# NCM Prgression



## Halu (18 Apr 2010)

How long does it take from OS to AS, AS to LS and LS to MS 
how many years does it usually take to petty officer 2nd class


----------



## George Wallace (18 Apr 2010)

Halu said:
			
		

> How long does it take from OS to AS, AS to LS and LS to MS
> how many years does it usually take to petty officer 2nd class



There are technically "ideal" timelines for one to be in each rank and have achieved the required courses and qualifications to be promoted to the next rank.  That being said, there are no timelines.  You could find yourself a OS for twenty years, or progress through all the ranks to CPO2 in twenty years.  It will depend on what Trade you are in, and how bright and ambitious you are, as well as how your superiors write you up in your PERs.


----------



## aesop081 (18 Apr 2010)

There is no answer.......everyone's career progression will be different. Some people will serve 25 years and never make it beyond their current rank.


----------



## PMedMoe (19 Apr 2010)

But for some ranks, you must be at that rank for a certain period of time before being eligible to be promoted.  For example:  MCpl to Sgt - 2 years, Sgt to WO, 3 years.


----------



## George Wallace (19 Apr 2010)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> But for some ranks, you must be at that rank for a certain period of time before being eligible to be promoted.  For example:  MCpl to Sgt - 2 years, Sgt to WO, 3 years.



That would fall into the "ideal" timelines that I mentioned.  We all know that those really don't exist.   >


----------



## Halu (20 Apr 2010)

Then what is the IDEAL timeline for each rank ???


----------



## Occam (20 Apr 2010)

Halu said:
			
		

> Then what is the IDEAL timeline for each rank ???



OS to AB (not AS...AB is the proper abbreviation for Able Seaman) is an automatic promotion at 30 months service, assuming you meet the prerequisites for promotion.

AB to LS is an automatic promotion at 48 months service, assuming you meet the prerequisites for promotion.

LS to MS is a promotion entirely based on merit.  Your performance as a LS is evaluated along with your potential to perform at the MS rank, and if you are ranked high enough in relation to your peers, you are promoted if there are vacant positions at that rank.  You require two years in rank as a LS in order to be promoted to MS.


----------



## Pat in Halifax (20 Apr 2010)

This was info I had put in another forum a while back. It applies specifically to a trade with Spec 1 (at LS level) and Spec 2 (at the PO2 level) but is a pretty good guide for timings for most Naval trades if you keep your nose clean. Contrary to what many seem to be saying here, because of attrition, timings for promotion are not too bad right now. I just started a group of Mar Eng QL6 students and most have 10-14 years in.
AB - 24 months
LS - 48 months
LS Tech - 6 years
MS - 6-8 years
PO2 - 8-10 years
PO2 Art - 10-12 years
PO1 - 13 years
CPO2 - 15 years
Bottom line, if you make CPO2 in 20 or less, you are doing quite well. Realistically, 22-25. There will always be 'stalls' in your career (coursing, MATA/PATA etc) as well.
Good Luck!


----------



## dapaterson (20 Apr 2010)

MS is an appointment, not a rank.

In theory, it requries completion of PLQ prior to appointment; in practice, anyone and his dog are being appointed MS/MCpl lacking the course.


----------



## George Wallace (20 Apr 2010)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> MS is an appointment, not a rank.
> 
> In theory, it requries completion of PLQ prior to appointment; in practice, anyone and his dog are being appointed MS/MCpl lacking the course.



And it really shows.    :-[


----------



## Halifax Tar (20 Apr 2010)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> And it really shows.    :-[



Excuse me but I am one of those "anyone and their dogs" and I would appreciate knowing how you think it shows.

Their are compelling arguments that "Leadership Courses" have minimal effects on improving ones leadership abilities. How exactly one is "taught" to be leader is beyond me.


----------



## PMedMoe (20 Apr 2010)

Halifax Tar, I tend to agree with you.  My PLQ taught me how *not* to be a leader and gave me some lessons regarding teaching, O Gps, small party taskings and that's about it.  It's all in the calibre of the students *and* the instructors.


----------



## Pat in Halifax (20 Apr 2010)

For all:
I have heard now for 28 years that Master Corporal/Seaman is an appointment and not a rank but you know what-It is treated in the workplace as a 'rank', it is worn as a 'rank' and is grouped for PER purposes as a 'rank', so guess what!!?..and a tomato is a fruit! I think you are all missing the point of the original poster/ee.


----------



## Occam (20 Apr 2010)

Pat in Halifax said:
			
		

> For all:
> I have heard now for 28 years that Master Corporal/Seaman is an appointment and not a rank but you know what-It is treated in the workplace as a 'rank', it is worn as a 'rank' and is grouped for PER purposes as a 'rank', so guess what!!?..and a tomato is a fruit! I think you are all missing the point of the original poster/ee.



You took the words right out of my mouth.


----------



## CountDC (20 Apr 2010)

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> Excuse me but I am one of those "anyone and their dogs" and I would appreciate knowing how you think it shows.



Your there    ;D  Ok cheap shot and only kidding as I have no idea what you are like at work.

In some trades it does show - RMS is promoting many acting lacking and you can usually pick them out. They often have little idea of what they are doing as a supervisor.  As a result there are 2 sits that happen - the staff walks over them or they over compensate and run the place like their own little empire, ignoring their staffs concerns.  I know this happens anyways but it happens more with the acting lacking than those that have had the training.  



			
				Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> Their are compelling arguments that "Leadership Courses" have minimal effects on improving ones leadership abilities. How exactly one is "taught" to be leader is beyond me.



It would depend on what they are teaching on the course and what the member has learned from their supervisors.  When I did mine they taught the "shit sandwich", getting to know your troops in order to accomplish taskings (helps to know that you have a trucker in your section when doing veh recovery or that Cpl Bloggins can type 120 WPM when you have 5 minutes to get the report completed), proper lectures (who knew you were supposed to give pauses when doing drill lectures, sure didn't seem like it when I was on the other end), proper counselling techniques (hollering and smacking with pace sticks is not proper), how the various parts of the military work together.  Basically a whole bunch of little things that added up and most people didn't think of because it was not what we saw in practice. The JLC/CLC/PLQ is not just about teaching someone how to tell Johnny to be at work on time. I see messages almost every month stripping the leaf off members that were not able to pass the course and an odd one that it was found that they really were not suited to wear it. I have yet to see a message reducing someone that has the course.

Some people will benefit more from the course than others simply because of who they are or because of the supervisors they had.  I figure there must be something to the course as mine started with 54 candidates and graduated 13.  Also if I didn't have the course I am sure I would have been an even bigger ass than I am because that is what my early roll models were. Thankfully I had some really good instructors to straighten me out some.


----------



## George Wallace (20 Apr 2010)

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> Excuse me but I am one of those "anyone and their dogs" and I would appreciate knowing how you think it shows.



Generally speaking, it does show.  Some more than  others.  A few not at all.  I have seen MCpl/MS and Sgts, in various trades promoted before being qualified.  In most instances, someone higher up has found a need to do so, without honestly looking at some of these people.  I was just on a Crse with a Sgt who now having the crse, will likely get promoted WO.  That person was Shyte as a Sgt, and probably was as a MCpl as well.  Now we have that person in a position to be promoted again, way beyond their level of competence.  Someone fucked up.  The members of the crse are dumbfounded, as are the Staff.  Standards managed to give this person a PASS after they had failed every PC and had to rewrite every PC, been through a PRB, etc.  

I have to deal with another on a daily basis, who has no managerial, leadership, or people skills and does not have a full knowledge of the Reserve Admin and Pay Systems, yet as a Regular Force person, their Career Mgr has promoted them on posting to be a CC without a PLQ.  

Yes.  I have seen it and IT SHOWS.   My whole crse does not want to be associated with this person at any time in the future.  Our credibility has been damaged. 

PMedMoe

Whether your PLQ taught you Leadership, or taught you what not to be as a leader; you still learned leadership skills and developed your own style.   In the end you learned something about leadership.  Everyone does develop their own style.


----------



## PMedMoe (20 Apr 2010)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> PMedMoe
> 
> Whether your PLQ taught you Leadership, or taught you what not to be as a leader; you still learned leadership skills and developed your own style.   In the end you learned something about leadership.  Everyone does develop their own style.



Oh yeah, and I lost 10 lbs too.  I'd do it again right now*, just for the weight loss!!   

*No, I really wouldn't, it was just like Basic at Cornwallis, except I was older.   :-\


----------



## dapaterson (20 Apr 2010)

Pat in Halifax said:
			
		

> For all:
> I have heard now for 28 years that Master Corporal/Seaman is an appointment and not a rank but you know what-It is treated in the workplace as a 'rank', it is worn as a 'rank' and is grouped for PER purposes as a 'rank', so guess what!!?..and a tomato is a fruit! I think you are all missing the point of the original poster/ee.



It`s a key difference.

Walk into the CO`s office hatless as a MS/MCpl, get sentenced to a reduction in rank, and you march out an AB/Pte.


