ncm to officer and commision on rank?

[airlady]

Just finished BMQ and going to AVS tech in the airforce. I am holding an engineering degree and planning to switch an officer one day. However I found out that it will take 4 years to become a Cpl plus another 2 years to become a Mcpl, while it only take an Ocdt 5 years to become a Capt. I found this is outrageous.

I heard somethings about commision on rank, for someone who is Mcpl and without taking IAP/BOTP to become 2lt.
Can someone tell me more about that?

thanks

 

[Michael OLeary]

I would suggest you start with some of the "Officer" threads in the Recruiting FAQ - http://army.ca/forums/threads/21101/post-103985.html#msg103985

 

[Shamrock]

Just finished BMQ and going to AVS tech in the airforce. I am holding an engineering degree and planning to switch an officer one day. However I found out that it will take 4 years to become a Cpl plus another 2 years to become a Mcpl, while it only take an Ocdt 5 years to become a Capt. I found this is outrageous.

I'm assuming you're talking about an individual entering as DEO v. ROTP. 

How does this timeline produce outrage?

 

[Lumber]

Correct me if I've put together what I've been told incorrectly,

But doesn't reaching Captain (or LT(N)) not simply equate to being fully trade qualified? Don't all officers make it to Captain, through the regular, systematic, and expected training schedule, unless they someone get the boot?

So, how is this outrageous? Ever seen a career LT?

 

[Roy Harding]

I had a fairly harsh reply all set to go - but I binned it.

The salient points, however, are these:

• You claim to be an engineer (what discipline, just out of idle curiousity)
• Engineers (that I know) have an unhealthy (in my opinion) propensity for ascertaining the facts (from accredited resources) BEFORE they commit to a course of action
• You don't seem to have done so
• Why is that a systemic problem?

 

[airlady]

first of all, i believe i was misled by the recruitors and they didn't tell me the truth. I never thought I have to redo IAP basic training all over to become an officer since I just completed the BMQ. Some Cpls told me they have to do IAP/BOTP to become 2lt, and some Mcpl and even a Sgt have to do BOTP to become 2lt. I've heard another version that from Mcpl and above do not require IAP/BOTP to beome 2lt. I don't know which one is the truth.
secondly, the salary is low being a private, and 4 years suffering from low pay, and the so call backpay is not always guaranteed, as some people told me they never get it.
by the way, I am an electrical engineer.

 

[airlady]

Correct me if I've put together what I've been told incorrectly,

But doesn't reaching Captain (or LT(N)) not simply equate to being fully trade qualified? Don't all officers make it to Captain, through the regular, systematic, and expected training schedule, unless they someone get the boot?

So, how is this outrageous? Ever seen a career LT?

unlike you, the gov't didn't pay my tuition and living when I was a student. The fact is a 2lt make more than a cpl and being an officer can advance faster than a ncm in his/her career,as the recuitor lied to me 2 years become a cpl another 1 to 2 years become a mcpl.

 

[Roy Harding]

first of all, i believe i was misled by the recruitors and they didn't tell me the truth. I never thought I have to redo IAP basic training all over to become an officer since I just completed the BMQ. Some Cpls told me they have to do IAP/BOTP to become 2lt, and some Mcpl and even a Sgt have to do BOTP to become 2lt. I've heard another version that from Mcpl and above do not require IAP/BOTP to beome 2lt. I don't know which one is the truth.
secondly, the salary is low being a private, and 4 years suffering from low pay, and the so call backpay is not always guaranteed, as some people told me they never get it.
by the way, I am an electrical engineer.

You're an Engineer all right - yuh kant rite.

However, from what I can ascertain in your post:

One cannot compare BMQ to IAP (I'll be honest - I may be misinterpreting the acronyms here - BMQ is for soldiers, IAP is for Officers - right?)  What is expected of a "basic" soldier, and what is expected of a "basic" Officer are two different things - for simplicity's sake (and it's an over simplistic view), one "does", the other "directs".  They don't equate.

CFRs (Commissioned From the Ranks) are considered on an individual basis.  I have seen MCpls CFRd to Lt, and I've seen Sgts CFRd to 2Lt - their personal qualifications and background were different vis a vis their chosen classifications.

The applicable pay rates were available to you BEFORE you chose to sign on - they are a matter of public record.  You knew what the financial recompense was BEFORE you committed - and yet you committed.  Sounds like you don't like the decision you made - if that's the case, "suck it up".

