# coming out of university and joining enlisting as an NCM?



## Future Prodigy (17 Mar 2008)

From the few threads I have read on here it seems that this is suggested by some, so they get their boots wet, etc... but my question is not pertaining to whether someone should join as a NCM before an officer... rather it is, do people whom have graduated from university normally join as NCMs?


The reason i ask is because i too will be graduating in a couple weeks with a honors BA and have been thinking of enlisting as an ncm over an officer, but this at times seems silly. From the threads ive read on here... the majority of ncms enlist as early as 18 years old. I'm 24 and have spent years in school, i feel like id be an old overeducated - in the sense that my university studies has no pragmatic value for the job at hand - NCM.


----------



## retiredgrunt45 (17 Mar 2008)

The best thing for you to do, would be to speak with a recruiting officer first. They'll be able to point you in the right direction.


----------



## Shamrock (17 Mar 2008)

Future Prodigy said:
			
		

> The reason i ask is because i too will be graduating in a couple weeks with a honors BA and have been thinking of enlisting as an ncm over an officer, but this at times seems silly. From the threads ive read on here... the majority of ncms enlist as early as 18 years old. I'm 24 and have spent years in school, i feel like id be an old overeducated - in the sense that my university studies has no pragmatic value for the job at hand - NCM.



Nothing silly about it.  I've served alongside quite a few NCM's with college diplomas and university degrees (and in one case, a private with a graduate degree).  I would say not only is 24 not that old to start off, but that 18 is hardly the vast majority of enlisting ages.


----------



## deej96 (17 Mar 2008)

I agree with retiredguy45...

...but for a quick add on:
I know quite a few guys who have done university and then gone into NCM.  It isn't uncommon or silly.  You also wouldn't be considered over educated, any education helps.  After all...knowledge is power!


----------



## Lumber (17 Mar 2008)

Future Prodigy said:
			
		

> ...in the sense that my university studies has no pragmatic value for the job at hand - NCM.



You can't think of being an Officer as requiring a higher level of education or intelligence. True, there are different Aptitude requirements that you must meet for every trade, and certainly that of an Infanteer differs from that of an Infantry Officer, the choice of whether to go NCM or Officer should be about what it is you want to do. I decided I wanted to be an Officer not because I thought as an Officer I was the best, the brightest, that NCMs were "below me". I am certain I will at some point run into an NCM who is both smarter then me and more competent than me. I chose to be an Officer because I want to lead, because anytime I have ever been given the chance to be in charge of something I found took the responsibility very comfortably; I could think fast and make quick and clear decisions (regardless of whether or not they were the best decisions  :) and it just felt very natural to me. Now, these are all traits that I'm sure would benefit an NCM as well. NCOs are leaders after all as well. 

Anyways, my point is don't let your degree affect what it is YOU want to do in the CF.

Cheers.


----------



## Journeyman (17 Mar 2008)

Lumber said:
			
		

> *I am certain I will at some point run into an NCM who is both smarter then me and more competent than me. *


You don't think you already have? Hmmmm.....

I too know an increasing number of NCMs with degrees. Individual ability and drive is much more important than a piece of paper or a school ring. Don't worry about it.




> *You can't think of being an Officer as requiring a higher level of education or intelligence*.


Oh, and please don't mistake education with intelligence. That they're not synonymous is demonstrated all too regularly by some posters.


----------



## Lumber (17 Mar 2008)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> You don't think you already have? Hmmmm.....



I'm _certain_ that I already have.


----------



## Maritime_Matt (17 Mar 2008)

I am 29 and in 3 months will be finished my second degree. I will be starting my third degree this fall. I am attempting to join the reserves in my town as an NCM.


----------



## geo (17 Mar 2008)

I have my university degree and do not regret having done my service as an NCM
I have had many sappers who've also had their College &/or university degree.

It's a choice.  

NCOs are no smarter/dumber than the officers who lead them.


----------



## BDTyre (17 Mar 2008)

I applied while in university, but the way things worked out, I ended up doing all my training after I graduated.  I was 23 when I got in, and that was 3 years ago.  I decided to join as NCM for several reasons and I don't at all regret it.  Okay, as an officer I would have got a cooler cap badge, but that was hardly first and foremost in my mind.

And judging by skills demonstrated in several RTS games, I lack tactical judgement and should not be trusted with the lives of 40 or more people.  ;D


----------



## geo (17 Mar 2008)

That,s OK CT, most all junior officers shuold be seen but not heard... unless they run it past their Troop WO beforehand 

Behind all good officers are some very good NCOs  8)


----------



## lone bugler (17 Mar 2008)

I'd say that being and officer and NCM all depends on trade. weather the trade you like is an officer or NCM trade. Being and officer isn't all about paperwork and leadership. neither is being an NCM all about being in the field and getting hands on work. once you become a Senior NCO through the NCM route, you will need leadership qualities and be "flying a desk" sometimes as the airforce says. And many Company level officers go on patrols, do alot of field work or at least supervise in the field. With a bachelors degree means you'll have more options. You know yourself best so think about what kind of job you wanna do. narrow it done to combat arms, support arms. than specific field such as infantry or engineering or medical. than you can ask recruiters the specifics on what an infantry officer does Vs. and infantry NCM.

Also keep in mind the CF might need you in a trade more than others. Not saying you should choose what's in demand but just keep an open mind and maybe the trade you want  might not be available      

ps: I'm applying for med tech(NCM) right now and im currently attending a civi university. Like alot have said above officers are not more important than NCMs in any way


----------



## dwalter (17 Mar 2008)

Well I have to say that although I was accepted for ROTP, I wasn't actually sure if I was going to be. I told myself that I would have absolutely no qualms about finishing university on my own, and then going in as an NCM, either Med Tech or AVN Tech. As everyone said it's all about what you want to be doing. I find myself leading without realizing it, especially at university, and I enjoy it. I figured that I'd really like to do that as a career. Also some of the 'specialist' officer trades (Medical, Dental, and Legal) are also very appealing in the military environment.


----------



## PPCLI Guy (17 Mar 2008)

I know an Reg F Infantry Officer who made it to LCol with a Gr 11 Quebec education, before he was forced to take a year off to get a degree.  As far as I can tell, he is not smarter now, just more educated.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (17 Mar 2008)

Quote by Lumber


> I am certain I will at some point run into an NCM who is both smarter then me and more competent than me.



I would have guessed that by now, you would have realized many here are, at least, your peers. Stick with that attitude, and you'll find out how much smarter and more competent NCMs are, than you are, when you start 'leading' them. Come across like that and they'll eat you alive. Grizzled old NCOs & WOs just love playing with a cocky, arrogant youngster that thinks he knows everything. You'll either be with them or against them, and I know what side I'd rather be on.


----------



## George Wallace (17 Mar 2008)

Piper said:
			
		

> The requirement for all officers to have a university degree is a holdover from the OLD days when officers were considered 'gentlemen' and a cut above their troops. It evolved into a requirement for officership (minus some exceptions like CFR's) because having a degree *implies* that one is capable of organisation, problem solving etc.




I have no idea who those officers were, but they were obviously not students of history.  It has only been in the last ten years that it has been mandated from the top that all officers should have a degree.  Before that, there were many who did not have degrees.  Some acquired degrees while in the CF.  Others did not.


----------



## Reccesoldier (18 Mar 2008)

Lumber said:
			
		

> I am certain I will at some point run into an NCM who is both smarter then than me and more competent than me. I chose to be an Officer because I want to lead, because anytime I have ever been given the chance to be in charge of something I found took the responsibility very comfortably; (Which one?  You either found the responsibility came comfortably or you took to the responsibility comfortably)  I could think fast and make quick and clear decisions (regardless of whether or not they were the best decisions  :) and it just felt very natural to me.



Just wanted to clear up your grammar and syntax a bit to make you easier to understand.



			
				Lumber said:
			
		

> Now, these are all traits that I'm sure would benefit an NCM as well. NCOs are leaders after all as well.



I can't express just how thankful I am that you acknowledge us poor NCO's this way.  We're so grateful that people like you will be leading us. Thank you, thank you, thank you!

I bet that there are a whole slew of Naval NCO's that can't wait to get you (and your ego) on Phase 5.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (18 Mar 2008)

OK folks,.....not that the young lad hasn't deserved the lashing he got but lets hope he learns something from this thread before its too late for him.

If possible, lets carry on with the topic at hand and maybe others can learn.

Thanks,
Bruce
[Grade 9 dropout ]


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (18 Mar 2008)

I know there is a huge thread on this from a couple of years ago I must look up this afternoon.


----------



## garb811 (18 Mar 2008)

Piper said:
			
		

> For those of you interested (like me) in why a degree is deemed necessary for officers (we're getting on a tangent here) in this day in age (as the need to differentiate between men and gentlemen is long gone) and why it was ultimatly decided (as George said) that all officers in the CF MUST have a degree..I offer up the following article.
> 
> http://www.rmc.ca/boardgov/reports/withers/06_developingofficer_e.html
> 
> It's an interesting read and perspective.


In Mar 97 the MND published a series of reports as the first steps towards recovering from the Somalia scandal.  Amongst those asked to contribute reports were esteemed academics such as J.L. Granatstein, Thomas Dimoff, Desmond Morton etc.  A common thread through many of the reports was the fact that Canadian Officers were an uneducated lot and that a degree should be a requirement.  The reports are at this link.

A couple of interesting quotes from J.L. Granatstein's Annex H:



> The CF has a remarkably ill-educated officer corps, surely one of the worst in the Western world. Only 53.29 percent of officers have a university degree and only 6.79 percent have graduate degrees, most in technical areas. Almost a quarter of the officer corps has only high school education. By comparison, in the United States armed forces, virtually every officer has a degree and, for all practical purposes, as in the USAF, the standard for promotion to major is a graduate degree. Roughly nine in ten of American general officers have graduate degrees and, while some of these are "soft" qualifications, most are not. The result, one officer who had served with the US forces put it, is that the US general officer corps is "a collegial intelligentsia." No one could say this of the CF senior leaders.



And, perhaps not surprising as I don't think he knew the answer to the question when he asked it but I assume he assumed he knew the answer:



> No one who has taught in a university for thirty years has any illusions left about the quality of Canadian higher education or the certainty of education's civilizing effects. *Nonetheless, it might be instructive for the Minister to ask how many of the officers caught up in the CAR's Somalia troubles had university degrees.* (my bold)



Not long thereafter, the Officer Candidate Training Plan was suspended and it wasn't until CEOTP was implemented that you could be comissioned without a degree unless you were CFR'd.


----------



## geo (18 Mar 2008)

CSA 105 said:
			
		

> I have heard that there are Warrant Officers with degrees in political science that are good leaders and also like being NCOs!


Umm... present and accounted for... Sah!


----------



## Lumber (18 Mar 2008)

Piper said:
			
		

> The Nicholson Report is a good read. I posted the Wither's Report as a reference of sorts as to why the CF has a degreed officer corps (not why we should or shouldn't, but the actual reason why it happened). I don't agree with it, personally.
> 
> In fact, I'm against the idea that a university education automatically confers higher levels of anything on anyone. It doesn't. Take my case. My MOC is land logistics. My degree is Criminal Justice and Public Policy. Neither has anything to do with the other, except that my CJPP degree fullfills the 'generic BA' requirement that is accepted if you are not taking a 'preferred degree' for your trade. Sure, finance/management degrees are preferred for log types, but a generic BA is acceptable. Unless I'm an MPO, my degree does not bring anything major to the table for my job...aside from say some lessons in writing style, organisation etc. And most of THAT is self taught or can be taught through the CF at one of the various staff officer courses.
> 
> So unless your taking a degree in engineering or the medical sciences because you are going to be an engineering or medical officer, for example, then I do not see the logic in forcing young officers to go to the Royal Military Gongshow in Kingston, or some other alcohol-soaked university full of immature idiots with good student lines of credit solely for the purpose of getting a degree that they don't need.



I wouldn't say you get NOTHING out of University education. No matter what the degree is, undergoing the education teaches you to think both critically and analytically, among other less tangible benefits. However, some people, all more senior and experienced then I, pointed out in another thread (where we debated the exact same thing *sigh*) that these are traits that are better suited for senior and flag officers, not tactical level officers. 

Not necessarily MHO, but it's food for thought.


----------



## davidk (18 Mar 2008)

Lumber said:
			
		

> [...]these are traits that are better suited for senior and flag officers, not tactical level officers.



Lumber, critical and analytical thinking are good traits for *anyone* to have, including junior officers, and, heavens forbid, NCMS...


----------



## infamous_p (18 Mar 2008)

Lumber said:
			
		

> I decided I wanted to be an Officer not because I thought as an Officer I was the best, the brightest, that NCMs were "below me".



Take note of this point here, and continue reading...



			
				Lumber said:
			
		

> I am certain I will at some point run into an NCM who is both smarter then me and more competent than me.



...and now, in this line, you successfully put NCMs below you. You bring to light some sort of an irony here in the fact that you (may) run into an NCM smarter and more competent than you. Could you explain this irony? Why is it ironic that you may run into an NCM smarter and more competent?

Subliminal message in the first sentence, perhaps?


----------



## Jarnhamar (18 Mar 2008)

cleared up below


----------



## DONT_PANIC (18 Mar 2008)

On a side note, with regards to the NCM with degrees, one of the most remarkable things that I found when sailing on MCDVs is that, like many reservists, people joined for help through school, and stayed in the reserves when they graduated.  However, this gives a tremendous *quantity * of education to each crew.  For example, part of the refrigeration system overheated, and the stoker in the space happened to inhale some of the released coolant.  It just so happened that one of the master seamen had a masters degree in resperatory therapy.  While this might be an extreme example, I've known plenty of NCMs who were finishing law school, or were RNs and such.  Always nice when in addition the the reg force med tech we've been loaned, there are 2 nurses aboard too.


----------



## Lumber (18 Mar 2008)

infamous_p said:
			
		

> Take note of this point here, and continue reading...
> 
> ...and now, in this line, you successfully put NCMs below you. You bring to light some sort of an irony here in the fact that you (may) run into an NCM smarter and more competent than you. Could you explain this irony? Why is it ironic that you may run into an NCM smarter and more competent?
> 
> Subliminal message in the first sentence, perhaps?



Did you notice the word _*NOT*_ in the first quote? 

AS for the second quote, I'm actually still scratching my head on that one (notice I posted at 333am?). I was trying to highlight that I am not one of those who wanted to be an Officer because Officers are "a cut above" the NCMs. I guess it should have read:

"I am certain there are NCMs who are smarter and more competent than Officers, just as there are Officers who are smarter and more competent that NCMs."


Or something to that effect.

Basically I was trying to say (with the rest of the paragraph) that being an Officer or being an NCM isn't about your level of competency or intelligence, it's about what you want to do in your career.


Is that more clear? :-\ I wasn't trying to put anyone down.


----------



## infamous_p (18 Mar 2008)

Lumber said:
			
		

> Did you notice the word _*NOT*_ in the first quote?



Yes, I did, which was why I pointed the first quote out - because the second one was a contradiction to the first.



			
				Lumber said:
			
		

> Did you notice the word _*NOT*_ in the first quote?
> 
> AS for the second quote, I'm actually still scratching my head on that one (notice I posted at 333am?). I was trying to highlight that I am not one of those who wanted to be an Officer because Officers are "a cut above" the NCMs. I guess it should have read:
> 
> ...



Yes, I was very clear on what you were trying to say from the start. However, the point that I was trying to make is that although maybe <b><i>I</i></b> understood what you were saying, it was unclear enough to have the potential to offend any number of other people who may misinterpret your statement due to its clarity issues.

I am simply making the point that when making a statement about a matter such as this which could, under some circumstances, be considered "sensitive" because you are comparing two different groups of people, it is <b><i>very</b></i> important to ensure that your message is very clear and concise. Doing so will prevent misinterpretation and the offense of others.. regardless of whether or not it's 3:33 am.


----------



## Reccesoldier (18 Mar 2008)

Piper said:
			
		

> Traits that can be learned without the need for stuck up professors, WAY over priced textbooks and all the other BS that goes along with universities.



Not according to the CF , the very same entity that decided that I required remedial training in the form of an ILQ after having decided themselves that I was not only worthy of being a Warrant Officer, but that I had also passed the technical requirements ofd that position by learning how to lead an Armoured Recce Troop.



> These skills include the ability to do research, read specialized documentation, and write an analysis. While preparing assignments, the candidate will learn how to structure and explain his ideas in the form of a rational argument based on concrete facts and reference material.


http://www.cmrsj-rmcsj.forces.gc.ca/ilqdl/engraph/home_e.asp

Bollocks.  If I didn't know how to "form of a rational argument based on concrete facts and reference material" then they never should have promoted me past the rank of Cpl.

The pendulum has swung, and as usual it has gone way too far.


----------



## George Wallace (18 Mar 2008)

;D


> These skills include the ability to do research, read specialized documentation, and write an analysis. While preparing assignments, the candidate will learn how to structure and explain his ideas in the form of a rational argument based on concrete facts and reference material.


http://www.cmrsj-rmcsj.forces.gc.ca/ilqdl/engraph/home_e.asp


Those are the qualities of a good Cpl INT OP.

 ;D


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (18 Mar 2008)

...or a Correctional Officer,...only present them to a very hostile reception group. :warstory:


----------



## Future Prodigy (18 Mar 2008)

Piper said:
			
		

> Again, skills that can be learned at one of the various command and staff colleges that you have to attend anyways if you want to be a senior officer. Sure, a free degree is great, because regrettebly 'degree' has become synonymous with 'experience' or 'intelligence' depending on where you are applying for a job (CF, civvie side, whatever). I think higher education, especially  in the areas of the arts and social sciences is an absolute sham.
> 
> Thanks for making my point for me.



