Author Topic: Officer positions  (Read 27505 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline DustintheWind

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Full Member
  • *
  • 7,105
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 455
Re: Officer positions
« Reply #25 on: December 17, 2008, 10:27:51 »
So the bottom line: Desk work is inevitable, even as Combat Arms :D

Offline Old Sweat

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 137,450
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,856
Re: Officer positions
« Reply #26 on: December 17, 2008, 10:47:57 »
Also for your knowledge, right now and for the next year, we have an abundance of young Officers, and another 24 slated for EACH Regiment next summer (we just had our career manager brief) so that is a shitload, seeing as we used to get like 5 or 6 at the end of summer from the phase 4. So because of the influx, you might not get any Troop leading time, or your Troop leading time might be spent in Wainwright, in charge of of enemy force for 6 months, like some of the people that are doing it (from all 3 Regiments) now.

Is this systemic? This type of situation has been around for decades. In the early sixties in Gagetown there were RCD officers in the Black Watch commanding platoons because there was a shortage of junior infantry officers and a surplus of armour infantry officers in 3 CIBG at the time. In the mid seventies when I was in the artillery school my colleagues in the armour school were faced with the prospect of producing too many subalterns who would never command a troop in an armoured regiment. This also was the situation in the late seventies when I was in the individual training shop at FMCHQ; each year the NDHQ forecast requirement for armoured subbies was totally off the wall compared to the ability of the army to train and employ them. In the last case at least this apparently was based upon the large number of unfilled positions in the ranks of armoured captains and the attempts by the centrailized personnel system to address the shortage.

Offline dapaterson

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 238,125
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,694
Re: Officer positions
« Reply #27 on: December 17, 2008, 11:11:49 »
Problem is, a shortage of Capts today requires recruiting too many subbies so those positions can be filled in the future.  Things will get worse before they get better; there are stresses throughout the officer and NCM corps of the Regular and Reserve Forces.

So more junior folks underfoot for the foreseeable future, who need to be shaped and formed.

Part of the problem today is that when we did FRP and its realted reductions in the 1990s we fired all the long-term HR planners.  So people who looked and saw all their Capt positions were filled said "No problem", instead of noticing that their Capts were aging badly and there was no pool coming up behind them.

Promotion rates in 08/09 for certain ranks and trades are alarming; the experience deficit is getting larger.  Interesting times, to say the least.
This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Offline DustintheWind

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Full Member
  • *
  • 7,105
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 455
Re: Officer positions
« Reply #28 on: December 17, 2008, 11:27:18 »
Problem is, a shortage of Capts today requires recruiting too many subbies so those positions can be filled in the future.  Things will get worse before they get better; there are stresses throughout the officer and NCM corps of the Regular and Reserve Forces.

So more junior folks underfoot for the foreseeable future, who need to be shaped and formed.

Part of the problem today is that when we did FRP and its realted reductions in the 1990s we fired all the long-term HR planners.  So people who looked and saw all their Capt positions were filled said "No problem", instead of noticing that their Capts were aging badly and there was no pool coming up behind them.

Promotion rates in 08/09 for certain ranks and trades are alarming; the experience deficit is getting larger.  Interesting times, to say the least.

Would you say that this means the CF would want MORE or LESS officers in the future to balance out the experience through the ranks/years?

Offline Michael O'Leary

  • The moral high ground cannot be dominated by fire alone, it must be occupied to be claimed as held.
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 258,975
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,522
    • The Regimental Rogue
Re: Officer positions
« Reply #29 on: December 17, 2008, 11:53:26 »
Would you say that this means the CF would want MORE or LESS officers in the future to balance out the experience through the ranks/years?

The CF wants enough officers.    ;)

Keep in mind it's a double-edged sword.  The last really big surge for the combat arms was in the early and mid 1980s, and many of those officers have now or are releasing at 20 and 25 years of service, which has compounded the usual attrition rates.   Because of the cyclical nature of these surge intakes, the chances of advancement changes with the size of the cohort you are part of.  If you consider that each generation (of a few years breadth) must produce a generation of generals, any one officer's chances are (proportionally) better in a recruiting period of small intakes.  In periods of large intakes, the bar may seem lower to get in the door, but it's also proportionally higher at each successive advancement checkpoint with larger numbers of officers competing for each level of promotion.  A given officer who may progress within a lean recruiting era cohort may simply miss the numerical windows within a strong cohort.   Large recruitment cohorts produce large numbers of staff Captains and Majors because they have the relative population density to fill those billets and still provide their contribution to the promotion stream.  But those officers all age together and the bulk of them may release within a similar spread of years.  And the cycle begins anew.

