Canadian Forces' senior brass have been growing at a much faster rate...

[garb811]

To be fair, the proper term of address for any MWO/CWO rank in the RCAF, regardless of the rank of those addressing them, is "Brent" or "Marjorie", unless they are a pilot at which point it become "Scooter" or "Dumbo" or...

Better employment of SCRP to fill junior specialist positions would have to overcome a significant degree of institutional bias in the MWO/CWO corps against junior officers.

Of course, do a better job of selling the pay increase and related improvement of their best 5 years for pension purposes, and it might become more popular.

Fixed that for you

SRCP is officially an off ramp career line in the SEM project, but the actual positions have not been formalized much as of yet.  That being said SRCP is only one of 3 lines careers for CAF CWO.  Subject Matter Expert CWO is a line by itself.  So I disagree that "the institution" has decided that CT appointments are the only option.  This is a Army centric problem that the CA doesn't understand a need or entry level SME CWO, the other elements are much more open to having SME CWO.  The only caveat the SEM directive says is that you can't go from a entry level SME CWO to a level 2 SME without doing a unit CWO/RSM job after your entry level job.

I really don't see the need to have a "technical" CWO giving technical advice at a Div or even Army HQ, let alone NDHQ. SCRP 'em and that way you don't have to worry about a getting an "entry level SME CWO" a CT position prior to them going to a "level 2 SME CWO" position.  CSS CT positions are few and far enough in between that we really don't need the fratricide of tying up one of those positions just to get a "SME CWO" from Div HQ to Army HQ as a "SME CWO" when a SCRP'd Capt can freely move amongst those levels without difficulty now.

As was stated previously by PPCLI Guy, I might be missing something about what a "SME CWO" at Div HQ is bringing to the table that requires the rank of CWO that can't be provided by a MWO or Capt.  You're essentially just giving us the "trust me, it's required" thing instead of some concrete examples of what you, specifically, bring to your Comd and his senior SOs other than a few examples that can be done with a much lower rank.  :dunno:

 

[daftandbarmy]

Fixed that for you
I really don't see the need to have a "technical" CWO giving technical advice at a Div or even Army HQ, let alone NDHQ. SCRP 'em and that way you don't have to worry about a getting an "entry level SME CWO" a CT position prior to them going to a "level 2 SME CWO" position.  CSS CT positions are few and far enough in between that we really don't need the fratricide of tying up one of those positions just to get a "SME CWO" from Div HQ to Army HQ as a "SME CWO" when a SCRP'd Capt can freely move amongst those levels without difficulty now.

As was stated previously by PPCLI Guy, I might be missing something about what a "SME CWO" at Div HQ is bringing to the table that requires the rank of CWO that can't be provided by a MWO or Capt.  You're essentially just giving us the "trust me, it's required" thing instead of some concrete examples of what you, specifically, bring to your Comd and his senior SOs other than a few examples that can be done with a much lower rank.  :dunno:

My fear is that we are merely aping the customs of our American cousins by requiring every formation to have a 'X/XX/XXX/XXXX etc' RSM as well as a Commander. These are merely 'show pony' positions at best, political positions at worst.

The right place for good CWOs is in the units, making sure that the right things get done in the right way - or else - and that our leadership supply chain is producing good material. They are best employed at the coalface, 'where the bayonet meets the belly' as one of my former CSMs described it to me, because no one else with the right experience can do that job. Good soldiers (and Officers) cross the Start Line because they are, in equal portions, both confident and afraid of failing to meet 'the standard', and our CWOs can ensure that the right balance is maintained to ensure victory.

Get a Captain/ Major to drive your Comd's rover, or make his coffee, or crank up a PowerPointless presentation, or present a report with 'advice' at the higher HQ levels.

Our CWO's have real work to do.

 

[Underway]

There is a weight/authority assigned to rank, whether we want to acknowledge it officially on not. Down ranking NCM positions while continuing to push more senior officer bloat devalues NCM ranks. Now maybe my experiences aren't indicative of the entire CAF, but I have been disregarded because I'm not "senior enough" by officers with significantly less experience than me. As a Sgt I had OODs with a few weeks on ship disregard my advice because a SLt knows better...

This goes both ways.  I've had quite a few Sgt, POs etc... disregard me over the years because my "experience" was less valued than theirs and watched it bite them in the ass.  Sometimes people make mistakes. But I completely understand your frustration .

As for Snr officer bloat, maybe we are looking at the issue from the wrong side.  Perhaps we have a correctly sized senior officer corp, but an undersized everything else?  The problem might not be with the Snr Officer numbers but the size of the military in general.

 

[Infanteer]

As for Snr officer bloat, maybe we are looking at the issue from the wrong side.  Perhaps we have a correctly sized senior officer corp, but an undersized everything else?

If that were true, than why the increase in 50% in a decade?  Was something not functioning during the height of our Afghan War?

 

[tomahawk6]

During the last 10 years what new headquarters have been added ? Each HQ will generate flag officer spaces. Of course NORAD for exa Additmple may have caused additional generals to be needed. Like the posting of LTG Eyre to Korea where Canada had not posted anyone there maybe since the Korean War.

 

[FJAG]

My fear is that we are merely aping the customs of our American cousins by requiring every formation to have a 'X/XX/XXX/XXXX etc' RSM as well as a Commander. These are merely 'show pony' positions at best, political positions at worst.

The right place for good CWOs is in the units, making sure that the right things get done in the right way - or else - and that our leadership supply chain is producing good material. They are best employed at the coalface, 'where the bayonet meets the belly' as one of my former CSMs described it to me, because no one else with the right experience can do that job. Good soldiers (and Officers) cross the Start Line because they are, in equal portions, both confident and afraid of failing to meet 'the standard', and our CWOs can ensure that the right balance is maintained to ensure victory.

Get a Captain/ Major to drive your Comd's rover, or make his coffee, or crank up a PowerPointless presentation, or present a report with 'advice' at the higher HQ levels.

Our CWO's have real work to do.

I'm with Barmy on this one. At the unit level, the RSM is a major and highly necessary NCO because he deals directly with the junction point of young soldiers and young officers where a strong knowledgeable guiding hand does the most good. At higher levels it basically becomes a less significant job of setting dress and deportment standards across the brigade, etc. Yup there are other things they do too but mostly those become issues of micro-management of what the unit RSMs and unit staff should be left to do on their own. By the time one becomes a unit RSM supervision by brigade CWO is neither desired nor necessary.

We've had an explosion of CWOs across the forces and many of them in jobs where their experience isn't as necessary as we make out. The problem is that we simply don't want to lose good soldiers who still have years of service in them so we've developed numerous positions for them. When we first started the JAG CWO position I wasn't in favour of it. I much preferred the American system where legal technicians/administrators at the warrant officer rank (specialty 270A) and paralegal soldiers (MOS 27D) filled many of the jobs we currently assign to former RSMs and civilian staff. I've always thought that the absence of such personnel greatly handicapped the operational deployability of legal offices. (as an aside I do prefer the US warrant officer concept (ie individuals who are neither NCOs nor commissioned officers) for specialty and technical trades/occupations rather than ours system where warrant officers are part of the NCO stream.)

I'm resigned to the fact that I'm speaking heresy here and that the system is not about to change. Please spare me your moral outrage. I'm just  :stirpot:

:cheers:

 

[Old EO Tech]

My turn to be pedantic...

Just like we misuse "Strategic" and "Operational", army folk who should know better have a really bad habit of calling anyone in an Army uniform "SM" simply because the person is a CWO or MWO. The Navy gets this. I have yet to hear a CPO1 called "Cox'n" when they did not hold that appointment; I can't imagine anyone in Halifax or Esquimalt referring to the AJAG CPO1 as "AJAG Cox'n" without being immediately corrected.  Better yet are Army pers who insist on translating that to RCAF CWO/MWOs as well.

