Proper protocol for Officer Cadets

[Bruce Monkhouse]

That didn't answer the compliment question though, since neither is commissioned, yet Mr O'Leary has stated unless the CO orders it thus.

 

[IPC10]

This might be a bit of a moot point, as my understanding is that the new system once the candidate arrives in Gagetown he/she/it takes CAP (Common Army Phase) followed by DP 1.1 then DP 1.2.  While they seem similar as DP 1.1 focuses on dismounted TTPs and DP 1.2 focuses on mechanized TTP there are several POs (patrolling for example) that are not completed until the end of DP 1.2. 

So unlike the old Phase III, upon completion of DP 1.1 the candidate's MOC is still 23U (as in untrained). 

(NOTE:  this is my understanding at this point in time.  We also pronounce the courses as DP one point one and DP one point two - so you can say it out loud in the heads at night ala Full Metal Jacket)

 

[SeanNewman]

The new all-inclusive Ph3 and Ph4 system is as of 2005.  2004 was that last year where the course files were kept separate, that is to say, even if you were at PRB-level on Ph3, if you pulled out a pass, you start with a fresh file for Ph4.

Even before that though, they dropped the full-qualification for Ph3 around 2001.  Before that, once you passed Ph3, you actually got badged.

So,
XXXX-2001:  Pass Ph3 = qualified light pl comd.  Pass Ph4 = fully qualified.
2001-2004:  Pass Ph3 = qualified but not badged.  Pass Ph4 = fully qualified.
2005-XXXX:  Pass Ph3(DP1) = 1/2 done the overall course, and not qualified until end LAV trg.

 

[elscotto937]

I don't remember the phase 3 Inf Regular guys getting badged until after phase 4, prior to 2001. They may have known where they were going, but then again I can't speak on anything prior to 1993 or after 2000.

 

[GO!!!]

Wrong.

In the same instance, a Sgt may fill the spot of pl comd if he has completed his Infantry 6Bs, where he is tested and qualified as an able pl comd.

Not to play devils advocate too much - but if any good Sgt can do an officers job - why do we need officers at all?

 

[Infanteer]

Not to play devils advocate too much - but if any good Sgt can do an officers job - why do we need officers at all?

Well, that's a pretty weak devil's advocation that makes alot of assumptions about what Officers do and if most Sergeants are qualified to take on a majority of these tasks.  One could just as easily flip the argument around and say that it is easier to develop an Officer to command a platoon in 2 years then it is a Warrant in 10-15.

Both the NCO and the Officer Corps have important parts to play in a professional military force.

 

[pbi]

I don't remember the phase 3 Inf Regular guys getting badged until after phase 4, prior to 2001. They may have known where they were going, but then again I can't speak on anything prior to 1993 or after 2000.

I did all four phases (incl BOTC Chilliwack) between Sep 1982 and Aug 1983. At the end of Phase IV we OCTP, OCTP(M) , DEO and CFR guys were assigned and badged: the RMC guys already had their badges and affiliations by the end of Phase III.

Cheers

 

[Edward Campbell]

Forty plus years ago we, serving soldiers, kept our cap badges/affiliations IF:

"¢ We had applied to stay in our previous regiment/corps; and

"¢ Our regiment/corps accepted us - not a sure thing.  Some corps - like Enginees, if I recall, were not even open to non-degree officers.

My recollection - and I may be wrong - was that we were commissioned after Phase III and before the (common to all corps) Young Officers' Tactics Course and Phase IV.

My recollection - equally potentially faulty - is that ROTP did a 'tour' prior to 1st year RMC/university then 1st, 2nd and 3rd phases at the ends of 1st, 2nd and 3rd years and they, too, were commissioned - on graduation - just prior to YOTC.

Of course the earth was still cooling when all that happened; and we wore fuzzy woolen battle dress, ankle boots and putties, too.

 

[Bartok5]

I did all four phases (incl BOTC Chilliwack) between Sep 1982 and Aug 1983. At the end of Phase IV we OCTP, OCTP(M) , DEO and CFR guys were assigned and badged

The same process applied to officer trainees during my time within the system from 1986-88.  The DEO guys were commissioned as 2Lts following BOTC, however they were not badged until completion of Phase 4 Infantry.  The RMC types joined us for Phase 4 during the summer months and IIRC were not yet regimentally badged.  There was no such thing as "contact training". 

Unless I am mistaken, the notion of sending Ph 3 qualified OCdts for "contact training" with operational units was purely a function of the reduced officer enrolment and training throughput during the early to late 1990s.  The lack of a sufficient quantity of officer candidates to conduct back-to-back phase training during the non-summer months left the reduced number of non-RMC officer candidates in "training limbo" for up to 6 months  while awaiting the next scheduled Phase 4 course.  To my understanding, this was the sole impetus for implementing "contact training".  The notion being that it was better for the Phase 3 qualified infantry OCdt to "mark time" within a line battalion rather than in the training system, in the expectation that such exposure would be of developmental benefit. 

