On April 1, 2025, the Government of Canada introduced a significant pay increase for members of the Canadian Armed Forces. The objective was clear: improve retention, slow attrition, and rebuild the strength of the force after years of shortages, recruitment difficulties, and public concern about the CAF’s ability to meet its operational commitments. This raises a direct and important question that frames the core purpose of this article. Will the April 1st pay increase, along with any subsequent adjustments, actually retain soldiers?
This article argues that, although it may help at margins, pay raises will likely not be sufficient alone in addressing the CAF’s retention issues without resolving deeper structural challenges that disproportionately affect early-career members.
The primary challenge in answering this question is that there is not yet enough post-increase data to measure whether the 2025 raise has produced measurable improvements in retention. The available evidence, however, allows us to examine the likely directions of the impact and the conditions under which higher pay does and does not influence decisions to stay.
Drivers of Attrition
Structural issues dominate the Canadian military’s root causes of attrition, and pay is not one of those listed causes. A September 2025 DND report examined some of these factors over the past few years. That report showed that previous pay increases for specific trades, including earlier increases for pilots, did not clearly improve retention. Instead, the causes of attrition were overwhelmingly structural.
These included training delays, difficulty adapting to CAF culture, geographic relocation patterns that destabilize families and partners, dissatisfaction with institutional processes, limits surrounding pension eligibility, and the absence of coordinated retention programs that support early-career personnel.
Early-Career Attrition and International Evidence
Most attrition in Western militaries happens early in the career. The RAND Corporation’s research on the United States military provides useful parallels. Their research found that while pay increases improved retention, they also did not alone explain the full picture. Personnel across both enlisted and officer roles, and across varying trades with different pay levels, all saw retention rates at similar rates, suggesting that pay itself did not drive much of the attrition.
Their data showed instead that, just like in Canada, retention problems are concentrated in the first few years of military service. In other words, early-career soldiers are the most vulnerable to leaving for structural reasons, not because of low pay. Military members are also found to compare their pay to civilian labour markets, but this comparison occurs in a broader context that includes personal motivations, job satisfaction, institutional culture, and family considerations.
Motivation and the Limits of Money
Pay alone does not address the motivations of early-career forces members. We need to ask what motivates early-career soldiers to join, and what motivates them to stay. Evidence from Scandinavian militaries helps illuminate this. Research on Swedish and Norwegian soldiers shows that early-career motivations often begin with curiosity, a desire to test themselves, and the appeal of a challenging and meaningful experience. These motivations differ from the long-term incentives that guide career military personnel. Scandinavian recruits often do not join with the intention of serving ten or twenty years. Instead, they join to explore something new and interesting in their lives. If soldiers initially join out of curiosity or short-term interest, how can Canada convert those motivations into durable, long-term reasons to remain?
The Scandinavian research also illustrates the pressures that push early-career soldiers out. Distance from friends and family, limited job opportunities for non-military partners, the emotional and financial strain of frequent relocations, and the difficulty of maintaining social networks are central drivers of attrition. Pay only becomes a significant factor later, when it transforms into a demotivating force if it remains comparatively low. Applied to Canada, this means that improving pay may reduce dissatisfaction, but it will not fully counterbalance the structural difficulties that young soldiers face. If new members struggle with long training waits, lack of clarity about their career progression, or challenging cultural environments within their first units, higher pay will not necessarily keep them in uniform.
Attrition: Not a Generation Problem
Attrition in the CAF is also not necessarily a reflection of the job discipline of young people. While it might be assumed that high attrition in the CAF reflects general labour behaviour among young Canadians, such as higher mobility or lower job tenure, this is not what the data shows. A 2023 Statistics Canada report found that job tenure has increased modestly over recent decades for Canadians.
Even among young workers, who have the shortest tenure, the trendline has moved upward. This means that the CAF’s retention challenges are less likely to be driven by generational attitudes and more likely to be rooted in the institution itself. The problem is not that young people will not stay in jobs; it is that the CAF clearly has structural issues that prevent people from making the armed forces into a long-term career.
Economic Timing
That said, the recent pay increases may have been timed perfectly for Canada’s stagnating economic environment, especially for youth. Recent increases in youth unemployment in Canada mean that young workers now face a particularly difficult entry-level job market, especially in major cities. This shifts the calculation for younger CAF members: instead of competing with a variety of attractive civilian opportunities, the CAF is now positioned as a stable and relatively well-paying alternative. As a result, we may actually see attrition decline among the youngest recruits, at least in the short run, who may view staying in the military as preferable to reentering a challenging civilian job market. In this sense, the pay increase interacts with the broader economy. However, this benefit is short-sighted if the fundamental goal is to maintain retention.
Was it a Mistake?
That said, if pay is not a significant driver for retention, did the Carney government make a mistake in pursuing it as a policy? Not necessarily. Pay increases are important in making the Canadian Forces a more competitive place for new recruits while improving the lives of those currently serving. The increase will likely improve morale and perceptions of institutional fairness. Compensation is deeply symbolic: it communicates value and commitment from leadership, which can still influence decisions to stay even if pay is not the central motivator. Beyond that, assuming other aspects are also addressed, higher pay means that CAF members can more viablely build a career and life around serving, instead of looking elsewhere to make a living.
Ultimately, the April 2025 pay increase is an important step, but only one part of a broader solution. Pay can support retention, especially in the present labour market, but it cannot compensate for institutional problems that drive early-career attrition. What Canada needs is a clearer understanding of why people join in the first place, what experiences shape their first years of service, and what conditions give them strong reasons to stay. Only then will compensation work as intended.
Photo: Canadian soldiers of the Royal Canadian Regiment at the Yavoriv International Peacekeeping and Security Centre in Ukraine. via ANTON SKYBA / The Globe and Mail
Disclaimer: Any views or opinions expressed in articles are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the NATO Association of Canada.
