Seattle Proposes New Recruiting Rules


Seattle Public Schools is considering new rules that would significantly  limit access for military recruiters on high school campuses.  According to the Seattle Times,

The proposed rules mandate that:

• Recruiters be confined to designated areas on campus.

• All military recruiters wear uniforms.

• No private appointments be held between recruiters and students on
campus, and no private appointments be held when a student is due in

• Schools post recruiting rules and upcoming visits on campus throughout the year.

• Organizations advocating alternative careers to the military be
allowed on campus at the same time and in the same location as military

• Recruiters first receive written
permission to be on campus from the principal or a principal’s
designee. Recruiters must sign in and out of the school office at each
visit and leave clear contact details on any written information left

The proposal follows school-year activism on the part of the Garfield High School’s Parent Teacher Student Association (PTSA), and its co-chairwoman Amy Hagopian.  In May, the PTSA adopted a  symbolic resolution banning recruiters from campus.

"I applaud the fact that they are looking at this issue, and
appreciate the fact they took our field stance seriously enough they
examined districtwide policies," [Hagopian] said.

Hagopian added she would have liked the district to go further by
outlining its anti-discrimination policy to the military, which does
not allow openly gay soldiers.


8 Responses to “Seattle Proposes New Recruiting Rules”

  1. ToddBoyle Says:

    Suggested topics for School Board Resolutions regarding Military Recruiting on campus

    A. Scope and extent of visits
    B. Prohibition of omissions or misrepresentations in recruitment
    C. Affirmative actions for balanced information
    D. Privacy and choice in information disclosures
    E. High Schools administering the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB)
    F. Guidelines regarding pipelining of High School students to enlist in the armed services.
    G. Physical safety

    A. Scope and extent of visits

    1. Whereas Section 9528 of the ESEA requires high schools to admit military recruiters to the same extent as colleges or employers, and
    Whereas, this provision has resulted in frequent visits to some high schools in (district), and
    Whereas, frequent visits impose time and attention costs, financial costs and risks on (district) detracting from its educational mission, and
    Whereas, frequent and extensive visits can result in influence incompatible with local control over high school curricula (district),
    therefore, each high school in (district) shall set limits on the number of visits and the total hours of access by any college, employer, or the military. These visits shall not exceed 6 visits per school year, total 48 hours.

    2. Schools will inform recruiters of the expectations of this district, that they not counsel or induce any student to take any action against the law or code of conduct of the district or the high school.

    3. Schools will request recruiters not to induce or persuade students to drop out before graduation from high school, in order to join the military, and will take reasonable measures to monitor and prevent this practice.

    4. Meetings with recruiters during the student’s regularly scheduled class times, are to be regarded as absences and will not become a routine practice.

    B. Prohibition of omissions or misrepresentations in recruitment

    1. No employee of the District will knowingly allow omissions or misrepresentations by military recruiters in their presentations to students.

    2. Principals will inform teachers, staff and other employees of the nature of this problem and how to report any patterns of abuse they may observe.

    C. Affirmative actions for balanced information

    The District adopts a principle of affirmative action, to positively ensure that students receive balanced information about critical life choices involving the military.

    The District implements minimum standards to prepare students for critical life choices involving the military, and reduce the likelihood of errors, as follows:

    1. The district will develop brief conceptual elements and presentation aids such as booklets, charts, and multimedia which communicate effectively to students the personal costs and risks involved in life choices involving military service. These materials will focus on areas most susceptible to omission or understatement by recruiters intent on enlistment goals.

    2. The district will develop qualification standards, and record-keeping necessary to identify qualified presenters for the District’s balancing information elements.

    3. The district will implement procedures ensuring equal access to these qualified presenters, to meet with students to balance the advocacy of recruiters. (Note 1)

    4. The district will collect information from the qualified presenters sufficient to inform future decisions whether information presentations are necessary to all students, or can be limited to students who are involved in discussions with recruiters.

    5. The district bars JROTC curricula from high schools without detailed review by the school district and high school. JROTC curricula shall not fall below existing civics and history courses in completeness or balance, in elements such as citizenship, history, civil rights, or aspects of political participation. JROTC instructors shall be no less qualified or experienced, and shall hold no lower credentials or certification than other civics or history teachers.

    D. Privacy and choice in information disclosures

    The District establishes informed consent as policy, governing all releases of private directory information to military recruiters.

