Poll

The RCN has its old rank titles and executive curl back.  What should be the next step for the CF rank structure?

Nothing.  The current rank system works, so leave it alone.
120 (58.5%)
Complete return to the pre-unification ranks of the 50s and early 60s.
40 (19.5%)
Complete return to post unification ranks of the 70s and early 80s.
1 (0.5%)
Officers only return to the pre-unification ranks of the 50s and early 60s.
9 (4.4%)
Copy the UK rank system - it is the prototype anyway.
17 (8.3%)
Copy the US rank system - they are the new colonial master.
2 (1%)
Create a whole new Canadian system.
8 (3.9%)
Lobby for standardized NATO rank insignia.
7 (3.4%)
Copy the French rank system - it is the other founding nation's turn
1 (0.5%)

Total Members Voted: 204

Author Topic: "Re-Royalization", "Re-Britification" and the Heritage Transformation  (Read 1985305 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Pusser

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 73,150
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,537
Now someone in the Army will read this and demand that the buttons and bows elves make an Cdn Army Ops capbadge...

Except, they already have one, that they make the rest of us wear...
Sure, apes read Nietzsche.  They just don't understand it.

Offline Pusser

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 73,150
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,537
OGBD,

I want to preface with the statement that I share your beliefs in the way we would like to see things run in the log world.

BUT

I was that MS Sup Tech you talk about; who after only serving with the RCN (Minus some time in AFG) was posted to a field unit (CFJSR).  Actually, Vern was my RQ.  I think I did ok.  I managed to get promoted to PO2 and posted back to the RCN in 4 years minus 8 or 9 months of paternity leave.  I actually liked the Army, and I think it taught me allot about leadership that, IMHO, the RCN is neither prepared nor capable to teach.

Lastly I wouldn't over inflate the RCN's grasp of logistics, if I were you.  I cant speak for others but I don't hold the understanding or appreciation of Logistics by MARS O's in great esteem.  The Army, while as difficult as it can be, at least understands it needs beans and bullets to fight and win, the RCN seems to see it as some dark voodoo magic that isn't worth the time in understanding or respecting, until it all goes to shite and the Log Dept is left to pick up the pieces again.

Again I agree with you, in premise, but that's not the way it is, and the RCN will not heavy hand the Log Branch or Service or what ever so we are all going to have to live with it.


I think OGBD oversimplified things a bit too much.  Yes, in order to obtain a Command Qualification (which is only required by the CO and XO) a MARS officer is required to pass a Command Exam on Logistics.  It's a self-study program, however, and the knowledge gained is cursory at best.  What it really does is enable the CO/XO to have an intelligent conversation with the SYO and understand what the SYO is telling them.  It certainly does not qualify the CO/XO to take over the SYO's job!  More to the point, however, is that naval logistics is much more holistic than what we see in the Army.  Whereas an army unit may have a variety of sections that handle various aspects of logistics, each with their own OiC, the ship has only one department dedicated to that and only one officer in charge of all logistics.  Therefore, a naval logistics officer is expected to have a much broader knowledge of all things logistical at a much earlier career stage than his/her army/air force counterparts.  They also have to have a different understanding of logistics support in general - ships are different than tanks and require a very different kind of support.  Having said all of this, naval logistics is actually much simpler than army logistics, which is one of the reasons we don't need as many people to do it, but that doesn't mean it's easier or that an army and naval logisticians are interchangeable!

The reason most naval officers have little understanding or knowledge of logistics is largely due to the much smaller amount of logistics planning that they are exposed to.  For the most part, naval logistics planning is done by the folks who design the ship - they decide what systems are on board (therefore, the spare parts lists) and they also decide how much storage space is available.  Even from a naval logisticians point of view, our job is pretty simple: fill the storerooms - when they're full, you're done.  I never had to worry about what I had to bring (because it rarely changes), how many trucks I needed to carry it, how much fuel I needed for those trucks, or how many additional trucks I needed to carry the fuel for the trucks I needed to carry the gear...

All of this to say that although there is certainly a lot of common ground amongst all logisticians, there are also some significant differences.  In fact, I would say that there are enough differences to enable the log trades to have separate promotion lists by environment and to allow personnel to concentrate on only one environment for their careers.  Trades not big enough?  Nonsense!  The Navy already has separate promotion lists by Home Port Division for most hard sea trades and the log trades are bigger than those.   Should folks want to move around, fine, but don't require it.  Furthermore, if someone does change environment, they should also change uniform to match.
Sure, apes read Nietzsche.  They just don't understand it.

Online MJP

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 135,605
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,218

The Logistics Branch will be going to the "Royal Canadian Logistics Service".   
Ugggg cue puke emoji.   :boke:    More deck chairs being rearranged on the Titanic

One of the CWO Gp recommendations to the Log Branch was that "if you want non-commissioned Logisticians to be proud of the cap-badge they wear, then give them a cap-badge they'd be proud to wear" with comments alluding to the fact that the .02 cent Chinese cheap knock-off that the troops, sailors, airmen & women are currently relegated to wearing sucks.  Proposed that the current Log O cap-badge (larger and more prominent than the troops' current badge) be issued to the troops

This I totally agree with.

The reason for that is because the LS in the RCN (or the Cpl in the RCAF) can be promoted, packed up and moved into a Cdn Army Unit on 30 days notice ... and likewise.  ONE service serving 3 environments - and many more Commands.  ONE merit list no matter the uniform colour etc etc.

That whole premise is ridiculous and results in a number of people being re-trained to be able to function in a new environment.

The better solution is that I wish we would pursue is:

In fact, I would say that there are enough differences to enable the log trades to have separate promotion lists by environment and to allow personnel to concentrate on only one environment for their careers.  Trades not big enough?  Nonsense!  The Navy already has separate promotion lists by Home Port Division for most hard sea trades and the log trades are bigger than those.   Should folks want to move around, fine, but don't require it.  Furthermore, if someone does change environment, they should also change uniform to match.

Staying within environmental lines makes much more sense rather than posting people willy nilly all over the place just to fill holes.  There will still be purple jobs that can be filled by any DEU at the institutional level to ensure that there is a good mixture of cross thought/pollination but the focus for a young soldier from Pte-MCpl should be predominately within their environmental lines.  I don’t need a Navy PO2 that has grown up in the Navy in a field unit any more than HMCS Winnipeg needs an Army Sgt that has developed in a CMBG.
Hope is not a valid COA

Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 172,490
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,645
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Whoa whoa whoa.....

I sense heresy. You mean that Helleyer was wrong when he MBA'd all Log functions into one, regardless of the specific needs of the elements they served?

Shocked I am.
"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 E.R. Campbell

  • Retired, years ago
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 456,210
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,074
Whoa whoa whoa.....

I sense heresy. You mean that Helleyer was wrong when he MBA'd all Log functions into one, regardless of the specific needs of the elements they served?

Shocked I am.


Actually he wasn't totally wrong ...

Many people, in the mid 1960s, were looking, hard, at what the Americans and brits were doing: the US and the UK were both, for example  pioneering "joint" and "integrated" units and formations for support services ~ the two defence communications systems, for example, were the models for out (mid to late 1960s) CF Communications System and, a bit later, CF Communications Command. Handling dat-t0-day strategic communications in underground bunkers is a skill that Navy, Army and RCAF communications specialists shared, equally. Who cared what colour of suit the person handling your message wore?


But life got more complicated when you took a sailor from that underground bunker and said: "Hi, there, this is 1st Div Sig Regt ... do your work in that back of that truck after you have stood sentry and so on." The skill sets for soldiers and sailors were different and there was never enough time and money to make the "all singing - all dancing" creature that Mr Hellyer may have envisioned. It was, I think, worse for the Log Branch, but some of my best cooks in an Army fiend unit were navy types and one of my sergeant clerks, 20+ years solid air base experience, adapted quickly, easily, enthusiastically and well to working in the field.

-----

By the way, I know for a fact that back about the time the executive curl was being re-introduced a proposal was made to put ALL naval personnel into naval ops cap badges and use branch identifiers above officers' stripes and on NCMs' collars. I know that at least a couple of retired and one serving admiral supported the idea. Some RCAF colonels also proposed something similar ... both proposals went nowhere.
It is ill that men should kill one another in seditions, tumults and wars; but it is worse to bring nations to such misery, weakness and baseness
as to have neither strength nor courage to contend for anything; to have nothing left worth defending and to give the name of peace to desolation.
Algernon Sidney in Discourses Concerning Government, (1698)
----------
Like what you see/read here on Army.ca?  Subscribe, and help keep it "on the air!"

