# NCM's Not Professionals??  Split from-Supply Tech Ettiquette



## aesop081 (30 Nov 2006)

The Librarian said:
			
		

> we are professionals after all.



According to OPME...PSE 402 leadership & Ethics....NCMs are not professionals.....

I know.....i know  :


----------



## Halifax Tar (1 Dec 2006)

cdnaviator said:
			
		

> NCMs are not professionals.....



Hahahahahaha. God love our British based system! lol Oh well just wording I suppose


----------



## 2 Cdo (1 Dec 2006)

Actually, I find that the average supply tech today (at least where I am) doesn't display that old attitude about keeping the "good" kit for officers and friends, that seemed to be prevalent 20+years ago. (Not all old supply techs, so don't jump down my throat ) In fact, I don't recall having ANY issues with supply techs in so long it's become scary!


----------



## aesop081 (2 Dec 2006)

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> Oh well just wording I suppose



I'm afraid it was not "just wording".......i could not beleive it when i did the course.


----------



## Good2Golf (2 Dec 2006)

Yeah, cdnaviator...not very responsible wording IMO.  

I think they were using "P"rofessional in the sense of Doctor, Lawyer, Accountant, etc... expertise and accountability through a governing body.....yada yada yada, but it perpetuates an archaich attitude that somehow NCMs are less professional than officers which is, of course, absolute BS.

G2G


----------



## armyvern (2 Dec 2006)

Good2Golf said:
			
		

> Yeah, cdnaviator...not very responsible wording IMO.



No it's not very responsible or accurate wording at all, that may explain another phenomena:

Perhaps when the merit boards are sitting then, they strike through comments such as the following:

"MCPL Bloggins is a consumate professional who leads....."

as it must obviously (  :  ) be an untrue statement IAW



> According to OPME...PSE 402 leadership & Ethics....NCMs are not professionals.....


----------



## GO!!! (2 Dec 2006)

pro·fes·sion·al

 Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[pruh-fesh-uh-nl] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation     
–adjective 
1. following an occupation as a means of livelihood or for gain: a professional builder.  
2. of, pertaining to, or connected with a profession: professional studies.  
3. appropriate to a profession: professional objectivity.  
4. engaged in one of the learned professions: A lawyer is a professional person.  
5. following as a business an occupation ordinarily engaged in as a pastime: a professional golfer.  
6. making a business or constant practice of something not properly to be regarded as a business: “A salesman,” he said, “is a professional optimist.”  
7. undertaken or engaged in as a means of livelihood or for gain: professional baseball.  
8. of or for a professional person or his or her place of business or work: a professional apartment; professional equipment.  
9. done by a professional; expert: professional car repairs.  
–noun 10. a person who belongs to one of the professions, esp. one of the learned professions.  
11. a person who earns a living in a sport or other occupation frequently engaged in by amateurs: a golf professional.  
12. an expert player, as of golf or tennis, serving as a teacher, consultant, performer, or contestant; pro.  
13. a person who is expert at his or her work: You can tell by her comments that this editor is a real professional.  


By most of these definitions, (4,10) most officers are not professionals either - if we define it as only the "learned" professions. 

If the definition is expanded to include (1,2,3,7,8,9,11,12,13) we are all professionals, once we have reached a competent level.

I suspect that as the education/qualification/pay gap continues to close between officers and NCMs, statements like the one above will soon be just as laughable as the one in reference to an officer "guiding the thinking of his men as a professional responsibility" from the Cold War. There is very little room left today for such elitist speech or attitudes.


----------



## aesop081 (2 Dec 2006)

GO!!! said:
			
		

> I suspect that as the education/qualification/pay gap continues to close between officers and NCMs, statements like the one above will soon be just as laughable as the one in reference to an officer "guiding the thinking of his men as a professional responsibility" from the Cold War. There is very little room left today for such elitist speech or attitudes.



GO!!!,

agreed.  I was amazed that this attitude was offcial CF thinking as it is directly taught to officers coming through the OPME program.


----------



## Halifax Tar (4 Dec 2006)

cdnaviator said:
			
		

> GO!!!,
> 
> agreed.  I was amazed that this attitude was offcial CF thinking as it is directly taught to officers coming through the OPME program.



Well I always wondered why my cleaning station on ship was the officers heads and washplaces. I boggles my mind that a "professional" cant clean there own crappers. And C&POs need NCMs to look after the tiddiness of there messes on ship. In my opinon the Navy is the wort at perpetuating this elitist thought process in its officers. 

Take today as an example. The wardroom is getting fixed up at the moment so the officers have to draw there rats from the main galley instead of having it served to them by the stewards. Now standin inline for food next to me was a LT(N) and behind her was oddles of NCMs. That is not professional or right in my books. 

I think the Army has it right. The lower rank you are the harder life is so it seems they try to impove it at any point they can. For example officers eat last.


----------



## Zertz (4 Dec 2006)

I'm definately a military newbie so I suppose my opinion doesn't really matter that much, but why not give it a go.

Officers have far more important things to do than clean the mess and the shitter. When it comes to things like food and kit, sure equal treatment is in order, but look at the whole picture.

I'd much rather my superiors worried about the big stuff than having to be concerned with the small and menial details.


----------



## aesop081 (4 Dec 2006)

Zertz said:
			
		

> I'm definately a military newbie so I suppose my opinion doesn't really matter that much, but why not give it a go.
> 
> Officers have far more important things to do than clean the mess and the shitter. When it comes to things like food and kit, sure equal treatment is in order, but look at the whole picture.
> 
> I'd much rather my superiors worried about the big stuff than having to be concerned with the small and menial details.



When you get some time in, you'll see what we mean and change your tune.......


----------



## Good2Golf (4 Dec 2006)

+1 to what cdnaviator said, Zertz.  You will come to understand this in due course...

As others have noted elsewhere, NCMs are Professionals in what they practice, Officers in what they do. (or both should be in their respective duties).

More importantly, professional officers should be thinking about the prioritization of their efforts:

1. The Mission
2. The Men
3. Myself

G2G


----------



## Zertz (4 Dec 2006)

I respect your experiences and opinions. I'll be sure to keep my ears and eyes open, perhaps I will be singing a new tune but perhaps not.


----------



## 17thRecceSgt (5 Dec 2006)

Good2Golf said:
			
		

> +1 to what cdnaviator said, Zertz.  You will come to understand this in due course...
> 
> As others have noted elsewhere, NCMs are Professionals in what they practice, Officers in what they do. (or both should be in their respective duties).
> 
> ...



Funny that I was taught "the 3 M's" by an old RSM of mine...not an officer.   ;D


----------



## old man neri (5 Dec 2006)

I don't want to take sides or make an opinion but I just want to point this out.

The original quote has the word 'professionals', this is a noun.

People after that, including that dictionary definition, seem to be using the work 'professional' in the adjective sense.

There are some differences when one uses it as an adjective and when one uses it as a noun. For example, one can be professional without being a professional.

Perhaps this can shed some light or clarity onto this discussion.

Cheers.


----------



## armyvern (5 Dec 2006)

Ooops, Neri....Spell check that last post!!!


----------



## paracowboy (5 Dec 2006)

I brought up point 7 myself in a thread a few months back to a young troopie becoming a signaller.

Sometimes, the Signaller, Driver, and Wpns Det Comd have to lay out the Officer's sleeping bag, cook his meal, grip him by the scruff, and force him to eat then sleep. 



_edit: hmm, apparently "point" only has one "i" in it now. When did that happen?_


----------



## Good2Golf (5 Dec 2006)

paracowboy said:
			
		

> I brought up poiint 7 myself in a thread a few months back to a young troopie becoming a signaller.
> 
> Sometimes, the Signaller, Driver, and Wpns Det Comd have to lay out the Officer's sleeping bag, cook his meal, grip him by the scruff, and force him to eat then sleep.



+1

My "self" as Pri 3 was for stuff above and beyond what I'd need to be competent in what I do.  I think most of us have seen that even in operations, there are little opportunities to go a bit beyond just "recharging the batteries".  When such opps present themselves, the men get the benefit of it first, then me.

Keep in mind, that just because somethings are ranked as Pri 1, 2 then 3, does not necessarily mean that they should occur sequentially.  I should be able to look after 3 whilst still focusing on 1 and making sure 2 is looked after.  Of course, having a switched on NCM to be able to, through actions or words, tweak me if I'm "having a moment" (i.e. remind me that I really should be getting that 16 hrs crew rest per 1 CAD orders  ) is all the more proof that NCMs are just as professional as officers in their own right.

Cheers,
G2G


----------



## geo (5 Dec 2006)

Is an NCO a professional?
Is an Officer a gentleman?

Questions, questions, questions....... We are all members of the profession of arms
we all expect our troops to act and behave in a professional manner.  While I may have oversimplified things a bit..... here goes!

Is an Ocdt a Pro? Nope
Is a 2Lt a Pro? Nope
Is a Lt a Pro? Hmmm....not yet
Is a Capt a Pro?Hmmmm.... we're getting warm - some are some aren`t

Is a Pte a Pro? Nope
Is a Cpl a Pro? He's developing an expertise in his field - he's getting there
Is a Mcpl a Pro? Some are techs - experts in their field (pro) OR he's supervising troops in the execution of their duties - If he isn't, he's getting close
Is a Sgt a Pro? He's the one that the Lt & Capt go to see to get the job done.  If he wasn't a pro,  the Lt & Capt would be in big trouble
Is a WO a Pro?  Who does the Sgt go see when he needs help in getting things done?


----------



## x-zipperhead (5 Dec 2006)

paracowboy said:
			
		

> I brought up poiint 7 myself in a thread a few months back to a young troopie becoming a signaller.
> 
> Sometimes, the Signaller, Driver, and Wpns Det Comd have to lay out the Officer's sleeping bag, cook his meal, grip him by the scruff, and force him to eat then sleep.



I remember a great Troop Warrant when I was in the Armour Corps who used this premise to guage troop morale and what kind of a job he and the LT were doing with the troop.  It went like this;

Once in the hide or harbour for the night the troop leader would immediately leave the troop to go get orders at SHQ.  When he came back, if;

1.  His sleeping bag was all laid out by his crew and a hot meal waiting for him - morale was good, he's doing things right.

2.  His sleeping gear was still stowed on the tank and a cold IMP waiting for him on the fender - not bad, but  room for improvement.

3.  His sleeping bag was in a ditch somewhere 2 km outside the hide and no meal in sight - some serious issues with troop morale.

This WO was a true professional and influenced quite a few extremely professional officers.


----------



## George Wallace (5 Dec 2006)

That WO was from PEI, right?


----------



## x-zipperhead (5 Dec 2006)

He was indeed.  And a big nascar fan.  Loved Dale Ernhardt (sp?)


----------



## Command-Sense-Act 105 (5 Dec 2006)

And did this WO dislike the Strathconas and was one of his favourite exclamations "JAYSUS!" ?


----------



## George Wallace (5 Dec 2006)

He hasn't been on the site for a while......wonder if he is making some more 'bathtub gin' or gone huntin?  ................................or both?


----------



## Kat Stevens (5 Dec 2006)

"Is a Cpl a Pro? He's developing an expertise in his field - he's getting there"


  Well, I beg to differ.  Everyone else on your list are conduits of the commanders intent.  The Cpl and the Pte are the ones who put it into practice.  I therefore submit that at a higher rank, you are somewhat less professional, and more clerical.  I was on the tools and machines every day of my career, I would like to think I wasn't a beginner, or developing.  As a Cpl, I would put my AEV/AVLB practical knowledge up against anyone else's, rank notwithstanding.  Professionals get their hands dirty too, y'know.


----------



## geo (6 Dec 2006)

Hey Kat,

Yeah - as I stated at the start, I might have oversimplified beyond the bounds of reason (for the Officers ) but
You are correct, the Cpl is the one who is expected to do all the wondrous things we ask him to perform.  

(as time progresses (in any rank) you learn more and more about less and less until you know everything about nothing - and then they promote you)


----------



## x-zipperhead (6 Dec 2006)

Command-Sense-Act 105 said:
			
		

> And did this WO dislike the Strathconas and was one of his favourite exclamations "JAYSUS!" ?





			
				George Wallace said:
			
		

> He hasn't been on the site for a while......wonder if he is making some more 'bathtub gin' or gone huntin?  ................................or both?



I believe we have his identity nailed down.  I also loved his welcoming speech to the new troopers coming to his troop fresh out of Battle School, "You're all f***ing a**holes until proven otherwise, understand?" ;D


----------



## Fishbone Jones (6 Dec 2006)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> He hasn't been on the site for a while......wonder if he is making some more 'bathtub gin' or gone huntin?  ................................or both?



The still is in the basement closet and he's back from hunting.


----------



## GO!!! (8 Dec 2006)

> Similarly, if a Pl or Coy Comd has 5 minutes to scarf down grub in between planning sessions, going to orders, whatever, and he either eats when he can or waits until all the troops eat, do you want him making the plan while he is distracted by a hungry belly?


