Author Topic: Senior promotions, appointments and retirements (merged)  (Read 71157 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline PuckChaser

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 879,910
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,265
    • Peacekeeper's Homepage
Re: Senior promotions, appointments and retirements (merged)
« Reply #125 on: July 09, 2017, 15:32:15 »
That makes a lot more sense. Our career progression system is stuck in the 1970s, there's a lot more folks getting in at 18 and staying until 60. If that individual makes CWO/CPO1 in 25 years, they're still only 43 with lots of time left to contribute. If we insist on our CWOs and successsion planned Tier 1/2 CWO/CPO1s be younger than 55, we need to provide a proper outlet into the officer corps.

We have a massive problem in Sigs, where we're 50% over PML in CWOs, but every single one in succession planning turned down a posting as the 1 HQ&Sigs RSM, forcing the Army to give it to a Cbt Eng CWO. Those CWOs were not removed from succession planning, nor told "SRCP or release", so we're still stuck in a quagmire that's partly of our own creation.

Offline Haggis

  • "There ain't no hat badge on a helmet!"
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 47,725
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,443
  • "Oh, what a glorious sight, Warm-reekin, rich!"
Re: Senior promotions, appointments and retirements (merged)
« Reply #126 on: July 09, 2017, 17:06:13 »
That makes a lot more sense. Our career progression system is stuck in the 1970s, there's a lot more folks getting in at 18 and staying until 60. If that individual makes CWO/CPO1 in 25 years, they're still only 43 with lots of time left to contribute. If we insist on our CWOs and successsion planned Tier 1/2 CWO/CPO1s be younger than 55, we need to provide a proper outlet into the officer corps.

Back around 5 years ago there was a CWO/CPO1 Senior Appointment Employment Construct/Concept document published which outlined potential career "off-ramps" for CWO/CPO1 who were not, at a point in time, succession planned.  This closely followed the CANFORGEN announcing the 35/55 exit ramp ArmyVern mentioned in a previous post. Some of those "off-ramps" were, for example, lateral postings at Tier 4  (RSM to RSM), back-to-back KP postings, SA to KP to SA postings, ATL postings and, of course, SRCP and CFR.  I CFR'd in late 2014 after almost eight years as a Tier 4 and KP CWO so I didn't follow where this eventually went.
Train like your life depends on it.  Some day, it may.

Offline ArmyVern

    is awake.

  • Army.ca Myth
  • *****
  • 202,156
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,470
Re: Senior promotions, appointments and retirements (merged)
« Reply #127 on: July 09, 2017, 19:41:44 »
...  As this is the CA's attitude right now.  ...

Not from my experience; where are you getting this from?
Hard by MCpl Elton Adams

If you or someone you love is having difficulty & would like to speak to someone who has been through a similar experience, who understands, & will respect your need for privacy and confidentiality, contact OSISS toll-free at 1-800-883-6094. You can locate the peer closest to you by logging on to www.osiss.ca, clicking on “Contact us” link & then choosing the “Peer” or “Family Support Network”. Help IS out there.

Offline ArmyVern

    is awake.

  • Army.ca Myth
  • *****
  • 202,156
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,470
Re: Senior promotions, appointments and retirements (merged)
« Reply #128 on: July 09, 2017, 20:00:53 »
Back around 5 years ago there was a CWO/CPO1 Senior Appointment Employment Construct/Concept document published which outlined potential career "off-ramps" for CWO/CPO1 who were not, at a point in time, succession planned.  This closely followed the CANFORGEN announcing the 35/55 exit ramp ArmyVern mentioned in a previous post. Some of those "off-ramps" were, for example, lateral postings at Tier 4  (RSM to RSM), back-to-back KP postings, SA to KP to SA postings, ATL postings and, of course, SRCP and CFR.  I CFR'd in late 2014 after almost eight years as a Tier 4 and KP CWO so I didn't follow where this eventually went.

I'll link to the following, but even it has been worked on heavily as part of the SEM project.  I have more recent project docs at my desk, but suffice it to say it's a dynamic project at this point in time. "Off-ramps" options have changed somewhat etc and the SAs & KPs now well-defined as to requirements, expectations and TORs etc ...

