Navy to consider gender-neutral ranks

[Kat Stevens]

I guess it’s just me, being a product of a less enlightened age of military life, but when I saw “may contact me directly”, I automatically added “go on, I double dog dare ya” at the end. Glad to hear that’s not the case.

 

[Lumber]

Let's talk about career managers that don't seem to manage careers anymore and only care about filling holes not developing future leaders or experts.

Maybe not in the army or air force (definitely not the air force), but they do in the navy. Let me explain:

Once you get promoted to Lt(N), you train into one of 6 specializations (ok 8 technically but lets ignore clearance diver and subs for a moment). We call these specializations our director level qualification, or "D-levels". Two of these are warfare related (AWWO, UWWO), 1 is sort of but not really warfare related (IWO), and 3 are not warfare related at all (NavO, DeckO, CISO). So, by the end of our "d-level tour", some of us have warfare experience and time working in an operations room, while others have very little, or none.

Fast forward to our next qualification, where regardless of what D-level we did, we all train to become "Operations Room Officer". It trains us to lead the operations room in defending the ship against all areas of warfare. It's kind of like our version of AOC. However, while all NWOs will do this course, not all NWOs who finish this course will actually work as an "ORO" in an actual ops room. You could get posted to a Kingston-class as an XO, or to one the new AOPS which have no real fighting capability at all.

So, how do they decide who get's which posting? This is wear navy career management gets a win. They know that by the time we get to be XOs (LCdr) and COs (Cdrs), we need a wide breadth of experience. So, those of us who already have warfare and ops room exepreience (AWWOs, UWWOs and IWOs) are more likely to get posted to a Kingston or AOPV, while those who have not yet had a chance to actually work in an ops room are more likely to get posted to the frigates.

That's not how it works 100% of the time. I mean, I wouldn't want to be sailing on a ship with 3 OROs who were all former DeckOs! (sorry, not sorry) But at least the navy is trying to manage our experience make sure it's future leaders get a breadth of experience.

 

[BeyondTheNow]

Maybe not in the army or air force (definitely not the air force), but they do in the navy. Let me explain:

Once you get promoted to Lt(N), you train into one of 6 specializations (ok 8 technically but lets ignore clearance diver and subs for a moment). We call these specializations our director level qualification, or "D-levels". Two of these are warfare related (AWWO, UWWO), 1 is sort of but not really warfare related (IWO), and 3 are not warfare related at all (NavO, DeckO, CISO). So, by the end of our "d-level tour", some of us have warfare experience and time working in an operations room, while others have very little, or none.

Fast forward to our next qualification, where regardless of what D-level we did, we all train to become "Operations Room Officer". It trains us to lead the operations room in defending the ship against all areas of warfare. It's kind of like our version of AOC. However, while all NWOs will do this course, not all NWOs who finish this course will actually work as an "ORO" in an actual ops room. You could get posted to a Kingston-class as an XO, or to one the new AOPS which have no real fighting capability at all.

So, how do they decide who get's which posting? This is wear navy career management gets a win. They know that by the time we get to be XOs (LCdr) and COs (Cdrs), we need a wide breadth of experience. So, those of us who already have warfare and ops room exepreience (AWWOs, UWWOs and IWOs) are more likely to get posted to a Kingston or AOPV, while those who have not yet had a chance to actually work in an ops room are more likely to get posted to the frigates.

That's not how it works 100% of the time. I mean, I wouldn't want to be sailing on a ship with 3 OROs who were all former DeckOs! (sorry, not sorry) But at least the navy is trying to manage our experience make sure it's future leaders get a breadth of experience.

Would you say they’re as highly regarded where NCM’s careers & the Navy are concerned? (I have no clue, so am curious about the other end of things...apart from Officers. Leadership is important there also...)

 

[Lumber]

Would you say they’re as highly regarded where NCM’s careers & the Navy are concerned? (I have no clue, so am curious about the other end of things...apart from Officers. Leadership is important there also...)

Would you say they’re as highly regarded where NCM’s careers & the Navy are concerned? (I have no clue, so am curious about the other end of things...apart from Officers. Leadership is important there also...)

Alas, I don't think so, but NCM career management and officer career management are two completely different beasts.

With NWOs, the CM really is at arms length and looks at the big picture and posts people based on ship and navy needs and individual aptitudes, (and wants if possible). Only deploying COs seem to have any actual ability to influence who they get.

With NCMs on the other hand, it seems like the CM just rubber stamps the decisions of the coastal MOC advisers. I could be wrong, but I get the sense that the best NCMs continue to get all the best postings instead of spreading it around. That's just the impression I've gotten fromt he NCM trades I've been closest to, so it might not be true across the board, or it might not be true at all <coughpepperoniclubcough>...

Then again, we drive our best NCMs into the ground and they release, so theres not that many of them to go around. Officers essentially do 2 years at sea followed by 2-5 years ashore, and NWOs do a MAX of 5 tours on sea going units, and that only if you make it to CO of a ship. NCMs can spend a decade on ship before their first short posting (not counting career courses as "shore postings").

I just the other day met up with a PO2 who worked for me when he was a MS. We both have roughly 13-14 years in the navy. He's had 7 deployments and 1300 days at sea, while I have.... vastly less than that.

 

[Furniture]

Alas, I don't think so, but NCM career management and officer career management are two completely different beasts.

With NWOs, the CM really is at arms length and looks at the big picture and posts people based on ship and navy needs and individual aptitudes, (and wants if possible). Only deploying COs seem to have any actual ability to influence who they get.

With NCMs on the other hand, it seems like the CM just rubber stamps the decisions of the coastal MOC advisers. I could be wrong, but I get the sense that the best NCMs continue to get all the best postings instead of spreading it around. That's just the impression I've gotten fromt he NCM trades I've been closest to, so it might not be true across the board, or it might not be true at all <coughpepperoniclubcough>...

Then again, we drive our best NCMs into the ground and they release, so theres not that many of them to go around. Officers essentially do 2 years at sea followed by 2-5 years ashore, and NWOs do a MAX of 5 tours on sea going units, and that only if you make it to CO of a ship. NCMs can spend a decade on ship before their first short posting (not counting career courses as "shore postings").

I just the other day met up with a PO2 who worked for me when he was a MS. We both have roughly 13-14 years in the navy. He's had 7 deployments and 1300 days at sea, while I have.... vastly less than that.

I can assure you that you are 100% wrong in your assumption about NCM career management in the RCN.

The RCN requires ~200  NCM sailors for each ship at sea, compared to ~40-50 officers(at most). So for NCMs to have the same sea to shore ratio officers enjoy you would require thousands more sailors posted to shore billets. It is not possible in the current state of the CAF given the limitations on pers numbers, recruiting, and of course retention. 

CMs need to balance the needs of the CAF against the needs of the member, which depending on trade can often mean that the needs of the member take a back seat most of the time. We have a very large number of people who game the system to avoid doing taskings they don't want, while complaining about not getting opportunities. If you can't sail for WUPS, why should you get the deployment?

I'd suggest you speak with a few RCN NCM occupation CMs before broadcasting a judgement. It might be a bit enlightening...

 

[Lumber]

I can assure you that you are 100% wrong in your assumption about NCM career management in the RCN.

The RCN requires ~200  NCM sailors for each ship at sea, compared to ~40-50 officers(at most). So for NCMs to have the same sea to shore ratio officers enjoy you would require thousands more sailors posted to shore billets. It is not possible in the current state of the CAF given the limitations on pers numbers, recruiting, and of course retention. 

CMs need to balance the needs of the CAF against the needs of the member, which depending on trade can often mean that the needs of the member take a back seat most of the time. We have a very large number of people who game the system to avoid doing tasking they don't want, while complaining about not getting opportunities. If you can't sail for WUPS, why should you get the deployment?

I'd suggest you speak with a few RCN NCM occupation CMs before making judgement. They are from my experience all hard working people doing the best they can to manage both the CAF's and the individual members needs.

Everything you just said I agree with, so I'm genuinely asking which part of my statement you disagree with?

That CMs just rubber stamp MOC advisor posting plots?
That we drive our NCMs into the ground?
Or my mild allusion that if you piss-off or are otherwise are not liked by the MOC advisors and their friends your career will be... difficult. (I am going to say right now that I have no idea if this is actually true but I have had several senior NCMs profess that the pepperoni club is 100% a true, although getting better)

 

[OldSolduer]

 

CMs need to balance the needs of the CAF against the needs of the member, which depending on trade can often mean that the needs of the member take a back seat most of the time. We have a very large number of people who game the system to avoid doing taskings they don't want, while complaining about not getting opportunities. If you can't sail for WUPS, why should you get the deployment?

