Canada moves to 2% GDP end of FY25/26 - PMMC

[dapaterson]

Well, the CAF has metrics to deliver on first.

• stop the bleed of those who can train
• train past BMQ, in fact develop the forces well and way past BMQ
• properly house, support and supply what and who they have now
• equip what we have now
• demonstrate that’s all been properly done in good working order.

I’d argue no larger force unless and until they can accomplish those very basic items. Good luck, BTW.

The CAF doesn't have a bleed.

It has an indecent obsession with retention, instead of an obsession with excellence.

 

[McG]

The multi person rooms are only appropriate for DP1 training according to the department’s own standards. According to that same standard, bathrooms should not be shared between more than two people after DP1.

 

[Cloud Cover]

An organization of 67.8k + 25k people should be able to walk and think about plans for tomorrow at the same time.

Why yes, yes they should be able to do that.

 

[PuckChaser]

if you are a Cpl now, 90% chance you are a MCpl in 3 years, a new program has started as well in the reg force to identify those with stronger leadership potential early

I said competent MCpl, not "hit the minimums MCpl" which is still ridiculously fast at 5 or 6 years as per the new policy (which is just sliding left a year). 8000 people recruited FY 25/26 should not be ready to instruct until FY 33/34. You don't just magically change how competent someone is by moving the promotion goal post a year to the left.

 

[MilEME09]

I said competent MCpl, not "hit the minimums MCpl" which is still ridiculously fast at 5 or 6 years as per the new policy (which is just sliding left a year). 8000 people recruited FY 25/26 should not be ready to instruct until FY 33/34. You don't just magically change how competent someone is by moving the promotion goal post a year to the left.

Competency is an open metric based on experience, and comprehension. I am not suggesting we push unready people to PLQ, infact i hate that notion. However we also shouldn't put a hard wall either of no promotion before X time either if a person is ready. Im not saying someone recruited today will be in plq in 3 years, a cpl today likely has 4+ years already, so 3 more would make it 7+ which is the sweet spot for a PLQ

 

[ArmyRick]

Having trained many a soldier, my thoughts on readiness to progress is
-EVERY single person is an individual and grows independently. Some will NEVER be able to handle leadership

-The above comment being said, in the infantry I noticed a rare few are able to handle being MCpl really fast (one of my battleschool peers made it to MCpl in 2.5 years and then a year later joined JTF2 as an Assaulter, so that kind of guy). Looking at the infantry, I would say most should be ready for MCpl (after passing current courses) in 4-6 years. Some may need a little longer. And as I said, some will never be able to handle leadership.

-A pet peeve of mine was seeing people that are eager and willing from trying to progress because CoC get locked into "too new" or "But we have so and so should do his course first because he has been in longer.." I wanted to attend 6B INF PL WO (later 3B) when I had 2 years as sergeant (knowing I would not be promoted for a few years), my RSM said no because X, Y and Z were more senior to me and he was trying to get them on it. X, Y and Z never had the balls to do the course and I ended up passing them anyways. So lose the dogma and bureaucratic thinking

-We are talking MCpl level (and for context, I was infantry), and what we expect of a MCpl and a Sgt are much different. SO I see times were its justifiable to accelerate people to Master Jack but not sergeant

My opinions, take them for that they are worth.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

The multi person rooms are only appropriate for DP1 training according to the department’s own standards. According to that same standard, bathrooms should not be shared between more than two people after DP1.

The RCN frigates laugh at this in mouldy gray paint talk.

 

[ytz]

Sovereign launch capability coming. This has been on the 3 CSD wishlist for a while:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/space-launch-pad-nova-scotia-9.7130406

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

Youre the first person Ive heard from who held that opinion, so I'll work from the assumption that its a minority opinion.

Every other person that I have spoken with prefers a private room when studying, working on homework, and relaxing the weekends. Remember, most of the new people aren't plastered from noon Friday through Monday morning anymore...

Just take the Infantry School circa mid 2000s approach to training... your six person room will be a single person room in a few weeks from all the injuries and VRs . I had a different bed to sleep in every night! Kept the one beside my desk "inspection ready" . Beer and Preserves kept in another barrack box for some after hours morale

No need to get acquainted with your classmates, the man eating truck would eat them on our various forced marches, never to be seen again .

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

Having trained many a soldier, my thoughts on readiness to progress is
-EVERY single person is an individual and grows independently. Some will NEVER be able to handle leadership

-The above comment being said, in the infantry I noticed a rare few are able to handle being MCpl really fast (one of my battleschool peers made it to MCpl in 2.5 years and then a year later joined JTF2 as an Assaulter, so that kind of guy). Looking at the infantry, I would say most should be ready for MCpl (after passing current courses) in 4-6 years. Some may need a little longer. And as I said, some will never be able to handle leadership.

