same time hamfistedly arguing for “woke” policies is simply beyond words. I can’t decide if you’ve got the biggest case of cognitive dissonance or just trying to troll as desperately as you can.
👍
Sky News today Sunday Grant Shnapps was furious with the Army about lower Security Clearance for the sake of Diversity and Inclusion he’s not a happy bunny
I question his grasp on the situation. SC is not something that’s required to work in the Armed Forces, it’s a fairly involved process that’s costs money and people are only put through when there is a need.
But he’s got a culture war drum to beat because that’s the only thing the Conservatives have left before the next general election as evidenced by the fact that he thinks “nobody should be offended by having to attend christian rememberance services.” Frankly, as an Atheist serving Regular, Mr Schnapps can take his opinion and shove it where the sun doesn’t shine, or he can look at having one more vacancy to fill.
SC protocol I had to be Pre Vetted, then Vetted for a job taking Documents from my base in Portsmouth up to Whitehall what a parlaver Every aspect of my life was put under scrutiny
Same. Also coming from a family that was separated hunting down the details of 2x the usual number of “immediate” family.
Being a Left footer (Catholic) but no Irish roots and it was the height of the troubles did raise concerns if it happened now I’d claim Human rights violation just too be a pain
Tbf, although as a godless heathen I’ve not really paid attention most of the time Catholics seem to be catered for. Stand fast when your in a field and the Padre claims to be holding a non denominational service for all faiths but still is Anglican so does a shitty job at keeping his stick “faith neutral” and all.
At least as a recruit there was a separate Catholic church for the papists. Godless heathens like me and other faiths had to get up earlier than everyone else to go to generic “ethics” classes to make up for our lack of hym singing lol
I never brought the faith which I was Baptised in to , into my time with the Navy didn’t feel the need too no tambourine bashing whilst I served if anything had happened the only thing that would seperate me from the rest was I’d be laid in the Catholic section not the Anglican section Whoopy Doo
“SC is not something that’s required to work in the Armed Forces”
Signals and EOD amongst others would disagree.
Transferring from Inf to MP took 9 months, I’d had a cousin named Kevin… around 1916, the Army had taken a profound dislike to him 😉
However, Civil Service are taking 3 months for basic security checks.
So your saying no SC is required to join. So that means that you have people joining that you have no idea about or their affiliations and could share things they learn I training like equipment short comings, actually ranges of weapons etc. Quite frankly that’s bonkers and has huge potential to be exploited.
Okay so you’re falling into the trap that they’re trying to set for the Layman:
SC is not a generic term for a background check, it’s a specific level of clearance that you can be given by the government (and its a government wide standard AFAIK).
Most soldiers will never get SC as most soldiering jobs do not require the in depth background check that SC entails, but they’ll still get a background check. Just a less in depth one, does that make sense?
Pte Atkins does not need SC clearance because the effective range of the GPMG is, frankly, pretty easy to find.
It nakes sense if you can actually excute background checks. But how do you do a background check for some one who.lives in Bangladesh, Pakistan, Zimbabwe, you get the idea theres a fairly extensive list of countries where it would be extremely challenging. Its easy to checks on Canadians or Australians for instance but you won’t hit diversity targets recruiting from these nations easily.
I had to be SC cleared for very basic access. And part of the security training they demonstrated how adversaries build a picture by collecting fragments of data. Its not just about equipment they capture names of people to target, so it may appear these new overseas recruits have no access to critical data but they can observer who maintains equipment for instance or can access part of the base and can pass this on so these people can be targeted in various other ways to get data. Of course these people aren’t looking for data on GPMG, but things like how effective is the latest active protection system, are sensors less effective is certain conditions, what if its not serviced on time. All little snips of data that can be used and could cost lives. They may target 10s of people using various techniques to get data from what may seem very benign situations.
Lastly in some countries its extremely easy bribe officials to falsify records, even ordinary citizens do it but throw in a deep pocketed state actors and effectively your background checks are worth squat.
So imo it’s bonkers.
The thing is if you can’t do a basic background check that will result in a failure of your application. I suspect it would fall under “Commonwealth Unsuitable for Entry”
So do you feel Rememberance Sunday is a Christian service ..and if so are you offended by it.
I feel making it a Christian Service is in violation of what King George V wanted it to be. I also think it is extremely disrespectful to any soldiers who have died on Operations who are not Christian (either because they are of another faith, Sikh Muslim etc or because they have no faith). So if Remembrance Day is about the dead it should be faith agnostic in order to include ALL who gave their lives, not just the ones who happened to be Christian.
If on the other hand Remembrance Day is for the living then it should still be a secular, rather than religious, service because: Forcing non-Christians to attend a Christian service is frankly a rather scummy move. Put an Atheist in a service as ask them to either sing along to hyms or bow their heads in respect and you’ve now put them in an extremely awkward position of either pissing off all the Christians around them or compromising their own beliefs, and to many Atheists that will feel like a underhanded attempt at conversion, which means that they’ll resent Remembrance Day as an attempt to force Christianity on them, rather than embrace it as a day of national mourning.
So I don’t find the idea of Christian services on Remembrance Day offensive in themselves, but I do find the idea that any Scale-A “lets all come together and remember the fallen” style event should have a religious component to be divisive and counter productive.
How would you feel if the Army said that Christian Soldiers (or yourself) had to attend Muslim Prayer sessions, and then the Imam said it was time for everyone to get on their knees and face Mecca as part of the Remembrance service? Would you feel that’s offensive?
My kid was rejected during the medical for some excema on his hands! Just ridiculous. He gyms a lot and is in good shape for a young man. They might be begging for intake soon if war comes closer.
The medical grounds rejection is not surprising, as it’s not fit for purpose! I mentioned this before but my eldest daughter went to join, but had had a bad back at the age of 15/16 or so! She was late 20s when she applied for the reserves and after a number of medical rejection due to this “serious back problem” (went to A&E at the time, quick Look, some pain relief and a few days off school, right as rain) and put up with an 18 month period with a lot of fighting against the shite online recruiting system, to include a letter to our local MP, she eventually got in! However after a couple of years of not doing much at the RLC Reserves next to Abbey Fields in Colly, she sacked it off and joined Essex plod, based at Clacton off all the bloody places! Crackton…..now that’s another story 😂
Got rejected for Army in 1985 and again in 1986 owing to nasal cavity op, minor surgery to open the cavities. Rejected immediately. Couldn’t reapply until late 86 when there were no vacancies that were of interest anyway.
Are the other services rejecting for similar reasons?
I was rejected 4 times over a span of 10 years due to medical reasons, beggars can’t be choosers and I certainly won’t be fighting for them if conscription comes knocking now…
I understand that applications run at @ 100,000 per year. So 25+% are rejected for the reasons set out. That still leaves @75000 not rejected, but we still fail to recruit the 10/15000 we need to maintain overall numbers. It’s the failure to convert those non rejected applications into actual recruits that is the biggest problem.
Google it. Only about 6-8% fail basic.
So presumably the rest drop out during the recruitment process?
I wonder how many would be declined if conscription returned.
Depends on whether they are needed or not. If there was actual conscription aka Ukraine, would the fact that you had a spliff in the last month stop you from being put to use to defend the Nation?
Afraid too say Brain they’d probably be a large proportion requesting Irish Passports claiming citizenship because their GGG cousin was from the emerald Isle
I am a Kenyan in London can I join the Army
So much for rehabilitation of offenders. 838 rejected due to criminal records. Unless they were rapists and murders I’m not clear why the armed forces would reject them.
238 rejected due to obesity, surprised it’s not more than that.
17,000 rejected on medical. Why was that? Not fit enough or underlying asthma, diabetes or epilepsy?
Does seem they are rejected so many that it is no wonder the armed forces are shrinking. Some of those individuals would be fine and would get fitter. They just need the opportunity to join and a longer basic training programme to get them upto the required fitness level. Blame modern society for the terrible health of the nation. I’ve known 14-16 year olds that struggle to walk up a hill.
+7000 rejected from the commonwealth as no vacancies or places.
Wtf? Is this because of governmental targets and Brexit?
The armed forces clearly have vacancies. Ergo this reason is just mind numbingly stupid.
It is presumably to maintain the Forces at a given %age so as to stop it turning into something of a mercenary force. Many Commonwealth countries and/or a large proportion of their citizens are not overly friendly. Although there are also a large number of individuals within the UK whose loyalty is doubtful.
I have been trying to rejoin for over 3 years. After leaving during the pandemic and not so much as a thank you for your service.
I’m unemployed, still keeping relatively fit and had my doctor’s make sure everything was in order medically.
The company that run the recruitment area need some serious evaluation.
Now nearing FTRS age of 40 I see no hope in keeping my pride in the British Army.
They have let me down medically even though I’ve been cleared and they continue to churn out excuses of why it takes so long.
It’s demoralising.
I’ve come across people who applied and were turned down for tattoos and 1 had a small dry skin spot on his arm, rejected medically saying he had exema , although never actually ever been diagnosed. I think the main issue for recruitment is capita at Trenchard line not doing there job correctly bring back the good old recruitment offices in the city’s and a doctor actually doing a proper medical and making a proper assessment wether the candidate Is fit for the role they are applying for Capita have had this all wrong since the day the took over recruitment
I think the military need to get real. The majority of roles are in support , not frontline. They can continue to let numbers drop or get real !!
I don’t get your point. Are you suggesting that there should be a lower entry standard for those going into support roles?
Essentially yes
In REME we were soldiers first, tradesmen second. We would have to defend our positions in combat. You don’t want individuals in support roles with poor fitness, poor eyeight, medical issues.
Many of our officers and soldiers serve in first line REME units attached to combat arms – my first posting was to the Scots Guards then equipped with FV432.
Not suggesting we do, all I am suggesting is a relaxing of the rules regarding support roles
The CS CSS Corps are still soldiers, so it would dilute the capability of the army quite badly.
What rules were you thinking of relaxing?
Given the current numbers , someone with a minor ailment , which does not affect them in normal life . Is knocked out of selection.
Frankly given the state of the armed forces recruiting nothing should be ruled out.
For example, I believe piercing is a down grade? Why if the person is willing to remove them,
It’s not a downgrade, as I’ve explained elsewhere having a piercing is not a barrier to entrance. It’s if you have a piercing that either can not be removed or when removed leaves large gaps (think a piercing that is designed to stretch a hole into your earlobe) that are grounds for rejection.
I’m not sure why. We are all soldiers and have to defend our tactical position, do stags, conduct standing patrols around our position etc. Most support soldiers in the Falklands conflict also had to to do a fair bit of tabbing.
I suggest that Capita and MoD set some realistic medical criteria for all and not reject applicants who had acne at 13 or 14 or broke a bone in childhood etc.
Support Role or not you still have to have the ability to be on the Frontline. You might join as a Medic with the idea of working in a DPHC facility in Cyprus or the UK but then a posting doesn’t go the way you’d hoped and you’re in an Infantry Multiple patrolling.
It’s the same for almost any capbage.
Then maybe it is time for some streaming, just a thought
No? First of all everyone in the army should be capable of picking up a rifle and taking the fight to the enemy.
Secondly “streaming” would be retention negative as it would mean a small number of personnel would permanently be in very high tempo jobs and would never have a break. Even Front-line Infantry can expect to spend a portion of their career in non-deployable roles in the UK specifically in order to give them: A) More predictable schedules, make time for their families and just experience a more or less normal life, and B) get a broader range of experience.
If you don’t allow the career opportunities to do that then you’ll have a force that consists of G1 issues and Burnout almost constantly. (It also would make career management in Glasgow even more of a nightmare than it really is. If you start streaming, again lets use Medics as an example, into ‘deployable’ and ‘non-deployable’ career streams, then if you *need* to fill a PID in 3 PARA because their high readyness Coy’s medic just signed off, the potential pool of people for that “must be filled” PID has just been halved.
In my experience there is a lot of fudging of people as “deployable”. In the Reserves few would be actually deployable.
That’s because you’re basically civilians. 😂
Why are few of our Reservists deployable?
It wasn’t that long ago that we had deployable TA brigades! eg 15 and 49 Inf Bdes, part of 2 Inf Div, with remit to fight the Russians in Germany if the Cold War turned hot! They regularly exercised in Germany alongside regulars.
Formed bodies of reservists deployed to Former Yugoslavia in the 90s and on Op TELIC in Iraq and Op HERRICK in Afghan.
There was only a very short period of time (2009-2011) that we only deployed TA/Army Reserve as individuals rather than formed sub-units or units, the exception being medical units.
Post July 2011, the TA/Army Reserve have deployed as formed bodies and as individuals topping up reg units.
MLD?
MLD – thanks – must be a new acronym. It was PES in my day.
When I was in Camp Bastion in 2008/9, the OC and the bulk of our FP Coy was from a TA Rifles company. I assumed they were all from the same company, but they could have been drawn from across that TA Battalion into a composite company – it’s possible.