So, while you may have glorious visions of going over the top, sword in hand, you should also read this.

And if you're fated to be a captain, it's not so bad:

Quote
"Captain is such a dashing title. I've always thought." She gave him a bright, brittle smile. "I mean, colonels and so on are always so stuffy, majors are pompous, but one always feels somehow that there is something delightfully dangerous about a captain." - Terry Pratchet, Guards, Guards

Offline DustintheWind

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Full Member
  • *
  • 7,105
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 455
Re: Officer positions
« Reply #30 on: December 17, 2008, 11:56:48 »
The CF wants enough officers.    ;)

Keep in mind it's a double-edged sword.  The last really big surge for the combat arms was in the early and mid 1980s, and many of those officers have now or are releasing at 20 and 25 years of service, which has compounded the usual attrition rates.   Because of the cyclical nature of these surge intakes, the chances of advancement changes with the size of the cohort you are part of.  If you consider that each generation (of a few years breadth) must produce a generation of generals, any one officer's chances are (proportionally) better in a recruiting period of small intakes.  In periods of large intakes, the bar may seem lower to get in the door, but it's also proportionally higher at each successive advancement checkpoint with larger numbers of officers competing for each level of promotion.  A given officer who may progress within a lean recruiting era cohort may simply miss the numerical windows within a strong cohort.   Large recruitment cohorts produce large numbers of staff Captains and Majors because they have the relative population density to fill those billets and still provide their contribution to the promotion stream.  But those officers all age together and the bulk of them may release within a similar spread of years.  And the cycle begins anew.

So, while you may have glorious visions of going over the top, sword in hand, you should also read this.

And if you're fated to be a captain, it's not so bad:


Good link. I am not joining the Combat Arms family solely for the chance to fight. It just seems more of the getting out and doing things area.

As for hitting the wall at Captain (which I am sure is not that bad...), I will worry about that down the road.. far down the road  ;D

Offline Rowshambow

  • Member
  • ****
  • 455
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 191
Re: Officer positions
« Reply #31 on: December 17, 2008, 12:09:45 »
Old Seat and DA got it right on the head, we need Capt's, so hire lots of young'uns and hopefully down the road we will have enough that stick around! Sucks if you don't get troop time, but we need staff officers too! Oh just as a side note old sweat, we have 2 LdSH(RC) Officers that are going to 1 PPCLI to fill voids in the LAV Capt roll, both are excellent choices, and both are ex rankers, one a Sgt and one an SSM!
Yes remaining a Capt is not so bad, 10 incentives!
Let's play hide and go f^*k yourself...I'll go hide!

Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 87,805
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,349
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Re: Officer positions
« Reply #32 on: December 17, 2008, 17:10:08 »
Old Seat and DA got it right on the head, we need Capt's, so hire lots of young'uns and hopefully down the road we will have enough that stick around! Sucks if you don't get troop time, but we need staff officers too! Oh just as a side note old sweat, we have 2 LdSH(RC) Officers that are going to 1 PPCLI to fill voids in the LAV Capt roll, both are excellent choices, and both are ex rankers, one a Sgt and one an SSM!
Yes remaining a Capt is not so bad, 10 incentives!

Good point. We also need to get over our traditional reluctance to give deserving NCOs 'battlefield promotions', as well as make better use of the CFR process. It's an army folks, not a private club.
"The most important qualification of a soldier is fortitude under fatigue and privation. Courage is only second; hardship, poverty and want are the best school for a soldier." Napoleon

Offline recceguy

    A Usual Suspect.

  • "Look, I don't know if shooting penguins will help the environment or not. But I do know that the decision shouldn't be in the hands of people who just wanna kill for fun."
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 156,142
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,275
  • doddering docent to the museum of misanthropy
    • Army.ca
Re: Officer positions
« Reply #33 on: December 17, 2008, 19:10:09 »
Everytime I see this thread title in unread posts, I think - 'bent over a table' or some such. :blotto:

Sorry, probably the old NCO coming out in me. Now you can go back to the serious discussion. ;D
If I were to live every day as though it were my last, the body count would be staggering

DISCLAIMER - my opinion may cause manginal irritation.

Offline pbi

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 30,450
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,624
Re: Officer positions
« Reply #34 on: December 21, 2008, 08:54:26 »
Good point. We also need to get over our traditional reluctance to give deserving NCOs 'battlefield promotions', as well as make better use of the CFR process. It's an army folks, not a private club.

