Role of Officer vs job of NCM [Merged]

[portcullisguy]

I‘ll be honest, if I were a police service, I would hire the person I thought best suited to be a police officer, regardless of whether that person was an NCO, officer, or even in the military at all.

Keeping in mind you need at least 5 years of "primary response" policing experience before you can even qualify to apply for an Emergency Response Unit with an Ontario police service, joining the military may not necessarily help or hinder you -- you need to be a competent police officer first.

Often, there are idealogical differences between the police and the military, in the way they do things, and in SOME people, this can be a hinderance. For others, they can extract the best from each and be better at both.

If you want to be a police officer, think first about how you are suited to that career goal, and what qualities you have that can best assist you to that end. If you want to be a police officer who is also a reservist, take that a step further and determine how you can extract the best qualities of your reserve experience and apply them to policing. Every person, and every situation, is different.

I am personally in a similar situation. I got tired of waiting to get on a police service, my career of choice, so I joined the military. My decision to join the militia was to achieve a personal goal independent of my civilian law enforcement career goal. However, should I decide later to again apply to be a police officer, I will do my best to take the best parts of the army and put them in my civvy career.

 

[humint]

Hi Habitant: All is good. Long story, but the MIR in Gage did a terrible job diagnosing the problem. I‘m back at it. For my troubles, they‘ve given me a position with some responsibility at the unit. Arrgh. By the way, how are things with you?

 

[mrhappy1985]

"...just make sure that you know the differences between NCM and officer and decide what you want"

Whats the difference between the two really? An officer leads the group, whereas a ncm takes orders?

 

[mrhappy1985]

Sorry about this i thought i was adding to my old thread but it came up as a new post? im not very good with computers. So basically someone said the above quote, can anyone clarify the difference for me?

 

[Michael OLeary]

It‘s one of those issues that‘s difficult to explain to someone that hasn‘t experienced it. And, unfortunately, the Hollywood stereotypres don‘t help one bit.

Consider this brief comparison (it doesn‘t cover every possibility):

You can be an 18 year old private soldier responsible for yourself and your own weapon, expected to be where you‘ve been told to be at the directed tinmings. Most activities will be surpervised by your Section Commander or 2IC and you will seldom be given tasks on your own until you have had an opportunity to prove you can be given such tasks. Your future will be many years of service in the battalion as you increase in rank and experience, but you will always be commanded by the officers of the battalion.

Or you might be a 22 year old (after 4 year university) platoon commander. You will be responsible for the training, welfare and activities of 30 (+/-) soldiers. Some of these soldiers will have infantry training and leadership experience that outweigh your own significantly, but they and you understand that the decisions in the platoon are yours and that you will be held responsible for them. Your future will be alternating tours of duty in and out of the battalion; tours away from the Regiment may be instructional, staff or other types of employment. Tours returning to the battalion will see you in increasing apppintments of responsibility and command over larger numbers of troops.

Another view from my notes:

The young officer brings to the table vigour, freshness, newness, an understanding of the latest interpretation of tactics and leadership as imposed by his/her training, and, ultimately, the vested authority and responsibility which places him/her in charge reinforced by an aggressive need to assert authority because that is what their training experience has expected of them. The Senior NCO brings years of training, experience, knowledge (especially of the unit, resources and soldiers) and, hopefully, maturity and unlimited patience with each new junior officer. The challenge for both is understanding how to balance these contributions for greater effect, the sum is much greater than the whole when both work together, and much less when they don't.

Mike

 

[Danjanou]

The young officer brings to the table vigour, freshness, newness, an understanding of the latest interpretation of tactics and leadership as imposed by his/her training, and, ultimately, the vested authority and responsibility which places him/her in charge reinforced by an aggressive need to assert authority because that is what their training experience has expected of them. The Senior NCO brings years of training, experience, knowledge (especially of the unit, resources and soldiers) and, hopefully, maturity and unlimited patience with each new junior officer. The challenge for both is understanding how to balance these contributions for greater effect, the sum is much greater than the whole when both work together, and much less when they don't.

Mike that says it perfectly, especially that last sentence.

 

[Gunnar]

Cross-posted (and re-posted)from the Recruiting board. Someone complimented my on my explanation, and on further reflection, I like it too.
=========
As near as I can tell, being a civilian, the difference between Officer and NCM is roughly the same as being University or College educated. Nothing - bright people will always make their mark.

University teaches theory (the why), and expects you to extrapolate the practical (the how). College teaches you practical (the how) and expects you to do it well. To the extent that you can see the big picture, you will interpolate the theory (the why).

Both "classes" of jobs are necessary, and both require responsibility. The difference is what you personally get a bang out of doing, and what your own physical and mental abilities allow you to do.

Capt: We will make camp on *THIS* hill. (Oh, Sgt., what would be the best way to make camp on this hill?)

Sgt: We will *MAKE CAMP* on this hill. (Good choice on the hill Sir).

