Purple Trades: Definition & Trg Discussion

[Snakedoc]

My apologies for the double post, it appears the threads were split just as I was posting.  I believe my post fits better in this thread:

To argue that "The Navy is so different" or "The Air Force is unique" is ridiculous.  It's a base, emotive claim, as if somehow people can't move to antoher environoment and work there.  Of course that's not true; in the real world people are often forced to move to new workplaces witrh radically different cultures.  Only in the nanny-state of the military would we attempt to institutionalize fear of change and inflexibility and call them character traits to emulate.

But each element IS quite different, the function of each base is to support operations within that environment, organizational identity and culture play a large role in that.  I do not know of one civilian organization in the real world that has 6 different cultures for an employee to adopt.  Not only this, but one of the main reasons why civilian employees are not hired or end up quiting is that they do not fit within an organizations culture.

Now, I completely agree with the fact that this should not mean 'somehow people can't move to another environment and work there.'  If additional surge capacity or support is required there should be the ability to move people of equivalent training to a new environment and for them to learn the new environment and how it works.  However, this should not be the norm, the majority of this person's career should be spent within their environment, and at the end of the day, this person should be able to say 'I am a Sailor, I am in the (Royal) Canadian Navy, and my role is to support the (Royal) Canadian Navy within the CF.  As a Sailor, I am able to defend a ship or naval establishment, be part of a damage control team, be part of a fire fighting team, and perform general shipboard duties required of all Sailors (ie coming alongside etc.)' or something to that effect.

So  I say, let the trades people learn the unified processes and systems at schools that do not have any Navy/Army/Air Force bias  but then let them chose their environment, absorb its culture and live within it. I am sure it would make Pusser and Halifax Tar happy.

As for the original question, while I can live with Canadian Navy, I would be proud to serve the Royal Canadian Navy again.

Here Here to that.  I completely feel the same sentiment.  The benefits of a unified system can still be reaped while maintaining a strong sense of organizational culture and identity.  Most major militaries around the world are moving towards this.  However they are doing this gradually whereas the CF went a complete 360 (gutting the identity and culture of the former services in the process) and then is now slowly back-peddling to find a balanced medium.  Though I've never served in the Royal Canadian Navy, I would certainly be proud to adopt the name and identity.

 

[Halifax Tar]

As much I would love to see the harbinger of change in all the unification and separating the log branch, the question needs to be asked, "Are we just beating a dead horse about this?"

What I mean to say is that I doubt in my service or lifetime I will ever see change. Does anyone actually see it as a distinct possibility or are we really just dealing in alternate realities here ?

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Thank you Blackadder, Woodward was who I had in mind. And I am glad to see my point confirmed, though the details were incorrect: While the recapture was obviously done by soldiers, the overall command was Navy. And that was my point about jointness.

Halifax Tar: Keep your hopes high. In my career, we have gone from the (depressing) era of walking about in green gas bar attendant uniform (the Work Dress, not the CF) and calling ourselves "maritime command" (with the attendant HQ exile to Halifax) to recovering our pride with a naval uniform, calling ourselves a Navy again (though with some resistance still out there) and having CMS reintegrate the circles of political power in Ottawa. So change occurs - just at a rate that may seem too slow for those who figure out quickly where we should be going.

As for those who still cling to the purpose statement of  the Glasso Commission on Unification as a method  "to reduce the tooth to tail ratios" because "maintaining excess capacity of three kinds of supply techs (for example) to fill positions is a waste of money and of personnel" and that  "in a resource constrained environment we don't have the luxury of bloated establishments", well I have news for  you: Not only did the Navy "tooth to tail" ratio increase by bounds and leap since unification [I cannot comment on the other two elements] but the specific type of wider training and qualification the Navy provided its "pay clerks" that made them capable of handling multiple tasks (like the sea logistics officers, which we thankfully retained) that are now each trade specific has disappeared and that creates a need for excess capacity within the Navy.