This is already happening. In the PPCLI we are in the process of CFR several quite senior WOs, and we have a number of junior officers who were in the JR's. I have 25 years in the Regt and I've never seen this high a percentage of CFR and NCM entries as we currently have. This is not just true of the PPCLI: when I was teaching at Foxhole U, I noticed the higher percentage of CFRs and NCM entry Capts in each serial. In one of my syndicates the top candidate was a former Inf Sgt Maj. This is driven to a great extent by the shortages at the Capt/Maj level in the Inf, but it's sustained by the extremely high quality of NCMs we have in our Army. Man for man, the human material is at least as good as any other Army I've seen and probably much better. With the much more liberal and intelligent approach to providing formal higher education today, if a guy CFR's young enough he can probably have similar chances for advancement to any other officer with equal number of years left to serve.

We have to be very careful,though, not to rob Peter to pay Paul. Each sharp, capable young NCO who commissions is one less great WO, Sgt Maj or RSM. Our NCO situation is, if anything, as dismal or worse than our officer situation, so we need to be careful how we cherry pick. Service as a WO must be seen as a respected, honoured and valued path, not just a stepping stone to the Officers' Mess. Without a solid NCO/WO corps we will be useless.

Cheers

pbi
The Nation that makes a great distinction between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting done by fools. ...

The true measure of a man is what he would do if he knew he never would be found out...

Offline DustintheWind

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Full Member
  • *
  • 7,105
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 455
Re: Officer positions
« Reply #35 on: December 21, 2008, 09:03:53 »
This is already happening. In the PPCLI we are in the process of CFR several quite senior WOs, and we have a number of junior officers who were in the JR's. I have 25 years in the Regt and I've never seen this high a percentage of CFR and NCM entries as we currently have. This is not just true of the PPCLI: when I was teaching at Foxhole U, I noticed the higher percentage of CFRs and NCM entry Capts in each serial. In one of my syndicates the top candidate was a former Inf Sgt Maj. This is driven to a great extent by the shortages at the Capt/Maj level in the Inf, but it's sustained by the extremely high quality of NCMs we have in our Army. Man for man, the human material is at least as good as any other Army I've seen and probably much better. With the much more liberal and intelligent approach to providing formal higher education today, if a guy CFR's young enough he can probably have similar chances for advancement to any other officer with equal number of years left to serve.

We have to be very careful,though, not to rob Peter to pay Paul. Each sharp, capable young NCO who commissions is one less great WO, Sgt Maj or RSM. Our NCO situation is, if anything, as dismal or worse than our officer situation, so we need to be careful how we cherry pick. Service as a WO must be seen as a respected, honoured and valued path, not just a stepping stone to the Officers' Mess. Without a solid NCO/WO corps we will be useless.

Cheers

pbi


Newbie question here, but when a WO commissions does he or she start out as 2Lt? (and I'm am guessing they do not need a degree at that point, having so much hands on experience anyways)

Offline pbi

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 30,450
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,624
Re: Officer positions
« Reply #36 on: December 21, 2008, 10:14:57 »
Normally an Inf WO would become at least a Lt. An MWO/CWO will normally commission as a Capt.

Cheers

DJB
The Nation that makes a great distinction between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting done by fools. ...

The true measure of a man is what he would do if he knew he never would be found out...

Offline George Wallace

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Relic
  • *
  • 285,470
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 26,737
  • Crewman
Re: Officer positions
« Reply #37 on: December 21, 2008, 10:16:37 »
.....and ALL officers are encouraged/expected to have a Degree.
DISCLAIMER: The opinions and arguments of George Wallace posted on this Site are solely those of George Wallace and not the opinion of Army.ca and are posted for information purposes only.

Any postings made by me which are made on behalf of Army.ca will be followed by the statement "George, Milnet.ca Staff".

Unless so stated, they are reflective of my opinion -- and my opinion only, a right that I enjoy along with every other Canadian citizen.

Offline DustintheWind

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Full Member
  • *
  • 7,105
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 455
Re: Officer positions
« Reply #38 on: December 21, 2008, 10:21:38 »
.....and ALL officers are encouraged/expected to have a Degree.

Can never hurt a person in their position I suppose

Normally an Inf WO would become at least a Lt. An MWO/CWO will normally commission as a Capt.

Cheers

DJB

Thank you.


