• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

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

IST Joeschmo said:
So, from my experience at two completely different units (1 Sigs, CFJSR) and two very different operations (OP ATHENA, OP IMPACT) never mind the various international ex's and other things I've done, I've barely seen CST's do a whole lot of programming switches and routers. Or touching servers... Or doing anything in an IST way for that matter. In 2008, we had a 'Connectivity' tech who was a QL5 Qualified LCIS in 1 Sigs who did actually do a lot of programming. One. Guy. Then he was posted in end of 2008 I believe. Since then, there were no LCIS in C Tp, it was all "Sig Ops" manning all the routers, switches, servers, you name it. We deployed to OP ATHENA 2011... Again, mid-switch from Sig Op to ACISS-IST. Once again, all Sig Ops running the networks and servers.

Fast forward 2013 I'm posted to CFJSR... Not a single LCIS tech giving a f$ck except one exceptional MCpl I deployed to Cyprus with who really knew his networking. One. Guy. Again... Fast forward a little more to the present OP IMPACT... We have a few (2-3) ACISS-CST whom work here... Doing very very traditional LCIS roles. Fixing, tagging and bagging NS kit, working a national rear-link sat and... Well... Doing that stuff! They do tinker a little with some networking. Who is running the deployed networks and servers? ACISS-IST.

All the front line field units I've dealt with from 2008-now have all been guys whom were Sig Ops at the time or are now ACISS-IST running networks and serves. I think maybe the time period before me LCIS used to do more of our type of job.

Also just finished the last (literally) serial of Data Comms before I came here. 1/2 the class of 12 was ATIS & ACISS-CST, other half was ACISS-IST. They course staff advised us this was the very very last serial and wasn't even supposed to run, as all the relevant portions of Data Comms have been pushed to ACISS-IST 1.1 and ATIS QL5.

Point being: ACISS-CST aren't supposed to be doing networking anymore. Not unless specifically required by their individual position. I think over the past couple years someone wised up and realized they were sleeping too long in the back of the LCIS shop while everyone watched satellite TV and now they noticed they gave away too much of their jobs. Our own ACISS-CST in CFJSR joke that they have become the "GD Tp" because they don't have anything better to do usually.

I don't know what people's experience has been in places like CFNOC, ANOC / other positions in Ottawa but I know quite a few ACISS-IST's that are manning national service desks, critical networks and nobody knows where CST's are or what they do anymore.

We also now (brand new) have a 4th wiseman. CFJSR has made a position for a WO ACISS-IST to be the fabled 4th wiseman! So, FOS, CCO and LCF + ... I don't know what the new acronym is... IST guy! From MY limited perspective it appears that ACISS-CST has been almost obsoleted, more so than a lot of people thought ACISS-Core even would be. They do a whole lot of setting up camp and tearing it down god-bless, but they're 1/2 obsolete but I think radios will always be around so they have a saving grace.

Lastly, ACISS-ISTs also now get a 'tech stamp' to inspect information systems related equipment and tag it as they feel appropriate. Big changes folks! Massive... If I have time (Hahaha!) I'll try and dig up the job specification from DIN and paste it here. It literally breaks down what each sub-occ is supposed to do.

I want to meet these LCIS guys who are doing IST jobs! We have some that switched from legacy LCIS- ACISS-IST!
:2c:

There are places and positions where ACISS CST guys do full-time IS work. I know some in Ottawa, Halifax, CFSCE and even in Petawawa...

That said, a lot of what you said is true, though I think it heavily depends on the unit you are talking about. I was one of the CST guys who did give a f*** about IS work. I became an LCIS tech because I wanted to do IS work. I've done many years of radio repairs before the military and wanted something more as I am a computer / IS guy. I didn't join as LCIS just to only work on green kit. However, the units I have worked at do no IS work outside of a LES and E-lan. (Even our own IST did mostly setup of desktops and IS stores,etc. Not his fault. That's the only work he had available to him) That being said, the places I worked at, we were always VERY busy doing OUR job.