Focus is different, but both use their experience and intelligence to do their part. Captain needs to know the strategic reasons why they camp on the hill. Sgt needs to know how to make a camp, and why camps are made that way. Sgt probably knows the strategic reasons as well or better than the Captain, but he‘s not responsible for it. That‘s why the Captain asks his opinion. Captain may know how to make a camp just as well as the Sgt., but he‘s not responsible for *making* it, just in having it made. Further, a good commander will explain his reasons as far as he can or is allowed so that his NCM‘s can make informed decisions and suggestions, but he‘s not required to - the reasons why are HIS problem.

The difference in responsibility is a biggie. A dumb Sergent can get a bunch of men killed. A dumb Officer can get a LOT of men killed. A good Sergent can save some lives. A good officer can save a lot of lives.

Another two cents from a civilian.

 

[scm77]

This is kind unrelated, but no sense starting a new thread. What is the largest group of people a NCM can command? Does it go any higher then a section commander?

 

[mrhappy1985]

good question scm77

 

[chrisf]

Originally posted by scm77:
[qb] This is kind unrelated, but no sense starting a new thread. What is the largest group of people a NCM can command? Does it go any higher then a section commander? [/qb]

An NCM can command as many people as he‘s assigned...

A section commander is usually a Master-Corpral, with a Sergeant in charge of the platoon, a lieutenant in charge of the sergeant.

 

[Ex Ranger Instructor]

Not to be a jerk, but actually, Just a Sig Op, you aren‘t right.

While it would be possible in theory to have 10000 guys under the command of a Cpl, this wouldn‘t happen in real life. Officers are supposed to take over command duties starting at the Platoon/Troop level.

Section Commanders are SUPPOSED to be Sgts, with a MCpl as the section 2i/c.

Platoon Commanders are SUPPOSED to be Lts or in some cases Capts. 2 Lts are not SUPPOSED to be really in charge of anything, it‘s intended to be a "learning" rank. Ideally, they get slotted into a platoon as a 2i/c. Platoons will also have a WO to advise the officer in charge.

MWOs and CWOs are likewise advisors to higher officer ranks. MWOs are usually Company Sergeant Majors, for example, and CWOs are Regimental Sergeant Majors. Pers holding those ranks are not, in theory, supposed to be officially commanding anything themselves, but in practice, they can, and do take over command responsibilities for small sub units when there is a shortage of officers.

Note that everything I‘ve said above is the way it is under "ideal circumstances". Just a Sig Op probably got the information he posted as a result of seing it done that way, which does happen often.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Just a Sig Op:
[qb]

Originally posted by scm77:
[qb] This is kind unrelated, but no sense starting a new thread. What is the largest group of people a NCM can command? Does it go any higher then a section commander? [/qb]

An NCM can command as many people as he‘s assigned...

A section commander is usually a Master-Corpral, with a Sergeant in charge of the platoon, a lieutenant in charge of the sergeant. [/qb]

A section commander is usually a sergeant, actually, with the platoon second in command ranked as a Warrant Officer and called either the Platoon 2 i/c or Platoon Warrant.

On parade, the Company Sergeant Major will "command" his entire company. In time of war, in the field, it is not unheard of for CSMs to take over entire companies when the officers are all killed or wounded.

Similarly, the RSM will "command" an entire battalion on battalion parades, before the officers turn up.

 

[Ex Ranger Instructor]

Beat you to the punch. Ha ha.

 

[chrisf]

Ok, my mistake, blame it on the reserve world... where you‘re lucky if you can scrounge up the master jacks let alone a sergeant.

 

[ZipperHead]

Originally posted by willy:
[qb]

MWOs and CWOs are likewise advisors to higher officer ranks. MWOs are usually Company Sergeant Majors, for example, and CWOs are Regimental Sergeant Majors. [/qb]

Actually, you have it backwards (sort of). A CSM or RSM could be a Cpl, Pte, Sgt or whatever. CSM and RSM are positions, not ranks. ****Usually*****, a CSM is a MWO, and a RSM is a CWO, but not always. I have had SSM‘s (Squadron Sgt‘s Major) who were WO‘s. In war, once the feces hit the oscillating cooling device, it wouldn‘t be uncommon for a "mere" Cpl or Sgt to be the CSM after the higher-ups bought the farm (that‘s when you hope the guy higher up in the food chain was paying attention during orders.....).

I was going to throw in my opinions on the difference betwixt an officer and an NCO (don‘t even get me started on the name/policy change from NCO to NCM.....), but if you want my ***honest*** opinion, PM me (this board can be read by anyone, and my PER has already suffered enough lately from my "negative" attitudes regarding CF, Army, Corps, etc policy).

I‘ll give my somewhat PC explanation in the difference of officer and an NCO: an officer should bring to the table: knowledge of tactics, leadership and what is expected to accomplish the Commanders mission. An NCO executes the plan. Plain and simple. The NCO ***should**** have the experience and knowledge neccesary to accomplish this, and the officer ****should*** be able to plan what needs to be done, and explain this.

Too many explanations of this devolve into education (formal, that is...... the University of Life has a very steep learning curve, and tuition is very expensive.... I have never stepped foot into a ‘real‘ institute of higher learning, but I don‘t for a second feel inferior in real world ‘knowledge‘ to a person who has a BA, PhD, or whatever other alphabet-soup acronyms that they paid $50,000 for (or had the luck and good grace to have the Crown and tax payers of Canada pay for....). Nor should any soldier. Sure, a formal education can teach you all the theories, but without the practical application thereof, that‘s all it remains: a theory. My opinion is this: no person should become an officer without first being a soldier for a minimum of 3 years. Walk a mile in my ankle boots before slipping on the Oxfords.....

It is a great honour to be an NCO, as well as it should be a great honour and priviledge to be an officer. I would hope that all those that have taken the Commission bear that in mind.

I hope that helps, without causing any great grief to the Mandarins (I‘m sure I‘ll hear about it either way....)

Allan

 

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Allan Luomala:
]Actually, you have it backwards (sort of). A CSM or RSM could be a Cpl, Pte, Sgt or whatever. CSM and RSM are positions, not ranks. ****Usually*****, a CSM is a MWO, and a RSM is a CWO, but not always. I have had SSM‘s (Squadron Sgt‘s Major) who were WO‘s. In war, once the feces hit the oscillating cooling device, it wouldn‘t be uncommon for a "mere" Cpl or Sgt to be the CSM after the higher-ups bought the farm (that‘s when you hope the guy higher up in the food chain was paying attention during orders.....).

Wouldn‘t it? I‘ve never heard of such a thing. CSMs and RSMs, as you know, run ammo and food and water up, and prisoners and waters back of the lines in action. I‘ve not ever read of a company being so badly hit they needed a corporal to take over as CSM - so you‘ll need to forgive me if I ask you for an example of such.

Your other comments are reasonable enough, but would be quite interested in hearing of a case where a corporal was made acting CSM. I don‘t think CSMs were killed all that often anyway; a look at any "roll of honour" from any Canadian unit in either world war will show the majority of losses were among the junior ranks.

The Calgary Tanks lost exactly one SSM killed during all of WW II, for example, and the Calgary Highlanders exactly two CSMs. That doesn‘t include wounded, missing or captured.

I would imagine the CQMS would be likeliest to fill in for a CSM (or SQMS in the case of an SSM). The odds of both being killed in the same action, along with all the platoon 2 i/cs seem to be extremely remote. The Essex Scottish at Dieppe, for example, lost one CQMS killed and none of the CSMs.

In all of WW II the 48th Highlanders had one CQMS killed and none of the CSMs. Again, that doesn‘t include the wounded.

Looking at wounded, captured and killed together, the Calgary Highlanders lost one RQMS, two CQMS, and 10 CSMs (not counting those hit more than once). That‘s for the whole war. The dates for the CSMS were (including men hit more than once)

18 Jul 44
19 Jul 44
24 Jul 44
1 Aug 44
8 Aug 44
13 Aug 44
8 Sep 44
22 Sep 44
22 Sep 44
1 Nov 44
20 Dec 45
9 Mar 45

If you have a corporal filling in as CSM, I‘d suggest you have much bigger problems!

 

[ZipperHead]

My point (and I‘m always prone to exageration... ask my wife, she‘ll tell you) is that anyone (Pte‘s included) could be called in to fill in for CSM or RSM, without neccesarily being a MWO or CWO (respectively). Rare, sure, but that‘s why we are always trained to be able to fill in for the next rank/position higher (I was the acting Tp WO for 6 months whilst "only" a MCpl.... manning issues.... ain‘t they a b!tch?!?!)

I know that there are always more than a few Cpl‘s and MCpl‘s hoping that the Sgt and WO‘s mess blows up during a function...... (like we had here in Gagtown tonight....). Wouldn‘t be total loss, in my mind :evil:

Al

 

[Ex Ranger Instructor]

"Actually, you have it backwards (sort of). A CSM or RSM could be a Cpl, Pte, Sgt or whatever. CSM and RSM are positions, not ranks. ****Usually*****, a CSM is a MWO, and a RSM is a CWO, but not always."

I know that. I thought I said that in my post. I stated specifically that I wasn‘t talking about wild flights of worst case fancy, but rather about the way things are intended to be. What exactly did I get backwards?

 

[Cae]

Just another question: How is the job different if you are an officer instead of a NCM or the other way around. 

 

[McG]

The CF recruiting site describes officers as "Managers & Leaders" and it describes NCMs as "Technicians & Operators."  This is a rather poor way outline of the differences, and it does not do justice to the senior non-commisioned officers (who are NCMs).

Officers are the senior leaders of the forces.  In the Army they start as troop/platoon commanders and can raise to the hights of general.  Officers will also fill the bulk of staff jobs through various headquaters.

NCMs at the junior level are the workers of the Army.  However, as they progress they also become increasingly involved in leadership & managment.  At the platoon/troop level, the WO (an NCM) overseas much of the managment issues.