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

SIC Scale of Issue/Entitlements (merged)

Northalbertan

Jr. Member
Reaction score
1
Points
130
PViddy said:
I'm sorry friends (CIC folks).  I'm not buying the "i don't know what we're entitled to", "that information doesn't make it to me".  Our trade is unique sometimes from the stand point of comms, if we just sat around and waited for some of this information to make it to our LHQ level, we would still be waiting.  I know the scales are readily distributed in Ontario (not through DWAN) and the last time when i wasn't sure about something, i emailed my C of C and asked for the latest scale and had it in 5 minutes, it's your own due dilligence.

cheers,

PV

In NW it's available on cadetnet, as I believe it is for all regions in the country.  The latest scale is there.  Not hard to find with a minimal amount of effort. 

I just had a new member who went down to Wainwright for their initial issue.  There was a little confusion at first, the tech hadn't dealt with CIC previously, but once the scale was provided no problems.  They are a pretty good group to deal with.  Of course we weren't asking for the moon or anything we weren't entitled to.  We are authorized enough kit to do our jobs effectively, keeping in mind our primary job is to lead kids.  I can't imagine a situation where we would need a tac vest or helmet to do our job.  It is just as easy to understand why we are not and should not be at the top of the priority list for new kit. 

Vern, I have seen an example of what you were talking about, unfortunately.  I had the misfortune of coming in behind a complete *&%^stick of a CIC officer in Edmonton when I went for my initial issue.  He was literally freaking out because the supply tech wouldn't give him a tac vest, really losing his mind.  I felt embarrassed to share my trade with the man.  I can only imagine what the supply tech was thinking when he was finished with him and I stepped up.  Oh Christ another one.  My experience thereafter was very positive in spite of the jerk in front of me.

It really sucks that the rest of us are jumbled up with and judged by the behavior of a few bad apples.

NorthAlbertan
 

dale622

Jr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Jim Seggie said:
Ignorance of rules and refs is not an excuse.

Never said it was an excuse. Just stating a fact. Just because a sign or brief is posted doesn't mean troops will read. All the troops give a damn about, is the end of day points.
 

McG

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
124
Points
680
Jim Seggie said:
Ignorance of rules and refs is not an excuse.

Ignorance of the Law is not a defence.  But, you will find legal officers advise that rules and regulations are a different situation.
The command needs to show it has made reasonable efforts to make rules and regulations known.  That is why CANFORGENs and similar such higher orders are coppied and published into routine orders.  It is why changes to standing orders are announced in routine orders and it is why routine orders are hanging on bulletin boards.

I have never known guys to be charged for not reading routine orders, but I have known many to be found guilty because they did things (or failed to do things) as directed in routine orders which were posted in communal locations of unit lines.  I have also (unfortunately) seen guys get off for blatantly wrong acts because a unit failed to communicate directions in a way that was demonstrably universal. 
 

dcs

Jr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
A little off topic, but on similar train of thought. When cadet units (CIC's) do not secure uniforms from cadets leaving, and simply feel that they should get lots of new every year it causes me to loose faith in their training, ethics,  and the system.

Sons' first CO aggressively went after, followed up with phone call and letter (indicating that individuals were only using while in cadets and owned by DND) and had almost all returned. Only required a few uniform parts each year.   

Next CO did nothing and ordered well over a hundred each year, including boots etc.  If ran out of funds went to detachment and wined and got more.  He even spoke of how he was going to go and get new gear that came out and full winter wear.  This went on for a number of years and yet no one seemed to say anything about it.  A unit of about 125 cadets ( a lot leave very early so this is a net figure) goes from ordering perhaps 20 new uniforms a year to ordering 80 and no one questions???  Sons in the reg force tell me that when they retire out they may get to keep their dress uniform but that everything else has to be returned. (and should be)

Having been a CIC I have heard on numerous occasions the absolute feeling of entitlement and discussions as to how they can work the system or get items they do not need or are not entitled to.  When son returned to his air cadet squadron and was talking to a few of his formed squadron mates about his training and BMOQ being 16 weeks, a CIC walking by interrupted and stated that "he was able to do the same thing in two weeks".  The sad thing is that he really seemed to believe that his training of this length was the same or equivalent.

