# BOTC



## Docherty (7 Dec 2004)

How long is Basic Officer Training for a Reserve Officer Candidate?


----------



## Eowyn (7 Dec 2004)

In 41 CBG, you would take BMQ with the Ptes, then take a 5 day course on leadership.  This qualifies you with BOTC and permits you to take CAP(R).


----------



## Infanteer (7 Dec 2004)

5 days is what it takes to spit out a 2Lt. now?  The reserves seems to be doing a good job undercutting itself out of the job real fast (like the "qualified" MITCIP officers....).


----------



## Eowyn (7 Dec 2004)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> 5 days is what it takes to spit out a 2Lt. now?   The reserves seems to be doing a good job undercutting itself out of the job real fast (like the "qualified" MITCIP officers....).



You need BOTC and CAP(R) to be qualified 2Lt.  I guess the figure it's more cost effective to have the officers on the BMQ and then only have to fund the additional 5 days.


----------



## mdh (7 Dec 2004)

5 days is what it takes to spit out a 2Lt. now?  The reserves seems to be doing a good job undercutting itself out of the job real fast (like the "qualified" MITCIP officers....).

Sigh...you try and build bridges but there's always some reg force guy out there.... :-\


----------



## Jungle (7 Dec 2004)

Eowyn said:
			
		

> In 41 CBG, you would take BMQ with the Ptes, then take a 5 day course on leadership.   This qualifies you with BOTC and permits you to take CAP(R).


Are you sure about this ??? There are publications that define what Basic Offr trg is: a QS (Qualification Standard) and a TP (Training Plan). While BMQ and IAP are similar, there are differences that cannot be overlooked. A 5-day BOTP is useless...


----------



## mdh (7 Dec 2004)

Eowyn is correct.  The reason is two fold - there are not enough officer candidates to run a separate course and there is always the problem of trying to schedule training when folks are working full time. Plus, as Eoywn pointed out it probably saves money.


----------



## Eowyn (7 Dec 2004)

Jungle said:
			
		

> Are you sure about this ??? There are publications that define what Basic Offr trg is: a QS (Qualification Standard) and a TP (Training Plan). While BMQ and IAP are similar, there are differences that cannot be overlooked. A 5-day BOTP is useless...


Yes I'm sure about that.  We had 2 junior officers on a BMQ last winter.  Unfortunately neither of them could finish, due to work commitments.  My Adjt mentioned the 5 day requirement to qualify them BOTP.


----------



## Byerly (7 Dec 2004)

I knew a guy, who, at the start of this last summer was a no-hook private.  He then decided he would like to become an officer, and voila, 8 weeks later, 2Lt.  

That means that all told he has 16 weeks of training, four for BMQ, four for SQ, and the 8 that it took to get his commission.  If you ask me that is ridiculous.  From an untrained no-hook to a commissioned officer ostensibely able to lead troops after 8 weeks?  Not going to happen, I don't care how intensive those 8 weeks were.

Stu


----------



## Infanteer (7 Dec 2004)

> Sigh...you try and build bridges but there's always some reg force guy out there....



http://www.datanation.com/fallacies/attack.htm

_argumentum ad hominen

Definition: 
The person presenting an argument is attacked instead of the
argument itself. This takes many forms. For example, the
person's character, nationality or religion may be attacked.
Alternatively, it may be pointed out that a person stands to
gain from a favourable outcome. Or, finally, a person may be
attacked by association, or by the company he keeps.
There are three major forms of Attacking the Person:

(1) ad hominem (abusive): instead of attacking an assertion,
the argument attacks the person who made the assertion.

(2) ad hominem (circumstantial): instead of attacking an
assertion the author points to the relationship between the
person making the assertion and the person's circumstances.

(3) ad hominem (tu quoque): this form of attack on the
person notes that a person does not practise what he
preaches._

My, where assumptions lead you - that statement easily cover number 1 and 2.   How come you assumed I was a regular soldier?   My time in the reserves was split about between Class A/B and a Class C augmentation.

Anyways, does it make a difference; I argued that 5 days seems awfully short to turn out officers, especially when regular force ones have about a years worth of actual course time (which reservists used to take).

Please address my statement instead of making an ass out of yourself and starting some res/reg BS.


----------



## mdh (7 Dec 2004)

Whose making assumptions here? I found your comment disappointing. If you have a real argument to make regarding reserve training let's hear it. Don't be thin-skinned if some one challenges you.


----------



## Infanteer (7 Dec 2004)

I'm not being thin skinned - I'm pointing out the problem with your asinine comment.

You talk about "building bridges" and then dismiss my statement because you figured I was "some reg force guy" - what kind of bridge building is that?

I've made numerous arguments on reserve training on these forums before.   As well, I've argued that things like a 5 day "Leadership" course is not a good thing for "building bridges" - the qualitative gap (the "Delta") between regular and reserve Officers will only get larger with this kind of approach.

As well, Jungle, an experienced NCO, has also stated that the approach is "useless".

Now, do you have anything to support the notion that we should commission reserve officers with the least amount of training possible.   Last time I checked, the demands of leadership weren't subordinate to convenience.


