CSS Troops - Less "Deserving"?

[GO!!!]

Personally, I see the "inability" of CSS troops to learn very basic rifleman skills to be crap.

We train infanteers to be drivers, signallers, storemen and mortarmen, with little or no associated skill fade, and as an integral part of their career progression. Yet we accept the excuse that a CSS soldier could not possibly do his primary job, and maintain a seperate skill set at the same time.

How is asking a truck driver/supply tech to dig a trench and hit a figure 11 at 100,200, and 300m, 8 times out of ten, any different than having an infantry WO as a CQ, an infantry Cpl as a signaller, or an Infantry Bn's Tpt platoon staffed and led entirely with infanteers?

I refuse to believe that our Cbt Arms trades are simply so much more versatile and hardworking that they can achieve a high level of proficiency in two trades, while our CSS troops can only achieve it in one.

 

[muskrat89]

Sorry GO!! But to me you are sending mixed messages...

My response was intended to dispell the notion that so many people on this site have that the job of an infanteer is simple, easy, and should be considered a "secondary" task to all of their "real" duties.

I've responded to other threads where Air Force techs are claiming to want to "patrol like the infantry" and "secure their own bases". This holds about as much water as the FOO/FAC claiming to be more of an infanteer than the infantry, which is, bollocks.

Wandering around with a rifle and TV does not make you an infanteer, even if you know G32's frequency, any more than Infanteers practicing calling for fast air on their PLQ makes them a Air traffic controller. All soldiers must know how to use their rifles, but a competent shot and an infanteer are miles apart, in terms of skills, mentality, training and equipment.

And before you say that I don't know what I'm talking about, I've escorted FOOs, seen them in action (in theatre and on lots of exes) and pardon my saying, but every FOO I've seen in action would be in a body bag, shallow grave or enemy hands if he did not have an infantry escort.

and

Personally, I see the "inability" of CSS troops to learn very basic rifleman skills to be crap.

It seems that you chastise one side of the board for not being able to hold a candle to their Infanteer brethern, and then in this thread - it's a cop-out if they can't function as "basic riflemen"...

Or - maybe you want them to be posess 2 skillsets, one of which should be infanteer - but just not be too cocky about it  ;D

Anyway, back to your regularly scheduled debate...

 

[GO!!!]

Sorry GO!! But to me you are sending mixed messages...

and

It seems that you chastise one side of the board for not being able to hold a candle to their Infanteer brethern, and then in this thread - it's a cop-out if they can't function as "basic riflemen"...

Or - maybe you want them to be posess 2 skillsets, one of which should be infanteer - but just not be too cocky about it  ;D

Anyway, back to your regularly scheduled debate...

Don't confuse "Rifleman" with "Infanteer", one is a weapon operator, the other a multi - faceted cbt soldier.

As for posessing two skills - why not? I think we manage to corner the market on "cocky" - so no argument there.  ;D

 

[muskrat89]

 

[TN2IC]

How is asking a truck driver/supply tech to dig a trench and hit a figure 11 at 100,200, and 300m, 8 times out of ten, any different than having an infantry WO as a CQ, an infantry Cpl as a signaller, or an Infantry Bn's Tpt platoon staffed and led entirely with infanteers?

Did it..done it. Passed.

 

[armyvern]

Personally, I see the "inability" of CSS troops to learn very basic rifleman skills to be crap.
How is asking a truck driver/supply tech to dig a trench and hit a figure 11 at 100,200, and 300m, 8 times out of ten, any different than having an infantry WO as a CQ, an infantry Cpl as a signaller, or an Infantry Bn's Tpt platoon staffed and led entirely with infanteers?

Been there and got the t-shirt GO!!!.
Now, to let me clarify the "CQ" quote. A CQ is not a qualified Supply Technician. There is no comparison. A combat storesman is just that....a combat storesman. Basic Supply knowledge. Any person (Combat storesman, CQ Adm runner) can pick up the Unit credit card and go downtown and purchase stationary, pens, or whatever on the credit card. It happens all the time right? (Now...just to point out that any combat storesman doing this is doing so illegally as there is a National Contract for these items. IAW Treasury Board Regulations/various CANFORGENs items available from the particular holder of this contract must, IAW the law, be processed via the FMAS system -not credit cards-).
I have yet to see a combat storesman loaded onto an FMAS course, purchasing management course, hazmat storrage and handling course, packaging course, CTAT/ITAR Regulation Course, MiMs Management, Site Manager Functional Courses etc etc). 1st line CQs/cbt storesman etc are relegated to employment in those specific Units for a reason. And, they also have qualified MOC 911 at those same said Units for a reason, for it is the MOC 911 putting those demands the cbt storesmen etc are writing up through the system, vetting, applying fin coding, sending the QD messages to NDHQ, SMs and LCMMs. That is the crux of our trade and it is not being done by CQs/cbt storesman. Any person can write up a demand or a TSR -to know how (and to have the proper trg/courses) to process these items in a fashion which is legal and IAW all applicable regulations, draft the contract, specs or standing offer, or request for purchase. That is another story all together. Therefore let's be absolutely clear on this...no CQ or combat storesman could walk into 2nd line Supply or 3rd line supply and do our job. Period. Yep, they can use a credit card, write a TSR, offload a truck, stock a shelf, fill out a Temp Loan Card, write up a DND2227 demand when their stock gets low...but face the facts....that demand them goes over to the QM from the CQ....where a Supply Tech does the actual work to get whatever it is through the system via message, PWGSC contract, LPO, standing offer or whatever.

I refuse to believe that our Cbt Arms trades are simply so much more versatile and hardworking that they can achieve a high level of proficiency in two trades, while our CSS troops can only achieve it in one.

I refuse to believe, with your statement above, therefore, that you would have any qualms with becoming a functional Supply Tech....ie a high level of proficiency in both your trade and mine. That does not mean a cbt storesmen because of course, to be proficient in my trade you need to be able to work in many many sections, writing contracts, messages, complying with the 10 001 applicable regulations when you receive a part that is DMC A (for one example)...who do you draft the message to etc etc.
So, seeing as how we Land Force Posn Sup Techs are out on the ranges at least once/year maintaining our basic skillsets on a multitude of weapons, passing our weapons handling tests, annual range qualifications, BFT, fieldcraft, hand signals, comms, NBC drills etc etc and complying with what the pointy end likes to call "basic rifleman skills", I'm wondering when you will all be becoming proficient in our trades.

That would also solve another problem brought up by Caesar:

3-Due to way more field time, Johnny can't keep up with all the paperwork at the Orderly Room. If necessary, hire more Admin Clerks, contract out some work, etc.

No hiring will be necessary. You see, if you are all for CSS to become proficient riflemen, I expect you should also have no problem becoming a "proficient" RMS clerk, that way you'll both be cross-trained. If required they can then be 'that soldier first" and the pointy enders who like to hang out at Timmies  during Regular working hours...can now go to work in the OR and ease some of that clerk's paperwork...after all the CF is based on "Teamwork" isn't it??

Or is that only when it's good for you guys?? Just wondering because as you pointed out....we are all paid 24/7. PS....you'll have to give up the block leaves that you're so used to getting too...a rarity amongst us CSS pers.

 

[Daidalous]

Not the evil CTAT and ITAR. I will take  ITAR N  and  CTAT A,  please ArmyVern  ;D .    Lets look at one thing first before we go on.  Some CSS trades have been merged with other trades over the decades.  It is the same as if the Infantry and Artillery were amalgamated.  Good luck

 

[armyvern]

Not the evil CTAT and ITAR. I will take  ITAR N  and  CTAT A,  please ArmyVern  ;D .    Lets look at one thing first before we go on.   Some CSS trades have been merged with other trades over the decades.  It is the same as if the Infantry and Artillery were amalgamated.  Good luck

Nice try there Daidalous...but no way...they're the easiest messages to draft and the list of companies certified to take them off our hands for proper handling after we demilitarize it and have it certified by the Tech Inspector already have their security checks done!! We could probably qualify a combat storesman to work that CTAT A Desk at R&D section in about a month; but nice try...trying to suck the easy job outta me!!  ;D

 

[GO!!!]

<sigh>

I am not saying that Infanteers do the job of a supply tech, only (still) trying to get my point accross that it is not unreasonable to expect other trades to have a basic understanding of ours, as is already the case for us.

Infanteers can fill out loan cards, hand out weapons and kit etc. Supply techs can shoot rifles, become jumpers and jumpmasters, so what is the problem here?

Why can't a minimum be expected? No - one is asking Cbt storemen to acquire space shuttle parts, or part the ocean of paperwork that Supply tech Sgts deal with, just as supply techs are not being asked to lead platoon fighting patrols, or do month long exercises living out of their rucksacks.

March, shoot and hit the target - why do you hate this concept so much?

 

[armyvern]

<sigh>

March, shoot and hit the target - why do you hate this concept so much?

You should read my post again Go. I do not hate the concept...I hate the fact that most of the Zero trades, especially those posting in this thread, are failing to grasp the concept that WE already do this!! Every year. Annually. It's required and it's done.

You stated that CQs etc have "achieved a high level of proficiency" in both trades. This is absolutely false and I called you on it. They may be proficient at working in one single section of supply...a first line Stores account (which still requires a qual'd 911er in the QM to enable that CQ to 'operate'), unfortunately the Supply Trade encompasses approximately 21 different sections (not one), all of whom have different regulations, paperwork and governing policies and procedures, and no two desks within the same section in our trade will have the same work requirements and anyone already proficient in my trade would already know this and wouldn't need to be told.

I agree with you..."soldier first" but it's really about time certain MOCs got off their high-horses about how with their own little 'concepts' about how we CSS personnel need to get off our asses and go out and do something that we already are.

 

[dutchie]

You see, if you are all for CSS to become proficient riflemen, I expect you should also have no problem becoming a "proficient" RMS clerk, that way you'll both be cross-trained.

You miss the point. Were talking about soldiers surviving in battle.  An RMS clerk must be able to act as a rifleman to survive on the battlefield. An Infantryman does not need to cross train as a clerk to survive on the battlefield - he (or she) has all the necessary skills already.

 

[DG-41]

GO!,

Back in the day I was a maintainer posted to 1 SVC, Maint Coy right off my TQ3. A Maint Coy in a service battalion is set up for doing all the second-line maintainence for a Brigade Group involved in a full-on shooting war, so in peacetime, there just wasn't enough second line maintainence to go around; we were way overmanned.

I don't know if this was 1 SVC policy or something more widespread, but they solved the problem by rotating surplus young Craftsmen through the first line LADs at the other units in the Brigade. You'd do a rotation attached to somebody else (so you'd do all their exercises) but you were also responsible for attending all the SVC Btn exes as well. The end result was a lot of field time.

In garrison, you'd work on the shop floor with your attached unit, turning wrenches. (I was attached to 1 Hq & Sig, and anywhere there are Linesman there are broken trucks) When your attached unit went to the field, you'd be part of an MRT or a recovery team. But when Mother Maintainence Company came calling, that was almost always "soldier training" with no wrenching on the agenda at all.

I remember a lot of patrolling (day and night), lots and lots and lots of digging, and I got to lead a 3-man recce patrol on FRG's hide at one point. We weren't anywhere near Infantry standards, but we took the "soldier first" thing pretty seriously. I'd say that about half the exercises I did there didn't involve my trade at all.

And incidentally, one full month out of my TQ3 was devoted to being a member of a fighting platoon. Recce patrols, defensive positions, and lots of fire and movement (in gas masks no less - God that sucked)

Maybe things have changed since, but when I was doing it, "soldier first" wasn't just lip service.

DG 

 

[GO!!!]

You should read my post again Go. I do not hate the concept...I hate the fact that most of the Zero trades, especially those posting in this thread, are failing to grasp the concept that WE already do this!! Every year. Annually. It's required and it's done.

You stated that CQs etc have "achieved a high level of proficiency" in both trades. This is absolutely false and I called you on it. They may be proficient at working in one single section of supply...a first line Stores account (which still requires a qual'd 911er in the QM to enable that CQ to 'operate'),

I am not asking supply techs to "attain a high level of proficiency" I am asking why they so strongly resist marching and shooting, and use "too much work" as an excuse not to practice.

Your assertation that Company Quartermasters are incompetent compared to a qualified Sup Tech is utter tripe, to put it mildly. A CQ handles the logistics for up to 150 men, beans, bullets, transport, and everything else required by a Company. He is often required to "think outside the box" as the oft heard Supply Tech mantra "blame it on the pubic service/Government" or "come back tomorrow" just does'nt cut it when 100 plus men are freezing and starving in the dark. In addition to this, a CQ holds the keys to enough firearms and heavy weapons to lay waste to a small city, and several million dollars worth of kit, combined with the knowledge to use it all, not just hand it out and do the paperwork. He is also expected to serve as a JM, CSM, PlWO, and the same again for courses, etc. I have never even heard of a Supply tech who can do all of the above, unless he was an infanteer first.

Maybe a certain logistician needs to step down from her oversized equine.

 

[MJP]

Well said Go!! and Ceaser.....A very interesting debate on a topic many of us in the infantry wonder about from time to time.

 

[TCBF]

"LADs"  Light Aid Detachments - I haven't heard that one in years.

Typical Recce Sqn task on an Exercise " Send someone to go hit 4 Svc Bns Maint Coy.  They are dug in and keyed up and need somebody to bounce them so they can repel you and build on their sucesss."

Okay, deal.  I know what it's like to be bored.

US Army Captain on FALLEX 88: " Thanks for attacking us.  Only time we've been hit in almost two weeks!"

Me:  "Hey Sir, no problem."

Tom

 

[armyvern]

I am not asking supply techs to "attain a high level of proficiency" I am asking why they so strongly resist marching and shooting, and use "too much work" as an excuse not to practice.

You actually believe that they resist this? All the ones I've worked with actually very much look forward to our annual IBTS/ranges etc. We know it's going to happen and the CoC can't tell us to skip it because it is an annual requirement that we must complete to maintain our basic soldiering skills. The "too much work excuse" doesn't come into play with this annual training, as it must be completed. Whether we like it or not, the work needs to be done. The rank and file of the CSS trades are in a catch22 situation for if the CoC decides to forego the workload and get out on the ranges more often...invariably the complaints come in about 'no stock for my soldiers' from the very same personnel who are usually complaining about us not being out on the ranges enough. And the circle continues.

The "too much work" factor comes into play for PT... and is not used by the rank and file themselves. PT is mandatory at all Army Supply sites I've been posted to..and if constant course kittings etc keep them from PT, or an overwhelming workload (that sometimes must come first...especially if you want clothing in stock to be able to issue etc) that is not a problem to blame on the CSS troops, but rather the leadership who fails to provide adequate human resources which would allow the completion of PT and workload, a point I've brought up many times.

Your assertation that Company Quartermasters are incompetent compared to a qualified Sup Tech is utter tripe, to put it mildly.
Maybe a certain logistician needs to step down from her oversized equine.

I asserted NO such thing whatsoever. I stated that they were proficient in one section of Supply. Yes they may also be JMs (if they've got that course) etc, just as they could be proficient in other sections of Supply....if they had those courses. I know very well what a CQ does...my husband previously filled this posn and was a JM too. There are many CQs who are not Infantry; the engineers, Arty, Armd have CQs, SQs etc as well. Many Sup Techs are JM qualified as well (PMD has a ton of them), CSS trades also have PL WOs, CSMs. Our courses for Pl WOs, CSMs etc differ from yours because our primary task, even while deployed, is to do our CSS job. Just as the Arty PL WOs course differs from that of the Infanteer.

If the dust hits the fan then it becomes our job to drop the stock/get off our comfy chairs and really get to work utilizing those "soldier first" skills we maintain annually, and hopefully which we have learned correctly and I don't know a CSS person in NATO who would disagree with this.

