Command Sergeant Majors to promote high standards?

Discussion in 'Seniors' started by chocolate_frog, Mar 12, 2009.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. From Soldier Magazine Mar 09.

    Do we really need these positons and what are they? A Super RSM or a super Adjt? It specifies "all ranks".

    Why don't 2, 4 and 5 require such a slot?

    Where do they feature in the rank structure? Above the AcSM? Above the various CRSMs? GSMs? Etc.

    And who do the RSMs defer to their CRSM or this Super dooper RSM?

    Finally, are they going to provide value for money, or just whinge about blokes in Afghanistan wearing sun glasses?
  2. I pity the poor bloke who gets spammed for a two year tour in Afghan.

    Presumably, WO1s with seniority will be put up for these jobs - so, essentially, ex-RSMs in the twilight of their careers? Or an extra step on the ladder for three lucky souls to negotiate on the way to a commission?

    And the job? Given the traditional hierarchy of the Army - Cpls sort out standards in their section, Sgts grip the Cpls, CSM grips the Sgts, RSM grips the CSMs - ComdSM grips who? The RSMs? If this role is needed, does it infer that the current RSMs are perceived to be punching below their weight?

    Or is it interference for interference sake? The Spams have the appointment, so it's perceived that we need it too? How long before we go the whole hog and have direct entry to Warrant Officer as a totally separate career path? With accommodation in the Commissioned & Warrant Officers' Mess?

    It's fortunate that the Army isn't democratic, because if this idea had been put to a vote...
  3. Re the position, IIRC the CRSM of the Royal Signals has his commission back dated to when he assumed the CRSM position.

    Not sure how this will work.

    Re Theatre Tps, I was thinking that was Land ie tps not in 1 or 3 div. rather than out on tour.

    I am wondering as to why this appointment is needed.

    We have RSMs, who are in turn guided by Corps' RSMs, Garrison/District Sgt Majs and of course the daddy Sgt Maj the AcSM in RMAS.

    Why do we need three more? Why not tidy up the existing system up so RSMs answer to/receive guidence from their CRSM or Local G/DSM depending on the nature of the guidence. With the AcSM capping it all.
  4. It sounds as if these posts are going to be liaison and co-ordination which would probably mean more of a superintending clerk organising RSM conferences and offering guidance to new RSMs maybe? I can't really see what use these posts will be.
  5. Why couldn't the job be done by a WO1 in Div / Bde HQ (I presume there is 1 already?!)
  6. At present there is no 'RSM' at 1 Div for instance. The new bloke coming is apparently deferring a commission to take the post with back dated seniority. Or so the rumour mill goes.

    We'll wait and see if he takes the Platoon strength of WO1s to task as his first mission or if he's skilled in the black art of diplomacy.
  7. My limited experience of the American Command Sergeant Majors is positive; they provide a direct link to the CoC in order to raise soldier issues. As an ADC going on Bde and Unit visits with the GOC he often thought that a 'Divisional RSM' would be a useful tool to measure Unit performance. The Sgts' Mess is often described as 'the Engine Room' of any Battalion or Regiment and as such a 'Command Sgt Maj' would be an excellent judge of how things are going. They would clearly have to be post-Regimental Duty in order to carry some level of authority/respect. Certainly worth doing for a trial period.
  8. I think people have got to remember that their were a large amount of warrant officer posts lost with all the cut backs since the early 90's either as TA posts or with regiments disbanding/amalgamating. Their is also the massive bottle neck at CSgt/SSgt with nowhere to go causing resentment. A lot of WO's are now filling in at SO3 level bringing added experience and filling gaps at operational level. I think it's a good ideal but jurisdiction will have to bee sorted out in a mature manner or it will cause big problems.
  9. Call them what you like, they'll still be junior to a Conductor RLC!
  10. How's about they get called 'Conductor RLC?'
  11. Not really.

    All that Her Majesty (gawd bless her) has to do is sign an order that says, words to the effect of "The Appointment of Command Sgt Major trumps ALL Warrent Officer Ranks and Appointments, including Conductor RLC" and guess what.....

    You'll be whinging like feckers for the next 100 years :D
  12. I bet people thought that about Field marshall until they got sacked.

    Why do you have to be so senior to sell bus tickets anyway?? :wink:
  13. I was thinking that myself, why we need three more WO1s, to oversee everything, when surely a GSM for the Bulford and Gutersloh Garrison is all that is required, just beefed up to include what ever duties they feel needed for this CommandSM.
  14. I see your point scots_wahey, and it's well made, but surely the measurement of a unit's performance musy be made by it's Brigadier in conjunction with his staff, an opinion that get's reinforced by that unit's GOC (and in conference with his staff) when he visits the units. Deployments, courses targets, MATT's targets, Budgets etc etc are all recorded in Brigades and Divisions by groups of civil servants and SO2/SO1 types. The measurement must be made from what's down on paper and by seeing the units for oneself.

    To raise soldier issues? How many more avenues do we need to raise our concerns? There are a number of welfare agencies, SSAFA, AFF etc available to all and sundry, open pen letters to Soldier mag, Corp journals, and for the brave amongst us - Corp Directors, in barracks we employ Hive personnel, we have welfare officers and snco's as well as civilian staff, and that's not even getting started on the good old CoC. If a red arsed private, fresh out the factory, has a problem is he going to go to his RSM? Or even his CSM? No chance, chances of his issue aren't going to get heard by such a rank, and are probably not going to get past SNCO level anyway, for example: issue with clothing kit? First step CoC, then onto QM's Cpl/SNCO who should get it sorted. Issues with so much deployment? Maybe CoC, and if so a quiet word with Tp Sgt or maybe a quiet chat with welfare snco 'off the record'.

    Is this 'Div RSM' going to get to hear about all the nitty gritty anyway? No chance, if he's measuring performance, he'll be getting his info off the RSM's in his area of responsibility, and they won't shoot their Regiments in the foot by telling him about X number of mong privates who won't deploy...he'll turn into a yes man and tell him everythings sweet so their performance scores please the GOC.

    Not sure about Bulford, but when I was at G-town the RSM's of the 3 main Regiments rotated the duties as Base RSM. They can't change too much as Base RSM, just get kudos whilst it's there turn and get to speak to the Brigadier every now and then. A permanent Base RSM can only give advice and organise meetings so many times before he run's out of ideas.
    Surely the implementation of 'RSM Super Bollox' would undermine the role of Corp RSM's (?)
  15. I think you may be right there mate.

    There is a danger that they will only be aware of what is going on in their office or building and not what's happening on the ground, that's my experience anyway.

    Bearing in mind values and standards should also apply to all MOD employees (service personnel and civilian staff alike) and the wider military community, we should really be asking for an appointed external/independent person to oversee Garrisons; ie someone out of uniform who wears no rank but has a clearly defined authority to act and enforce.

    I can't see a Command Sergeant Major having jurisdiction over civilian staff, dependents, etc or being particularly approachable to the average Tom :?: :!: :eek: