Acting lacking MCpl in charge of a section with qualified MCpl's

[captloadie]

To muddy the waters even further...this is true unless you are unable to take your QL5 in the time period you normally would have received it due to the needs of the service.  I have only ever seen this happen due to pers deploying on Operations.  In this specific instance you will be granted Spec Pay effective the day you would have graduated from the QL5 course you would have been scheduled to attend had you not been deployed as embers will not be disadvantaged due to reasons beyond their control.  The caveat to that is you fail the QL5 or don't go on the next QL5 you are available for, your spec pay is forfeit and you pay it all back.

See, there is a problem with the system. How is a member disadvantaged by not getting spec pay before he is actually qualified? I think they are more disadvantaged if they get paid the money, and if/when something goes wrong they have to pay it all back. Why not do like most officer trades where members don't get promoted until they get the course completed, then their rank and pay is made retroactive.

 

[lethalLemon]

See, there is a problem with the system. How is a member disadvantaged by not getting spec pay before he is actually qualified? I think they are more disadvantaged if they get paid the money, and if/when something goes wrong they have to pay it all back. Why not do like most officer trades where members don't get promoted until they get the course completed, then their rank and pay is made retroactive.

Why not? Because that would mean someone with a brain would have to run the system  :

 

[ARMY_101]

What - precisely - is the definition of an Acting/Lacking promotion now that the CDS has released this CANFORGEN:

PROMOTION OF P RES NCMS WITHOUT LEADERSHIP QUALIFICATION

UNCLASSIFIED


REFS: A. CFAO 49-5 CAREER POLICY - NON-COMMISSIONED MEMBER - PRIMARY RESERVE

B. CF MIL PERS INSTR 04/08 - NON-COMMISSIONED MEMBER ADVANCED PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT (NCMAPD)

C. CF MIL PERS INSTR 02/06 - PRIMARY LEADERSHIP QUALIFICATION



A DIFFERENCE EXISTS BETWEEN P RES AND REG F PROMOTION ELIGIBILITY PREREQUISITES INSOFAR AS LEADERSHIP QUALIFICATIONS ARE CONCERNED. WHILE PROMOTION TO ACTING RANK IS PERMITTED IN THE REG F WITHOUT THE ASSOCIATED LEADERSHIP QUALIFICATION, IT IS SPECIFICALLY PRECLUDED AS A P RES PRACTICE AT REF A, PARA 8


REFS B AND C GIVE PRIORITY ONE STATUS FOR COURSE LOADING TO NCMS WHO ARE PROMOTED TO ACTING RANK (LACKING LEADERSHIP QUALIFICATION). SINCE P RES NCMS CANNOT BE PROMOTED WITHOUT THIS QUALIFICATION, THEY CAN BE CONSIDERED NO HIGHER THAN PRIORITY 2 CANDIDATES. RECOGNIZING THAT THE NCMPD PROGRAMS DELIVERED IAW REFS B AND C ARE IDENTICAL FOR REG F AND P RES NCMS, TO REMOVE THIS DISPARITY IN COURSE LOADING AND CAREER POLICIES, P RES AND REG F POLICIES WILL BE HARMONIZED WRT LEADERSHIP QUALIFICATIONS AND ELIGIBILITY FOR PROMOTION


ACCORDINGLY, THE PRACTICE DESCRIBED AT REF A PARA 8 IS DISCONTINUED AND THE FOLLOWING PRACTICE IS NOW AUTHORIZED: QUOTE TO MEET SERVICE REQUIREMENTS THE PROMOTION AUTHORITY MAY, IN RESPECT OF PROMOTION TO THE NEXT HIGHER RANK, WAIVE EITHER THE TIME OR OCCUPATION QUALIFICATION PREREQUISITE BUT NOT BOTH. THE LEADERSHIP QUALIFICATION MAY BE WAIVED PROVIDED TIME AND OCCUPATION QUALIFICATION PREREQUISITES ARE MET UNQUOTE

PROMOTION AUTHORITIES SHALL EXERCISE DISCRETION IN THE APPLICATION OF THIS POLICY AMENDMENT. STRONG CONSIDERATION SHALL BE GIVEN TO REQUIRING COMPLETION OF THE DISTANCE LEARNING PORTION OF THE LEADERSHIP QUALIFICATION COURSE BY THE MEMBER PRIOR TO FILLING THE HIGHER RANKED POSITION

THE NEW DAOD 5511 SERIES COVERING THIS POLICY CHANGE IS EXPECTED IN DUE COURSE

SIGNED BY GEN T.J. LAWSON, CDS

Does Acting/Lacking occur when any of the above-noted requirements are not met (i.e. time OR leadership qualification OR MOC qualification), or would someone being promoted under this CANFORGEN be AWSE?  What exactly defines Acting/Lacking?

