Go beyond your local experience...

[Jarnhamar]

Theirs obviously many good CIC officers out there that do amazing jobs. From gung hoe young cadets who want to stay involved with cadets after their 18 to older reserve and regular force soldiers who enjoy the uniform, working with cadets, living at a relaxed pace, whatever.

In the CF you hardly hear about the good deeds performed by soldiers but the minute someone does something bad, it's all over the front page. I think the same mentality holds true for CIC officers.  We don't hear about the good officers, only the ones who try to pull rank in order to change the channel in the common room at the shacks or the CIC Officers that see themselves as in infantry officers and try to teach/lead their platoon as such.

Their shouldn't be this big pressure for cadets to join the army . Cadets/CIC needs good people just like the reserves/regs do. I think the problem is that some cadets and CIC officers want what they do to be like the army but without the commitment, discipline or hard work.(Like a certain someone I can think of whom it looks like quit the reserves after not being allowed to ware whatever they want)
It's an easy way around going to basic, putting time in.  This isn't the attitude of all CIC officers but this particular attitude found in some CIC officers is what gives the over all group a bad name to many.

I'd agree with the comment that making CIC members "Officers" it creates a lot of confusion.

 

[THEARMYGUY]

I have to agree with ghost on the fact that very few good deeds get noticed in the CF.  The fact that we all share "the shame" that others place upon us in the CIC is a tough pill to swallow with that in mind.  I try my best as do many other CIC members.  I don't think that being an "officer" is confusing however.  We wear a different hat badge from everyone else.  We wear different shoulder titles as well.  Just as any other branch of the forces we are different and our training is different.  I hate getting painted with the same brush as "the few who ruin it for the many".  I will just continue on and do my best.  Others will say what they say.  I hope that we can all try to get past preconceived notions of what a CIC member is, and just get to work with what we do best.  Lets train and be trained.  Do what you can for the CF and for Canada.  No matter how small your effort, we can all make a difference in our own way.

Cheers!!

The Army Guy

 

[elscotto937]

Army Guy... the CIC have a place and the CCM is very good organization for the youth of Canada, but you don't call cadets...Soldiers, So you can't really think that CIC Officers are military officers. What do you (CIC) do to assist Infanteer to close with and destroy the enemy, I know what I do...

Don't get confused, I'm not saying that the CIC are bad people or incompetent boobs (every organization has those). On the contrary the vast majority are don't selfless act by developing Canada's youth. Now if tommorow the Boy scouts were made a federal institution and put under the direction of the CF, would you commission the leaders? If your answer is yes then were are arguing apples and oranges, and I will quit.

Finally, now that most of the contributers to this thread have finished patting themselves on the back, I whole-heartedly resent the fact that you (the CIC) believe that you stand alone in the CCM, and believe that you are the only ones to supervise and give up free time to the cadet movement... there are plenty of soldiers and civilians that do this without the pay and opportunity for summer employment. I wouldn't be so nieve to beileve all CIC have not been in the PRes or RegF, so don't do the reverse.

 

[THEARMYGUY]

Scott

Firstly I agree with your point about the CIC not calling "cadets" "soldiers".  They are not soldiers and are therefor not referred to as such.  Secondly I do think that if Boy Scouts( which is now called Scouts Canada because now it's co-ed) came under the direction of the CF then yes I would make the leaders commissioned officers.  That is however only if the Scouts adopted the CF rank structure as the cadets have.  Officers are in a roll of supervision and leadership.  Sound like a leader to me.  And finally, just because we don't kill or save people does not mean that we are not worthy of being officers in the CF.  My job( appointed by her majesty the Queen) is no less important than that of any other person in our fair country.  I develop in youth the potential for good leadership, physical fitness and an interest in the CF.  Youth are the future and I count on them to be "soldiers" in that future.  Some will be anyway.  I don't wish to be compared to PRes or RegF.  I don't do the same job they do.  They are good at what they do and so am I.  Remember, anyone can be an officer.  Call a bank sometime.  The message will say "an officer will be with you shortly.  Go to the Salvation Army.  They are also officers.  I think we are dealing with apples and oranges here and I just want to drop the entire comparison.  We all are going to feel the way we do and that's that.  One more quick note.  I had no intention of excluding the other members of the  CF and civi life who help out in the CCM.  I was one of them.  We get great support from not only PRes and RegF but our parent and civi volunteers.  I think that they are a large part of the movement and yes, they don't get payed, and most don't have employment opportunities with the CF or the unit.

In the CCM of today and yesterday the volunteers are the grease that keeps the wheels of the future moving.

Kudos to all of those( members and civilians) who take the time to help any youth organization.  They are selfless and caring in a way that many people will never understand.

Cheers!!

The Army Guy

 

[sgt_mandal]

Very well said, sir.

 

[Excolis]

well said.. well said... 

 

[Infanteer]

Secondly I do think that if Boy Scouts( which is now called Scouts Canada because now it's co-ed) came under the direction of the CF then yes I would make the leaders commissioned officers.  That is however only if the Scouts adopted the CF rank structure as the cadets have.

Seeing how you said "[cadets] are not soldiers and are therefor not referred to as such" and then go on to advocate this, I really question if you understand the history and the nature of the rank structure in a military force?  Why would the boy scouts need rank (for that matter, why do the cadets need it)?  Is there any lawful commands and duties that a 14 year "Master Corporal" is responsible to carry out according to the QR&O?

Officers are in a roll of supervision and leadership.  Sound like a leader to me.  And finally, just because we don't kill or save people does not mean that we are not worthy of being officers in the CF.

So, I don't treat patients nor am I properly trained to, but I am still worthy of calling myself a Doctor?  Do you understand the nature of the military profession to which you claim you are entitled to be a part of?

My job( appointed by her majesty the Queen) is no less important than that of any other person in our fair country.  I develop in youth the potential for good leadership, physical fitness and an interest in the CF.  Youth are the future and I count on them to be "soldiers" in that future.  Some will be anyway.

So should we commission high school teachers as well, since they fall under your definition of an "officer"?

I don't wish to be compared to PRes or RegF.  I don't do the same job they do.

So you say you are not a professional soldier, nor do you do anything that professional soldiers do, but somehow you are still a member of the military profession?  Which is it?

They are good at what they do and so am I.

I never disputed that fact, as it is irrelevant to my argument.  I could care less if the CIC's were turning out Olympic athletes, I fail to see how they fit into the profession of arms.

Remember, anyone can be an officer.  Call a bank sometime.  The message will say "an officer will be with you shortly.  Go to the Salvation Army.  They are also officers.

Well, that is a pretty professional statement.  I am sure that members of the Officer Corps, with their specialized body of knowledge, their multiple deployments in command of soldiers, and their relevent military education and Staff College would appreciate the fact that you've downgraded their devotion to the profession of arms to a pencil pusher at the RBC or some charity worker down at the Sally Anne.

You are really helping to prove my point.

I think we are dealing with apples and oranges here and I just want to drop the entire comparison.  We all are going to feel the way we do and that's that.

Bottom line is, some of the CIC have started a thread trying to state the rational for them being a professional equivalent to the military officers of the CF because you share a Queen's Commission.  I've argued against this claim, and to date, I've yet to get a serious rebuttal to my arguments.  Rather then attempt to seriously address the facts of the points Scott and I have presented on military professionalism, you have merely committed yourself to back-patting and talking about how dedicated you are, much to the cheers of your Cadet "comrades-in-arms."  Well it may sound nice, you haven't really answered my question on your relevance to the Army and how it should make you a member of the professional Officer Corps

So, perhaps I'll ask my question again.  Do you feel my argument for the military profession (and backed by serious historians and professional soldiers) is out to lunch and that you, the CIC, have somehow redefined the status of the profession of arms?

 

[Michael Dorosh]

Call a bank sometime.  The message will say "an officer will be with you shortly.  Go to the Salvation Army.  They are also officers.

They don't hold the Queen's commission.  I should think the difference in terminology would be obvious even to an 8 year old, but apparently not.

I worked for Scotiabank for two years; two of the secretaries at our trust company were retitled "officers" - the ex-Regular Air Force sergeant I worked with and I had a good laugh over it - so did the secretaries, come to think of it.  It was a benefit without having to give them a raise.  And just goes to show how cheaply the word is used.  Like Infanteer says, you prove his point.  If you are trying to equate the status of CIC officers with bank tellers and secretaries, I must say, you're very convincing.

 

[Excolis]

everyone needs to grow up and just learn to live with the fact that CIC officers are commissioned officers.  and if you have a bad experience with a CIC officer.  you should have your troop officer/platoon comander whoever, go to the CO of the cadet unit and let them know what they are doing wrong,  believe me it will better those officers.  if you keep letting things happen that make CIC look bad nothing will change.  i know many PRes officers that dont know anything, and sometimes i tell them what they are doing wrong.  once someone knows what they are doing wrong they will change it to make it right. 

 

[THEARMYGUY]

To all who choose to listen.

I am willing to concede that the CIC is not a branch of the CF that would be considered members of the profession of arms(as you put it).  We are not combat trained.  We as a body are trainers of youth.  I am not here to say that we should or should not be commissioned officers in the CF.  I am simply stating that we do a job in a leadership roll.  As the cadets uses the rank structure to maintain balance in the unit, so do we at the officer level.  If you think thats wrong and lends a bad impression to the CF then that is your opinion.

It is not my intention to compare officers of the RegF or Pres to bank tellers or Salvation members.  I am simply stating that they too carry the name. I was also not comparing the CIC to the aforementioned organizations.  It was great the way you guys did that though!!  The CIC is not intended as a fighting force.  We simply teach youth.  I don't think I would make high school teachers CF officers as they do not all promote an interest in the CF.  We really don't need to pat each other on the back and I think that I have said enough on this thread.  By the way I think most cadets would be thrilled to be 14 years old and be a M/Cpl.  Cadets are not bound by QR&O's as they are not members of the CF.  One final thought that the rest of you can punt around:  Why don't we just get the CIC to go through regular training like all other officers??  Sure some of you will say that the CIC would not be up to the task.  Why not make a go at it though?  All new CIC officers could take the training required by the CF that any other officer would take.  Just one small problem.  Many of the officers that went to go CIC would stay RegF or PRes.  So where do we go from here??

The rest of you can duke it out from here.  I've had enough of this one.

Cheers!!

The Army Guy

 

[combat_medic]

"Why don't we just get the CIC to go through regular training like all other officers?"

I think that was part of the point. Having to salute a teenager who got a commission after 10 training days is part of the reason there is so much disrespect for the CIC. Every other officer, both Reg and Res and required to undergo basic officer training, not to mention are required to adhere to certain physical, intellectual, and medical standards. They are also required to hold a post secondary degree, and yet people can get into the CIC without so much as a high school education, carrying an extra 100lbs of body fat, and with medical conditions as severe as diabetes and epilepsy.

However, if the CIC were held to the same standards of the remainder of the CF, and of the Officer Corps, and were required to attend the same level of training, then, I believe, a lot of that gulf would be eliminated. If you know the 2Lt you're saluting got beasted for X many weeks by some Infantry Sgt in Gagetown, you're going to have a lot more respect for him than knowing he spend 10 days on his arse in a classroom, instructed by another CIC guy.

Saying that you're worthy of a commission simply because you're in a leadership role is a fallacy. A reserve MCpl is just as much of a leader, is responsible for administrating and training young troops (who are often old enough to be cadets themselves), and has FAR more training than a CIC officer, and yet is not entitled to a commission. Cadet NCOs are also in positions of leadership and training, and yet anyone would balk at the suggestion of handing some pimply-faced kid the Queen's Commission.

As Infanteer stated, no matter whether you're in the Infantry or you're in the rear echelon, all soldiers are just that; SOLDIERS. We are all in the profession of arms, and our job is either to close with and destroy the enemy, or support those who are doing it. A civilian recruiter generates and promotes just as much interest in the CF as you do, and yet they aren't expecting a commission.

If the CIC were prepared to get all the prerequisites of joining the CF, underwent the same training, and were held to the same standard as every other person who puts on the uniform, then they would be a lot more deserving of their commission than they are presently, and I think the vast majority of people woudl have a lot less problem with them being commissioned members of the CF.

Either become civilian youth leaders, or become commissioned officers, the same as all the other Officer Corps... you can't maintain the status quo and expect to get the respect of those people who spent years of training to earn a single chevron.

 

[Infanteer]

everyone needs to grow up and just learn to live with the fact that CIC officers are commissioned officers.

If you didn't notice, this was a civil discussion, but nice way to try and deflect the argument.

As well, if we just decided to "live with the fact" there wouldn't be much to discuss around here.

and if you have a bad experience with a CIC officer.  you should have your troop officer/platoon comander whoever, go to the CO of the cadet unit and let them know what they are doing wrong,  believe me it will better those officers.  if you keep letting things happen that make CIC look bad nothing will change.  i know many PRes officers that dont know anything, and sometimes i tell them what they are doing wrong.  once someone knows what they are doing wrong they will change it to make it right.

Four pages and you have still been unable to grasp the thesis of my argument?  Have you even been reading anything I write?!?  As I've said in every post I've written, the performance of CIC officers has nothing to do with the issue.
----

Why don't we just get the CIC to go through regular training like all other officers??  Sure some of you will say that the CIC would not be up to the task.  Why not make a go at it though?  All new CIC officers could take the training required by the CF that any other officer would take.  Just one small problem.  Many of the officers that went to go CIC would stay RegF or PRes.  So where do we go from here??