And too many seem to think that its the other way round - the CAF takes the back seat. Not so in most cases.

 

[stellarpanther]

I'd suggest you speak with a few RCN NCM occupation CMs before broadcasting a judgement. It might be a bit enlightening...

The CM's do have a lot on their plate, there is no denying that but I really think they could do a lot more to balance the needs of the CAF and the needs of the mbr.  Some CM's do that but a lot don't.  I'm convinced that the last 2 CM's at the HRA MCpl level including the current one are only looking at their plot and could careless how it will effect the mbr or their families.  People have and will continue to release and the CM's and Sr. leadership will continue to wonder why.  They are good at slogans like family first etc but when a mbr wants to put their family first they forget they said it.  As far as I'm concerned, if they aren't serious about it, don't say it because it only frustrates people.

 

[stellarpanther]

And too many seem to think that its the other way round - the CAF takes the back seat. Not so in most cases.

The CAF shouldn't take the back seat but they could spend a little extra time trying to find something that works for both the mbr and CAF's needs.  If both sides can be happy should that be the goal?

 

[Furniture]

Everything you just said I agree with, so I'm genuinely asking which part of my statement you disagree with?

That CMs just rubber stamp MOC advisor posting plots?
That we drive our NCMs into the ground?
Or my mild allusion that if you piss-off or are otherwise are not liked by the MOC advisors and their friends your career will be... difficult. (I am going to say right now that I have no idea if this is actually true but I have had several senior NCMs profess that the pepperoni club is 100% a true, although getting better)

1) Your post alleges that CMs aren't doing their jobs, and letting others do the job of CM. Based on my conversations with CMs, this is false. MOC advisors and the CM may come to the same conclusion, that does not mean the CM is just "rubber stamping" the MOC advisor plot. 
2) The CAF as a general rule drives the fit, motivated, and competent into the ground. I don't disagree, and even offered a suggestion as to why it happens.
3) It might be that pissing off the senior members of your trade is a bad idea, though that extends well beyond the NCM world since it's a part of human nature. Perhaps the senior NCMs you're speaking with are just disgruntled, maybe they took the posting the CAF needed them to rather than the one they wanted? It's easier to blame the "system" when you fail to move at your expected rate of advancement than it is to be introspective, and see if maybe your attitude is hurting your advancement.

I'm not saying there is no potential that some CMs are not 100% fair for 100% of the troops, but your first post implied that the RCN NCM CMs were somehow lesser than their officer counterparts. 

 

[Furniture]

The CM's do have a lot on their plate, there is no denying that but I really think they could do a lot more to balance the needs of the CAF and the needs of the mbr.  Some CM's do that but a lot don't.  I'm convinced that the last 2 CM's at the HRA MCpl level including the current one are only looking at their plot and could careless how it will effect the mbr or their families.  People have and will continue to release and the CM's and Sr. leadership will continue to wonder why.  They are good at slogans like family first etc but when a mbr wants to put their family first they forget they said it.  As far as I'm concerned, if they aren't serious about it, don't say it because it only frustrates people.

What happens when nobody wants the "bad" posting? Does a unit go without a HRA or FSA? How does that impact the troops at the unit that none of the clerks want to go to? As every CM briefing for at least the last 19 years has said, the needs of the CAF come first, members needs come second.

At the end of the day the CAF needs certain people in certain places just to make things work. If nobody volunteers to go, the CM is left to sort through the available people and make a choice. Should only single people get posted where they don't want to go? They don't have families so the CM should ignore the members needs if someone with a spouse and kids doesn't want to move?

It's easy to get caught up in the "why me?", but have you considered other members, and their concerns?

 

[stellarpanther]

What happens when nobody wants the "bad" posting? Does a unit go without a HRA or FSA? How does that impact the troops at the unit that none of the clerks want to go to? As every CM briefing for at least the last 19 years has said, the needs of the CAF come first, members needs come second.

At the end of the day the CAF needs certain people in certain places just to make things work. If nobody volunteers to go, the CM is left to sort through the available people and make a choice. Should only single people get posted where they don't want to go? They don't have families so the CM should ignore the members needs if someone with a spouse and kids doesn't want to move?

It's easy to get caught up in the "why me?", but have you considered other members, and their concerns?

The CM's might say CAF first but Sr. leadership is constantly saying "family first"  everyone has heard it.  Here's an example of where the CM might be able to look out for the mbr and the CAF.  I had one of the Cpl's in my unit a few weeks ago ask me if I still had any contacts in the CM shop which unfortunately I don't anymore.  She has a friend currently in the Transition Centre for a mental health issue but will be going back to trade soon after making a successful recovery.  The CM wants to send this person to Petawawa.  The mbr is convinced it will destroy his family because of family needs.  So this guy busts his ass getting himself better when others would probably get the easy medical release and for everything he's gone through they want to send him to Petawawa, a place that might just cause him to relapse.  It's like a runner with a broken leg having his coach say as soon as you get that cast off, you have a marathon to run.  It isn't right but that's just my opinion. In my mind, people like that who fight an illness and want to save their career should get their choice of available postings.  That's what I mean when I say they could do more.  There are a lot of shortages in Pet, but there are shortages all across the country.

 

[Furniture]

The CM's might say CAF first but Sr. leadership is constantly saying "family first"  everyone has heard it.  Here's an example of where the CM might be able to look out for the mbr and the CAF.  I had one of the Cpl's in my unit a few weeks ago ask me if I still had any contacts in the CM shop which unfortunately I don't anymore.  She has a friend currently in the Transition Centre for a mental health issue but will be going back to trade soon after making a successful recovery.  The CM wants to send this person to Petawawa.  The mbr is convinced it will destroy his family because of family needs.  So this guy busts his *** getting himself better when others would probably get the easy medical release and for everything he's gone through they want to send him to Petawawa, a place that might just cause him to relapse.  It's like a runner with a broken leg having his coach say as soon as you get that cast off, you have a marathon to run.  It isn't right but that's just my opinion. In my mind, people like that who fight an illness and want to save their career should get their choice of available postings.  That's what I mean when I say they could do more.  There are a lot of shortages in Pet, but there are shortages all across the country.

Nobody but the member, the medical staff, and the CM know the facts of the situation. Maybe your Cpl's friend isn't telling the whole truth, maybe the units in Pet need clerks more than the units where the member is posted.

Who would you send to take the job in Pet? Would you "punish" someone with a more stable family situation? What if the "stable" family now develops issues due the unexpected posting? What about a single member? Who is the priority, and why?

In the end the CAF's needs come first, anyone telling you something else is not being completely honest. If members always came first we wouldn't release people for medical, conduct, or administrative reasons.

 

[Kat Stevens]

The CM's might say CAF first but Sr. leadership is constantly saying "family first"  everyone has heard it.  Here's an example of where the CM might be able to look out for the mbr and the CAF.  I had one of the Cpl's in my unit a few weeks ago ask me if I still had any contacts in the CM shop which unfortunately I don't anymore.  She has a friend currently in the Transition Centre for a mental health issue but will be going back to trade soon after making a successful recovery.  The CM wants to send this person to Petawawa.  The mbr is convinced it will destroy his family because of family needs.  So this guy busts his ass getting himself better when others would probably get the easy medical release and for everything he's gone through they want to send him to Petawawa, a place that might just cause him to relapse.  It's like a runner with a broken leg having his coach say as soon as you get that cast off, you have a marathon to run.  It isn't right but that's just my opinion. In my mind, people like that who fight an illness and want to save their career should get their choice of available postings.  That's what I mean when I say they could do more.  There are a lot of shortages in Pet, but there are shortages all across the country.

DIVERGENCE ALERT!
What is it that you actually think Petawawa is, some kind of vortex that sucks out the soul and will to live? You seem to have a particular lip on for that place. It's not my cup of decaf half fat triple stevia chai latte either, but I have lots of friends (real ones) who love it there.
DIVERGENCE ALERT ENDS

 

[Haggis]

DIVERGENCE ALERT!
What is it that you actually think Petawawa is, some kind of vortex that sucks out the soul and will to live?

Nah.... that's Meaford.  I loved my time in Petawawa.