I think the only examples of Army Reserve people who do in uniform what they do in civvy life would be largely the Medical units, but possibly also some HGV drivers. Most join the AR to do something well away from their civvy life.
I think it is right that the AR should provide both individuals and formed bodies to supplement the Regular army as required. I really don’t understand why for an 18-month period in the 116 year history of the Territorial Force/TA/T&AVR/AR, it was deemed to be the provision only of individuals.
Everyone should be capable of picking up a rifle and taking the fight to the enemy. …..Might be an idea of actually training people to do that. As a Reserve medic I fired a rifle once a year and “picked up a rifle” twice.
Even more time on the DCCT would help.
Maybe take some ownership of your ITR’s then? You’re also a reservist so a very different kettle of fish.
Take “ownership”? As a Reservist I can only do what I’m allowed to do. At the moment even Training Nights have been restricted, let alone anything else. I keep my fitness up, practise my nav in the hills and attend my shooting club….what else what you suggest…..
And that’s why I consider the Reserves, while fantastic for the individuals looking for something different, to be of limited value.
My experience is dated but in 2008/9, I was COS Camp Bastion. Our FP Coy was found from a Rifles Bn in the South West (Devon/Cornwall). OC was TA as were 2/3 of the Toms. They were excellent and prevented at least one attack on the base. They were far better then the all-Reg RAF FP Sqn that followed and who were in place for the ‘Battle of Bastion’.
Wonder if A will read that! He’d love it.
A or AB? Just to add to that, the TA OC Bastion FP Coy (and a good number of his Toms) had far more operational deployment experience than I (a Regular) had!
Airborne. He loves the Rock Apes with a passion.
I think we all do! They have even less significance since they gave up operating SAMs.
I never heard of anyone in the army that was not ‘weapons-trained’, except padres!
Fair point.
However, the regular REME workshop I commanded converted onto L85A1 SA80 in 1992, and of course I participated, although my personal weapon was the 9mm pistol.
I did not touch SA80 again until my pre-HERRICK training package in summer 2008, some 16 years later. The L85 would be my personal weapon on that tour. An extreme example of course of a regular not being very familiar with an essential piece of kit.
But whenever regular soldiers deploy there is a lot of new stuff to learn and old stuff to refamiliarise with. Everyone is rusty at the start of a tour in one way or another.
Reservists spend less time with kit, so will have less familiarity. That is fully understood. They are, where possible, generally located in the less intensive, less demanding part of the battle space. Back in BAOR days 15 and 49 Bde, both TA bdes, were responsible for the security of the Corps rear area. That made perfect sense.
I take your point although in my Reserve RAMC unit there were a number of female CMTs who would have had questionable fitness for patrolling, and zero actual medical/patient experience (the RAF insist on civ medical qualifications and actual employment) It made me wonder what use they would be in actual operations. They were cosseted by the seniors and got more promotions etc even when only CMT2s.(I was a CMT1/ILS/BATLS/CBRN Medic/Combat Health Duties and 15 years as an NHS ambulance service Tech). I got fed up, binned all my quals and transferred to the RAF as something else.Is that the Army’s loss. Who knows.
Again, reserves is a different kettle of fish, they’re basically civilians with an occasional weekend of training, they’re not going to be the equivalent of Regulars, and it’s impossible to expect them to be, and frankly probably why they never deploy formed units and just individual augmentees.
If there failed to gather soldiers from Britain we have people in Uganda who want to join british army
With Commonwealth, setting up a recruitment route to UK BritMil so that they could be prioritised towards gaps across the forces rather than just Army, might make sense. Just saying.
I wrote ‘recruitment route’ to supply manpower across the forces.
I did not write ‘direct’ route.
So 23,175 applicants were rejected for the year 23/24. So how many ‘successful’ applications were there?
If we were to make a hairbrained assumption that the 23,175 was a failure rate of 75%, that could mean that the Army in 23/24 received 30,900 applications in total.
Of that 30,900, there were 7,725 successful applications. Therefore… why is the British Army under-strength??? To me, it does not make any sense at all, other than the successful applications being deliberately held up?
If so, why, by whom, for what possible reason, and on who’s say-so?
Answers on a Post-Card to…
No Post-Card but army has been under-strength for years because poor Retention was a bigger issue than Recruitment. Outflow greatly exceeds Infow.
That’s bang on Graham. To be honest, I cannot help but wonder, if anyone has any real interest in why so many are looking to leave.
