# DEO or ROTP



## steve_TDP (27 Sep 2006)

Hey guys.. just in my 3rd year at the UofA, after reading about the overwhelming negative reports of non-success and non-cooperation on the ROTP process, (I'm actually quite embarrassed to hear about them, especially compared to our neighboring allies) I have decided to not bother with this stage and just go DEO.

Just wondering if anyone knows if 'grades' are looked at for being accepted in DEO. Or at that point is it.. if u have a degree, then you have a degree?? And acceptance is based on a full applicant analysis?


----------



## Shamrock (27 Sep 2006)

steve_TDP said:
			
		

> ...the overwhelming negative reports of non-success and non-cooperation on the ROTP process, (I'm actually quite embarrassed to hear about them, especially compared to our neighboring allies) .



Huh?  



			
				steve_TDP said:
			
		

> Just wondering if anyone knows if 'grades' are looked at for being accepted in DEO. Or at that point is it.. if u have a degree, then you have a degree?? And acceptance is based on a full applicant analysis?



I can't say for certain, so confirm with a recruiter, but I'm pretty sure grades are reviewed as part of your application.  Including high school and any other post-secondary.


----------



## scoutfinch (27 Sep 2006)

Donning my *crappy writing* decoder ring, let me take a stab at translating this to English:

I think what he is trying to say is that his grades sucked so he couldn't go ROTP (despite the fact that he heard about people in other countries with lower marks being accepted to their respective ROTP programmes).  

So, instead of ROTP, he is going to apply DEO once he graduates hoping that they won't look at his crappy marks but worries about the *full applicant analysis*.


----------



## George Wallace (27 Sep 2006)

Now this is starting to sound like a "Clarica Commercial".


----------



## scoutfinch (27 Sep 2006)

I just hope they wear gloves while conducting the *full applicant anaylsis*.  

I am not sure if it sounds dirty or if it sounds like it hurts...


----------



## GAP (27 Sep 2006)

scoutfinch said:
			
		

> I just hope they wear gloves while conducting the *full applicant anaylsis*.
> 
> I am not sure if it sounds dirty or if it sounds like it hurts...



Scoutfinch....you have a warped mind.....tis a wonderful thing, what?  ;D


----------



## Magravan (27 Sep 2006)

As a DEO applicant, they check grades. It is not the entire score, but it is a portion... Brutal grades wont completely disqualify you from the CF, but it might limit your acceptance to certain areas. And as for DEO, the type of degree will vary your eligibility to certain trades. So in no way does having a degree simply count as a checkmark on a long list. It has a point value, and affects your application by bringing the total points in an upward or downward direction, depending.


----------



## scoutfinch (27 Sep 2006)

Magravan:

Stay in your lane.  You are only able to relate your personal experience as you are simply an applicant in the hopper with the rest of us.  You are not a recruiter.  Perhaps you should leave the recruiting questions to those trained to answer them.


----------



## Grahamg (27 Sep 2006)

In response to admission to ROTP and DEO. My recruiter said that on the bottom line university marks have almost zero meaning for a DEO applicant. I believe him because I was actually accepted to both programs. I was accepted to ROTP near the end of my 3rd year when i had just under a 70% average. I told my recruiter that I could just finish up a 3 year degree as opposed to a 4 year degree and he suggested I do that and just go DEO. I finished, sent in my marks, overage 67% average and was just given an DEO for infantry. The recruiter said I needed to do an updated physical test but I never did and they still accepted me. I think the process is alot more slack that some of these guys make it sound


----------



## kincanucks (27 Sep 2006)

_My recruiter said that on the bottom line university marks have almost zero meaning for a DEO applicant. _ 

I guarantee that your recruiter has never seen the scoring sheet for assessing applicants or he wouldn't have made such an asinine statement.  Your marks definitely count along with your CFAT score and your interview.  The reason you got in with a 67% average is that Infantry is desperate so i is not something I would want to brag about.

HH


----------



## Magravan (28 Sep 2006)

scoutfinch said:
			
		

> Magravan:
> 
> Stay in your lane.  You are only able to relate your personal experience as you are simply an applicant in the hopper with the rest of us.  You are not a recruiter.  Perhaps you should leave the recruiting questions to those trained to answer them.



