# WANT A JOB MAKING COFFEE?



## DAA (19 Jul 2012)

Here is the actual Reserve Employment Opportunity Class B Job posting which has since been cancelled...

http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/reo-oer/details-renseignements.aspx?positionnumber=o-8210&lang=eng


----------



## Jarnhamar (19 Jul 2012)

Remarks: Replacing a Reg Force mbr which is on parental leave


----------



## Fishbone Jones (19 Jul 2012)

DAA said:
			
		

> Here is the actual Reserve Employment Opportunity Class B Job posting which has since been cancelled...
> 
> http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/reo-oer/details-renseignements.aspx?positionnumber=o-8210&lang=eng



9.Remarks: Replacing a Reg Force mbr which is on parental leave  

WTF?

So this wasn't just something that someone dreamed up, it's an actual position that is staffed by the Reg Force?

I say again, WTF, over.


edit: OZ beat me to it.


----------



## PuckChaser (19 Jul 2012)

Isn't the canteen person seen as extra duties? Insane.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (19 Jul 2012)

Magical.


----------



## Maxadia (19 Jul 2012)

It's out in the open now....

Whoops.....almost quoted that here until I saw the author's name....


----------



## bridges (19 Jul 2012)

We have Reg F posns, including section heads, which have been unfilled for years because there are not enough pers available - and there are people who make coffee as their primary job?  Granted, probably not the rank level and skill set that we could use as a section head, but they could do _something_ useful.  Most workplaces have a long list of jobs that could be done if only someone were available to do them - and I'm betting they're all more important than coffee.  

I wonder how the cost of a Reg F member, including salary, benefits, health care, employer's share of EI/CPP etc., etc., would compare to the cost of a long-term contract with a local coffee firm to take care of this.  They do exist.


----------



## medicineman (19 Jul 2012)

Hmmm...seem to recall this is something a Steward does is it not?

Just tossing that out there...

MM


----------



## Journeyman (19 Jul 2012)

bridges said:
			
		

> ..... I'm betting they're all more important than coffee.


 rly:  Careful.... not _everyone_ in today's army drinks 'double mint latte with extra foam.'


----------



## bridges (19 Jul 2012)

Yep, this looks like a Steward posn.  Stewards have lots of different types of jobs.  



			
				Journeyman said:
			
		

> rly:  Careful.... not _everyone_ in today's army drinks 'double mint latte with extra foam.'



 ???

Not sure what that's about.  Anyway, I'm among those surprised to see a soldier providing the coffee as their full-time job.  But maybe someone who does that kind of job can chime in and explain why it's best done by a CF mbr.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (19 Jul 2012)

Perhaps a job for injured soldiers recovering from their wounds?


----------



## Journeyman (19 Jul 2012)

bridges said:
			
		

> Not sure what that's about.


  :

It's a joke. Some of us think coffee is important, especially first thing in the morning.

Nevermind.


----------



## Pusser (19 Jul 2012)

medicineman said:
			
		

> Hmmm...seem to recall this is something a Steward does is it not?
> 
> Just tossing that out there...
> 
> MM



Save that everyone except the Navy decided they didn't need stewards and got rid of them.  They've been paying for it ever since by getting other folks to do the things that stewards used to do.

The fact is that, as described, this could in fact, be a full time and busy job, depending on the size of the operation.  Whether a CF member or an NPF employee (on a static base) should be doing it is an entirely different matter (I would argue that Canex should be doing this - it's in their mandate).


----------



## bridges (19 Jul 2012)

Colin P said:
			
		

> Perhaps a job for injured soldiers recovering from their wounds?



Yep that occurred to me too.  Around here we have jobs that injured/recovering soldiers can do, and frequently do - but we don't have them as established CF posns just waiting for the next injured soldier to show up.  Anyway, it's curious.  




			
				Journeyman said:
			
		

> :
> 
> It's a joke. Some of us think coffee is important, especially first thing in the morning.
> 
> Nevermind.



