Army Communication & Information Systems Specialists (Sig Op, Lineman and LCIS Amalgamation)

[PuckChaser]

I think spec pay should be linked to goals and incentives for a shop/unit.  That way our CoC would have incentive to replace dead weight instead of keeping them around for general labour.

Where does that "dead weight" go? Its all well and good if you're talking about a civilianized workforce, but how do you fire someone from the CAF if they do their job, albeit poorly?

 

[ixium]

Where does that "dead weight" go? Its all well and good if you're talking about a civilianized workforce, but how do you fire someone from the CAF if they do their job, albeit poorly?

Post and promote seems to be the the answer they've gone with for the last while.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

I work in a desktop tech support shop.  We have people in our shop (ATIS & Core) who simply should not be in a tech shop.  They're 'doing' IST jobs - very poorly; they spend most of their time playing minesweeper or texting on their phone.  I think spec pay should be linked to goals and incentives for a shop/unit.  That way our CoC would have incentive to replace dead weight instead of keeping them around for general labour.

That's a leadership issue, not a spec pay issue.

 

[Jager]

IST Joeschmo, you dam Slacker. Going to have to meet up for a coffee this summer as I'll be coming through on my way to my next posting.

 

[DigitalCurrents]

Where does that "dead weight" go? Its all well and good if you're talking about a civilianized workforce, but how do you fire someone from the CAF if they do their job, albeit poorly?

Members shouldn't get to keep their favorite postings if they can't do their jobs.  Send the deadweight to aciss core dets / stick them in sub-units.  Dets that support a Div or Bde should get the most skilled (spec pay) people.  Sub-units with small signals dets should have aciss-core individuals. 

 

[PuckChaser]

Members shouldn't get to keep their favorite postings if they can't do their jobs.  Send the deadweight to aciss core dets / stick them in sub-units.  Dets that support a Div or Bde should get the most skilled (spec pay) people.  Sub-units with small signals dets should have aciss-core individuals.

IST isn't above having sub-standard soldiers, you're not the special forces (or Cyber Warriors?). You also have no idea if you're even going to get spec pay, so get off your high horse.

Your proposal would be the most ridiculous admin nightmare figuring out who gets spec pay and where.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Where does that "dead weight" go? Its all well and good if you're talking about a civilianized workforce, but how do you fire someone from the CAF if they do their job, albeit poorly?

 

A longggggggg process that has to start using this tool to deal with these types of problems.  If the RMs, etc don't sort the dufus out, then you can try to initiate one of these.  It is possible for recommendation for release/release to be the outcome but trade health and Careers opinion factor in to unit recommendations obviously.

And of course, proper and detailed use of CFPAS to support the member's performance deficiency.  Unfortunately, it is far more easier to make the poor performer the 'Safety Committee Rep', give them the easy stuff to do and hope they get posted even if only locally or 'out of your shop'.

By the time you did the PDR review/adverse PDR-PERs, RMs etc etc and all the way to the AR machine, the member would likely have sorted themselves out OR be posted anyways...while it is not the best thing to do, the easier thing to do is administered the Big D PERs and hope they are posted.  >

 

[JBP]

So the new IST career manager seemed like a decent guy. VTC worked out ok.

Although he said it's 'a good time to be an IST' , there is still no further information on spec pay lol...

But the good news is promotions are happening for people and there's no budget cut career show stoppers!

 

[Sig_Des]

I hadn't really checked this thread in a long time. Some of my thoughts:

Branch/Corps Communication - It's pretty horrible. The C&E branch website doesn't seem to have been updated since August of last year, and if there's a RCCS weblink, I haven't found it. The most recent newsletter is over a year old, and the advisors' corners were mostly a lot of fluff and self pleasuring statements about what a great success celebration 2013 was. That and a small statement about no answer on  pay. The occupation page on D Mil C hasn't had the Career Manager's briefing up since 2012. Lot's of questions and very little answers. Not much filtering down. It's a lot like a mushroom farm right now. Which is horrible, because it has created an information void very much proven by this thread. Speculation and a lot of "well, this is what I heard", "I have it on good authority", "this is what this guys told me".

The Spec Pay Beast- I honestly have no dog in this fight. I have never, will probably never, nor should I ever receive spec pay. I do a job that I was trained to do, working hard to the best of my abilities, to support others, and receive a fair wage for it, especially considering that any training I have ever had was provided by the military. I'll never say no to extra money, but I'm not pining and whining for it. I feel bad for the techs who are in limbo, and those who joined as LCIS with the understanding that they would get it, but never reached the level where they could before it was frozen. Thems the breaks. But either push for answers, or remuster to ATIS if it's that big a deal at this point. Bitching in the shop or on army.ca hasn't given you any answers for 3 years, so try something new. My personal opinion (and I know it would be an administrative nightmare, but in my perfect world) is that spec pay should be positional. As in, you do the work which requires special training, you get paid for it. You get that jammy posting at a recruiting center in Vancouver, then you don't get paid extra.

Spec Pay for the Ner....IST's -  (had to get it in there) Not to take away from you guys, but I honestly (not facetiously, not jealously, not humorously) do not believe that you deserve spec pay either. There is no entry requirement for previous education, there is no DEP, all training is provided. And for those of you who say that you can make way more money doing this civvy side, I want to see a paystub for someone with 4 years experience (4 years including training, the training provided to you that does not currently give you an equivalent certification). So a VIE, DP 2.1 IST, end contract and go out to civvy street. Because this is what I found for computer network technicians:

http://www.servicecanada.gc.ca/eng/qc/job_futures/statistics/2281.shtml#stats

Average Annual Employment Income
(Full-Time, Full-Year) Unit Group 2281 All occupations
Full-time, full-year 74.5%         53.2%
Average income         50,919         45,157
0-19999$                 4.9%                 16.5%
20000-49999$         50.1%         52.4%
50000$ and over  45.0%         31.1%

And to confirm it up, the median wages from payscale.com for Computer / Network Support Technician Salary and System Administrator, Computer / Network Salary in Canada are 43,621$ and 53,828$ respectively. Hell, the high end for Sys Admin is 73,254$ and I was pushing that at MCpl in Edmonton. Yes, I was in a field unit, so I got LDA, but guess what, I joined the goddamned Army. If I wanted to do what I do in an office, I would have gone to work for Nortel back in the day. Because they offered WAY more job security than a career in the Armed Forces  .

I stand by my statement wrt IST here :

http://army.ca/forums/threads/114975/post-1309978.html#msg1309978

Because of the long training periods for members to become technically proficient and deployable, specialists (for better lack of a non-spec pay deserving term) needed to be protected and have the time invested into them to make them valuable to the organization (in a value added way, not as in we need you more than Linemen, Techs or Operators). If a sub-trade was the only way to protect these members from being posted immediately following the point where they are truly the experts on their system, then so be it, but I believe it was ultimately a solution to the problem of poor man-management.

1 Sigs - Personally, as much as I joke about it, I had a very good experience when I was at 1 Sigs, albeit a little before you Joeschmo, but we crossed over. And you were there at the same time rmc_wannabe. I was there for almost 3 years, was on the parade for the embarrassing "Cyber-Warriors" speech (though just back from tour and on my way to a first-line unit). The Gary/Rej command team years were actually really good. I saw the circle turn, and it got ridiculous, but I was gone at that point. Who knows, the wheel may turn again. I actually had a great section, had some great training, and we had a very successful tour. And no, none of us bladed each other. And we actually had pretty good leadership (for the most part).

I don't know the whole background on the Engineer RSM story, so I won't make excuses for how embarrassing it was, but I definitely don't believe it was right when CWO's (who were succession planned) were able to turn it down when Cpl's were being told by CM's to "take the posting they were given or release". An example should have been made from the top.

Members shouldn't get to keep their favorite postings if they can't do their jobs.  Send the deadweight to aciss core dets / stick them in sub-units.  Dets that support a Div or Bde should get the most skilled (spec pay) people.  Sub-units with small signals dets should have aciss-core individuals.