You are probably very familiar with the below already I suspect:

http://www.davidmlast.org/POE456-NEPDP/POE456-NEPDP_files/10%20NCM%20DP%205%20Report%2016%20June.pdf
« Last Edit: July 09, 2017, 20:03:42 by ArmyVern »
Hard by MCpl Elton Adams

If you or someone you love is having difficulty & would like to speak to someone who has been through a similar experience, who understands, & will respect your need for privacy and confidentiality, contact OSISS toll-free at 1-800-883-6094. You can locate the peer closest to you by logging on to www.osiss.ca, clicking on “Contact us” link & then choosing the “Peer” or “Family Support Network”. Help IS out there.

Offline PuckChaser

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 879,910
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,265
    • Peacekeeper's Homepage
Re: Senior promotions, appointments and retirements (merged)
« Reply #129 on: July 09, 2017, 20:11:13 »
Back around 5 years ago there was a CWO/CPO1 Senior Appointment Employment Construct/Concept document published which outlined potential career "off-ramps" for CWO/CPO1 who were not, at a point in time, succession planned.  This closely followed the CANFORGEN announcing the 35/55 exit ramp ArmyVern mentioned in a previous post. Some of those "off-ramps" were, for example, lateral postings at Tier 4  (RSM to RSM), back-to-back KP postings, SA to KP to SA postings, ATL postings and, of course, SRCP and CFR.  I CFR'd in late 2014 after almost eight years as a Tier 4 and KP CWO so I didn't follow where this eventually went.

Some good info here, thanks. I'm keenly interested in how this all develops, as I'll end up one of those young MWO/CWO with lots of time left to serve should I make it that high up.

I'm not up high enough in the food chain to have all the succession planning acronyms down, what's KP and SA? I've got the tiering down but haven't seen them before.

Offline Spectrum

    sociopath since 2007.

  • I'm from the government; I'm here to help you
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 49,115
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,260
Re: Senior promotions, appointments and retirements (merged)
« Reply #130 on: July 09, 2017, 20:26:20 »
I'm no CWO but I think it's Key Position/Senior Appointment?

I plan to be a civilian long before I need to worry about succession planning, so I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm way off.

Offline ArmyVern

    is awake.

  • Army.ca Myth
  • *****
  • 202,156
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,470
Re: Senior promotions, appointments and retirements (merged)
« Reply #131 on: July 09, 2017, 21:16:47 »
I'm no CWO but I think it's Key Position/Senior Appointment?
...

You're right.
Hard by MCpl Elton Adams

If you or someone you love is having difficulty & would like to speak to someone who has been through a similar experience, who understands, & will respect your need for privacy and confidentiality, contact OSISS toll-free at 1-800-883-6094. You can locate the peer closest to you by logging on to www.osiss.ca, clicking on “Contact us” link & then choosing the “Peer” or “Family Support Network”. Help IS out there.

Offline ArmyVern

    is awake.

  • Army.ca Myth
  • *****
  • 202,156
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,470
Re: Senior promotions, appointments and retirements (merged)
« Reply #132 on: July 09, 2017, 21:19:56 »
Some good info here, thanks. I'm keenly interested in how this all develops, as I'll end up one of those young MWO/CWO with lots of time left to serve should I make it that high up.

I'm not up high enough in the food chain to have all the succession planning acronyms down, what's KP and SA? I've got the tiering down but haven't seen them before.

I'll get something up on Tuesday as to tiering /environmental, Branch, PAN-CAF, and how each Tier fits into KPs or SAs.
Hard by MCpl Elton Adams

If you or someone you love is having difficulty & would like to speak to someone who has been through a similar experience, who understands, & will respect your need for privacy and confidentiality, contact OSISS toll-free at 1-800-883-6094. You can locate the peer closest to you by logging on to www.osiss.ca, clicking on “Contact us” link & then choosing the “Peer” or “Family Support Network”. Help IS out there.

Offline PuckChaser

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 879,910
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,265
    • Peacekeeper's Homepage
Re: Senior promotions, appointments and retirements (merged)
« Reply #133 on: July 09, 2017, 21:46:58 »
Thanks Vern, much appreciated. I'll split everything out into a succession planning thread on it's own afterwards, I think it'll be a good resource here.

Offline Haggis

  • "There ain't no hat badge on a helmet!"
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 47,725
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,443
  • "Oh, what a glorious sight, Warm-reekin, rich!"
Re: Senior promotions, appointments and retirements (merged)
« Reply #134 on: July 09, 2017, 22:27:22 »
I'll link to the following, but even it has been worked on heavily as part of the SEM project.  I have more recent project docs at my desk, but suffice it to say it's a dynamic project at this point in time. "Off-ramps" options have changed somewhat etc and the SAs & KPs now well-defined as to requirements, expectations and TORs etc ...

You are probably very familiar with the below already I suspect:

http://www.davidmlast.org/POE456-NEPDP/POE456-NEPDP_files/10%20NCM%20DP%205%20Report%2016%20June.pdf

Thanks, ArmyVern, and yes I am (was) familiar with this and the CWOSEM as well as the creation of the SAL Occ Specs.  I went to the civilian side/Class A world in mid 2013.  It seems like a long time ago now.
Train like your life depends on it.  Some day, it may.

Offline Old EO Tech

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 8,905
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 351
Re: Senior promotions, appointments and retirements (merged)
« Reply #135 on: July 09, 2017, 23:13:51 »
Not from my experience; where are you getting this from?

Its actually in a SEM ppt Vern, I'll dig it up and send it to you at work.  The CA doesn't consider CWO valid if they are not in a Command Team with a CO/Commander.

Jon

Offline Haggis

  • "There ain't no hat badge on a helmet!"
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 47,725
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,443
  • "Oh, what a glorious sight, Warm-reekin, rich!"
Re: Senior promotions, appointments and retirements (merged)
« Reply #136 on: July 09, 2017, 23:18:24 »
Its actually in a SEM ppt Vern, I'll dig it up and send it to you at work.  The CA doesn't consider CWO valid if they are not in a Command Team with a CO/Commander.

The CA have a number of CWO KP as well.
Train like your life depends on it.  Some day, it may.

Offline Old EO Tech

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 8,905
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 351
Re: Senior promotions, appointments and retirements (merged)
« Reply #137 on: July 09, 2017, 23:36:38 »
The CA have a number of CWO KP as well.

Yes true they are fine with those they have designated KP, like Corps SM, AJAG etc

Jon

Offline ArmyVern

    is awake.

  • Army.ca Myth
  • *****
  • 202,156
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,470
Re: Senior promotions, appointments and retirements (merged)
« Reply #138 on: July 10, 2017, 00:44:51 »
Its actually in a SEM ppt Vern, I'll dig it up and send it to you at work.  The CA doesn't consider CWO valid if they are not in a Command Team with a CO/Commander.

Jon

Not quite right.  RSM is just the initial entry level appointment to the tiers of SP (Tactical Level Command Team).  Most CWOs are expected to do some TIR as a CWO (Snr Tech etc) prior to being appointed as RSM/Cox'n/UCWO is all.  Some CWOs will then move up a tier from those initial entry posns into the higher tiers, KP (operational lvl) through SA (strategic lvl).

I'm pretty sure that I also have the powerpoints with the project docs already.
Hard by MCpl Elton Adams

If you or someone you love is having difficulty & would like to speak to someone who has been through a similar experience, who understands, & will respect your need for privacy and confidentiality, contact OSISS toll-free at 1-800-883-6094. You can locate the peer closest to you by logging on to www.osiss.ca, clicking on “Contact us” link & then choosing the “Peer” or “Family Support Network”. Help IS out there.

Offline Old EO Tech

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 8,905
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 351
Re: Senior promotions, appointments and retirements (merged)
« Reply #139 on: July 10, 2017, 01:48:34 »
Not quite right.  RSM is just the initial entry level appointment to the tiers of SP (Tactical Level Command Team).  Most CWOs are expected to do some TIR as a CWO (Snr Tech etc) prior to being appointed as RSM/Cox'n/UCWO is all.  Some CWOs will then move up a tier from those initial entry posns into the higher tiers, KP (operational lvl) through SA (strategic lvl).

I'm pretty sure that I also have the powerpoints with the project docs already.

Well I think we are getting different in formation Vern, I think we will be lucky to see any Snr Tech left, I talked with my Corps SM last week and the CA wanted to just simply cut 1/3 of our CWO....we are pushing back on that of course, but it's not as pretty as the slides make it look, the "SME CWO" stream in the SEM structure is not defined, and looks more likely to just be KP CWO positions only.  Time will tell.

Jon

Offline ArmyVern

    is awake.

  • Army.ca Myth
  • *****
  • 202,156
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,470
Re: Senior promotions, appointments and retirements (merged)
« Reply #140 on: July 10, 2017, 02:10:06 »
Well I think we are getting different in formation Vern, I think we will be lucky to see any Snr Tech left, I talked with my Corps SM last week and the CA wanted to just simply cut 1/3 of our CWO....we are pushing back on that of course, but it's not as pretty as the slides make it look, the "SME CWO" stream in the SEM structure is not defined, and looks more likely to just be KP CWO positions only.  Time will tell.

Jon

Master Diver, Master Driver, CAF Senior Rigger etc are staying. 

Your Cdn Army SME level Infanteer, Artilleryman etc are staying, Log Br CWO, etc etc

Some Snr Techs may be disappearing - those that are called "Snr Techs" at bases looking after moving their trades around within the base (NOT Career Managers)  ... some bases are using CWOs to do this; one does not have to be a CWO to do this.

And, trust me, it is not going to be just KPs and SAs around.  Just saying.  It isn't just the Cdn Army that going to lose CWO either.  It's a SEM initiative. SEM is CAF-Wide project.  But, when one moves into a non-SME KP or SA, the trade and branch affiliations come down.  They wear the Coat of Arms cap badge, no shoulder titles, Crossed Swords as their collar dogs, Army buttons. 

For KPs, no change to the actual CWO rank badge itself.  SAs see either the tri-service appointment below their rank badge (Base CWOs, Formation CWOs, Div CWOs etc) or a laurel beneath (Command CWOs - there's only 6 of them), and the CFCWO wears the ring of Maple Leafs around his.  This latter paragraphed group of KPs and SAs are no longer trade or branch affiliated - they become MOSID 00351 upon their Change of Appointments (ergo, no longer amongst the Army, RCN or RCAF in numbers, but still CWOs)and belong to the CAF and are managed through DSA.

Oh ... and those CWO posns that are cut are not disappearing per se - they will become MWO posns for the vast lot of them.  You realize that we have >450 CPO1/CWOs in this outfit?  More than 450!!
« Last Edit: July 10, 2017, 02:36:41 by ArmyVern »
Hard by MCpl Elton Adams

If you or someone you love is having difficulty & would like to speak to someone who has been through a similar experience, who understands, & will respect your need for privacy and confidentiality, contact OSISS toll-free at 1-800-883-6094. You can locate the peer closest to you by logging on to www.osiss.ca, clicking on “Contact us” link & then choosing the “Peer” or “Family Support Network”. Help IS out there.

Offline Old EO Tech

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 8,905
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 351
Re: Senior promotions, appointments and retirements (merged)
« Reply #141 on: July 10, 2017, 04:53:16 »
Master Diver, Master Driver, CAF Senior Rigger etc are staying. 

Your Cdn Army SME level Infanteer, Artilleryman etc are staying, Log Br CWO, etc etc

Some Snr Techs may be disappearing - those that are called "Snr Techs" at bases looking after moving their trades around within the base (NOT Career Managers)  ... some bases are using CWOs to do this; one does not have to be a CWO to do this.

And, trust me, it is not going to be just KPs and SAs around.  Just saying.  It isn't just the Cdn Army that going to lose CWO either.  It's a SEM initiative. SEM is CAF-Wide project.  But, when one moves into a non-SME KP or SA, the trade and branch affiliations come down.  They wear the Coat of Arms cap badge, no shoulder titles, Crossed Swords as their collar dogs, Army buttons. 

For KPs, no change to the actual CWO rank badge itself.  SAs see either the tri-service appointment below their rank badge (Base CWOs, Formation CWOs, Div CWOs etc) or a laurel beneath (Command CWOs - there's only 6 of them), and the CFCWO wears the ring of Maple Leafs around his.  This latter paragraphed group of KPs and SAs are no longer trade or branch affiliated - they become MOSID 00351 upon their Change of Appointments (ergo, no longer amongst the Army, RCN or RCAF in numbers, but still CWOs)and belong to the CAF and are managed through DSA.

Oh ... and those CWO posns that are cut are not disappearing per se - they will become MWO posns for the vast lot of them.  You realize that we have >450 CPO1/CWOs in this outfit?  More than 450!!

Yes I understand what KP/SA CWO wear :-/  450 may seem like a lot...but I'm betting its no were close to the number of GOFO/Col/LCol, and we seem to have no issues employing officers in staff positions, but its not ok to have CWO in non command roles.  And I'm not saying all those officer jobs are not valid, just that the same career path's should be given to the NCM Corps.  If a LCol CO needs the advice of a CWO, I think a Div/CA branch head could use that advice as well.

And I agree if we have CWO's "just moving people around" on a Base that is not a reason to have a CWO there.  But I would propose that those Snr Tech's should be managing strategic LEMS/SC/Fleet management, and if we are not doing that then we have not set ourselves up in the right roles.  Strategic resource management is part of that job, but that is much more than just helping the CM's move people around for sure.

But we can chat more offline at the mess :P

Jon

Offline Haggis

  • "There ain't no hat badge on a helmet!"
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 47,725
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,443
  • "Oh, what a glorious sight, Warm-reekin, rich!"
Re: Senior promotions, appointments and retirements (merged)
« Reply #142 on: July 10, 2017, 09:57:39 »
In 2010 there were over 500 CWO/CPO1 positions and a few dozen more actual CWO/CPO1s.  The herd was culled then, notably in the A Res, before the CDS would approve any more P Res KP or SA.  Dropping to 450-ish is progress.

It's also notable that CWO/CPO1 who join the Senior Appointment List (SAL) also enter another MOSID and pay scale, which they stay in for one year post-appointment (as long as they don't release).  KP CWO/CPO1 do not.  They retain their original MOSID, even if they do re-badge.
Train like your life depends on it.  Some day, it may.

Offline Infanteer

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 121,745
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 14,423
  • Honey Badger FTW!
Re: Senior promotions, appointments and retirements (merged)
« Reply #143 on: July 10, 2017, 10:47:31 »
And I'm not saying all those officer jobs are not valid, just that the same career path's should be given to the NCM Corps.

Why would we want two matching, parallel career paths?  As well, the goal is not to let every NCM be a CWO/CPO1.  Senior NCMs perform a specific function based on their unique career path.  If there is a valid role for a senior NCM, create the position, but don't just bolt one on to every officer above the rank of Major for the sake of job creation.

We probably need to broaden the training/opportunities for WO/MWO, add some additional IPCs to those ranks, and improve commissioning programs for them as well.  This way, the Forces can draw from a smaller pool into a reduced number of CWO/CPO1 positions.  For the record, I am also about cutting the number of LCol/Cdr positions down by half from about 1200 to 600-ish max, so don't think I'm picking on the NCMs.
"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 ModlrMike

    : Riding time again... woohooo!

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 198,454
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,467
    • Canadian Association of Physician Assistants
Re: Senior promotions, appointments and retirements (merged)
« Reply #144 on: July 10, 2017, 12:00:58 »
Why would we want two matching, parallel career paths?  As well, the goal is not to let every NCM be a CWO/CPO1.  Senior NCMs perform a specific function based on their unique career path.  If there is a valid role for a senior NCM, create the position, but don't just bolt one on to every officer above the rank of Major for the sake of job creation.

We probably need to broaden the training/opportunities for WO/MWO, add some additional IPCs to those ranks, and improve commissioning programs for them as well.  This way, the Forces can draw from a smaller pool into a reduced number of CWO/CPO1 positions.  For the record, I am also about cutting the number of LCol/Cdr positions down by half from about 1200 to 600-ish max, so don't think I'm picking on the NCMs.

You are correct, the goal is not to let every NCM be a CWO/CPO1... but the opportunity should be there. If we clog the system with folks who are going to spend 20 years in rank, that clearly has a negative impact on opportunity. That being said I realize that this phenomena is not restricted to CWO/CPO1, but arguably that rank has the greatest downstream effect.
WARNING: The consumption of alcohol may create the illusion that you are tougher,smarter, faster and better looking than most people.
Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats. (H.L. Mencken 1919)
Zero tolerance is the politics of the lazy. All it requires is that you do nothing and ban everything.

Offline Old EO Tech

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 8,905
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 351
Re: Senior promotions, appointments and retirements (merged)
« Reply #145 on: July 10, 2017, 16:12:15 »
Why would we want two matching, parallel career paths?  As well, the goal is not to let every NCM be a CWO/CPO1.  Senior NCMs perform a specific function based on their unique career path.  If there is a valid role for a senior NCM, create the position, but don't just bolt one on to every officer above the rank of Major for the sake of job creation.

We probably need to broaden the training/opportunities for WO/MWO, add some additional IPCs to those ranks, and improve commissioning programs for them as well.  This way, the Forces can draw from a smaller pool into a reduced number of CWO/CPO1 positions.  For the record, I am also about cutting the number of LCol/Cdr positions down by half from about 1200 to 600-ish max, so don't think I'm picking on the NCMs.

No we don't need to let every NCM be a CWO, but the pyramid narrows a lot more from MWO to CWO than it does for Maj to LCol.  And increasing the number of MWO has its own problems, in the RCEME Corps we are already dealing with having just as many MWO as WO, due to many staff positions needing the experience of an MWO(LCMM/CM etc), down grading CWO positions is going to make that even worse.

I'm all for doing a proper analysis on both what CWO do and LCol do, but I don't see much of a concern over having a lot of LCol sitting around, but having 450 CWO across the CAF seems to be a red button issue....and I personally am not convinced that it is.  I can't speak to the RCN or RCAF as I don't have enough exposure to how they employ CWO/CPO1, but in the CA, being a CWO at Div HQ or the Standards CWO at a Div TC is required not just for the expertise and experience they bring but also because they have to be able to deal on an equal footing with RSM's, and an MWO is not going to be able to do that.   It's no doubt the same reason that Div Branch heads are LCol, so they have no issues addressing concerns with the Div's CO's...

The CWO SEM project does have three streams identified, a Command stream(well understood), and SME stream and an SRCP stream(including hard assigned Maj and LCol positions).  I have not seen a deep dive into what these mean for numbers of CWO though.  The SEM project was supposed to be about CWO employment, but it seems the emphasize is being placed on just reducing numbers, and to me that is putting the cart ahead of the horse, we should complete the analysis and then decide of we have CWO doing jobs that don't need a CWO....but then maybe I'm just to far from the centre to be read in on what is happening...but if so that speaks to a lack of communication, something we are suppose to be good at as CWO....

Jon

Offline ArmyVern

    is awake.

  • Army.ca Myth
  • *****
  • 202,156
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,470
Re: Senior promotions, appointments and retirements (merged)
« Reply #146 on: July 11, 2017, 05:19:55 »
No we don't need to let every NCM be a CWO, but the pyramid narrows a lot more from MWO to CWO than it does for Maj to LCol.  And increasing the number of MWO has its own problems, in the RCEME Corps we are already dealing with having just as many MWO as WO, due to many staff positions needing the experience of an MWO(LCMM/CM etc), down grading CWO positions is going to make that even worse.

I'm all for doing a proper analysis on both what CWO do and LCol do, but I don't see much of a concern over having a lot of LCol sitting around, but having 450 CWO across the CAF seems to be a red button issue....and I personally am not convinced that it is.  I can't speak to the RCN or RCAF as I don't have enough exposure to how they employ CWO/CPO1, but in the CA, being a CWO at Div HQ or the Standards CWO at a Div TC is required not just for the expertise and experience they bring but also because they have to be able to deal on an equal footing with RSM's, and an MWO is not going to be able to do that.   It's no doubt the same reason that Div Branch heads are LCol, so they have no issues addressing concerns with the Div's CO's...

The CWO SEM project does have three streams identified, a Command stream(well understood), and SME stream and an SRCP stream(including hard assigned Maj and LCol positions).  I have not seen a deep dive into what these mean for numbers of CWO though.  The SEM project was supposed to be about CWO employment, but it seems the emphasize is being placed on just reducing numbers, and to me that is putting the cart ahead of the horse, we should complete the analysis and then decide of we have CWO doing jobs that don't need a CWO....but then maybe I'm just to far from the centre to be read in on what is happening...but if so that speaks to a lack of communication, something we are suppose to be good at as CWO....

Jon

The CWO posns you mention above would still be CWO posns [Div, School etc].  They are not being cut just for the sake of cutting, but by the same token as you speak of "needing experience to do MWO [LCMM]) jobs" ... what we don't require is CWOs doing MWO or Capt jobs ... that analysis has been done.  I won't put any specific numbers up here because the project is not yet complete.

I still don't know where you're getting the "need to do analysis first" - there was/is analysis.

There's not actually a "separate stream" for SRCP - CWO are eligible for CFR into a Capt posn, but not all of them will be offered such. Also may be offered SCRP to a Capt posn if they possess the very specific skillsets and expertize require for that specific posn. Then, when/if a CWO moves up the CWO scale into the 00351 MOSID (already happening) Senior Appointment, they stay eligible to CFR or be offered SCRP into a Major posn if they meet the specific skillsets and expertize for that particular posn.  The CFCWO, Tier 0, is eligible for a LCol posn.  These are part of the "off-ramps" for CWOs.  Another "off-ramp" for them all is "release" etc.

In short, your specific trade and branch posns where actual CWOs are required to perform the job are still going to exist.  Once/if those CWOs then move up into the KP realm and onto the SA realm they will change MOSIDs as their work is no longer trade/branch related - they are career managed by DSA on behalf of the institution vice any trade, branch or environment.  Your trade/branch can then promote/fill the vacated trade/branch posn as the lads and lasses in the KPs and SAs do not count towards your trade & branch specific numbers as they are no longer part of your trades and branches.
Hard by MCpl Elton Adams

If you or someone you love is having difficulty & would like to speak to someone who has been through a similar experience, who understands, & will respect your need for privacy and confidentiality, contact OSISS toll-free at 1-800-883-6094. You can locate the peer closest to you by logging on to www.osiss.ca, clicking on “Contact us” link & then choosing the “Peer” or “Family Support Network”. Help IS out there.

Offline Chanada

  • Guest
  • *
  • 5,090
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18
Re: Senior promotions, appointments and retirements (merged)
« Reply #147 on: July 11, 2017, 11:11:27 »
Well put ArmyVern!  This is an old problem that has been the subject of multiple great circular discussions as far back as when LGen Dallaire became ADM(HR) identified problems with the denigration of the CWO rank and tried (without success) to bring it back into line with a number of things (including the Lateral Skills thing).  Some (long) time ago one of his predecessors wrote (DeChastelain) wrote in the Pers Newsletter the danger of the CWO community's propensity to somehow think that there is a rank above CWO "super-chiefs".  It is one of the best articles on the subject of CWO credibility I have ever seen but unfortunately doesn't show up in Google Searches these days.  We sometimes forget that the most important job for a CWO in the Army is to be an RSM (or its equivalent at a school) - where the soldiers are.  CWO pers development aims towards that...after that is done it becomes training for employment. The other thing that people forget about SCP, UTPNCM, CFR is that these are officer production streams designed to meet CAF requirements by offr MOS.  They are not solutions for PML problems in NCM MOSs that have CWO problems created by inflation and PML manipulation over the past 10-15 years.    Now I would think in terms of both LCol and CWO positions an effort is underway to reduce PMLs while still ensuring a critical mass of quality individuals available for selection to serve in key positions (small kp) as COs and RSMs.  Pro Patria