----------



## mdh (7 Dec 2004)

Infanteer,

Actually I've read your previous posts and have always found them interesting, informative and thoughtful. It's not my intention to start a shooting war about reg.vs reserve either, but I should always be aware of the "law of unintended consequences" when posting on forums. I was really trying to make a light-hearted jab rather and a categorical put-down. But to address the main point, I think the arguments about the inadequacies of officer training in the Militia are well known (as you have pointed out).   Is five days sufficient? No I don't think so, but on the other hand we try our best in balancing professional careers, family and reserve obligations.   I think one previous poster noted that two junior officer candidates dropped out of training because they couldn't find that balance. That's a loss for us because we need good people who want to commit their spare time to this exotic enterprise called the Militia - (an alternative lifestyle if there ever was one in contemporary Canada). So in fact I agree with you and the other posters, reserve training for officers is not what it should be, but I am not sure what the alternatives are given some of the hard realities we face in making the current system work.   I hope that clarifies my comment with no wish to offend,

Cheers, mdh


----------



## Infanteer (7 Dec 2004)

mdh said:
			
		

> Infanteer,
> 
> Actually I've read your previous posts and have always found them interesting, informative and thoughtful. It's not my intention to start a shooting war about reg.vs reserve either, but I should always be aware of the "law of unintended consequences" when posting on forums. I was really trying to make a light-hearted jab rather and a categorical put-down. But to address the main point, I think the arguments about the inadequacies of officer training in the Militia are well known (as you have pointed out).   Is five days sufficient? No I don't think so, but on the other hand we try our best in balancing professional careers, family and reserve obligations.   I think one previous poster noted that two junior officer candidates dropped out of training because they couldn't find that balance. That's a loss for us because we need good people who want to commit their spare time to this exotic enterprise called the Militia - (an alternative lifestyle if there ever was one in contemporary Canada). So in fact I agree with you and the other posters, reserve training for officers is not what it should be, but I am not sure what the alternatives are given some of the hard realities we face in making the current system work.   I hope that clarifies my comment with no wish to offend,
> 
> Cheers, mdh



Seen.

However, if a person is unable to complete a 5 day training period because their personal/professional life is incompatible, which to me seems indicative of the time the will be able to give to their unit for the rest of the reserve career, then perhaps the Army Reserves is just not a suitable place for them to be.   Being a reservist should be about more then showing up for beer at the Mess on Thursdays and going into the bush a couple nights a month.   Unfortunately, to many that is what the Army reserves are - my reserve unit had lots of junior officers who showed up for Remembrance Day or the Officers Dinner, but it always seemed that 3-4 (two Lieutenants come to mind) really carried the Regiment.


----------



## Eowyn (7 Dec 2004)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> Seen.
> 
> However, if a person is unable to complete a 5 day training period because their personal/professional life is incompatible, which to me seems indicative of the time the will be able to give to their unit for the rest of the reserve career, then perhaps the Army Reserves is just not a suitable place for them to be.



Just to clarify, the 2 individuals did not complete the BMQ, not the 5 day adjunct.  One of them, is a good parader, just had to miss a critical weekend.  The BMQ was inflexible to allow them to miss that weekend and still pass.


----------



## mdh (8 Dec 2004)

Hi Eowyn,

Just curious - wouldn't they allow him to re-do that weekend at some other date to qualify?


----------



## Meridian (8 Dec 2004)

Yes....  Im curious as well... I do not presume to understand the entirety of the training that occurs in the 2 days... but would it be impossible to have this candidate redo the weekend on the next BMQ, or even test on the knowledge with a qualified instructor in their unit or area should they already possess the knowledge required to pass?

I guess this has always been the biggest issue with the reserves - how can you mandate a training requirement that may conflict with other commitments... ie how does the military remain flexible alongside the civilian world remaining flexible.

I can imagine my employer stating "You must fly out to this weekend conference, its a requirement of your position" and it being right in the middle of BMQ.....  I can't see this being really the Reservist's fault, or them not having enough devotion to the forces.


----------



## mdh (8 Dec 2004)

Hi Meridian,

Having worked in an agency environment myself (billable hours?) I feel your pain.  The amount of flexibillity probably depends on who is running the weekend BMQ.  I am told that we do have some flexibililty on this issue in our unit.  As for overall training the Miliitia has made a genuine attempt to address this issue by adopting a modular approach to summer training.  Both CAP-R and Reserve Platoon Commander can be done in two week blocks - the downside is it takes forever to get qualified and of course you don't have the intensity of training to harden up the candidate, cheers, mdh


----------



## Meridian (8 Dec 2004)

Yes... I've heard about the dreaded "block training".  I wonder about the frequency of it.. if it was frequent enough I doubt it would be such a hard thing to get it done around work schedules and the like... but my aim is to try and get as much training done as fast as possible....  I'm not one to leave a year's time in between training....

Plus, who wants to be unqualified.

And yes, its a consulting company, a large one, but still, billable hours


----------



## Eowyn (8 Dec 2004)

mdh said:
			
		

> Hi Eowyn,
> 
> Just curious - wouldn't they allow him to re-do that weekend at some other date to qualify?


Nope.  IIRC, it had something to do with standards and course reports.  That PO had to be done that weekend because of training aids.  I think it was gas hut training.


----------

