Purple Trades: Definition & Trg Discussion

[Roy Harding]

One of Roy's "pick your battles" lessons ?

Yeah - something all fresh new Sgts should pay attention to when arguing with their CSMs.  And when you lose - and you will - accept it with good grace and humour.  That particular CSM and I remained friends for a good long time.

 

[xo31@711ret]

Pretty much same thing happened to me Roy. I had LOTPed from the RCR to medic. Went to Stad; almost two years later went to Chatham, 119AD as their medic. Got loaded on the JLC at the armoured school early 91 or 92. (anyway it was the last JLC with the 'small party taskings' before the field portion was introduced). Finished the course and went back to Chatham only to be told I may have to do the whole JLC with field portion or at the very least the field portion. I jokingly told the hospital WO in Chatham, that if a medic has to lead a section attack, then the war was over. He told me, that seriously, I would have to do the next JLC. I replied thanks, but no thanks, keep the leaf. I had enough of the field for awhile ( 6 years with 1RCR); had the pre-ISCC (or the 'leading infantryman's course' back then which I had completed about 3 weeks before I went to Borden to attend TQ3 medic course - why I was ever loaded on the pre-ISCC...).
The boss contacted the career mangler and I got exempt from the re-doing the JLC. I thought great, no more field for awhile....a year later I was posted to 2RCR UMS for 5 years LOL!  Karma?  But it was good to back with the Troops and connect with some old buddies again.

 

[TCBF]

...  Would it be the final nail in the coffin of Trudeau‘s unification of the forces?

- Wasn't Trudeau.  Pearson. 1 Feb 1968.  Trudeau became PM 20 April 1968.

 

[PMedMoe]

Did you ever do an LLQ or an LET??

They were the predecessors to the current "SQ".

They call that grandfathering if so. Same for the CLC, JLC or Army JNCO predating the current "PLQ" course. I'm quite sure you must have done one of those no?

Never did an LET or an LLQ and I was on one of the first "Common" PLQ courses.  I looked up the TP for Mod 6 and it's pretty hard to distinguish it from the small party tasking portion of the course.

 

[lone bugler]

When I joined up as a Med tech (reserves) the officer interviewing me asked me what element would I like to be in. Being totally shocked when asked this, he simply replied that theres really no difference in these purple trades. Seeing as I was serving with an Fld Amb I thought the logical choice was army, I thought if I had asked for navy I'd be parading in a different location. So on my first day I was so ever relieved when I found out everyone else choose army too at my unit.

 

[armyvern]

... the officer interviewing me asked me what element would I like to be in. Being totally shocked when asked this, he simply replied that theres really no difference in these purple trades...

Well, at least for your trade that still seems to be the case. There is no difference as all MedTechs are on the list to be "SQ" qualified.

Sadly though, the above statement used to be the case for us suppies, cooks, RMS etc --- but no longer is as per the CANFORGEN. Now, there really IS a difference ... and that difference creates nothing "value added" or for the betterment of our trade. Actually accomplishs the opposite.

 

[McG]

Everyone who joins the CF SHOULD undergo SQ.

I disagree.

As far as I'm concerned, if a blue clerk or cook or whatever wants to go to Afghanistan, then they should be SQ qualified, or equivalent.

I agree

Each individual is responsible for their own defence, and that means knowing how to operate certain small arms.

This is covered on BMQ in the C7 rifle.

You're a liability if you do not know how to use a C7, C9 or a C6.

From an Army perspective, sure.  From a Navy perspective, maybe it is more important to know the 9 mm and .50 cal. 

Clearly, one intent of this CANFORGEN is to ensure people serving in land operations have the requisite land qualifications.  It would also seem, given that not everyone in certain occupations will recieve the land training, that there is an intent to rationalize training resources (commit time, resources and manpower to training everyone when only some require it?) and to guide people into career paths linked to the environment of which they are apart.

If you are Navy cook, then I would think it make perfect sense for you to go do NETP while your Army counterparts are doing SQ.  A fall out of this is that the occupational structure must then recognize the specific sub-occupation streams of cook, land and cook, sea. Some jobs would be exclusively land, some would be exclusively sea and others would be 'any.'

The Air Force is where this gets tricky.  I am not aware of any air environmental training for non aircrew types (somebody can let me know if such a thing does exist).  At the same time, if things go really bad it is the non-aircrew types that will be fighting the ground fight for the airfield.  On this line of thinking, it would most certainly be reasonable to consider SQ for these pers.  I personally think the construction engineering trades should do the SQ and PLQ-L despite being purple and under the managing authority of the air force.  You find construction engineering trades on all bases with units in the Air Force and a Naval Troop on each coast.  If base defence is required, then construction engineering provides a manpower pool along with MPs and non-flying occupations.  Further, construction engineering trades deploy on land operations.

... I guess my point is that you don't need SQ to fight a ship and you don't need SQ to crew an aircraft.  However, any other job and your fight will (by nature of your job) be on the land.  Some jobs are required on the land & in ships.  Training all people in such occupations for both roles adds flexibility, but it comes with a cost (resources, manpower and time).  The best solution for the CF is probably not one of the extremes of:
1. train every person in every purple occupation for everything, or
2. train a individuals in a purple occupation for the relevant enviroment as posted into jobs.

 

[armyvern]

...
2. train a individuals in a purple occupation for the relevant enviroment as posted into jobs.

Unfortunately, this is where this CANFORGEN errs.

We now have purple trades posted into Land Enviornemental positions who we can not course load for SQ by virtue of their uniform colour as per this new CANFORGEN; ergo they can NOT perform all aspects of the job they are required to do in this location ... and their co-horts and fellow Sup Techs in green get shafted to do all those 1st line CQ/QM jobs while they ride the desks in Base Supply.

Might as well leave the positions empty for cripes sake rather than filling them with people who can only perform partial tasks. It's better on morale to have to do the field work because there's no one else available to do it, then to have to do it because someone else has been deemed "special" enough to garner all the desk work. <--- that's just BAD for morale.

 

[OldSolduer]

I still say everyone who joins the CF should undergo SQ, NO MATTER what element.

 

[McG]

Unfortunately, this is where this CANFORGEN errs.

I think that in the past we attempted to do the just in time training, but LET was unequally & inconsistently applied (some units ran LET for purple trades, some did not, and I've never heard of external standards organizations monitoring like they do for just about any other course we run now).  Not only were we missing the mark on just in time LET, but we were as far off with PLQ-L vs CFPLQ.  One could spend the first part of a career supporting the Navy do a CFPLQ and then get posted straight into an army combat unit.

We now have purple trades posted into Land Enviornemental positions who we can not course load for SQ by virtue of their uniform colour as per this new CANFORGEN; ergo they can NOT perform all aspects of the job they are required to do in this location ...

That is looking at things in the transition period.  Obviously, the way ahead must be that land environmental pers are posted to land units.  Those Air & Navy types unable to get the training must be posted to Air and Navy units.  There is no specific mention of posting only land environmental pers to land units (esp field units) & no mention of recognizing a sub-MOS for the land environment.  However, such steps would be essential to making the plan work (and I believe you've commented along similar lines) and so I am assuming this information will be revealed in future CANFORGEN or other orders.

For the interim, if nobody has the new training yet then nobody is less qualified than anybody else.  If the Army types already are getting the training, then look to requesting equivalencing  to keep your air and navy types as equally employable as possible (until they get posted out).  If you've got an ex combat arms cpl or higher, then staff an equivalencie for SQ, and do the same for any air or navy types that have done PLQ-L and an iteration of more of annual IBTS.

 

[OldSolduer]

Again my question is:

How many naval and air types are willing to forgo the allowances and benefits that come with an operational tour? If you want an op tour, get SQ first.
If you don't have SQ, you shouldn't be elible for an op tour.

