Army Communication & Information Systems Specialists (Sig Op, Lineman and LCIS Amalgamation)
- Thread starter JBP
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 4,712
- Points
- 1,160
Solves that problem then.... either give everyone Spec 1, or give it to no one. People will still want to do the Sub Occupations, its the Core trade we're having problems recruiting and retaining for.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
C/S 0 said:
So why wasn't this considered when the whole MES was dreamt up? If all this is going to do is create issues between trades, then we haven't moved forward at all. And the MES was supposedly designed to fix the issues the Army had with the employability of the C&E trades.
- Reaction score
- 4,712
- Points
- 1,160
The good idea train didn't get that far down the track...
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Then the train should go back to the station until it has somewhere to go.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
C/S 0 said:
I find it interesting that this little tidbit hadn't been brought out until after the ACISS sub-trade selection survey.
From what I remember of the ACISS brief, they were pushing for spec-pay for the entire super-trade. Wonder how many people will now be looking for reassessment now.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
I'm just gunna jump in and throw in my :2c:....
I think that they could easily settle this matter by leaving the ACISS core at base pay and giving LST, CST and IST their appropriate Spec. Pay. At that point, you ARE specializing in a field, which means you should be getting specialist pay.
But like I said, that's just my :2c:
I think that they could easily settle this matter by leaving the ACISS core at base pay and giving LST, CST and IST their appropriate Spec. Pay. At that point, you ARE specializing in a field, which means you should be getting specialist pay.
But like I said, that's just my :2c:
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Beadwindow 7 said:
Funny how this whole process is using hindsight instead of forsight. Its always too late to change your mind once you take the first step off a cliff.
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 430
It's time for a refresher course on Spec pay. The article below is stolen from a 2005 edition of "Matelot", a Navy publication - though the policy applies equally to the Army and Air Force. Any errors in it are probably a result of my converting it from a PDF to a text format...
Recently at the Directorate of Pay Policy and Development (DPPD) we have received a lot of questions about Specialist Pay, how it works and why it is paid. This article will help to answer some of those questions.
Historical Context – With the integration of the Army, Navy and Air Force into the Canadian Armed Forces in the late 1960s, trades were combined and their numbers drastically reduced. There were, however, numerous pay fields, which meant that members working side by side, in similar environmental conditions, sometimes with the same skill sets, were being paid differently. This caused great morale problems and led to the 1972-73 review and job evaluation process called the Canadian Forces Trade Evaluation Plan (CFTEP). As a result of this review, theca adopted an “institutional” pay system, meaning that everyone at the same rank, regardless of occupation, generally receives the same rate of pay. This is called the rank-based, team concept. In 1975, the team concept grouped the majority of all trades into one pay field: the Standard Trade Group. Nevertheless, given the market reality that certain trades require highly technical training and are therefore attractive to the private sector, two additional pay fields were added forth purpose of attraction and retention: Specialist 1 and Specialist 2 Trade Groups. Roughly one-quarter of NCM trades fall into the latter two categories.
How are occupations (MOCS) assigned to a pay group? – The CFTEP is a Treasury Board approved methodology similar to that used in the Public Service, that is used to evaluate an occupation’s predominant jobs (the descriptions of these predominant jobs are referred to as PJDs) for the purposes of assignment to a pay group. The CFTEP is a point score system. Nine factors are evaluated: Comprehension and Judgement, Trade Training and Experience, Responsibility sub-divided into resources, services and safety of others, Effort sub-divided into mental and physical effort and Working Conditions again sub-divided into environmental and hazards.
The Technical Stuff – Job evaluations are completed by a board that usually consists of at least three members usually military officers who are trained in classification jobs and job evaluation who review the PJDs for an occupation based on the factors identified above and assign points. The PJDs are provided to the Directorate of Pay, Policy and Development (DPPD) by the occupation’s Branch Advisor and Managing Authority. An occupation’s predominant jobs are those that an experienced Cpl (normally a Cpl IPC 4,that is a Cpl with at least 8 years of military experience from enrolment) or MCpl is expected to complete on a regular basis within the occupation. When all predominant jobs within an occupation are evaluated, an overall occupation score is determined by calculating a weighted average for all Corporals employed in the predominant jobs. For example, if only25% of the members of an occupation performed a job that scored high enough to achieve Specialist (or Spec) Pay, whether or not the whole occupation would receive Spec Pay would be determined by the resulting mathematical score.
Occupationally Qualified – Until recently, technological limitations in the CF pay system did not allow a means of differentiating between “occupation qualified” IAW occupation specifications and “non-occupation-qualified” members for the purposes of pay. Therefore, if you became a Cpl in an occupation that was assigned to a Spec Pay Trade Group you were paid Spec Pay, whether you were qualified to do the job or not. The administration of Spec Pay was challenged in the 2003 Chief of Review Services Report on the basis that personnel who were not qualified were in receipt of Spec Pay. Consequently, changes to the CF pay system, and the introduction of the Occupation Structure Implementation Plan (OSIP) in Aug 04, have now afforded us the opportunity to rectify this situation in ensuring that Spec Pay is administered appropriately. As of 1 Aug 04, if you are not qualified to do the job in accordance with the occupation requirements and specifications provided by your branch’s Managing Authority, then you are not be entitled to receive Spec Pay,
Burning Questions – Here are some of the burning questions we often receive at DPPD:
“Although we are different occupations, right now I am doing the same job as another Cpl, how come my occupation is in the Standard Pay Group while his gets Spec Pay?”Based on the Treasury Board approved methodology of how we do job evaluations and the whole concept of the weighted average you can see that in the CF we do not pay members based on individual qualifications, but on the requirements of the occupation. In this case, although some tasks may be similar in different occupations, in order to receive Specialist Pay, the majority of members of a Spec Pay occupation must be doing jobs that score in the Spec Pay range in accordance with the CFTEP methodology.
“I know that my job requires more skills than another occupation’s jobs, how come we both get Spec 1 Pay, shouldn’t my occupation get Spec 2 instead?” Another important point to note is that it doesn’t matter whether an occupation just barely makes the score for Specialist 1Pay or scores almost but not quite high enough to achieve Specialist 2 Pay, they both receive Specialist 1 Pay. This follows the lines of high school grading in that a 79% is a B, as is a 71%.
“I used to be in the Reg F and my occupation received Spec Pay. Now I am in the Res F why don’t I get Spec Pay, I still hold the same qualifications?” There are two sides to the answer to this question. First, as mentioned earlier, the CF does not pay members based on individual qualifications, but on the requirements of the occupation. Although similar to those in the Reg F, Res F occupation requirements are not always exactly the same and therefore may not evaluate at the Specialist Pay Trade Group. Second, in order for an occupation to receive Spec Pay, it must have scored in the Specialist Pay range, and, it must be assigned to the Specialist Pay Trade Group by the CDS. In order for this to occur, the Branch Advisor or Managing Authority must have submitted it for evaluation. There are only seven Reserve occupations that have successfully undergone the process and been assigned to a Specialist Pay Trade Group.
All that to say - ACISS core will likely never qualify for Spec pay. In my opinion, I personally doubt IST and LST will qualify for it either...as civvie street is not poaching linemen and IT-employed personnel from the CF in large numbers. My $0.02...
Recently at the Directorate of Pay Policy and Development (DPPD) we have received a lot of questions about Specialist Pay, how it works and why it is paid. This article will help to answer some of those questions.
Historical Context – With the integration of the Army, Navy and Air Force into the Canadian Armed Forces in the late 1960s, trades were combined and their numbers drastically reduced. There were, however, numerous pay fields, which meant that members working side by side, in similar environmental conditions, sometimes with the same skill sets, were being paid differently. This caused great morale problems and led to the 1972-73 review and job evaluation process called the Canadian Forces Trade Evaluation Plan (CFTEP). As a result of this review, theca adopted an “institutional” pay system, meaning that everyone at the same rank, regardless of occupation, generally receives the same rate of pay. This is called the rank-based, team concept. In 1975, the team concept grouped the majority of all trades into one pay field: the Standard Trade Group. Nevertheless, given the market reality that certain trades require highly technical training and are therefore attractive to the private sector, two additional pay fields were added forth purpose of attraction and retention: Specialist 1 and Specialist 2 Trade Groups. Roughly one-quarter of NCM trades fall into the latter two categories.
How are occupations (MOCS) assigned to a pay group? – The CFTEP is a Treasury Board approved methodology similar to that used in the Public Service, that is used to evaluate an occupation’s predominant jobs (the descriptions of these predominant jobs are referred to as PJDs) for the purposes of assignment to a pay group. The CFTEP is a point score system. Nine factors are evaluated: Comprehension and Judgement, Trade Training and Experience, Responsibility sub-divided into resources, services and safety of others, Effort sub-divided into mental and physical effort and Working Conditions again sub-divided into environmental and hazards.
The Technical Stuff – Job evaluations are completed by a board that usually consists of at least three members usually military officers who are trained in classification jobs and job evaluation who review the PJDs for an occupation based on the factors identified above and assign points. The PJDs are provided to the Directorate of Pay, Policy and Development (DPPD) by the occupation’s Branch Advisor and Managing Authority. An occupation’s predominant jobs are those that an experienced Cpl (normally a Cpl IPC 4,that is a Cpl with at least 8 years of military experience from enrolment) or MCpl is expected to complete on a regular basis within the occupation. When all predominant jobs within an occupation are evaluated, an overall occupation score is determined by calculating a weighted average for all Corporals employed in the predominant jobs. For example, if only25% of the members of an occupation performed a job that scored high enough to achieve Specialist (or Spec) Pay, whether or not the whole occupation would receive Spec Pay would be determined by the resulting mathematical score.
Occupationally Qualified – Until recently, technological limitations in the CF pay system did not allow a means of differentiating between “occupation qualified” IAW occupation specifications and “non-occupation-qualified” members for the purposes of pay. Therefore, if you became a Cpl in an occupation that was assigned to a Spec Pay Trade Group you were paid Spec Pay, whether you were qualified to do the job or not. The administration of Spec Pay was challenged in the 2003 Chief of Review Services Report on the basis that personnel who were not qualified were in receipt of Spec Pay. Consequently, changes to the CF pay system, and the introduction of the Occupation Structure Implementation Plan (OSIP) in Aug 04, have now afforded us the opportunity to rectify this situation in ensuring that Spec Pay is administered appropriately. As of 1 Aug 04, if you are not qualified to do the job in accordance with the occupation requirements and specifications provided by your branch’s Managing Authority, then you are not be entitled to receive Spec Pay,
Burning Questions – Here are some of the burning questions we often receive at DPPD:
“Although we are different occupations, right now I am doing the same job as another Cpl, how come my occupation is in the Standard Pay Group while his gets Spec Pay?”Based on the Treasury Board approved methodology of how we do job evaluations and the whole concept of the weighted average you can see that in the CF we do not pay members based on individual qualifications, but on the requirements of the occupation. In this case, although some tasks may be similar in different occupations, in order to receive Specialist Pay, the majority of members of a Spec Pay occupation must be doing jobs that score in the Spec Pay range in accordance with the CFTEP methodology.
“I know that my job requires more skills than another occupation’s jobs, how come we both get Spec 1 Pay, shouldn’t my occupation get Spec 2 instead?” Another important point to note is that it doesn’t matter whether an occupation just barely makes the score for Specialist 1Pay or scores almost but not quite high enough to achieve Specialist 2 Pay, they both receive Specialist 1 Pay. This follows the lines of high school grading in that a 79% is a B, as is a 71%.
“I used to be in the Reg F and my occupation received Spec Pay. Now I am in the Res F why don’t I get Spec Pay, I still hold the same qualifications?” There are two sides to the answer to this question. First, as mentioned earlier, the CF does not pay members based on individual qualifications, but on the requirements of the occupation. Although similar to those in the Reg F, Res F occupation requirements are not always exactly the same and therefore may not evaluate at the Specialist Pay Trade Group. Second, in order for an occupation to receive Spec Pay, it must have scored in the Specialist Pay range, and, it must be assigned to the Specialist Pay Trade Group by the CDS. In order for this to occur, the Branch Advisor or Managing Authority must have submitted it for evaluation. There are only seven Reserve occupations that have successfully undergone the process and been assigned to a Specialist Pay Trade Group.
All that to say - ACISS core will likely never qualify for Spec pay. In my opinion, I personally doubt IST and LST will qualify for it either...as civvie street is not poaching linemen and IT-employed personnel from the CF in large numbers. My $0.02...
- Reaction score
- 4,712
- Points
- 1,160
Occam, are you in a ACISS trade? Or the Signals branch altogether? Its easy to say "You shouldn't get spec pay." without having done the jobs. I really doubt they're going to let one Sub Occupation get Spec Pay, and 2 others+core not get it. If that happens, why the hell did we amalgamate in the first place?
Spec for everyone, or spec for no one. My :2c:.
Spec for everyone, or spec for no one. My :2c:.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
I think its odd that current Sig Ops are up in arms with the "apparent" announcement that the Core branch will not receive Spec pay.
I mean, you didn't get spec pay Dec 31.. what magically happened (other than a name change) on Jan 1st? Did your micro market courses suddenly become national qualifications? I don't buy the argument that Sig Ops are network admins. ( last time I checked.... the networks we use in DND are administered in Ottawa, by civilians ! ) and... the network admin band wagon is over saturated on civie street.. those guys are a dime a dozen and are paid as such. (Senior admins are another story.)
I don't have a hate on for Sig Ops. There are a lot of outstanding and smart guys in that trade. But, we have to look at the bigger picture and the old trade as a whole... and what the new core occupation will be qualified and required to do.
I think there would be a bigger problem IF the core received the same pay as the sub occupations. I mean, why would you want to go into a slower moving sub occupation with more training time, less promotions and make the same pay ?
I think instead of waiting for someone to hand you spec pay at the snap of a finger, those complaining should OT.
I started out as an operator... thought that I knew everything and deserved Spec pay. So, I put in for an OT. Went back to CFSCE for 1.5 years ( POET and LCIS 3s then 204 / 208)
I am not a supporter of the MES program in the slightest. It's a big mess that is going to stay that way for the foreseeable future.
I mean, you didn't get spec pay Dec 31.. what magically happened (other than a name change) on Jan 1st? Did your micro market courses suddenly become national qualifications? I don't buy the argument that Sig Ops are network admins. ( last time I checked.... the networks we use in DND are administered in Ottawa, by civilians ! ) and... the network admin band wagon is over saturated on civie street.. those guys are a dime a dozen and are paid as such. (Senior admins are another story.)
I don't have a hate on for Sig Ops. There are a lot of outstanding and smart guys in that trade. But, we have to look at the bigger picture and the old trade as a whole... and what the new core occupation will be qualified and required to do.
I think there would be a bigger problem IF the core received the same pay as the sub occupations. I mean, why would you want to go into a slower moving sub occupation with more training time, less promotions and make the same pay ?
I think instead of waiting for someone to hand you spec pay at the snap of a finger, those complaining should OT.
I started out as an operator... thought that I knew everything and deserved Spec pay. So, I put in for an OT. Went back to CFSCE for 1.5 years ( POET and LCIS 3s then 204 / 208)
I am not a supporter of the MES program in the slightest. It's a big mess that is going to stay that way for the foreseeable future.
A
aesop081
Guest
PuckChaser said:
Why not ?
Take a look at the AC Op trade. AC Ops who are PAR controllers get spec 1 while the core trade does not.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 10
PuckChaser said:
If you read further back, the spec pay issue had nothing to do with the re org of the trades. It was to address manning issues, training shortfalls and overall readiness of the core trade and the sub occs. Spec pay is in the mix because the LCIS trade brings it with them. You aren't going to be successful at managing the LCIS / CST trade if you take spec away from them at the WO rank. The spec 1 Sgt 4th incentive makes more than a standard pay WO 4th incentive. Unless of course you are trying to reduce the numbers in the LCIS / CST trade then you would be successful.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
PiperDown said:
I think most of us Techs and the Linemen don't buy into the smoke and mirrors concepts as some of our Operator peers do. Rad Ops were the only Sigs trade that had a hostage retention policy of you can OT out, But we won't let you. ACCIS appears to set the same rule.
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 430
PuckChaser said:
I'm not in an ACISS trade, but I am in the C&E Branch and stayed in a Holiday Inn Express last night! ;D
I'm smack dab in the middle of a bunch of LCIS techs and Sig Ops (hell, my entire CoC is Sig Ops), and I know their pain. It's not personal - my belief that ISTs and ACISS core aren't going to get Spec Pay is based on the battle that Nav Comms have been waging for years. A bunch of one week Microsoft/Cisco/Novell courses does not a specialist make. The Sig Ops who are overseas supporting deployed networks don't even get local logon privileges on the servers - they're managed back here. They're relegated to user maintenance in AD, connectivity issues, and blowing the dust out of the fans. That's not Spec Pay material.
As far as the LSTs go, my guesstimate that they're not going to get Spec Pay either is based on the fact that they weren't getting it before, and the fact that retention hasn't been an issue for them. The job occasionally calls for a higher level of technical skills, but not on an every day basis.
Hell, if they pare back technical training any more, the CSTs aren't likely to get Spec Pay either!
- Reaction score
- 4,712
- Points
- 1,160
Thanks for the background, Occam.
I personally feel that all of this talk that all Sub Occs will get spec is what is putting the 215s up in arms. If LST and IST don't end up with Spec, I think its completely fair that Core doesn't get spec. From the training I saw recent RC(S) helpdesk pers get, then getting spec just makes no sense. Its the MES machine that's fueling the in-fighting, by either not answering questions, or giving information like "All sub occs will get spec". If the whole goal was retention for the SigOp and LCIS trade, they're really screwing it up by not giving a financial incentive.
Tango: What smoke and mirrors? It sounds like you have a personal hate for Operators that want the same piece of the pie 227s have been enjoying for a few years. You get spec for POET. POET was great when radios and equipment was built with tubes, but you don't need 15 months of electronics training to change a card in a radio. The 052s want it as well. Won't be special anymore if everyone gets spec 1, will you?
I personally feel that all of this talk that all Sub Occs will get spec is what is putting the 215s up in arms. If LST and IST don't end up with Spec, I think its completely fair that Core doesn't get spec. From the training I saw recent RC(S) helpdesk pers get, then getting spec just makes no sense. Its the MES machine that's fueling the in-fighting, by either not answering questions, or giving information like "All sub occs will get spec". If the whole goal was retention for the SigOp and LCIS trade, they're really screwing it up by not giving a financial incentive.
Tango: What smoke and mirrors? It sounds like you have a personal hate for Operators that want the same piece of the pie 227s have been enjoying for a few years. You get spec for POET. POET was great when radios and equipment was built with tubes, but you don't need 15 months of electronics training to change a card in a radio. The 052s want it as well. Won't be special anymore if everyone gets spec 1, will you?
Something I don't understand right now is hubby went in for LCIS, finished BMQ last year and we knew the amalgamation was coming, but my understanding is that LCIS was undermanned, so why are they having him sit for 6+ mths. in Kingston doing nothing. I'd think they'd want to push him through quicker since he is LCIS (CST with the amalgamtion now according to my understanding). I'm not going to sit and gripe about it, but I'd think they'd want to get the people who are subspecializing in CST through first. I'm just the wife at home though, so I'm not up on all the acronymns and logistics and everything, just trying to think logically about it all. I know there are a lot of people that have been sitting in Kingston for quite some time, but there are quite a few people who he graduated with that are getting all their training dates and he's just been told there is absolutely nothing going on for him for the next 6+ months.
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 430
The MES Machine can promise Spec Pay across the board until the cows come home, but as you can see from the article that I posted, the decision ultimately is not in their hands. Treasury Board will crunch the numbers according to the procedure, and it may fly or it may not, or it may fly for some and not others. The Nav Comms (Naval Communicators, also the ship's IS Administrators) have been shot down twice for Spec Pay now in recent memory. If I'm not mistaken, there has to be a certain time period between attempts, so if the Army is going to try to get Spec Pay for ACISS & subtrades, they'd better have their sales pitch slicker than snot with numbers which will make the grade using the TB formula.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
PuckChaser said:
I hate to disappoint you, but i don't have a hate on for the individual operators. I do have issues with a trade that thinks they are all that and a bag of chips within our branch. We are all equals, ands its about time that the Sig Op Trade makes this realization. POET is still relevant, but I guess you must be under the impression that all we repair is 522s. The Linemen are welcome to spec pay, they understand what hoops they have to jump through to gain it. And they know exactly why their bid failed on their last attempt.
Similar threads
