# Is there a difference between Corporal and Private?



## stellarpanther (16 Sep 2014)

I'm just curious what other mbr's experience is between Cpl and Pte.  I know when I was posted on a base, there actually was a difference such as the Pte's normally got the crap duties before a Cpl etc.  Here in Ottawa there is no difference between a senior Cpl and a no hook Pte.  At least in my current unit.  Is this normal?  I bit my tongue as a no hook Pte, on the job for about 9 months sarcastically corrected me in front of the MCpl and then I was questioned today by the same Pte as to why I couldn't do something.  If there is no difference then why have the rank in the first place?  In case it matters, I'm referring to the RMS Clerk trade.


----------



## Brasidas (16 Sep 2014)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> I'm just curious what other mbr's experience is between Cpl and Pte.  I know when I was posted on a base, there actually was a difference such as the Pte's normally got the crap duties before a Cpl etc.  Here in Ottawa there is no difference between a senior Cpl and a no hook Pte.  At least in my current unit.  Is this normal?  I bit my tongue as a no hook Pte, on the job for about 9 months sarcastically corrected me in front of the MCpl and then I was questioned today by the same Pte as to why I couldn't do something.  If there is no difference then why have the rank in the first place?  In case it matters, I'm referring to the RMS Clerk trade.



Short answer, there was a larger distinction under Hellyer which was erased in order to get treasury to allow a pay increase. It is certainly possible for someone not to get promoted to corporal, but its not that great of an achievement to get promoted. Experienced privates are commonly given leadership positions for some taskings, and some incompetent corporals are given maximum supervision five years after their promotion.

If you're getting attitude in front of your supervisors, and you aren't being allowed to take corrective action, you should be talking to your supervisors in private about why. Whomever's in charge should be keeping an eye on respect amongst their subordinates.

Either there is a problem with your unit or in your perception of what happened. Even if you are a lost cause as a leadership prospect in the eyes of your supervisors, contempt by a private for a corporal isn't helpful within a unit.


----------



## kratz (16 Sep 2014)

I've just retired as a clerk, when I started as an 841.

Customer Service = you always doing the right thing.

In the years since I joined, I have encountered the "Walmart shopper", who 
did not like the clerk answer. It's our job to KNOW the answers, and STRIVE to 
benefit the member. So rank in trade does not show as much as experience.

I've seen OS who are switched on and I have seen MS who are a bag of nails.
As for attitude from those "Walmart" customers when you are on the front line,
it is your "proving ground" in our trade, but you do NOT need to put up with abuse.

The title and location of your question is valid, but not in the worded right or in the right place for this site.


----------



## PuckChaser (16 Sep 2014)

Kratz, it looks like this is more of a clerk to clerk issue, not a customer service-type one.


----------



## wildman0101 (17 Sep 2014)

Yeah, Time in. There was private, usually after basic, copy, Then you did your time in whatever Regt you were post to,,,,After 4  yrs service  depending you were promoted to Cpl.  Comprendre Amigo. Dumb  Ass


----------



## x_para76 (17 Sep 2014)

wildman0101 said:
			
		

> Yeah, Time in. There was private, usually after basic, copy, Then you did your time in whatever Regt you were post to,,,,After 4  yrs service  depending you were promoted to Cpl.  Comprendre Amigo. Dumb  ***



WTF?!


----------



## DAA (17 Sep 2014)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> I'm just curious what other mbr's experience is between Cpl and Pte.  I know when I was posted on a base, there actually was a difference such as the Pte's normally got the crap duties before a Cpl etc.  Here in Ottawa there is no difference between a senior Cpl and a no hook Pte.  At least in my current unit.  Is this normal?  I bit my tongue as a no hook Pte, on the job for about 9 months sarcastically corrected me in front of the MCpl and then I was questioned today by the same Pte as to why I couldn't do something.  If there is no difference then why have the rank in the first place?  In case it matters, I'm referring to the RMS Clerk trade.



Last I checked, a Cpl still out ranked a Pte.  Your MCpl should have set them straight, right then and there.  By not doing so, only serves to increase the problem as you have noticed.