This would probably do well to eliminate some of the "chaff" that slips through the cracks, but does it get to the root of the issue?  What does a CIC officer fully trained to Common Army Phase standards (Phase II) do now.  He/she is trained, but does not contribute to the profession nor work within it.  As well, I've asserted before that being a member of a Professional Officer Corps is much more then simply receiving training in tactics and techniques related to small unit command.  There is a myriad of other factors which define the profession (education, actual leadership, etc, etc).  Is it worth putting all this effort into professionalizing CIC officers only to have them return to a position that many of you seem to do quite well with the 10-20 days of training you receive?

I would say that if you were going to professionalize the CIC, then you would have to do more to transform the Cadets as a body that is someway associated with the profession of arms.  However, due to current social trends, existing international legislation that Canada has signed to, and a plethora of other issues, I can see the chances of this happening at about zero.

 

[sgt_mandal]

I'm just curious of one thing, If any of you, who dispise the CIC, saw them in uniform while you were in uniform, would you salute them?

 

[Michael Dorosh]

I'm just curious of one thing, If any of you, who dispise the CIC, saw them in uniform while you were in uniform, would you salute them?

I don't despise the CIC so I probably shouldn't answer, but I can probably speak for some of my colleagues when I say, no, we would not salute them, we would salute the Queen's commission....

 

[Excolis]

just to let all of you know, the training for CIC officers is undergoing a major change.  they are implimenting a new standard where therewill be physical fitness, Appt test, and more training.  so it will not be 10 days to get your commission.    we will also be given a proper MOC.  so now the CIC trade will show up on trade lists.  they are trying there best to make the CIC more "army" and also by doing this they are giving us as CIC officers better training.

and on another note, if you just salute us because you have no respect for us and just the commision,  do you feel the same way about padres?

 

[Michael Dorosh]

and on another note, if you just salute us because you have no respect for us and just the commision,

Don't put words in anyone's mouth.  Remember what Winters said in Episode 8 of Band of Brothers...."Captain Sobel, we salute the rank, not the man...."

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

I don't recall seeing CIC officers deployed with us nor do I recall a CIC officer winning a Victoria Cross at Dieppe.... While I am not a religious person I respect the service they provide the CF.

 

[Infanteer]

I'm just curious of one thing, If any of you, who dispise the CIC, saw them in uniform while you were in uniform, would you salute them?

Just to let you know Mandel, I don't state anywhere in my posts that I despise CIC's.   Obviously, there are many CIC's who are very good at what they do and provide a valuable service to their communities; I am simply arguing for the need to commission them as I believe it is against the interests of the professional Officer Corps to be granting superfluous commissions.

As for saluting them, as a professional soldier of course I would.   When I walk by a CIC, I usually notice the Officer rank rather then trying to pick out if they have a CIC unit tag or a Cadet capbadge, so I salute them like I'd salute any other Officer I came upon while in uniform.

---

just to let all of you know, the training for CIC officers is undergoing a major change.  they are implimenting a new standard where therewill be physical fitness, Appt test, and more training.  so it will not be 10 days to get your commission.    we will also be given a proper MOC.  so now the CIC trade will show up on trade lists.  they are trying there best to make the CIC more "army" and also by doing this they are giving us as CIC officers better training.

Again, I already brought that up; if you ever want to "be airborne" you should start paying attention to details.  Look at my last post; is this really going to make a difference in a professional sense?

and on another note, if you just salute us because you have no respect for us and just the commision,  do you feel the same way about padres?

Although I would question the need to commission our Padres I respect their place within the profession of arms.  Since they hold a commission I, again as a professional soldier, would of course salute them.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

One might argure that chaplains "earned" their right to be commissioned - during WW II they were granted Honourary status only.  After Foote got the Victoria Cross - and he was by no means the only example of a physically brave chaplain - I suspect things were destined to change.

Of course, Infanteer, you could extend your logic to doctors, military lawyers, even CFRC personnel, couldn't you?

 

[Infanteer]

I believe commissioned Medical personnel command troops in the field in Field Ambs and Hospitals, so I would say they are rightfully commissioned and part of the profession of arms; I would consider dealing with battlefiled casualties to be a very specialized field of knowledge that supports winning the land battle.  Recruiting is a additional task of both officers and the ranks, just as training recruits is, so there is no such thing as a "CFRC personnel"; they are members of the profession performing an ancillary duty that is vital to the health of the military. 

However, command of troops is not the only qualifier of belonging to troops.  I think you could include Military Lawyers because they deal with Military Law, which would fit under Huntington's definition as they are dealing with a unique sub-set of skills that is pertinent to the culture of the military.  Perhaps I'll have to go back to Huntington and the others I've read to further define the nature of belonging to the profession.

I remember seeing on your German Army site that the Germans had some sort of distinctive commission for officers who performed vital support tasks but were not involved in the command of troops in battle.  Can you confirm this?