So please, unless someone can show me a current comparative study between the CF "tooth to tail ratio" and that of  a reasonably similar military force from another country that is not "unified" [my suggestions would be Australia, Britain, the Netherlands and Germany) that proves to me that the CF ratio is better, or at the very least just as good, don't quote me Mr. Glasso and his "efficiency" bumpf that never materialized.

 

[dapaterson]

Of course efficiences aren't realized - because we insist on treating people as enviro-centric and building bloat.

It's not low-hanging fruit in rationalization (NCR-centric occupations being civilianized would be among the easiest ways to free up several hundred Reg F PYs to reinvest *) but is necessary.

Empire building is DND's biggest problem.  Using bollocks environmental issues to maintain those empires is a leadership failure.  And, unfortunately, one that the organizational culture rewards.


* Occupations like MARE, EME, AERE, Sigs (Land and Air) and Log all have disproportionate numbers of their pers in Ottawa.  The majority of those functions should be civilianized; that a full 20 year career in those occupations can be had in a static office job is proof that they are not military essential functions, but rather are functions essential to supporting the military (a distinction that is too often lost).

 

[Halifax Tar]

* Occupations like MARE, EME, AERE, Sigs (Land and Air) and Log all have disproportionate numbers of their pers in Ottawa.  The majority of those functions should be civilianized; that a full 20 year career in those occupations can be had in a static office job is proof that they are not military essential functions, but rather are functions essential to supporting the military (a distinction that is too often lost).

dapaterson,

I would like to know your foundations for your statement that so man people of the various occupations you listed spend there whole careers in Ottawa or another static location ?

We are now reaping what sow with regards to the civilianization of DND positions in Ottawa. Have your tried to get an answer from an Item/Supply Manager recently that wasn't garbled or way out in left field ? Be careful what you wish for. I would rather have someone who at least has an iota of sympathy or an idea of what I am talking about than the current batch of people I have been dealing with there!

 

[McG]

* Occupations like MARE, EME, AERE, Sigs (Land and Air) and Log all have disproportionate numbers of their pers in Ottawa. 

I would like to know your foundations for your statement that so man people of the various occupations you listed spend there whole careers in Ottawa or another static location ?

Have a look at PML for the listed occupations, then have a look inside ADM(Mat) to see count the number of established positions for those occupations.

We are now reaping what sow with regards to the civilianization of DND positions in Ottawa. Have your tried to get an answer from an Item/Supply Manager recently that wasn't garbled or way out in left field ? Be careful what you wish for. I would rather have someone who at least has an iota of sympathy or an idea of what I am talking about than the current batch of people I have been dealing with there!

An officer that has spent more than a decade not leaving NDHQ is a bureaucrat in uniform.  The civilian doing a Class A reserve job will often be more in-touch and sympathetic to the users perspective.

 

[Pusser]

The solution to these problems is not necessarily to civilianize certain jobs.  We need military folks in staff jobs in order to ensure that the aim and a proper perspective is maintained.  Where we fail in this regard is in not rotating people with current experience into the staff jobs.  The static folks are at fault for pushing to stay in Ottawa far too long where they lose currency, and the operational folks are at fault for complaining about how the "idiots on staff" don't know what's going on, but fighting like hell to avoid going to Ottawa to be part of the solution.  In short, the answer is that we all need to get out a bit more.

 

[dapaterson]

But there aren't enough positions to get out in to the real world in those trades.  Geographic locations for over 2/3 of Log officers (all colours) Major and above in the Regular Force are in the NCR.  The AERE branch is overwhelmingly located in the Cumberland building.  Louis St Laurent is the MARE and EME home station (or at least it should be).

Military influence in PMOs = good.  Military excess = bad.

We have a finite number of military PYs authorized by the government.  They have to be prioritized.  And DGAEPM 7-34-9-12 (Nuts, locking, rudder, left hand side, Auroras, pre midlife extension) should not be a priority to establish as a military position (let alone as a Maj with two military subordinates).  [Note:  These positions are ficticious.  As far as I know]


If we build a structure that demands massive numbers of engineers in cubicles, that demand is best met through civilian engineers, with some military augmentation.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Have a look at PML for the listed occupations, then have a look inside ADM(Mat) to see count the number of established positions for those occupations.
An officer that has spent more than a decade not leaving NDHQ is a bureaucrat in uniform.  The civilian doing a Class A reserve job will often be more in-touch and sympathetic to the users perspective.

Where should the Cdr/Lcol Log Officer go ? Perhaps for the army they can command a SVC BTN IF and I stress IF they are lucky, as those positions are also held by EME officers. But a Naval LOG O is destined to be shore bound in an HQ or staff setting for the vast majority of their careers. Lets also not forget that those positions didn't just appear, at some point someone addressed an outstanding need by creating them. Those people with 10+ years in NDHQ came from somewhere and had some sort of "first line" experience before being summoned to the empire err NDHQ.

Dont get me wrong here I have spent almost my whole 12 years, to date, on either ships or on tour, I have avoided shore postings like the plague, and I have zero interest in going to a 2nd or 3rd line posting or an HQ. Having said that I feel that if I was posted to a position, say on the CMS staff then I feel I could contribute somewhat to that with my Naval Supply related first line experience, notwithstanding my constant efforts to get back to fleet.

So MCG I see your point, I do, but I see the other side as well.

A PO once told me a quote, and love it to this day "Sailors should be on ships and ships should be at sea" and that is how I see it.

 

[Pusser]

A PO once told me a quote, and love it to this day "Sailors should be on ships and ships should be at sea" and that is how I see it.

This sailor prefers to be "in" ships.  It gets a little cold "on" ships if one never gets to go inside! ;D  Otherwise, well said.

 

[TangoTwoBravo]

In my experience there are indeed cultural differences between the services (whatever the heck we call the Army/Navy/Airforce).  Those differences exist for good reasons.  We do different things. 

I can see having a few "purple" trades such as Chaplain, Legal and MOs, but the lion share should belong to their parent service.

Regarding NDHQ, just because somebody has been there ten years does not make them a bureaucrat.  I'm not saying that I want to get posted there, but I appreciate that there are uniformed folks.

 

[dapaterson]

Regarding NDHQ, just because somebody has been there ten years does not make them a bureaucrat.  I'm not saying that I want to get posted there, but I appreciate that there are uniformed folks.

No one is argunign the need for uniformed folks in NDHQ.  What I'm critiquing is that better than 1 in 8 trained members of the Reg F are posted to the National Capital Region.

 

[OldSolduer]

Regarding NDHQ, just because somebody has been there ten years does not make them a bureaucrat.  I'm not saying that I want to get posted there, but I appreciate that there are uniformed folks.

Understood, but when someone has been there 14 years.......an slides from one place to another.....that ain't right.

I was on course not long ago and two of my syndicate  members (combined) had more time in Ottawa than I have in....and that is sad.

 

[captloadie]

There is another very good reason to keep uniforms in static locations like NDHQ and the ADMs. No disrespect to our civilian counterparts in the Log world, but once you unionize your work force, you lose a lot of flexibility. Work to rule, strikes, or simply the union rules about work day length cannot be allowed to hinder operations. If for instance the CF has to move a large supply hub in 30 days to a new location for some reason, it needs to be able to push its planning staffs to work longer hours, weekends etc. If these were all civilianized, and this corresponded to a strike period, the CF would be screwed.

Please don't take this as a rant against the Unions. It is meant to be an argument why you need to have a flexible workforce in place.

 

[George Wallace]

I must agree with captloadie.  The civilian side of DND has strict rules by which it works by.  If you want to have a civilian to do something, it had better be written up in their contract or they are not going to do it.  The simple hanging of pictures on  an office wall call for a Work Order to be submitted to Public Works and a person from Public Works coming in and placing the nail in the wall in the appropriate spot.  Don't you even think of bringing in a hammer and nail from home.  Them are the rules, and you are forced to follow them.  (Now I know what others are going to say, and I have knowledge of what has been done so myself, but we won't say what we did or didn't do on the internet.)

 

[dapaterson]

Please.  The "flexible"military workforce in the NCR takes their 1 hour for PT from their 8 hour shift, plus meals, plus smoke breaks, gets more annual leave than the civilians, plus gets additional special days at Christmas, short days at other times, and are frequently told to go home early on long weekends, plus have training requirements to maintain proficiency (well, they're supposed to, but there are still senior folks going to the range to fire the "new" rifle - you know, that newfangled C7 that replaced the FN).  Overall, you generally get less work from a military member than from a civilian.  Military personnel are also significantly more expensive than civilians at equivalent levels. 

Again:  If you have a Reg F of about 60K trained strength (end-state), how many do you want to take off the top for the highest level HQ function - and how many at each lower level of HQs - before you get to the sailors in ships, boots on the ground, and pilots in 4 star hotels (OK, yes, it's an Air Force jab)?  I would argue that over 6K Reg F in the NCR is too many.

 

[Halifax Tar]

I think we may be drifting away from the Re: Purple Trades: Definition & Trg Discussion title of this thread

 

[Kat Stevens]

I think we may be drifting away from the Re: Purple Trades: Definition & Trg Discussion title of this thread

Nah, that never happens around here.

 

[Bird_Gunner45]

As stated by many before ... starting down a slippery slope.

Within the Log Br
- RCN and RCAF wanting their pers to wear their cap badges
- too many Log differences between environments therefore need to set up different schools
- too many differences environments therefore Log pers becomes environment specific in occupation and service
- but ... wait service bemoaning that there are not enough Log pers to meet their needs
- unification of all Log pers into a common system and school and requirement to serve in any environment no matter what uniform - sounds familiar?

i do agree that Army, Navy, and Air logistics are different and should be trained differently in the supply (foods too) and transportation streams, but could be trained as 1 for the finance and HR streams. The tactical training of logisticians at the NCM level is almost non-existant for Army pers and they need more training on establishing CPs, DPs, convoys, etc. For example there's a Sup Tech in Shilo just promoted to MCpl that hasn't done SQ yet... SQ!! Jr Logisticians need more field skills taught earlier and enforced at a younger level at the school.

Officers would also benefit from a combination of streams for the army pers into the 4 CMBG S&T Coy, with the 3 week specialty courses either tacked onto LOCL to put out pers who can be Supply or transport. Navy pers could have their specialty courses (fin, supply) put on LOCS, and air force could have a S&T type training pack put on their LOCA. LOCC could then be HR and fin heavy and remain as a common training point for the 3 services.

Logistics needs much more focus on tactics, particularly when you read the requirements in ADO 2021. The RCEME trade does this FAR more effectively than Log does, so Log could learn from them.

 

[dapaterson]

i do agree that Army, Navy, and Air logistics are different and should be trained differently in the supply (foods too) and transportation streams, but could be trained as 1 for the finance and HR streams. The tactical training of logisticians at the NCM level is almost non-existant for Army pers and they need more training on establishing CPs, DPs, convoys, etc. For example there's a Sup Tech in Shilo just promoted to MCpl that hasn't done SQ yet... SQ!! Jr Logisticians need more field skills taught earlier and enforced at a younger level at the school.

Officers would also benefit from a combination of streams for the army pers into the 4 CMBG S&T Coy, with the 3 week specialty courses either tacked onto LOCL to put out pers who can be Supply or transport. Navy pers could have their specialty courses (fin, supply) put on LOCS, and air force could have a S&T type training pack put on their LOCA. LOCC could then be HR and fin heavy and remain as a common training point for the 3 services.

Logistics needs much more focus on tactics, particularly when you read the requirements in ADO 2021. The RCEME trade does this FAR more effectively than Log does, so Log could learn from them.

Supply and transport functions should be uniform agnostic.  The employment of that knowledge may take place in environments that require specific skills, but the trade knowledge base is common to all.  The current fetish for dis-unifying the Log branch is not driven by rational, professional analysis, but rather by operator ego and their desire to have uniform uniforms on parade.