The RMS Clk occupation is vast to say the least.  Not everyone can be an expert at everything and some individuals can and do master certain aspects, generally based on their assigned duties and the experience they gain, regardless of the rank level.  So it's not that uncommon for a Pte to know more than a Cpl at given times.  Heck, I've seen Pte's know more than Sgt's but only because of prior experience and it's to be expected in the RMS Clk occupation.

So when ever I have been asked a question such as "Do you know how to do X?" my normal response is "I've never had the opportunity or been employed in a situation where I had to do X.  If you have the time, I'd like to learn!"  It sure as heck beats "Can't help you, go ask the Sgt."


----------



## Halifax Tar (17 Sep 2014)

wildman0101 said:
			
		

> Yeah, Time in. There was private, usually after basic, copy, Then you did your time in whatever Regt you were post to,,,,After 4  yrs service  depending you were promoted to Cpl.  Comprendre Amigo. Dumb  ***



Best post of the day!


----------



## Eye In The Sky (17 Sep 2014)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> I'm just curious what other mbr's experience is between Cpl and Pte.  I know when I was posted on a base, there actually was a difference such as the Pte's normally got the crap duties before a Cpl etc.  Here in Ottawa there is no difference between a senior Cpl and a no hook Pte.  At least in my current unit.  Is this normal?



In black and white terms, yes a Corporal outranks a private.  By its QR & O definition, a Cpl is a Superior Officer to a Pte and is capable of giving lawful orders, whereas a Pte can't.  This is (IMO) obvious.  So, in the black and white of rank/seniority, there is the line.

If your unit/CofC isn't drawing a distinction between a Pte and a Cpl (a Jnr NCO), that might be part of the problem itself.  I don't care about trade nuances and all that crap, cut to the chase; Cpl's outrank Pte's, supported by the NDA and QR & O.  Full stop.  



> I bit my tongue as a no hook Pte, on the job for about 9 months sarcastically corrected me in front of the MCpl



The sarcastically  above is the trigger for me.  To quote my mom from many times when I was growing up "It's not what you say, it's how you say it".  

It is not at all abnormal for lower ranks to "know more about something" than a superior of theirs.  Subordinates routinely advise their superiors on various matters - admin, tactics, personnel issues, you name it.  Right?  Despite the 'more knowledge', there is still a professional way to go about it - this Pte (appears) to not have done so.  

What is the work environment usually like there?  All Rank/Lname basis?  First name between the Jnr Ranks up and down?  I ask because, IMO while it has nothing to do with the QR & O side, it has to do with the 'reality' side.  If things are loosy-goosy in the unit like that, it is more likely things like this will happen.  Doesn't make it right, but sets the tone.  

I would have said something to the Pte right then and there.  That's me.  I don't expect my Sgt to have to do my JNCO job for me if a Cpl or Pte gets out of line.  I also don't want my Sgt or above to THINK I can't handle simple situations like this.  That's me and based on my TI and experience. 

The follow-on event with the Pte questioning you...that'd been it for me (again my  :2c.  I'd discuss it with the MCpl, and if he/she went with my recommendation, there'd be a 1 way convo from Cpl Me to Pte Bloggins - with the MCpl in the room as a witness and the Pte's next up in the CofC.  Wouldn't have to hammer the Pte into the ground, but whatever needed to be said in whatever tone that gets the point across - I've learned over the years not every nail needs a 10lb hammer to drive it home.



> If there is no difference then why have the rank in the first place?  In case it matters, I'm referring to the RMS Clerk trade.



You might not like this part.  You said you bit your tonque.  Why?  You know as a Cpl, a Pte is a subordinate; if they are acting in a way you believe isn't correct IAW CAF customs, practices and regulations, isn't it YOUR job as a Jnr NCO to correct them and monitor their conduct after?

I know I've heard lots of people say they don't get treated any different as a Cpl - I say more Cpl's need to start ACTING like Jnr NCOs instead of "Super Privates" if they want their CofC to start viewing them as Cpl/JNCOs.  Its been my experience that you get treated not only on your rank, but how you carry yourself.  

If you want to be thought of as a Jnr NCO-type Cpl, carry and conduct yourself as one.  Doesn't mean you go all Gunnery-Sgt Hartman on everyone subordinate to you, but be professional about it, lead by example and enforce the appropriate standards from the people below you.  

I get the feeling you are a Cpl, but relatively knew to your rank.  If you are unsure of what to do, how to handle it, go to your MCpl and discuss.  The job of every leader in the CAF is to help develop the leadership potential in their subordinates.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (17 Sep 2014)

wildman0101 said:
			
		

> Yeah, Time in. There was private, usually after basic, copy, Then you did your time in whatever Regt you were post to,,,,After 4  yrs service  depending you were promoted to Cpl.  Comprendre Amigo. Dumb  Ass



You have to remember, what is obvious to some of us guys who've are from a different generation and have been around the CF for years because things were black and white to us, well these days it seems there's a lot more gray in the minds of the younger/newer troops.

As kids, our generation did what we were told and when we were told to or else.  We were lots more disciplined.  We were taught to respect authority and "rank" in the family from the get-go most of the time.  I could imagine backtalking to my mother the way kids today to.  I'd of been to scared to.

When I did my Basic (Cornwallis, 1989), a Pte with a hook 'outranked' us.  I remember being told, very clearly, what would happen if we were insubordinate to anyone.  It was drilled into us, the discipline.  People who didn't follow orders got rucksack drill back then, or SI inspection (which was far worse).  Now?  We make them write essays or take the cellphone away for a few hours.  

The 'new' generation of recruits, Ptes and J NCOs aren't living in the same world that guys like you knew when you were working towards your Jacks.   :2c:


----------



## wildman0101 (17 Sep 2014)

Eye Thank You-Bang On


----------



## ModlrMike (17 Sep 2014)

I'm sorry, I can't agree with the soft approach.

If he's insubordinate to a Cpl today, he'll do the same to MCpl or Sgt tomorrow. Now is the time to sort it out; before it really becomes a problem.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (17 Sep 2014)

And the soft approach was...


----------



## stellarpanther (17 Sep 2014)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> I get the feeling you are a Cpl, but relatively knew to your rank.  If you are unsure of what to do, how to handle it, go to your MCpl and discuss.  The job of every leader in the CAF is to help develop the leadership potential in their subordinates.



I've been a corporal for a few years but this is the first time I've actually experienced this.  In previous units that had Pte's, the Pte's always listened to what the Cpl's said and everything went smooth.  In a trade where we all work together closely in an office setting, I certainly would not expect "yes Cpl, no Cpl" but at the same time, a fairly new Pte doesn't have the right to try putting me in my place or question me.  I think the problem is, I assumed the MCpl would have said something and since she didn't, I didn't feel I should have either.  Talking to a couple of the other Cpl's today, they all said this isn't new and she isn't the only one.  Apparently most of the Pte's have this attitude and the CoC ignores it because they think it will negatively affect moral on the floor.


----------



## George Wallace (17 Sep 2014)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> I've been a corporal for a few years but this is the first time I've actually experienced this.  In previous units that had Pte's, the Pte's always listened to what the Cpl's said and everything went smooth.  In a trade where we all work together closely in an office setting, I certainly would not expect "yes Cpl, no Cpl" but at the same time, a fairly new Pte doesn't have the right to try putting me in my place or question me.  I think the problem is, I assumed the MCpl would have said something and since she didn't, I didn't feel I should have either.  Talking to a couple of the other Cpl's today, they all said this isn't new and she isn't the only one.  Apparently most of the Pte's have this attitude and the CoC ignores it because they think it will negatively affect moral on the floor.



Not good at all.  That BS should not happen.  It not only reflects badly on the leadership skills of that MCpl, but all above her.  It also allows bad attitudes to fester and grow in her subordinates.   This goes against all the rules of military discipline that we have developed over the centuries.  Not a good thing.  Those people will be posted to other units and spread their insubordinate attitudes as they go, poisoning the workplaces they occupy.


----------



## The_Falcon (18 Sep 2014)

I'd would sort the Pte's out, politely but firmly, and try and set the tone by being more formal with your own superiors. If anyone says anything, tell them you prefer working in a more professional work environment.  It may not change everything wholesale, but may  change how people interact with you.  

When I was working full time in my unit, the whole full-time staff were pretty informal during the day (ie first names between all ranks except officers), on admin/parade nights when others (especially Pte/Cpls) were around it was back to using rank.  Despite the informality during the day, no one ever presumed they were equal to someone with a higher rank, just because we used first names.


----------



## CountDC (22 Sep 2014)

bit late to the game but just have to as it is the trade.