When some do decide enough is enough, I do know that it can take as long as 18 months from asking for a discharged, to actually getting a date to go.
When you leave HM Forces earlier than your service-end date is (PVR), you are asked for the reasons – this is known information – and might be on OS. It can be correlated to the Continuous Attitude Survey of all personnel (not just those choosing to leave).
Not sure what senior officers or Minsters do with the info – probably nothing as causes for disatisfaction are never addressed and come up time after time.
I PVR’d at the age of 53 in Sep 2009 – having put in my PVR application some 6 months previously.
I think all must be aware for the reasons service personnel leave under PVR. One factor that used to dominate was over-frequent, stressful and dangerous op tours (not a problem I experienced though) but this won’t be a reason now.
Its not just PVR. There are many service personnel that do ‘their time’ and choose not to re-engage. Many soldiers only do 4 years. Many officers do less than 10 years.
The problem is that the medical criteria is uniform across all services and assumes that all personnel will be required to yomp across Goose Green on a regular basis. Take ACL injury for example. Blanket bar on entry, even if a decade ago and after a completely successful reconstruction and rehabilitation. Total bar on entry for all services. This is ridiculous. ACL injury is commonly sustained playing rugby or other team-based field sports, the sorts of activities undertaken by otherwise ideal candidates.
One can understand why this might be a bar for infantiers and other combat arms, but for a radar operator in the navy? Or a drone pilot in the air force? For an education specialist or similar in the army? Absolutely preposterous.
ACL is just one example of a number of blanket bans for medical conditions, each of which assumes that all roles in all branches of the armed forces require all recruits to be as fit as a combat soldier. Others include asthma, dietary requirememts, skin conditions including sweat rash etc.
The reality is that if each role across all three services had their own role-specific medical criteria, many of those recently rejected could be contacted and offered roles where their medical issue wasn’t… Well wasn’t an issue.
But no. Far better to have blanket bans and face a recruitment crisis.
Bizarre.
You don’t need to be a picture of health to fly a drone. I’m sure that things could get looked into, like new regiments could come about in the future?
All who want to join…unless they are physically not capable…..get them signed up! asap . Increase army size.
Who fought and “won” the last two World Wars? White, working class soldiers and lower middle class junior officers in the main. What did they get out of it? Why would such people join now? To fight for an establishment that holds their values in contempt?
What a shambles….nothing works in this country anymore….
I’ve tried joining. I know they have their guidelines to follow. But they stopped me for headaches and said I have to wait 2 years. They are short of people and yet they are picky af
I’ve read some of the comments, back in the early 90s , the British military had a recruiting problem, they adopted quantity rather than qualify . Some recruits who joined were less than satisfactory. Across the infantry battalions they re training these guys after they’ve just come out of training. It’s a waste of time recruiting trash, each battalion needs to fill spaces and do the job in hand. I would say 4 of said recruits ended up in the officer’s mess as waitors instead on infantry company men.So I see why the military are picky ,you change for military not the other way round
I understand the Medical reasoning, I’m chronically ill and could do everything my mates could when I was younger in sport etc. I was middle of the road physically, however to sustain it over time under constant physical and mental stress I would breakdown quicker than others. Even when competing; it was only with medication eg despite being fit that I could take part normally. So fine in life on civvy street but my body would be unreliable when lives were at risk without support. Now I have quite serious conditions but I can appreciate how even the impact of minor conditions can be exacerbated in a military environment.
I realise that a good level of health is required for the special forces, but I question if some jobs really need to have people of the highest fitness. Drone flying for example, lorry driving, engineering and many physical jobs that are done on civi street are done by people who would not pass a military medical,or be of the right age etc.
There are many precidents in history where the wrong type, has ended up being a hero, Nelson & Douglas Bader did pretty well (even if they started in one piece, they made there impact disabled). And lets not forget that in the last two world wars the professional soldier was pretty much wiped out at the start (being super fit didnt change that), and the rest of the war was fought and won by ex civi’s who were by no means the perfect human specimen.
It’s just another drop in standards to try and recruit numbers, boils my blood when I look how the military numbers have been axed too a pathetic number, it’s a different world, and the military is dropping standards too please the left, robust uniformed motivated individuals is what is required
Are you sure about “dropping standards”? I was rejected for nonsense medical reasons which didn’t make sense. Had I signed up 10 years before, I would have probably got in with no issues.
If anything they’re only making their entry requirements even MORE difficult. And it shows now as they’re struggling to get recruits.
