IAP For CFR's

[Disenchantedsailor]

not sure if this is the right place for this one,

Being on the most recent run of the back to back IAP/BOTP I'm wondering if anyone has the same perception that IAP for mbrs CFR'd with a few years under their belt (some with CD's) is a rather large waste of taxpayers money. In some cases these mbrs were made to remove capbadges altogether, now branch/regimental cap badges I can see for the sake of the trg establishment but denying the wear of the CF Cap Badge (earned once allready in thier career) seems to me a bit far.

Lets look at it from a trg perspective. In the most recent course
PO 101: Contribute as a member of a military team (with between 5 and 15 Years experience I'm not sure this had any benefit to CFR'd mbrs)
PO 102: Adhere to CF regulations and orders (Again if we havent figured it out by now we wouldn't have had our CO's reccomendations)
PO 103: Operate the service rifle (annual requiremnt for refresher trg)
PO 104: Maintain physical fitness proficiency (CF Express/BFT every year, and had to be passed prior to application for the programs (SCP/CEOTP)
PO 105: Perform drill (Covered during BMQ/PLQ/JLC and every parade since)
PO 106: Administer First Aid (Again refresher and pre-deployment requirment)
PO 107: Operate in a field environment (covered during BMQ - this could be taught during BOTP for CFR's - see proposal at the end)
PO 110: Maintain a safe working environment (Unit safety lectures during annual PD Day's and constant refresher trg)
PO 111: Communicate verbally and in writing (Most CPL's have this down pat and being a CPL is a req for all in service commisioning)
EDO 101: Canadian domestic / international military relationships (very little taught on this 1 lecture topic)
EDO 102: History, heritage, traditions of the profession of arms in Canada (most mbrs have an understanding of this none tested subj)
EDO 103: CF well-being programs and initiatives (never a waste)
EDO 104: Personal management and administrative procedures (most CPL's and even Pte(T) have a fairly decent understanding of the topic to the level that is taught)

The most beneficial part of this course is the half day LPAC.

So a better use of taxpayer money would be to make BOTP a 7 week course (remove week zero - really im sure we can all figure out an in routine in 10 minutes- especially when everyone is on TD)
Run a CFR Specific BOTP course add on PO 107 and LPAC in the first week of the course and save 10 weeks of wages not only of the students but the instructors, the R&Q, Incidentals, and so on.

My thoughts, anyone else on the course care to comment

 

[Nfld Sapper]

Did you ever stop to think as to the reason why they do it like that?

To make sure that everyone is on the same playing field.

 

[Disenchantedsailor]

I can buy that, but not all are on the same field, some like myself for example have to worry about burning off 25 Days leave between now and ph 2 which might maybe start in February. We were not permitted to talk to our home units for example and of course being on TD were entitled to benefits the "off the street guys" were (no offence to the off the street guys, we were all there once).

 

[Nfld Sapper]

We were not permitted to talk to our home units for example

Hmm...... to me that seems strange during my Leadership course I had constant access to my home unit. Maybe someone posted as an Instructor to CFLRS could clarify the above statment as to why they can't talk to their units.

 

[Michael OLeary]

I can buy that, but not all are on the same field, some like myself for example have to worry about burning off 25 Days leave between now and ph 2 which might maybe start in February. We were not permitted to talk to our home units for example and of course being on TD were entitled to benefits the "off the street guys" were (no offence to the off the street guys, we were all there once).

You may not all start out "on the same field", but it is your new peer group you are training with.  Look upon it as an opportunity to integrate with that peer group, train with them from the outset of this stage of your careers, and (like those with prior service on BMQ) take the opportunity to share your experience with them as a peer and team member.

There are enough occasions where people declare themselves to be special, or deserving of special treatment, there's no reason to create more of them.  I doubt the cost savings of a shorter course for the few would really be worth the effort. 

