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

Cyber Operator trade Mega Thread

PuckChaser

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Mentor
Reaction score
652
Points
1,060
There's no 2017 or 2016 CANFORGEN announcing a new trade. Only a single 2016 CANFORGEN referencing soliticing candidates for a Cyber Operations Staff Officer course.
 

Eye In The Sky

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
409
Points
910
I am on leave but saw something quickly that a friend had sent to me on DWAN email...asking him on civie means what the source was, but it was def about the new Cyber Op MOSID....
 

Eye In The Sky

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
409
Points
910
UNCLAS

SUBJ: CYBER OPERATOR (CYBER OP) - MILITARY EMPLOYMENT STRUCTURE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (MES IP)

1. THIS MES IP WILL COME INTO EFFECT 31 JAN 17 AND IT WILL ESTABLISH
A CYBER OPERATOR OCCUPATION WITHIN THE CAF

4. EMPLOYMENT QUALIFICATIONS. THERE WILL BE THREE RANK QUALS (RQ),
SIX UNIQUE SPECIALTY QUALS (USQ) AND SIX EXPERIENCE QUALS (EQ)
ASSOCIATED WITH THE CYBER OP OCCUPATION. THE ASSOCIATED TRG
REQUIREMENTS WILL BE DEVELOPED OVER THE NEAR TO MEDIUM TERM

5. OCCUPATION GROUPS (OCC GP). THE CYBER OP OCC WILL BELONG TO THE
00378AA (CYBER OP), 90000AA (ATR), 90010AA (COMM SYS OPS) AND 90052AA
(CYBER OPS) OCC GPS

 

Avail

Jr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Eye In The Sky said:
UNCLAS

SUBJ: CYBER OPERATOR (CYBER OP) - MILITARY EMPLOYMENT STRUCTURE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (MES IP)

1. THIS MES IP WILL COME INTO EFFECT 31 JAN 17 AND IT WILL ESTABLISH
A CYBER OPERATOR OCCUPATION WITHIN THE CAF

4. EMPLOYMENT QUALIFICATIONS. THERE WILL BE THREE RANK QUALS (RQ),
SIX UNIQUE SPECIALTY QUALS (USQ) AND SIX EXPERIENCE QUALS (EQ)
ASSOCIATED WITH THE CYBER OP OCCUPATION. THE ASSOCIATED TRG
REQUIREMENTS WILL BE DEVELOPED OVER THE NEAR TO MEDIUM TERM

5. OCCUPATION GROUPS (OCC GP). THE CYBER OP OCC WILL BELONG TO THE
00378AA (CYBER OP), 90000AA (ATR), 90010AA (COMM SYS OPS) AND 90052AA
(CYBER OPS) OCC GPS


Thanks for that. It would be nice to see this make its way to the Reserve side of the house, but I have my doubts, since we couldn't even get IST for some reason beyond my comprehension.
 

Avail

Jr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Eye In The Sky said:
UNCLAS

SUBJ: CYBER OPERATOR (CYBER OP) - MILITARY EMPLOYMENT STRUCTURE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (MES IP)

1. THIS MES IP WILL COME INTO EFFECT 31 JAN 17 AND IT WILL ESTABLISH
A CYBER OPERATOR OCCUPATION WITHIN THE CAF

4. EMPLOYMENT QUALIFICATIONS. THERE WILL BE THREE RANK QUALS (RQ),
SIX UNIQUE SPECIALTY QUALS (USQ) AND SIX EXPERIENCE QUALS (EQ)
ASSOCIATED WITH THE CYBER OP OCCUPATION. THE ASSOCIATED TRG
REQUIREMENTS WILL BE DEVELOPED OVER THE NEAR TO MEDIUM TERM

5. OCCUPATION GROUPS (OCC GP). THE CYBER OP OCC WILL BELONG TO THE
00378AA (CYBER OP), 90000AA (ATR), 90010AA (COMM SYS OPS) AND 90052AA
(CYBER OPS) OCC GPS

If there are any other interested parties -

The 17-18 Defence Policy has a handful of interesting points regarding the Cyber Operator occupation in Reserve context:

"Assign Reserve Force units and formations new roles that provide full-time capability to the Canadian Armed Forces through part-time service, including: ... Cyber Operators ..."
          - Canada Defence Policy Report, p.69(75)

"Use Reservists with specialized skill-sets to fill elements of the Canadian Armed Forces cyber force."
          - Canada Defence Policy Report, p.73(90)

Looking very forward to this and an OT.
 