Scoutfinch,

I got my information from Kincanucks on a separate thread that wasn't related to this particular topic, just happened to tangent on it. As far as I know, posting valid information from a recruiter as a DEO applicant, I am in my lane. If you do not see it that way, I would happy to discuss it with you in PMs.


----------



## scoutfinch (28 Sep 2006)

Then acknowledge where your information comes from so that it has some credibility.


----------



## Magravan (29 Sep 2006)

At the time, I couldn't recall the source of the original comment, whether it was mentioned in my application, my interview or (as I realized after seeing Kincanucks later post), from a topic on Army.ca .. I will make efforts to point people in the direction of where I got my information the next time that I post.


----------



## Meridian (29 Sep 2006)

Kincanucks already answered, but, anyone who has actually filled out the application form (and paid attention) to the fields would note that when you indicate your degree, you have to indicate where your GPA falls  (There are three 'categories' here, I believe).

Kincanucks, do they require a transcript, or just to see/certify the copy of the Degree?


As for all the problems with ROTP; I don't really see what you are relating too. However, if you are that close to completing a degree, financially it would be in your better interest (I would think, at least it is for me) to enrol as a DEO, as the DEO payscales start at a higher level than ROTP.


----------



## kincanucks (29 Sep 2006)

_Kincanucks, do they require a transcript, or just to see/certify the copy of the Degree?_

Well the last time I looked at a degree it didn't indicate the GPA or any other marks so yes an applicant has to submit a copy of the transcript and the degree.


----------



## Kid_X (29 Sep 2006)

Meridian said:
			
		

> financially it would be in your better interest (I would think, at least it is for me) to enrol as a DEO, as the DEO payscales start at a higher level than ROTP.



"Ummmm", they do?   :-\

http://www.forces.gc.ca/dgcb/dppd/pay/engraph/OfficerRegFPayRate_e.asp?sidesection=3&sidecat=28

Row section A = ROTP
Row section C = DEO

Check for 2LT.

Here's the link to the thread that that pops out of.

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/41837.0.html

This guy didn't make assumptions, he asked.  He also got a few answers, this one probably applies best.



			
				NCdt Lumber said:
			
		

> That's exactly right. Even though ROTP 2nd LT's were in 'school' for four years, they are still considered CF members for four years and their pay increase reflects that accordingly. Another examply of this is when an NCM reservist who is (I think) a MCpl or higher transfers over to ROTP. Because as a MCpl he makes more than a 1st year OCdt he doesn't switch over to the OCdt pay scale, he keeps his NCM pay until his OCdt or 2LT pay meets or passes his NCM pay. Okay this isnt an _exact_ comparaison, but it does show how our pay system reflects service already commited. You are not going to putforth 4 years of service as an NCM and receive _less_ pay in your 4th, 5th etc. years because you switch to ROTP.


----------



## Meridian (30 Sep 2006)

Kid X - I can make more in the civilian world completing my degree than I can under ROTP on the salary that ROTP pays an OCdt.  (now I wont get into whether people go work second jobs while being at ROTP civy U, because the the last time I asked officially about that I was told it was generally not authorized).

Thus financially it is better for me (as I mentioned above, in quotations, that my comment applied to me).  I should, however have stipulaetd (my apologies), that I was assuming he was completing part time or working a civilian job - indeed I probably assumed too much there.


----------



## SupersonicMax (30 Sep 2006)

You still have to pay for you degree and our 4 years as ROTP counts towards the 25 years for the pension.  I make more than a DEO as a 2Lt and I was paid during my degree (didn't really have to pay for rent or rations or it was taken off my pay but I still had around 600$ left in my pockets at the end of the month).  So, generally, I think ROTP is a better deal than DEO...

Max


----------



## Quag (30 Sep 2006)

If you look at the broad picture, Meridian, financially it is far better to go ROTP.  Just look at the pay scales when you are a 2LT.  An ROTP person who is a 2LT is making a substantial amount more than you.   Plus, ROTP does not have to pay for school, and instead gets paid to go etc.. etc...


