Author Topic: Army Communication & Information Systems Specialists (Sig Op, Lineman and LCIS Amalgamation)  (Read 631105 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ludoc

  • Member
  • ****
  • 11,165
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 114
We're getting a patch?

Keep in mind the Sigs vote on beret colour was "we'll do it if everyone else is doing it." So not entirely our fault.
Everyone else is not doing it. The Engineers said "That sounds stupid, we don't want any part of it." So, can we skip it?

Offline MOOXE

  • Member
  • ****
  • 845
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 141

Offline IT_Dude_Joeschmo

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 2,071
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 797
  • Getting 1's and 0's to flow...
Haro everybody!

Well folks, don't worry, in about 2 more years, there will barely be a single (competent) IST to fight about!

Very very very many I know have already gotten out, are in the middle of getting out or already have OT's and plans in to get out. I would never have thought it would get as bad as it is for manning, but IST is a dead horse. Keep beating it, it'll turn into chunks of meat the dogs can eat soon enough.

From what I'm also told, it's close to that bad for all the Sigs trades, not just IST, but of course, IST is the worst off. I'm very curious to see how they will fill the vacuum. Do the higher chains of command even know how bad it is? As in, the Chief Sig and his Colonel counterpart? Or have they been kept in the dark and that's part of the problem? Is there a complete culture of 'yes' men silently deleting the entire trade by attrition?

PS> Yes, I left a year ago and am a civilian now as well but I'm still supporting the military in my job.
PPS> Going to go change my name now as I'm not 'IST' anymore.
"When I retire, I want to become a gay Hollywood actor, they always make more money!"... My old boss's plans ;)

Offline c_canuk

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 13,735
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 413
The only people baiting ISTs with spec pay is ISTs. If you deserve it, you'll get it. Technicians who lost it because of this gongshow are the only people with a right to complain, if you bought the sales pitch that everyone was getting Spec 1 and CISTMs were going to get Spec 2, I really don't have much sympathy because that was like expecting a unicorn to show up and hand you a cheque.

I take slight issue with this...

IST didn't exist when the SNCO and Senior Officers came to the town halls and presented us with the SME who was going to get us spec pay.

IST's didn't brow beat a lot of us until we accepted the trade change. As a junior MCpl I assumed with so many senior SNCOs telling my I'd be a fool not to take IST, I should accept their advice since they are in those positions because they are supposed to more than me.

You know they guys who are supposed to be the pinnacle of leadership, who achieved professional competence, appreciate their own strengths and limitations while pursuing self improvement, seek and accept responsibility, lead by example, make sure their followers know their meaning and intent, then lead them to the completion of the mission, know their soldiers and promote their welfare, develop leadership potential of their followers, make sound and timely decisions, train their soldiers as a team and employ them up to their capabilities, and finally, keep their followers informed of the mission, the changing situation and the overall picture.

Yes, currently many ISTs are coddling the last embers of hope; they are in denial that losing 2 years of progress on their careers while AORs expand and numbers shrink, isn't going to pay off. They are partly responsible for keeping the idea alive, because many of us can't stomach that we took that hit for nothing, so some people at the top could get a "leading change - mastered" point on their PERs.

Unfortunately the architects of this crap show are long gone and won't be held accountable. The current architects won't soldier up and call it a lost battle, they keep kicking the can down the road, feeding that little ember of hope. So no, it's not just ISTs feeding this thing.
"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."
-John Stewart Mill

Offline IT_Dude_Joeschmo

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 2,071
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 797
  • Getting 1's and 0's to flow...




I take slight issue with this...

IST didn't exist when the SNCO and Senior Officers came to the town halls and presented us with the SME who was going to get us spec pay.

IST's didn't brow beat a lot of us until we accepted the trade change. As a junior MCpl I assumed with so many senior SNCOs telling my I'd be a fool not to take IST, I should accept their advice since they are in those positions because they are supposed to more than me.

You know they guys who are supposed to be the pinnacle of leadership, who achieved professional competence, appreciate their own strengths and limitations while pursuing self improvement, seek and accept responsibility, lead by example, make sure their followers know their meaning and intent, then lead them to the completion of the mission, know their soldiers and promote their welfare, develop leadership potential of their followers, make sound and timely decisions, train their soldiers as a team and employ them up to their capabilities, and finally, keep their followers informed of the mission, the changing situation and the overall picture.

Yes, currently many ISTs are coddling the last embers of hope; they are in denial that losing 2 years of progress on their careers while AORs expand and numbers shrink, isn't going to pay off. They are partly responsible for keeping the idea alive, because many of us can't stomach that we took that hit for nothing, so some people at the top could get a "leading change - mastered" point on their PERs.

Unfortunately the architects of this crap show are long gone and won't be held accountable. The current architects won't soldier up and call it a lost battle, they keep kicking the can down the road, feeding that little ember of hope. So no, it's not just ISTs feeding this thing.