----------



## Halifax Tar (20 Apr 2010)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Generally speaking, it does show.  Some more than  others.  A few not at all.  I have seen MCpl/MS and Sgts, in various trades promoted before being qualified.  In most instances, someone higher up has found a need to do so, without honestly looking at some of these people.  I was just on a Crse with a Sgt who now having the crse, will likely get promoted WO.  That person was Shyte as a Sgt, and probably was as a MCpl as well.  Now we have that person in a position to be promoted again, way beyond their level of competence.  Someone ****ed up.  The members of the crse are dumbfounded, as are the Staff.  Standards managed to give this person a PASS after they had failed every PC and had to rewrite every PC, been through a PRB, etc.
> 
> I have to deal with another on a daily basis, who has no managerial, leadership, or people skills and does not have a full knowledge of the Reserve Admin and Pay Systems, yet as a Regular Force person, their Career Mgr has promoted them on posting to be a CC without a PLQ.
> 
> ...



I hear your point GW but there are slugs at all ranks and trades across the board. I have to hold faith that that members CoC saw something in him/her initially to put him/her forward. Perhaps he/she hasn't been in the environment yet where they can shine. For example some people are base line peps and some people are first line peps... Perhaps you saw him in the wrong line... If you catch my drift. 

I know many people who have completed the PLQ/JLC who are slugs, and have at much higher ranks now shown true colors and collapsed as a person and a Snr NCO some facing severe career and disciplinary actions. 

I'm not saying I'm right I'm just trying play devils advocate for this member and give the benefit of the doubt. Also is this person regular or reserve ? Why you ask well from what I was told all reserve pers with PLQ/JLC are to be promoted to Mcpl tout de suite! Hence the 2 19 y/o Mcpls in my tent at Meaford this year and the gross over abundance of that rank in the NSE FP right now! This has caused serious issues with regards to a watering down of abilities at that rank level for the reserve IMHO. 

What are leadership skills ? PowerPoint ? Being able to glide through the CFAOs with ease ? Or perhaps being able to be the perfect ATL (Attack Team Leader for firefighting). Leadership is something you cant teach because there are so many avenues and different ways to be a leader. If you have attained the appropriate in the eyes of your superiors isn't that a good example of your being a leader ? 

My point is you cant tell, and you have to go by the members write ups from their supervisors, and being humans some will get through that shouldn't, in the end though whose fault is that really ?

Perhaps the PLQ should be more geared towards the Admin/PER/PDR and disciplinary processes. For all my asking advice from MS/Mcpls they have all, 100%, said this was the most challenging aspect of the new rank.


----------



## George Wallace (20 Apr 2010)

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> I hear your point GW but there are slugs at all ranks and trades across the board.



So very true.



			
				Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> I have to hold faith that that members CoC saw something in him/her initially to put him/her forward.



Unfortunately, this is not the case in many instances.  They are a result of a Trade being so short of Jnr and Snr leaders, that they have promoted whomever they could find that had a pulse, in order to beef up their numbers.  I think this is where the real problem started.



			
				Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> I'm not saying I'm right I'm just trying play devils advocate for this member and give the benefit of the doubt. Also is this person regular or reserve ?



Both examples I gave are Regular Force.  In fact the one on Crse, which was half Reg and half PRes, was bottom student.  The Reservists, even with less time in, had more experience than this person.   It is unfortunate that this is a case of one of those 'slugs', that we have both seen, making it through, thus generating this little rant.  (Not helped by the fact that I just spent 90 minutes on my stomach disconnecting the power and water from a dishwasher.)


----------



## jollyjacktar (20 Apr 2010)

H Tar, not to worry.  I have known you for years and you will do fine as I mentioned when we met for coffee.  Sure there is some trepidation with the unknown and a new position and situation.  Don't fret, you will grow into feeling comfortable in your new skin.  I experienced the same when I was on the threshold as well.  You are professional and worthy of the move.  I am sure that you will go far by the time the race is run and you are an old fart like me.


----------



## Pat in Halifax (20 Apr 2010)

dapaterson:
That may have happenned and probably shouldn't have but going the other way, I have yet to hear of a Corporal being "promoted" to Sgt. In fact I have yet to see any admin order or directive refer to a MS/MCpl using a term other than 'rank'.
As for all the comments about the 'weak' MS/MCpl: if a MS is weak, then a supervisor somewhere f***ed up. Come on people, take ownership for your own inadequacies. CFPAS is there for a reason and if it is necessary to do a weekly PDR on a problem child then that is your duty as a supervisor. Yes, there are some well beyond guidance but the majority come around eventually. I look back on shiny new (and needing 'guidance') MS I knew years ago and they are coming up on their QL6 course now as mature leaders and mentors to subordinates.
Remember for some of the older folk here, we were all that gangly new uncomfortable junior rank before and we had our mentors who 'guided' us.
"I couldn't even spell eng-gineer and now I are one!!!!"