Some CIC's at Trenton for Cadet camps complaining about their accommodation and wanting the same as reg force Captains and Majors.

There are some great, dedicated CIC individuals in the program, and there are some that simply should not be there.  But please institute a system of tracking and controlling uniforms............  At the squadron I was at, and I am sure many more it is costing a lot of money.  With the exception of the boots the kids don't want them anyway... and a lot of the boots end up collecting dust or sold to surplus stores.  I know of at least one squadron that secures them immediately after annual parade for those aging out or those not returning.

All of the cadets are on the DND system. Track the uniforms in a similar manner.  Believe me the kids will respect the uniform and staff a lot more instead of it being a running joke.  What do you thing the parents think about DND and budget/cut backs when they see this happening.

Cudos to those CO's and CIC's that are doing it right and handling appropriately.  I don't know how the others are able to get away with what is happening and being paid to do so.
 

myself.only

Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Northalbertan said:
In NW it's available on cadetnet, as I believe it is for all regions in the country.  The latest scale is there.  Not hard to find with a minimal amount of effort. 

Yes  :nod: that recent change will definitely be a boon for all once we all get up to speed, probably the only really effective means of getting info out to everybody including those Corps you hear about in the boonies with 2-3 staff where their "admin office" is a pair of boxes in the CO's trunk. 

Northalbertan said:
I just had a new member who went down to Wainwright for their initial issue.  There was a little confusion at first, the tech hadn't dealt with CIC previously, but once the scale was provided no problems.  They are a pretty good group to deal with.  Of course we weren't asking for the moon or anything we weren't entitled to.  We are authorized enough kit to do our jobs effectively, keeping in mind our primary job is to lead kids.  I can't imagine a situation where we would need a tac vest or helmet to do our job.  It is just as easy to understand why we are not and should not be at the top of the priority list for new kit. 

Well, I'd be lying if I was to agree I can't imagine a situation where we would need a tac vest.  After all, I frequently use the item it replaced - my purchased 82 pattern FFO - when directly supervising cadets in the field.

But the key point, I think, is that the whole attitude of (a) demanding kit beyond our entitlement and (b) not accepting that we are not priority for issuing items that we are entitled to, is simply unacceptable.. And furthermore, it should really be a red flag up the chain that the officer is probably not suited for delivering anyone any leadership program.


Northalbertan said:
It really sucks that the rest of us are jumbled up with and judged by the behavior of a few bad apples.

NorthAlbertan

Well, I cannot agree with you more of this point.  And I hate to see those bad apples then described as how "most CIC officers" are.
Well, hopefully that stigma can goad those of us who know better into sorting out the bad apples and those noobs who might emulate them.
 

myself.only

Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
dcs said:
A little off topic, but on similar train of thought. When cadet units (CIC's) do not secure uniforms from cadets leaving, and simply feel that they should get lots of new every year it causes me to loose faith in their training, ethics,  and the system.

Sons' first CO aggressively went after, followed up with phone call and letter (indicating that individuals were only using while in cadets and owned by DND) and had almost all returned. Only required a few uniform parts each year.   

All of the cadets are on the DND system. Track the uniforms in a similar manner.  Believe me the kids will respect the uniform and staff a lot more instead of it being a running joke.  What do you thing the parents think about DND and budget/cut backs when they see this happening.

Cudos to those CO's and CIC's that are doing it right and handling appropriately.  I don't know how the others are able to get away with what is happening and being paid to do so.

Please bear in mind, direction from higher is one phone call and one letter. No communication that can be construed as aggressive, or threatening legal action or any other penalty, or even claiming that anyone is being held responsible for the kit (except the CO). Your letter is to list the missing pieces of kit and ask the parents for their help in recovering it.

Our personal opinions aside - and I also hate to see uniforms not get returned, anything more than that is not deemed to be "handling appropriately". 
 

392

Full Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
myself.only said:
After all, I frequently use the item it replaced - my purchased 82 pattern FFO - when directly supervising cadets in the field.