I have already posted my views regarding the largely negative results of contact training when you take the wider view of comparing the dubious "benefits" accrued by a partially-trained infantry officer aspirant against the deleterious impact that such an arrangement typically has upon the soldiers whom he/she is inflicted upon.  I won't belabour the point again other than to state that those who suggest infantry OCdts with Phase 3 are "qualified" to lead genuine soldiers are wrong.  This was the case even before the latest version of infantry officer training rendered arguments in favour of post-Phase 3 contact training moot.  Phase 4 has always been considered an integral and essential component of the infantry officer basic qualification.  It is/was not, nor has it ever been considered a "nice to have" nor a "finishing" course for Regular Force infantry officers.  Were that the case, it would not have been mandatory qualification training which inevitably resulted in the further elimination of unsuitable infantry officer candidates.  Phase 4 has always been about much more than "mech" training.  As was the case in the past, those additional 10 weeks of training impart a great deal of the fundamental knowledge and skills required by infantry officers prior to commencing regimental duty.  Equally important is the fact that Phase 4 provides critical experience-based reinforcement of the elementary knowledge/skills which were introduced (but not refined) during Phases 2 and 3.  The ability to effectively and efficiently apply the combat estimate process in developing viable solutions to tactical problems (eg. military decision-making skills) is merely one critical skill enhanced during Phase 4.  The fact that Phase 4 candidates are instructed, mentored and assessed by officers rather than NCOs (who have fulfilled the "hands-on" developmental role up to that point), is also key.  This increasingly intimate exposure to the officer instructors provides the Phase 4 candidates with insight into their forthcoming duties which has been lacking to that point.  I could provide numerous other reasons why the Phase 4 qualification is essential (not merely desirable) for infantry officer candidates prior to joining Reg F units and leading actual soldiers, but I will leave it at that.  "MG34's" previous comments regarding the inadvisability of "contact training" for officer candidates are typical of the feedback that I have received over the years from other highly capable and respected NCOs.  That alone should be enough to convince those currently in favour of this "stop-gap" practice that it is ill-advised for a host of reasons.

I won't speak to the Res F officer development system, as I am no longer familiar with their specific qualification requirements.  I will simply note that the past practice of commissioning Phase 3 Infantry graduates and deeming them "qualified" to lead Res F dismounted platoons was based on a variety of factors;  most of which had nothing whatsoever to do with the issue of whether or not those officers were adequately trained/prepared to assume their duties.  IMHO, issues such as "Train to Need", training costs, the time/commitment required for candidates to obtain a basic qualification, the perception that lesser training standards would suffice for the Res F, etc, were the overriding considerations.  Whether these issues continue to drive the Res F infantry officer qualification and promotion system is not clear to me. 

What I can tell you is that the Phase 3 Infantry qualification simply does NOT suffice for the command of Reg F soldiers.  Particularly not in light of the increasingly complex operations we are collectively required to undertake.  Partially-formed officer aspirants are a weak link and we simply cannot afford to accommodate them during unit training events or on operations.  At the end of the day, the average Phase 3 qualified infantry officer candidate simply does not possess the baseline level of training necessary to satisfactorily command Reg F soldiers within a battalion.  The suggestion that these "personnel awaiting training" are "qualified" as dismounted platoon commanders is utterly fallacious.  Their basic classification training is incomplete and the training system has not yet determined whether they have the full range of knowledge, skills and personal attributes required to command Reg F infantry in any type of operation - be it mechanized or light. 

I would humbly suggest that the ultimate consideration here is the welfare of our soldiers.  They deserve the best possible leadership that the commissioned ranks can provided.  As a MINIMUM that automatically entails (in my admittedly simple mind) fully-QUALIFIED leadership.  As "MG34" so succinctly stated, our line units and the soldiers serving within them are not "petri dishes" for the informal development of partially-trained officer aspirants.  The "developmental contract" between our non-commissioned and commissioned members begins when the infantry officer arrives at the unit fully qualified by the training and selection system. 

I can't speak to other officer classifications and what they should or should not do in terms of informal officer candidate training/exposure.  I know for a fact that the Int Branch seems to have no problem placing an OCdt under the direct tutelage of a senior Int WO while the former is awaiting basic classification training.  Indeed, such "temp placements" routinely occur at the Tac Sch and we are happy to accommodate.  The key distinction is that this arrangement results in a direct "one on one" mentoring relationship wherein the OCdt has no subordinates.  I can see the potential benefits of such an arrangement, and this sort of "technical" contact training within a static unit makes apparent sense.  At the opposite end of the spectrum however, to place half-formed infantry officer candidates in command of platoons of highly-trained Reg F NCMs is patently inadvisable for a whole host of reasons. 
   