I think you would see more people go IST if ACISS could make up its mind about what its going to be, and what each sub-occs job ACTUALLY is.  IST is starved for people right now, and so is CST. So even the CSTs who want to go IST probably won't have that option. People don't want to change sub-occs without some accurate information on what their roles will be (as well as a final answer on spec pay).... and given how the last 4 years have played out, I don't think a lot of people will. If IST guys are not happy at the idea of ACISS CST doing networking, imagine how those who joined as LCIS feel with the changes forced upon them with ACISS.... and you wonder why no one wants to go CST and why so many legacy LCIS are jumping ship.

I've since moved on to ATIS, and hope for the best. I'm sure, that depending on my unit I may still run into similar issues with IS type work (shared services getting the IS work while ATIS techs only working with deployable kit), but all the LCIS / ACISS CSTs that I personally know that have gone ATIS are very happy with their decision.

I truly do hope ACISS can work itself out. There are a lot of switched on skilled people in the trade...they just need the right place in the trade to shine.
 
Last rumour I hear was the fourth wisemen was going to be called the FISM (Forman Information Systems Manager) but I believe they are dropping the Forman part so its just the ISM. As for the IST trade, it is on the right track but as stated needs to be pulled completely from the grips of all the CST CoC and be independent. It would be interesting to see the trade go purple in the sense that it would give IST's some pretty good working options and maybe (and i know this is a hard one for the CAF) build continuity.
 
From what I can see the sub occs are falling into general roles. The Tacrad world is quickly falling out of favor instead of computers computers computers.

ACISS-Core seems to be filling mostly the 1st line help desk, CP work and setting up sat comm. ACISS-LST is doing what Linemen always did but what's coming out of the school isn't the same standard as linemen used to be. ACISS-CST seem to be falling into the role of tagging stuff, fixing basic problems and essentially making all the sat comm stuff work (ie configuring MUX, setting up rear link routing). ACISS-IST seem to cover everything on the inside of networks, from the switches, red routers, to the servers, the workstations.

Frankly I see the job of CSTs eventually being absorbed into ISTs.
 
Isn't that just what we had? LCIS guys doing networks and fixing stuff?

Tacrad will never fall out of favour. At the end of the day we enable C2, and if that means humping a radio or running an austere CP, we need to be able to do that and do it well. I think in 5-10 years you're going to either see ISTs being pushed closer to the FEBA to support all the network/manpack capable radios coming, or we'll be back with Core guys getting network training so they can do their jobs.

Slow return to what we had before, if we don't crush the Branch with infighting and empire building first.
 
PuckChaser said:
Isn't that just what we had? LCIS guys doing networks and fixing stuff?

Tacrad will never fall out of favour. At the end of the day we enable C2, and if that means humping a radio or running an austere CP, we need to be able to do that and do it well. I think in 5-10 years you're going to either see ISTs being pushed closer to the FEBA to support all the network/manpack capable radios coming, or we'll be back with Core guys getting network training so they can do their jobs.

Slow return to what we had before, if we don't crush the Branch with infighting and empire building first.

The only way tacrad won't is if guys start learning more about computers as all the radios are moving to an IP based platform. Setting up masts and dishes is something you can train anyone to do as it is not overly complicated. But, i will agree 100% with the empire building statement. Too many people thing they are too smart and thus won't accept others ideas or will change them to make themselves look good.
 
:deadhorse:

Well looks like their strategy of drawn out warfare paid off. The last official update we got is several months past and it's been over a month since the last person posted a comment in this thread. Seems that we finally gave up.

Every PD session, email, memo, conversation with branch managers and in the end what do we have to show for it? 2 Bde CST manning for Cpl and MCpl is approx 50-60% and no relief in sight. Recruitment is down the drain, training is in shambles and retention is non-existant  :facepalm:
 
LCIS227 said:
:deadhorse:

Well looks like their strategy of drawn out warfare paid off. The last official update we got is several months past and it's been over a month since the last person posted a comment in this thread. Seems that we finally gave up.

Every PD session, email, memo, conversation with branch managers and in the end what do we have to show for it? 2 Bde CST manning for Cpl and MCpl is approx 50-60% and no relief in sight. Recruitment is down the drain, training is in shambles and retention is non-existant  :facepalm:

It would be interesting to see how the other Bdes are stacking up.  I know out in 1 CMBG they lost a number of the guys that got stuck in the transition period but numbers seem stable overall. 
 