----------



## Kid_X (30 Sep 2006)

"_Kid X - I can make more in the civilian world completing my degree than I can under ROTP on the salary that ROTP pays an OCdt.  (now I wont get into whether people go work second jobs while being at ROTP civy U, because the the last time I asked officially about that I was told it was generally not authorized)."_

If you go into a civilian line of work after paying for your own degree, you are not considered a DEO because you are not joining the military.  Am I correct on this?  Financially, ROTP makes more sense. If it did not, why would anyone do it?


----------



## kincanucks (30 Sep 2006)

_If you go into a civilian line of work after paying for your own degree, you are not considered a DEO because you are not joining the military.  Am I correct on this?_

He said he could make more money working while completing his degree then going ROTP and when he is finished his degree he would go DEO.

HH


----------



## George Wallace (30 Sep 2006)

kincanucks

I believed you left out the important line:

"Pay attention to detail".


----------



## Magravan (30 Sep 2006)

The advantages of DEO seem to be autonomy, and a quick start if you've decided to change fields...

ROTP, provided you aren't questioning your commitment to this particular dream, seems the optimal choice for getting a degree if you have to start from scratch..


----------



## Shamrock (30 Sep 2006)

I think some of the most overlooked aspects of ROTP are:

a) Guaranteed summer employment.  This is as appealing for students as for parents.
b) Guaranteed post-education employment.  Nothing beats finishing school and wondering if you'll have a job.

For some of us, a career isn't about money.  It's about vocation. Like so many people in the CF, I turned down high-paying careers in favor of a uniform.  I don't doubt that at any time I could release and pursue those other careers, but I will not because I love what I do.  

Find me another job that will let me say that.  Find me a job that lets me wear my pride on my sleeve.


----------



## mcchartman (1 Oct 2006)

You forget one of the biggest advantages of DEO though... TIME. Sure, I am now decided to join the Canadian Forces, but I still wasn't 100% decided when I first entered university. By going at a civilian university, I had a chance to taste the civilian life (with chances to work both in the public or private fields) while gathering all the information required for me to make my mind. In the meantime, I was acquiring a degree and had a truly open-ended future. I am sure I am not the only one who took a lot of time to ponder on whether a career in the CF was truly the occupation I wanted to pursue. The bottom line is that in first year university I still didn't feel ready to make the commitment...

If anyone is already 100% decided by the time he finishes highschool however, I really don't see why anyone would not recommend him to go the ROTP way.


----------



## Kid_X (1 Oct 2006)

Yeah, see, I've been considering the CF since I was about 8, that childhood fantasy became a dream when I turned about 12, and a goal when I was 16, so by the time I finished highschool earlier this year, I knew the CF was for me.  We were told that if we wanted to work a job, so long as our grades didn't suffer from it, we would most likely be allowed.  If I was living in residence, that would probably be a necessity for me, but I'm at home here in Ottawa, living with my mom, so I don't have to pay rent.  I'll see how things go either later this year, or after next summer, whenever my car stops working and I get myself a room downtown.


----------



## Magravan (2 Oct 2006)

The different entry plans are available because people have different things that they value and prioritize. Some people want one thing, while to others, that is of lesser importance when compared to another thing... Either way, people will find the way into service that best meets their current and future needs.


----------



## steve_TDP (2 Oct 2006)

scoutfinch said:
			
		

> Donning my *crappy writing* decoder ring, let me take a stab at translating this to English:
> 
> I think what he is trying to say is that his grades sucked so he couldn't go ROTP (despite the fact that he heard about people in other countries with lower marks being accepted to their respective ROTP programmers).
> 
> So, instead of ROTP, he is going to apply DEO once he graduates hoping that they won't look at his crappy marks but worries about the *full applicant analysis*.



Sorry about my delayed response.  But I was busy actually accomplishing something else in life, other than making cheap insults to individuals in vulnerable positions. Why are you even a member of the army forum? Obviously ur not a CF member AT ALL, and are probably an overweight white bread son of a POG, with no idea of what combat is truly all about.

To provide a more accurate explanation of my 'crappy marks', the basis of my question isn’t because I am not 'capable' of memorizing all the logarithmic tables in order to get a 95%, but rather would suffice meeting the requirements of getting an 70-80% WHILE earning a self-employed student income which probably doubles your own, right now.  As for my high school marks, no. they were deff NOT good enough for ROTP.  By age 18 I was operating a 5 employee business, and made more than my prof's. I was lucky if I made it to class 1/2 the time.. But I still pulled off 70's. Therefore there was not alot of motivation TO study.  By age 19, I had a fully operating non-profit boxing club with over 12 amateur fighters, and that also tied up most of my time. 

When it comes down to selecting WHO will be the most effective infantry platoon leader (what I’m applying into). I’m pretty sure the most important aspect is NOT who can recite the most passages from grade 12 Shakespeare.  

The reason I posted this thread, as I was wondering weather I should sacrifice my fitness, combative, and leadership training in order to ensure a University 90%..   OR just slide by a 70% + have alot more applicable infantry skills/experience in my background..

Thanks for the helpful comments otherwise guys. I’m am confident that my DEO app will be accepted based on my pervious combat experience, and I'm sure my 'resume' will more than accommodate 'non-competitive' previous average. I'll probably just run an 80 for the next 2 years, and be content with that.

To scoutfinch or anyone with a 'BIG INTERNET MOUTH'
Feel free to PM me, and I’ll arrange a meet for you to stop by one of my clubs, and we'll put on the gloves    or.   I’ll accept a 300yard rifle challenge, with a shot of tear gas in my face!!

THX a BUNCH!! to those who take this forum seriously and actually provide useful information for those seeking it.


----------



## Gouki (2 Oct 2006)

Threatening a beating over the internet .. Reminds me of grade 6 only the bully wants to meet you on a computer screen and not the skate park.


----------



## George Wallace (2 Oct 2006)

steve_TDP 

Quite the 'virtual grenade' you dropped down your pants there.


----------



## Infanteer (2 Oct 2006)

steve_TDP said:
			
		

> Sorry about my delayed response.  But I was busy actually accomplishing something else in life, blahblahblahblah



Welcome to the warning system Steve.  Next time you're sparring with the death squad, maybe you can contemplate the word "tact".


----------



## big bad john (2 Oct 2006)

steve_TDP said:
			
		

> Sorry about my delayed response.  But I was busy actually accomplishing something else in life, other than making cheap insults to individuals in vulnerable positions. Why are you even a member of the army forum? Obviously ur not a CF member AT ALL, and are probably an overweight white bread son of a POG, with no idea of what combat is truly all about.
> 
> To provide a more accurate explanation of my 'crappy marks', the basis of my question isn’t because I am not 'capable' of memorizing all the logarithmic tables in order to get a 95%, but rather would suffice meeting the requirements of getting an 70-80% WHILE earning a self-employed student income which probably doubles your own, right now.  As for my high school marks, no. they were deff NOT good enough for ROTP.  By age 18 I was operating a 5 employee business, and made more than my prof's. I was lucky if I made it to class 1/2 the time.. But I still pulled off 70's. Therefore there was not alot of motivation TO study.  By age 19, I had a fully operating non-profit boxing club with over 12 amateur fighters, and that also tied up most of my time.
> 
> ...



Officer Boards in my experience do look at things such as marks, grammar and spelling.  You really should brush up on it if you want to make it in as an officer.  As regards to the Infantry; You know it is all about paying attention to detail and being in control of ones self.  Boxing is not combat no matter what you might think.  Grow up.

He posts and runs.


----------



## Quag (2 Oct 2006)

With your response, I can tell you right now you will not cut it as an infantry officer, or as ANY member of the CF.

The CF prides itself on teamwork among other things.

Did you know that you need to demonstrate the among highest forms of selfless leadership (which you did not at all in your post) to be an infantry officer?

Food for thought.  

Good luck, you are going to need it.