Offline Rowshambow

  • Member
  • ****
  • 455
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 191
Re: Officer positions
« Reply #39 on: December 21, 2008, 13:38:32 »
The only problem with the CFR program is that you can be a MCpl, but usually at least a Sgt to go the CFR route and also must have 10 years experience, and UTPNCM, although you can be a Cpl or higher, you have to do school first, so you lose the SA of whats going on right then on the battlefield and way of doing things can change in 4 years. The best program for getting soldiers into the job right away is the CEOTP, which you can also do as a Cpl, but you do you training right away and get the degree "while working on your own". This way it does not deplete the Snr Ncm ranks as a typical CFR program might.
Let's play hide and go f^*k yourself...I'll go hide!

Offline George Wallace

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Relic
  • *
  • 285,470
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 26,737
  • Crewman
Re: Officer positions
« Reply #40 on: December 21, 2008, 13:49:46 »
The only problem with the CFR program is that you can be a MCpl, but usually at least a Sgt to go the CFR route and also must have 10 years experience, and UTPNCM, although you can be a Cpl or higher, you have to do school first, so you lose the SA of whats going on right then on the battlefield and way of doing things can change in 4 years. The best program for getting soldiers into the job right away is the CEOTP, which you can also do as a Cpl, but you do you training right away and get the degree "while working on your own". This way it does not deplete the Snr Ncm ranks as a typical CFR program might.

I don't agree with some of your figures, and you must also remember that things will always change.  Even those who are returning to do another Tour will find things have changed since their last one, so that was a rather moot point. 

Sometimes in order to promote, room at the top has to be made.  CFR, UTPNCM, and CEOTP are ways of doing so, without loosing all that experience to people Releasing.   The CFR of a MWO, may create several positions below him to open up for promotions: MWO, WO, Sgt, MCpl, and even Cpl's.  Stagnation at the bottom Ranks, will only create larger gaps in experience and leadership. 
DISCLAIMER: The opinions and arguments of George Wallace posted on this Site are solely those of George Wallace and not the opinion of Army.ca and are posted for information purposes only.

Any postings made by me which are made on behalf of Army.ca will be followed by the statement "George, Milnet.ca Staff".

Unless so stated, they are reflective of my opinion -- and my opinion only, a right that I enjoy along with every other Canadian citizen.

Offline ltmaverick25

  • The keyboard is mightier then the sword!
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 14,700
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 652
Re: Officer positions
« Reply #41 on: December 21, 2008, 14:44:28 »
I don't agree with some of your figures, and you must also remember that things will always change.  Even those who are returning to do another Tour will find things have changed since their last one, so that was a rather moot point. 

Sometimes in order to promote, room at the top has to be made.  CFR, UTPNCM, and CEOTP are ways of doing so, without loosing all that experience to people Releasing.   The CFR of a MWO, may create several positions below him to open up for promotions: MWO, WO, Sgt, MCpl, and even Cpl's.  Stagnation at the bottom Ranks, will only create larger gaps in experience and leadership. 


Thats a really good point.

I dont think CFR's should be limited to Sgt and above though.  The one danger you run into there is you have a bunch of NCOs running around with bars on their shoulders.  I think its important for officers to employ a different style of leadership then a hard army NCO would typically use.  There is nothing worse then working for a Capt that still thinks he is a Sgt! 

I think a balanced approach to the CFR process would work well though.  Get some of the SNCOs commissioned thus filling some officer gaps, and also making room for advancement for Junior NCOs and NCMs.

But also take a decent amount of Cpls up as CFRs too.  This way you are not wiping out your NCO corps, and you still have a solid and diverse experienced officer corps.

Offline Rowshambow

  • Member
  • ****
  • 455
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 191
Re: Officer positions
« Reply #42 on: December 21, 2008, 15:29:47 »
Well George, agree or not, those are the numbers on the Edmonton Garrison BPSO website. Yes sometimes you have to promote or move people as you indicated, but as some of the others have pointed out, right now the Snr NCM ranks are very short, I know in my Regt it is very very short, and I know the Armour school is also very very short, so tapping into the Snr Ncm world (at least right now) can be detrimental as others have also said. Don't get me wrong, I also agree in promoting people, and moving them, but right now we in the military are in dangerous times, in regards to our Snr Ncm experience. I also agree that the CFR program should be open to different rank levels, I was just showing the numbers from the BPSO website on a couple of different programs.
Yes things will change and always will, and I was just trying to say that there can be better ways to get people into the job, that are needed now, and not 4-5 years down the road, as we will then be in even worse shape!
Let's play hide and go f^*k yourself...I'll go hide!