    Whereas, Section 9528 of the ESEA requires that “the local educational agency shall notify parents of the option to make a request, and shall comply with any request.”, and
    Whereas recruiters have contacted schools prior to September 1 in some districts, and
    Whereas the District cannot ensure compliance with Section 9528 without a schedule and procedures,

    1. Schools will inform parents and students of their choice in registration packets each year.

    2. One additional announcement will be made to parents and students informing them of their choices, not less than one week prior to releasing students’ names, addresses and phone information to recruiters,

    3. District and School computers will keep track of opt-out choices by parents or students, as a separate and discrete choice, without combining them with other privacy preferences.

    4. Parents will be required to specifically elect YES or NO on student enrollment forms, to the question of providing student information to recruiters.

    5. Parents or students will be allowed to change their YES/NO election up to the last 3 days before release to recruiters, and

    6. Schools will not release information to recruiters earlier than October 1 of each school year.

    7. Schools will not release information to recruiters unless requested.

    8. The district establishes recordkeeping to determine costs incurred in connection with Sec. 9528 opt-out choices, and the costs of mandatory disclosure of student names, addresses and phones to the Dept. of Defense.

    E. High Schools administering the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB)

    Whereas the Armed Services ASVAB test has increased the frequency of recruiters’ telephone calls, and the degree of insistence of recruiters calls to some students, and causes a degree of targeted or personalized sales that is inappropriate for minor children,

    1. Students shall be clearly told that they don’t have to take it. High schools shall provide students with alternative educational activities, if their classrooms are being used for testing.

    2. The District shall inform principals and teachers of the eight options regarding the release of test information. At one end of the spectrum is “Option 8. No release to recruiters.” Recruiters would not receive a printout of students’ scores. The default option for schools is known as “Option 1. No special instructions.” Under this option, recruiters are free to obtain scores and use them however they wish. In between these two extremes are a number of options specifying when recruiters may receive full information or whether they will be given access to phone numbers.

    3. Principals shall protect students’ privacy by keeping the test results from recruiters. This means that the school must tell the military before the test is given that it is choosing “ASVAB Option 8.” If a school chooses this option, students who want their scores to go to the military can still permit them to go to recruiters on an individual basis. (The military provides a special permission form for such requests.) However, it doesn’t work the other way around. If a school chooses to release information to recruiters, this information will be handed over for all students, removing choice from some students.

    F. Guidelines regarding pipelining of High School students to enlist in the armed services.

    Whereas the personal costs and risks involved in military enlistment are categorically different than other career or educational options available to students,

    1. No district employee shall recommend or advocate the military enlistment option to students under the age of 18.

    2. No information or counseling about military enlistment shall be made available on an ad-hoc basis, without the concurrent presentation of balancing information required in sections B. and C. above.

    3. Principals shall ensure that teachers and counselors are made aware of these provisions, and shall ensure that the necessary for addressed.

    G. Physical safety

    Whereas military recruiters are often adult males, and
    whereas students may regard uniformed military members as persons of authority or special trust, and be particularly vulnerable to them, and
    whereas recruiters interact with students extensively both on and off campus, at times and circumstances not limited to normal school hours, now,
    therefore, the District establishes as policy, that schools in this district will protect students’ safety in their dealings with recruiters on campus, and establishes guidelines to minimize the possibility that a recruiter assault or sexually exploit any student undetected:

    1. Schools will maintain a record of the identity of each recruiter visiting the school, and as a minimum, the school will contact their military command and confirm whether that service member has had any prior offenses before or during their military service.

    2. Schools will require advance notification before visits by recruiters to the school, and maintain a log of the times, dates and recruiters involved in the visits.

    3. Recruiters will be restricted to designated locations, and not permitted to move about the campus unaccompanied by a teacher or staff. Designated areas will be publicly visible, such as student centers or cafeterias; private offices or conference rooms will not be provided.

  2. Recruiter Says:

    “3. Schools will request recruiters not to induce or persuade students to drop out before graduation from high school, in order to join the military, and will take reasonable measures to monitor and prevent this practice.”

    An individual CAN NOT enlist unless they have graduated High School, have their GED or the school certifies that they will graduate on time. If they drop out the individual will NOT SHIP to their Basic Training! Do some research!

    As for the safety of students:
    “ a minimum, the school will contact their military command and confirm whether that service member has had any prior offenses before or during their military service.”

    If the recruiter has been convicted of sexual assault (or greater offense) before or during their military service they would not be in the military………

    Shouldn’t the school be required to do the same thing for all college recruiters? If you want to make rules for Military Recruiters you have to make it even across the board for ALL recruiters of ANY kind. Whether it be for the Military, college, civilain employment, Boy Scouts, YMCA, whatever.

    Last I checked this IS a free country….. nobody’s holding a gun to a kids head and making him sign. If you actually looked into what it takes just to join the miltary you’d understand that it’s a LONG process and isn’t easy. Nobody is forcing anybody to do anything.


  3. Todd Boyle Says:

    Recruiter, all your points are distractions or worse.

    Your paragraph “An individual CAN NOT enlist unless they have graduated High School, or have their GED…” for example. Do recruiters care whether a kid is a dropout with a GED or waits til June to graduate? No. Cases have been reported where recruiters encouraged kids to dropout. Do some research yourself. There are 300 RI’s a year from Army and if you extrapolate to the other branches there may be around 1000 flat-out irregularities like the McSwane case, etc.

    Why does the suggested policy scare you? Do you think it would affect recruiting?

    Clearly you’re more interested in throwing chaff into the air to distract readers.

    Similarly you said “If the recruiter has been convicted of sexual assault (or greater offense) before or during their military service they would not be in the military………” Would you like to wager on this? I will concede the point, the military does perfunctory background checks on recruits. You will also concede that the military recruits large numbers of indicted but not convicted criminals, where judges accept military service in plea bargains. Furthermore would you please inform us of the percentage of women in the military who report they have been raped or sexually harassed. You seem like a well-informed guy. Then pencil back to the number of convictions. Even the Pentagon realizes there is a problem here, not only getting a conviction but repeat offenders.

    Finally you said “Last I checked this IS a free country….. nobody’s holding a gun to a kids head …”

    That’s fine when you’re talking about adults. But we’re talking about high schools, we are talking about underaged minors who are entitled to reasonable protections against unethical recruiting tactics, misleading and emotional appeals in advertising, and omissions and misrepresentations by recruiters.

    High schools are not Caveat Emptor, middle eastern bazaars. And the high schools have no obligatino whatsoever for the national defense and neither do underaged minors. Recruiters should NOT be within 1000 feet of a high school,

    Todd Boyle
    Washington Truth in Recruiting

  4. Army Soldier 05 Says:

    Mr. Boyle,
    I would like to point out that your logic in this case is close to on track, and we se where you are taking it. But in the same light, how many females in business and industry have been sexually assualted or raped? How many college students report sexual assault or rape? That is a plague on our society as a whole. It is not a problem in the military as extreme as you would have it appear. It is an extreme problem in all aspects of our culture.
    Secondly, to quote you “..where judges accept military service in plea bargains,” is a total and blatant lie. Truth in recruiting? Here it is, and don’t take my word for it, look it up on the USAREC web site, Army Regulation 601-210, Ch. 4-4, c(2), strictly and specifically prohibits the enlistment of any persons who are granted release from charges at any stage of court proceedings if they will apply for and be accepted for enlistment in any Armed Forces are not qualified for enlistment.
    As for perfunctory background checks, where are you resources? It is mandatory that criminal history is checked in all cities, states, and counties the applicant lived, worked, or went to school in the last 7 years if there is sufficient reason to suspect or known criminal history/offenses. Seeing as how the Department of Defense grants all security clearances in association with the NSA and its executive affiliates for everyone in the United States, these checks are more than mundane and routine skims of one’s record. Seeing as a Federal investigating body, expunged charges/records, “sealed” juvenile records, are still open for our investigation. The entire military deals with classified and FOUO information on a daily basis. We are a little more careful with who we trust with this information, by conducting thorough background checks. How many of your coworkers have a criminal history? Do you hold that against them? So, is it your belief that criminals have no right to hold a job or have the freedoms you do?
    High school students, all Americans, have a responsibility to National Defense. An obligation to continue to keep our country and her interests safe. It seems that many people in your organization have severe personal issues with the system, much as we do. I do not think someone with a GED is necessarily qualified to join the military, and certainly, we do not encourage drop-outs. If someone fails to graduate, we must administer extra testing to deem their caliber and mature standing for service. If someone does not have the dedication to complete a simple task such as high school, what makes the military think they would honor an enlistment.
    The issue is not recruiting ethics. Because you do not complain about emotional appeals advertising for consumer goods. It is a deep seeded issue with the military you harbor. Only my opinion. Thank you for your time.

