• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

BFT for CIC Officers.

I agree with  PViddy.  Good on you.  And I think it reflects well on the CIC. 

There is nothing stopping any CIC officer who wishes from completing the BFT.  I also agree that it can't help but foster a better relationship with the affiliated unit.  Granted there are some CIC who for various reasons can't complete the BFT.  They aren't required to, but for those who want to?  Give 'er.

Again, good job!!  :nod:

Northalbertan



 
Brihard said:
We can pretend that a comment about many CIC officers "receiving their walking papers." in response to a comment about 'held to the same fitness standards as the rest of the C.F." isn't a reference to many being fat and out of shape, but we're all smarter than that, so let's skip the pretense.

In any case, since my original statement - that they need to do EXPRES - was incorrect anyway, it's a moot point.


It's true most CIC types aren't up to soldiers standards of fitness, but,  their not soldiers.
You could probably get into a decent debate about them getting a commission, collecting pay, being saluted etc..  Personally I say at the end of the day their hearts in the right place so good on them.
Soldiers and Officers out of NDHQ with the shady exempt passes that you mentioned are something else completely and I agree.
 
Grimaldus said:
It's true most CIC types aren't up to soldiers standards of fitness, but,  their not soldiers.
You could probably get into a decent debate about them getting a commission, collecting pay, being saluted etc..  Personally I say at the end of the day their hearts in the right place so good on them.
  A large percentage of CIC put in countless hours of unpaid work every year supporting the largest youth movement in Canada.  Many are former/retired Reg F and P Res comissioned officers with years of real world experience under their belts and are entitled to a salute.

Grimaldus said:
Soldiers and Officers out of NDHQ units across the CF with the shady exempt passes that you mentioned are something else completely and I agree.

There, I fixed it for you.  ;)
 
Haggis said:
  A large percentage of CIC put in countless hours of unpaid work every year supporting the largest youth movement in Canada.  Many are former/retired Reg F and P Res comissioned officers with years of real world experience under their belts and are entitled to a salute.

There, I fixed it for you.  ;)

Thanks for the reminder of that, it is wise for all of us to keep this in mind before posting opinions on the matter.

No need for rebuttals, folks, that's been done to death here. Haggis is bang on.

Scott
Staff
 
Haggis said:
  A large percentage of CIC put in countless hours of unpaid work every year supporting the largest youth movement in Canada.  Many are former/retired Reg F and P Res commissioned officers with years of real world experience under their belts and are entitled to a salute.

I have no issue with saluting CIC officers at all. In fact I'm quite happy to do so and I'll go out of my way to salute them if they are in front of their cadets. I'll also ensure anyone below me in rank pays CIC officers and cadets the same amount of respect (in the latter using their rank when speaking to them)

The context of my comment was that I've seen some arguments about saluting CIC officers due to requirements (for lack of a better word) to get the scroll/commission.  I believe an ex colonel or CWO turn CIC is well deserving of a salute for sure.  Being honest I think that's somewhat different than a 19 year old doing a couple of weeks whatever they do then falling under the same tree.
That said, they do fall under the same tree and since a soldier is most happy when following orders, I'm happy to salute them.
Obedience.

Regarding them doing BFTs, if I was younger I would say since they are in uniform, commissioned officers in the CF  and paid I think?  they should be held to the same standard as anyone else in uniform.
Now it doesn't bug me either way.
 
The vast majority are paid 25 days per year on Class A, 30 for corps/squadron COs, plus any courses. Cadet Summer Training Centre staff are on Class B, as are headquarters and school staff.

From the other side of the fence, I'm always a bit put out at the lack of some sort of fitness assessment for CIC, even something that only confirms one's ability to conduct the same activities as the "average" cadet, as far as (depending on element) sailing and field training, and (in common) recreational sports and drill. Set CF standards entirely aside: I have a very hard time with CIC pers who can't meet the same standards we're expecting brand new 12 year olds to handle.
 
I was told, when i was on my last RCIS course last year, that the new standard is 1 period of PT for every 2 days of course training for officers currently enrolled.  Now, laughable still for most, it's still a slow step in the right direction and; my only hope is this will increase in the future.

cheers

PV
 
quadrapiper said:
From the other side of the fence, I'm always a bit put out at the lack of some sort of fitness assessment for CIC

  I fully agree with the motion of physical standards.  Those who always have it easy because they're not physically able to be in the field I find disturbing.  One thing to keep in mind though is not that the Corps officers are not the ones who have set the standard.  So for those who are not fond of these officers because of the standards that are set forward.  Take into account that the corps officers are doing the job they are tasked to as best they can with the resources that are available to them.  If the standards are the issue, it is best directed to those who set those standards.
 
Grimaldus said:
It's true most CIC types aren't up to soldiers standards of fitness, but,  their not soldiers.

Is this a true statement?  Arn't all members of the CF technically sailors, soldiers, and airmen/airwomen regardless of trade/officer classification?  Agreed that a different standard may be held for certain members of the CF but to say they arn't soldiers would be an untrue statement as they are reported as such in official figures such as to the UN or NATO etc. and are also held to the same responsibilities (such as unlimited liability, held to the CSD etc.) as other soldiers.
 
Pugsley said:
  I fully agree with the motion of physical standards.  Those who always have it easy because they're not physically able to be in the field I find disturbing.  One thing to keep in mind though is not that the Corps officers are not the ones who have set the standard.  So for those who are not fond of these officers because of the standards that are set forward.  Take into account that the corps officers are doing the job they are tasked to as best they can with the resources that are available to them.  If the standards are the issue, it is best directed to those who set those standards.

yeah - and the young 'fit' ones end up doing most of the active work ....all....the....time....

I had an exercise planned last year that involved a long hike backpacking into a campsite. It was frowned upon by some officers becaucse they weren't fit enough to do it  :'( I ain't the fittest officer, but I do encorporate daily physical fitness where I can, and I'm a few pushups away from passing the express test (my weakness! gah). Regardless of fitness standards or looking thin or whatever, everyone should be doing something - whether walking, or jogging, or swimming, or ..... - for their personal health and wellbeing. I am not the fittest person in the world (far from it) nor am I the post child for thinness - but I am fit enough to perform my job, and perform it well.

For the record - until I injured my ankle, BFT prep was encorporated into my physical fitness routine.... now its all about getting the strength back to do it :) and so far....so good.

It would be great to have the same standards as the PRes - I'll do the fitness test (and CFAT).......in exchange or the same benefits ;) .............(before anyone jumps in - I like my job working with Cadets too much to leave it at this point.)

My little ramblings ;)

Now........if we want to discuss how to better encorporate physical fitness for all officers and cadets, not just dodgeball every few months.......

 
Snakedoc said:
Is this a true statement?  Arn't all members of the CF technically sailors, soldiers, and airmen/airwomen regardless of trade/officer classification?  Agreed that a different standard may be held for certain members of the CF but to say they arn't soldiers would be an untrue statement as they are reported as such in official figures such as to the UN or NATO etc. and are also held to the same responsibilities (such as unlimited liability, held to the CSD etc.) as other soldiers.

Good question.  I don't think CIC are soldiers.  I can't see them being deployed in to any warzone or fighting in any sort of capacity. Medics still carry weapons and I've been told of a padre getting the boot for refusing to go through CBRN training.  I'm not sure if CIC officers do CBRN training.  Are CIC officers deployable overseas?

By all means I'm not trying to sleight the CIC corps, I could very well be wrong and they could be considered/called soldiers  I just didn't believe they were since they recieve next to no type of soldier training, even less I would say than a padre (Who are in unique positions but again still deployable)
 
Being a "soldier" is a vague term. CIC are commissioned under a sub componet of the reserves. A real live commission like a reserve or regular force officer. Are they members of the canadian forces? Yes. Are they soldiers IMHO? No. And most CIC officers I've met would agree to that.

Contrary to what I keep hearing 90% of CIC officers I've met have zero military experience outside of CIC courses. Many are mom and dad's; uni students, school principles; CEO's of civilian companies etc.

Will they ever deploy as a CIC? No. Will they ever understand what soldiering is? No.

To compare regular and reserve soldiers to CIC is akin to comparing the Salvation army to the knights templars. While connections can be made; there is very little in common.
 
Devils advocate here:

As for CIC doing a BFT I wonder what happens when a CIC officer decides to do a BFT and drops with a heart attack, destroys a ankle or a knee etc? What is in place to ensure this sub componet's fitness level is sufficient to complete a Army fitness test? A CIC officer showing up to do a BFT who approved it? Is he carrying a weapon and mags that he has zero qualification to carry? In a program trying it's very best to ensure children are not seen as soldiers ( privates are now lance corporals as Soldat in french is somehow offensive...I could rant on about how much I think Soldat/soldier shouldnt be a bad thing...heck I'm a soldier whats wrong with that??) Should a CIC member be wearing a tatical vest? A vest designed to carry our things to kill people?



 
Good question Dogger, the same can kind of be applied to the reserves.
The regular force, in theory, do 6 weeks of BFT work up.  Even if that isn't the case they do PT a few times a week which atleast gets them somewhat prepared for it.

9 times out of 10 when we do our BFT in the reserves guys just throw a ruck on their back and claw and bite their way through it.  Our members aren't brought in and paid to do any sort of work up training.  What happens if a Class A guy tries it and goes down with an injury.  I'd imagine CIC in the same boat.
 
Grimaldus said:
Good question Dogger, the same can kind of be applied to the reserves.
The regular force, in theory, do 6 weeks of BFT work up.  Even if that isn't the case they do PT a few times a week which atleast gets them somewhat prepared for it.

9 times out of 10 when we do our BFT in the reserves guys just throw a ruck on their back and claw and bite their way through it.  Our members aren't brought in and paid to do any sort of work up training.  What happens if a Class A guy tries it and goes down with an injury.  I'd imagine CIC in the same boat.

A class reserve force members are REQUIRED to complete the BFT (or express) CIC officers have zero requirement to do so. So why would they be covered if injured?

And I will be looking into a CIC officer carrying a fully auto weapon that he has had no training on. Regardless that there was no ammo. Theres a reason a tacvest/rifle isnt issued to CIC officers. They have no need or requirement to wear/use it.

If that CIC officer went down and got injured I could see a "**** show" happening and who ever allowed him to come out and play army in a load of charges.
 
dogger1936 said:
A class reserve force members are REQUIRED to complete the BFT (or express)
But is the CF required to support class A members in order to facilitae them passing the BFT or express test? ie paying them to come in for half days to do BFT work up training.
 
Grimaldus said:
But is the CF required to support class A members in order to facilitae them passing the BFT or express test? ie paying them to come in for half days to do BFT work up training.

Thats a totally differnt topic! :nod:

Fact is regardless of how a reserve member gets ready and what protocols are in place to ensure a safe BFT for class A ; it is a requirement of them.

It is NOT a requirement for CIC to do a BFT, and I'm willing to bet carrying a C-7 tacvest etc is verboten as well. If a class A member has a heart attack and dies on a BFT...he is covered. If a CIC officer blows out a ankle why would he be covered? Did he ask permission from his regional headquarters to carry fully auto weapons tacvest and participate?

From my view point now I don't think the unit should have allowed him to participate at the level they did. And I am willing to be his regional Det had ZERO idea it happened.

I'd love to hear from the original poster.
 
I used to volunteer with the cadets as an adult supervisor or whatever. One sunday afternoon with nothing else to do in connaught I took 3 sections of cadets gave them radios and taught them different section movement formations moving up and down some fields there.  It culminated in a platoon attack with snowballs where they (quite effectively) used fire and movement throwing snowballs. Covering moving, all the fun stuff.  They had a great time and loved it. Someone drove by saw it and apparently freaked out. When we got back from the weekend I found myself no longer supervising cadets. I guess they really take that stuff seriously ;)

I don't think there will ever be a requirement for cadets to do a 'battle' fitness test.  It would be a good idea to emphasize physical fitness (lead by example) considering the level of obesity in kids today.  I think at the end of the day there are just some CIC members who if made to do any sort of physical test would fail and the CIC movement loosing them isn't worth trying to make them pass a fitness test which their job doesn't exactly require them to do.
 
Grimaldus said:
I think at the end of the day there are just some CIC members who if made to do any sort of physical test would fail and the CIC movement loosing them isn't worth trying to make them pass a fitness test which their job doesn't exactly require them to do.

Emphasis mine.

I disagree with this wholeheartedly. As a CIC Officer, I am expected to lead my cadets. Physical fitness is one of the aims of the cadet program. How can I expect them to aim for high physical fitness if I won't do the same myself? Leadership by example is often important, and never moreso than when you are dealing with 12-18 year olds (particularly given that they can just up and leave if they don't like it).

Furthermore, as an officer in the CF, I am a representative of the CF wherever I am in uniform. This is particularly important in rural areas, where we are often the only representatives of the CF for quite a distance. If I am not in decent shape, I give a bad look to CF members everywhere. When we put on the uniform, Joe Public doesn't generally know the difference between me and an RegF mbr with 20 years experience and a few tours under their belt.

Also, I have encountered members who were not physically fit enough to do their jobs. The people like this in our side of the house are a prime example of why physical fitness testing to some standard (even if lower than the MPFS, though that should be achievable outside of those with MELs) should be occuring for us (I know these people exist in other sub-components/components but they already have this testing in place - doing something about it is up to their superiors IAW DAODs 5023-2 & 5019-4).
 
Dogger -- Re: the tac vest being used to carry things that kill people, then by your argument Padres shouldn't carry that either.

As for the weapon, ever thought he may have been carrying the hard rubber fake?

The OP went out and did the BFT to help strengthen his attachment to his affiliated Reg F unit.  I suspect to participate, said unit would have had to make sure he was properly kitted out and the appropriate waivers were signed.  You're posting as if he just showed up and said, "I'm gonna go do the BFT with you guys, kay?"  Probably nowhere close the what actually transpired.
 
Back
Top