Double-mint latte with extra foam ... I'm sure that has your necessary caffeine too.  Just saying.      But I have a hard enough time getting Tim's to put ONE shot of mint in their advertised mint-chocolate Ice Capp, I don't want to push my luck and ask for double.


----------



## brihard (19 Jul 2012)

As of this morning the REO position has apparently already been yanked.


----------



## aesop081 (19 Jul 2012)

Pusser said:
			
		

> Save that everyone except the Navy decided they didn't need stewards and got rid of them.



The rest decided that officers can make their own beds and take care of themselves at meal time.


----------



## Pusser (19 Jul 2012)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> The rest decided that officers can make their own beds and take care of themselves at meal time.



But they forgot that stewards also run the entire NPF operation in operational areas.

For the record, stewards don't make beds anymore and working the Wardroom is a only a small part of their overall duties.

About 15+ years ago, the Army eliminated all steward positions and decided it would run its messes with NPF employees (who tended to be inner circle friends of those in appropriate postions, but that's another story).  Not six months after the last Steward had been posted out of the Army, the Army sent out a critical manning message for - get this - a Steward, to run a field canteen on an operation.  Lo and behold, there were none to be had as the neither the Navy nor the Air Force had any to spare.  The position was filled by someone else.  Several months later the NPF Board of Directors was faced by a request from that same operation (and the Army) to write-off $50K-$60K (or thereabout) of spoiled and lost canteen stock because the non-stewards in charge of the canteen didn't know what they were doing.

Anything worth doing is worth doing well.  Professionalism and training go a long way to ensuring this.  Stewards are professionals trained in NPF management (their primary responsibility).  Assuming that just anybody can do it can be a recipe for disaster.


----------



## Jarnhamar (19 Jul 2012)

Colin P said:
			
		

> Perhaps a job for injured soldiers recovering from their wounds?



Understand your theory Colin but  I can't think of a more degrading job for an injured warrior than making coffee for someone.


----------



## Haggis (19 Jul 2012)

Brihard said:
			
		

> As of this morning the REO position has apparently already been yanked.



It's still in REO, just with a status of "cancelled".

The perplexing part is that at least two different staffers had to sign off on the messge before it got posted in REO.  Clearly a "WTF were you thinking?" moment should have occured somewhere in the chain of command....


----------



## brihard (19 Jul 2012)

Pusser said:
			
		

> But they forgot that stewards also run the entire NPF operation in operational areas.
> 
> For the record, stewards don't make beds anymore and working the Wardroom is a only a small part of their overall duties.
> 
> ...



That's nice, but the plural of 'anecdote' is not 'data'. Existing QM and food services organizations - which have a primary sustainment role - should easily be able to run canteens on operations; that was what I saw over and over in Afghanistan, which I think is about as 'operational' as it gets. Imagine that; we actually have field deployable trades whose primary job it is to deal with keeping stuff in stock, and keeping track of perishables. And - wait for it - we even have people in the CF whose primary job is money management.

The historical intransigence of the senior service notwithstanding, in today's stressed military we do not need uniformed members whose primary role could even conceivably lead to the establishment of full time PYs for coffee bitch or running canteens. If the Navy can demonstrate and justify a legitimate requirement for a specific manner of service aboard ship, that can be delegated to cooks so that we can retain the compulsory deployability that comes with being in uniform. For EVERY other non-operational position which stewards fill, it should be part of our ongoing rationalization to offload those tasks to others who already have the various parts of those jobs as part of their trades.

The recovered PYs can be pushed right back into operational units. This isn't even the familiar 'up yours- fill the battalions!' refrain we in green are fond of. I'm sure even if the navy kept every PY formerly dedicated to it would find ample use for them- some small percentage for the tasks stewards were actually critical for, and the rest to trades that are in constant short supply.


----------



## Infanteer (19 Jul 2012)

Brihard has the right of it.  Unit and sub-unit canteens are administered by combat storemen and CQs with little fuss as an extra duty.


----------



## Haggis (19 Jul 2012)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> Brihard has the right of it.  Unit and sub-unit canteens are administered by combat storemen and CQs *with little fuss as an extra duty*.



