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

[Avail]

Have you had a look at Comms Research? That might be what you're looking for.

http://www.forces.ca/en/job/communicatorresearchoperator-29

"Collect, process, analyze and report on electromagnetic activity on radio frequency, using highly sophisticated equipment
Manage and protect computer networks
Ensure information technology is secure
Use and maintain classified publications"

You should apply to the CSE as a Cybersecurity Analyst as well. What harm would it do?

https://www.cse-cst.gc.ca/en/node/1462

 

[mapledonutmouth]

Have you had a look at Comms Research? That might be what you're looking for.

http://www.forces.ca/en/job/communicatorresearchoperator-29

"Collect, process, analyze and report on electromagnetic activity on radio frequency, using highly sophisticated equipment
Manage and protect computer networks
Ensure information technology is secure
Use and maintain classified publications"

You should apply to the CSE as a Cybersecurity Analyst as well. What harm would it do?

https://www.cse-cst.gc.ca/en/node/1462

Comm. Research Operator seems promising, heck I even qualify for it. I'll speak to a recruiter today about it. As for applying to the CSE, I just graduated high school but I'll definitely keep that in mind.

 

[RADOPSIGOPACCISOP]

What do you mean "fairly long list" of credentials? All I have are 2 entry level IT certifications I did during the summer, and I am working on completing a more advanced one right now. Even in my other thread, I stated that I have only the certifications with no job experience. And now that you mention it, I don't think "fresh" was a good word to describe my status. It's going to be about a year since I graduated.

Don't worry about that. Some people pretend to be experts on everything, even if it is well outside their trade or the trade they were when they were in the military a decade ago.

 

[PuckChaser]

Thanks for that. It would be nice to see this make its way to the Reserve side of the house, but I have my doubts, since we couldn't even get IST for some reason beyond my comprehension.

How is that beyond your comprehension? What is a PRes IST going to do all day? They don't have TSLs, MTs or classified networks to administer. Massive skillfade. Huge training costs to industry standards with no contract to keep that person in the CAF once they got qualified. There's hundreds of reasons not to do it, and why it made sense that they didn't do it. They even cut pieces out of the ACISS DP1/2 packages for Core to make it shorter. Even R291 is a wasted trade with limited ability to augment the RegF and huge hindrances to equipment and training time.

You're likely to see the exact same thing for Cyber Op. The only Cyber piece the PRes had (which was done well) was the CRIP teams that were SigOps and Techs with personal training and on long term Cl B contracts.

 

[Avail]

Calm down, everything's going to be ok.

1. What are we going to do all day?
In a Class A sense, training and exercise. I'm sure you could have figured that out on your own without resorting to throwing a tantrum.

2. "They don't have TSLs, MTs or classified networks to administer. Massive skillfade. Huge training costs to industry standards"

We have plenty of members capable of fielding sysadmin and network admin work that have been through College and University already, at a significantly higher standard of qualification than most Regular IST's. There is less skill fade for us in this role, as the principles are the same as a civilian sysadmin or network admin like myself. There aren't so many green radios in the civilian world, plenty of cisco routers, switches, Windows Servers, and Linux though. Almost of of the training can be done at the Unit level. You might be surprised at how many highly skilled IT professionals are in reserve signals

tl/dr: You are wrong. IST is more viable than ACISS Core.

 

[PuckChaser]

I've run Cl A training plans, thanks. Likely before you even joined the CAF. I know whats involved, and I know what resources a PRes Comms unit has. Racks of servers, and medium/large scale networking devices are not one of them.

There's absolutely plenty of civilian qualified technologies that would make excellent ISTs, in the Regular Force. A PRes trade needs to provide value to the CAF, I'd even argue its more imperative that there's bigger bang for the buck in PRes than RegF due to fiscal and structural realities that exist in the PRes. Are you going to pay for the cisco routers, switches, and servers for the unit to own and train on? How is that equipment going to be employed on exercises with other units, when those Inf Coys and Cmbt Eng Sqns barely have laptops for their CPs? Have you ever seen the infrastructure in a RegF Bde CP and compared it to a Stalwart Guardian (or ARCON) CP? The PRes Signallers do a fantastic job kitting together what they can to make a very functional CP with some IS/IT assets, but its no where close to the complexity and employment concepts of what an IST is going to do a JSR or HQ&Sigs.

I get it, you're upset that you can't do your day job as a night job as well. You also seem to forget the entire point of Army Signals is communications from the Commander to the warfighter on the FEBA. Last I checked, we didn't have laptops with dismounted infantry section commanders sending ICQ messages back looking for direction. Green radios are evolving, and those "less viable" Core guys are catching up with subnetting and creation of wireless IP networks to eat into your empire.