It seems the only way this will be fixed is if attention outside the branch can be brought to bear on the MES shortcomings.

Other than that I predict a glacially slow return to the way things were before; except no spec pay for anyone and a diminished ROI for the CF's expenditure on Sigs.
 
Very true it seems...

I can say for the IST side of things we're pooched. At CFJSR we're at 30% for actual, qualified ISTs. That's.... UBER bad. I seen the staggering numbers and it's shocking but I'm not posting exact manning numbers on an open internet forum.

1 Sigs, well, just talked to a buddy out there who works in what used to be or is supposed to be the IST shop and he said they're roughly 55-60% for the whole unit. He said they are hurting extremely bad in the IST dept. They lost many to postings and attrition with no back fill.

The 'numbers' for ACISS as a whole look great. Trained effective sub-occ's are just dying. Especially IST/CST it seems.

I've been told from a WO that apparently this has been brought up to the attention of National level pers. I don't know if said WO meant specifically the critical manning shortages of IST in CFJSR or the entire IST field.

Somebody won in all this, I'm just not sure who but it definitely wasn't Sigs!
 
I don't know about anyone winning, but we've been rendered ineffective due to staggering incompetence, hubris, arrogance and apathy.

Hopefully someone outside our branch realizes the damage that is done and sets up a task force to take the necessary drastic steps to reverse or fix it and puts a framework in place to make the timeline short and crucify anyone who resists the repair efforts.

I think a reason our woes are not yet seen as a huge problem for the CAF as a whole, is because despite being broken, we are still managing to meet our obligations. Until we start failing to meet our obligations to the CAF I don't think it will be looked at seriously... but if things continue the way they are going... I hope it's nothing critical that gets compromised.

 
Its a Catch 22. We're too proud and professional as a general rule to let these tasks fail despite the burnout rate and poor morale, but the only way to bring some attention to improve the burnout and morale is to fail at tasks.

Our officer corps is short ~60 Captains, and they are having issues fixing that problem. We're going to be in a world of hurt when that FRP cliff reaches CRA, and we lose 20% of the trade in very short order.
 
PuckChaser said:
Its a Catch 22. We're too proud and professional as a general rule to let these tasks fail despite the burnout rate and poor morale, but the only way to bring some attention to improve the burnout and morale is to fail at tasks.

Our officer corps is short ~60 Captains, and they are having issues fixing that problem. We're going to be in a world of hurt when that FRP cliff reaches CRA, and we lose 20% of the trade in very short order.

When is that supposed to happen roughly? Another 5-10 years or less? Like 2-5?

Maybe it wouldn't be so hard to fill the Officer ranks if they weren't so brutal with the UTPNCM program. I'm not talking about standards. I'm talking about numbers! If you only allow 3 UTPNCM intakes a year for the Sigs officer trade.... When there could potentially be 20+ applicants...? Is the whole point of that low number so they don't reap the best from the ranks in a way? Or just reap the ranks in general? Or is it more because they've already spent a bunch of time/money/effort into you at the level you're at and it's more costly to re-train altogether than get a 18/19yr old to sign up and go to RMC? Is it just the money aspect?

Anyway... I can tell you folks that a lot of people at CFJSR in the IST world are starting to burn out now and those of us coming OFF tour may be expected to go right back after a year of stipulated down time. Or less. I'm not signing any waivers I can say that for sure.

Some people at the unit are single/no kids and don't mind it though and will do hand-over-fist deployments I'm sure. Soak up the cash and medals while you can!
 
IST Joeschmo said:
When is that supposed to happen roughly? Another 5-10 years or less? Like 2-5?

I think its getting around 2-5 years. FRP was 92-96, so anyone that joined before and stayed in after would be at 25 years in 2016. The issue is going to be that we're going to lose a lot of CWOs, MWOs and some WOs that have hit that magic number. It'll cause the upward push for promotions again (although Core is totally unsustainable at 100+ to MCpl every year IMO, leaving further gaps in the Pte-MCpl ranks.

We may be short PML by 60 Captains, but do we need those 60 Captains? Bde units are getting their Sig Os, and so are HQ+Sigs. Those 60 Captains are in projects somewhere in Ottawa, and I'm willing to bet we don't need half of them.