To me, this is what professionalism is - the ability to perform to a high standard even under conditions of extreme hardship and duress. 

Furthermore, the adage used in my unit is "My weapons, my kit, myself" in reference to the priority of work - given that the work is different, could a Pte. then, by extension, justify his nap and ration prior to cleaning his rifle on the basis that it _could_ be a shoddy job if he was not well rested? 

I can think of a few very professional NCOs that would heartily disagree.

I would submit that a similar set of rules exist for both officers and NCMs, that only the context that they are applied differ.



> Do you want your commander so sleep deprived because he or she "did their part on sentry and radio watch and laid out their own kit, not making the troops do it for them" that they write down a grid wrong in their FMP or reverse a couple numbers when calling for fire?



Do you want your C6 gunner so sleep deprived that he aims for the suicide bomber and hits the pregnant woman instead?

Forgive my candor, but my position remains that if he is unable to perform basic functions under duress, perhaps he is in the wrong line of work.

Finally, in my unit, when in the field, and on operations as well, I would say that the division of work is pretty equal. I've never heard of a platoon commander saying "well, Cpl GO!!!, I'm going to need you to pull a 12 hour shift before our op tomorrow, so I can be nice and sharp for orders". I can't even imagine it happening. I *have* seen a platoon commander and WO strap on a Pte's epaulette and work a shift of KP when they were not otherwise occupied - just to give their guys a break.

Having said that - nearly everyone I know has set up their fire team partner's/sect i/c or platoon commander's hootch in the rain at some point. Not because it was a menial task - but because they are all valuable members of the team - *and they would do it for you* if the conditions were reversed.


----------



## medaid (8 Dec 2006)

I think I detected a slight hint of officer bashin here in one of the earlier posts   hehehehehe.


Are NCMs professionals? Yes. In my opinion, they are. NCMs are the Army. Without the soldiers there would be no one for the officers to command (well...other then themselves, but that would be a little silly wouldn't it? An entire platoon of 2Lts and Lts commanded by Capts  ;D). Without my troops I am nothing. I too believe in the points brought forth by GO!!! and many others. Although I was never in a position of actual command when I was an NCM, I had the privilege of serving with those NCMs who were in command positions that did a damn good job. I am now equally privileged in serving with them as an officer (But!! OCdts arent officers! blah blah blah...we'll get into that later  ;D), and to be able to seek their guidenance, experience and advice when I need it. 

I believe the ideals of the 3 Ms, and I try to adhere to the leadership principles, I devoutly hope that this makes me a better leader, an officer and soldier. Do I believe in the British ideals between the seperation of Officer and NCM? No. I believe that when a soldier is acting to the best of their ability, with the interest of those around them in mind, irregardless of rank or trade, they are a professional. 

Just my thoughts.

Oh...ya...with regards to the "Pl Comd's primary weapon" Ya... I made the mistake of joining my QRF when my medical facility was bumped and...well lets just say my RSM had a chat with me vis a vis my role as an officer and 2 i/c lol. Lesson learned quick.


----------



## warrickdll (8 Dec 2006)

cdnaviator said:
			
		

> According to OPME...PSE 402 leadership & Ethics....NCMs are not professionals.....
> 
> I know.....i know  :



Could be worse:



			
				Iterator said:
			
		

> The first OPDP module used to espouse how officers were the only true warriors; NCMs were merely technicians of particular trades/weapons, with NCOs to direct the labour. Only officers could be considered warriors as they studied the theories, strategies and mindset of war.
> 
> A couple of caveats: first, I read that part of the module about 16 years ago; and second, I have no copy of the module or reference to it.
> 
> It was an oddly worded chapter, but it hints at more than just a professional difference between officers and NCOs/NCMs, at least in the minds of some. Anyone know if this is still part of the curriculum? Or how far off my understanding of it was?



I guess part of it still remains, but I'm still wondering if I'm remembering it correctly.


----------



## geo (8 Dec 2006)

Iterator,
There was a period of time when junior officers coming off of phase had the attitude of "don't trust your NCOs".  Is it a case of some of their NCO instructors giving them a hard time - to which they intended to return the favor? - I don't know but - it was a hell of a time breaking em of that perspective.