PuckChaser

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Mentor
Reaction score
652
Points
1,060
If we waste expensive training on making a zero to hero Cyber Operator reservist, it will confirm to me that the CAF has no idea what its doing with the PRes. Cyber Op PRes should be skilled entry or CT from RegF Cyber Op only. I can just imagine us dumping $500K in courses to get a DP1 PRes Cyber Operator who's Cl A, and see them walk swiftly out the door to a nice civilian job with no intention of ever working a real day after OFP.
 

Avail

Jr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
PuckChaser said:
If we waste expensive training on making a zero to hero Cyber Operator reservist, it will confirm to me that the CAF has no idea what its doing with the PRes. Cyber Op PRes should be skilled entry or CT from RegF Cyber Op only. I can just imagine us dumping $500K in courses to get a DP1 PRes Cyber Operator who's Cl A, and see them walk swiftly out the door to a nice civilian job with no intention of ever working a real day after OFP.

What I'm taking away from the plan is that it's intended to be skilled entry only, but who knows.
 

buzgo

Full Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
The plan is to let people working in INFOSEC already contribute as reserve Cyber Operators. There won't be much if any training, maybe some tool specific stuff. We are looking for people working in industry.

 

Avail

Jr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
signalsguy said:
The plan is to let people working in INFOSEC already contribute as reserve Cyber Operators. There won't be much if any training, maybe some tool specific stuff. We are looking for people working in industry.

Any idea if it's too soon to try for an OT?
 

PuckChaser

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Mentor
Reaction score
652
Points
1,060
I split out the Cyber Op trade posts into its own thread. Figured with the trade being officially announced, it deserves its own home and discussion place. We can keep it under the C&E Branch header for now, as I'm sure we all believe the trade will fall under the Jimmy umbrella, but I've yet to see an official announcement.

Moderator Achievement Unlocked: Don't screw up a thread split.
 

meni0n

Sr. Member
Reaction score
3
Points
230
I'd hold off on OTing for a few years, they don't have any of the training figured out yet and they got no infrastructure so it will be quiet a while before they can do anything really.
 

The Bread Guy

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
358
Points
1,130
... and according to the G&M, not just universality of service - shared under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-42) ...
The Canadian Armed Forces is preparing to bend the rule that says all its members must be fit and ready for deployment as the military looks to hire the best people in an era where cyberspace is a battlefield and where lifestyle choices must sometimes be accommodated.

General Jonathan Vance, Chief of the Defence Staff, has the job of implementing the government’s new plan to boost military spending by more than $30-billion over the next decade.

The plan calls for the number of military personnel to increase by 5,000, and requires that, by 2026, women hold one of every four jobs in the Forces. And, in a move that was previously unthinkable, it urges measures be adopted to allow some members of the Canadian Armed Forces who no longer meet the universality of service rule – the requirement that all personnel be fit for deployment anywhere at any time – to continue to serve on a case-by-case basis.

“We need a modern set of working human-resource principles and rule sets that allow for some variance in a career, because everybody is a little bit different,” Gen. Vance said recently during a wide-ranging interview about military recruitment and retention.

Nearly two years after he became the country’s top soldier, Gen. Vance appears comfortable and relaxed sitting on the couch of his office at defence headquarters and greeting a succession of journalists lined up by his communications team to get details of the multiyear plan. Human-resource issues are a huge part of that – something he said he welcomes. On his desk is a sign that says “The Buck Stops Here.” Cliché perhaps, but also fitting.