 

[DAA]

You need to meet ALL the "prerequisites" and if you don't and you are promoted, then it is considered "Acting/Lacking".

The CANFORGEN removes the "hard" requirement for Primary Reserve personnel to have met ALL the prerequisites prior to being promoted.  Previously in the Reserves, if you didn't meet ALL the prerequisites, then you could NOT be promoted.

 

[ARMY_101]

You need to meet ALL the "prerequisites" and if you don't and you are promoted, then it is considered "Acting/Lacking".

Is there a specific ref that states this? CMP 20/04, CFAOs, DAODs... none seem to define what Acting/Lacking is, other than to say that members may, in certain circumstances, be promoted Acting/Lacking.

What differentiates A/L from AWSE, for example?

 

[DAA]

Is there a specific ref that states this? CMP 20/04, CFAOs, DAODs... none seem to define what Acting/Lacking is, other than to say that members may, in certain circumstances, be promoted Acting/Lacking.

What differentiates A/L from AWSE, for example?

A/L is a promotion to a higher rank, where the individual lacks either the qualification (occupational or leadership) or the required time in (which is rare).  AWSE is a "temporary" promotion to the next higher rank and only in effect while an individual is performing a specific job (ie; whilst so employed).  To be promoted AWSE, you must be fully qualified and eligible to hold the next higher rank as "substantive", so you must meet ALL the promotion prerequisites, unless a waiver is authorized.

See CFAO 49-4, Anx A - Eligibility Criteria (Reg F) or 49-5, Anx A, App1 (Primary Res).

 

[stokerwes]

I heard a "rumour" that the ILP was being phased out and the ILQ and SLC would be the only two leadership courses required for NCM`s. Anyone here this or have some reliable information like a DAOD or CANFORGEN?
I have tried the search function and couldn't find anything

 

[Old EO Tech]

I heard a "rumour" that the ILP was being phased out and the ILQ and SLC would be the only two leadership courses required for NCM`s. Anyone here this or have some reliable information like a DAOD or CANFORGEN?
I have tried the search function and couldn't find anything

The ALP is being turned into DL only.  Other than that the other career courses(ILP, CQC, SAP etc) are unchanged so far. 

Jon

 

[Franko]

I heard a "rumour" that the ILP was being phased out and the ILQ and SLC would be the only two leadership courses required for NCM`s. Anyone here this or have some reliable information like a DAOD or CANFORGEN?
I have tried the search function and couldn't find anything

I've heard the same rumour....and only a rumour. As far as I know, there is no plans to cancel ILP/ ILQ or whatever they plan on calling it this week.

Regards

 

[DAA]

ALP/ALQ is in fact being converted over to strictly DL (ie; no residential) from what I understand.  D Mil C/CM's are in the process of contacting pers who have already done the ALQ DL portion and offering them the "Residential" phase prior to the cut-over inorder to obtain the full qual.  If they don't attend, then they will be subject to the full DL program once is comes out.  Just had a member of our unit experience this.

 

[Haggis]

The CANFORGEN removes the "hard" requirement for Primary Reserve personnel to have met ALL the prerequisites prior to being promoted.  Previously in the Reserves, if you didn't meet ALL the prerequisites, then you could NOT be promoted.

No, this CANFORGEN removes only the hard requirement for the leadership qualification for P Res, bringing P Res NCM promotion policy into line with Reg F NCM promotion policy in CFAO 49-4 for Acting/Lacking promotions only.  In the past, P Res members could be promoted Acting/Lacking as long as they had the leadership qualification.  Occupational quals and time in rank could be waived.