I'm curious - why do you need full fighting order to supervise cadets?
 

my72jeep

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
0
Points
410
bananaman said:
You mean that random printed piece of knowledge that no one pays attention to? Just because it's posted up doesn't mean people take personal initiative to look.
My HQ is very diligent  at posting RO's on the wall in the OR 730km away. emailing them to out laying units hit or miss.
 

myself.only

Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Well the usual reason, load bearing.  When not carrying a ruck, it seems the most effective way to keep my hands free while carrying canteen(s), small first aid kit, rain gear, and all the other stuff that's nice to keep handy while secretly wondering how much longer we'll go before the candidate realizes he's on the wrong bearing.
 

my72jeep

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
0
Points
410
Northalbertan said:
In NW it's available on cadetnet, as I believe it is for all regions in the country.  The latest scale is there.  Not hard to find with a minimal amount of effort. 

I just had a new member who went down to Wainwright for their initial issue.  There was a little confusion at first, the tech hadn't dealt with CIC previously, but once the scale was provided no problems.  They are a pretty good group to deal with.  Of course we weren't asking for the moon or anything we weren't entitled to.  We are authorized enough kit to do our jobs effectively, keeping in mind our primary job is to lead kids.  I can't imagine a situation where we would need a tac vest or helmet to do our job.  It is just as easy to understand why we are not and should not be at the top of the priority list for new kit. 

Vern, I have seen an example of what you were talking about, unfortunately.  I had the misfortune of coming in behind a complete *&%^stick of a CIC officer in Edmonton when I went for my initial issue.  He was literally freaking out because the supply tech wouldn't give him a tac vest, really losing his mind.  I felt embarrassed to share my trade with the man.  I can only imagine what the supply tech was thinking when he was finished with him and I stepped up.  Oh Christ another one.  My experience thereafter was very positive in spite of the jerk in front of me.

It really sucks that the rest of us are jumbled up with and judged by the behavior of a few bad apples.

NorthAlbertan
Been there. but I've also walked in to supply with the latest scale and the CANFORGEN telling me I can have it. (fleece) I was given a used jacket that the zipper was n/s and a pair of bottoms that I swear some one had a crap in. When I questioned these items I was told "You want fleece that's all you get, take it or leave it"
 

jpjohnsn

Member
Reaction score
0
Points
160
I've been in the CIC for 23 years and, despite working at a couple of CSTCs and a few squadrons, this proverbial tantrumming CIC member is beyond my experience.  I HAVE seen OCdts getting offered kit far beyond their entitlements - not because they were scamming it but because the supply tech honestly didn't know the scale of issue.  Case in point, an CIC army OCdt on the old Trenton Air Cadet Camp slate (when they had one) who was offered everything - and I mean EVERYTHING imaginable from Trenton supply.  To his credit, he turned pretty much all of it down.

As was said before, CANFORGENs are simply not directly accessible to most cadet units and our HQs don't seem to filter that info down reliably.  The admonition here to pick up a phone is all well and good but you have to know you're missing a piece of info before you can inquire about it. Frankly, I've read more CANFORGENs here than at my own unit.

Cadetnet is a fine resource but info isn't always filed in the places you'd expect and isn't always updated in a timely manner.  The lag between the promulgation of the latest scales of issue and when it arrived on cadetnet was a LONG time.  And while some Supplies may have a scale of issue handy so we scheming CIC don't get tac vests,  I also bring along my own copy because, more than once, I was told i wasn't entitled to something the scale of issue said I was.

Now, the LCF issue... Well, I don't really care about the bits and bobs.  I've always believed that we, as CIC, should wear the most similar order of dress to what we tell the cadets to wear.  They're in jacket and tie, I'm in jacket and tie.  They are in short sleeves "summer dress", so am I.  Being air, I also rail against the few air CIC members who insist on  wearing berets in DEU when the cadets wear wedges.  Similar orders of dress down the line.