-A pet peeve of mine was seeing people that are eager and willing from trying to progress because CoC get locked into "too new" or "But we have so and so should do his course first because he has been in longer.." I wanted to attend 6B INF PL WO (later 3B) when I had 2 years as sergeant (knowing I would not be promoted for a few years), my RSM said no because X, Y and Z were more senior to me and he was trying to get them on it. X, Y and Z never had the balls to do the course and I ended up passing them anyways. So lose the dogma and bureaucratic thinking

-We are talking MCpl level (and for context, I was infantry), and what we expect of a MCpl and a Sgt are much different. SO I see times were its justifiable to accelerate people to Master Jack but not sergeant

My opinions, take them for that they are worth.

I too have noted these individuals throughout the time I served. What generally happens is one of the following:

1. They stream into a SMU (JTF2, CSOR, JTFX, SARTECH, Clearance Diver, etc)

2. They become an Officer (One of my former Privates is now a Maj, probably will be a LCol soon, guy was an absolute stud and just way too smart for what he was doing)

3. They leave the CAF entirely and move on to wildly successful private careers. (My former Signaller is one of these types. Guy was a Rockstar and basically good at everything he did, went to Snipers, did that for a few years, then punched his ticket and is now multi-millionaire in the private sector).

 

[Underway]

I would say most should be ready for MCpl (after passing current courses) in 4-6 years. Some may need a little longer. And as I said, some will never be able to handle leadership.

Huh its almost like it takes 5 years as an apprentice to become a journeyman...

The trades have it mostly correct here. Education covers off the knowledge, hours ocver off the experience. You'll see a number of various supervisors in you time. Then you do you exams and get qualified.

Military didin't invent this system. We copied it, and then sometimes forget why it works. It's also why you'll get very Jr. folks in higher leadership positions during extended conflicts. The bad and unlucky are weeded out ruthlessly, and you get waaaay more hours in your apprenticeship in a short period of time.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Having trained many a soldier, my thoughts on readiness to progress is
-EVERY single person is an individual and grows independently. Some will NEVER be able to handle leadership

-The above comment being said, in the infantry I noticed a rare few are able to handle being MCpl really fast (one of my battleschool peers made it to MCpl in 2.5 years and then a year later joined JTF2 as an Assaulter, so that kind of guy). Looking at the infantry, I would say most should be ready for MCpl (after passing current courses) in 4-6 years. Some may need a little longer. And as I said, some will never be able to handle leadership.

-A pet peeve of mine was seeing people that are eager and willing from trying to progress because CoC get locked into "too new" or "But we have so and so should do his course first because he has been in longer.." I wanted to attend 6B INF PL WO (later 3B) when I had 2 years as sergeant (knowing I would not be promoted for a few years), my RSM said no because X, Y and Z were more senior to me and he was trying to get them on it. X, Y and Z never had the balls to do the course and I ended up passing them anyways. So lose the dogma and bureaucratic thinking

-We are talking MCpl level (and for context, I was infantry), and what we expect of a MCpl and a Sgt are much different. SO I see times were its justifiable to accelerate people to Master Jack but not sergeant

My opinions, take them for that they are worth.

The Infantry, unlike the Navy and others, likes to keep people in stovepipes called 'regiments'. Forever. And it keeps many people down...

What if you had the chance to easily and quickly move regiments to 'move up'?

Or if there weren't any regiments, and we just shuffled people around the numbered units (the Navy and Marines call it 'drafting') based on capability and need.

 

[Halifax Tar]

The Infantry, unlike the Navy and others, likes to keep people in stovepipes called 'regiments'. Forever. And it keeps many people down...

What if you had the chance to easily and quickly move regiments to 'move up'?

Or if there weren't any regiments, and we just shuffled people around the numbered units (the Navy and Marines call it 'drafting') based on capability and need.

I can hear the regimental Mafias pulling out your voodoo doll now ... Watch out for ladders and black cats.

 

[ytz]

Huh its almost like it takes 5 years as an apprentice to become a journeyman...

The trades have it mostly correct here. Education covers off the knowledge, hours ocver off the experience. You'll see a number of various supervisors in you time. Then you do you exams and get qualified.

Military didin't invent this system. We copied it, and then sometimes forget why it works. It's also why you'll get very Jr. folks in higher leadership positions during extended conflicts. The bad and unlucky are weeded out ruthlessly, and you get waaaay more hours in your apprenticeship in a short period of time.

I often wonder if there's more room for education for NCMs inside the CAF.

I do think the system is a tad outdated in this regard. We now routinely send tech trades on sponsored education at the college level. I wish they would just build a CAF Community College or CEGEP and do year technologist programs in 16 months full time there. This way the actual trade schools can focus on conversion from education to practice. Might take 2 years to get a trained tech, but it's highly likely their experience accretion improves.

On a personal note, I always thought it's unfair that people like me got to do very expensive sponsored education that is highly valuable outside the CAF while we go out of our way to screw NCMs into getting red seal equivalent training. Getting NCMs a college diploma would be no different than getting officers a Bachelor's Degree.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

I often wonder if there's more room for education for NCMs inside the CAF.