  5. prior recruiter Says:

    To Mr. Boyle

    Your comment at the end of your statement is clear enough of your political view and agenda. “Recruiters should NOT be within 1000 feet of a high school”. I did my service as a recruiter. I find that your lack of information on how recruiters are selected for service and the rules, regulations and policies (both from the Army and the local High School Districts) to be rather lacking.

    First: All High Schools have career counselors and events. The Army (military) are not the only ones on campus trying to enlist young people. (How many college sport programs violate school policies and rules, to the extent where the coaches are fixing grades?) You do not give these young students (or their parents) any credit. Most are highly informed and are quite aware of the potential high cost of military service.

    Second: It would be self-defeating for any military recruiter to encourage a student to drop out. The mission given is not for a drop out. The mission is for a High-school Graduate or higher. A GED normaly (during the school year) requires an exception to policy. So for a recruiter to spend time on an unqualified applicant is not productive.(believe me when I say that recruiting is all about production).

    Third: As for the previously stated “changes” in the Seattle education system for recruiters: The schools I recruited in had those policies already written. I was required to check in with the educational counselors every visit. I was allowed to place my information booklets in the same place as everyother employer/college. The ASVAB was school sponsored and the information was used by the school counselors (the interpretation for careers and further education possibilities was paid for by the US Army, thanks for your tax dollars). The school could either opt to not have the names and numbers released to the Army or not. My school allowed it, some did not. That is up to the local school board.

    Fourth: Yes, I do realize that there are judges that will ask if the individual is entering military service and reduce or eliminate the judgement against that individual. However, the recruiter is required to ask (and is unauthorized to intervene on the applicant’s behalf) if they have been: cited, charged, detained in any way by any law enforcement agency to include Dept of Wildlife, Military Police, or any other law enforcement agency you could possibly think of, at any time and anywhere. Regardless, the recruiter is required to run local, state, county, township, parish law enforcement checks everywhere the applicant has lived for the last seven years. Even if the applicant gets through this screening (and it is only a screening tool) the local Department of Investigative Services runs a complete check and many are eliminated in Basic because of this. Further, it strikes me odd that you do not think that anyone that has any type of a background issue would not deserve a second chance! HMMMM.

    Fourth: Recruiters are also required to go through the same process before going to the Recruiter School at Ft. Jackson. If there is any problem, they do not go. That is all I have to say about that.

    Fifth: During the American Civil War, The Revolutionary War there were children on the front lines. They were drummers, runners and many other positions. The rights and freedoms we enjoy in the United States of America are everyones responsibility to protect and defend.

    Additional Comments:

    I would be interested in knowing where you stand on the legal age of voting? Do you believe, as some do in California that children as young as 16 should be allowed to vote? Or, since you say that these children that are being recruited are underage minors, do not understand and have knowlege of the greater world and therefore do not understand or have the ability to make rational decisions? Then sir, at what age do you think that one would have that ability?

    Last: I agree that there are some recruiters out there that bend the rules and some that even break the rules. This happens in not only recruiting, but also happens in regular business. My father was recruited, as an electrical engineer, to leave one job and state to work for a competing employer in another state. He was garunteed that he would recieve twice his current pay and that his moving expenses would be covered. He was not told that the cost of living was three to four times higher and that he would have to commute to work two to three hours one way. The Army as well as the other military services, enforce the standards of conduct to the letter. Yes there are hundreds of Recruiter Investigations each year. I had one done on me, only one in 36 months, and it came back negative. The young man had simply changed his mind about joining the Army and was looking for a way to save face with his family. My point is that these Recruiter Investigations are thorough and complete. If a recruiter is found at fault, he/she could face discharge or jail. You seem to be very familiar with the system, look it up and find out the statistics yourself. You sir, say that that the the “recruiter” listed above was putting chaff into the air to cloud the facts. I find sir, that it is you that are not being completly truthful and are giving only one side of the issue.
    Thanks for your support of our great nation.

  6. Recruiter Says:

    Army Soldier and Prior Recruiter,

    I was going to respond to Mr Boyle but you guys said everthing that I was going to say. Thanks for sticking it to ’em!


  7. JAMES Says:


  8. sisam jarrer Says:

    Thank you.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: