Canadian Forces' senior brass have been growing at a much faster rate...

[MilEME09]

Without over-generalizing, this is a managerial trend that commonly occurs in large, complacent private sector companies immediately prior to the point in time when the business fails.

but we can't fail the same way a business can, what I am seeing right now is jr NCO's picking up the slack for SNCO's and officers who actually don't know what they are doing, way more then should be happening. What I can see failing is we get into a shooting war and our top heaviness is going to bite us in the ass very very hard.

 

[Cloud Cover]

I agree that the CF must not fail the way a business can, but they appear to be well on their way to doing a great job of it anyway.

 

[Cloud Cover]

What I can see failing is we get into a shooting war and our top heaviness is going to bite us in the *** very very hard.

But it didn't bite in the last war, and therefore the logical conclusion is that it must have been part of the explanation for success.  :sarcasm:

 

[sandyson]

And  shootings wars for Canada have always been optional and far away.  The bureaucratic war in Ottawa is a clear and present danger.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

new and enabler capabilities (Space, cyber, CANSOF, AEWs, ...).

The other 3 might be fairly significant in numbers, but the Space one is relatively small in numbers (based on what was taught on the BSOC course).

The AEW part...not really sure what the measureable benefit of this one was/is.  Anytime a ATF is required, that I've been involved in, I've never seen a direct link to the AEW concept back to the ATF.  :dunno:

 

[Navy_Pete]

but we can't fail the same way a business can, what I am seeing right now is jr NCO's picking up the slack for SNCO's and officers who actually don't know what they are doing, way more then should be happening. What I can see failing is we get into a shooting war and our top heaviness is going to bite us in the *** very very hard.

Isn't the same thing happening in the jr ranks, where they get quickly promoted to fill up the more senior positions, which we have a hard time filling due to the attrition rate?  Maybe more acute in the Navy, but folks are getting into key positions with far less hands on experience than ever before. No big deal though; we have risk assessments in DRMIS to track it!  As long as you talk it til it's blue you are GTG!

 

[Old EO Tech]

Isn't the same thing happening in the jr ranks, where they get quickly promoted to fill up the more senior positions, which we have a hard time filling due to the attrition rate?  Maybe more acute in the Navy, but folks are getting into key positions with far less hands on experience than ever before. No big deal though; we have risk assessments in DRMIS to track it!  As long as you talk it til it's blue you are GTG!

While that has been a problem in he past for some trades, at least in the CA, the SEM project and cutting of 60 CWO positions is going to put the breaks on this for likely the 2-5 years.  I'm seeing it already out west with having to find several post CSM MWO's jobs since they are not lined up this year for the few RSM jobs we have now.  This is going to trickle down to Sgt and MCpl promotions soon as well.

Jon

 

[PPCLI Guy]

While that has been a problem in he past for some trades, at least in the CA, the SEM project and cutting of 60 CWO positions is going to put the breaks on this for likely the 2-5 years.  I'm seeing it already out west with having to find several post CSM MWO's jobs since they are not lined up this year for the few RSM jobs we have now.  This is going to trickle down to Sgt and MCpl promotions soon as well.

Jon

RSM jobs are not being cut.  CWO technical jobs are, and all of those positions are being converted to either MWO or Capt.  There is zero change to the number of CSM jobs that feed the RSM pool.  This is how the non-technical trades (read combat arms) have had to do things for a long time now.

 

[Old EO Tech]

RSM jobs are not being cut.  CWO technical jobs are, and all of those positions are being converted to either MWO or Capt.  There is zero change to the number of CSM jobs that feed the RSM pool.  This is how the non-technical trades (read combat arms) have had to do things for a long time now.

PPCLI Guy, no were did I state RSM jobs were being cut.  Yes the Combat Arms are not as affected as the CSS Corps, but they are still losing the CADTC Standard CWO and Career Managers, even the Combat Arms liked having tier 5 positions to develop CWO prior to being RSM's.  For the CSS Corps, losing the Tier 5 CWO means a large capability gap, downgrading them to MWO or Capt is not a solution, that just means a 25 year old Capts or 35 year old just promoted MWO are now the people being leaned on instead of a CWO with 30 years experience.  But this is another topic of discussion.

Cheers Jon

 

[CountDC]

never understood why we need so many generals when it seems at least some of it could be handled at the LCol/Col level instead until dealing with mbrs of that rank that will not accept an answer from anyone that does not out rank them.  Maybe all the top heaviness is there to tell those Light and full Colonel that their staff and his staff is correct on the regulations and policies.  :facepalm:

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Keep people at the Capt, Major and LCol ranks for longer, perhaps more pay levels and perhaps extra pay for certain skill sets/training. Since we know the maximum number of people that can be in, set the number of senior ranks to the numbers of pilots/soldiers/sailors serving. Also set the size of NDHQ civil and military to the size of the Combat Arms/squadrons and ships. You don't want to few senior officers, but you also don't want to many. 

 

[daftandbarmy]

Keep people at the Capt, Major and LCol ranks for longer, perhaps more pay levels and perhaps extra pay for certain skill sets/training. Since we know the maximum number of people that can be in, set the number of senior ranks to the numbers of pilots/soldiers/sailors serving. Also set the size of NDHQ civil and military to the size of the Combat Arms/squadrons and ships. You don't want to few senior officers, but you also don't want to many.