... and a ready supply of volunteers as an alternative to a Summary Trial.....


----------



## bridges (19 Jul 2012)

Haggis said:
			
		

> ... and a ready supply of volunteers as an alternative to a Summary Trial.....



Because they can be counted on to do a good job with planning/organizing?   And money?


----------



## Haggis (19 Jul 2012)

bridges said:
			
		

> Because they can be counted on to do a good job with planning/organizing?   And money?



No.  Because they'd rather make coffee, wipe tables and sweep floors for a week under the supervision of the CQ (who would handle the money) rather than go before the old man doing the hatless dance.


----------



## GAP (19 Jul 2012)

perfectly resonable reason...... :nod:


----------



## Remius (19 Jul 2012)

To be honest, what I saw in the news seemed to be a bit misleading.  It looks like part of the job is making coffee for the CO.  For those in the know, CO's Coffee on friday mornings is akin to RSM's breakfest or any other social work function.  I am assuming the job entails the preperation and execution of that task not the actual preperation of the COs mug of java.  However, I'm sure teh REO could have used a better way to describe the work functions.  For the layman, it does look like you would be making the COs coffee.


----------



## LieutenantPrivate (19 Jul 2012)

its hard honest work making a good cup of coffee...have a little respect here....


----------



## bridges (19 Jul 2012)

First of all - this was in the news?

And secondly, a news article misleading?  I'm shocked.  _Shocked!_


----------



## Eye In The Sky (19 Jul 2012)

Yup.  Ottawa Citizen.


----------



## Robert0288 (19 Jul 2012)

And front page.  You would think they would have important world news to cover, like Syria for example.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (19 Jul 2012)

Crantor said:
			
		

> To be honest, what I saw in the news seemed to be a bit misleading.  It looks like part of the job is making coffee for the CO.  For those in the know, CO's Coffee on friday mornings is akin to RSM's breakfest or any other social work function.  I am assuming the job entails the preperation and execution of that task not the actual preperation of the COs mug of java.  However, I'm sure teh REO could have used a better way to describe the work functions.  For the layman, it does look like you would be making the COs coffee.



CO's coffee is (or was when I was staff at CFLRS) a mandatory attendence event for all staff, its like a quasi townhall/O Gp kind of event.  While some people gripe about these kind of things, they are normal.  Heck, my wife works in an office of 5 people and they have bi-weekly co-ord meeting!  I was at CFLRS in '07 and am glad to see the CO's coffee is still happening.  There is not enough face-to-face time in the CF with computers, Email, Blackberrys and all that stuff IMO.

So..no this isn't to make the Cmdt's coffee every day, the CO Coffee is a weekly event for all staff that aren't busy doing the business CFLRS does.  IIRC, part of it also included collecting $ for GCCWC, etc as well.

Now that there is a Navy DEU Cmdt, they might just change it to "10 o'clock stand-easy" or whatever the proper RCN term is and add soup!


----------



## blacktriangle (19 Jul 2012)

Is this really a surprise to anyone? There are some people paid Capt salary to essentially make coffee and take phone calls for their bosses. 

CO's coffee is a good time though. I am a big fan of pastries and dessert trays.


----------



## bridges (20 Jul 2012)

I'm not against meetings, or coffee.  Quite the opposite on both counts.  Regular meetings have been ceased where I work, and you can practically see the stovepipes growing as a result.  

Just surprised that this is a CF mbr's primary job, in this age of outsourcing & emphasizing deployability.


----------



## GnyHwy (20 Jul 2012)

I don't see this as anything different than (insert any unit) having 2 or 3 Cpls running a canteen, and probably a Sgt IC.  

Funny how the person who posted the ad was probably trying to be blatantly truthful and transparent, yet it bit them in the ***.  I guess they could have posted the ad as goods and services coordinator wanted, and waited until the person showed up to tell them that they were the coffee biatch.


