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

[technophile]

I've got guys who received backpay they were not entitled to.  Guys who were entitled getting too much or too little backpay. Some that were entitled getting nothing and best yet, a couple guys pay actually going down !

We were briefed two months ago to tell pers who received backpay not to spend it.  ( easier said than done )

There was an email sent in Feb from D RCCS acknowledging the screwup.  Apparently the solution is " not easy" ( his words) and they were working on an approval ( however, they will not elaborate on the plan)

 

[Cobrajr]

At least the legacy LCIS got their pay back, so we have the breathing room to get it right this time.

Does not change anything for the guys who got POET and then suddenly were ACISS before they qualified for spec, and are now doing the same job as the guys getting spec for less pay - with the same training. Sure is lovely.

There is also 0 incentive to go CST, so now we are hurting for people BADLY. 
Go CST, do extensive extra training, slower promotions, no spec. Stay core, Jack after a few years.

 

[MOOXE]

Plan A was to continue the spec pay freeze and wait for all the original LCIS techs receiving it to retire, then start from scratch. At least that was the joke some of us core fellows were spreading around.

I see a lot of spec pay wasted on techs that don't work a bench anymore. I think the whole system is messed up. I am not even sure its intended purpose is still in effect. Techs be grateful for what you are getting, most of us join with zero incentive.

 

[Brasidas]

I see a lot of spec pay wasted on techs that don't work a bench anymore. I think the whole system is messed up. I am not even sure its intended purpose is still in effect. Techs be grateful for what you are getting, most of us join with zero incentive.

"The whole system's intended purpose" was to make up for a shortfall of Sig Ops by rebranding Linemen and LCIS as Sig Ops. Its intended purpose succeeded, and now the powers that be are considering how to undo the damage.

Why would anyone choose to go CST when they could go ATIS (about the same training) or Core (where they'd be trained as Sig Op det commanders as well as techs while compromising their ability to advance in their careers)?

 

[PuckChaser]

D RCCS put out a Branch update on Friday.

- Blue berets are approved by CCA and they're choosing a colour and sourcing to Logistik Unicorp before laying out a issuing timeline. My gut tells me they'll want it done before C&E Week in October.

- 3 COAs on the table for ACISS restructure, status quo not an option: (1) Stay as is but remove CISTM allowing all trades to promote to MWO in their own trade; (2) 4 separate trades (Operator, IST, CST, LST); and (3) Merge CST+IST into one trade with specialties for each, all other trades stay as is.

- An update on legacy LCIS spec pay return, I didn't read it as it didn't apply to me and only had a few minutes to browse.

There was a 4th point in the letter but it must not have been important as it didn't survive first contact with some beers last night.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

D RCCS put out a Branch update on Friday.

- Blue berets are approved by CCA and they're choosing a colour and sourcing to Logistik Unicorp before laying out a issuing timeline. My gut tells me they'll want it done before C&E Week in October.

- 3 COAs on the table for ACISS restructure, status quo not an option: (1) Stay as is but remove CISTM allowing all trades to promote to MWO in their own trade; (2) 4 separate trades (Operator, IST, CST, LST); and (3) Merge CST+IST into one trade with specialties for each, all other trades stay as is.

- An update on legacy LCIS spec pay return, I didn't read it as it didn't apply to me and only had a few minutes to browse.

There was a 4th point in the letter but it must not have been important as it didn't survive first contact with some beers last night.

Saw the same thing. Two other points were mentioned:

They're starting up the Signals Attraction Tram again to try and get more Army Sigs in place.

Also, talked briefly about the Cisco IT Fundamentals curriculum taking effect at CFSCE for ISTs.

 

[Ludoc]

Saw the same thing. Two other points were mentioned:

They're starting up the Signals Attraction Tram again to try and get more Army Sigs in place.

Also, talked briefly about the Cisco IT Fundamentals curriculum taking effect at CFSCE for ISTs.

The Cisco stuff is being included in the DP 1.0. All new ACISS will learn it, not just the ISTs.

For anyone interested in the update:
https://cmcen.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/bil-ltr-to-rccs-apr-171.pdf

 

[RedcapCrusader]

D RCCS put out a Branch update on Friday.

- Blue berets are approved by CCA and they're choosing a colour and sourcing to Logistik Unicorp before laying out a issuing timeline. My gut tells me they'll want it done before C&E Week in October.

Why!?

 

[PuckChaser]

Why!?

Beats me, but we'll match signallers from Aus, UK, and I believe NZ so I guess that's a thing?

 

[PiperDown]

Once again, lets make former LCIS techs wait some more while someone tries to figure out how to implement a CDS directive. Whats another year between friends !

And, lets come up with a great new idea to mash Infomation Systems Techs and Communication Systems Techs into a new sub occupation.  Lets call it.  IC systems tech.  no wait, Land IC systems tech.  Hmmmm..  C before I.  Land CI systems tech.  OK.. LCIS tech.  DOH !!!!

The lads will sure be happy with the new blue beret !

 

[meni0n]

The blue beret was the best bit.

"We got the new beret sorted out, that's how awesome we are! But who got times to look at the collar dogs, we got more important things to take care of like spec pay. So don't be asking about no collar dogs."

 

[PuckChaser]

Once again, lets make former LCIS techs wait some more while someone tries to figure out how to implement a CDS directive. Whats another year between friends !

And, lets come up with a great new idea to mash Infomation Systems Techs and Communication Systems Techs into a new sub occupation.  Lets call it.  IC systems tech.  no wait, Land IC systems tech.  Hmmmm..  C before I.  Land CI systems tech.  OK.. LCIS tech.  DOH !!!!

The lads will sure be happy with the new blue beret !

So what you're saying is you don't like that COA? Maybe you missed the other 2 in there...

 

[PiperDown]

coa 1.  Get rid of CISTM - ACISS core plus 3 sub ocs including MWO
coa 2.  Dismantle ACISS structure and create 4 seperate occupations up to CWO ( no CISTM)
coa 3 - Dismantile ACISS and 3 occupations up to CWO ( no CISTM)

2 of the COAs kill the current " train everyone to be operators" bull****  ( COA 2 and 3)
COA 3 essentially goes back to the way things were before MES.

COA 1 is essentially what we have now, considering there are no CISTMSs ( on paper perhaps... but, there is no course Qual, and we are still merrited in CST/LST/IST sub occupations  at the WO and MWO level and FoS/LCF positions are still pulled from CST/LST )

I said it in the beginning, and I will say it again.  We will eventually go back to 3 ( not 4 ) seperate occupations.  MES has been an exercise in futility.



 

 

[PuckChaser]

I believe COA 1 and COA 2 scored the highest, within a few points of each other at the working group. You don't need to indicate no CISTM, as that "trade" is effectively dead. You're also only looking at ACISS from only one side. It was intended to make a well-rounded signaller who could do basic troubleshooting, make some cables, and run a radio. The courseware was poorly designed as the individuals designing it thought working a radio was easy, and gutted that training and only paid lip service to the well-rounding part.

It would be interesting if we did something similar to RCEME and their EME Common course, where DP1 candidates complete a Sigs Common course that covers types of cabling, technician tools and a good grounding (pun not intended) in Radio/Electrical theory before breaking off into their own streams for specialties. Obviously that would only be an option if COA 1 was picked, but I feel that's a better compromise.

COA 3 goes back to the way things were before MES, but the WG also identified that the CST trade could end up dying (as we've traditionally known it) due to advances in technology and less reliance on high-reliability soldering and more on card-based equipment which doesn't need a 6 month POET/FET course to exchange. This COA would provide flexibility in that training system to "follow the technology" instead of being stuck in an archaic structure.

 

[PiperDown]

I would take a cautious approach to the statement that we don't need a 6 month POET to train a technician.

Let me offer this.  POET taught a methodology of troubleshooting that can be ( and goes get) applied to every aspect of  maintenance/diagnosis/repair.

This is distinctly lacking from MES produced CSTs.  Not every module in POET was put into direct practise after the course, however the building blocks of approaching a problem last a career.  I don't know of any other way this can be taught to the same standard.  Clearly OJT of baby faced CSTs wont/doesn't net the same results.

Its been a fun experiment.  Lets get back to work.

 

[Cobrajr]

Let me offer this.  POET taught a methodology of troubleshooting that can be ( and goes get) applied to every aspect of  maintenance/diagnosis/repair.

100% this, the biggest thing I took away from my electronics training is a whole new way of thinking and looking at problems.
Understanding what makes circuits tick (heh) is a BIG part of that, whether you are looking to replace an IC or a whole card.

This foundation makes following specialized equipment courses go by much faster since techs have a better understanding of electronics in general.

While I may not use the component level, telecommunications theory, digital, etc. skills every day, I certainly use the overarching skills gained from taking the whole program daily both in and out of the workplace.

It would be interesting if we did something similar to RCEME and their EME Common course, where DP1 candidates complete a Sigs Common course that covers types of cabling, technician tools and a good grounding (pun not intended) in Radio/Electrical theory before breaking off into their own streams for specialties. Obviously that would only be an option if COA 1 was picked, but I feel that's a better compromise.

We could definitely still do this even if we split up again, EME is all separate trades, not subocs like ACISS. I like the idea, but it would have to be relevant information, and not trying to make operators out of everybody again.

 

[PuckChaser]

We could definitely still do this even if we split up again, EME is all separate trades, not subocs like ACISS. I like the idea, but it would have to be relevant information, and not trying to make operators out of everybody again.

We'd have to keep the training as common to all. Would remove the requirement for basic theory in the DP1 phase.

Keep in mind here that the training was never going to make operators out of anyone. It was the idea that the operator job was easy to train and retain was how we started down this gongshow.

 

[Fishchip]

Reading this thread is giving me a sinking feeling -- I'm a reg force nav comm (5B qualified) thinking of downshifting to reserve 00362. Is it really as bad as I'm reading? Am I about to make a huge mistake and jump feet first into a wallowing swamp of misery?

 

[GnyHwy]

You guys should get rid of Sig Op outright. Is that even a skill when matched up against your other tasks/expectations?

Talking on a radio and basic trouble shooting is a skill that any soldier can learn, some learn it very quick... others can be taught numerous times and they never get it.

Sig Op should be an IBTS for all, and Sigs (actual) should only do it as a secondary task, when their bored, or absolutely needed. 

 

[PuckChaser]

You guys should get rid of Sig Op outright. Is that even a skill when matched up against your other tasks/expectations?

Talking on a radio and basic trouble shooting is a skill that any soldier can learn, some learn it very quick... others can be taught numerous times and they never get it.

Sig Op should be an IBTS for all, and Sigs (actual) should only do it as a secondary task, when their bored, or absolutely needed.

I don't tell you how to be a Gunner, so you should probably stop assuming you know anything other than gunline comms. There's a lot more than basic troubleshooting and voice procedure that goes into being a Sig Op, but I wouldn't expect for you to know any of that based off your flippant comments.