Alternate for the CIC

[McG]

If nothing else, CIC officers should have to do IAP/BOTP. They're becoming commisioned officers like the rest of us, they should have to do the same basic course we do.

The logic does not work.  The PRes does not take the same basic officer training as the regular force.  Is one component more deserving of its commission than the other?

 

[CrashBear]

And CrashBear, theres no such thing as PRes or Reg BMOQ, its IAP/BOTP

Sorry I stand corrected :-X

The end result is the same.

 

[COBRA-6]

Just to clarify, PRes Army (Navy, Air?) Officers take BMOQ, which is BMQ with an extra week of leadership small-party tasking type stuff tacked on. It can be run as a 5 week course, or a one week suppliment to the BMQ, in fact I had two officers in with the 58 pte's on the BMQ I ran last summer. IMHO, officer and NCM trg should not be mixed...

 

[Trinity]

Money is a factor...

They can't afford to send people away on a 10 or 12 week officer course.....

Time - they're people probably cannot afford to train for a whole summer as they are short
officers now and need them for the current year.

PT is another factor...
(i have no idea what the requirements are so I'll just leave it there and someone in the CIC world can inform
me on what the PT standards are... please and thank you)

Hey.. different trade, different standards, different training.  It just the way it is.  Why train any trade
to a higher standard or more extensive than they need (if it won't get used).  Its not cost efficient and
most likely the skills will be lost from lack of using because they won't have the chances to apply the extra
knowledge on a regular basis.

I like the system....    :  It just needs tweaking

(be nice.. please.. I just finished two essays and I swear I have no idea what i'm writing about)

:

 

[CrashBear]

Just to clarify, PRes Army (Navy, Air?) Officers take BMOQ, which is BMQ with an extra week of leadership small-party tasking type stuff tacked on. It can be run as a 5 week course, or a one week suppliment to the BMQ, in fact I had two officers in with the 58 pte's on the BMQ I ran last summer. IMHO, officer and NCM trg should not be mixed...

The present CIC Trg covers basically the same thing but in two courses with leadership in both and SPT in MOC. The problem is it's very basic and just skims the surface.  In my opionion while it's not prefered to have officers in the same classes as others it can really help an officer to understand what the feet of the organization is doing. Other wise not a good practice.  Once again I boils down to time allotted for the required trg and the taskings that each has at the end.  Is it enough ?????

 

[COBRA-6]

The present CIC Trg covers basically the same thing but in two courses with leadership in both and SPT in MOC. The problem is it's very basic and just skims the surface.   In my opionion while it's not prefered to have officers in the same classes as others it can really help an officer to understand what the feet of the organization is doing. Other wise not a good practice.   Once again I boils down to time allotted for the required trg and the taskings that each has at the end.   Is it enough ?????

That's the battle isn't it, the PRes had the same issue with the old MITCP vs RESO training, where one group would train to RegF standards, and the other... no so much... and this produced much of the same animosity towards MITCP trained officers some display towards CIC officers... quality of the officer vs time available training... I know for me it took 23 weeks of training over 2 summers to become MOC qualified... they recently switched from phase 2 (old CAP) to CAP(R), a switch from 11 weeks to 5 weeks of training... this lasted 3 years, and now they've gone back to RegF CAP (10 weeks) for PRes officers as well... why? I don't know, but quality of training delivered is number 1 on my list of suspects... quality vs quantity...

 

[CrashBear]

I concur. 

The other issue may as well be not fully understanding the roles and responsibilites and the need for type of training to do the primary duties. 

Is it really cost effective to training a CIC Off to the same level as one in a purely operational role.  Is it likely that the additional trg given to the CIC Off will ever be put to any practical use.

Therefore one of my arguments for more trg in the needs of the primary duties.

Does an operational officer required training in how to deal with a problem child?  Not if their primary duty doesn't call for it.  We have RegF Officers working in the program and they have to obtain the reg'd training that CIC Off gets.

Basically it's optics

 

[Inch]

I concur.  

The other issue may as well be not fully understanding the roles and responsibilites and the need for type of training to do the primary duties.  

Is it really cost effective to training a CIC Off to the same level as one in a purely operational role.   Is it likely that the additional trg given to the CIC Off will ever be put to any practical use.

Therefore one of my arguments for more trg in the needs of the primary duties.

What do you guys keep going back to "primary duties"? You're an officer remember? Welcome to the land of secondary duties. I'm a pilot, my day to day job does not consist of using the C7 yet I maintain yearly quals on it because I'm a member of the CF and that's what we do (with the exception of padres since they're non-combatants but that's a special case). No one is saying you should be MOC qualified infantry officers, personally, I'd like to see CIC's and reservists do the same BOTC (IAP/BOTP whatever they call it now) that I did. On my BOTC there was a doctor, 2 dentists and a JAG and a whole assortment of other trades. Why? Because we're all CF officers and we have a common baseline that way.

For the record, I'm not sure where you guys are getting this 10 week nonsense, RegF basic officer training was 14 weeks when I did it and I believe the new system is also 14 weeks. It can be broken down into two summers too, mine was, 8 weeks followed by 6 weeks.

Does an operational officer required training in how to deal with a problem child?   Not if their primary duty doesn't call for it.   We have RegF Officers working in the program and they have to obtain the reg'd training that CIC Off gets.

Basically it's optics

That's MOC training, that has nothing to do with being a general service officer (universality of service, which you guys don't seem to have to fit into like the rest of us), but if a RegF officer has to deal with problem children as a secondary duty, rest assured, they'll have the proper training.

 

[McG]

The 10 week reference was to Common Army Phase (which takes place after BMOQ for reservists or after IAP/BOTP for regular force), and the course lengths given were all for the PRes courses.  The only airforce types that do CAP are regular force who are in occupations that are managed by land forces (I've seen MPs and logistics officers in blue berets doing the course).  However, CAP goes beyond the needs of the CIC.

 

[Neill McKay]

Or, as an opposite alternative, have CIC Officers take normal PRes officer training like everyone else (land/air/sea), then their cadet-specific (trade) training. This would eliminate the "not a real officer" argument, increase their usefullness to the CIC in times of crisis, and go a long way to improve the calibre and professionalism in the CIC ranks. Those members who have already served in the PRes or Reg Force will already have completed this training, and would only have to do the cadet-specific part. If this was done then CIC officers should be paid the same as PRes officers, which would be a lot more as I understand. Those who take fitness and military duty seriously would have what it takes to complete the training, those with prior service would be largely unaffected, and those who don't could still be involved with cadets in a civilian instructor capacity....

Problems I foresee:

Time of training (4weeks BMOQ + 10weeks CAP + cadet-specific crses)
Cost (longer training time + new class A pay rates)
Impact on training system (so many CIC officers to train)

Thoughts?

Outstanding idea, but you're correct about the problems.  Right now CIC officers come pretty cheap both in what we're paid when doing our normal jobs, and in the relative brevity and classroom nature of our courses.  I'd love for someone to send me on more and longer courses, but there are only "n" dollars in the defence budget and I imagine we all agree that the pointy end should be getting most of it.

 

[Neill McKay]

Its not whether or not the cadet program can be better served, its if the CF can be better served by a new system.

So far, the only problem for the Forces seems to be a group, majority or minority I don't know, who have some sense that commissioned CIC officers somehow take away from their own achievements as service members.  I don't think hurt feelings are a good reason for major organisational changes.  What do you want to spend the defence budget on: bombs and bullets, or a mob of bureaucrats to design new uniforms and write new commissions, terms of service, and reams of other required paper to implement this new outfit?

 

[Neill McKay]

Because I don't know the environment-specific course names for the air and navy officers... Common Army, Air or Navy Phase then, depending on which environment the officer plans to serve in. Of course I wouldn't expect a Air Cadet Officer to take infantry training... oh and CAP(R) is dead, all reserve officers now take RegF CAP, on the bus off the bus, yay!!

No idea about the air force one, but the naval courses are called Naval Environment Training Programme and Naval Environment Training Programme - Officers.   (The latter includes training on naval history, sword drill, and the attack team leader segment of the shipboard firefighting training, all of which I believe are absent from the NCM course.   I don't know what other differences there are, if any.)

It would be a wonderful course for CIC (Sea) officers to take.

 

[elscotto937]

I think it would be to everyone's advantage if, some knowledgable person placed a mini-CTP for the CIC BOQ(what ever the minimum commisioning Crse is) Detailing PO and periods. Because I'm interested to see how much time is spent on training a CIC to deal with children. Because, if we only have the resources to train the CIC for example 10 days, are we giving up time that should be spent on training to work with youth to trying to make CIC officer candidates into military officers. If we are restricted in such a fashion, and required to insert mil training at the cost of youth worker training, does that not dictate the arguement for removing the commissions and inserting them with a special status. As the arguement that the CIC hold positions of responsibility within their units/schools therefore require them to be accountable, doesn't really hold water because civilians employed by DND have the ability to control public funds and can organize training and administer a unit. The CIC do not exercise command of the Cadets or thier units, as they are not accountable for the operational readiness of that unit. They could look similar to CF members, they could wear ranks that are recognizable within the CCM, but when the report to the base for training or are involved with the rest of the CF they become CIC Smith, status lvl of CPL.

Next the other option that I have mentioned before is that of the continuous training. Most can agree that initial training is insufficiant for the CIC. But the CIC have numerous other Crses beyond BOQ... Why not make them all a requirement for Commissioning, because surely that would be enough time to provide them a modicum of military knowledge. As officer cadets the could still supervise cadets and act in positions of responsibilty  within thier organization, however until they are properly trained, cannot exercise command of soldiers. 

 

[McG]

As the arguement that the CIC hold positions of responsibility within their units/schools therefore require them to be accountable, doesn't really hold water because civilians employed by DND have the ability to control public funds and can organize training and administer a unit.

Right.  So the CIC should be either civilians or commissioned members of the CF.

The CIC do not exercise command of the Cadets or thier units, as they are not accountable for the operational readiness of that unit.

There is no operational readiness that must be maintained in a cadet unit, but the CIC do exercise command over their units and they are responsible for the effective training of the cadets.

 

[elscotto937]

There is no operational readiness that must be maintained in a cadet unit, but the CIC do exercise command over their units and they are responsible for the effective training of the cadets.

Are they? I'm really asking. Because in my experience with the Cadet organization, I have never seen a CO repremanded or fired for the poor to none existant training and effectiveness of their cadets. If by responsible you mean that they are required to put together a training plan on paper then I'll buy that.

 

[Neill McKay]

Are they? I'm really asking. Because in my experience with the Cadet organization, I have never seen a CO repremanded or fired for the poor to none existant training and effectiveness of their cadets. If by responsible you mean that they are required to put together a training plan on paper then I'll buy that.

I've yet to see one fired, but I've seen a couple reprimanded for deficiencies in their units.

 

[Bean]

I've seen a couple of CO's turfed over the last 10 years for negligence, inappropriate conduct, and issued related to NPF.  There are few evaluations of the effectiveness of the training delivered to the cadets, provided you are training to the prescribed curriculum.  So it would be rare to see a CO turfed on that account since all of the other CIC officers supporting the CO are generally responsible for the conduct and quality of training.  If they all conspire to deliver a different programme or blatently dis-regard the current programme, I'm sure there would be a massive re-org of the unit, if not the revocation of the unit charter and recognition as a unit of the CCM.  I am aware of only 3 units that this has happened to, and none after 1982 (so my information is historical only and is likely incomplete).  The individual cases of CIC officers being turfed however, I do have some first hand knowledge there as I've had to be on the end delivering bad news in the past.  

The CO is generally also responsible for ensuring the professional development of the officers and staff working within their unit, and making the recommendations for promotion or further advancement and training.  Their role is often as manager and supervisor of their staff, but after several years working with the same team, this often takes a very informal role to complete as most CIC officers will complete the full training program available to them before leaving the system.  It is in this area where we can use some additional support and may provide a point of integration with affiliated units and like.  For example, the affiliated unit provides technical advisors to the cadet corps, perhaps one of the corps officers shuold also function as a regular liaison position within the regiment to the CCM (perhaps supervision of tech advisors, coordination of temporary loan of equipment as required, etc.) which are elements that often fall to the CO to arrange.  Just different thoughts on how we can better integrate and cross educate the officer cadre without incurring additional cost while building additional professionalism.

Coming orginally from the PRes, I have the advantage over some, but not all, of the CIC officers I work with as I've had opportunities for training they will never get.  I like the idea of putting CIC though BMQ but there also may be other ways to deliver this cost effectively that need to be explored, and perhaps expanded in its application.  Not that I'm the one to do that however.

A large portion of the CIC I work with would welcome the opportunity to partake in the PRes training, and in factare itching for the day when we are required to meet the same standards, but many rules must chage to bring us into line (i.e. retirement age should align so we don't become a last refuge for some, enrollment standards and MOC structure need to be updated, etc.).  Some of this is underway and we hope for a more positive result.

At the end of the day, we are not the PRes and we know it.  For those younger officers who are adament about portraying a different image of the CIC, they need some time in and to be mentored into their role just as any other officer would, and in time they will learn or leave.  We must also recognize the difference between corps/sqn officers and those on special slates such as sailing centers and summer training centers, who may have a different view since many believe they are only officer's during the summer since they don't wear the uniform the rest of the year.  I'm sure that some of these are a problem category that needs to be addressed.

As a CIC officer now all I ask is assess me for how I perform my duties, and correct me if you think I'm wrong.  I've been around long enough to know I don't know it all, but neither does anyone else and we're all just trying to get our prescribed jobs done in various service to this country.

 

[elscotto937]

Good post Bean, you don't much hear about the ones they kick out (unless they make the news)

 

[Bean]

Scott937;

Referencing your questions about CIC Basic Officer Qualification, I'll try and sum up the process and course outline quickly and in an appropriate format for this type of board.  Please recognize that while supervision of cadets is the overall mandate of the CIC, BOQ focuses on providing core skills and the ability to provide our system with Instructors for cadets.  More time on dealing with social issues, Harassment and Human rights, and dealing with and counselling youth happens at later phases of the training.

Once enrolled in the CIC an Officer Cadet applies for a convenient BOQ (either a 10 day straight course or a series of weekend training sessions).  Prior to arrival, each candidate must complete the self study Programmed Instructional Package for the course.  This consists of four (4) topics which the candidate will be tested on and expected to pass the first weekend of the course.  These include Apply General Service Knowledge (PO 411), Write Administrative Correspondence (PO 406), Comply with Supply Procedures (PO 410), and Utilize Administrative Procedures (PO 413).  The intent of the package is to provide the candidate with the specific information required to fill a subordinate position within the unit in administration or supply, as these are supporting activities and form the basis of good management of the cadet unit.  PO 411 covers Rank structure, paying of compliments, conduct and attendance at ceremonial parades, the Officers mess organization, customs and etiquette, as well as social conduct or how to act in the public eye.  The remaining elements focus on specific orders regulations and practices to complete the forms and daily activities of unit support staff.  O/Cdts are often employed in these roles first when they join the CIC as they may or may not have the experience to actually instruct within the curriculum, and technically O/Cdts are not to supervise cadets on their own (although you don't always have that option).  So having these pers work in admin or supply initially reduces the regular need to supervise while still untrained.

Additionally the Supply Officer and Admin Officer courses are open to O/Cdts to get further details and exposure prior to moving into the training section of a unit (remember this is perfect world).

On the course the curriculum looked like this when I took it many years ago (according to my tattered course outline).  Generally speaking there were 5 instructional periods per day plus time allotted for at least 2 exams per day on previously learned material.  Not sure if this is still a match, but it should be close:

-Duties and Responsibilities of an Officer â “ 4 Periods
-Safety â “ 6 periods
-Leadership â “ 10 periods plus 1 day Practical Field Exercise
-Physical Fitness Training â “ 1 Period per day plus 3 periods on conduct of effective PT
-Instructional Technique â “ 10 Periods
-Drill â “ 10 Periods
-CF Environmental Policies â “ 3 Periods
-CF Harassment and Racism Prevention Policies â “ 4 Periods

It is expected that once completing BOQ the candidate will do at least 1 year of additional service as an O/Cdt before recommendation for promotion so they have time to learn from more senior officers and build their skills.  There are waivers in place for those who are ex-cadets or joining from other elements of the CF, but if the CO is doing their job, an average off the street candidate for the CIC should be at least 2 years before promotion to 2/Lt.  Often this is not the case as there has been liberal application of the waivers, to meet the expanding need for qualified or experienced instructors that cannot always be met following the full process much many of our chagrin.  The focus on training of a CIC officer as has been mentioned by others is really on the job training, supplemented by bursts of formal training. 

The last unit I had command of, every CIC officer was encouraged to continue their military or professional education, and all but one were either working on second degrees through RMC, or taking the OPME courses.  Also I only enrolled two officers during my tenure, one former reg force MWO who was commisioned easily, and one off the street university student that we waited 24 months to promote because he just wasn't getting the job done at first.  Not necessarily the norm, but it is the CO of the cadet unit who is responsible for ensuring their staff of CIC officers seek out these opportunities and help them achieve them.  It is also their responsibility to correct those who seem to pretend to be something they are not.

 

[Inch]

Pissed off Taxpayer, obviously you lost the point of what I and others were trying to make, but that's easily done looking in from the outside of the military culture when you know nothing about it as you said. I never once said that the CIC's were doing a bad job nor did any of the posts that I read, I simply said I'd like to see more military relevant training if they're to hold the same commission that the rest of us do. CIC's don't have to write the aptitude test, there's no physical fitness standards to be met, there are a few medical standards to be met but not anywhere near what their reserve and regular force counter parts must meet, and finally, there is a decided lack of training which I think we've all agreed on and for the most part we would all (CIC's included) like to see more thorough training but the almighty dollar wins that round.

Universality of service is the crux of the matter IMO, you should be able to take an infantry officer, a pilot or a MARS officer and put him into a different job with proper training and the only limiting factor should be aptitude for the selected job (ie flying aircraft isn't for everyone). Medical and physical fitness should be the same for all CF members with a few higher standards for pilots, aircrew and astronauts for obvious reasons, CIC's and Rangers are the only ones exempt from that. Rangers however aren't commissioned, CIC's are.

Bean, great posts by the way.