Or we follow the lead of the private sector and embrace 'up then sideways' career pathing options:

http://fortune.com/2011/10/13/how-to-make-a-smart-lateral-career-move/

 

[jollyjacktar]

Or we follow the lead of the private sector and embrace 'up then sideways' career pathing options:

http://fortune.com/2011/10/13/how-to-make-a-smart-lateral-career-move/

Oh we're going sideways alright.  And l don't mean in a cool Ken Block fashion either.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Or we follow the lead of the private sector and embrace 'up then sideways' career pathing options:

http://fortune.com/2011/10/13/how-to-make-a-smart-lateral-career-move/

Interesting concepts.  I truly hope before any "advantageous" changes are made in Officer career progression, pay grades, ect, ect; that the NCM world is thoroughly overhauled.  LT(N)/Capt already have excellent pay rates in 10 IPCs.  Meanwhile I know CPO2/MWOs who are massively underpaid in comparison to their level of responsibility both in terms of pers management and operationally.

I know a CPO2 that has roughly 75 people working for him (civi and Mil) and runs what is one of the busiest warehouses/depots in Canada, he has no Div O BTW.  Meanwhile we have an IPC 10 LT(N) who is I/C canoes.  Something is wrong there in the scheme of things, and lets not bring in the aiguillette folks who are paid to follow around our bloated brass. 

Our NCM corps deserves a major over haul in HR and Pay levels as they are in no way representative of what is expected and required of their jobs anymore, especially from the MS/MCpl rank and above. 

 

[Jarnhamar]

[quote author=Halifax Tar] Meanwhile we have an IPC 10 LT(N) who is I/C canoes.  
[/quote]
For real?

 

[Halifax Tar]

For real?

Yup.  CIC/Reserve LT(N); I am unsure which as I haven't seem him with headdress on yet.  No names, no pack drill. 

 

[McG]

Yup.  CIC/Reserve LT(N); I am unsure which as I haven't seem him with headdress on yet.  No names, no pack drill.

So, you know this guy is IPC 10, yet you don’t know if he is PRes or CIC? How much more of your examples were made-up/exaggerated to suit your conclusion?

 

[jeffb]

Keep people at the Capt, Major and LCol ranks for longer, perhaps more pay levels and perhaps extra pay for certain skill sets/training.

I think that time in rank is less important than the quality of time in rank. Look at the bios of most of the GOs from the Second World War. Simonds went from commanding 1 RCHA in 1940 to Bde Cdmd in 1942, Division Comd in 1943 and Corps command a year later. Patton had something like 2 weeks of combat experience before he commanded a Division in combat for the first time. Given the variety of ages and backgrounds on new officers these days, I'd offer that promotion should be more based on demonstrated competence then adherence to rigid gateways based on time. Not every year served actually improves experience or prepares for higher rank and there are many individuals entering the CAF now with civilian experience that is readily transferable.

 

[Halifax Tar]

So, you know this guy is IPC 10, yet you don’t know if he is PRes or CIC? How much more of your examples were made-up/exaggerated to suit your conclusion?

How does one distinguish Res V Reg V CIC in NCDs ?  We don't have differentiating epaulettes like the Army does with unit tiles, all of ours just say Canada.  Headdress is rarely worn in our area; And I can only go off of what I am told and have seen.  If you want to refute that the NCM career and pay channels aren't in major need of an overhaul, be my guest.  Mature debate is always welcome, and its probably the only way we will find balance. 

All this is to say, I dont care if that LT(N) is IPC 1 or 10, lets play happy medium and say hes IPC 5; hes still making more than that CPO2 with all that staff and operational responsibility, and that simply isn't right.  I/C canoes is a job for a LS/Cpl.

Not all Officers are underemployed and not all NCMs are over employed, you can find examples in all avenues.  But in my still counting 18 years of, various bases, ships, regiments and units, I have noticed more and more work load and responsibility being pushed down upon the NCM corps without what I think is fair compensation, generally from MS/MCpl and above and especially at the MWO/CPO2 level and above.  Mean while we are cutting and slashing CPO1/CWO positions, while growing GOFO positions, because those CPO1/CWO aren't "command level". 

I have to ask, we have a uniformed service of what ?  65K (ish) ?  Yet we continue to produce shiny new A/SLTs and 2Lts at an astonishing rate.  Have a chat with your local Log O (Sea) folks, the backlog for A/HOD and HOD tours is immense, some will never get that opportunity.

 

[Halifax Tar]

I think that time in rank is less important than the quality of time in rank. Look at the bios of most of the GOs from the Second World War. Simonds went from commanding 1 RCHA in 1940 to Bde Cdmd in 1942, Division Comd in 1943 and Corps command a year later. Patton had something like 2 weeks of combat experience before he commanded a Division in combat for the first time. Given the variety of ages and backgrounds on new officers these days, I'd offer that promotion should be more based on demonstrated competence then adherence to rigid gateways based on time. Not every year served actually improves experience or prepares for higher rank and there are many individuals entering the CAF now with civilian experience that is readily transferable.

I generally agree with this.  And I think you could import it over to NCM as well.  But how do you propose we measure demonstrated competence ?  I have been told in the US Navy in order to advance in rank you have to merit against your peers and complete leveled exams on your job knowledge, the combination of both scores pushes people forward.  Perhaps something we should look at ?