The issue with taking all these people in via UTPNCM is (as I see it) 1. You're correct, it raids the ranks. 2. You dilute the candidates, so its no longer the best leaders with Officer Like Qualities, you end up with the middle third Cpl/MCpl who just wants to run the show (with or without any leadership skills), 3. We lose a qualified Core/IST/CST/LST for 4 years, which is extremely damaging especially for those red numbered sub-occs.
 
I was listening to the C&E briefs this morning and Col Sullivan gave a quick update on the state of Spec Pay.

Essentially DCBA (Director Compensation Pay Admin) is almost done their revamp of the method in which they analyze the requirement for Spec Pay. This was the reason the file was put on hold last winter if you recall the letter Col Sullivan sent out last March.  He expects DCBA to be done reviewing their process by end-November and the ACISS file will be the first one to be reviewed. Keep in mind that this will be a new process and we’ll be the guinea pigs…

He hopes that DCBA will render their recommendation by early next year, followed by the CDS’s decision shortly after that.

Not sure if he’ll be sending out anything official.

TLDR; Don't expect anything for another 6 months  ::)
 
I see that the DSigs assurances that he was going to get old LCIS techs grandfathered (vice frozen)  until the trade review was done has quietly slipped under the radar ( I seem to recall in the spring, his word was that by the summer, qualified LCIS techs spec pay would be put back inline with their rank and IPC)

ah well. whats another 6 months. LOL  ( and another 6, and another 6 etc )

 
LCIS227 said:
I was listening to the C&E briefs this morning and Col Sullivan gave a quick update on the state of Spec Pay.

Essentially DCBA (Director Compensation Pay Admin) is almost done their revamp of the method in which they analyze the requirement for Spec Pay. This was the reason the file was put on hold last winter if you recall the letter Col Sullivan sent out last March.  He expects DCBA to be done reviewing their process by end-November and the ACISS file will be the first one to be reviewed. Keep in mind that this will be a new process and we’ll be the guinea pigs…

He hopes that DCBA will render their recommendation by early next year, followed by the CDS’s decision shortly after that.

Not sure if he’ll be sending out anything official.

TLDR; Don't expect anything for another 6 months  ::)


But we can do math and deserve Royal Blue berets ;D
 
c_canuk said:
Time keeps on slipping slipping slipping, into the fuuuuuuturrreeee!

Yeah. I'm not holding my breath on anything from the Branch/Corps anymore. Last Branch newsletter was Winter 2014, and other than the DSigs letter, I haven't heard or seen anything from the Corps leadership.
 
There was a Branch newsletter sent out by DSigs last week; seeing as many people did not receive it here it is:

We write to you to provide an update on a number of topics in which we are sure you are interested. However, before we do, we wish to formally acknowledge the change of RCCS CWO appointment. As CWO MacIsaac steps down, it is fitting that we recognise his untiring efforts over the past two plus years. Not only has he supported Dir RCCS by providing advice on a number of topics, he has worked tirelessly behind the scenes to ensure our Corps was well represented in a variety of forums, not the least of which was Canadian Army and other L1 Succession boards. On your behalf, we thank him for his service to all of us in his capacity as the RCCS CWO. As a Corps we welcome CWO Pat Richer as the new RCCS CWO.

Specialist Pay. In our last update we informed you that Chief Military Personnel (CMP) had stopped work on any pay analysis in order to “re-tool” and modernize their process to conduct pay reviews. We therefore intended to seek removal of the current pay protection with a view to re-instating Spec Pay to those who had been receiving it prior to MES IP. The good news is that CMP is still on track to complete their work by the end of Nov 15 and will commence pay reviews shortly thereafter. Better news is that currently the ACCIS file is first on the “To Do” list. The MES team continues to work closely with the staff in the Director of Pay Policy and Development, to ensure we provide them the best possible information with which to conduct the review. Upon completion of the review, Chief Military Personnel will pass the recommendation to the Chief of Defence Staff for decision. The bad news is that there is no policy mechanism to have Pay Protection removed. As soon as we have the targeted completion date for the ACISS Pay Review we will share it with you.