----------



## Michael OLeary (2 Oct 2006)

steve_TDP said:
			
		

> Sorry about my delayed response.  But I was busy actually accomplishing something else in life, other than making cheap insults to individuals in vulnerable positions. Why are you even a member of the army forum? Obviously ur not a CF member AT ALL, and are probably an overweight white bread son of a POG, with no idea of what combat is truly all about.
> 
> To provide a more accurate explanation of my 'crappy marks', the basis of my question isn’t because I am not 'capable' of memorizing all the logarithmic tables in order to get a 95%, but rather would suffice meeting the requirements of getting an 70-80% WHILE earning a self-employed student income which probably doubles your own, right now.  As for my high school marks, no. they were deff NOT good enough for ROTP.  By age 18 I was operating a 5 employee business, and made more than my prof's. I was lucky if I made it to class 1/2 the time.. But I still pulled off 70's. Therefore there was not alot of motivation TO study.  By age 19, I had a fully operating non-profit boxing club with over 12 amateur fighters, and that also tied up most of my time.
> 
> ...



steve

You may think you have an idea of what it takes to be a successful infantry officer, but I would advise you to pull back and do a bit more research.  While you may think your "combatives" experience will put you in good stead, it's a limited skillset that won't much help you do many other aspects of the real job of an infantry officer.  You can't punch a memo down the Company Second-in-Command's throat, nor can you threaten to choke a pay clerk into submission to understand a soldier's pay problems. Many early lessons for young (new) infantry officers deal with mollifying the bursts of energy and anger they develop in training to solve phyiscal problems under stress, and to teach them to reapply themselves in a calmer fashion to solve problems with their head, not just with simplistic tactical solutions at mach three.  As in many areas of life, a calm demeanor and tact are valuable assets for an infantry officer too.  New infantry officers soon leave the platoon commander's job and enter what may seem to be very strange worlds; headquarters staff, instructional jobs, working with the Reserves ..... all very different from the stereotypical "infantry officer" image, but all real life assignments in which a roundhouse kick is even further from a workable solution to the daily issues and problems.

Relax, reassess, and try to understand that while what you offer is valuable, you have not described a complete package.  As an infantry officer, and one that has run training for officers at the infantry school (admittedly some years ago), I would personally be looking for you to demonstrate that balance before I would recommend your successful completion of training.

Mike


----------



## niner domestic (3 Oct 2006)

steve:

Mike's advice would be best taken, along with the other poster's comments, to heart. In all of your postings with respect to this subject, I have not seen any reference to a subscription to an Officer's core beliefs (without sounding like an ad for RMC) of duty, honour and valour - with a fair share of commitment to Queen and Country thrown in. (don't kid yourself that during your interview that an absence of expressing - with demonstrative evidence -  of these core beliefs will not bode well with your file).  

Might I also suggest that before you take one step further into putting your mouth around your foot, that you go read an Officer's commissioning scroll and review the oath.  Can you, will you be able to fulfil the requirements of that oath and commission?  

On a rather minor nickpick, being able to recite passages from literature or biblical sources proved to be quite useful to many of the men/women in POW camps and Civvie internment camps during our conflicts.  Take a moment and do it it soon, to meet with the survivors of Japanese POW camps in Burma (you'll be able to ID them they'll have the Burma Star gong on their chests) and listen to their stories of having their officers and comrades recite the 23rd Psalm when many of them were held in the "sweat boxes" to keep their morale up.  After listening to these men's stories, come back and tell me that not being able to recite a line or two from Shakespeare isn't going to be part of who you are as an Officer.

On another nickpick, I have to draw a serious doubt that you along with the imaginary "white bread son of a POG" haven't got a schmick of what combat is either.  I'm afraid that owning the expansion pack of Call of Duty doesn't count as combat experience nor does operating a boxing club give you that level of experience that you decry to the other poster.  If I recall correctly, the appropriate gong hanging from your chest is a marker of your having somewhat of a decent level of "combat experience".  

As a mother of an NCM, I shudder at the thought of your ever being in command of my child or her husband.  As the wife of an Officer, I recoil at the thought of you being a subordinate to my husband with your wannabe-John-Wayne-cowboy-shoot em-up-and-engage-brains-later attitude as it will more than likely either get my husband in a world of hurt having to deal with your fallout or yourself in a bigger hurt locker.  As a former CF member, I can only hope that the recruitment screening processes are still in working order.