Offline Redeye

    Living The Afghan National Army Dream...

  • Banned
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 46,170
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,337
  • Hope Is Not A Method
    • The Unofficial Website of the Hastings & Prince Edward Regiment
Re: Officer positions
« Reply #43 on: December 21, 2008, 16:02:47 »
I've seen how bad that can be first hand on a couple of occasions.

There is nothing worse then working for a Capt that still thinks he is a Sgt! 
Palma Non Sine Pulvere - Nothing Worth Having Comes Easily!

Offline Infanteer

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 90,495
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,430
  • Honey Badger FTW!
Re: Officer positions
« Reply #44 on: December 22, 2008, 03:34:05 »
Oh just as a side note old sweat, we have 2 LdSH(RC) Officers that are going to 1 PPCLI to fill voids in the LAV Capt roll, both are excellent choices, and both are ex rankers, one a Sgt and one an SSM!

I've heard this rumour as well - I don't know where it's coming from because there is no need for LAV Captains in that battalion.  As well, I'd be interested to hear the logic behind it, as it doesn't seem to make sense.  A LAV Captain is going to be a Company 2IC for a spell overseas, and I know one who led Infantry Company attacks due to OC and 2IC being absent.  Would the Armoured Corps want a relatively junior Infantry Captain (ATOC qualified) filling in the Battle Captain position in a Tank Squadron?
"Overall it appears that much of the apparent complexity of modern war stems in practice from the self-imposed complexity of modern HQs" LCol J.P. Storr

Offline pbi

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 30,450
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,624
Re: Officer positions
« Reply #45 on: December 22, 2008, 09:13:20 »
I think a balanced approach to the CFR process would work well though.  Get some of the SNCOs commissioned thus filling some officer gaps, and also making room for advancement for Junior NCOs and NCMs.


Overall, this is the way it works right now. Some branches do more CFR than others, some do more UTPNCM, but of course a secondary effect is that a slot is opened for advancement for other folks in the ranks. Unfortunately, in our Army (esp the Inf) the problem isn't lack of slots: it's lack of people available/willing to fill them. That's why we have to be very careful about "poaching" the ranks to get officers: it's all part of the same machine.

Cheers

DJB
The Nation that makes a great distinction between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting done by fools. ...

The true measure of a man is what he would do if he knew he never would be found out...

Offline Cleared Hot

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • 4,325
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 95
Re: Officer positions
« Reply #46 on: December 22, 2008, 10:41:55 »
Oh just as a side note old sweat, we have 2 LdSH(RC) Officers that are going to 1 PPCLI to fill voids in the LAV Capt roll, both are excellent choices, and both are ex rankers, one a Sgt and one an SSM!

And someone correct me if I am wrong but aren't they also sending one to 1 RCHA as a FAC?  Not CFR though I don't think.

Quote
Overall, this is the way it works right now. Some branches do more CFR than others, some do more UTPNCM, but of course a secondary effect is that a slot is opened for advancement for other folks in the ranks. Unfortunately, in our Army (esp the Inf) the problem isn't lack of slots: it's lack of people available/willing to fill them. That's why we have to be very careful about "poaching" the ranks to get officers: it's all part of the same machine.

This is the point, with units promoting every mod 6 Cpl and even bringing back DAPS to promote Ptes straight to MCpl, I don't think there is an argument to be made that we need to open spots at the top for the advancement potential of the young guys.

In my opinion there are three reasons people CFR:

1 - People who have taken time to "better themselves" i.e. get a degree etc. and shown the aptitude and leadership potential with enough time to have a career as an officer are either identified or volunteer to CFR.

2 - Older SNCOs and WOs who are reaching the end of their advancement potential and are looking for new challenges or frankly to pad their pension a bit.

3 - Disgruntled SNCOs and WOs who think that CFRing will give them more of a "voice".

In the end, taking people from category 1 doesn't rob from the top and they still have the potential to have a fulfilling careers as officers - good for all.  2 is fine but has to be managed properly.  In the interest of "looking after our guys" we almost never say no to these guys because they have usually served well and we feel they have earned it, but in the end the needs of the CF must be weighed against "doing right by an individual" and sometimes like it or not, the right thing overall to do is say no.  As for 3, those individuals couldn't be more wrong, but depending on the situation they can be hard to identify as they can sometimes sell themselves as 2.  I don't know why some people think this, an experienced WO has more credibility than a junior Capt let alone a Lt.  In the end if there is one thing we can agree on it is that the CF does not do a great job at "man management" which is why they find themselves in these cyclical problems in the first place.
Close Air Support - When Army strong isn't quite strong enough.