The frustration of others here is understandable, but they don't debase themselves to subtle trade bashing. Your attitude however, pisses me off. The whole purpose of the support trades in the Army is to support the combat arms, or support others who support them in their mission. And you want to reward those who sit on their duffs, while sending the junk to the dets and out-units that provide that immediate first-line support? You may need to rethink your position, or go find yourself a union job.

 

[PuckChaser]

Beadwindow for RCCS CWO!  ;D

 

[Brasidas]

Did the RCCS CWO say something he shouldn't have? 

 

[Sig_Des]

Beadwindow for RCCS CWO!  ;D

Not likely. No Kingston check in the box, and there won't be any if I can help it.

 

[PuckChaser]

Not likely. No Kingston check in the box, and there won't be any if I can help it.

Its a blackhole, I can't leave fast enough. Although, its like complaining about only being in a 4-star hotel for the city....  >

 

[JBP]

I hadn't really checked this thread in a long time. Some of my thoughts:

Branch/Corps Communication - It's pretty horrible. The C&E branch website doesn't seem to have been updated since August of last year, and if there's a RCCS weblink, I haven't found it. The most recent newsletter is over a year old, and the advisors' corners were mostly a lot of fluff and self pleasuring statements about what a great success celebration 2013 was. That and a small statement about no answer on  pay. The occupation page on D Mil C hasn't had the Career Manager's briefing up since 2012. Lot's of questions and very little answers. Not much filtering down. It's a lot like a mushroom farm right now. Which is horrible, because it has created an information void very much proven by this thread. Speculation and a lot of "well, this is what I heard", "I have it on good authority", "this is what this guys told me".

The Spec Pay Beast- I honestly have no dog in this fight. I have never, will probably never, nor should I ever receive spec pay. I do a job that I was trained to do, working hard to the best of my abilities, to support others, and receive a fair wage for it, especially considering that any training I have ever had was provided by the military. I'll never say no to extra money, but I'm not pining and whining for it. I feel bad for the techs who are in limbo, and those who joined as LCIS with the understanding that they would get it, but never reached the level where they could before it was frozen. Thems the breaks. But either push for answers, or remuster to ATIS if it's that big a deal at this point. Bitching in the shop or on army.ca hasn't given you any answers for 3 years, so try something new. My personal opinion (and I know it would be an administrative nightmare, but in my perfect world) is that spec pay should be positional. As in, you do the work which requires special training, you get paid for it. You get that jammy posting at a recruiting center in Vancouver, then you don't get paid extra.

Spec Pay for the Ner....IST's -  (had to get it in there) Not to take away from you guys, but I honestly (not facetiously, not jealously, not humorously) do not believe that you deserve spec pay either. There is no entry requirement for previous education, there is no DEP, all training is provided. And for those of you who say that you can make way more money doing this civvy side, I want to see a paystub for someone with 4 years experience (4 years including training, the training provided to you that does not currently give you an equivalent certification). So a VIE, DP 2.1 IST, end contract and go out to civvy street. Because this is what I found for computer network technicians:

http://www.servicecanada.gc.ca/eng/qc/job_futures/statistics/2281.shtml#stats

And to confirm it up, the median wages from payscale.com for Computer / Network Support Technician Salary and System Administrator, Computer / Network Salary in Canada are 43,621$ and 53,828$ respectively. Hell, the high end for Sys Admin is 73,254$ and I was pushing that at MCpl in Edmonton. Yes, I was in a field unit, so I got LDA, but guess what, I joined the goddamned Army. If I wanted to do what I do in an office, I would have gone to work for Nortel back in the day. Because they offered WAY more job security than a career in the Armed Forces  .

I stand by my statement wrt IST here :

http://army.ca/forums/threads/114975/post-1309978.html#msg1309978

1 Sigs - Personally, as much as I joke about it, I had a very good experience when I was at 1 Sigs, albeit a little before you Joeschmo, but we crossed over. And you were there at the same time rmc_wannabe. I was there for almost 3 years, was on the parade for the embarrassing "Cyber-Warriors" speech (though just back from tour and on my way to a first-line unit). The Gary/Rej command team years were actually really good. I saw the circle turn, and it got ridiculous, but I was gone at that point. Who knows, the wheel may turn again. I actually had a great section, had some great training, and we had a very successful tour. And no, none of us bladed each other. And we actually had pretty good leadership (for the most part).