Offline Dimsum

    West coast best coast.

  • Mentor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 133,880
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,972
  • I get paid to travel. I just don't pick where.
By the way, I know for a fact that back about the time the executive curl was being re-introduced a proposal was made to put ALL naval personnel into naval ops cap badges and use branch identifiers above officers' stripes and on NCMs' collars.

Now *that* would be truly "re-Britified".
Philip II of Macedon to Spartans (346 BC):  "You are advised to submit without further delay, for if I bring my army into your land, I will destroy your farms, slay your people, and raze your city."

Reply:  "If."

Offline PuckChaser

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 877,075
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,190
    • Peacekeeper's Homepage
How would 291ers know who's who on ships when they can't see colours?  ;D

Offline Halifax Tar

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 33,648
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,423
  • Ready Aye Ready
How would 291ers know who's who on ships when they can't see colours?  ;D

We lock them in a dark closet, away from everyone else, and only let them out to eat, so it wouldn't be an issue lol
Lead me, follow me or get the hell out of my way

Offline ArmyVern

    is awake.

  • Army.ca Myth
  • *****
  • 201,501
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,461
...

That whole premise is ridiculous and results in a number of people being re-trained to be able to function in a new environment.

The better solution is that I wish we would pursue is:

Staying within environmental lines makes much more sense rather than posting people willy nilly all over the place just to fill holes.  There will still be purple jobs that can be filled by any DEU at the institutional level to ensure that there is a good mixture of cross thought/pollination but the focus for a young soldier from Pte-MCpl should be predominately within their environmental lines.  I don’t need a Navy PO2 that has grown up in the Navy in a field unit any more than HMCS Winnipeg needs an Army Sgt that has developed in a CMBG.

I've said many times that this would be acceptable ... provided that we go to THREE separate merit lists as well.  What would not be acceptable is staying with the one merit list and bypassing the 15 or so RCAF or RCN suppies to get to the highest listed Cdn Army MCpl because the available position is with the Army.

I've served in every environment - the learning curve between the three is nothing difficult - no more so than changing sections or Coys and overcoming that curve.

If you want to get right down to it, the last thing the Cdn Army needs is an Logistics Army Sgt that's developed in a single CMBG; and there's way too much of that crap going on these days.  I have a much harder time snapping these guys & gals out of there "this IS the way it is" mindset and often erroneous/ill-trained procedures/requirements than those I get in from other environments.  They obviously have no damn clue at this location what a properly filled out 942 tag looks like, pretty basic stuff, right up to big stuff - shipping bolts with weapons etc.   :facepalm:

« Last Edit: May 28, 2017, 12:47:14 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 ArmyVern

    is awake.

  • Army.ca Myth
  • *****
  • 201,501
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,461
...
Whereas an army unit may have a variety of sections that handle various aspects of logistics, each with their own OiC, the ship has only one department dedicated to that and only one officer in charge of all logistics.  Therefore, a naval logistics officer is expected to have a much broader knowledge of all things logistical at a much earlier career stage than his/her army/air force counterparts.  They also have to have a different understanding of logistics support in general - ships are different than tanks and require a very different kind of support.  ...

Hmmm, that ship sounds eerily like a Cdn Army 1st line unit.  So, much like the QM (Quartermaster) in a Cdn Army Unit oversees the Logistics and has to have a broader knowledge of all things Logistical much earlier in their career (and QM shops within 1st Line Army Units providing their integral support aren't that big either).  Likewise the Log Flight O or Sp Flight O within the RCAF.  Yep, a ship is different from a plane, is different from a tank, or even a deployed MT out of the signals world ... they all require support, parts, maintenance, procurement and contracting support often while deployed outside of their home location etc etc.

Different - yes; special - no.

You had a point until you started talking OiCs etc and comparing Army 2nd Line with RCN 1st line Ships (Units).  The Army has those 1st Line Units too just as the RCN also has 2nd line.
« Last Edit: May 28, 2017, 12:43:43 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.