----------



## Pusser (20 Jul 2012)

Brihard said:
			
		

> That's nice, but the plural of 'anecdote' is not 'data'. Existing QM and food services organizations - which have a primary sustainment role - should easily be able to run canteens on operations; that was what I saw over and over in Afghanistan, which I think is about as 'operational' as it gets. Imagine that; we actually have field deployable trades whose primary job it is to deal with keeping stuff in stock, and keeping track of perishables. And - wait for it - we even have people in the CF whose primary job is money management.
> 
> The historical intransigence of the senior service notwithstanding, in today's stressed military we do not need uniformed members whose primary role could even conceivably lead to the establishment of full time PYs for coffee ***** or running canteens. If the Navy can demonstrate and justify a legitimate requirement for a specific manner of service aboard ship, that can be delegated to cooks so that we can retain the compulsory deployability that comes with being in uniform. For EVERY other non-operational position which stewards fill, it should be part of our ongoing rationalization to offload those tasks to others who already have the various parts of those jobs as part of their trades.
> 
> The recovered PYs can be pushed right back into operational units. This isn't even the familiar 'up yours- fill the battalions!' refrain we in green are fond of. I'm sure even if the navy kept every PY formerly dedicated to it would find ample use for them- some small percentage for the tasks stewards were actually critical for, and the rest to trades that are in constant short supply.



The incident I described is not a case of "someone who knew someone, who heard that...."  I have direct first hand knowledge of all the details I provided (was involved in the CF Steward survey, drafted Navy's response to the Army's Critical Manning message and briefed MARCOM on the details of the Army's write-off request for an upcoming NPF Board of Directors meeting).  Although time has caused me to forget the precise details in terms of the actual dollar amounts involved, the gist of what I described was real and the amounts were significant. 

Please note that I'm not talking about a couple of guys running a small unit canteen with a few cases of pop, chips and chocolate bars.  I'm talking about NPF operations that can run into the hundreds of thousands of dollars (a ship's Exchange operation can easily be worth $100K).  It's not appropriately managed as a secondary duty.  It's also not simply a matter of counting stuff or putting it on shelves.  Although there is some significant overlap with aspects of what RMS clerks and Sup Techs do (who also do a heck of a lot more than count stuff or put things on shelves), the occupations are not fully interchangeable.  Think of it this way:  I think we would all agree that Vehicle Techs and Marine Engineers are not able to do each other's jobs, despite the fact that they are both mechanics and would have a pretty good understanding of the basics of what the other does.

As for Stewards themselves, the Navy has studied it in depth and there is still a justifiable and viable role for them to play and one that cannot be filled with civilian NPF employees or wounded/injured members that cannot meet UofS.  Stewards are busy people and as a CF trade, it is filled with dedicated and enthusiastic professionals.  To the best of my knowledge, we don't have any difficulty recruiting.  You would also be hard-pressed to find another navy that doesn't have stewards in some form or another.

Now back to the actual point of this thread.  Although perhaps poorly written, with the appropriate background understanding of the requirement, one can read between the lines and see that this could be a viable full-time job (which would not include actually making and serving individual cups of coffee to the CO).  It would all depend on the volume of sales and the overall size of the operation.  Having said that, if the operation is big enough to require a full-time person, it would also be big enough to require more professional NPF knowledge than a corporal who is not trained in NPF can be expected to have.  Being on a static base as well, in my opinion, this would be best performed by an NPF (i.e. Canex) employee.  However, if you get Canex involved, then it will fall under Canex's rules and the profits then get distributed according to Canex's royalty distribution formula, which is probably exactly what the unit involved was trying to avoid in the first place...

On a final note, it's interesting to see that everyone involved seems to have forgotten that years ago, the CDS actually gave specific direction to the effect that units were not set up "coffee boats" of this magnitude and that all requirements were to be deferred to Canex.


----------



## Occam (20 Jul 2012)

Pusser said:
			
		

> On a final note, it's interesting to see that everyone involved seems to have forgotten that years ago, the CDS actually gave specific direction to the effect that units were not set up "coffee boats" of this magnitude and that all requirements were to be deferred to Canex.



Although it's possible the direction came from higher, that was actually the subject of CANAIRGEN 012/02 .