In the field or on the range, etc, we're expected to be in uniform.  Prior to CADPAT, we were entitled to nothing. If you saw someone in OG 107s, it's because they bought them at a surplus store and the general condition reflected that.  Yeah, we were quite aware of that and were just as angry and embarrassed by that ourselves but what exactly were we supposed to do about it, wear DEU in training areas in Blackdown?  Hell, I've had to resort to wearing the OG green longjohns under a set of OG 107 pants late into the spring because they were so sheer they almost qualified as lingere!  So you should excuse the enthusiasm when we get a message saying that a) we're going to have CADPAT issued to us and b) start making the appointments to go get them.  Are we supposed to feel guilty because we're allowed to join the queue for issue despite whatever other supply issues are out there?  Nope, not me.  It's not that I believe my need is greater or even equal to someone who needs them for operations - no that's not it.  But if I'm told to go get it and it's there and I'm issued it, I refuse to feel guilty about it.

Now, when (and if) any of our folks show up and start acting like tools, did anyone ever think to get it passed to their chain of command?  I know that any of the times I was CO of a cadet squadron, I would have kicked the keister of any spoiled brat member of my staff into next month. 

Now, coming to the Supply counter from the other side, I've also run into some Supply Techs who like to play their petty little power-trippy games because I'm "only CIC" - hence the copy of the scale of issue I bring.  One summer I was working in Trenton for the summer and, literally, walked through the bottom of one my oxfords.  I went to supply and was told I would have to go back to Borden to get new ones issued.  Fair ball, says I and then strolls over to cash sales (when we still had it) and was told I couldn't even BUY a pair because I was CIC and Reg Force people posted to Trenton *might* need them (the shelf had many pairs in my size, by the way). 

If you advocate for yourself, your experience ends up on places like this as an example of a CIC officer trying to throw their weight around.  You defer and your experience ends up in places like this as an anecdote of a Cpl who put one over on a CIC officer.  That's some catch, that Catch 22.
 

GAP

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Mentor
Reaction score
3
Points
380
Uh...not that it's not interesting reading, but does this thread not belong in the Cadet forum so the information is distributed there?
 

myself.only

Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
GAP said:
Uh...not that it's not interesting reading, but does this thread not belong in the Cadet forum so the information is distributed there?

IMHO, I'd say it belongs here in the uniform forum since the thread deals with the interactions between sup techs and CIC officers on the subjects of uniforms.

To shift it to the cadet forum would be excluding half that equation: sup techs such as ArmyVern who has provided significant insight into what sup techs are putting up with.
In fact, while the implication is that only CIC officers to try exceed their entitlement or line up for kit based on LCF, going to clothing stores is an experience common to all trades - but unknown to cadets - and I'd welcome anyone Reg F or PRes contributing their insight on the experience.

Besides it has nothing to do with training cadets or the cadet program.

 

Jarnhamar

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
678
Points
940
CIC members should wear the same kit as the cadets they instruct/supervise.

CIC officers shouldn't be wearing Load bearing vests anymore than they should be carrying rubber rifles while on a nav ex.
 

myself.only

Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
ObedientiaZelum said:
CIC officers shouldn't be wearing Load bearing vests anymore than they should be carrying rubber rifles while on a nav ex.

Really?  Rifle = load bearing vest
Utterly ridiculous comparison.
I guess I should carry things around in a grocery bag. 

ObedientiaZelum said:
CIC members should wear the same kit as the cadets they instruct/supervise.
Actually, all of my cadets are issued utility belt, canteen and pouch. They're encouraged to purchase additional LBE to facilitate carrying things of use and most of the NCOs do.
 

jpjohnsn

Member
Reaction score
0
Points
160
ObedientiaZelum said:
CIC members should wear the same kit as the cadets they instruct/supervise.

CIC officers shouldn't be wearing Load bearing vests anymore than they should be carrying rubber rifles while on a nav ex.
Sorry, but I have to pedant for a moment...

About the only thing common between the kit I was issued and what cadets are issued is the wedge, the boots, the SS shirt, the tie and the socks.  Everything else is *similar* but not the same.  If the cadets and the staff were expected to dress alike, I fear that our VSSes might be in for some scrutiny. ;)

The army cadets are coming on-line with a field training uniform (also issued to air and sea cadets - as required - at summer training centres) but this is basically the OG-107 with a few modifications.  Air cadets are authorised to wear surplus OG-107s in the field if they wear it correctly.