Recruitment not making targets, wars breaking out across the world and the defence ministers reaction is to attack existing soldiers by calling them woke. Good good. Can see how that will help recruitment …
I think it’s safe to say anyone that signed up to fight for their country deserves respect, not insults from their own government.
Not to mention retention, I know a lot of LGBT soldiers are having seconds thoughts about their service right now.
Why?
Because the SoSD seems very intent on stabbing them in the back due to the clamour of some retired dinosaurs so he can score culture war points in the election.
I doubt the electorate care that much about LGB soldiers so long as they are trained and effective. Just how many votes do these dinosaurs have?
Unfortunately the electorate doesn’t have much say on specific policies. So when the Minister decides he wants to screw over LGBT (yes Trans soldiers exist) before the next GE, which he seems to have decided to do given his announcement this weekend of a war on woke in the MoD, how many votes the Dinosaurs have is irrelevant.
It’s LGBT mate. As I said, Trans soldier exist.
I only highlight the T because LGB is used by some right wing groups who want to remove trans rights, and it’s a bit of a dog whistle.
I don’t think anyone who is LGBT expects special treatment, not beyond protection from harm that Cis-het people are not exposed to.
Pretty simple actually. Trans-women are women so they should use the women’s facilities, if they’ve not socially transitioned then they’ll still use mens facilities. Physical standards in the British Army is moot since the SCR and RFT are not gendered.
It’s not really complelex and it’s not asking for special treatment, just treatment as the gender people identify as (I notice you only pic on Transwomen not Transmen which kind of highlights a lot of the misogyny inherent in this debate, edit: Not saying that you’re actively or deliberately misogynist, just that the talking points raised are inherently so).
I’m sorry you hate the term Cis-Het, is it the Greek or the Latin that bothers you?
Let’s not bring “basic biology” into this because there’s nothing basic about biology and once you look into the Biology of sex you’ll find that it’s nowhere near as simple as transphobes like to pretend it is.
You don’t have the right to exclude transmen from your bathroom fortunately, the equality act doesn’t work like that, but even if it didn’t, how would you ever enforce it. You’ve said that medical transition is your bar, but unless you’re willing to stop every guy who looks a bit feminine for your taste, or every woman who looks a bit masculine and challenge them for evidence that they must carry 24/7 that they’re on HRT you’re out of luck (and even then, I think that’s incredibly cruel to both Cis and Trans people, for Trans people it’s a constant reminder of the fact they don’t pass yet, and I don’t imagine any teenage cis boy whose a bit feminine looking or teenage cis girl whose a bit masculine looking would be helped by allowing strangers to challenge them for some sort of “I’m not trans and I don’t need HRT” certificate.)
The point isn’t that you pick on transwomen, as my edit tried to point out, the point is that the TERF/GC/Transphobic argument inherently focuses on them. Like you said you don’t see a single story about Transmen competing, but you also don’t see any stories about Transwomen loosing in competitions, which they do, at a higher rate than Ciswomen. Both are non-stories, but because occasionally a Transwomen will win (because unless your standard is that a Transwomen must NEVER win at sports they occasionally will) it’s turned into a headline.
And cool, now we are reaching the point where, despite the fact that I specifically said I wasn’t calling you a misogynist you’re now resorting to the ad hominems against me.
See, and this is where you are being a dick, because I asked what part of Cis-het you object to, which you didn’t even bother answering, or even suggesting a term you’d prefer, instead only being snarky, but at the same time, you’ve gone and decided to be actually offensive by again calling Transwomen men. If anyone in this scenario is asking for special rights, it’s the Cis-Het guy who refuses to respect other peoples identities, while sitting on top of a tower of privilege crying that language exists that acknowledges the existence of transpeople.
I got as far as “slapping on some lipstick” sorry, but you’re a transphobic bigot and I’ve tried giving you the benefit of the doubt far longer than you deserve. You’ve done nothing but try to be offensive this whole time while I’ve tried to polite and give you all the rope in the world. But you couldn’t even manage a civil conversation.
I’ll respond to the bit I read which is more than you frankly deserve: Biology is not simple. This isn’t about what you wear or what you find attractive, it’s me pointing out the fact that there is a gradient between male and female, and that there are literally millions of people who biologically don’t fit into either camp without even going into self-ID.
No need to ramp up personal attacks between the both of you. I have something to say to both of you.
Hereward: You would learn a lot if you actually met and understood trans individuals in real life. The crazy, hostile activists in real life are not reflective of their intentions.