You are quite right, I was posting quickly, but living in a Joint HQ, were we have lots of RCN types, I've given up on correcting these things, I get called "Chief" daily, were if I used that when I was a Junior NCO towards an Army CWO, I'd have many weekends on duty to consider my mistake....

But does not a AJAG Cell have a CO?  I'm not knowledgeable enough about their current structure to say.  But if they have defacto someone doing a CO or OC job, then having a "SM" is also correct.

Cheers

 

[PPCLI Guy]

My fear is that we are merely aping the customs of our American cousins by requiring every formation to have a 'X/XX/XXX/XXXX etc' RSM as well as a Commander. These are merely 'show pony' positions at best, political positions at worst.

Hmm.  Not sure what experience you have had with US Senior Enlisted Leaders - it appears to vary from mine.  They do not have Command Teams per se.  They have SNCOs with very narrowly prescribed arcs, within which they have surprising latitude.  The primary focus seemed to be, in my experience, on Force Protection,  They remain confused by our concept of a Command team, as do most of our Allies, all of whom pay nothing more than lip service to the value of a very Senior NCO. 

The Brits actually had to take an LSE LCol and revert him in rank to the equivalent of CWO in order to create their first Army SM.  They absolutely DO NOT get the whole Command Team Thing....

 

[Old EO Tech]

Fixed that for you
I really don't see the need to have a "technical" CWO giving technical advice at a Div or even Army HQ, let alone NDHQ. SCRP 'em and that way you don't have to worry about a getting an "entry level SME CWO" a CT position prior to them going to a "level 2 SME CWO" position.  CSS CT positions are few and far enough in between that we really don't need the fratricide of tying up one of those positions just to get a "SME CWO" from Div HQ to Army HQ as a "SME CWO" when a SCRP'd Capt can freely move amongst those levels without difficulty now.

As was stated previously by PPCLI Guy, I might be missing something about what a "SME CWO" at Div HQ is bringing to the table that requires the rank of CWO that can't be provided by a MWO or Capt.  You're essentially just giving us the "trust me, it's required" thing instead of some concrete examples of what you, specifically, bring to your Comd and his senior SOs other than a few examples that can be done with a much lower rank.  :dunno:

Well I certainly did not make these rules I was just stating them....IMHO we should be able to go on the SME stream, just like the CT stream or in theory the SRCP stream.

And I'm certainly not afraid of putting a microscope on what I do specifically as an ETSM, so rather than type for ages here I will simply attach my ToR, both primary and as part of the RCEME regional network, none of which is in any way classified.  And then you are free to judge for yourself if I am worthy of being a CWO :-/

Cheers

 

[Old EO Tech]

I'm with Barmy on this one. At the unit level, the RSM is a major and highly necessary NCO because he deals directly with the junction point of young soldiers and young officers where a strong knowledgeable guiding hand does the most good. At higher levels it basically becomes a less significant job of setting dress and deportment standards across the brigade, etc. Yup there are other things they do too but mostly those become issues of micro-management of what the unit RSMs and unit staff should be left to do on their own. By the time one becomes a unit RSM supervision by brigade CWO is neither desired nor necessary.

We've had an explosion of CWOs across the forces and many of them in jobs where their experience isn't as necessary as we make out. The problem is that we simply don't want to lose good soldiers who still have years of service in them so we've developed numerous positions for them. When we first started the JAG CWO position I wasn't in favour of it. I much preferred the American system where legal technicians/administrators at the warrant officer rank (specialty 270A) and paralegal soldiers (MOS 27D) filled many of the jobs we currently assign to former RSMs and civilian staff. I've always thought that the absence of such personnel greatly handicapped the operational deployability of legal offices. (as an aside I do prefer the US warrant officer concept (ie individuals who are neither NCOs nor commissioned officers) for specialty and technical trades/occupations rather than ours system where warrant officers are part of the NCO stream.)