----------



## dapaterson (21 Apr 2010)

Pat in Halifax said:
			
		

> In fact I have yet to see any admin order or directive refer to a MS/MCpl using a term other than 'rank'.



Which, is part, why you need PLQ - to learn to read the damned regulations, so you can properly lead and mentor your subordinates and provide them with accurate information, not misinformed opinions.

QR&O 3.01 lists no such rank as Master Seaman or Master Corporal.  QR&O 3.08, on the other hand, says the following:



> 3.08 – MASTER CORPORAL APPOINTMENT
> 
> (1) The Chief of the Defence Staff or such officer as he may designate may appoint a corporal as a master corporal.
> 
> ...


----------



## blacktriangle (21 Apr 2010)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> So very true.
> 
> Unfortunately, this is not the case in many instances.  They are a result of a Trade being so short of Jnr and Snr leaders, that they have promoted whomever they could find that had a pulse, in order to beef up their numbers.  I think this is where the real problem started.



EDIT: Sorry for going off topic George, I should have been more specific. 

I was only speaking to the push for bodies in certain trades, regardless of performance etc. The people I had in mind when I typed that reply are in fact now through their recruit (and god forbid) their trades training. Give it a few years and they will be getting the same A/L promotions with even less ability, just to fill a gap.


----------



## George Wallace (21 Apr 2010)

popnfresh

This has nothing to do with the CFRC recruiters.   The examples given are of people who have already made it into the system.  They have already been through Recruit School and Trades Trg.


----------



## Pat in Halifax (21 Apr 2010)

Fair enough, I stand corrected; There is indeed an order addressing this exact question. Believe me, I have had PLQ (equivalent) and more. Read paras 3 and 4 of 3.08. Without actually saying it, does that not define the word "rank" ?  I think we are leaning too much to the political correctness side of the house. Further on (3.09), it also says an Officer has seniority over all NCMs. Based on this, what do you think would be the outcome of a brand new A/SLt giving the Cox'n an order? I really don't want to dwell on this. From the perspective of EVERY NCM, MS/MCpl is a rank, a 'stage' that one must go through to make it to PO2/Sgt. So, fine, let's agree to disagree about what is termed a rank and what in reality is, indeed a rank and get this back on track. That poor young fella who posed the original question got a face full from all of us!
If you'd like to push this, I am willing to stick my neck out for 'the team' and the next time one of my LS is being promoted, I will, indeed quote your reference and DEMAND he recieve his PO2s. I'll let you know how that one goes over!!(Depending on my demeanour, it may be from a cell!!!)


----------



## Occam (21 Apr 2010)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Which, is part, why you need PLQ - to learn to read the damned regulations, so you can properly lead and mentor your subordinates and provide them with accurate information, not misinformed opinions.
> 
> QR&O 3.01 lists no such rank as Master Seaman or Master Corporal.  QR&O 3.08, on the other hand, says the following:



Whoa, whoa, whoa.  

Yes, the QR&O says the rank of MS/MCpl is an appointment.  I used to correct people all the time on the subject, until I realized one day that I was telling them something that they already knew, but really didn't care about.  

The problem is not misinformed opinions.  The problem is that many of us have done that JLC/PLQ course and been MS/MCpl, and other than the distinction that you've made about the punishment of reduction in rank, few of us really care that it's an appointment.  The dictionary definition of promotion is "advancement in rank or position", which does describe the appointment to MS/MCpl.

Telling us that there is no such rank as MCpl flies in the face of all logic, when we've spent countless opportunities inserting MCpl into the "Rank" field on leave forms, PERs, and every other type of document you can imagine.  We also see it in official policy, such as the annual message for CFRP that tells us that one of the prerequisites is to be the minimum _rank_ of MCpl.

So, to the overwhelming majority of servicemembers, one is _promoted_ to MS/MCpl - an elevation of position, if not actual rank by the book.  The pedantic can keep preaching that it's an appointment, but only those who are ever sentenced to the punishment of reduction in rank will ever really be listening.


----------



## Pat in Halifax (21 Apr 2010)

Hear Here!!!! And with that, I can enjoy my "Welfare Wednesday" lunch up at the Mess today!
Why can't everyone just get along! (Of course if they did, the bulk of the contributors to this web site would be out of work!)


----------