No that is not acceptable and yes you and the other Cpls have to start the ball rolling as the MCpl obviously isn't. if you don't then this will follow you through out your career.  As you move along so will these Ptes and they will be your subordinates as you become MCpls and Sgts.  Do you really want to have to deal with it then?  Unfortunately this is common in Ottawa as they have a lot of new Ptes posted direct from the School so every rotation of clks has the same problem as the ones already there pass it on.  Personally I think they need to stop posting the Ptes from the school to Ottawa and send them to the units to get wet first. 

If you use first names in the office - stop.  Address everyone by rank.  Establish that distinction with everyone so it is made clear to them you are strong into the rank structure. Hell - everyone here regardless of rank addresses me by my rank.

Talk to your CofC and clearly voice that you are not impressed with the attitude of the Ptes towards the Cpls (this would work best if you could convince your counterparts to do it as a group but do it on your own if they won't).  As a Cpl in the RMS Trade you are most certainly a Jr NCO and expected to lead.  If I had been your MCpl I would have corrected you for not correcting the Pte. Your post shows 3 people that didn't do their job, none of you respected the rank.  The Pte was out of bounds, you didn't step up and the MCpl ignored an obvious issue (or perhaps chose to force you to deal with it rather than getting her hands dirty).  Even if supervising you in a task that you are just learning they should be addressing you properly.


----------



## x_para76 (22 Sep 2014)

Out of curiosity can a corporal lay a charge against a private? If no why not?


----------



## Eye In The Sky (22 Sep 2014)

X_para76 said:
			
		

> Out of curiosity can a corporal lay a charge against a private? If no why not?



I'll chime in "no".  There are rules and regs who can lay/prefer charges, and the pers authorized to are usually detailed in ROs/Standing Os/Sqn Os.  They can recommend, they can give lawful orders, etc but I believe the only Cpl that could lay a charge would be a badged MP in CFNIS.

I've recommended charges before as a SNCO but it was the Sgt-Major who laid them.


----------



## cupper (22 Sep 2014)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> Talking to a couple of the other Cpl's today, they all said this isn't new and she isn't the only one.  Apparently most of the Pte's have this attitude and the CoC ignores it because they think it will negatively affect moral on the floor.



Sorry, I had an involuntary snort when I read this.

It's obvious that the CoC has missed the point, because it already appears to have had a negative effect upon morale - of the Corporals. It is a shame that they do not see that by appeasing the sensitivities of the Privates, they have created a toxic environment which has a detrimental effect upon overall morale.


----------



## x_para76 (22 Sep 2014)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> I'll chime in "no".  There are rules and regs who can lay/prefer charges, and the pers authorized to are usually detailed in ROs/Standing Os/Sqn Os.  They can recommend, they can give lawful orders, etc but I believe the only Cpl that could lay a charge would be a badged MP in CFNIS.
> 
> I've recommended charges before as a SNCO but it was the Sgt-Major who laid them.



I apologize my question was poorly worded. So a corporal could recommend a private be charged.


----------



## George Wallace (22 Sep 2014)

X_para76 said:
			
		

> Out of curiosity can a corporal lay a charge against a private? If no why not?



No.  A Cpl could, however, recommend to his CoC that the Pte be charged.  Once upon a time a MCpl could charge people, but with the changes in political attitudes that was removed to Snr NCO levels and keeps on getting higher and higher, with fewer and fewer of direct supervisors having the power to charge a subordinate.   

Only exceptions would be MP's.

( slower than Eye In The Sky...  )


----------



## George Wallace (22 Sep 2014)

X_para76 said:
			
		

> I apologize my question was poorly worded. So a corporal could recommend a private be charged.



In a well oiled, disciplined unit.  Yes.  All part of the effective operation of the CoC.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (22 Sep 2014)

QR & O, Vol II, Ch 107, Art 107.02 - Authority To Lay Charges


----------



## Franko (22 Sep 2014)

Anyone can make a complaint, thereby instigating a DI (Disciplinary Investigation) if it's warranted based on the initial facts surrounding the incident.

From there, the recommendations of the investigating NCO are presented to the MWO or appointed WO to officially lay the charges.

A DI can be done by MCpl or above, but is usually done by Snr NCOs or WOs.