Soldiers can become unsuitable for deployment due to illness or injury. Many have found themselves unhappily discharged after being permanently disabled, either physically or psychologically, and have pleaded with the military for this sort of accommodation.

But Gen. Vance is thinking beyond those whose wounds have left them unable to do their jobs. He wants to find a way to keep the young female pilot who does not want to be deployed during the years she is raising her children, or the computer expert whose ties to his community make it impossible for him to consider being shipped out.

“Maybe we need to make units in the Armed Forces that allow for people to say ‘I am going to be cyber, I am not ever going to deploy, my work is in cyberspace,. I can be networked, I can be given direction, as long as it’s in an environment that’s safe,’” said Gen. Vance. “As long as you’re loyal to the Armed Forces, you’ve gone through sufficient training to make you loyal to the Armed Forces, why can’t that be your job?”

If the rules around military employment are “cut and dried and inflexible, you may not be drawing all the best individuality of people,” the general said. Allowing some variance from the traditional military path “should appeal to a wider range of people,” he said, “diverse men and women with skill sets I can mine to get the very best talent out of Canada and get them into the Forces without any loss of combat capability. In fact, we will be more capable.”

All of this is in the imagination phase. At the moment, the universality of service rule is in effect. And Gen. Vance does not intend to abandon it completely. To do so, he said, would affect the military’s operational capacity.

But “imagine a very bright and intelligent infantry soldier who loses a limb,” he said. “Well, we’ve already sunk cost into that person, if you want to take the crass business view. So, if we can, why not retrain them on a case-by-case basis and let them complete their career, at least to a horizon of when they are pensionable or whatever suits them.”

That might mean creating different classes of full-time members and reservists, he said.

Those who can be deployed would be unrestricted and would advance through the ranks as soldiers, sailors and aviators traditionally do. Those who cannot be deployed would be restricted from advancement into leadership positions, but could still get pay increases as they develop their skills and experience.
 

The Bread Guy

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
358
Points
1,130
meni0n said:
I'd hold off on OTing for a few years, they don't have any of the training figured out yet and they got no infrastructure so it will be quiet a while before they can do anything really.
Not to mention terms of service ...
 

McG

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
299
Points
880
“Maybe we need to make units in the Armed Forces that allow for people to say ‘I am going to be cyber, I am not ever going to deploy, my work is in cyberspace,. I can be networked, I can be given direction, as long as it’s in an environment that’s safe,’”
As I stated in another thread, if these are the job requirements, why are we considering cyber as military and not civilian employment?
 

Eye In The Sky

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
409
Points
910
The cons of this whole plan I will refer to as •the double standard plan• outweigh the pros.

We will have a very politically correct and even less capable force.  Quotas like this 1 in 4 must be women makes me want to kick someone in the nads.
 

Journeyman

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
565
Points
940
Two points come to mind -- both meaningless....

“Maybe we need to make units in the Armed Forces that allow for people to say ‘I am going to be cyber, I am not ever going to deploy,’” said Gen. Vance.
A clear priority is going to be developing a new set of bling;  no deployments means no medals for Remembrance Day or Legion gatherings.  :crybaby:  There's one member here (sorry, I cannot recall the 'name' or be bothered searching, as his posts really didn't make him that memorable), but who was desperate to deploy anywhere,  in order to be one of the cool kids.

Added bonus: maybe the HQ types who cannot manage to get on a '30-day + 1' Staff Annoyance Visit will qualify for this bling as well.  :nod:


Eye In The Sky said:
Quotas like this 1 in 4 must be women makes me want to kick someone in the nads.
I believe you meant to say "...want to kick someone in the nads or  ovaries."
(or perhaps nads and  ovaries, so as not to exclude hermaphrodites)


I now return you to more intelligent comment (hopefully), and me, to my morning coffee.
 
Top