I don't know the whole background on the Engineer RSM story, so I won't make excuses for how embarrassing it was, but I definitely don't believe it was right when CWO's (who were succession planned) were able to turn it down when Cpl's were being told by CM's to "take the posting they were given or release". An example should have been made from the top.

The frustration of others here is understandable, but they don't debase themselves to subtle trade bashing. Your attitude however, pisses me off. The whole purpose of the support trades in the Army is to support the combat arms, or support others who support them in their mission. And you want to reward those who sit on their duffs, while sending the junk to the dets and out-units that provide that immediate first-line support? You may need to rethink your position, or go find yourself a union job.

Absolutely, all of it. Hence why I myself never thought IST would get spec pay. Not that I would mind it... Of course. That being said, 2/4 ISTs I know whom have released recently are making far over what they were making as MCpl's and Cpl 4's, 2 in Edmonton and 2 in Kingston. But I'm sure if you take a handful of any trades almost every guy will have extremely different outcomes after release.

PS> Why no love for K-Town?! JSR has been great (for me) so far! I'm just hungry for another deployment. The taxes in Ontario and this city specifically, SUCK badly though I must admit! There's got to be some new PLD rumors kicking around I can hope for...

 

[PuckChaser]

So not to pump up the rumour mill, but a Sigs CO in KTown recently had a townhall, and D Sigs understands the lack of communication up to this point, and is developing a clear and concise "this is where we are" communique for the RCCS. Timeline was "2 weeks" before it was issued, but those might be 2 Ottawa weeks.

 

[PiperDown]

I heard the same thing.

I am sure the Coles notes version of the "update" will be.

" the pay review has encountered a number of administrative obstacles along the way.  We expect a full answer in the coming months ... This is our number one priority "

Sorry if that sounds familiar.

One of the MES managers briefed the 6a course at CFSCE recently that the pay review made it all the way to the CDS's desk in Dec. but for some unknown reason was not signed. Then, the treasury board changed some "policy" as of Jan 1st that makes the unsigned pay review null and void. So, it's back through the process again.

Seems like some smoke and mirrors to me.  No worries though, I am sure the fellow in my shop that has been promoted twice, but still makes the exact same pay as he did in Oct 2011 ( technically 2009, which is when he topped out as a Cpl4) s just happy he still has a job.

 

[Swingline1984]

I heard the same thing.

I am sure the Coles notes version of the "update" will be.

" the pay review has encountered a number of administrative obstacles along the way.  We expect a full answer in the coming months ... This is our number one priority "

Sorry if that sounds familiar.

One of the MES managers briefed the 6a course at CFSCE recently that the pay review made it all the way to the CDS's desk in Dec. but for some unknown reason was not signed. Then, the treasury board changed some "policy" as of Jan 1st that makes the unsigned pay review null and void. So, it's back through the process again.

Seems like some smoke and mirrors to me.  No worries though, I am sure the fellow in my shop that has been promoted twice, but still makes the exact same pay as he did in Oct 2011 ( technically 2009, which is when he topped out as a Cpl4) s just happy he still has a job.

The pay review has never made it past DPPD that is the last word we ever had from DSigs and MES and that is the only word that counts.  Lots of rumour and conjecture in this thread along with understandable, but misplaced anger.  The process is the process it's not the Branch's fault.

 

[PiperDown]

Lots of rumour and conjecture in this thread along with understandable, but misplaced anger.  The process is the process it's not the Branch's fault.

So it's "the process" that has given only 3 official updates in 3.5 years ( and each update promises a final answer in a couple months)

Or it's "the process" that started a SharePoint site as a repository of information.... That's last upload was 2011 ?

If "the process"  gives repeated vague and inaccurate updates, the rumour, conjecture and misplaced anger is sure to take its place.

 

[PuckChaser]

The process is not the Branch's fault. Communicating where we are in the process is.

 

[ixium]

The process is not the Branch's fault. Communicating where we are in the process is.

If only there was a magical place that existed that everyone world wide had access to. It could be like a web that connects millions of people!

Ah, but that is just a dream off in the distance I guess.