As always, just my $.02 

Mark C

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Good post, Mark. Thanks

 

[291er_sigdev]

I always based my ettiquete off the drill manual, which doesn't even mention officer cadets, but does say that besides the queen &al. commissioned officers are the only ones to be saluted. 

At my sea cadet unit, we teach the cadets to salute ncdts, but I always hated it, only receiving the salute when my DCPO reported to me on parade.  (I'm an awful stickler & will march with my arms breast-pocket high until I finish BOTP.)

But now I learn there is a precedent for saluting ocdts at other places.  All I ask is why can't they just be treated as are sgts-maj or CPOs: with respect but no salute? 

How about this: as we can salute civilians, can an officer not to salute NCM reservists who are off duty (& are therefore civilians)?  I rather think we ought not to.

When a CO orders 'salute ocdts' which is contrary to the drill manual, is there a conflict?  The manual is an order isn't it?

Many levels of Orders..

Unit Standing Orders are the lowest form of orders, QR&O's are the top level, then CFAO's..

If you want to be a barracks room lawyer then you can get charged and then fight it and probably win.. BUT and this is the BIGGEST but.. your ass is now grass as far as the unit is concerned.. On second thought, the order is a legal order not prohibitted by the NDA or the Criminal Code.. you may lose..

Personally I would follow the order.. Pleading ignorance of Standing Orders is NOT an excuse..

 

[Disenchantedsailor]

I always based my ettiquete off the drill manual, which doesn't even mention officer cadets, but does say that besides the queen &al. commissioned officers are the only ones to be saluted. 

At my sea cadet unit, we teach the cadets to salute ncdts, but I always hated it, only receiving the salute when my DCPO reported to me on parade.  (I'm an awful stickler & will march with my arms breast-pocket high until I finish BOTP.)

But now I learn there is a precedent for saluting ocdts at other places.  All I ask is why can't they just be treated as are sgts-maj or CPOs: with respect but no salute? 

How about this: as we can salute civilians, can an officer not to salute NCM reservists who are off duty (& are therefore civilians)?  I rather think we ought not to.

When a CO orders 'salute ocdts' which is contrary to the drill manual, is there a conflict?  The manual is an order isn't it?

Hate beating a dead thread but need to point out a wee bit of clarification here,

the CF Manual states that all NCMS shall pay compliments to ALL OFFICERS (not it does not say anything about commision)

NDA defines officers as  officer" means

(a) a person who holds Her Majesty’s commission in the Canadian Forces,

(b) a person who holds the rank of officer cadet in the Canadian Forces, and

(c) any person who pursuant to law is attached or seconded as an officer to the Canadian Forces;


The QR&O's define officer as

"officer" means


(a) a person who holds Her Majesty’s commission in the Canadian Forces,


(b) a person who holds the rank of officer cadet in the Canadian Forces, and


(c) any person who pursuant to law is attached or seconded as an officer to the Canadian Forces;


so based on the letter of my references is the CO's direction contrary to instructions or right on the money.

 

[284_226]

Hate beating a dead thread but need to point out a wee bit of clarification here,

the CF Manual states that all NCMS shall pay compliments to ALL OFFICERS (not it does not say anything about commision)

Actually, if you check CFP201 Section 2, it says:

3.  In Canada, military compliments are only paid to the Sovereign; the Governor General; members of the Royal Family; recognized foreign royalty; foreign heads of state or government; the Prime Minister; the Minister and Associate Minister of National Defence; lieutenant-governors; and commissioned officers.
{...}
10.  Non-commissioned members shall salute all commissioned officers.

 

[Disenchantedsailor]

quick question here,

exaclty how does an Ocdt address a MWO/CWO, I would think not as Sir as NCM's are required but by rank and name then? (or Mr in the case of a CWO) as for the Navy types its easy Chief is the accepted form from below and above.

 

[Nfld Sapper]

quick question here,

exaclty how does an Ocdt address a MWO/CWO, I would think not as Sir as NCM's are required but by rank and name then? (or Mr in the case of a CWO) as for the Navy types its easy Chief is the accepted form from below and above.

For MWO`s and up Sir is fine.

 

[Gunner]

OCdt's don't refer to MWOs/CWOs as Sir. Generally it would be by their position (CSM/RSM) or by their rank.

 

[Nfld Sapper]

OCdt's don't refer to MWOs/CWOs as Sir. Generally it would be by their position (CSM/RSM) or by their rank.

Thx Gunner I wasn't too sure but I thought Sir would be acceptable.

 

[Gunner]

Thx Gunner I wasn't too sure but I thought Sir would be acceptable.

Nfld Sapper - absolutely not.

 

[big_johnson1]

It's one of those mistakes you'll only make once.  ;D

 

[Disenchantedsailor]

Hence the reason for asking, don't particulary feel like a trip to the dentist, the Branch CWO may have a broken collarbone but he is a pathfinder after all