 

[X-mo-1979]

And to add a little naphtha to the Arctic mitts before lighting the stove.(Anyone remember that video) ;D

I worked with a gentleman who had completed up to phase 3,then quit and re-enlisted as a NCM.His PLQ was written off even though he came in as a Pte.

 

[X-mo-1979]

I can buy that, but not all are on the same field, some like myself for example have to worry about burning off 25 Days leave between now and ph 2 which might maybe start in February. We were not permitted to talk to our home units for example and of course being on TD were entitled to benefits the "off the street guys" were (no offence to the off the street guys, we were all there once).

That sucks.Worrying about burning off leave.I hate that!!

How long did you have in the army?Course staff should sort out all your admin military side.Why would you need to talk to your unit?

 

[armyvern]

Hmm...... to me that seems strange during my Leadership course I had constant access to my home unit. Maybe someone posted as an Instructor to CFLRS could clarify the above statment as to why they can't talk to their units.

I had no access to mine during my ILQ in Saint Jean. No DWAN/DIN for we students ... ergo the dreaded "Blackberry" coming my way push ... too bad I got myself posted just to keep away from that Blackberry "is an absolute necessity" requirement!!

>

 

[Nfld Sapper]

Ok, guess I stepped out of my safe lane then.


Oopss.  :-[

 

[ModlrMike]

In some cases these mbrs were made to remove capbadges altogether, now branch/regimental cap badges I can see for the sake of the trg establishment but denying the wear of the CF Cap Badge (earned once allready in thier career) seems to me a bit far.

WTF? I think asking an experienced NCO or WO to remove a cap badge that they have earned through years of valued service is a shame. I'm all for everyone belonging to the same peer group, but good lord! Some of these folks have quite literally risked their lives for their country, and this is their reward? Shame!

 

[aesop081]

A freind of mine CFR'ed last year. He did not have to do IAP. Him and the other CFRs showed up for the last 6 weeks of the course.

Has this changed ?

 

[Disenchantedsailor]

The latest rumours are that IAP will not be req'd for CFR's and BOTP will be written off by the new version of CF PLQ, but again as all things military this is still a rumour as far as I know. (I'm still sifting through 4 months of message traffic and trying to sort out xmas lve)

 

[Shamrock]

I think asking an experienced NCO or WO to remove a cap badge that they have earned through years of valued service is a shame.

It's a hat badge.  A trinket.  Given that most individuals are not or are no longer trade qualified when attending IAP, it should be a non-issue -- they are not or no longer qualified to wear it.

I have gone through BOTC after being a passable NCO, and had no qualms with doing everything required of me.  I was QL5B qualified in a couple of trades, had a couple of medals, and had to do the same shit as everyone else fresh off the street.  And I did them without complaint -- indeed, I feel I did the tasks before me with less complaint than the individuals fresh off the street.  It did not bother me to remove my cap badge, it did not bother me to shelve my medals, it did not bother me to do the same thing expected of everyone else.  That meant redoing indoctrination period, calling out the timing, and the dreaded coming to attention for a MCpl.

Yes, I did feel that certain bits of my training were repeated, but  that's the military.  The CF would have saved no money having me skip those portions as I'd have been drawing salary regardless, and having redone them cost me nothing -- and given BOTC serials aren't run every week, finish dates would have been the same.  The only benefit to skipping portions of training would be to the individual's ego, and an inflated ego or sense of entitlement in any junior officer is a dangerous thing.

 

[Disenchantedsailor]

A hat badge is not a trinket, it is something earned through hard work and dedication, it allows a mbr to salute any commission issued by or on behalf of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the second, this includes all commissioned officers, warships, cenotaphs, and war dead. It is a dismal feeling to watch a friends casket pass by you in DEU's and a cap with no badge while you solemly stand there denied the privledge to salute his sacrifice, that privledge earned by years of hardship, deployments, long absences from family. Not common to only myself, but common to all 60 of us CFR's on the recent run, some of whom had been in Canada from Afghanistan less than one month before the course started.

And medals, again issued by or on behalf of our Sovereign not to be removed for any reason other than misconduct. I challange you as a fellow officer to tell just one of your soldiers to remove thier hat badge and not display wear thier earned medals, regardless of whether you or I did it does not make it right. But hey I have an Idea lets do away with the honours system if all they are is "trinkets"

 

[Shamrock]

And medals, again issued by or on behalf of our Sovereign not to be removed for any reason other than misconduct. I challange you as a fellow officer to tell just one of your soldiers to remove thier hat badge and not display wear thier earned medals, regardless of whether you or I did it does not make it right. But hey I have an Idea lets do away with the honours system if all they are is "trinkets"

I'm sorry, I'm not falling for your self righteous indignation (as prosically worded as it is)

Yes, I hold cap badges, medals, qualification badges, collar dogs, buttons, buckles, belts, keepers, and stitches to be trinkets.  I guess I foolishly expect my deportment to indicate my levels of dedication and professionalism; I don't need to wear my UER on my uniform to feel like a soldier and I don't require a prettily decorated uniform for others to treat me as same. 

I do, however, consider professionalism, dedication, and esprit de corps in very high regard.  I hold the ability to lead by example and not with a volley of paperwork in very high regard.  I hold the ability to perform any task set before the individual without whining on the Internet about how it was a crime against his very being because he already did something pretty close to it before in very high regard.  I hold the willingness to perform a duty that is good enough for everyone else as though it's good enough for the person who's too good for it in very high regard.

While I'd love to let your red herring fade away, I suspect you're like a terrier with someone else's bone.  Honours have a time and place and are of an important cultural and symbolic nature to the CF.  Do I hold them in as high regard as most?  I suspect not as I'm willing to forego them in the name of getting a fucking job done quickly and without whining. If you think long and hard about this, you'll realize that we in the army suspend several practices for convenience, operational requirements, or both.  If not wearing one's medals or a cap badge is a make-or-break moment in an individual's career, there's a bigger problem.

Now, to forego any further indignation on your behalf, I'll address a point you should have already formed.  Since I seem to hold medals in such low esteem, given the opportunity to endorse a deserving individual awards for conspicuous behaviour in the face of the adversity, would I? 

 

[armyvern]

So why then does a remuster retain the right to wear his hard-earned capbadge until he is presented with his new trade cap badge?? Unlike the other pers on his 3s -- he is NOT in a cornflake because he does hold a trade qualification.

Making him an Officer -- does not erase that qual from his record; nor should the fact that he does hold a bonified CF trade qualification lessen the esprit de corps of the, to use your own words, professional and dedicated Officers he is now on course with.

To use more of your own words:

"If not wearing one's medals or a cap badge is a make-or-break moment in another individual's career initial course, there's a bigger problem."

They've earned that right to wear it. Why take it away?

 

[medaid]

I believe that making anyone redo their basic, while they are still a serving member of the CF regardless of component is a waste of money and time on both the CF and the individual in question.

We are currently at a need to expand our military, due to both operational requirements and other needs. I think that BMQ/IAP does not benefit anyone with prior experience to have to redo it. If the individuals have never completed PLQ, then fine, send them to BOTP because that's where we teach them leadership. I say go for it, because leadership is constantly evolving thing and should never be brushed over.

But, if the person's got PLQ, ILQ or what ever other forms of leadership, is it really pertinent to send them on IAP/BOTP = BOTC all over again? No. It is a waste of time and opportunity. The sooner we get some of these pers trained up the better off we as an organization shall be. If we think that we will not be hit by the retiring frenzy that is currently hitting the civilian job market, we are kidding ourselves. The more experience we give to the up and coming leaders regardless of rank, will only further our own cause of creating a stronger CF.

By training them up sooner, and having them work under the supervision of more senior officers, our more "junior" officer with previous service may turn out to be better officers in the long run without having to redo BOTC. That is my opinion. You may disagree. In fact some of you probably will. However, having to redo basic, and be taught how to do hospital corners, how to shine your boots for people with any TI above 3 years is kind of pointless. IAP is not needed for anyone whose completed BMQ. If they've been assessed ready by both their CoC and the PSO... I think they're good to go... don't you?

 

[Shamrock]

So why then does a remuster retain the right to wear his hard-earned capbadge until he is presented with his new trade cap badge?? Unlike the other pers on his 3s -- he is NOT in a cornflake because he does hold a trade qualification.

No idea.  However, when a candidate goes through IAP, he becomes trade unqualified.  His UER, MPRR, and various other R's do not cease to exist, they just cease to be relevant.  And this isn't the case for officers only; NCM's who go through BMQ who are trade qualified are also required to go sans cap badge.

Making him an Officer -- does not erase that qual from his record; nor should the fact that he does hold a bonafied CF trade qualification lessen the esprit de corps of the, to use your own words, professional and dedicated Officers he is now on course with.

These individuals represent the very first realistic glimpse future officers get of NCM's -- unlike the staff, former service members aren't out to kill and eat the recruits.  When they whine, bitch, and complain about the special treatment they aren't getting because of their previous service, I say yes, they do hinder esprit de corps.  If these individuals present themselves as capable and willing to perform any task in any condition equal to (or more austere than) those coursemates face, then they certainly won't have reduced the esteem the new officers will have for the troops that will eventually work for them.

To use more of your own words:

"If not wearing one's medals or a cap badge is a make-or-break moment in another individual's career initial course, there's a bigger problem."

If wearing one's cap bade is a make-or-break moment in another initial course, there's a bigger problem?  I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to get across here.  I think you've cleverly reworded what I said to say the same damn thing.

MedTech As I said before, it's not really a waste of money; former service officers draw a salary regardless, and graduation dates would be the same.  EWAT can be barely rewarding -- there's only so many times one can press the copy button before he ceases to feel like a functioning member of a unit.  You fringe upon a valid point, though: the undue strain rehashing lessons to former service pers places on an already strained recruit training system.  Given the increased drive to commission from the ranks, there's certainly more impetus behind improving this system, but the stress this seems to generate within individuals seems unneccessary. 

 

[CFFB]

I think it all comes down to one thing.  When you apply for an in service selection program you know what is expected of you for training.  If your objections are that strong then don't apply. 

I'll be heading off for BOMQ (IAP/BOTP) in Jan, and while I must admit that I have thought about all of the objections that are listed below (not wearing a hat badge, wasting time on repeated training, etc) I just pictured the look on my instructors face when I told him that I should be different.  And when I thought about it some more, do I want to be that different than my course mates?  It's a much higher height to fall from if you've placed yourself on a pedestal.  Rather be just one of the guys with a funny blue hat on, running my a$$ into the ground just like everyone else. 

There is a CWO that works in my building, and after he heard my story, he was ready to call all over ready to say that I shouldn't go on the training.  And maybe I shouldn't, but I don't want my name being dragged all over, being the guy at CFLRS that thinks he doesn't need to be there.  So I asked him politely to not bother.  I think I'll probably learn a thing or two when I'm up there, and be a better officer for it.  (cheesy, but true)

I'm not putting anyone down, but in my experience I've just told myself to suck it up buttercup.  It will all be worth it when I'm doing something that I really enjoy and hopefully being a better provider for my family because of it.


 

 

[George Wallace]

I believe that making anyone redo their basic, while they are still a serving member of the CF regardless of component is a waste of money and time on both the CF and the individual in question.

Some would argue quite the opposite.  With their experience, they can mentor their peers.  They can show initiative and coursemanship in passing on some of their experience to their new coursemates.  Their knowledge and experience can help foster "Teamwork".  In the eyes of the Training System, this would be beneficial in that it takes some of the load off the Instructors and Staff.  It would also free up some of the Staff from constantly having to monitor the course 24 and 7.