Relinquishing rank when transferring to reg force (inf)

[Jarnhamar]

When reservists were returning from Afghanistan in the later years there was a moratorium put on members relinquishing their rank when taking offers to transfer to the regular force.  MCpls for example were not able to try and transfer over as a cpl, it was explained that this wasn't fair to cpls trying to compete for cpl positions with someone of a higher rank.

Is that still the case or can MCpls drop down to the rank of cpl when going from res infantry to reg infantry?

 

[dapaterson]

That initiative is no longer in place, as far as I know.  Each case is assessed individually for a CT in trade.  There are a number of variables at play, including qualifications, experience, state of the PML of the Reg F occupation...

That said, I know of one person who recently CT'd to the Reg F (in a support trade) who entered in rank as a WO.  (And I know that the plural of anecdote isn't data).

 

[Franko]

I know of one that CT'd in as a Sgt when he wasn't qualified. Don't ask me how it happened, but it was sorted out rather quickly.

Regards

 

[RADOPSIGOPACCISOP]

When reservists were returning from Afghanistan in the later years there was a moratorium put on members relinquishing their rank when taking offers to transfer to the regular force.  MCpls for example were not able to try and transfer over as a cpl, it was explained that this wasn't fair to cpls trying to compete for cpl positions with someone of a higher rank.

Is that still the case or can MCpls drop down to the rank of cpl when going from res infantry to reg infantry?

It depends on the offer you get from the occupation manager. They look at your qualifications and experience, the state of the trade and shortages in rank, and then the positions they are going to put you into.

Also depends on the training scheme, some trades have the same qualification courses for regular and reserve (lately I've seen alot of courses that are combined with a mix of reg and reserve on them), where as other trades have abreviated courses for the reserve. Typically if the courses are less in the reserve then it's more likely the CT candidate will drop in rank, all other things the same.

 

[DAA]

When reservists were returning from Afghanistan in the later years there was a moratorium put on members relinquishing their rank when taking offers to transfer to the regular force.  MCpls for example were not able to try and transfer over as a cpl, it was explained that this wasn't fair to cpls trying to compete for cpl positions with someone of a higher rank.

Is that still the case or can MCpls drop down to the rank of cpl when going from res infantry to reg infantry?

Have a look at CF MILPERSCOM Instr 03/08, it will lay out most of the details with regards to a CT from PRes to Reg F.

Basically at the end of the day, "rank" is at the discretion of the Occupation Manager and DMCPG 5-2 as to what is contained in the offer.  If there is a vacancy in the target MOSID available at the targeted rank, then you just might retain your rank.  If there is no vacancy, then the offer maybe at a lower rank.  Also, there is no GUARANTEED pay protection on transfer from Res F to Reg F.

 

[brandon_]

Almost 3 years ago, I completed a CT to the reg force, and I am currently in a battalion that with the last couple of months has received a large amount of reservists, some have stayed jacks, but a majority of them lost the leaf, and are now PLQ and ASA qualified CPLS, IMO this isn't fair because now these guys are getting merited higher then some of the boys who have spent 5+ years in battalion.

 

[PuckChaser]

IMO this isn't fair because now these guys are getting merited higher then some of the boys who have spent 5+ years in battalion.

Maybe they're earning it? You'd probably have the same people pissed if they CT'd with 4 years in the PRes as MCpls and kept their appointment.

 

[George Wallace]

Almost 3 years ago, I completed a CT to the reg force, and I am currently in a battalion that with the last couple of months has received a large amount of reservists, some have stayed jacks, but a majority of them lost the leaf, and are now PLQ and ASA qualified CPLS, IMO this isn't fair because now these guys are getting merited higher then some of the boys who have spent 5+ years in battalion.

What is fair in your mind?  Is it fair to rank these guys with the qualifications, but not the rank, lower than others who don't have the qualifications?  Are all those Cpls you speak of going to become "streamers" or are some of them perhaps "Career Cpls"?

Is it really your place to question how your leadership look at and merit their personnel?  If you are lucky, perhaps some day you will be in the position to judge which person, the one with five years in or the one with three years in has the most potential to be put on a course or promoted.  Then perhaps you will have some lowly member question your choices.   

 

[RADOPSIGOPACCISOP]

Maybe they're earning it? You'd probably have the same people pissed if they CT'd with 4 years in the PRes as MCpls and kept their appointment.

Frankly, I would think they'd be more pissed if they were CT'd at MCpl than dropping back to Cpl. Some people are never happy.

 

[George Wallace]

I wonder if you factored in the fact that a unit can only fill so many positions of each rank level. 

We all can't be LCols......or MCpls.....or CWO's....or whatever rank you choose to fill in the blanks.

 

[RADOPSIGOPACCISOP]

I wonder if you factored in the fact that a unit can only fill so many positions of each rank level. 

We all can't be LCols......or MCpls.....or CWO's....or whatever rank you choose to fill in the blanks.

Exactly, if they CT'd to Cpl then there's still a chance one of the guys that have been there for 5 years can work hard and merit higher next year in hopes of promotion. If they CT to MCpl then they instantly fill the position that would have been up for grabs.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Great information, thank you very much.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Almost 3 years ago, I completed a CT to the reg force, and I am currently in a battalion that with the last couple of months has received a large amount of reservists, some have stayed jacks, but a majority of them lost the leaf, and are now PLQ and ASA qualified CPLS, IMO this isn't fair because now these guys are getting merited higher then some of the boys who have spent 5+ years in battalion.

This mentality has been around for decades and shows that some people don't get the concept of a merit list/system.  Units don't have a union structure, where Bob is senior to Jim because he has been with the company for 2 more months, etc.

