CEOTP (Continuing Ed Officer Trg Plan) 2003-2018 [Merged]

[agc]

It is likely that releasing after BMQ, but prior to the completion of your initial 3 years of service that you would have a release item which would be unfavourable for re-applying.  Not necessarily impossible, but if it did happen it would take much longer than the first time around.  Possibly longer than just doing your QL3 and applying for the SCP then.

What trade are you and when does your QL3 course begin?

 

[g_jeremies]

Currently my trade is WFE (Water, Fuels, Environmental) Tech, and my QL3 is supposedly starting in November, but I've heard different things every week, including that the course was already fully loaded, and I would have to wait until next April. The course lasts a touch over 6 months.
As to why I went NCM to begin with, several reasons:
-None of the officer trades that I was interested in, or my degree was relevant to, had openings that year (or so I was told).
-This trade was the closest NCM trade to my field of knowledge/interest that I qualified for "medically" (colour vision requirement makes me unsuitable for a slew of air force trades that would be a lot closer to my field of study).
-And lastly, yes, I actually believed the recruiters when they told me that commissioning would be a breeze because I already had a degree. Silly me, I know.

I don't want to VR, but I'm afraid of a Catch-22 with this QQL3 requirement. I can't go SCP without it, but if I get it and apply for SCP, I can see them telling me that they won't let me commission because they just spent time and money training me and they want to get some use/work out of me as a return on their investment.  I'm just baffled that a DEO candidate with literally no military knowledge/background is given an easier ride than someone who has passed BMQ (which is virtually equivalent to IAP - Initial Assessment Phase), and has the same degree as the DEO.

I'd love to hear people's thoughts/advice on this.

Thank you.

 

[George Wallace]

I'm curious as to what officer occupation would be close to WFE?

 

[g_jeremies]

I'm curious as to what officer occupation would be close to WFE?

As far as I know, the closest would be something in the Engineering Branch. Likely Construction Engineer.

 

[PMedMoe]

Why do people say "Army trades are not an options"?  You realize in other elements you may be away from home just as much, you can still get deployed and you will get posted.  :

 

[agc]

All entry plans and in service selection plans are ultimately about meeting the personnel requirements of the CF, while doing everything they can to accommodate the wishes of the member.

Lets compare apples to apples.  Someone made a specific job offer with particular details about your occupation, pay, term of service, etc, and you accepted it.  Someone who similarly accepted a DEO offer would also have to meet certain criteria and apply through a competitive process in order to change occupations.

It's easy to see that there would be a lot of manning issues and abuse of the system if remusters weren't as tightly controlled as they are.  Not saying anything about you, just that the same policy has to apply to everyone.  The CF can't afford thousands of cost moves for example just because individuals decide to change their training programs.

 

[agc]

I was wondering if there is a process to change my enrollment plan from CEOTP to ROTP without releasing.

Unfortunately, no.  How close are you to finishing your degree?

 

[Zoomie]

You realize in other elements you may be away from home just as much, you can still get deployed and you will get posted.  :

I can't speak for the OP - some people just have an allergy to green.  While I can't speak about deployments - as it differs for each Wing that you are posted to.  I would suggest that AF personnel are posted more often that any other DEU.    In the pilot MOSID, we are currently working on 3 year postings.

 

[g_jeremies]

All entry plans and in service selection plans are ultimately about meeting the personnel requirements of the CF, while doing everything they can to accommodate the wishes of the member.

Lets compare apples to apples.  Someone made a specific job offer with particular details about your occupation, pay, term of service, etc, and you accepted it.  Someone who similarly accepted a DEO offer would also have to meet certain criteria and apply through a competitive process in order to change occupations.

It's easy to see that there would be a lot of manning issues and abuse of the system if remusters weren't as tightly controlled as they are.  Not saying anything about you, just that the same policy has to apply to everyone.  The CF can't afford thousands of cost moves for example just because individuals decide to change their training programs.

I understand that. The original purpose of my posts wasn't to explore the rationale of CF policy, but rather to explore what, if any, alternatives there are to commissioning other than SCP.

 

[agc]

I'm just baffled that a DEO candidate with literally no military knowledge/background is given an easier ride than someone who has passed BMQ (which is virtually equivalent to IAP - Initial Assessment Phase), and has the same degree as the DEO.

I'd love to hear people's thoughts/advice on this.

I gave you my thoughts.  My advice is to finish your QL3, get your posting taken care of, and then check in with the PSO again.  Make sure your intent is known to your chain of command, and read the CFAOs so you know what they'll be looking for when it comes time to go to the competition.  Don't approach this with a sense of entitlement (not saying I think you are, just trying to point you in the right direction); you must be better prepared than your competitors to get what you want.

If you feel you were somehow wronged by the recruiting process, you can try a redress, but the statement of understanding you signed on enrollment will make that basically impossible to win.

I can't go SCP without it, but if I get it and apply for SCP, I can see them telling me that they won't let me commission because they just spent time and money training me and they want to get some use/work out of me as a return on their investment. 

Did the PSO tell you this?

 

[CallOfDuty]

Why do people say "Army trades are not an options"?  You realize in other elements you may be away from home just as much, you can still get deployed and you will get posted.  :

  I don't think that's the issue.  Personally, I want to be as far away from " the field" as I can possibly be!!

 

[g_jeremies]

Thanks for the input.
I don't feel wronged. I will finish the QL3, learn what I can, and like you said, after everything is settled down (posting, etc.) see where to take it from there.
Thanks

I gave you my thoughts.  My advice is to finish your QL3, get your posting taken care of, and then check in with the PSO again.  Make sure your intent is known to your chain of command, and read the CFAOs so you know what they'll be looking for when it comes time to go to the competition.  Don't approach this with a sense of entitlement (not saying I think you are, just trying to point you in the right direction); you must be better prepared than your competitors to get what you want.

If you feel you were somehow wronged by the recruiting process, you can try a redress, but the statement of understanding you signed on enrollment will make that basically impossible to win.

Did the PSO tell you this?

 

[agc]

Anyone else have their application in?

I applied for MARS and AEC.  I suspect they will not transfer very many under this program this FY, though.

 

[TimBit]

I don't even know why the program is still around to be honest, with no problems at all in recruiting and some people having already been released or undergoing admin action for failing to complete their degree in 9 yrs...

 

[agc]

The in service competition had fewer occupations open than last year, which probably reflects recruiting's success over the past few years.  So it is a flexible tool in that regard.

Perhaps more success in achieving degrees could be realized if the minimum requirements for education completed was the same as the UTP.  People would know what they were getting into, and wouldn't be able to take this plan as an easier alternative than getting the education done for the SCP or UTP.

 

[Griffon]

People would know what they were getting into, and wouldn't be able to take this plan as an easier alternative than getting the education done for the SCP or UTP.

I think this is the biggest problem with the program.  Many individuals think this is an easier program, but it is in fact both a harder and riskier route to take in the path to a successful career as an officer in the CF.  Members run a much higher risk of reversion or release in the event of a training failure, and if they get through the training they can expect to get minimal support in their endeavors to achieve the academic requirements within their initial TOS.

Many people have gone with the thought that the CF has put a large investment in such occ as PLT and thought they could get away without working towards their degree, but they're not so safe anymore.  The CAS has issued interim direction that CEOTP members reaching the end of their initial TOS without having an ILP or progression towards the attainment of a degree are to be released, so they are starting to crack down.

I don't think CEOTP will be around for much longer...but I put in my app for PLT just in case.  But if I were to be given the option of this or UTPNCM, I would take UTP hands down...it's just one less thing to worry about having to do later.

 

[Griffon]

The Strategic Intake Plan for FY 11/12 is now on the DIN, and it doesn't look good for CEOTP.  There are some major cuts from last year's projections.  If you have access to the DIN, you may want to check it out.

 

[agc]

If you're looking at the CFRG web page, that is a summary of the "External SIP."  Those numbers don't include in service positions.  If you're looking at something else can you let me know which site to check?

Thanks

 

[Bnelly]

Now that UTP is out hopefully we will hear something soon either good or bad.

 

[Bnelly]

Griffon, when you spoke with D Mil C 7-2 did they say anything about this program or just about UTP?