Regards


----------



## stellarpanther (24 Sep 2014)

Not sure if anyone in my CoC reads this but if they do I'll probably be singled out by this post however, I think it's a legit post so I'll deal with it if required.  Yesterday I did mention to one of the MCpl's that I think it is highly inappropriate for a Pte to be talking in a rude manner to a Cpl. This after I asked a Pte a question about a file and got a rude reply.  The MCpl advised me that she did sort out the Pte and I believe she did based on the cold shoulder I've received from the Pte.  That's fine for now.  Today I was told that in the absence of our MCpl for the rest of this week, a no hook QL3 Pte would be in charge because she has more knowledge in that section.  When I attempted to speak to the PO about it, I basically got dumped on and told to quit being so hooked on rank and that this was 2014 etc and the person with the most knowledge is put in charge.  If that's true, what's the point in having Cpl's?  I realize I could go to the WO but that likely not resolve anything and could make it worse.  Any ideas from anyone or do I just need to accept the fact that the military isn't what it use to be?


----------



## ModlrMike (24 Sep 2014)

stellarpanther said:
			
		

> Not sure if anyone in my CoC reads this but if they do I'll probably be singled out by this post however, I think it's a legit post so I'll deal with it if required.  Yesterday I did mention to one of the MCpl's that I think it is highly inappropriate for a Pte to be talking in a rude manner to a Cpl. This after I asked a Pte a question about a file and got a rude reply.  The MCpl advised me that she did sort out the Pte and I believe she did based on the cold shoulder I've received from the Pte.  That's fine for now.  Today I was told that in the absence of our MCpl for the rest of this week, a no hook QL3 Pte would be in charge because she has more knowledge in that section.  When I attempted to speak to the PO about it, I basically got dumped on and told to quit being so hooked on rank and that this was 2014 etc and the person with the most knowledge is put in charge.  If that's true, what's the point in having Cpl's?  I realize I could go to the WO but that likely not resolve anything and could make it worse.  Any ideas from anyone or do I just need to accept the fact that the military isn't what it use to be?



So many kinds of wrong that I don't know where to start.


----------



## George Wallace (24 Sep 2014)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> So many kinds of wrong that I don't know where to start.



Not really.  It is called "Delegated Authority".  

EXAMPLE:


A Cpl SME is giving a lecture/class to students who are several ranks above them.  As the Instructor and SME, they are the Delegated Authority in that classroom.

In the OP's case, it was pointed out that the Pte had more knowledge and was in charge.  Again, a case of Delegated Authority.  The Pte is the SME.


----------



## The_Falcon (24 Sep 2014)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Not really.  It is called "Delegated Authority".
> 
> EXAMPLE:
> 
> ...



Lecture/Lesson is one thing, running an OR or something similar for a week, especially if there seems to be very little adherence to the rank structure, seems like a recipe for problems.   Although...(and if this sounds like a smart ass response, it is), go to that Pte for every little decision that needs to be made, and I do mean everything.  If the PO or Pte, get uppity, simply point out you were following orders as directed.


----------



## Scott (24 Sep 2014)

Hatchet Man said:
			
		

> Lecture/Lesson is one thing, running an OR or something similar for a week, especially if there seems to be very little adherence to the rank structure, seems like a recipe for problems.   Although...(and if this sounds like a smart ass response, it is), go to that Pte for every little decision that needs to be made, and I do mean everything.  If the PO or Pte, get uppity, simply point out you were following orders as directed.



"Dumb Private" at the Cpl level. Nice!


----------



## George Wallace (24 Sep 2014)

Being in charge of an OR, or a QM, is not unusual.  It is not the norm, but if the most experienced and knowledgeable person is put in charge as Delegated Authority, then that is the way it goes.

Yes.  There does seem to be some serious problems in this convoluted story from the OP, and probably some serious problems with their CoC, especially the comments on rank by the PO.  It would appear that that work environment is not the healthiest.  We, however, are only hearing one side of the story.


----------



## stellarpanther (24 Sep 2014)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Being in charge of an OR, or a QM, is not unusual.  It is not the norm, but if the most experienced and knowledgeable person is put in charge as Delegated Authority, then that is the way it goes.
> 
> Yes.  There does seem to be some serious problems in this convoluted story from the OP, and probably some serious problems with their CoC, especially the comments on rank by the PO.  It would appear that that work environment is not the healthiest.  We, however, are only hearing one side of the story.



I realize it's only one side of the storey however, I can't think of a way to be clearer without naming the unit and I don't want to do that because this isn't about bad mouthing the unit.  from what I've been told by a previous Sgt that just left that unit last year.  This lack of respect shown to Cpl by Pte's has been happening a long time because they are treated as equals by the CoC.  According to him this is why he talked is way out of that unit and quit shortly after.  
If it's ok for a Pte to be put in charge of Cpl's simply because they have more knowledge within that particular unit, then why even have rank?  I've seen Pte's and Cpl's with more knowledge than a MCpl or Sgt, should they be in charge of them also?  My guess is you'll say no and that is part of the problem I have.  If there is going ot be no difference between Pte and Cpl, why even have the rank of Cpl?


----------



## Franko (24 Sep 2014)

I'd like to know the last time the CoC had a bitch session. Sure would be fun to be a fly on the wall there when it happens.

In all seriousness, if you have a gripe about Ptes being in charge, become the SME on your shop and then there is no recourse.

Personally, I ensure that all ranks respect each other and they know the pecking order. As far as I'm concerned, a guy that has two years in doesn't equal a Cpl....unless said Cpl is a mouthbreather.

Regards


----------



## Container (24 Sep 2014)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Being in charge of an OR, or a QM, is not unusual.  It is not the norm, but if the most experienced and knowledgeable person is put in charge as Delegated Authority, then that is the way it goes.
> 
> Yes.  There does seem to be some serious problems in this convoluted story from the OP, and probably some serious problems with their CoC, especially the comments on rank by the PO.  It would appear that that work environment is not the healthiest.  We, however, are only hearing one side of the story.



George- wouldn't this create issues when an investigation happens after an incident when the process of "who is responsible" for the shop starts?

I would expect the axe to fall on the cpl in the shop.

I'm still a little,confused about how a cpl knows less about his job than a private? Perhaps the cpl should have been more aggressive in learning his arcs when coming into the new job.


----------



## George Wallace (24 Sep 2014)

Container said:
			
		

> George- wouldn't this create issues when an investigation happens after an incident when the process of "who is responsible" for the shop starts?
> 
> I would expect the axe to fall on the cpl in the shop.
> 
> I'm still a little,confused about how a cpl knows less about his job than a private? Perhaps the cpl should have been more aggressive in learning his arcs when coming into the new job.



A SME is a SME.  

I think what we have here is a large number of inexperienced people all in one section and that workplace is dysfunctional.   The more the OP carry's on, the more I get the impression that they are just as much inexperienced as the Pte, or more so.  

We don't know what the situation actually is, and the OP is showing more inexperience than experience in the matter.  I don't think we will come to any reasonable conclusions here, no matter what scenarios we may present.


----------



## The_Falcon (24 Sep 2014)

Container said:
			
		

> I'm still a little,confused about how a cpl knows less about his job than a private? Perhaps the cpl should have been more aggressive in learning his arcs when coming into the new job.



It was like this when I got to the recruiting centre.  We had two Pte(R)s who got hurt in St. Jean, and were sent to the RC to work while they rehabed.  Obviously they knew more than I did when I got there.  As well, while one was always used rank and proper military protocol, the other did not. He and I had a chat not to long after I got there.


----------



## kratz (24 Sep 2014)

If the Op is  CT from PRes, this would explain why the Pte is the daily SME than the Cpl.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (25 Sep 2014)

Can't agree to this Pte being in charge of Jnr NCOs.  If a MCpl delegates their authority in their absence it STILL should be within the rank structure.  A Pte can't issue a lawful order to another Pte let alone a JNCO.

The PO saying this is 2014, get over the rank thing?  I would love to say that to him/her the next time they told me to do something.  Taste of your own medicine.


----------



## ModlrMike (25 Sep 2014)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> Can't agree to this Pte being in charge of Jnr NCOs.  If a MCpl delegates their authority in their absence it STILL should be within the rank structure.  A Pte can't issue a lawful order to another Pte let alone a JNCO.