 

[Avail]

You're entitled to your opinion, and so am I. I'm of the opinion that we can add value to the CF through education and skills that already exist. To not leverage that because we can't afford some networking equipment, servers and a few racks is absurd. The equipment required can easily be allowed for in our current budget. It has absolutely nothing to do with "wanting to do my day job as a night job" and everything to do with wanting to add value to the organization where we can. If you think that means subnetting and a WLAN you have some reading to do.

And no, at 32 you weren't doing any of that before I joined the CF, but thanks for the condescending tone. I didn't call the members "not viable" - maybe take a little extra time reading a post before replying. We have fantastic people, which is exactly the point.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Here is the part about the new MOSID and PRes.

7. RES F ESTABLISHMENT.  THERE ARE NO RES F POSITIONS FOR THIS
OCCUPATION

I know a lot of Pres folks would like to 'do the same stuff' as the Regs but...as mentioned, skill fade and the cost of trg makes this 'bad money spent' a lot of the time.  I've been Pres in a former life, so I'm not saying that with no understanding of the PRes world reality.  I knew/know some of the guys who were the CRIPT folks and they were very rare in terms of abilities and trg.  I''ve got 3 years of college including a post-grad in Information System Tech, 2 handfuls of certs and done the CAF sys admin gig as a PRes and Reg Force (former 226). 

Even the CRIPT guys had the 30 day option on any given day.  There needs to be a return of investment;  I can see a restricted release/OT date coming with the folks who go into this trade, much like we do with aircrew, for that exact reason.  :2c:

 

[PuckChaser]

You're entitled to your opinion, and so am I. I'm of the opinion that we can add value to the CF through education and skills that already exist. To not leverage that because we can't afford some networking equipment, servers and a few racks is absurd. The equipment required can easily be allowed for in our current budget. It has absolutely nothing to do with "wanting to do my day job as a night job" and everything to do with wanting to add value to the organization where we can. If you think that means subnetting and a WLAN you have some reading to do.

What are you cutting to get that equipment to every PRes Sigs unit? You can't use O&M money for it, so where do you find the Vote 1 and Vote 5 to build a network system for the PRes to use thats viable as a training nexus to ISTs in the RegF who are administering DWAN, CSNI and a whole host of other networks? 30 laptops running into a Cisco switch and a 3U server isn't nearly close to what a RegF IST is taught and can handle. Its not just lack of equipment, its lack of users, which means lack of user induced faults. How long before your PRes ISTs are bored of their MCpls introducing faults on the system that they know should work perfectly fine? Ask JSR how much fun it is for their pers setting up a Div HQ complex in a parking lot that has nobody working in it, but they have to monitor all the systems anyways as "good training".

And no, at 32 you weren't doing any of that before I joined the CF, but thanks for the condescending tone.

I'm hoping the collective experience of the members here will have some useful tips for me. I am an ACISS Core Cpl in the P Res and now a first time Det Comd. I am not PLQ qualified and I still have a portion of DP2 remaining to complete.

In September 2014 I had already completed 2 deployments, worked as a Section Commander in both the PRes then RegF and with a CRIPT member as my DC built one of the first deployable standalone network systems (to mimic TacNet) for the PRes and used it on exercise with great success.

As I'm sure you've seen in the PRes, age can be very deceiving.

I didn't call the members "not viable" - maybe take a little extra time reading a post before replying.

tl/dr: You are wrong. IST is more viable than ACISS Core.

and those "less viable" Core guys

You clearly didn't read what I wrote.

I get it though, you're an IT guy and see the world through IT lenses. Think about your 18 year old kid heading into university with no IT experience and taking Basket Weaving at university. IST sounds cool, so he takes the training. Ends up with watered down training, barely scratching the surface and not nearly having the experience on equipment as someone like you who does it for a day job as well. Finishes university, decides he wants to deploy. We have reservist quotas, so he's thrown in HQ&Sigs and now its someone's problem to train him up to be a competent IST and fill all those gaps the  PRes couldn't possibly train during an 8 week summer course and 2 weekends a month. He's a huge drain on resources, but it sure looks good that we have another PRes trade to dilute the existing PRes trades that are bleeding people and struggling to recruit.

 

[Avail]

In September 2014 I had already completed 2 deployments, worked as a Section Commander in both the PRes then RegF and with a CRIPT member as my DC built one of the first deployable standalone network systems (to mimic TacNet) for the PRes and used it on exercise with great success.

Congratulations. Give yourself a pat on the back for me.