I'm resigned to the fact that I'm speaking heresy here and that the system is not about to change. Please spare me your moral outrage. I'm just  :stirpot:

:cheers:

Well I am actually a fan of the US WO System too. Maybe we would not have had to make PA's fully commissioned officers if we had a semi-commissioned WO alternative for the CFMS...just to pay them enough so they don't get out for civy jobs...

I agree that RSM's are critical at the unit level, but I will disagree that formation SM's are not needed, or just in charge of the 4D's at a higher level.  Comd are surrounded by senior officers that are all no doubt good at there jobs at this point in their careers, but only the SM has the background to advise the Comd from 30+ years as an NCO, representing the concerns of the NCO's in the formation.  Not to mention providing a private sounding board for the Comd.  There is likely a whole lot more "projects" on a formation SM's desk, but TBH I don't work in the short hallway upstairs so I can't speak to the DSM's workload and what the Comd tasks him with on a daily basis.  But I am sure that these guys are important leaders in their formations and while they are not really RSM's like at a unit level, that doesn't mean they have not evolved equally important roles.

Cheers

 

[Blackadder1916]

But does not a AJAG Cell have a CO?  I'm not knowledgeable enough about their current structure to say.  But if they have defacto someone doing a CO or OC job, then having a "SM" is also correct.

I suppose if an AJAG organization was an "army" element, it would be acceptable to use the title of "sergeant major" for the senior NCM.  However, since all the legal types are in the JAG chain of command, they are a CF unit vice an army unit, so the generic term of AJAG CWO/CPO1 is appropriate.  Just as they are referred to in the JAG annual report.

http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/about-reports-pubs-military-law-annual-2016-17/ch-1-who-we-are.page

Office of the Judge Advocate General Chief Warrant Officer

The JAG Chief Warrant Officer (CWO) serves as the senior non-commissioned member advisor to the JAG. Based on the command team concept, the JAG CWO provides perspective to the JAG and his leadership team on strategic issues related to the JAG’s statutory roles, the CAF and the Office of the JAG.

Together with the Canadian Armed Forces CWO, the JAG CWO also co-chairs the Canadian Armed Forces Discipline Advisory Council. This council includes the most senior non-commissioned members from each command, and from other key level one organizations. The council meets to discuss strategic issues relevant to the maintenance of discipline, and provides input to both Armed Forces Council and the JAG.

Other experienced CWOs and Chief Petty Officers First Class (CPO1) are posted to positions in the AJAG offices within Canada and in some Deputy Judge Advocate Offices. The AJAG and Deputy Judge Advocate CWOs/CPO1s provide an invaluable link between senior non-commissioned members at the unit, base and formation level and the local legal office in addressing disciplinary and administrative matters.

 

[MJP]

Well I certainly did not make these rules I was just stating them....IMHO we should be able to go on the SME stream, just like the CT stream or in theory the SRCP stream.

And I'm certainly not afraid of putting a microscope on what I do specifically as an ETSM, so rather than type for ages here I will simply attach my ToR, both primary and as part of the RCEME regional network, none of which is in any way classified.  And then you are free to judge for yourself if I am worthy of being a CWO :-/

Cheers

Thank for posting these, only 5 div had theirs in acims and they aren't nearly as complete as these are. 

Just because it sounded like I was hacking on CWOs in my earlier postings, I fully agree with a few other posters here in that we should be rationalizing what rank does what across the board for officers and ncm alike.  I am fairly convinced that most of the CWO cuts have fairly strong rationale, but as always open to revisit my opinion (that and $2 will buy you a coffee).

 

[Old EO Tech]

I suppose if an AJAG organization was an "army" element, it would be acceptable to use the title of "sergeant major" for the senior NCM.  However, since all the legal types are in the JAG chain of command, they are a CF unit vice an army unit, so the generic term of AJAG CWO/CPO1 is appropriate.  Just as they are referred to in the JAG annual report.

http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/about-reports-pubs-military-law-annual-2016-17/ch-1-who-we-are.page

So given that its a CAF unit, then I image if we down-ranked the position it would just be call AJAG MWO/CPO2 then...