DIVERGENCE ALERT ENDS

 

[stellarpanther]

I only go by what I hear, but a lot of people have a certain impression of Petawawa whether it's right or wrong.

 

[BeyondTheNow]

Back on topic folks.

Milnet.ca Staff

 

[jaysfan17]

I've had a quick read through the postings in this thread and there's been some interesting points that I've observed from both sides of the fence here. I'm more inclined to side with the non-name changing camp. However, after doing some self reflection of my own I understand why there is a need for a rank change, whether I agree or not is irrelevant, imo. From what I've observed in the military is that rank/position (RSM, Coxswain, etc) means everything. When I was taking part in my pre deployment training (and during deployment), I was one of four OS's in a group of maybe 50. At times there were moments where I wasn't treated with respect when I did have more experience than some of the AB's and a few of the LS's and I was brushed off as just "ordinary". So I do understand the reasoning behind wanting to change the rank names from that perspective.

The whole "seaman" double entendre argument kind of bothers me. I think we as a society put too much power in words and have become so offended by the most juvenile quips which makes me wonder what are we even doing. Give or take 100 years ago young men and women were being born into a generation that would take part in the most destructive war to ever occur and we sit here and argue about offensive language. C'mon.

WRT the RAdm comments about "To those of you who have made hateful, misogynistic and racist comments", I don't really know what to say here. I've only seen the announcements being made on Facebook and I have not seen any of these types comments. I've seen both sides share respectful opinions on the matter. I think it's wrong for the RAdm to group all of the opposing view as being hateful (at least that's how I'm perceiving it). I agree with what  ModlrMike said "One can offer criticism that is not racist, hateful, or misogynistic." I understand FB is not the only social media platform, Reddit being the other (if there's any others please let me know). However, if I understand Reddit correctly, your real name and bio is not shown on what you post, therefore, in my eyes, the higher ups shouldn't be taking those comments seriously. Could just be trolls.

At the end of the day my opinion of this rank change is conflicting. I understand the 'why', but it just doesn't seem necessary considering the other pressing needs of the RCN.

 

[Donald H]

Ordinary seaman or seawoman, Able seaman or seawoman, Leading seaman or seawoman, and petty is o.k. so far.

If they really must?

 

[FSTO]

Maybe not in the army or air force (definitely not the air force), but they do in the navy. Let me explain:

Once you get promoted to Lt(N), you train into one of 6 specializations (ok 8 technically but lets ignore clearance diver and subs for a moment). We call these specializations our director level qualification, or "D-levels". Two of these are warfare related (AWWO, UWWO), 1 is sort of but not really warfare related (IWO), and 3 are not warfare related at all (NavO, DeckO, CISO). So, by the end of our "d-level tour", some of us have warfare experience and time working in an operations room, while others have very little, or none.

Fast forward to our next qualification, where regardless of what D-level we did, we all train to become "Operations Room Officer". It trains us to lead the operations room in defending the ship against all areas of warfare. It's kind of like our version of AOC. However, while all NWOs will do this course, not all NWOs who finish this course will actually work as an "ORO" in an actual ops room. You could get posted to a Kingston-class as an XO, or to one the new AOPS which have no real fighting capability at all.

So, how do they decide who get's which posting? This is wear navy career management gets a win. They know that by the time we get to be XOs (LCdr) and COs (Cdrs), we need a wide breadth of experience. So, those of us who already have warfare and ops room exepreience (AWWOs, UWWOs and IWOs) are more likely to get posted to a Kingston or AOPV, while those who have not yet had a chance to actually work in an ops room are more likely to get posted to the frigates.

That's not how it works 100% of the time. I mean, I wouldn't want to be sailing on a ship with 3 OROs who were all former DeckOs! (sorry, not sorry) But at least the navy is trying to manage our experience make sure it's future leaders get a breadth of experience.

What was the reason for making Deck and Comms Director level? A misguided need to get more and more officers through the ORO sausage maker?

When those two positions were 2nd Sea Tour Lt(N)s the Wardroom had 2 more experienced officers to assist the NAVO in BWK assessment and development, the XO in overall officer development, and the Deck Dept had an officer with actual experience as their Dept Head.
Another plus is that these officers gained valuable experience in all aspects of ship handling, ships routine and Dept head duties and responsibilities.