----------



## Sig_Des (8 Dec 2006)

geo said:
			
		

> Iterator,
> There was a period of time when junior officers coming off of phase had the attitude of "don't trust your NCOs".  Is it a case of some of their NCO instructors giving them a hard time - to which they intended to return the favor? - I don't know but - it was a hell of a time breaking em of that perspective.



I wouldn't mind hearing from some who have recently come out or are in the final stages of RMC, see what attitude has been promulgated to them insofar as NCO's


----------



## Wootan 9 (8 Dec 2006)

The only authoritative CF manual on this issue is very clear on the professional status of NCOs.  Chapter 1 of "Duty with Honour: The Profession of Arms in Canada" describes the Canadian military profession and on page 11 categorically states that all CF members are military professionals.  I don't know how OPME deals with this but if the programme is not using approved CF doctrine it needs to be sorted out.

The idea that "NCOs are not professionals" originates in Huntington's "The Soldier and the State" and is a very dated Cold War construct that described how things were in the US Army in the 1950s and 60s.  I was the Army member of the writing team that put "Duty with Honour" together and we had extensive and heated discussions on this specific issue but, in the end, the facts spoke for themselves.  From an Army point of view (at least) there should be no doubt that NCOs are full members of the profession of arms - the Army would simply cease to function without the professional expertise that NCOs apply each and every day. 

Having just retired after 32 years of service I have personally known any number of Sr. NCOs and Warrant Officers who have personified the idea of military professionalism - in my mind there is no debate.

Cheers,
MC


----------



## Big Foot (8 Dec 2006)

Sig_Des said:
			
		

> I wouldn't mind hearing from some who have recently come out or are in the final stages of RMC, see what attitude has been promulgated to them insofar as NCO's


Des, pretty much what we're told is to trust our NCOs. Esentially, the thought now is that officers are part of the team and as such, we need to be able to rely on the technical expertise and experience of our subordinates. That is not to say, however, that there are not still some holdovers from the old way of thinking. The impression that I get is that we're all part of the same team, each with our own area of expertise and we need to take advantage of these and face the mission at hand, not worry about infighting. As was mentioned before, we are all professionals in the Profession of Arms.


----------



## Sig_Des (8 Dec 2006)

Big Foot said:
			
		

> The impression that I get is that we're all part of the same team, each with our own area of expertise and we need to take advantage of these and face the mission at hand, not worry about infighting. As was mentioned before, we are all professionals in the Profession of Arms.



Well, that is encouraging to see.Thanks for the reply.


----------



## geo (9 Dec 2006)

If we go back to the 70s, some couintries like the US, UK, France, Germany, USSR & Co maintained a force of conscript soldiers..... VS a professional officer corp.  In that concept, I might be inclined to second guess / doubt the professionalism of the the conscript "other ranks". 

A volunteer army is a professional army - from the top down.............


----------



## GO!!! (9 Dec 2006)

So a clean, functioning weapon is important, unless that weapon is a platoon, in which case it can be put away wet, dependent only on the operator's skills to function properly? That is a contradictory statement.

What if that Private is a signaller, responsible for 10 vehicle mounts, 3 manpacks, 6 section radios and 36 personal ones - and because he is a sleep deprived zombie - only half of it works, because he loaded the wrong crypto, etc. I'd say, from experience, that a higher thought process is required to troubleshoot our glorious TCCCS radios than to command a platoon, and nobody rolls without comms. Technical skill vs. leadership being the difference, but both are nearly impossible if one's mental state is degraded.

No, I'd say it's apples and apples. The days of the officers making the only important decisions on the battlefield are long gone - Privates in certain positions control more firepower than a Platoon had 60 years ago - and it is demonstrably true that a platoon commander can be replaced by his platoon warrant with little discernable difference, over long periods of time. (casualties, HLTA etc.)



> I am not sure that you understand all the functions that your Pl and Coy Comds and NCOs in key positions need to fulfil over and above those that every soldier must undertake.


I am keenly aware of the functions (at the platoon level) that officers and NCOs must undergo, but none of this precludes them from the basic soldier skills that keep us all alive. A platoon (or a Coy) is not a sufficiently large organisation that it can sustain a leadership caste which is excused from soldiering in order to command.

I was under the impression that our leaders were our leaders because they were able to soldier _and_ lead. I am quite sure that most people of average intellect can make correct command decisions when they are well rested, fed and comfortable, but this is why our leadership training at the lower levels is so miserable - to ascertain who can make the right decisions under stress.


----------