Apparently the senior Leadership of the Army has decided that the IBTS trg, ranges etc that we CSS pers do annually is sufficient for us to maintain these basic skills. If it's not then perhaps a change to the IBTS trg is warranted, a decision made well above the rank and file of the CSS.

I don't think I'm on a high horse GO, I agree that we should all be soldier's first...I am contstantly fighting for the resources I require to allow my section the time to maintain these skills/ease our workload/allow regular attendance at PT etc...but if the resources aren't there (our trade is currently closed) the regular work still has to happen. You're comment about "blame it on the pubic service/Government" made me laugh for I can't tell you how many e-mails I've sent up my CoC calling it the "Non-Supply" system. Us Sup Techs don't like the way the system works either...you won't get an argument from any of us on this point. There are many of us who are very adept at thinking outside the box (and who are sometimes/often quite embarrased to be a Supply Tech) but we don't get to decide what system we work with..."blame it on the Government."

I only ask the respondants in this thread to "think outside the box" once in awhile as well. I have watched my personnel take off their gortex to give it to CAP/SQ students etc because they'd be out in the field and needed it more.

Many assertions in this thread have asserted that the CSS rank and file are, for the most part, less deserving, lazy, and willfully negligent at maintaining weapons skills, basic soldiering skills, and PT standards, and that they only show up to collect a paycheck is mis-information and simply wrong. And that's what I have the problem with.

..call it a high horse if you will

 

[S McKee]

I've been on both sides of the fence and this is a completely pointless and ridiculous argument. Everybody has a job to do. Not everbody can be an Infanteer, just like not everybody can be an MP or a Medic, Sup Tech etc. Hey we've only got 60,000 people in this outfit so we can only afford to have 5000 guys do PT 4 hours a day, hang-out at the coffee shop for two hours and pack and re-pack their kit for the remainder (and don't forget personal admin time). All the crap like pay and supply just doesn't magically happen.  Get your heads out of your butts, all this bitching about CSS trades seems like a lot of the green eyed monster. We all had our chance at the recruiting center to pick what we wanted to be when we grew up.  I know the 031s like to have this air of superiority, you work hard I know that, but you're not all Rambos, so for the love of God please stop living this fantasy that you can all be cross trained medic/helicopter pilot and give it a rest. So when the RMS clerk makes sure that you've filled out all the proper forms because he/she cares that your wife has money in the bank at the end of the month while your on tour, and that she is the beneficiary of your estate if something should happen to you, and when the Sup Tech gives you your new pair of boots and when the Medics patch up all your injuries, just say thank-you and be on your way. You can say what ever you want to the MPs because they're just there to screw you over and they really don't care what you think.

 

[TheNomad]

Very true - most MP do not care what you think of them.  They have heard it all before and it did not impress them then either 

 

[GO!!!]

I've been on both sides of the fence and this is a completely pointless and ridiculous argument. Everybody has a job to do. Not everbody can be an Infanteer, just like not everybody can be an MP or a Medic, Sup Tech etc. Hey we've only got 60,000 people in this outfit so we can only afford to have 5000 guys do PT 4 hours a day, hang-out at the coffee shop for two hours and pack and re-pack their kit for the remainder (and don't forget personal admin time).

Who are these guys? Well, whoever they are, they are truly driving the body compared to the dudes who work at DB - 4 days on 4 days off - just like the yellow jackets?

I give up. This is a pointless argument, and one that will go on until the end of time.

I know the 031s like to have this air of superiority, you work hard I know that, but you're not all Rambos, so for the love of God please stop living this fantasy that you can all be cross trained medic/helicopter pilot and give it a rest.

Air of superiority? Spoken like a true former infanteer.

Better than the inferiority complex that seems to accompany the the storm trooper uniform and red beret.

We have the distinction of actually being able to do our jobs on occasion, as opposed to attempting to ever - expand our job description as a method of job security.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Well, I think that about does it. The circle has been worn down to trench level. If anyone has anything new and exciting to add, ask a Mod to open it for your post.