Online MJP

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 135,605
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,218
I've said many times that this would be acceptable ... provided that we go to THREE separate merit lists as well.  What would not be acceptable is staying with the one merit list and bypassing the 15 or so RCAF or RCN suppies to get to the highest listed Cdn Army MCpl because the available position is with the Army.

I've served in every environment - the learning curve between the three is nothing difficult - no more so than changing sections or Coys and overcoming that curve.

If you want to get right down to it, the last thing the Cdn Army needs is an Logistics Army Sgt that's developed in a single CMBG; and there's way too much of that crap going on these days.  I have a much harder time snapping these guys & gals out of there "this IS the way it is" mindset and often erroneous/ill-trained procedures/requirements than those I get in from other environments.  They obviously have no damn clue at this location what a properly filled out 942 tag looks like, pretty basic stuff, right up to big stuff - shipping mags with weapons etc.   :facepalm:

Absolutely 3 merit lists and absolutely not sitting in a single CMBG.  To much of that already I agree.

As for not knowing the trade, I blame the trade for continuing to promote people too fast.  Shitty people with rank don't help the trade and the soldiers.  We also have inconsistent QL4 requirements and oversight  from CFLTC with every base doing it different.  Add in the fact that we still don't treat DRMIS trg as a high priority make a recipe for disaster.

I have seen what great leadership and technical trg can do to a previously weak section.   We simply do not have the expertise across the breath of the trade to make it happen everywhere IMHO.  E need to take a breath and revitalize technical and leadership trg in the trade.
Hope is not a valid COA

Offline ArmyVern

    is awake.

  • Army.ca Myth
  • *****
  • 201,501
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,461
Absolutely 3 merit lists and absolutely not sitting in a single CMBG.  To much of that already I agree.

As for not knowing the trade, I blame the trade for continuing to promote people too fast.  Shitty people with rank don't help the trade and the soldiers.  We also have inconsistent QL4 requirements and oversight  from CFLTC with every base doing it different.  Add in the fact that we still don't treat DRMIS trg as a high priority make a recipe for disaster.

I have seen what great leadership and technical trg can do to a previously weak section.   We simply do not have the expertise across the breath of the trade to make it happen everywhere IMHO.  E need to take a breath and revitalize technical and leadership trg in the trade.

I've edited my original to read "bolts with weapons" vice "mags with weapons".   >:(  That was fun.

Agreed on the promotions.  Many Log trades in the same boat- that's what tends to happen when we grow the CAF but not the supporters.  Cutting the "Tail" is NOT supposed to include the actual boots on the ground supporters.

As for DRMIS, it is important.  Problem is that the QL courses are 'all-DRMIS all the time' and troops have no concept, knowledge of, or inherent ability any more to know what the no-longer-taught basics are.  I'm pretty certain that the QL6 which used to be Warehouse, hazmat, management and building is now all-DRMIS too.  That isn't helping.

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 Pusser

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 73,150
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,537
Different - yes; special - no.

You had a point until you started talking OiCs etc and comparing Army 2nd Line with RCN 1st line Ships (Units).  The Army has those 1st Line Units too just as the RCN also has 2nd line.

I never said special (well, OK, perhaps I did, but I didn't mean it like that).  First and 2nd line get blurred in ships as the Logistics Department in a single ship does both.  An AOR is not really a 2nd line unit supporting ships, although it kind of does that sort of thing sometimes (it also provides an occasional 3rd line function if you really want to get into it).  When an AOR provides support to another ship (with the exception of fuel), it's more along the lines of one QM (i.e. the SYO) helping out another QM.  With the exception of fuel, AORs do not really carry stock for other ships unless it has been specifically pre-arranged and even then, they're really only providing deck space.
Sure, apes read Nietzsche.  They just don't understand it.

Offline Cloud Cover

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 13,230
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,204
Re: "Re-Royalization", "Re-Britification" and the Heritage Transformation
« Reply #5813 on: September 19, 2017, 11:10:43 »
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/queen-canadian-secretary-royal-visits-heritage-1.4295322

Interesting how the Liberals are, to an extent, "de-royalizing".   I have a feeling that if it wasn't for the cost, they would indeed reset things back to 1968, however as the article points out they have left the military out of the latest reformation, for now.

 
You're right. I Never  Met A Motherfucker Quite Like You, or someone as smart as you.  Never ever will, either.