Now, I completely agree that the cadets and their staff should be in equivalent orders of dress and I COMPLETELY agree that tac vests are not something cadets or CIC should be wearing.  If a staff member of mine showed up with a tac vest on an FTX, I'd tell them to put it back in their car and leave it home next time.

 

Jarnhamar

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
678
Points
940
myself.only said:
Really?  Rifle = load bearing vest
Utterly ridiculous comparison.
I guess I should carry things around in a grocery bag.
Or you could try a backpack?

Comparing a rifle to military issued full fighting order isn't that ridiculous when you consider the primary thing the webbing/LBV is designed to carry.


jpjohnsn said:
and I COMPLETELY agree that tac vests are not something cadets or CIC should be wearing.  If a staff member of mine showed up with a tac vest on an FTX, I'd tell them to put it back in their car and leave it home next time.
Agreed.  I'm not sure if it's semantics or not but I think that "no tacvest"  would/should extend to "webbing" and load bearing vests since it's the same function.
 

jpjohnsn

Member
Reaction score
0
Points
160
ObedientiaZelum said:
Agreed.  I'm not sure if it's semantics or not but I think that "no tacvest"  would/should extend to "webbing" and load bearing vests since it's the same function.
Only to a point.  We have available to us, in cadet stores in Borden, 82 pattern webbing and rucksacks.  When we're out for the full weekend, we'll draw them for the cadets to use so they'll have a handy water supply, someplace to keep their rain gear (if the weather looks like it'll be needed) and to have a decent pack to hike back to the biv site.  It's practical and any excuse to expose the cadets to actually military kit - obsolete or not - IMHO goes towards the 'stimulating interest in the activities of the CF'.  In those instances, I see no issue in CIC wearing webbing for that version of its intended purpose.
 

392

Full Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
myself.only said:
Well the usual reason, load bearing.  When not carrying a ruck, it seems the most effective way to keep my hands free while carrying canteen(s), small first aid kit, rain gear, and all the other stuff that's nice to keep handy while secretly wondering how much longer we'll go before the candidate realizes he's on the wrong bearing.

Is there any reason why the same thing could not be accomplished through the same means most Cbt Arms NCOs and WOs use when they are assessing candidates' abilities to move dismounted across a piece of terrain - a small pack or personally purchased Blackhawk backpack? Sorry, but I cannot for one second think of one single reason that a CIC officer or any cadet (and please do not use the term NCO without cadet in front of it when speaking of your cadets - the soldiers, sailors and airmen/women of the CAF have earned that designation) would require a piece of load carriage equipment designed solely for a soldier in combat to have quick and easy access to those items needed to inflict harm on the enemy, aside from some type of PD training the CIC officer may be participating in with a RegF or PRes field unit.

I have no doubt CIC officers and staff cadets require the ability to have water and other goodies on-hand when in "the field" with their cadets, however entitlements are there so that the finite resources the CF have are properly managed and the right people get the right tools to do the jobs required of them. Want a tacvest issued? Component Transfer to a MOC that requires it and the rest of the skillsets and headaches that go with it. Don't want all that? There are all kinds of aftermarket places to buy good quality load carriage equipment that you don't need an entitlement to purchase.

You can keep "comfortable", have all the goodies you need and set the example to the younger folks without making more out of your role than what it is  :2c:
 

myself.only

Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
ObedientiaZelum said:
Or you could try a backpack?

Comparing a rifle to military issued full fighting order isn't that ridiculous when you consider the primary thing the webbing/LBV is designed to carry.

IIRC FFO is designed to carry the essentials required to sustain you in the field for 24-hours.
Not quite verbatim but that is the intent.
So, sorry I still don't see the devil incarnate lurking in my FFO.

True I could buy a civvie backpack. But honestly why would I? 
Setting aside comfort, that I already have a ruck for carrying more than the essentials, and the comparative utility of FFO's organized pouches over a backpack, I see nothing morally superior in wearing a blatantly civilian backpack with my CADPATs.

Having said that - and to get back on point - the point I was making is that although I can see the utility when trekking of a tacvest or other LBE (and on this point, OZ, you and I agree that are the same item), however, this in no way endorses CIC officers hassling sup techs for such kit or lying to obtain it.
 
Top