You were a PRES type before, right?  Didn't your TI, training and experience counts towards your 'worth' to the CAF when you CTd?  I was never a fan of the "you're just a quick-pick" mentality, and I was especially least fond of the Reg Force guys who had it that were in the 'Mau just a few years ago themselves and also "quick picks". 

Of all the discussion, fights, whatever over Reg and Res BS I've heard over the years, I've personally always liked the way CWO Van Iderstine put it in the 1997 Armour Bulletin (page 37 of 50 on the PDF).  "Who gives a rat's ass?"

 

[trustnoone73]

IMO this isn't fair because now these guys are getting merited higher then some of the boys who have spent 5+ years in battalion.

5+ years in Bn is not the same as five years in rank.  2nd year Cpl's, yeah, this might push them a notch lower but not far or long.  Three or more PER's in rank at a unit vs zero PER's will come out in the scoring at the Unit/Regimental/Corps level sooner before later.  Real people do watch this and the system is designed so that short term blips should have minimal impact on long term careers.

Yes, there are exceptions.

 

[trustnoone73]

Exactly, if they CT'd to Cpl then there's still a chance one of the guys that have been there for 5 years can work hard and merit higher next year in hopes of promotion. If they CT to MCpl then they instantly fill the position that would have been up for grabs.

quite likely, the Cpl at year 5 in the unit is not in the promotion zone and doing what he is already doing will move his career along at the same pace regardless of the static of ins and outs of other Cpls.

I would be surprised if a career manager on the cusp of promoting MCpl's would then CT MCpl's in from the PRes to save himself the hassle.  If PRes are coming in at rank it is more likely that the merit list of qualified pers was not going to fill the promotion forecast.  Therefore no one is getting passed over.  Perception may not be reality.  Pay attention to career manager briefs.  When in doubt ask. 

 

[ModlrMike]

Is MCpl still an uncontrolled rank in the Inf? By which I mean driven solely by national merit boards and lists like support trades are.

 

[DAA]

Is MCpl still an uncontrolled rank in the Inf?

CF MILPERSCOM Instr 03/08, Art 4.7  "In the Reg F and PRes, ranks are either uncontrolled or controlled.  Uncontrolled ranks are Corporal and below for NCMs and Captain and below for Officers.  All other ranks are controlled."

The only possible exception to this rule is for some Officer Specialist Occupations, such as Legal Officer, where the rank of Major may be considered an uncontrolled rank.

Part of the CT Process, also involves the members previous PRes Unit Merit File (ie; PERs), making photocopies of all previous PERs and sending these to the PER Processing Centre along with a copy of the CT message.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

CF MILPERSCOM Instr 03/08, Art 4.7  "In the Reg F and PRes, ranks are either uncontrolled or controlled.  Uncontrolled ranks are Corporal and below for NCMs and Captain and below for Officers.  All other ranks are controlled."

I can`t recall the exact CANFORGEN, but didn`t the one that detailed the changes to CFPAS-PER policy decentralize MCpl promotion authority from DMCA-D Mil C to the C Army...

 

[dapaterson]

I can`t recall the exact CANFORGEN, but didn`t the one that detailed the changes to CFPAS-PER policy decentralize MCpl promotion authority from DMCA-D Mil C to the C Army...

For Army managed occupations, yes.

CANFORGEN 011/14 discusses, and was discussed at: http://army.ca/forums/threads/25156.375

 

[brandon_]

You were a PRES type before, right?  Didn't your TI, training and experience counts towards your 'worth' to the CAF when you CTd?  I was never a fan of the "you're just a quick-pick" mentality, and I was especially least fond of the Reg Force guys who had it that were in the 'Mau just a few years ago themselves and also "quick picks". 

Yes, I was also CT, and if you got the impression from my comment that I wasn't a fan of 'Quick Picks' that is not the case, some of my best friends are from the Militia, I do not hold them in low regard, they bring more life experience to the table.

What is fair in your mind?  Is it fair to rank these guys with the qualifications, but not the rank, lower than others who don't have the qualifications?  Are all those Cpls you speak of going to become "streamers" or are some of them perhaps "Career Cpls"?

Is it really your place to question how your leadership look at and merit their personnel?  If you are lucky, perhaps some day you will be in the position to judge which person, the one with five years in or the one with three years in has the most potential to be put on a course or promoted.  Then perhaps you will have some lowly member question your choices. 

First you're right, it is not my place to question how leadership merits, the point I was making wasn't that the guys from the Mo' aren't deserving of being Mcpls, hell I'd prefer some if some of them were.


I want to be clear, I am not trying to start a Reg VS Pres argument.  The only reason I stayed a CPL is because of this, so it has directly, benefited me, but I will explain, where I think it is unfair, this is very mech world specific.

The boys from my battle school almost 3 years ago, are now on their second contracts, some have their hooks, most do not, most have spent the last 3 years driving, or gunning vehicles, some have been trying to be the best they can, so they can move on to Crew Commanding, now for example CPL bloggins from the mo is coming with 3-4 years in, qualified PLQ (which is a prerequisite to crew command), the platoons don't need to send one of the soldiers spending a good amount of time in the hatches learning the ins and outs of the vehicle, when they can just send the militia soldier, and take the spot, with no real experience of the vehicle.     

Do you think this is fair?    Perhaps i've gone off topic, perhaps i'm babbling about something totally irrelevant to the original question, I just wanted to clear that up, that as vehicle crew I expect the CC, or the MCPL in charge of the vehicles to be the most knowledgable, I don't think that's fair not only for the crew, but for the un-experinced CC.