As I see it, you are now in a trade (AVS) from which you wish to CFR.  Fair enough - do well in your trade, show leadership potential, and apply to CFR when you're able.  Depending upon your performance and perceived leadership potential, your CO will either support or not support your application - and your application will be successful or not.

In the mean time - as I understand it, you've just finished BMQ (perhaps QL3? - it's not clear to me); stop whining about how the "recruitors" misled you, when all the information was available to you, and get on with it.  The faster you buckle down and get at it, the more likely you are to show the qualities required of an officer - and the more likely your eventual application to CFR will succeed.

I think you honestly feel you've been mislead, but I don't agree.  Good luck to you, no matter what you decide.

 

[Lumber]

unlike you, the gov't didn't pay my tuition and living when I was a student. The fact is a 2lt make more than a cpl and being an officer can advance faster than a ncm in his/her career,as the recuitor lied to me 2 years become a cpl another 1 to 2 years become a mcpl.

1. I pay for my rations and quarters every month. $500 and $160 respectively.

2. Although I understand the benifit of, and am glad I am obtaining, a University diploma, if becoming an officer meant NO university diploma, I would have no problem with this. That being said, the truth is that my university degree, and thus my 4 years here at RMC, are part of my training to become an officer. Therefore, the government isn't paying for my "tuition", they are paying for my officer training, just like they payed for my IAP and BOTP, and just like they payed for your BMQ and whatever other training they will pay for so that you can become an AVS.

<Warning: ranting incoming>
You complain that privates make so little that as a private, you would spend 4 years "suffering". Trying being an OCdt, we make peanutes compared to a private. I'm not quoting the exact pay scales right now, but an OCdt from 1 to 4 years in makes only around 16k a year, while a brand new private makes 35k a year. Whos suffering? Oh, and FROM that meager 16k a year, I have to pay the afformentioned rations and quarters.

And Roy Harding couldn't have said it better: u nead 2 lurned 2 spill n right b4 u becum an occifer!!

TDV

 

[Roy Harding]

...
And Roy Harding couldn't have said it better: u nead 2 lurned 2 spill n right b4 u becum an occifer!!

TDV

NCdt Lumber:  It's not often that a Jr Offr finds that I'm in agreement with him on a non-policy issue - in this case, however, you're correct.

airlady:  You seem to be confusing the granting of a university degree with the conference of a Commission.  They are not interchangeable items.  I have a Bachelor's degree - earned while serving, and I retired a Warrant Officer.  I served under some wonderful officers who did not have a degree - was this wrong?  I didn't think so at the time, nor do I think so in retrospect.

You were offered and accepted employment as an OR (NCM) - if you felt you should have been enrolled on an Offr enrollment plan, why did you sign the contract?  Your story fails to gain my sympathy or empathy.  You enrolled as a Pte soldier - you've been trained as a Pte soldier, you will (according to your posts) continue to be trained as a Pte soldier, and once that training is complete you will have all the opportunities available to you as are available to any other Pte soldier.

What's your beef?

 

[Sub_Guy]

Just finished BMQ and going to AVS tech in the airforce. I am holding an engineering degree and planning to switch an officer one day. However I found out that it will take 4 years to become a Cpl plus another 2 years to become a Mcpl, while it only take an Ocdt 5 years to become a Capt. I found this is outrageous.

4 years to become a Cpl, plus another 2 years to becomes a Mcpl.  Yeah if all goes according to plan, I would not count on your Mcpls 2 years after your Cpl.  Mcpl's aren't just given out because of time in.  I know of quite a few LS in the navy who have close to 17-18 years in, and its not because they are hammers, sometimes its just the nature of the beast. 

 

[George Wallace]

The knowledge and skills you are going to learn as a NCM in your Trade far out weigh those that you would learn as an officer in the same Trade.  Get that knowledge and those skills first, and if it takes six to ten years or even twenty years; so what?  You will make a better officer for it in the future, if you so choose.


On a completely different tangent:

It is simply amazing what our Education System passes these days.

 

[armyvern]

first of all, i believe i was misled by the recruitors and they didn't tell me the truth. I never thought I have to redo IAP basic training all over to become an officer since I just completed the BMQ. Some Cpls told me they have to do IAP/BOTP to become 2lt, and some Mcpl and even a Sgt have to do BOTP to become 2lt. I've heard another version that from Mcpl and above do not require IAP/BOTP to beome 2lt. I don't know which one is the truth.
secondly, the salary is low being a private, and 4 years suffering from low pay, and the so call backpay is not always guaranteed, as some people told me they never get it.
by the way, I am an electrical engineer.

