The utility of three military colleges, funded undergrad degrees; Officer trg & the need for a degre

[Humphrey Bogart]

Sandhurst isn't even a year long, involves zero academic credit earning courses, and the graduates are still accused of many of the same negative things as RMC grads. 

The difference between us and them, IMHO, is that the one and only way in to the Officers' Mess in the British Army, apart from some CFRs, is Sandhurst. For all arms and services. It's kind of like the way the US Marines pout everyone through the same basic training together, then they go on to specialize. Although some go through with degrees earned in civvie U, RMAS is a common leadership development experience for 90% of the British Army's officer corps.

IMHO, as a result the British don't tend to suffer from the same inter-mess struggles that you see sometimes in the CF resulting from the RESO, DEO, MilColl (are there others?) matrix. From what I've seen, the US Army has similar issues with the West Point vs. Everyone else dynamic.

We should fix that, somehow.

I agree

RMC is also probably one of the only actual "Joint" institutions we have in the CAF, something which many people often forget.

As MCG says though, lets try and keep this on topic.

 

 

[PanaEng]

It's the perception of elitism, something which is a direct contradiction to Canadian values, which allows this attitude to fester, regardless of whether the place, person or thing in question is truly elite or not.  RMC is certainly not elite and the cadets that go there are no better or worse than their DEO counterparts but there are some advantages to RMC which are for another topic but also ties in to your question about whether the leadership holds some of the blame.

I disagree on this a bit. Some, not most, of the cadets do exude this sense of elitism. A small minority but enough to taint the rest untel they get to be known at the new unit.
I know, I went there but as a UTPNCM so somewhat detached pov.

If we talk about the leadership of RMC, it must first be stated that RMC is controlled by the military.  The Commandant is a 1* General and answers to a 2* General in charge of CDA.  CDA in turn answers to CMP who is a 3* and is soon to be Chris Whitecross, the GO placed in charge of the sexual misconduct TF (a coincidence? maybe).  There are some other players i.e. Alumni, Academia and the Senate but it's a military organization.  The current CDS is an RMC Graduate and was the Commandant of the school at one point so if we are blaming the leadership for this then is our entire CoC from the top on down at fault?

RMC has been allowed to exist in isolation for a very long time ...

BINGO!  but you forgot to mention the role of the Cadet Wing and the spotty supervision it gets from the Military Wing. And to bring this back on topic, relating to a sexually charged atmosphere. It's been a while and things may have changed for the better a bit but the culture there was definitely suppressive of "blading" your fellow cadets. Loyalty was interpreted to mean to protect your peers and Snrs.
IMHO, to correct this and help the cadets mature (at the same rate as those in civ U, or DEO - whatever that means) the cadet wing must have better supervision. The Sqn Comd should have more staff - at least a MWO/WO as SSM  and, after 1st yr, the cadets be fully accountable to the code of service.

RMC is a great institution and hopefully these issues can be fixed and its role within the CAF and the gov in general strengthened - but that is another topic.

hopefully that is somewhat coherent - not enough time to review.

 

[Jarnhamar]

  and, after 1st yr, the cadets be fully accountable to the code of service.

They're adults, why wait a whole year? Make them accountable the minute the sign the dotted line.

 

[Blackadder1916]

They're adults, why wait a whole year? Make them accountable the minute the sign the dotted line.

He may be alluding to the disciplinary process at RMC making use of the Code of College Conduct for breaches of conduct more than the Code of Service Discipline.  (If I'm wrong, correct me.  I did not go to a milcol.)

QR&Os: Volume IV - Appendix 6.1 The Queen's Regulations and Orders for the Canadian Military Colleges (QR Canmilcols)
http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/about-policies-standards-queens-regulations-orders-vol-04/appx-06-01.page

3.10 - CODE OF COLLEGE CONDUCT

(1) The Commandant shall make rules, which shall be known as the Code of College Conduct, governing the cadets at the College.

(2) The Commandant, or, subject to any limitations imposed by the Commandant, the Director of Cadets, or a military member of the senior staff or a senior cadet who has been authorized in writing by the Commandant, may impose sanctions in accordance with the table to this article against a cadet who breaches any of the rules contained in the Code of College Conduct.

(3) A record of sanctions imposed on a cadet under this article shall be maintained for the period the cadet is attending a college, but shall be destroyed when the cadet ceases to be a cadet or when the Commandant so directs, whichever first occurs. (25 Mar 80)

(4) Subject to (5) of this article, sanctions pursuant to this article shall not be imposed against a cadet more than once for the same breach of any of the rules contained in the Code of College Conduct.

(5) Action taken pursuant to this article against a cadet shall not constitute a bar to any further action under the Code of Service Discipline where the breach of any of the rules contained in the Code of College Conduct constitutes a service offence.

(M)

NOTE

Normally action should not be taken against a cadet, under the Code of Service Discipline, in relation to an incident for which a sanction has been imposed under this article.

 

[Jarnhamar]

He may be alluding to the disciplinary process at RMC making use of the Code of College Conduct for breaches of conduct more than the Code of Service Discipline.  (If I'm wrong, correct me.  I did not go to a milcol.)

I spoke too soon, thanks.

(3) A record of sanctions imposed on a cadet under this article shall be maintained for the period the cadet is attending a college, but shall be destroyed when the cadet ceases to be a cadet or when the Commandant so directs, whichever first occurs. (25 Mar 80)

That's an interesting one.

 

[OldSolduer]

I spoke too soon, thanks.
That's an interesting one.

No kidding.

When a private f**ks up during training he/she is subject the Code of Service Discipline.

 

[PanaEng]

exactly.

 

[Bird_Gunner45]

He may be alluding to the disciplinary process at RMC making use of the Code of College Conduct for breaches of conduct more than the Code of Service Discipline.  (If I'm wrong, correct me.  I did not go to a milcol.)

QR&Os: Volume IV - Appendix 6.1 The Queen's Regulations and Orders for the Canadian Military Colleges (QR Canmilcols)
http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/about-policies-standards-queens-regulations-orders-vol-04/appx-06-01.page

This is a weird one. I wonder if it's that the code of conduct replaces the CSD in RMC or whether it is used to augment the CSD for minor crimes not covered in the CSD (fraternization, etc). Saint Mary's university had a student code of conduct while I was there that students could be charged under by the campus security for violating the universities "values", which generally was a sort of "unbecoming" charge and fine.....

 

[captloadie]

It may have more to do with the types of punishments that were handed out at the time in conjuntion with the actual offense.

For instance, when I attended, guys who went code red on a course member during summer training were court martialled.

Falling off a parade for being hung over (there was always a parade after a big party), parking violations, code of conduct breaches, and even minor theft were dealt with using in house summary trials, with the appropriate punishment. One of the reasons for this too is there were almost never monetary fines. It was always some sort of confinement to barracks and extra duty and drill of varying lengths. They would have come off UDR after two years anyway, so maybe that's why there was the special rules for military colleges.

It also gave the individuals a fresh start when coming into a unit as a newly commissioned officer. No need to erode morale of the troops and confidence in the new leader by it quicky getting out that he was a shyte pump in his first year or two at college.

 

[yoman]

From the Code of College Conduct (otherwise known as CADWIN's at RMC) from when I was there.

1. From time to time, members of CF may demonstrate unacceptable deficiencies in performance or conduct.  For cadets at RMC, these shortcomings usually affect performance in one or more of the four components.  Like those available to the CF, the College has a number of administrative measures to encourage and assist cadets in overcoming their shortcomings and to allow the chain of command to formally monitor their progress.  They are not substitutes for disciplinary action, nor do they preclude it.

2. When considering those administrative measures, the supervisor shall also consider whether disciplinary action is warranted, as the deficiencies associated with the performance or conduct of a member may also constitute an offence under the Code of Service Discipline.  See Chapter 9.

3. Cadets whose performance or conduct in any area is considered to be unsatisfactory may be subject to any of the administrative measures listed below.

a. CF Administrative Measures.
(1) Verbal Warning (VW);
(2) Recorded Warning (RW); and
(3) Counselling and Probation (C&P).

b. RMC Administrative Measures.
(1) sanctions;
(2) corrective training;
(3) Unsatisfactory Performance Report (UPR);
(4) Probation; and
(5) removal from ROTP/RETP.

c. Release.
(1) compulsory;
(2)  voluntary

So in essence, the CADWIN's augment the CSD.

 

[McG]

RMC takes a bunch of people out of high school and locks them into another high school-like environment for 4 more years. In my unit, those of us officers who did not go to RMC have noticed a difference between those that did and didn't based on this, especially when we see new officers show up. For most it only seems to last a year or two after they graduate as they are now living like adults so they mature, some stay locked in the high school mentality for long after they get into the battalion, but that can be said for some percentage of all adults anyway.

So what might be some ways to ameliorate this?

Let's abolish prep-year and first year.  You want to go to RMC?  Show that you have what it takes by passing first year in a civilian university (or completing CEGEP in Quebec).  We demand NCMs demonstrate academic competency by completing university credits before we will look at them for UTPNCM, so why take in a civilian without this threshold?

In one move, we ensure all ROTP entries have had a year to mature outside of highschool, we have greater evidence of academic potential, and we have freed PYs for investment into trained positions.

One could also insert a Sandhurst training model as there would be four months between end of first year "Civi U" and start of ROTP vice the current two months following the end of the high school year.

 

[Bird_Gunner45]

So what might be some ways to ameliorate this?

Let's abolish prep-year and first year.  You want to go to RMC?  Show that you have what it takes by passing first year in a civilian university (or completing CEGEP in Quebec).  We demand NCMs demonstrate academic competency by completing university credits before we will look at them for UTPNCM, so why take in a civilian without this threshold?

In one move, we ensure all ROTP entries have had a year to mature outside of highschool, we have greater evidence of academic potential, and we have freed PYs for investment into trained positions.

One could also insert a Sandhurst training model as there would be four months between end of first year "Civi U" and start of ROTP vice the current two months following the end of the high school year.

Having went to civilian university, starting as a NCM, and coming into the reg force as a DEO some thoughts:

- finishing a year of civilian university really proves nothing other than you managed to show up to a few classes, all your midterms, and studied a bit for finals. There are programs that are exceptions, but anyone in a B arts, B science, or B Comm stream can name an entire laundry list of people who literally just show up for midterms and finals and come out with a B+average or higher. RMC would, I assume, at least force students to attend classes and maintain SOME level of basic discipline, whereas civilian U would accomplish none of that.

- UTPNCM would need to complete university credits to prove they can attend university based on their high school grades. For my old unit, the UTPNCMs were people who would have been accepted to university anyways and got into the program. Experiences differ, for sure, but if you are allowed into the program than that's what matters.

- RMC students that I have seen as a DEO succeed and fail at the same rate as any other officer. I've seen exceptional RMC grads and terrible ones, which is the same I can say for DEO and UTPNCM. I've seen DEOs, who were 25+ who were a million times worse than any RMC grad I've seen. The point is that its easy to point at an institution and say there's a problem, but the reality is that the officer you see attending a year of civi U is going to be put into a highly sexualized and slack environment without ANY sort of oversight, learn a million terrible things (drugs, alcohol abuse, sexual misconduct, etc) and bring that to RMC with them. I would suggest, which pains me as a DEO, that it's easier to mould a young mind in an environment like RMC than outside of it. With solid leadership, RMC would easily surpass any civi U in terms of developing military leaders.

 

[captloadie]

In the last three years, I have had 9 juniour officers work for me. 1 CFR, 3 DEOs, 3 RMC grads, and 1 ROTP Civy U. They have all had their strengths and weaknesses. The one thing that the RMC grads and the CFR had over the others was an ingrained sense of the military ethos. There wasn't as big of a learning curve on how the military worked, how to use the CoC, dress and deportment, etc. The DEO's are taking longer, except for one, who was in his thirties when he joined and already had plenty of life experience and maturity. To be honest, the most difficult to mentor of all of them is the ROTP civy U grad. But that is more because of the individual, not because they got a free ride through school without the military oversight.

As said before, it takes a mix of the different entry schemes to make the officer corps a diverse group that can provide different perspective to the way the CAF operates. 

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

One thing that has been overlooked in this thread and others, when discussing the utility of RMC, is the "joint" nature of the school.  People that go to the school develop an extensive network of friends and associates which crosses trade and service boundaries.  There is no other entry program that allows for the development of this sort of network and most military officers will only begin to interact extensively with members from other services when they reach JCSP/are a senior officer.

In a small military where a substantial minority of officers do in fact attend the government's sole military university, people shouldn't under-estimate the ability this network of people with shared experiences has to keep the ball going forward and get stuff done.  To build further on this, not only do cadets at RMC develop a network amongst their peers, they also develop a network with officers a couple of years senior or junior to them in the career stream which strengthens this network further.

RMC is one of the few "Joint" institutions this military has and in a military where the services tend to stovepipe themselves, is this something we want to lose?  The military is a business where people are its most important commodity, with this in mind it must be said that being a successful officer in the military comes down to relationships. 

For these reasons, RMC serves a very important purpose which is why I don't think it should be closed.  Perhaps the program needs to be modified but closing the school is not an option in my mind.  One COA which should be investigated is moving to a Sandhurst Model; however, given the fact that Sandhurst is an Army institution and RMC also needs to accommodate the Air Force and the Navy, I would look at creating a hybrid institution, drawing also from Britannia Naval College, RAF Academy and other Nations Military Colleges, which serves the needs of all three services and not just the Army. 

 

 

[Fishbone Jones]

One thing that has been overlooked in this thread and others, when discussing the utility of RMC, is the "joint" nature of the school.  People that go to the school develop an extensive network of friends and associates which crosses trade and service boundaries.  There is no other entry program that allows for the development of this sort of network and most military officers will only begin to interact extensively with members from other services when they reach JCSP/are a senior officer.

In a small military where a substantial minority of officers do in fact attend the government's sole military university, people shouldn't under-estimate the ability this network of people with shared experiences has to keep the ball going forward and get stuff done.  To build further on this, not only do cadets at RMC develop a network amongst their peers, they also develop a network with officers a couple of years senior or junior to them in the career stream which strengthens this network further.

RMC is one of the few "Joint" institutions this military has and in a military where the services tend to stovepipe themselves, is this something we want to lose?  The military is a business where people are its most important commodity, with this in mind it must be said that being a successful officer in the military comes down to relationships. 

For these reasons, RMC serves a very important purpose which is why I don't think it should be closed.  Perhaps the program needs to be modified but closing the school is not an option in my mind.  One COA which should be investigated is moving to a Sandhurst Model; however, given the fact that Sandhurst is an Army institution and RMC also needs to accommodate the Air Force and the Navy, I would look at creating a hybrid institution, drawing also from Britannia Naval College, RAF Academy and other Nations Military Colleges, which serves the needs of all three services and not just the Army. 

So, in two words, Ring Knockers  ;D

No malice, just too easy to let by  8)

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

So, in two words, Ring Knockers  ;D

No malice, just too easy to let by  8)

It is what it is and has always been  8).  People shouldn't under-estimate the power of friendship though.  I keep in frequent contact with many of the folks I went to school with, most of whom aren't even in the Army.  Often our discussion shifts to work related subjects which gets quite interesting given our various backgrounds and different perspectives.  I was in Victoria last summer and my buddy, who is a MARS Officer, offered to give me a guided tour of his frigate on his day off, an offer I graciously accepted. 

I've also found these connections very handy in my present job where I am often required to liaise with different services.  I usually have no trouble getting the information I need as pretty much every unit in the CAF that I walk into, and it doesn't matter which service it is, I run into someone I know who is able to point me in the right direction, some very handy connections to have.   

 

[George Wallace]

Sometimes "Networking" is more critical than any other attribute a person has.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

Sometimes "Networking" is more critical than any other attribute a person has.

Absolutely George!  Like I said, it is what it is.  If people want to put their head in the sand and pretend things are done any other way, well that's their prerogative but they should know that this isn't only applicable to the military.

 

[Good2Golf]

Just for the record, I don't think that officers, mil col or otherwise, hold a monopoly on self-aggrandization/self-importance. Many of us have dealt with shallow, petty and bitter people of all walks of life, and not uniquely from one particular stream.  Interestingly, 30 years ago if one heard the term 'ring knocker' it was usually either an OCTP officer or senior NCM. Nowadays, I rarely, if ever hear a DEO or CEOTP officer utter the phrase.  Although there were notable difference between RMC and RRMC, one of the biggest I believe was that (at Royal Roads) there was a cadre of very experienced and engaged senior NCMs who actually cared about helping young OCdts appreciate aspects of the officer-NCM dynamic.  To this day I maintain a deep respect for (most) NCMs and their critical contribution to the Forces, much of that due to the professionalism and exemplary conduct of senior NCMs at RRMC.  Amongst others, I think (actually pretty certain) that our CDS-designate would agree.

:2c:

G2G

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Absolutely George!  Like I said, it is what it is.  If people want to put their head in the sand and pretend things are done any other way, well that's their prerogative but they should know that this isn't only applicable to the military.

It's also a large part of my job  and I use it through a number of organizations that I belong to.

In case it was missed,  the ring knocker comment was in jest.