Substantive promotion, either P Res or Reg F still requires that all promotion prerequisites be met.

 

[Inf Soldier]

Scenario:

Member is in an under-ranked position

Member goes on PLQ and is told following PLQ they will be promoted to MCpl

Member returns from PLQ and is told they now need to attend another "new" course before being promotable (the new infantry DP2 ASA)

Member inquires about Acting/Lacking and is told their unit "doesn't do" A/L

Member cites CDS guidance specifically allowing A/L

Unit persists

... Does this sound like grounds for a grievance or redress of some sort?

 

[Haggis]

... Does this sound like grounds for a grievance or redress of some sort?

No.  You do not, at this time, meet all the prerequisites.  One of the prerequisites is CO's recommendation and it appears that you lack that.  Therefore, you will not be appointed Acting/Lacking MCpl.

 

[Awesomedude]

Hello Army.ca

<flame shield up>

I thought I saw a regulation that said an acting lacking MCpl should not be put in charge of other MCpl's who are PLQ qualified. It is the topic of
discussion right now with the boys and now im not sure if its something I dreamed while on a peyote trip.

 

[dapaterson]

1. MCpl is an appointment, not a rank.  MCpls are Cpls.

2. Order of seniority in rank is as laid out in QR&O 3.09.

 

[mariomike]

I thought I saw a regulation that said an acting lacking MCpl should not be put in charge of other MCpl's who are PLQ qualified. It

See also,

Substantive Rank [MERGED]
https://army.ca/forums/threads/50104.0

Definition of Acting/Lacking 
https://army.ca/forums/threads/111902.0

Acting/Lacking?
https://army.ca/forums/threads/97718.0

Acting Lacking Corporal 
https://army.ca/forums/threads/113678.0

etc...

 

[Awesomedude]

Thank you kindly,

I DID use the search but i didn't see those. Im a read the shit out of those topics and come back

 

[mariomike]

Thank you kindly,

You are welcome. My pleasure. 

 

[Awesomedude]

Digging around in that QR&O im seeing this

(1) Officers and non-commissioned members who hold acting rank have no seniority in that rank. They have seniority among themselves in their order of seniority in their substantive rank.

So im reading this as an acting lacking MCpl has less seniority then a substantive MCpl

(2) When any part of the Canadian Forces is on active service, substantive and temporary ranks shall be regarded as equal for purposes of determining seniority.

I read this as substantive and temporary ranks are treated the same. I am under the understanding that acting rank =/= temporary rank.

So a more accurate question would be does seniority matter? (in so far as the Sgt making an acting lacking his 2ic over substantive MCpl's )

I suppose I will reg-rat around for a better definition of seniority, it might be just a pay thing

EDIT:

This is making me think that a MCpl means nothing in regards to seniority cause its not part of the hierarchy at all. 

http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/about-policies-standards-queens-regulations-orders-vol-01/ch-03.page

EDIT2:

3.08 - MASTER CORPORAL APPOINTMENT
(1) The Chief of the Defence Staff or such officer as he may designate may appoint a corporal as a master corporal.

(2) The rank of a master corporal remains that of corporal.

(3) Master corporals have seniority among themselves in their order of seniority as corporals.

(4) Master corporals have authority and powers of command over all other corporals.


I guess MCpl's are special snow flakes.  I think where im not clear is:

- Acting rank = no seniority in that rank just your substantive rank.

- Acting appointment to MCpl = Corporal seniority?

So their is no real difference between MCpl appointed, and MCpl Substantive IRW seniority as they are both basically corporals? (substansive rank)?

Im assuming Corporal(B) is a pay thing and means nothing for seniority?

 

[mariomike]

I suppose I will reg-rat around for a better definition of seniority, it might be just a pay thing

Will this help?,

NCM Prgression  ( sic )
https://army.ca/forums/threads/93245.0.html

3.08 – MASTER CORPORAL APPOINTMENT

(1) The Chief of the Defence Staff or such officer as he may designate may appoint a corporal as a master corporal.

(2) The rank of a master corporal remains that of corporal.

(3) Master corporals have seniority among themselves in their order of seniority as corporals.

(4) Master corporals have authority and powers of command over all other corporals.