Holy fuck over. I say again -- Holy fuck over. Are you actually writing this bullshit?

The recruiters lied to you?

You are going to profess to sit here and tell us that they did NOT encourage you to take your commission and become an Engineering Officer upon your immediate enrollment? I guarantee you that they did NOT recommend that you enlist as a NCM and take your Commissioning later.

Do you understand the differences between Officers and NCMs? I'd profess not, as your whiney diatribe pertaining to IAP/BOTP is absolutely right the fuck out of 'er.

BTW, one can become a Cpl in 3 years (if they so deserve and earn), and a MCpl 2 years later (if they so deserve and earn), but following that schedule is highly unlikely as it is applicable only to the cream of the crop. I'd also suggest to you that your attitude displayed in the posts so far --- is also most likely obvious to your supervisors already as well, greatly reducing your chances even further. So, if your outrage is caused by NCMs being 6 years to obtain the "appointment" of MCpl (as noted it can be done in 5) -- it's also misplaced.

If you wanted to be an Officer ... why the hell didn't you join as one, which I guarantee that CFRC tried to encourage you to do?

You didn't. It's someone else's fault. Typical.

Give your head a shake. Wear tinfoil -- apply electrodes if necessary -- your degree may be of assistance in accomplishing this task. Sort yourself out.

You can't figure out if you wanted to be an NCM or an Officer, but you expected the Recruiting Centre to do this for you. Quaint. NOT.

An Engineering Degree -- No excuses then. Use caps for the word "I", use spell-check, and proper grammar and punctuation. It's in the site rules. Surely you can read.


Honest to gawd ... you slay me.  :

 

[George Wallace]

Another case that we are all too familiar with:  "My Mistake - Your Fault."

 

[PO2FinClk]

The CFAO's provide good clarity on rank granted and gained based on qualifications and rank when commissioning from NCM. However it does provide great detail on which courses will be required upon doing. Either way, I was informed recently by pers within CFRG HQ that the required courses standards upon commissioning will change in the new year and would thus advise to hold until they are released.

As far as time to get to the "working" rank, you are equating MCpl to Capt while this is in error. Yes Capt is considered to be the "working" rank, and as someone else has stated "trade qualified". This in turn equates to the rank of Cpl and not MCpl - proper research would of prevented this confusion. As far as the time requisites via comparison - well that is just baseless as you cannot simply equate one to the other as each have their own unique requirements.

As you can see you have attracted much negative attention, and the only cause being that you posted an uninformed rant without proper research or educated argument. All that to say, you post is without merit which should serve you to properly inform yourself prior to bringing forward an argument.

PS: Got a problem with the Recruiting Centre, take it up with them as complaining about it here or anywhere else would accomplish anything.

 

[armyvern]

Research also would have made her aware that when CFRing, it is not necessarily the rank that is important, but rather it's the experience and leadership courses which have been successfully completed that determine the outcome of the CFR process.

And, she'd also understand that

secondly, the salary is low being a private, and 4 years suffering from low pay, and the so call backpay is not always guaranteed, as some people told me they never get it.

her peers feeding her info are full of shit. If there's backpay -- we all get it. It's not a case of some do & some don't.

Something tells me the porch lights are flickering and are about to burn out.

What's that saying "the electrician can never look after their own house because they're too busy fixing someone else's"?

 

[Michael OLeary]

You are going to profess to sit here and tell us that they did NOT encourage you to take your commission and become an Engineering Officer upon your immediate enrollment? I guarantee you that they did NOT recommend that you enlist as a NCM and take your Commissioning later.

airlady, I gave you a response early this morning to go off and do some more reading to establish where you stood in relation to various commissioning programs.  Apparently that wasn't sufficient guidance, and I accept responsibility for not locking this thread at that time.  Something tells me that even if I did you would have started a new one and I'd have returned to some version of this mess anyway.

I quoted the above passage because I want to highlight two pieces of information which we have not been provided:

a. you have not told us exactly what degree, diploma or accreditation you have to declare yourself “an electrical engineer”, and

b. you have not told us what the results of your CFAT were – Were you even eligible for officer programs at the time you were in the recruiting process?

I am going to let you mull over those two omissions.  And I am locking this thread now because it helps none of us to continue in this tone and direction.

Please, do some reading and reflection regarding your options and come back when you are ready to discuss things openly and with respect for the CF, it’s personnel, and the personnel management and training processes.


Milnet.ca Staff