Promotions Captain in the Artillery

[Ubique RCA]

First off I have looked in other threads and there is nothing that discusses this topic specifically.

Currently in the Army to be promoted to Captain you need 3 years as a LT and 2 if you CFR (Commission From the Ranks). The old methodology was not to be promoted to Capt until you have completed your career courses Primarily the FOO crse (Forward Observation Officer) The argument that has been made is that in the artillery and any trade for that matter as a Capt you are expected to know your trade inside and out. As a Capt in the Artillery there are a number of positions you can hold. One of which is as a FOO.  In this role you as part of a company/combat team advise the Major/ commander on manythings from firepower to maneuvering.

How would you feel about promoting someone to Capt if they are not FOO qualified and only on the basis that they have the time in rank?

 

[GNR]

The rest of the Forces promotes for time in, Arty should follow suite or they will be left behind.
If the policy was to be changed for Arty it should be changed for ALL.

 

[Randy]

In the RegF one of issues we are dealing with now is that some officers have earned most of their time towards promotion to Captain while still in the training system.  When they complete phase training and are posted to their first unit, many are due to be promoted within a few months of arriving.

Couple months out of phase training just isn't enough time.....  CO's have the authority to defer a promotion until the officer has gained enough experience to wear the rank.  However, the pay is back-dated to the EPZ whenever the rank is finally granted.

 

[GNR]

I have to agree, a couple weeks out of phase training is WAY to soon.
It should be time in AFTER phase training.

 

[tomahawk6]

In the US Army promotion to Captain is also about the 36 month mark. However, there is no additional schooling required for pin on. Promotions have been accelerated due to the demands of Iraq/Afghanistan. A newly minted Captain will have had been a platoon leader and many have also been a company xo. A new Captain can expect to have had a company command prior to attending the Career Course.

 

[CdnArtyWife]

In the US Army promotion to Captain is also about the 36 month mark. However, there is no additional schooling required for pin on. Promotions have been accelerated due to the demands of Iraq/Afghanistan. A newly minted Captain will have had been a platoon leader and many have also been a company xo. A new Captain can expect to have had a company command prior to attending the Career Course.

Isn't it true though that in the US the "working rank" for officers is Major? Whereas ours here is Captain....

By that I mean, I see Captains here in myriad jobs, from Troop Commander to Adjt, Ops O, CIG, etc....even some staff positions.... In the US wouldn't the "higher admin" jobs, such as Adjt, Ops O, etc be more often than not, held by a Maj.

This is just something I have heard tossed around in conversations with hubby and his peers. I am looking for clarification on the subject.

Also, as the wife of an officer that was promoted to Capt for time in shortly after Phase training, I (we) agree....I mean, we are not gonna refuse the promotion, or complain about the pay raise... but there is a certain stigma or perception of skill that goes with the rank. On paper you can't tell if Capt. Bloggins is a "Phase 4 Captain" or a 8th incentive Captain awaiting promotion to Maj. This creates a huge learning curve...

I am confident that my hubby can handle it...he has not done badly so far...and has kept up his end of the bargain...so to speak...but he knows that he can give some of that credit to the phenomenal senior NCO's he works with....their experience, and advice is unmeasurable, but the fact that he always takes their opinions on the matter at hand (whether he actually follows their advice or not)into consideration may be indicative of what kind of officer hubby is.   He has stuck his head out there once or twice, and got his "d**k slapped" once or twice...but again, that comes with the learning curve.

edited to add a couple forgotten words.

 

[Ubique RCA]

We have had some American Artillery soldiers up from Fort Sill the US Army Artillery School HQ. What was described to us what that the Lt when out of training was sent to the FOO, with the Sgts. They have a FOO party with each Platoon not just the Company like us. So the Lt would be with the Company Commander and Sgt's would be with the Plt Commanders.

When promoted to Capt you now take the Battery and you are brought back to the guns. Maj as you said are for more admin positions like Adj OPS O etc...They actually said to us that they like our model better but due to the numbers of FOO parties it is the only way.

Where as we have it the Capt with more experience and Knowledge is with the Company Commander meaning he/she is better suited to advising the supported arms Comdr because they have more knowledge of the weapons at their disposal. Which is the reason why in the artillery we are training one level above everyone else. We use to take Tactics with Infantry Capt's going for their Maj where we were Lt's going for Capt. Which I still agree with.

But as you stated wouldn't turn down a promotion.

Cheers

 

[Randy]

On paper you can't tell if Capt. Bloggins is a "Phase 4 Captain" or a 8th incentive Captain awaiting promotion to Maj. This creates a huge learning curve...

Perhaps we need a new rank/appointment like Corporal and Master Corporal.  We could have Captain and Master Captain (2 bars and a leaf). 

Seriously though, I see the retention benefits ($$) for promoting "on time".  Most of the officers graduating phase training that this seems to apply to are the Direct Entry Officers with degrees, and probably huge student loans to pay.  So I have no issues with them making more as Lts on enrollment.  Just believe they need to wear the rank of Lt and be allowed to make those new officer mistakes and screw-ups for a couple years at their first unit.  You are correct that on paper you can't tell if the officer was promoted to Capt yesterday or 8 years ago, but you usually can in person. 

I believe it is "expected" that the skill/experience/knowledge base at the rank of Capt will vary widely.  I just see the variance getting a little bit wider.  On the flip side, I have seen mid-to-senior Capts that should still be Lts.

 

[tomahawk6]

Captain's in the US Army can and do fill a number of positions on staff's at all levels. Captain's fill many positions on staff from battalion to higher Hq as in the CF. While the Canadian or British Major in command of a company/battery has a great deal of experience our Captain has more practical experience than a Captain in the CF or British Army. Both systems seem to work well because officer's that rise to battalion command seem to be outstanding. In both system's Major is the break point for future advancement. Last year's selection board to LTC had selection rates of: 75% field artillery, 79% armor and 85% for infantry. Sixty-eight percent of the officer's had master's degree's. Some 53% of the officers had two company commands, the rest had one. Battalion S-3/XO experience was as follows : 94%
had at least one tour and 60% had experience in both. Twelve per cent had experience as a brigade S-3/XO. Promotion to Major occurs around the 10 year point[96% selection rate] and LTC in the 15-16 year point which is probably similar to your experience in the CF.

 

[STA Gunner]

Captain's in the US Army can and do fill a number of positions on staff's at all levels. Captain's fill many positions on staff from battalion to higher Hq as in the CF. While the Canadian or British Major in command of a company/battery has a great deal of experience our Captain has more practical experience than a Captain in the CF or British Army. Both systems seem to work well because officer's that rise to battalion command seem to be outstanding. In both system's Major is the break point for future advancement.

Emphasis mine.

That is too great a generalisation.  I have worked with US forces in both the Balkans and Afghanistan, and trained with the USMC MAWTS-1 in Yuma.  Our systems vary in many ways so to say that a US Captain has more practical experience is like saying that a Canadian Captain is far superior in staff positions.  It just is not so.

The systems are so great in some areas it is difficult to even find parallels.  For example, I was a FAC in Bosnia as a second year Captain.  My colleagues from Tuzla were a Lt-Col and a Maj.  Our Battery Commanders are forward, with the supported arms commander, coordinating support.  American Battery Commanders are responsible for reconnaissance and command of the gunline.  When in Kabul, I worked as a Captain in the Bde HQ.  I met my American counterpart for a meeting, and he was a Lt-Col.

So, in comparing practical experience of Canadian Captains to American ones, it is comparing the proverbial Apples to Oranges.  We call it the same thing, but in reality each is framed to do a job in a specific manner.