Army Communication & Information Systems Specialists (Sig Op, Lineman and LCIS Amalgamation)

[PuckChaser]

So does an IST now jump in the back of a truck/LAV to program the ELPRS, or CNR(E) when its ready, or is it still going to be that Core guy who is a platoon Sig?

I still see 0 point to having ISTs, instead of network-trained SigOps. We're already short pers, and we cut the heart out of the Techs and SigOps to create network admins who's jobs are being replaced by Shared Services (unless its classified networks).

 

[Brasidas]

CST, don't even say anything, you lost spec before the MES happened!

Say what now? I know LCIS, I mean CST's, who continue to be paid spec. They're just remaining at the same pay rate, and don't get a pay increase when they otherwise would (eg. MCpl IPC4 Spec 1 vs Sgt basic).

My understanding is that TB has not rejected them from (retaining) spec pay, and that they'll receive backpay if and when its decided that they receive it. Since they already qualified for it, I'd think they've got a shot at getting it vs the other (sub-)trades.

Tell me about it being taken away prior to MES.

 

[RADOPSIGOPACCISOP]

So does an IST now jump in the back of a truck/LAV to program the ELPRS, or CNR(E) when its ready, or is it still going to be that Core guy who is a platoon Sig?

I still see 0 point to having ISTs, instead of network-trained SigOps. We're already short pers, and we cut the heart out of the Techs and SigOps to create network admins who's jobs are being replaced by Shared Services (unless its classified networks).

Shared Services haven't taken over any deployed systems. LCSS, NGRI, TLAN, all of CSNI and int networks.

No, the EPLRS and CNR(E) probably remain Core. Network trained SigOps trying to run the entire show is a bad idea. The scope of knowledge more than merits it's own speciality, and it's getting more intensive, not less. I'm not saying Core doesn't need IP, everyone does, it's the language of love now for ACISS. However, moving into customized networks for operations and VoIP phone systems, and making it all jive with national systems is not a part-time side job.

ACISS job scope is lightyears from where it was when SigOp was formed. We need the different specialties. I see my job on the server and networking side as being complicated enough, it's ridiculous to think I can do that well enough, and learn all the Satcomm, EPLRS, HCLOS and all of that as well. There's too much to master, and jacks of all trades quickly hit the wall (of knowledge) when things get more and more complex.

There's growing pains in ACISS, but this trade is better for it.

 

[Brasidas]

ACISS job scope is lightyears from where it was when SigOp was formed. We need the different specialties. I see my job on the server and networking side as being complicated enough, it's ridiculous to think I can do that well enough, and learn all the Satcomm, EPLRS, HCLOS and all of that as well. There's too much to master, and jacks of all trades quickly hit the wall (of knowledge) when things get more and more complex.

And yet all members of the trade are expected to be trained as sig op det commanders. Tell me again how this makes a lineman a better lineman or a tech a better tech.

There's growing pains in ACISS, but this trade is better for it.

Really not seeing it.

Adding IST as a trade, maybe. Following what Puckchaser was saying, 742 at least has gotten a lot more civilians vice military positions compared to years past, and there was already position-based specialization in the old trades.

The new system overall is dysfunctional, not experiencing growing pains.

 

[RADOPSIGOPACCISOP]

And yet all members of the trade are expected to be trained as sig op det commanders. Tell me again how this makes a lineman a better lineman or a tech a better tech.

Really not seeing it.

Adding IST as a trade, maybe. Following what Puckchaser was saying, 742 at least has gotten a lot more civilians vice military positions compared to years past, and there was already position-based specialization in the old trades.

The new system overall is dysfunctional, not experiencing growing pains.

Probably ACISS is a step in the direction of a complete trade split. I do see the arguement of why a LST requires sigs training, but on the other side, I think other ACISS specialities will benefit greatly from Line training (at very least, techniques to avoid what I like to call server spaghetti).

I see the need for a ACISS Core speciality, I see the need for a LST speciality, I definately see the need for a IST speciality. CST's still confuse me, maybe I don't know enough about what they do, but I personally their purpose as a little muddled.

Maybe a couple of years down the road they might split IST, LST and ACISS Core into distinct trades. Maybe CSTs too, or maybe they might be a speciality divided among IST (IT and Networking) and Core (TSIT/TCI and replacing cards or whatever it is they do in their workshops)

 

[Brasidas]

Probably ACISS is a step in the direction of a complete trade split. I do see the arguement of why a LST requires sigs training, but on the other side, I think other ACISS specialities will benefit greatly from Line training (at very least, techniques to avoid what I like to call server spaghetti).

I see the need for a ACISS Core speciality, I see the need for a LST speciality, I definately see the need for a IST speciality. CST's still confuse me, maybe I don't know enough about what they do, but I personally their purpose as a little muddled.

Maybe a couple of years down the road they might split IST, LST and ACISS Core into distinct trades. Maybe CSTs too, or maybe they might be a speciality divided among IST (IT and Networking) and Core (TSIT/TCI and replacing cards or whatever it is they do in their workshops)

Why would any LCIS be left lumped together with Sig Ops while splitting off linemen and IST?  They were and remain specialists with training and taskings quite different from "core".

Split off an IST trade, sure.

Probably ACISS is a step in the direction of a complete trade split. I do see the arguement of why a LST requires sigs training, but on the other side, I think other ACISS specialities will benefit greatly from Line training (at very least, techniques to avoid what I like to call server spaghetti).

If you want to have better line practices followed by other trades, hold them to standards. There was a lineman training us in how to use line on my QL3.

ACISS is literally the antithesis of a trade split. Everybody became a sig op and they got a specialty designation on top.

 

[PuckChaser]

Shared Services haven't taken over any deployed systems. LCSS, NGRI, TLAN, all of CSNI and int networks.

No, the EPLRS and CNR(E) probably remain Core. Network trained SigOps trying to run the entire show is a bad idea. The scope of knowledge more than merits it's own speciality, and it's getting more intensive, not less. I'm not saying Core doesn't need IP, everyone does, it's the language of love now for ACISS. However, moving into customized networks for operations and VoIP phone systems, and making it all jive with national systems is not a part-time side job.

ACISS job scope is lightyears from where it was when SigOp was formed. We need the different specialties. I see my job on the server and networking side as being complicated enough, it's ridiculous to think I can do that well enough, and learn all the Satcomm, EPLRS, HCLOS and all of that as well. There's too much to master, and jacks of all trades quickly hit the wall (of knowledge) when things get more and more complex.

There's growing pains in ACISS, but this trade is better for it.

Here's the thing, where's all this Satcom, ELPRS, HCLOS going in the future? IP-based networks. Core is going to need those same skillsets for subnetting, and network design that an IST gets, and won't get a "special" trade for it. Either you're selling yourself and all the other ISTs short that they wouldn't be able to know how to run networks while keeping Core field skills, or you've just made a case why Core is specialized enough to be Spec 1 that IST is demanding.  Those jacks of all trades hit a wall called promotion before they top out of knowledge, or they simply stay below the rank of Sgt for their whole careers. At which point, they're no longer doing the daily nuts and bolts and are now planners.

The trades are already stepping back to the original configuration, after the 4A.1 was canned for the CISTMs. All we've done is change everyone's trade in JSR to IST and pretend its good for the Corps as a whole. Networking as an OSQ like HCLOS, sure. But we sure as heck didn't need a whole trade of them. It dilutes the pool of resources we have to provide the Close Support thats more important than some staff officer's DWAN at Div HQ.

 

[RADOPSIGOPACCISOP]

Why would any LCIS be left lumped together with Sig Ops while splitting off linemen and IST?  They were and remain specialists with training and taskings quite different from "core".

Split off an IST trade, sure.
If you want to have better line practices followed by other trades, hold them to standards. There was a lineman training us in how to use line on my QL3.

ACISS is literally the antithesis of a trade split. Everybody became a sig op and they got a specialty designation on top.

a week of running WD doesn't show someone how to properly run cabling in a server room or in a workspace.

 

[Brasidas]

a week of running WD doesn't show someone how to properly run cabling in a server room or in a workspace.

And the common DP1 provides what training that couldn't have been provided on a sig op QL3?

 

[RADOPSIGOPACCISOP]

And the common DP1 provides what training that couldn't have been provided on a sig op QL3?

No idea. I'm just saying it would be nice, you know, to not be tripping over haphazzard cabling all the time.

 

[Brasidas]

No idea. I'm just saying it would be nice, you know, to not be tripping over haphazzard cabling all the time.

Which dovetails neatly into what I said: if you want trades other than linemen to achieve certain standards of tradecraft, set them, train them, and confirm the skill. That's irrelevant to MES.

The other trades getting "line training" receive DP1, which is designed around everybody being trained to be a QL3 sig op. There's line, sure, but there was line in the old QL3 sig op too. Nothing I've heard or seen from the troops I've seen since the change indicates otherwise.

 

[RADOPSIGOPACCISOP]

Which dovetails neatly into what I said: if you want trades other than linemen to achieve certain standards of tradecraft, set them, train them, and confirm the skill. That's irrelevant to MES.

The other trades getting "line training" receive DP1, which is designed around everybody being trained to be a QL3 sig op. There's line, sure, but there was line in the old QL3 sig op too. Nothing I've heard or seen from the troops I've seen since the change indicates otherwise.

The point I'm trying to make is that while the change to ACISS wasn't perfect, some good did come of it. Those professing it's the apocolyptic destruction of the trade are both ignoring the positive reality of the situation and sabotaging the opportunity to make the most of it.

I get that Puckchaser doesn't think we should have split IST from the Sig Op trade, but I don't think he saw either the skills gap that existed on IT training and skills and what is needed, or how ridiculously inflated the training would need to be to cover everything that ACISS does.

There exists a definate need for a dedicated IST sub-occ (or possibly a IST occupation) just as there needs to be a sub-occ or trade to ACISS Core. I don't think I could do what he does, or vice versa, and maintain the same level of expertise required, there's too much.

 

[PuckChaser]

Then we had a training problem, not a trade structure problem. There's nothing wrong with giving the people that require extensive networking skills a 2 month course to cover it. Heck, CRCIED is at least 6 weeks, not including any practical training done at units, so there's a precedent already.

What we needed to do was rationalize the SigOp training to come into the 21st Century, and teach basic networking right at the DP1 level. DP2 with more advanced knowledge, but still have an OSQ to fill the gaps for specific networks.

 

[RADOPSIGOPACCISOP]

Then we had a training problem, not a trade structure problem. There's nothing wrong with giving the people that require extensive networking skills a 2 month course to cover it. Heck, CRCIED is at least 6 weeks, not including any practical training done at units, so there's a precedent already.

What we needed to do was rationalize the SigOp training to come into the 21st Century, and teach basic networking right at the DP1 level. DP2 with more advanced knowledge, but still have an OSQ to fill the gaps for specific networks.

So add a 2 month networking course. then MS Server courses, a few exchange courses, SCOM, SCCM, throw in some Cisco VoIP manager courses, VMware Vsphere. Some Systems analysis and ITIL courses and finish it all off with Network Security and Computer forensics.
Couple that with the huge amount of specialized systems, radio and satellite equipment and then good to go. Of course the trade would be so broad that by the time you actually got hands on any of that you'd have totally forgotten it. Do a posting as a Sat Comm guy and you'd completely forget all the server admin (not to mention you'd be a couple of revisions behind on the OS) and then they'd throw you into a LCSS networking det and you wouldn't know if a config-t is fit to eat.

There is a reasonable limit to how much you can expect one person to know. You can have a wide scope or a deep understanding but not both.

 

[Brasidas]

There is a reasonable limit to how much you can expect one person to know. You can have a wide scope or a deep understanding but not both.

And the new system has IST do both.

They get trained as a Sig Op with common DP1 and DP2 courses. We throw in additional 1.1 and 2.1 trades courses and OJT. Or have I missed something?

 

[RADOPSIGOPACCISOP]

And the new system has IST do both.

They get trained as a Sig Op with common DP1 and DP2 courses. We throw in additional 1.1 and 2.1 trades courses and OJT. Or have I missed something?

They get the basics on being a radio det member, they don't get the same level of training that a Core member does on everything they do. That's my understanding, but I didn't go through the training so I could be wrong.

 

[C/S 0]

ACISS training scheme is not working, therefore a new plan:

Ptes comes off basic goes to CFSCE and completes DP1.0 Common and is granted XXXX qual which states VHF Det Mbr under supervision.

They go to their new units, strong recommendation that it is a HQ & Sigs Sqn, there they complete the new ACISS Common 1.1, yes once again ACISS Common 1.1

ACISS Common 1.1 is divided into MODs. MODs 1-6 Essential that all members (future Core, IST, LST, CST) must do, part DL part OJT.  These Essential Mods will have their own XXXX qual which is required before going on the DP2.  Don't remember what all the mods are but included are basic skills that Battleview, Understanding crypto devices, etc.

Then there are Mods 7 - 13 which are considered supplemental, however everybody can do them for PD, but if you want to be ACISS CORE (fuck ya) you have to complete these Mods.  These mods will also have their own XXXX qual and are a pre-req for going on the ACISS CORE 2.1.  Once again some are hands on and some are DL.  For some of the older guys remember the old QL4.  Some of thre Mods are HF, Multiband Radio, HPW, intro to SAT Comms, etc.

Now you also have Mods 14,15,16 which will be pre-reqs for IST/CST/LST 1.1.

So, if you want to be an IST you can do Mod 14 (or what ever it is) 'Helpdesk', pass it you are on the road to IST
So, if you want to be an CST you can do Mod 15 (or what ever it is) 'AC/DC Math', pass it you are on the road to CST
So, if you want to be a kick *** 052 you can do Mod 16 (or what ever it is) Not afraid of heights, pass it you are on the road to LST.

There is still a 2.0 Common but here is the thing.  The above plan comes from writing boards that were conducted in the spring.  IST/CST/LST also had writing boards.  The result of these writing boards was that training for sub-ocups/Core will start sooner.  So stuff that was taught at the 2.1 is being push down to the 1.1 level.  So although you may have to do a 'Sig Op Det Comdr Refresher' ie 2.0, once people complete their 1.1 they are going to be stovepipe into their sub-ocup IST/CST/LST/CORE.

These writing boards are complete and now the results and TPs authorization is in the hands of CTC Gagetown.  Time line is the fall.

ACISS CORE 2.1 was also redesigned.

Here is the way I think it is going to go

Pte A, B, C complete their DP1 Common posted to HQ & Sigs.

They are place in the DP1.1 Common training pool, they all complete their 1.1 Common essential.
Pte A likes computers so he decides to do the Help Desk Mod, natural at it.
Pte B not sure what he/she wants so they do a few Supplemental Mods, doesn't like the radio stuff but wants to try the line side of the house, does the pre-qual mod and can climb a pole without fear of heights, wants to be a linemen.
Pte C likes being in a Radio/Sig Crew, does the supplemental mods to have the qual to go on the 2.1.

No problem for Pte C but what about Pte A and B how do they become IST/Line.

Where I see the selection process going
-Mbrs complete 1.1 Essential
-For those that want to go to the sub-ocups they do the pre-reqs, if they pass they are candidates.
-A selection board is conducted and the following is considered: Their desire trade, the results from the DP 1.0 and DP 1.1 essential, How they did on the pre-reqs, if working in that section doing OJT how they did, recommendations by supr and of course THE RQUIREMENTS AND GOOD OF THE SERVICE.  You signed the dotted line for three years 'Harden the fuck Up'.

The most important factor and responsibilities lies with the leadership MCPL and up.  We need to re-establish that MCpl Rank as a real leadership rank and stress that the devolpment of their det mbrs starts with them.  It is a great responsibility.  The MCpls have to be supported  and developed into leaders by the SNR NCOs.  Some hard decisions are going to have to be made on who goes where and who becomes what, there has to be a process that is fair, review when necessary and even sometimes a gut decision has to be made.

On a another note it looks like CISTM will be place on hold for ten years until the real first ACISS ptes get up to the rank for Sgts/WOs.  In the mean time those pers that progress to positions like FOS, LMF, CCO will be loaded on courses like ASP and ATWOC.

This fall there is a plan for review to look at and rewrite TPs for the DP 3.0, 3.1 and 4A.0

Yes when ACISS started it did not work out how it was envision on the drawing board.  The leadership has come to the realization (hard realization for some people I am sure) that it is not working.  This is an attempt to improve things, is it the 100% solution?  I don't know, is it going to work, I don't know.  i hope though that those in positions of responsibility and authority will buy-in and try to make it work.  If it works great, if not then we will try and fix again and hopefully keep on speaking up and making it better.

cheers 

 

[upandatom]

So basically, here's a run down

They rewrote the TP and Job Specs,

Which, in turn will kill the Spec pay once again..... Therefore it will have to go before the board again.

How is that expected to improve retention and or make people happy? Once again, you are taking money that was Earned from people that worked and studied for it. Yes the Job name changed, They are still doing the same thing, regardless if you call CST, LCIS or Plug and Play tech. They spent time learning the ins and outs, doing POET, 3s and 5s. They do the exact same thing, no change from before the MES hammer came down.

The LCIS techs, they signed with the confirmation that upon completion of BASIC, SQ, POET, QL3 and QL5 that they would be receiving Spec pay, that is the agreement, the contract, and in some cases the reason why they signed under that occupation. Pay scales, rates, should not of been touched for those with those qualifications and skills.

What is this three years now???


And the LST case??

I have worked with MANY Lineman, some great lineman, some absolute bag of hammers. majority are good people, good hard workers, even harder drinkers. Some, don't know their own trade and why standards exist. (its the same on both ends, so it will work...yes that has happened, or they cant even understand the BICs Panels numbering, that has happened as well)

You can teach basic line capability to people, but don't expect them to be geniuses at it. The way some have posted here is the fact that an ACISS member should be able to do any job. Wrong. they can do a bare minimum and have a general idea of what each sub occ does, and the number to call that sub occ det in and have it sorted.

As for the Server room comment,
I see IST/Sig ops doing that more then lineman, its laziness if the lines are all newfied and tangled in there. That is a personell problem, not an installation problem.

The only thing I have seen change is the name of the trade,

 

[Jom]

They rewrote the TP and Job Specs,

Which, in turn will kill the Spec pay once again..... Therefore it will have to go before the board again.

TP is teaching points? for the school?

did the the Job Specs change much? do you think this is going to help or hinder spec pay? I've seen a lot of rejections for spec pay over the last 3 years...................

 

[Brasidas]

TP is teaching points? for the school?

TP = training plan