I've administered and architected enterprise networks from the ground up and executed large scale domain and exchange migrations. Ive implemented SCCM, Puppet, and SharePoint projects. Again, those piped into IST should have a similar background, as many of my peers do.

My argument is that the skills are already there and that SUPPLEMENTAL training could be completed on the job. You've done nothing to sway that position. For the 2014-2015 FY the Army Reserve had a $13.5 million surplus. I'm no accountant but it would seem to me that there's at least some wiggle room for equipment.

Think about your 18 year old kid heading into university with no IT experience and taking Basket Weaving

The basics of network administration are no more complex than operating VHF and HF radio. The basket weaver may be in trouble either way if they don't have the aptitude.

Looks good that we have another PRes trade to dilute the existing PRes trades that are bleeding people and struggling to recruit.

You're right, we are bleeding people and struggling to recruit - because our members aren't being challenged or utilized as well as they could be.  We are stuck doing the same things over and over with no change on the horizon. I am confident our recruiting efforts, especially in the post secondary demographic, would go up if we had IST. The Army Reserve is hemorrhaging because our training is a joke. Our equipment is a joke. It has and continues to destroy morale, and people leave. Maybe we can't properly train IST members, but I'd argue our current training for ACISS Core isn't any better. We're in rough shape and we have very little in the way of experienced leaders, because many have gone on to greener pastures, largely due to the issues mentioned. Either way, this is getting a bit tangential.

You're right about the end user issue - I'll give you that one.

 

[Sig_Des]

Congratulations. Give yourself a pat on the back for me.

Your condescending tone is amusing to me as you were the one who initially started this digital dongle-measuring with your snarky tone. But judging from your posting history, before you had joined the CAF, he DID have more military and branch experience than you did.

I've administered and architected enterprise networks from the ground up and executed large scale domain and exchange migrations. Ive implemented SCCM, Puppet, and SharePoint projects. Again, those piped into IST should have a similar background, as many of my peers do.

Good for you. That's your experience. And yes, there's a lot of of the same among Res ACISS core, particularly around the big-city units. But it is not a standard throughout. And the fact remains, just because there's a lot of people who do that on their own, does not justify creating a trade just to keep them doing what they do in their civvy lives.

OK. so let's say you get what you want. You get Res IST. What will they do? And let's be honest, first 5 years, you'll have MAYBE 100 people. Sure, 33 Sigs may have a Tp's worth of pers, mostly due to the fact that the guys who have experience are working in the industry or on Class B at LStL. But what about the other units. What is their employment going to be? You complain about the level of leadership now, how many effective Jnr & Snr NCO's will cross over? And I'm not talking about just technologically effective.

DWAN Admin? Good luck breaking into that empire without actually working at a helpdesk. You'll get an A- account from their cold dead hands.

So what will the IST trade bring to the table? What WILL they do during parade nights and ex? Build and maintain LCSS suites, obviously, because THAT's the ONLY system that would be of any worth. But would it be though? Are you just going to build kits, that no one will use until one of the major Bde Exes? The Res Cmbt arms units aren't going to waste their training time with it on parade nights and weekend exes.

So you want to create a trade, that will build and maintain something that only that trade will want to use. And with the Concept of Employment and time required for Capability Increments, plus the tougher time the Res already has for procurement and maintenance, you think that won't frustrate people?

I'm sorry, but I just don't believe the juice is worth the squeeze.

 

[RADOPSIGOPACCISOP]

How is that beyond your comprehension? What is a PRes IST going to do all day? They don't have TSLs, MTs or classified networks to administer. Massive skillfade. Huge training costs to industry standards with no contract to keep that person in the CAF once they got qualified. There's hundreds of reasons not to do it, and why it made sense that they didn't do it. They even cut pieces out of the ACISS DP1/2 packages for Core to make it shorter. Even R291 is a wasted trade with limited ability to augment the RegF and huge hindrances to equipment and training time.

You're likely to see the exact same thing for Cyber Op. The only Cyber piece the PRes had (which was done well) was the CRIP teams that were SigOps and Techs with personal training and on long term Cl B contracts.

Supposedly they are rolling out LCSS (U) to the reserve units.

 

[RADOPSIGOPACCISOP]

What are you cutting to get that equipment to every PRes Sigs unit? You can't use O&M money for it, so where do you find the Vote 1 and Vote 5 to build a network system for the PRes to use thats viable as a training nexus to ISTs in the RegF who are administering DWAN, CSNI and a whole host of other networks? 30 laptops running into a Cisco switch and a 3U server isn't nearly close to what a RegF IST is taught and can handle. Its not just lack of equipment, its lack of users, which means lack of user induced faults. How long before your PRes ISTs are bored of their MCpls introducing faults on the system that they know should work perfectly fine? Ask JSR how much fun it is for their pers setting up a Div HQ complex in a parking lot that has nobody working in it, but they have to monitor all the systems anyways as "good training".

In September 2014 I had already completed 2 deployments, worked as a Section Commander in both the PRes then RegF and with a CRIPT member as my DC built one of the first deployable standalone network systems (to mimic TacNet) for the PRes and used it on exercise with great success.

As I'm sure you've seen in the PRes, age can be very deceiving.

You clearly didn't read what I wrote.

I get it though, you're an IT guy and see the world through IT lenses. Think about your 18 year old kid heading into university with no IT experience and taking Basket Weaving at university. IST sounds cool, so he takes the training. Ends up with watered down training, barely scratching the surface and not nearly having the experience on equipment as someone like you who does it for a day job as well. Finishes university, decides he wants to deploy. We have reservist quotas, so he's thrown in HQ&Sigs and now its someone's problem to train him up to be a competent IST and fill all those gaps the  PRes couldn't possibly train during an 8 week summer course and 2 weekends a month. He's a huge drain on resources, but it sure looks good that we have another PRes trade to dilute the existing PRes trades that are bleeding people and struggling to recruit.

Honestly it can easily be done on the cheap.

Set up a tiny stack of physical servers and you can virtualize the entire LCSS Bde suite to a pretty reliable degree. Couple in a setup with GNS3 and you can create virtual networks nearly identical as well.

Have the reserve guys play with that and I can guarentee you I can find a use for them in my IST sect. Sure they may not be up to the same level as a Reg F IST but a good chunk of our tasks are repetitive in nature. I'd have them shown how to image a rack of computers and they can do the next few hundred on their own. Show them how to program a VoIP DN and let them do the next couple of hundred.

Argue if you want but I can pretty authoritatively tell you I'd take smart people with minimum training over being understaffed any day of the week.

 

[buzgo]

I'm pretty sure the reserve units have LCSS(U).

Maybe they don't need ISTs, maybe what they need is a TACNET support course.  They can then send their people who work in these jobs in the real world on the training and learn to support the software and maintain the configurations. Hardware is not a problem.

I have to agree with some of the other posts, we can barely train ISTs in the reg force and we are not close to achieving the quality or quantity of folks that we need. We can put reservists on the courses but reserve units are better off recruiting kids with diplomas/degrees in IT related fields.

Reserve signals needs to have a serious look at tasks/requirements/capabilities and figure out what they can actually achieve.  Maybe its all about GATR and some unclass networking/it support and providing some HF capabilities.

 

[c_canuk]

Just got word that any former LCIS who did not complete QL5 prior to the 2011 cut off, will not get spec pay under the old system that's being unfrozen.

I had more comments regarding this, but I've chosen not to post them since it's not going to change anything. I have a problem with allowing things I can't change to negatively affect my mental health.

I'm working on it.

 

[RADOPSIGOPACCISOP]

I'm pretty sure the reserve units have LCSS(U).

Maybe they don't need ISTs, maybe what they need is a TACNET support course.  They can then send their people who work in these jobs in the real world on the training and learn to support the software and maintain the configurations. Hardware is not a problem.

I have to agree with some of the other posts, we can barely train ISTs in the reg force and we are not close to achieving the quality or quantity of folks that we need. We can put reservists on the courses but reserve units are better off recruiting kids with diplomas/degrees in IT related fields.

Reserve signals needs to have a serious look at tasks/requirements/capabilities and figure out what they can actually achieve.  Maybe its all about GATR and some unclass networking/it support and providing some HF capabilities.

Give me a smart reservist and I'll teach them the basics of first line help desk in a day, or teach them how to reimage pcs. If they have networking experience then we can put them to work right away on any of the systems.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Just got word that any former LCIS who did not complete QL5 prior to the 2011 cut off, will not get spec pay under the old system that's being unfrozen.

I had more comments regarding this, but I've chosen not to post them since it's not going to change anything. I have a problem with allowing things I can't change to negatively affect my mental health.

I'm working on it.

While I feel for the ACISS pain imposed on folks...I can't see the problem with this WRT spec pay for those who didn't complete QL5 prior to the 2011 cut off.  Spec pay is granted to people in spec trades that (1) are the min rank of Cpl and (2) have completed a QL5 (or other trade designated) course.  If you weren't receiving spec pay when the 2011 cut off happened...meaning you weren't entitled to spec pay yet...why would you magically be grandfathered into something you weren't entitled to receive before the "comes into effect" date?

Looking at it myopically, it could seem unfair or whatever word people like to use, but if you weren't entitled before a cut off date, I have a hard time understanding why you would be entitled after a cut off date.

:2c:

 

[ACISSfail]

I have been watching this forum since around the beginning of this whole fiasco.  I joined as LCIS, did POET and then got sucked into the nightmare that is ACISS.  I am happy to see that grievance about the delayed pay review for ACISS, but really I am not confident about seeing a resolution to this ridiculous situation any time soon considering taking this approach to unfreeze LCIS instead.  I am also happy that some of my friends are getting a nice big pay check, well deserved. 

The fact now is that half the section I belong to makes a fair chunk of change more than I for the exact same job.  I think the absolute worst thing was how they even managed to mess up the unfreeze, apparently applying the trade change to ALL former LCIS, as everyone that I know who wasn't QL5 Cpl at the cutoff saw back pay come onto their stub...Yea thanks, just keep rubbing more salt into that wound (all who joined as LCIS but didn't get qualified in time).

When I joined I had done my research, looked into the trades I was interested in, and between EO and LCIS I went with the latter.  They knew based on all my research that ACISS was happening, so why did they continue to hire LCIS then (don't actually entertain an answer I know why but still misleading none the less).  If I had known I would have definitely gone the other way.

Anyways, I really hate to have my first post be one of such negativity.  I certainly love my job and while I agree that money is not everything, It certainly helps, especially when you joined a trade with a higher level of training and education and that expectation.  I merely felt the need to finally hop on this forum and vent a bit  [.

Cheers

 

[PuckChaser]

While I feel for the ACISS pain imposed on folks...I can't see the problem with this WRT spec pay for those who didn't complete QL5 prior to the 2011 cut off.  Spec pay is granted to people in spec trades that (1) are the min rank of Cpl and (2) have completed a QL5 (or other trade designated) course.  If you weren't receiving spec pay when the 2011 cut off happened...meaning you weren't entitled to spec pay yet...why would you magically be grandfathered into something you weren't entitled to receive before the "comes into effect" date?

Looking at it myopically, it could seem unfair or whatever word people like to use, but if you weren't entitled before a cut off date, I have a hard time understanding why you would be entitled after a cut off date.

:2c:

It makes no sense to me either. Anyone that might have a case is the rare situation where a person was QL5 qualified and only a few days/weeks short of promotion to Cpl. The other side of the coin is that you have to draw a line somewhere, and someone was going to get shafted because of it so trying to walk on eggshells to make everyone in a large trade happy is just not possible.

Anyone who didn't have enough time in trade to complete their QL5 has literally no idea what they were missing. Their complaints are solely now based on money as a motivating factor, instead of actual hardship and are welcome to VOT into a Spec pay trade that will happily pay them extra money to feel entitled.

ACISSFail: You have very little understanding on how this whole process went about. They cannot hire for a new trade that's not approved. At some point they had to make a line in the sand and make an effective date for a trade. You literally have no idea what you're missing WRT spec pay, and have no right to gripe unless you were one of those Techs who were unfairly pay frozen by this gongshow. The pay unfreeze admin screw up sucks, but if you're that salty about not getting spec pay your solution is a AVOTP memo away. You're not any different than any other Signaller just because you did POET, or NCM-SEP. You'll find some folks in IST or Core with one or two college diplomas who happily enjoy their rate of pay, and although would welcome a spec pay boost, aren't butthurt about it. If you needed to vent, I'm sure you can do that all day in the tech shop, but those guys who actually earned their spec pay probably don't want to hear it anymore.

 

[LCISALCpl]

I am not sure how many other former LCIS techs this affected but they actually managed to screw up the pay unfreeze for many of us by applying the difference in our pay as a deduction for all the months/years of missing spec pay vice a credit. When I called the pay office, apparently it was a "known" issue for former LCIS techs on their end-JAN pay statement. Check your EMAA to make sure you are not getting screwed by this if you were looking forward to a payout this month.

Also ref the whole QL5 qualified requirement, some of you may remember there was a period of several years where the LCIS QL5 course was being redesigned and thus did not exist. I am talking around the 2004-2005 timeframe so there are some members who were not offered the opportunity the complete their QL5 yet still received their spec pay since no QL5 existed at the time. This issue affected me and I know of others who are fighting to get their backpay because of it. I was fortunate in that my MCpl insisted that I complete a PLAR for my QL5 just to cover my butt which got processed/approved in 2010 so I guess I dodged that bullet. Good luck to those of you who are facing this dilemma.