Communication Information System Technology Manager (CISTM). In our last communique, we informed you that that we would be taking a hard look at the CISTM sub-occupation and taking a look at the available options. This analysis has been conducted. Based on the assessment, the current construct of having CISTM as a sub-occupation into which CST, IST and LST automatically transfer upon promotion to WO and into which ACISS-Core can transfer, is not working. Nor is it likely to work in the short to midterm within the current CMP Personnel Management policy framework. To that end we will be requesting that CMP remove CISTM as a sub-occupation of the ACISS trade with the intent that sub-occupations of LST, CST and IST continue to the rank of MWO. While we wait for this to take effect, we will again conduct merit boards for CISTMs by previous sub-occupation and continue to handle CISTM career management (posting, promotion etc) by the previous sub-occupations; essentially as if the sub-occupations of LST, CST and IST extended through to the rank of MWO.

Notwithstanding the intent to remove CISTM as a sub-occupation, the concept of having our senior non-commissioned members regardless of sub-occupation develop into technology managers is sound and remains extant. The WOs and MWOs of today and more so into the future, must “think system”. Further, they must be capable of leading the soldiers of the RCCS who will be the subject matter experts on the technologies inherent in the command support capabilities we bring to the battlefield. Therefore, we will assess the professional development requirements in due course. Further, we will ensure that our soldiers begin to “think system” at the earliest stages of their professional development.

Miscellaneous. You may have already heard, but I am happy to officially announce that the RCCS has been approved to re-adopt Begone Dull Care as our Corps March. Although this March was formally the official march of the 1st Cdn Sig Regt and 1st Cdn Div HQ and Sig Regt this linkage broke upon the formation of the Joint Signal Regiment and it was removed from the official listing of Marches in the Heritage Structure of the Canadian Forces - CFP 200. Now we have it back for the entirety of the RCCS.

At the request of a few of our members, we have also been authorized as a Corps to wear spurs as an option with Mess Dress. Details will be promulgated in future versions of the CF Dress Instructions.

Within the Canadian Army there is some discussion about re-adopting the Royal Blue beret for those Corps and Regiments that formally wore it; specifically the RCCS, RCEME, RCE and RCA. From a RCCS perspective, should the CA decide that this is the way forward, we are supportive and will use this initiative to also look at the adoption of our former collar dogs as well. There are some who believe that we should equally adopt the former cap badge of the RCCS. However, the RCCS remains a component of the Communication and Electronic Branch and it is our common cap badge that is the sole uniform identifier that unites the CA, the RCAF and the Communication Research Operators as members of the Branch.

Sub-occupation Selection and Training

The collaborative work continues between the MES team and CFSCE to provide the necessary learning environment for DP 1.1 and beyond. This will allow for the multi-faceted manner by which soldiers will be selected (including the possibility for self-selection) for sub-occupations.

More details on training and career/employment management will be promulgated in the coming months.

Lastly, let us take the opportunity to highlight an individual accomplishment by one of our soldiers. Cpl Marc-André Gosselin, ACISS-CST currently stationed at CFS Leitrim successfully defended his title finish from last year at the 2CMBG Ironman competition. He again finished first; 15 minutes ahead of his closest competition; an outstanding accomplishment.

In closing, let us remind ourselves that without change there is no progress. The technology inherent in the command support capability delivered by the members of the RCCS whether they are employed in the field force of the Army, in strategic communication units, or delivering projects in ADM(Mat) or ADM(IM) requires that they be agile, well-educated and well trained. To that end the RCCS must be a workforce comprised of system technologists and technology managers that can regularly adapt to the insertion of new technologies. This is the intent behind the ACISS Military Employment Structure. A structure we are working hard to institutionalize for the future of our Corps.

On a side note Pte/Cpl CORE is standing at 136% PML while CST is at 74% and IST is at 54%. Looks like they fixed the low Sig Op numbers from past  :'(

 
LCIS227 said:
There was a Branch newsletter sent out by DSigs last week; seeing as many people did not receive it here it is:

On a side note Pte/Cpl CORE is standing at 136% PML while CST is at 74% and IST is at 54%. Looks like they fixed the low Sig Op numbers from past  :'(

Thanks for posting this.
 
Back
Top