It is true that biology is simple, however expression is more complex. Almost everybody goes through a crisis of expression in some way at some stage.
If you know any trans individuals, it’s absolutely horrific how they’re subject to political football that they want no involvement with. You never hear from trans individuals directly in the media because they never have a voice. It’s always the most polarising and self-defeating activists.
Having a policy of being accepted from above and having the organisation facilitate that has an enormous impact on morale. Have you heard from the people directly affected?
Dern: The activists who scream TERF at every turn are unfortunately responsible for a large proportion of the political attacks which the trans University receive.
A male in the female bathroom and a female in the male’s are not the same and never have been the same. There are a silent majority of women who do not want trans women in the female bathrooms.
Any male who retains a reasonable level of fitness would crush at least 99% of females. This is a fact of life and biology. Why is it particularly dangerous for women to go out at night? Such danger is part of the female (and women’s ironically given trans are targeted).
This is precisely the moment where you lose all credibly with the public. Females should have a right to feel safe in a vulnerable position. It’s insane to tell females who fear males every single day that they have no right to that space. That’s taking rights away from females and giving away privileges.
In circumstances when the male has completely transitioned from a woman, this generally isn’t a problem (so it’s context dependent). A bloke with a wig on? No way. That’s insane.
I respect the pronouns of someone who’s making a genuine transition (vast majority of trans) but defending outliers who use it to access women’s spaces is inane. This is a tiny minority of trans who do this and the genuine trans have their images tarnished by this hostile ‘activism’ which makes them into political targets.
There are also people who are mid transition, but if you look like a bloke in a wig then you shouldn’t ve near the ladies’ bathroom.
Common sense is required here. I support the provision of gender neutral/disabled toilets (which is a fair thing to do). In fact, it should be mandatory if not in the equality act.
Get rid of Capita whose staff are civilians so cannot answer questions on military life. Bring back recruiting sergeant’s who can at least answer questions from a potential recruit based on the sergeants own experience.
Stop this woke agenda, although going into combat is unlikely, especially since we pulled out of Afghanistan, each squad needs to feel they can rely on ALL its members under any conditions, with none of this “I did not sign up for this!!”
Military life is hard, but you want it’s members to be as fit mentally as well as physically.
I know as I used to be in the TA for 12 years and while it was tough it was very rewarding.
Lots of issues here.Why are so many Commonwealth applicants rejected? Could it be that the Commonwealth is so diverse and that actually a lot of it has people who do not particularly share our values and that having a large number of such people could be unwise? We could favour some CW countries (Aus, Malta, Barbados to take random examples) over others but imagine how that would go down.
Nepal, from where we recruit Ghurkhas isn’t even IN the CW, although we could probably recruit twice as many as we do without much drop in quality, if any. The issue is that having Forces that seem to be effectively mercenaries isn’t good optics.
Medical standards is a thorny issue. Do we have a baseline and then raise that line according to arm of service? Does it matter what someone had in childhood if it isn’t relevant now? You could argue that it might become relevant in which case you are restricting yourself to almost perfect physical specimens; and the very people you might want in the Forces may have no interest in joining volunteer Forces.
In the Israeli Army even those hard of hearing can join up (or obliged to)…they are simply given jobs they can do. That goes against our philosophy of Soldier First but if there are too few people joining because of relatively trivial issues then compromises may have to made somewhere or we are “administering” our Forces to extinction.
I think you are being over-complicated. The info is in the table – there is no reason to speculate wildly.
Most Commonwealth applicants were rejected as there were more applicants than vacancies. 23,763 Commonwealth applicants were turned away over the 5-year period due to “lack of vacancies”.
In contrast, very few Commonwealth applicants were rejected as unsuitable – only 39 this year.
Medical standards – I don’t believe there is a different standard for different Arms and Services.
But instead of rejecting them ,they would put them awaiting ,its better than rejection
I fully agree. More than that, I think we should up the quota for non-British nationals as we have insufficient Brits stepping forward.
What does it mean failed basic eligibility? Seems a bit muddy.
I was in cadets from age of 12 to 17 always dreamed of going in army to follow in family traditions, but I was rejected because I had been sent to prison for 3 weeks when I was 19 for fighting over protecting my now wife from been sexually assaulted, tried again when I was 22 and they still said no, maybe I shouldn’t of told them as I know there are plenty of people who have done far worse and still got in!!