I do think the system is a tad outdated in this regard. We now routinely send tech trades on sponsored education at the college level. I wish they would just build a CAF Community College or CEGEP and do year technologist programs in 16 months full time there. This way the actual trade schools can focus on conversion from education to practice. Might take 2 years to get a trained tech, but it's highly likely their experience accretion improves.

On a personal note, I always thought it's unfair that people like me got to do very expensive sponsored education that is highly valuable outside the CAF while we go out of our way to screw NCMs into getting red seal equivalent training. Getting NCMs a college diploma would be no different than getting officers a Bachelor's Degree.

But, is that education level universally required of NCMs?

I would argue the “bachelor’s degree to be an officer” is a made up standard, as an entry level requirement, for most officer occupations.

 

[foresterab]

I often wonder if there's more room for education for NCMs inside the CAF.

I do think the system is a tad outdated in this regard. We now routinely send tech trades on sponsored education at the college level. I wish they would just build a CAF Community College or CEGEP and do year technologist programs in 16 months full time there. This way the actual trade schools can focus on conversion from education to practice. Might take 2 years to get a trained tech, but it's highly likely their experience accretion improves.

On a personal note, I always thought it's unfair that people like me got to do very expensive sponsored education that is highly valuable outside the CAF while we go out of our way to screw NCMs into getting red seal equivalent training. Getting NCMs a college diploma would be no different than getting officers a Bachelor's Degree.

Personally I view this as a future role for RMC. They don't even have to offer the courses themselves but be the coordinator.

Offer a number of correspondence based programs that would allow for any CAF member to take courses. Difference being that some credits would be provided based upon CAF courses completed.

If you've taken a Sgt. or WO course you should have a certain degree of leadership training. Or language training. Basically use these courses as the electives and allow for a very focused stream to allow fast tracking of educational uplift.

So for example - Pvt. Bloggins tests out in language skill proficency at X standard and is given credit for 2 courses of a BA language minor. Then takes a drone course set up and gets a license...another elective course in data management/collection. Add in a course from Royal Roads College (correspondence) or Athabasca University (correspondence) or... and pretty soon you have a years education credit post secondary.

I've focused on more conventional schooling than red seal trades but there's no reason this couldn't be done as well for trades.

 

[daftandbarmy]

But, is that education level universally required of NCMs?

I would argue the “bachelor’s degree to be an officer” is a made up standard, as an entry level requirement, for most officer occupations.

Since the Somalia scandal...

 

[dapaterson]

Personally I view this as a future role for RMC. They don't even have to offer the courses themselves but be the coordinator.

Offer a number of correspondence based programs that would allow for any CAF member to take courses. Difference being that some credits would be provided based upon CAF courses completed.

If you've taken a Sgt. or WO course you should have a certain degree of leadership training. Or language training. Basically use these courses as the electives and allow for a very focused stream to allow fast tracking of educational uplift.

So for example - Pvt. Bloggins tests out in language skill proficency at X standard and is given credit for 2 courses of a BA language minor. Then takes a drone course set up and gets a license...another elective course in data management/collection. Add in a course from Royal Roads College (correspondence) or Athabasca University (correspondence) or... and pretty soon you have a years education credit post secondary.

I've focused on more conventional schooling than red seal trades but there's no reason this couldn't be done as well for trades.

Already exists.

Welcome to the Canadian Armed Forces Accreditation Certification Equivalency (CAF ACE) Portal | CAF ACE

caface-rfacace.forces.gc.ca

 

[ytz]

But, is that education level universally required of NCMs?

I would argue the “bachelor’s degree to be an officer” is a made up standard, as an entry level requirement, for most officer occupations.

The world changes. Setting aside the officer debate, I would argue that so much of what NCMs learn in just about any tech trade, especially those getting Spec pay is pretty damn close to college level. Look at all the electronics trade that did POET. How would those be different from the 1 yr accelerated electronics programs that colleges or private institutions like Devry offer/ed? Really the difference here is that those programs give the student an education standard qual (a diploma) and ours gives them a CAF Certificate on par with any training course.

On the officer side, I would argue, it's not the paper, it's the process. Presumably, while getting a degree, one develops faculties like communications and critical thinking and quite frankly maturity. I know people will say that we used to have 20 yr old officers in WW2. That is just hard to do today because society and culture have changed. Maturing that individual before you put them in charge of other humans probably has some value.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

The Infantry, unlike the Navy and others, likes to keep people in stovepipes called 'regiments'. Forever. And it keeps many people down...

What if you had the chance to easily and quickly move regiments to 'move up'?

Or if there weren't any regiments, and we just shuffled people around the numbered units (the Navy and Marines call it 'drafting') based on capability and need.

The regimental system has its limitations and this is most def one of them. I remember when I had my frank discussion with the Regimental Colonel about this. I had already made the decision that I was going looking for something else and was very transparent that I had no real interest in "following the path". The path didn't seem all that interesting and just wasn't pushing me the way I wanted to be pushed.

that being said, I was always more concerned with accumulating interesting experiences, undertaking physical and mental challenges, and exploration, than career advancement.

My wife calls it ADHD, which is probably accurate.