Exactly. The person to whom command is delegated must also have the legal authority to issue orders to those they command. That's why delegation is usually only handed down one rank. It doesn't matter if the Pte is an SME, he/she doesn't have the legal authority to issue commands to NCOs - delegated authority notwithstanding.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (25 Sep 2014)

We (the collective *CAF* we) seem to be forgetting much of 'the basics' of our military structure and way of doing our business.  All of these 'unofficial policies' do nothing to promote effectiveness and efficiency in our units.  Rank structure exits for a reason.  There are times when someone of a lower rank may be the lawful authority; example an aircraft captain is in command on the aircraft regardless of superior officers being onboard.  However, I think if you read some you'll find these instances are all covered.

Being a "SME" doesn't mean "rank doesn't matter".  Think of it; every support arms commander might sit at the Bde Comd/Bn/whatever level O Gp and are SMEs.   I am a SME on my gear compared to my ranking officers on any flight.  Does that mean I am suddenly immune to the CofC?

When I worked K line hanger spaces, there would usually be a "Floor Cpl" who was responsible for the day to day work we (Cpls and Tprs) did; he reported to the Tp MCpl.  I never heard of a Floor Tpr in charge of Cpls.  

There are times when mbr's of the same rank are given authority, but this is covered in our Regs.  Seniority by appointment, position.  In those instances our regs cover it.   Sqn 2 I/C is a Capt, one of the Troop Leaders is a Captain.  Of course, the 2 I/C has authority over the Troop Leader.

Yup, we are loosing some of the basics in how a military SHOULD operate.  More and more people are ignorant of the ACTUAL rules and regs that are supposed to form the foundation of a well-disciplined force and are replacing them with "opinions" and "I thinks".

http://www.admfincs.forces.gc.ca/qro-orf/vol-01/chapter-chapitre-003-eng.asp


----------



## George Wallace (25 Sep 2014)

Tell that to the MP Cpl the next time you get pulled over.    >


----------



## The_Falcon (25 Sep 2014)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Tell that to the MP Cpl the next time you get pulled over.    >



Funny you should say that, as I read a recent Courts Martial decision (yes I get that bored), where an MP actually used that (in)famous line "Don't confuse your rank, for my authority", needless to say the Judge, was not impressed by this conduct. 

http://www.jmc-cmj.forces.gc.ca/en/2014/wellwood.page (para's 3 and 8 of the decision).


----------



## RCDtpr (25 Sep 2014)

Hatchet Man said:
			
		

> Funny you should say that, as I read a recent Courts Martial decision (yes I get that bored), where an MP actually used that (in)famous line "Don't confuse your rank, for my authority", needless to say the Judge, was not impressed by this conduct.
> 
> http://www.jmc-cmj.forces.gc.ca/en/2014/wellwood.page (para's 3 and 8 of the decision).



Although it's technically true.......its a stupid thing to say.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (25 Sep 2014)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Tell that to the MP Cpl the next time you get pulled over.    >



I've reminded a few of them that they are Military Police, and Cpl's, and subject to the CSD...just like I am.  One insisted on being a real arsehole about his business so I paid a visit to the Shift MCpl in Windsor Park, and had a follow-on conversation with his WO the next day.  Oddly enough, turned out his WO agreed - a MP Cpl shouldn't be rude, cocky and the like to a SNCO.  What was the problem?  He had his patrol car blocking the (then) only entrance into Windsor Park.  So he could talk to one of the guys from work,  who had his civie car blocking the other side of the gate, and the cars from getting out.  I told him to move his car OUT of the gate.  He didn't like that, and then just kept making things worse for himself.  He found out that a MP Cpl doesn't outrank a Sgt after all.  Well isn't that a shock.   

Like I said above...we're loosing the basics (in some areas).


----------



## Eye In The Sky (25 Sep 2014)

RCDcpl said:
			
		

> Although it's technically true.......its a stupid thing to say.



FTFY


----------



## stellarpanther (25 Sep 2014)

Nerf herder said:
			
		

> I'd like to know the last time the CoC had a ***** session. Sure would be fun to be a fly on the wall there when it happens.
> 
> In all seriousness, if you have a gripe about Ptes being in charge, become the SME on your shop and then there is no recourse.
> 
> ...


I agree completely about becoming the SME and that's what I'm working on including reading unit policies and SOP's at home as well as other pubs related to the type of work done at that unit.  That said, it can take a bit of time considering every unit seems to have their own way of doing things.  
I want to make clear that my purpose of posting this thread isn't to bad mouth my unit or anyone in my CoC but rather to try and get advise on how to handle it.  Part of my concern is that as a Cpl, I obviously would like to go to the next level and I need the opportunity to show leadership skills.  It's tough to show that when a Pte with less than a year in is in charge of me.


----------



## RCDtpr (25 Sep 2014)

His and your rank are irrelevant...he's a police officer and as such should talk to EVERYONE he deals with respectfully...be it a Pte, general, or crackhead.  That's my pet peeve with a lot of my co workers...it's not hard to be polite to people in this job.

That said, for the case in question that hatchet posted....it was a 911 and therefore police have to be allowed to be police, regardless of whether or not they are MPs or civvie.  Would the major have spoken to an OPP constable that way?  Doubtful....either way that's not the issue.

The issue here is rank and there are times when rank can't come into play...a Cpl MP responding to say the base commanders house on a domestic....base commanders rank is entirely irrelevant.

Back on topic foru his thread though...I find it highly unprofessional to put a Pte in charge of a Cpl.....SME or not.


----------



## DAA (25 Sep 2014)

RCDcpl said:
			
		

> Although it's technically true.......its a stupid thing to say.



At the end of the day, the MP Cpl didn't have "respect" for the Major's rank and the Major didn't have "respect" for the job the MP Cpl was assigned to do.

Getting back to the topic at hand, some people view the Cpl rank as a "gimme" and "time in" thing and therefore tend to lean more towards the "knowledge" factor without taking the rank into consideration.  Will there be Pte's who out perform Cpls?  Absolutely!  But by not reinforcing discipline and respect for rank, it only encourages people to challenge the next guy up the ladder.



			
				stellarpanther said:
			
		

> I agree completely about becoming the SME and that's what I'm working on including reading unit policies and SOP's at home as well as other pubs related to the type of work done at that unit.  That said, it can take a bit of time considering every unit seems to have their own way of doing things.
> I want to make clear that my purpose of posting this thread isn't to bad mouth my unit or anyone in my CoC but rather to try and get advise on how to handle it.  Part of my concern is that as a Cpl, I obviously would like to go to the next level and I need the opportunity to show leadership skills.  It's tough to show that when a Pte with less than a year in is in charge of me.



The Pte is NOT in charge of you and can't be.  And if anyone says otherwise, you need to bring that issue up with your WO/MWO.

Not sure what is going on here but something isn't quite right about this picture.  I'm inclined to think this could be a case of pee-poor leadership on the part of your Snr NCO's who are letting the Jr NCO's run the show.

Feel free to PM me with any missing details.


----------



## The_Falcon (25 Sep 2014)

RCDcpl said:
			
		

> His and your rank are irrelevant...he's a police officer and as such should talk to EVERYONE he deals with respectfully...be it a Pte, general, or crackhead.  That's my pet peeve with a lot of my co workers...it's not hard to be polite to people in this job.
> 
> That said, for the case in question that hatchet posted....it was a 911 and therefore police have to be allowed to be police, regardless of whether or not they are MPs or civvie.  Would the major have spoken to an OPP constable that way?  Doubtful....either way that's not the issue.
> 
> ...



I posted that, because I found that incident amusing (never thought an MP would actually ever use that line in real life).  But it is sort of related to this thread, albeit in a narrower scope. The judge in his decision highlighted the issue of rank vs authority (or in the OP's case subject matter expertise), and how basically letting one of those things get to your head (inflate the ego), can be problematic, and in that specific case both sides erred and were unprofessional in their conduct towards one another.


----------



## ModlrMike (25 Sep 2014)

What needed to be reinforced in that instance was that an MP not conducting a specific policing function at the time, has no more authority than any other member of the same rank. For the record, I'm not dumping on MPs here. It's just that their special status is just that - special, and that does not always supersede their basic military status.


----------



## mgp (28 Sep 2014)

Hatchet Man said:
			
		

> Funny you should say that, as I read a recent Courts Martial decision (yes I get that bored), where an MP actually used that (in)famous line "Don't confuse your rank, for my authority", needless to say the Judge, was not impressed by this conduct.
> 
> http://www.jmc-cmj.forces.gc.ca/en/2014/wellwood.page (para's 3 and 8 of the decision).



Was a good read!


----------