 

[Old EO Tech]

Thank for posting these, only 5 div had theirs in acims and they aren't nearly as complete as these are. 

Just because it sounded like I was hacking on CWOs in my earlier postings, I fully agree with a few other posters here in that we should be rationalizing what rank does what across the board for officers and ncm alike.  I am fairly convinced that most of the CWO cuts have fairly strong rationale, but as always open to revisit my opinion (that and $2 will but you a coffee).

Don't get me wrong either, I'm not at all afraid of a real analysis of what CWO should be doing or not.  In fact the SEM project/CDS directed that we do this analysis, its just that in the CA that analysis became a simple two part question. 

1. Are you part of a Command Team(not a leadership team)?
2. If not, are you in a job that is a post RSM, institutional SME? Such as a Corps SM, AJAG etc

If both of those are answered no, analysis done...downgrade to MWO or SRCP Capt.

And, if we are doing this to CWO, of course we should be doing the same to every officer job Maj and higher as well.  And yes, my opinion and $2.20 gets you a coffee at Timmies :_/

Cheers

 

[FJAG]

You are quite right, I was posting quickly, but living in a Joint HQ, were we have lots of RCN types, I've given up on correcting these things, I get called "Chief" daily, were if I used that when I was a Junior NCO towards an Army CWO, I'd have many weekends on duty to consider my mistake....

But does not a AJAG Cell have a CO?  I'm not knowledgeable enough about their current structure to say.  But if they have defacto someone doing a CO or OC job, then having a "SM" is also correct.

Cheers

An AJAG cell does not have a CO. While an AJAG is a LCol, he does not carry the official CO designation or powers. There is only one CO for the entire Office of the JAG which if memory serves me correctly is/was the DJAG COS who is a full Colonel.

There was also one specific CWO/CPO1 who is designated JAG CWO and was the principle advisor to the JAG himself/herself. Unfortunately the outward facing JAG website, like the rest of the CF website, is short on information and I can't tell you who fills what job these days but you might be able to find the info on the JAG's DWAN site. There is the following blurb about the JAG CWO and the other CWOs/CPO1s in the last JAG Annual Report:

Office of the Judge Advocate General Chief Warrant Officer

The JAG Chief Warrant Officer (CWO) serves as the senior non-commissioned member advisor to the JAG. Based on the command team concept, the JAG CWO provides perspective to the JAG and his leadership team on strategic issues related to the JAG’s statutory roles, the CAF and the Office of the JAG.

Together with the Canadian Armed Forces CWO, the JAG CWO also co-chairs the Canadian Armed Forces Discipline Advisory Council. This council includes the most senior non-commissioned members from each command, and from other key level one organizations. The council meets to discuss strategic issues relevant to the maintenance of discipline, and provides input to both Armed Forces Council and the JAG.

Other experienced CWOs and Chief Petty Officers First Class (CPO1) are posted to positions in the AJAG offices within Canada and in some Deputy Judge Advocate Offices. The AJAG and Deputy Judge Advocate CWOs/CPO1s provide an invaluable link between senior non-commissioned members at the unit, base and formation level and the local legal office in addressing disciplinary and administrative matters.

:cheers:

 

[Blackadder1916]

The Brits actually had to take an LSE LCol and revert him in rank to the equivalent of CWO in order to create their first Army SM.  They absolutely DO NOT get the whole Command Team Thing....

Actually, they took the Academy Sergeant Major (who had already been commissioned as a LE Captain but continued to served as a WO1) and made him the Army Sergeant Major.  When his term is up he'll be promoted to major and go to staff college to continue his career.

Well I am actually a fan of the US WO System too. Maybe we would not have had to make PA's fully commissioned officers if we had a semi-commissioned WO alternative for the CFMS...just to pay them enough so they don't get out for civy jobs...

There are no more Warrant Officer Physician Assistants in the US Military and haven't been for nearly twenty years.  They were all made commissioned officers (those that were able to get a bachelors degree by the deadline) for basically the same reason that the CF did.  The entry to practise requirements (civilian licensing criteria) changed so that a minimum of a bachelors (or in some jurisdictions, a masters) became the norm.  Since having a four year degree was the minimum education level for that MOS, they were treated the same as all other MOS that have the same educational requirement, they became a commissioned officer occupation.

 

[Haggis]

About 8 or 9 years ago, I did a comparison of CPO1/CWO to CPO1/CWO positions.  At the time there was a move to designate new SA and KP CPO1/CWO positions but the VCDS wanted to know what and who was out there before proceeding.  The result was that there were around thirty or so CPO1/CWO occupying CPO2/MWO and Lt(N)/Capt, and LCdr/Maj positions.  There were a variety of different reasons for this, some good, some not.  Some had to do with the staffing challenges in various L1 and L2 HQs during Afghanistan when Capts and Majs were in short supply.  Some had to do with the CAF's addiction to Class B as a staffing tool to meet these shortfalls and the annuitant employment policies of the day which pretty much encouraged double dipping.  As a result of this study and the VCDS's direction, many CPO1/CWO in non-CPO1/CWO positions were told to CFR, relinquish or retire.

Shortly after this the CWO SEM was released which provided more clearly articulated "off-ramps" and "holding positions" for those CPO1/CWO who were not destined for new KP or SA employment but still willing and deemed acceptable to serve.  Then, in 2012, I believe, a CANFORGEN announced that the 35/55 cap would be rigorously applied to Regular Force CPO1/CWO in order to "cull the herd".  Due to the challenges faced in the P Res with generating sufficient CPO1/CWO to meet succession planning requirements, this policy was not applied to the P Res CPO1/CWO community as long as a need existed for continued employment and the member was, in all other ways, suitable and qualified to remain in uniform beyond CRA55.

It's also important to note that when a CPO1/CWO is posted to the Senior Appointment List (SAL) they become part of a new occupation (MOSID 00351). KP remain part of their occupation.  Also SA have their own pay scale while KP do not.

There is a lot of influence and prestige with being a CPO1/CWO, particularly as a member of a Command Team.  This is something not easily surrendered.  Pay and pension aside, this sometimes makes SEM off-ramps leading away from the CWO rank unpalatable.

 

[Infanteer]

It's also important to note that when a CPO1/CWO is posted to the Senior Appointment List (SAL) they become part of a new occupation (MOSID 00351). KP remain part of their occupation.  Also SA have their own pay scale while KP do not.

As of this summer, ALL CPO1/CWO will be part of the 00351 MOSID.

 

[Haggis]

As of this summer, ALL CPO1/CWO will be part of the 00351 MOSID.

Not that I doubt you (and I am a few years removed from inner workings of the CWO world) but how will this work for Tier 4 CPO1/CWO (i.e. Unit RSM, SCWO, Coxn)?  Do they all get SA pay now?

 

[Infanteer]

Not that I doubt you (and I am a few years removed from inner workings of the CWO world) but how will this work for Tier 4 CPO1/CWO (i.e. Unit RSM, SCWO, Coxn)?  Do they all get SA pay now?

There are now 5 tiers: Tactical Leadership Team, Tactical Post-Unit Leadership Team, Post-Tactical Leadership Team, Strategic Leadership Team, and CFCWO.  The MES IP states that there will be a pay review, with each tier possibly getting its own pay scale.

The MES IP is ambiguous on how a MWO gets moved into his or her first appointment at the unit level.  I tried reading through it, but its built on some complex assessment model.  From my understanding, it is feasible that an Artillery Regiment could end up with a CWO from, say, a Supp Tech background as an RSM.  Perhaps somebody else familiar with the change could elaborate.