A
aesop081
Guest
yoman said:Now if the CDS says he doesn't want CIC officers working with the PRes, then that's the way it is.
Are we done yet ?
yoman said:Now if the CDS says he doesn't want CIC officers working with the PRes, then that's the way it is.
Piper said:: : : : :
I doubt very much that it is because the CDS 'does not want' CIC officer to train with the PRes or Regs.
I suspect very much that it is because he knows that the CIC is not capable of filling that role and has made this new rule to ensure that it does not happen, period.
cdnaviator said:Are we done yet ?
In some cases a person was CIC, but only on paper. The accoutrements were never changed.Trinity said:c) many of these officers never actually work in the CIC but just wear the badge
rwgill said:The unfortunate truth is, it still happens, but extremely rare.
geo said:If said CIC officer is interested in taking up full time occupation with the CF - then maybe said CIC officer should take phase training and become a Pres or Reg officer...
Neill McKay said:Let me turn it around, then: if a position can be adequately staffed by a CIC officer, does it make sense to employ another officer whose training was much more expensive and whose specialized MOSID-specific skills could perhaps used elsewhere? CIC officers are by far the best bargain in the Service.
dapaterson said:There's an even cheaper bargain around - they're called civilians. If a function requires little to no military background or training, civilians are more than capable of meeting that need.
One word, U-N-I-O-N.dapaterson said:Not at all. I'm saying that if military training is not a requirement, why put someone in uniform in that chair at all?