----------



## George Wallace (3 Oct 2006)

steve_TDP 

Like your previous incarnation, Mr.Clean, with your "Post 'n Run" style of posting your tirades, you have progressed to the end of the Warning System.

Thanks for coming out.

Bye.


----------



## Franko (3 Oct 2006)

Wow....4 post wonder boy trying to bully someone on the internet.

 :

Regards


----------



## derael (4 Oct 2006)

Wow a "future officer" with a childish website containing numerous spelling mistakes, and a douche bag attitude to boot… hopefully not in my IAP/BOTC.  

I'll remember the name. Hopefully I won't see it again.


----------



## big bad john (4 Oct 2006)

derael said:
			
		

> Wow a "future officer" with a childish website containing numerous spelling mistakes, and a douche bag attitude to boot… hopefully not in my IAP/BOTC.
> 
> I'll remember the name. Hopefully I won't see it again.



Hey maybe he "will" be on your course and you can run him into the ground.  Life does have its pleasures!  >

*_Milnet.ca staff edit for site policy_*


----------



## Michael OLeary (4 Oct 2006)

Since he can no longer rebut, we're done here.  The usual caveats apply.


----------



## Canuck55 (29 May 2015)

Hi there, 

Apologies if this has already been covered somewhere but I could not find it. I am currently an Army PRes Officer hoping to OT/CT to Reg Force. I am currently 3/4 completed my university program and so I was wondering what approach I should be taking. I would have thought that I was too far into my program to enter the ROTP, but as I do not yet have my degree I do not have the qualifications for DEO. Would I be required to simply wait for one more year and then apply once I have my degree or should I fill out the DWAN form now and note that my desired date of transfer would be following completion of my degree? If there is another alternative option then I would love to know. My local CFRC was unfortunately less than helpful in the matter. 

Thanks for any and all advise


----------



## runormal (9 Aug 2015)

If you have one year left I _believe_ you are too late. I seem to recall that you needed two academic years left at the date of your application.

If you are going into your fourth year just put the CT in now and the second you get your degree send it to them.  it will take some time anyways.


----------



## PuckChaser (9 Aug 2015)

You're not going to get to pick a desired date to transfer. CT/OTs take a while to process, don't count on it to give you employment as soon as you finish school. You could be waiting over a year depending on the trade.


----------



## runormal (9 Aug 2015)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> You're not going to get to pick a desired date to transfer. CT/OTs take a while to process, don't count on it to give you employment as soon as you finish school. You could be waiting over a year depending on the trade.



When you apply on the DWAN you can actually select "preferred" date. I'm not sure how much if it all it factors into the process, however it is an option on the form, and you must specify a date.


----------



## SFHL (4 Apr 2018)

Hey guys,

Tried searching but couldn't find any info. I'm wrapping up my 2nd year at a civi uni with a physics major and was hoping to go in as a pilot or warfare officer. My grades are reasonably good (3.00 GPA). I had served a couple years in the infantry reserve until 2014, but for personal reasons I failed the infantry course and released. I've since realized my maturity wasn't there, and feel much better about it now.

My question is, should I wait to apply as DEO in my 3rd year, or is it possible to apply right now for ROTP to wrap up my schooling at my uni? If my application takes long enough that I don't hear back before graduating, do I need to restart the application as DEO? 

Thanks!


----------



## SFHL (4 Apr 2018)

Typo with the title, SEP should say DEO.


----------



## mariomike (4 Apr 2018)

SFHL said:
			
		

> My question is, should I wait to apply as DEO in my 3rd year, or is it possible to apply right now for ROTP to wrap up my schooling at my uni? If my application takes long enough that I don't hear back before graduating, do I need to restart the application as DEO?



For discussion of DEO and ROTP, see also,

Different paths for becoming an officer  
https://army.ca/forums/threads/105116.0.html
2 pages.

As always, Recruiting is your most trusted source of official, up to date information.

"Unofficial site, not associated with DND or the Canadian Armed Forces."


----------

