Kayghee said:
Like Skeletor said, you can change from being a soldier to an officer. In my year there's someone who used to be a MCpl and is now studying to become an officer.
UTPNCM Candidates. There are many of these throughout the country, some at RMC (Otter Squadron) and some at civi universities.
Also, regarding your question about RMC:
Ideally, yes, RMC graduates are promoted faster because the point of RMC is to build up officers well-educated. Going through a military school versus a civilian university is 'supposed' to give you an upper hand because that's exactly the point of the school being there in the first place.
I have yet to see the document which states that RMC graduates are
ideally promoted more quickly than their DEO/Civ U counterparts. The advantages RMC provide are that there is a possibility that you will be better known throughout your branch, having had 4 years to meet other officers both in training and those already commissioned (through events like RMC MOC weekend, etc.) and that you may have the advantage of better training during your school time, having access to officers/NCMs every day of the year, as well as mandatory SLT, athletics (including a higher PT standard) and other things like that.
These, however, have no weight on a PER unless they somehow improve your standing, such as having a bilingual profile because you learned French at RMC. In that case, you would have a slight advantage come PER time because you are bilingual, not because you went to RMC.
There is no direction connection between RMC and quicker promotions; early promotions are often based on time in and courses completed, while senior promotions are theoretically based on merit (not interested in debating the quality of the current PER/promotion system) and not based on where you got your degree.
Now, this isn't always the case and as such it's only a correlation and not a causation.
I don't even accept that proposition that there is a correlation, unless you're willing to provide hard statistics, rather than your own assumptions or anecdotal evidence.
In the end, it all depends on the individual's drive to succeed.
Insofar as your drive increases your merit and your standing come PER time. This is the only part of your post I don't take real issue with, and I'll point out that it has nothing to do with going to RMC vice Civ U.
As an aside...I am an OCdt at RMC and have access to many tools which can be used to improve my quality as an officer when I graduate from here. There is more here that I can use to improve and succeed than there was when I was at Civ U before arriving here. That is the only advantage I have over any Civ U students, other than potential networking. In the end, a better OCdt at a Civ U is going to be a better officer than a lesser OCdt at RMC; if you put bad ingredients but use a great recipe, you're still going to get bad soup.
I'll also add that this sense of entitlement (to promotion, or in other cases respect, seniority, leadership, position, influence, etc.) is exactly what makes other members of the CF think poorly of
ringknockers RMC grads. I highly recommend you start thinking of yourself, Kayghee, as on a level playing field with those attending Civ U, or you're going to get a wake-up call when you find yourself coming up short come PER time.
