Updated Army Service Dress project

[dimsum]

Oh no that’s still a thing, maybe not a wall but “I’m filling out duties and can’t help but look at my list of regimental dues unpaid.”

I still think regimental pride is more a benefit than a hinderance; but we definitely have too many of them.

The British Army, of all organizations, managed to amalgamate regiments. You would think they would have the strongest associations, since some of those units are quite old.

 

[AmmoTech90]

The total number of Cdr/LCol+ is (last I looked) about 3x the number of CPO1/CWO. Lots more officers to cull in a sickly season than CWOs.

It's been done. My trade list 25% of its CWOs. It would have been more, but one position had strong defenders at the LCol/Col level.

 

[Furniture]

It's been done. My trade list 25% of its CWOs. It would have been more, but one position had strong defenders at the LCol/Col level.

My trade lost half of its CWO positions years ago, and just had one of the remaining ones changed from a Met preferred position to wide open.

 

[Halifax Tar]

The total number of Cdr/LCol+ is (last I looked) about 3x the number of CPO1/CWO. Lots more officers to cull in a sickly season than CWOs.

Interesting.

I still think regimental pride is more a benefit than a hinderance; but we definitely have too many of them.

I have no doubt. But it shouldn't be the reason to keep doing business the same way if things are broken.

 

[Halifax Tar]

It's been done. My trade list 25% of its CWOs. It would have been more, but one position had strong defenders at the LCol/Col level.

My trade lost half of its CWO positions years ago, and just had one of the remaining ones changed from a Met preferred position to wide open.

Trades shouldn't have any CPO1s or CWOs at all.

They belong to the CPO1/CWO Corps now.

 

[dapaterson]

Trades shouldn't have any CPO1s or CWOs at all.

They belong to the CPO1/CWO Corps now.

Yes but... Enters the chat

For example, there are no SARTECH officers. So senior instructor positions include a CWO, who logically should be a SARTECH.

There are a handful of others as well.

 

[dimsum]

Yes but... Enters the chat

For example, there are no SARTECH officers. So senior instructor positions include a CWO, who logically should be a SARTECH.

There are a handful of others as well.

Maybe a Super MWO?

 

[dapaterson]

I for one look forward to an Air Maintenance Supervisor being named RSM of 3 PPCLI, on promotion and OT to CWO.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Yes but... Enters the chat

For example, there are no SARTECH officers. So senior instructor positions include a CWO, who logically should be a SARTECH.

There are a handful of others as well.

I completely agree.

I am not a supporter of the way we currently manage and employ our CWOs.

I for one look forward to an Air Maintenance Supervisor being named RSM of 3 PPCLI, on promotion and OT to CWO.

This should happen. And then maybe we can finally get rid of this stupid idea.

 

[OldSolduer]

Actually the RSM of any Army battalion or similar size unit has to be from that trade. He/she has to know and understand the hardships the troops go through.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Actually the RSM of any Army battalion or similar size unit has to be from that trade. He/she has to know and understand the hardships the troops go through.

So should every Cox'n or RSM. They should be versed in the goings on of the unit they are in. Unfortunately that's not the case anymore, and Army Bns shouldn't be immune.

RSM/Cox'ns are either administrators and can be employed anywhere in that role or they are not. Right now the CS and CSS world has lost a ton while Ops side is able to maintain its sacrosanct role.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Actually the RSM of any Army battalion or similar size unit has to be from that trade. He/she has to know and understand the hardships the troops go through.

It was sad to watch an Armoured Corps CWO try to cope as the RSM of an Infantry unit, filled with recent AFG veterans more than half his age.

It didn't go well for either of them

 

[Furniture]

So should every Cox'n or RSM. They should be versed in the goings on of the unit they are in. Unfortunately that's not the case anymore, and Army Bns shouldn't be immune.

RSM/Cox'ns are either administrators and can be employed anywhere in that role or they are not. Right now the CS and CSS world has lost a ton while Ops side is able to maintain its sacrosanct role.

My understanding is that to be a Cox'n you need to have sea time at various rank/position levels. It seems to me that the RCN did the best job of opening up the tactical unit CPO 1/CWO positions to as many occupations as possible, while still ensuring they have the relevant experience/knowledge.

 

[Halifax Tar]

My understanding is that to be a Cox'n you need to have sea time at various rank/position levels. It seems to me that the RCN did the best job of opening up the tactical unit CPO 1/CWO positions to as many occupations as possible, while still ensuring they have the relevant experience/knowledge.

You are correct. There is no minimum standard but the more exposure to life at sea the better chance you have.

To the RCNs credit we've had non hard sea trade Cox'ns since I got in. My first Cox'n when I was on PRE was a medic. And my trade has produced a large number, probably the most for non anchoring wearing folks. At one time we had 3 on this coast at once.

It's the Army who has certain corps and occupations jealousy guarding positions and taking others.

 

[Navy_Pete]

My understanding is that to be a Cox'n you need to have sea time at various rank/position levels. It seems to me that the RCN did the best job of opening up the tactical unit CPO 1/CWO positions to as many occupations as possible, while still ensuring they have the relevant experience/knowledge.

I think the way ships are set up you get a lot more overlap. Because everyone has to be able to do first response to DC, hazmat spills, casualties, force protection etc on duty watch and you get roles like duty MS, duty coxn, CPO2s as officer of the day, you tend to at least have an idea of what other sections are doing. And with everyone being within 500ish feet or less the amount of coordination to get anything done is pretty high, so you get used to it with HODs&CHODs, and checking with other departments every time before you bring COAs to Command. Even the air force guys get used to coordinating the fly pro with the other departments!

My impression is that norm doesn't translate to non-ships, and I suspect a lot of that is just because we are all literally in the same boat. But does mean anyone who has gotten to CPO1 has had some exposure to what everyone does (except maybe MSED, because we're weird trolls kept in the basement of the ship that get avoided unless you need hot water.)

 

[Eye In The Sky]

The current 1 Wing CWO has practically zero experience in the Tac Avn world yet…the previous one wasn’t even air ops. I can’t say I agree with that and a few WOs I spoke to who are green airforce didn’t support the concept either.

1 Wing Chief Warrant Officer - Royal Canadian Air Force - Canada.ca

Biography of the 4 Wing Chief Warrant Officer

www.canada.ca

I’m one of those old way of thinking folks that prefers to see trade-experienced Chiefs at the tactical level, who “get it” from experience in and with the trades they grew up in as young NCOs and are matched to units they have experience in before departing for the Chief Corps.

I should never be considered for any RSM positions and no green DEU people should be considered for a SCWO position either.

 

[markppcli]

Trades shouldn't have any CPO1s or CWOs at all.

They belong to the CPO1/CWO Corps now.

I strongly disagree with this. Knowing what the soldiers your leading actually do is to me critical. How are you supposed to mentor junior leaders when you have never done the job they’re doing ?

 

[markppcli]

So should every Cox'n or RSM. They should be versed in the goings on of the unit they are in. Unfortunately that's not the case anymore, and Army Bns shouldn't be immune.

RSM/Cox'ns are either administrators and can be employed anywhere in that role or they are not. Right now the CS and CSS world has lost a ton while Ops side is able to maintain its sacrosanct role.

How can an RSM in a Bn assess the performance of his CSMs if he’s never set a CCP / controlled the fast pack done any other CSM job ? That’s absurd.

 

[OldSolduer]

So should every Cox'n or RSM. They should be versed in the goings on of the unit they are in. Unfortunately that's not the case anymore, and Army Bns shouldn't be immune.

RSM/Cox'ns are either administrators and can be employed anywhere in that role or they are not. Right now the CS and CSS world has lost a ton while Ops side is able to maintain its sacrosanct role.

Beggin yer pardon but you put an RCAF CWO as RSM - it won’t be pretty. And an Army RSM at the unit level is not an administrator. Ask any Infantry type.

 

[Furniture]

How can an RSM in a Bn assess the performance of his CSMs if he’s never set a CCP / controlled the fast pack done any other CSM job ? That’s absurd.

I think @Halifax Tar was pointing out that the whole Chief Corps concept was never really going to work as intended, because so many positions require a direct knowledge of the unit and how it functions. What happened though is those units protect certain trade's CWO positions, but mean that the support side of the house lost it's protection. As an example, the CFINT Gp CWO isn't an Int Op, or Met Tech, the trades that belong to the branch.