I think higher education in anything other than the liberal arts is a absolute sham! All other fields are concerned solely with pragmatical thinking and nothing to do with the historical 'higher learning.' Have you ever engaged in a debate with a science major or business student?! Comment on their ethical worldview after that discussion... this rampant dispargaing of liberal arts students has got to stop. It is ignorance/arrogance beyond any measure, and i am writting this in a libral arts class right now, so i will not justify your message with a full response as it is taking away from my class time.


----------



## aesop081 (18 Mar 2008)

Methinks this thread is reaching its end.


----------



## benny88 (19 Mar 2008)

Haha, you think Guelph is like Laguna? I challenge you to visiting Western   :-X

   Sometime I feel the same way in that I want to get on with my training and do the job that I signed up for. But don't devalue your degree or the experience you get @ Civvy-U, hopefully you'll remember it fondly one day.


----------



## garb811 (19 Mar 2008)

Piper:  

While I appreciate the fact that you want to get on with it and do what you signed up to do, the fact is, right now the CF wants you to be in school earning your degree.  At some point in our career many of us hit a posting where it seems like our "talents, skills and time" are being wasted but the truth is we can't always get what we want all of the time.  At that point you have to make a choice; either make the best of a bad situation and give it your best effort or become the unit moaner who drags everyone down.  How people react in those situations says much about their true character traits and it is noticed by those above.

Another way to look at it is, which is more beneficial to the CF, to put you through school at your current rank or let you into CEOTP?  Right now, you are "cheap" (low salary, minimal training investment etc).  Later on either they put you through the rest of your courses as a fully trained and experienced Capt when you would really be of benefit to a unit or you have the extra workload of correspondence on your own time possibly impact your primary duties.  Take it from someone who is doing correspondence and juggling work and a family:  don't be a fool, stay in school! (props out to Mr T!)


----------



## benny88 (19 Mar 2008)

Piper said:
			
		

> Oh, you guys at Western are worse then us. It's like a bloody fashion convention every time you get dressed in the morning down there (I'm no better, having fallen into the fashion trap in some respects, but hey....Mustangs Sucks, Go Gryphons  ).



  At the risk of having this Radio Chatter-ed: Yates Cup baby!

 And all the popped collars here make me wish for my trusty C7A2.

 Back on topic troops. 8)


----------



## Franko (20 Mar 2008)

Future Prodigy said:
			
		

> .....and i am writting this in a libral arts class right now, so i will not justify your message with a full response as it is taking away from my class time.



So instead of concentrating on your studies and actually learning something you come on this site? Talk about having your priorities screwed up.

I won't even get into your spelling mistakes....for making a first impression of a Liberal Arts "Prodigy" your off to a flying start.

Regards


----------



## Infanteer (21 Mar 2008)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> I know an Reg F Infantry Officer who made it to LCol with a Gr 11 Quebec education, before he was forced to take a year off to get a degree.  As far as I can tell, he is not smarter now, just more educated.



Lol.  I almost missed this one.  I know him too....


----------



## PPCLI Guy (22 Mar 2008)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> I know him too....



Sadly, he is still a knob....


----------



## Goose (1 Apr 2008)

Hey everyone.... It seems that I'm in the same situation as alot of people in this thread, so I was wondering if anyone could give me some much-needed facts that I cant really find on the site. I'm graduating with an honors BA with a double major next week, and I know that the CF is where I want to go> The problem is, I dont know if I should go NCm or officer. (Granted, I know that their are high and low points for both positions). I want to have the 'hands on' job of a medic, with all the training opportunities and such that it involves. I'm on my provincial search and rescue team and have been a lifeguard for 10 years- so it's something I've got a bit of a knack for. On the other hand, I've always gravitated towards leadership positions, and don't know how well I would do if I couldn't 'think for myself.' (not meaning to insult anyone here, It's just what i've heard civi-side). I guess the road that I am most strongly attracted to right now would be to join up as a Med tech, do my 6 years, and then see (If I don't absolutely love it) if I can OT up to officer. My question is, what are the odds that I will be able to do this? I would be much more comfortable signing up reg force if I knew that I had a reasonable chance of becoming an officer, SHOULD I ever want too. Any input? thanks- Goose.


----------



## Shamrock (2 Apr 2008)

Goose said:
			
		

> ...don't know how well I would do if I couldn't 'think for myself.' (not meaning to insult anyone here, It's just what i've heard civi-side).



That's a mutually exclusive statement and a very clear indicator one of your premises are false.


----------