----------



## Maxadia (20 Jul 2012)

Anyone here comfortable having some 17 year old off the street doing this job instead? 

I would assume for this position, you would want someone knowledgeable regarding the CF's norms and practices, instead of the lowest common employable denominator.


----------



## Jarnhamar (20 Jul 2012)

Mean while infantry companies are under strength ..


----------



## brihard (20 Jul 2012)

RDJP said:
			
		

> Anyone here comfortable having some 17 year old off the street doing this job instead?
> 
> I would assume for this position, you would want someone knowledgeable regarding the CF's norms and practices, instead of the lowest common employable denominator.



There's no binary solution set on this of either a $55k/year uniformed member, or a 17 year old barely employable. That's a strawman of your own creation.

I see no reason the 'coffee bitch' part of this can't be rolled into routine canteen / qm tasks, and the money side given to someone appropriate. Or, as even Pusser has brought up, much of it given to CFPSA pers.

The only instance where I see these sorts of roles being appropriate as the primary job of uniformed pers is where the\re must be a compulsory deployment option with that employment position. Basically that limits it to on ships, since the army/air force have shown the ability to go without.

Not every person working for the military needs to be uniformed, and if you're uniformed (and paid as such) you shouldn't be primarily employed in this sort of task. Anyone who's been an assistant manager at a Tim Horton's or Second Cup could do this job. They sure as hell don't make Cpl's salary and benefits.


----------



## Pusser (20 Jul 2012)

Occam said:
			
		

> Although it's possible the direction came from higher, that was actually the subject of CANAIRGEN 012/02 .



The CDS direction I'm talking about came out in the mid-90s.  One concern had to do with the Pension Act.  If someone was injured while making coffee (i.e. not his/her primary duty) would they have been considered to have been "on duty" for purposes of the Act?

Now this is an anecdote, but since the Director of Pensions told it to me, I'm reasonably certain it's true.  Years ago, the Pension Board reviewed a case where an individual had a heart attack and died in an elevator at NDHQ(?).  After interviewing his co-workers, his survivors were denied a pension because his co-workers insisted they were on a "coffee break" (i.e. not "on duty").  Despite efforts to get them to state he was en route to a meeting (or something similar), they didn't change their story.  This is the way the Pension Act was being interpreted at the time and was a real concern.  We also saw Pension Board rulings that saw survivors of soldiers who died in their sleeping bags on exercise compensated while survivors of sailors who died in their bunks at sea were not.


----------



## daftandbarmy (20 Jul 2012)

I'm so old, I remember that when a Cpl was told 'double double', they actually _ran _ somewhere.  ;D


----------



## bridges (20 Jul 2012)

Pusser said:
			
		

> Now this is an anecdote, but since the Director of Pensions told it to me, I'm reasonably certain it's true.  Years ago, the Pension Board reviewed a case where an individual had a heart attack and died in an elevator at NDHQ(?).  After interviewing his co-workers, his survivors were denied a pension because his co-workers insisted they were on a "coffee break" (i.e. not "on duty").  Despite efforts to get them to state he was en route to a meeting (or something similar), they didn't change their story.  This is the way the Pension Act was being interpreted at the time and was a real concern.  We also saw Pension Board rulings that saw survivors of soldiers who died in their sleeping bags on exercise compensated while survivors of sailors who died in their bunks at sea were not.



 :not-again:    Sadly, this somehow isn't surprising.  I _hope_ it's no longer happening (which is probably being covered in at least one other thread), but stuff like this illustrates the need for thoroughly thinking through all of the hiring options.


----------



## dogger1936 (20 Jul 2012)

So how much B class has been cut at reserve units again?

When did people at the base become above being tasked to do this CO's coffee once a week? When did swing instructors become so busy they can't do a coffee run.


----------



## fraserdw (20 Jul 2012)

I suspect that the job description is poorly written.  I can think of a number of things a NPF clerk does at a static unit IAT coffee.  In any case, if there is a mis-use of staff, it has been corrected by now.  It is ironic given all the RMS clerks we are short.


----------