Offline Rowshambow

  • Member
  • ****
  • 455
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 191
Re: Officer positions
« Reply #47 on: December 22, 2008, 13:21:47 »
Infanteer, I was talking to one of the OC's at the mess, (from 1VP) and he said they were short of Officers for those postions, he said there were like 3 Officers for 6 positions or something like that (I was a little wobbly, and wasn't really paying too much attention), as for the Jr Inf Officer being a Battle Captain, with ATOC, that's what our BC's have, I know what you are saying though, an Infanteer with Armoured (regardless of courses) won't know the equipment etc. I don't think it is ideal, but at least the 2 pers going know the vehicles, and tactics very well, and that is better than not having someone at all is it not? after all it was those units that put the call out to the other units looking for the help! Why does that unit not need a LAV Capt (sorry I don't know) you said they preformed Coy attacks, so did they walk to the attack from a FOB? If not who took care of the Zulu veh's when they dismounted? I think (in that scenario) an Armoured person would be great, who better to contol the veh's or run a firebase than someone who does it for a living? When he has to dismount though, look out fire and brimstone everywhere!!
As for the FAC, I am not sure, I know there is a Capt from Gagetown posted to Shilo as a FAC, but haven't heard about him going overseas, or what unit he is posted too, I think he starts his FAC course in January, and no he is not a CFR, he is a grad of RMC.
Let's play hide and go f^*k yourself...I'll go hide!

Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 87,805
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,349
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Re: Officer positions
« Reply #48 on: December 22, 2008, 17:20:44 »
In my opinion there are three reasons people CFR:

1 - People who have taken time to "better themselves" i.e. get a degree etc. and shown the aptitude and leadership potential with enough time to have a career as an officer are either identified or volunteer to CFR.

2 - Older SNCOs and WOs who are reaching the end of their advancement potential and are looking for new challenges or frankly to pad their pension a bit.

3 - Disgruntled SNCOs and WOs who think that CFRing will give them more of a "voice".

In the end, taking people from category 1 doesn't rob from the top and they still have the potential to have a fulfilling careers as officers - good for all.  2 is fine but has to be managed properly.  In the interest of "looking after our guys" we almost never say no to these guys because they have usually served well and we feel they have earned it, but in the end the needs of the CF must be weighed against "doing right by an individual" and sometimes like it or not, the right thing overall to do is say no.  As for 3, those individuals couldn't be more wrong, but depending on the situation they can be hard to identify as they can sometimes sell themselves as 2.  I don't know why some people think this, an experienced WO has more credibility than a junior Capt let alone a Lt.  In the end if there is one thing we can agree on it is that the CF does not do a great job at "man management" which is why they find themselves in these cyclical problems in the first place.

All good reasons to run something like a 'Potential Officer' course to sort the wheat from the chaff and formally look over applicants for CFR.

I was part of one such course in the UK and it included serving SNCOs, Cpls, Ptes, as well as new applicants... just about anyone who wanted to be an Officer in the regiment. Out of 60 who started, about 25 finished the 2 month course and went to the Regular Commissions Board at Westbury. 15 made it into Sandhurst. 2 from my course (me and one other) made it through Sandhurst into the regiment, the rest joined other regiments/ corps as Officers. All those serving soldiers who didn't make it through to Sandhurst just went back to the battalion and resumed soldiering with a 'thanks for coming out' noted on their PERs.

The only downside would be the resources required to run such a program, but the benefits may outweigh the costs.
"The most important qualification of a soldier is fortitude under fatigue and privation. Courage is only second; hardship, poverty and want are the best school for a soldier." Napoleon

Offline NFLD Sapper

  • Mentor
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 211,791
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,205
  • Squadron Operations Warrant
Re: Officer positions
« Reply #49 on: December 22, 2008, 17:41:11 »
All those serving soldiers who didn't make it through to Sandhurst just went back to the battalion and resumed soldiering with a 'thanks for coming out' noted on their PERs.

The only downside would be the resources required to run such a program, but the benefits may outweigh the costs.

Would they be permitted to try out again as they matured through their careers?
CHIMO!
First in, Last out
Sappers Lead the Way

Just tell your wife she owes your life to some Muddy Old Engineer,
Some dusty, crusty, croaking, joking Muddy Old Engineer
#93 | Rank: 117 | Cbt Exp: 1,653,320 | Msns: 1,930