 

[armyvern]

I think that in the past we attempted to do the just in time training, but LET was unequally & inconsistently applied (some units ran LET for purple trades, some did not, and I've never heard of external standards organizations monitoring like they do for just about any other course we run now).  Not only were we missing the mark on just in time LET, but we were as far off with PLQ-L vs CFPLQ.  One could spend the first part of a career supporting the Navy do a CFPLQ and then get posted straight into an army combat unit.
That is looking at things in the transition period.  Obviously, the way ahead must be that land environmental pers are posted to land units.  Those Air & Navy types unable to get the training must be posted to Air and Navy units.  There is no specific mention of posting only land environmental pers to land units (esp field units) & no mention of recognizing a sub-MOS for the land environment.  However, such steps would be essential to making the plan work (and I believe you've commented along similar lines) and so I am assuming this information will be revealed in future CANFORGEN or other orders.

For the interim, if nobody has the new training yet then nobody is less qualified than anybody else.  If the Army types already are getting the training, then look to requesting equivalencing  to keep your air and navy types as equally employable as possible (until they get posted out).  If you've got an ex combat arms cpl or higher, then staff an equivalencie for SQ, and do the same for any air or navy types that have done PLQ-L and an iteration of more of annual IBTS.

Flaw 1: You're assuming that career manglers are about to tell a few hundred married service couples that they'll be posted seperately for career-long durations. You just know that isn't going to happen. Hell, they won't tell them that NOW due to retention issues. All this has caused here ... is some VERY disgunteled army type Sup Techs and an increase in the drafting of VR Memos from same type. A pri 6 Unit already 18 pers short due to our low priority fill rate in the Army heirarchy, and now some of the few that we DO have are being precluded from being tasked to do their purple jobs because of this CANFORGEN. We can't afford to lose any more, not now, not in the future - not if the Army wants any kind of support anyway.

Flaw 2: You know -- it doesn't help retention any when it is consistanlty the SAME people that you piss off over and over and over again. Transition ... who's getting the bonus marks for this one on their annual? I'm willing to bet that he/she doesn't wear a green uniform and belong to a purple trade.

Waaaayyyy too many spouses of the "fairer" type wearing black & blue here married to hard zero trades.

 

[McG]

If you don't have SQ, you shouldn't be elible for an op tour.

You don't need SQ to do an operational tour aboard a ship out at sea.  You don't need SQ to fly planes out of a non-hostile third country.

Flaw 1: You're assuming that career manglers are about to tell a few hundred married service couples that they'll be posted separately for career-long durations.

The CM could tell them to accept separate postings or apply for environmental transfer (and all the training that goes with that).  You will likely find green pers at the various wings or either coast looking to go to another environment for the same reason.  It has to happen or the concept fails.

 

[OldSolduer]

MCG: Agreed, however anyone wanting a tour in a hostile land environment must be SQ (in my opinion) qualified. The comabt arms are a bit busy chasing ne'er do wells. The "purples" have to know what to do, with what and when, even those who don't go outside KAF.

 

[Rodahn]

MCG: Agreed, however anyone wanting a tour in a hostile land environment must be SQ (in my opinion) qualified. The comabt arms are a bit busy chasing ne'er do wells. The "purples" have to know what to do, with what and when, even those who don't go outside KAF.

Hmmm... Whatever happened to the old adage that you were a soldier first, and a tradesman/tradesperson second?

 

[McG]

MCG: Agreed, however anyone wanting a tour in a hostile land environment must be SQ (in my opinion) qualified. ...  The "purples" have to know what to do, with what and when, even those who don't go outside KAF.

Now we are in agreement, and I think the concept introduced in the CANFORGEN achieves this intent for the most part.  The only place where I see this new concept break down is for the Air Force ground occupations.  The Navy can do NETP, the Army can do SQ, and the Air Force ground trades should also do SQ.

Hmmm... Whatever happened to the old adage that you were a soldier first, and a tradesman/tradesperson second?

This applies if you are a soldier.  Not so much if you are a sailor or airman.

 

[armyvern]

You don't need SQ to do an operational tour aboard a ship out at sea.  You don't need SQ to fly planes out of a non-hostile third country.

I don't see anywhere in this thread that this idea was suggested. Not all purple Supply Techs will be posted to Sea, to Land Force, or to Air Ops positions. But, they certainly COULD be ... and when they are posted to those posns -- they should be required to complete the enviornmental course for the applicable element. Period. Full Stop. That's their job. Now, with this - it's NOT their jobs anymore unless they're Army.

Anyone deploying overseas should undergo SQ - full stop.

I'm very sorry, but personnel joined the CF, not the Army, not the Air Force, and not the Navy. They applied. They chose a trade. And, IF they chose a purple trade - they were then either "offered" a uniform colour OR assigned one. But, the TRADE (ie JOB) choice came first. Now, apparently the JOB comes second. I have serious issues with that.

I have serious issues with that precisely because I am a Supply tech. Period. I have completed all three enviornmental courses when my postings to those enviornments necessitated it. I didn't complain. I didn't whine. I just did my job. I happen to wear a green uniform. My trade -- was MY choice, and after I picked that trade they asked what DEU I wanted.

The CM could tell them to accept separate postings or apply for environmental transfer (and all the training that goes with that).  You will likely find green pers at the various wings or either coast looking to go to another environment for the same reason.  It has to happen or the concept fails.

Unfortunately, the CMs are going to have to DIRECT uniform colour changes, because I'll tell you the old gals around here in blue and black still can't wipe the damn chesire grins off their mugs and you won't be seeing them volunteering for anything anytime soon. Nor will you see the CMs posting them seperately -- that's BAD for retention as I've already said and will cause releases for an already "red" trade. Their not posting them seperately is a large reason why we are 18 short here ... they needed to post them out to keep them with their spouses and no filled them as they left.

Just give a try cutting, hmmm say 3 PPCLI by 12% and getting away with it.  

In the end, the purple ones in green get shafted again.

If the move was to send Land to Land, Air to Air etc of the purple types ... then they should have implemented that policy change BEFORE they implemented this change that takes away 1/2 our local Sup techs here that are actually able to DO the WHOLE job.

 

[OldSolduer]

Now that MCG and I finally agree... ;D, any of those that are not qualified SQ or equivalent, should forgo operational tours in Afghanistan until they become qualified. Its not fair that a person takes SQ and then some weenie who doesn't qualifiy SQ gets to go anyways, thereby receiving the same allowances and benefits an SQ qualified person receives.

If you are "on the ground" and not qualified SQ, you are a liability to yourself and others. They do not have the time to babysit you, and you are putting others in danger.
Get SQ qualified.

 

[armyvern]

Now that MCG and I finally agree... ;D, any of those that are not qualified SQ or equivalent, should forgo operational tours in Afghanistan until they become qualified. Its not fair that a person takes SQ and then some weenie who doesn't qualifiy SQ gets to go anyways, thereby receiving the same allowances and benefits an SQ qualified person receives.

If you are "on the ground" and not qualified SQ, you are a liability to yourself and others. They do not have the time to babysit you, and you are putting others in danger.
Get SQ qualified.

Well, we have a firm "THREE" agreements on this bit then. 

 

[armyvern]

Now we are in agreement, and I think the concept introduced in the CANFORGEN achieves this intent for the most part.  The only place where I see this new concept break down is for the Air Force ground occupations.  The Navy can do NETP, the Army can do SQ, and the Air Force ground trades should also do SQ.
This applies if you are a soldier.  Not so much if you are a sailor or airman.

It achieves the intent?

Can you explain how then, we now have over 25 pers who can NOT undergo the necessary course required to fill pri 2 positions here? Ergo, they'll sit in the cosy Base Pri 6 ones, while the Army types go round and round out in the not-so-cosy pri 2 field Units?