*Extended Slow Clap*

Also, IST's are 'just nerds' who 'don't deserve spec pay' until you ask someone ELSE to do something related to computers.... Oh hey Sig buddy working in the CP, if we give you access to active directory, can you reset passwords for all your users in the CP or the TOC or the HQ? ... 'Oh no way man, I'm not smart enough for that computer ****'..... IST is then woken up at 3am because user X lost password for the 3rd time and there are no other IST's around. Or nobody willing. Nobody wanting to pitch in.

I watched other Jr Sigs on my last tour, in the infancy of their careers, shy away from any/all IST related activities b/c they didn't want to have to work that hard. Or that much, or have that level of responsibility on their shoulders...

Capt: Hey IST, when is the CLASSIFIEDNETWORK going to be back up so, you know, the HQ can do it's job and there's a point to everyone sitting here in the desert.
IST: I'm already working on it Sir, don't worry, we'll just switch to our failover and be back up in a jiffy.
Other Sigs: F-that...
"When I retire, I want to become a gay Hollywood actor, they always make more money!"... My old boss's plans ;)

Offline CSTDan

  • Guest
  • *
  • 360
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1
I don't get this animosity. Any Sig worth his/her weight in salt should recognize the contributions of other trades.
CST and IST alike have technically challenging jobs. Both have merit, so we should not diminish the value of one over the other. It serves no good.
+300

Online Pre-flight

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 5,195
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 286
Haro everybody!

Well folks, don't worry, in about 2 more years, there will barely be a single (competent) IST to fight about!

Very very very many I know have already gotten out, are in the middle of getting out or already have OT's and plans in to get out. I would never have thought it would get as bad as it is for manning, but IST is a dead horse. Keep beating it, it'll turn into chunks of meat the dogs can eat soon enough.

From what I'm also told, it's close to that bad for all the Sigs trades, not just IST, but of course, IST is the worst off. I'm very curious to see how they will fill the vacuum. Do the higher chains of command even know how bad it is? As in, the Chief Sig and his Colonel counterpart? Or have they been kept in the dark and that's part of the problem? Is there a complete culture of 'yes' men silently deleting the entire trade by attrition?

PS> Yes, I left a year ago and am a civilian now as well but I'm still supporting the military in my job.
PPS> Going to go change my name now as I'm not 'IST' anymore.

No doubt.

A bunch has left, including me, and I know of at least two others that were on their way out of the trade before they were bribed to pull their applications in exchange for OUTCAN postings. Getting the run around for 7 years is long enough. Honestly I feel kind of stupid for waiting around that long.

Offline MOOXE

  • Member
  • ****
  • 845
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 141
Quote
I reported to you one month ago that after having developed an amended Military Employment Structure Implementation Plan (MESIP) to better reflect the current compensation structure of the ACISS trade, we were working with Director General Compensation and Benefits (DGCB) to guarantee that the implementation of the compensation and benefits component to the amended ACISS MESIP achieved the precise, desired result, and that no member of the ACISS team would be adversely affected. It has already been a turbulent year in respect to remunerating you properly for your excellent service and we needed to guarantee precision moving forward. At that time, I also indicated I would provide a sitrep back to you as soon as it was practical to do so.

Today, I am pleased to provide such an update. First, DGCB has advised that the aim is for all former qualified LCIS Techs to have their specialist 1 pay reinstated no later than 30 November 17, correcting a departmental error and finally offering the compensation the CAF agreed you deserved one year ago. Your pay accounts will be fully adjusted and debits you accrued due to an error in the CDS Order on ACISS Spec Pay will be corrected. While no further obstacles are anticipated, should you encounter any challenges, I would ask that you use your local chain of command to indicate issues so that we may learn of any difficulties immediately and subsequently address them immediately.

It should be no secret at this time that Director Royal Canadian Corps of Signals (DRCCS), Colonel Parsons, has also petitioned the Commander of the Canadian Army (CA) and the CDS himself to grant specialist 1 pay to CST and IST retroactive to 2011. While we make no guarantees as to whether it will be approved, we are aware that this request has been perceived favorably and has gained the support of the CA and the leadership of Military Personnel Command (MPC) - who is ultimately responsible for your compensation. I will provide an update on this request in the very near future.

Of significance, CSTs who were affected by the CDS Order from last year, which resulted in them receiving specialist pay regardless of their eligibility, will not ‚Äéhave any corrective actions taken against their pay accounts until a final decision has been rendered on the future of ACISS compensation and specialist pay.

I appreciate your patience and I fully realize that this has not only been a difficult year; for some, you are entering the 7th year of performing work which is deserving of a higher level of compensation. It is for this reason that senior RCCS leaders have worked tirelessly to negotiate and position a fair deal to ensure you are paid properly for the work you perform. We are not at the finish line yet, but it is in sight. I ask that you continue to trust that the Director is working diligently on your behalf and ensuring that actions to improve compensation for ACISS are proceeding as quickly as possible in light of departmental pressures, the complexity of the task and the need to avoid error.

You will hear from me again as soon as there is more to report on, but no later than November. In the interim, I ask that you utilize your chain of command for all queries concerning this matter so that the Director will continue to be informed and in the optimal position to advocate on your behalf.

A translated version of this message will be provided by the end of next week.


Respectfully,


LCol Ian R Marchand