Discussion in 'RLC' started by mandownmat, Jun 9, 2007.

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. What is the official policy on first CR's. Can a soldier be recommended for promotion off their first CR. The reason I ask, is because the regiment I am currently serving with have a policy that the best grade you can receive off a first CR is AP.
  2. You can receive a recommendation for promotion from your first CR. Any Unit that has a policy of not doing so is acting in a way which is inconsistent with the MS Directive on CRs (not at work so cannot dig out chapter and verse).

    I have heard of a few Units that operate such a policy (usually in technician trades to be honest), but nonetheless, it is unfair, unwarranted and unless it can be objectively justified - quite wrong.
  3. You should be reported on as your ability as both a soldier and a tradesman. Whether your the Dogs B*ll*cks or his steaming sh1t your write up should reflect this. So if you are up to the task and capable then you should get the appropriate grading. Don't read too much into the grade though as it is the write up that matters, subject to being recommended of course.

    You can get promoted of one CR.
  4. You will be reported on as a soldier for you are not a tradesman. A bloke changing tyres in Kwikfit is a tradesman you are a soldier. Soldiering is your reason for being, it defines you, the fact that you have a trade reflects your role as a soldier. Therefore your skills as a warrior are synonymous with your trade skills, just like a soldier in the infantry trained in the use of mortars or a soldier in the REME trained to be a VM. Soldier first tradeasman second is a cliche, it is bunkem, you are a soldier and if you have the necessary talents to promote then recommended you must be. I'll take it one stage further. At any stage during your career, no matter your age or rank, if you show the aptitude and gifts for commissioning you should be offered the opportunity. it worked in the early part of the 20th century for Field Marshall Robertson, who after commissioning from the ranks post 12 years service went on to be Chief of the Imperial General Staff. This couldn't happen in today's Army and we are supposed to be a meritocracy!

    P.S. Go to the MS Guide to Report Writing in the electronic library on the ArmyNet and it will answer all your questions about report writing.
  5. I have been on a number of boards. Many soldiers are promoted with only 1 Cr in that rank. If you are good enough, the report should reflect it. Indeed, it is not uncommon for CO to state that a man/woman is their best NCO despite being only recently promoted.
  6. Yeah thanks for that. Nice to know that after 19 years worth of CR's they have all been written totally wrong as every single one has covered my ability to do my Job, which is a trade.

    Yes I know I'm a soldier and as part of being a soldier I employed within a trade which makes me a tradesman. And that is where the expression comes in and how it is used to define someones ability - judged by your ability as a soldier and by your ability as a tradesman.
  7. I have written the odd CR, and would say it is sometimes very difficult to write on someone as a soldier. Most soldiers spend their day practising their trade, whatever that may be, and in many cases spend a shockingly short amount of time on the soldier bit. This is not the fault of the soldier, if he/she only fires once a year on a range for his APWT and does one week long CT1 Trg Ex a year, and he/she doesn't cut it, how can you then call him a bad soldier? This is not something that can be addressed even at unit level, and needs to be changed as policy.

    That said I have often fought with people in grading conferences that no matter how good a tradesman someone is you cannot promote them unless they have leadership qualities. I would argue that soldiering skills in the field is merely an extension of your leadership abilities, which you should be using in barracks anyway.

    But to get back to the original thread, I must admit I am often wary about recommending people for promotion on their first CR if they are a Pte of LCpl. I have done it, and I have had people promoted on one CR, but these have usually been older soldiers. Many of the bad LCpls and Cpls I have met have been promoted too early and once they are set on a bad path it is very hard to set them right.
  8. Its really more a question of whether you feel you have settled into and learnt all you can about your new rank in less than twelve months.

    Have your current Regiment actually published this as policy or is your RO lacking the moral courage to tell you straight and it sounds better than "The big boys made me give you that grade?"

    Obviously I don't know you so this is not a personal slight it just seems strange that your unit would openly contradict MS Guidelines.
  9. Big Red, This is'nt just aimed at me, this is official Regt policy. I am not against this policy, as I think this will show better consistency across the board. My problem is with the fact this is not a standard thing and the fact some quality soldiers are missing out, because some regiments have there own rules.
  10. A mutual exclusive grade IMO. How can a soldier be well above the standard required, but only have the potential for advancement.

    I had this grade once and questioned it, the Squadron 2ic told me that my work was outstanding but they did not know me well enough to give me a Y recommendation. Stupid thick cow, glad i was in the office whilst the SAT educated her and told her to change it to an AY.
  11. Regt's and units should abide by the regulations and guides written down, then can only a fair report be written accross the full relevant trade.

    Policies of only 'there's only three O's given in this unit' is a complete load of bollox!!!! If you deserve it, you get it, whatever the grade!!!
  12. SJAR will allow this type of report. Performance and potential will be reported in separate paragraphs to allow a soldier to be reported on as excellent in their current work, but to be not yet ready for promotion. AP on a 2048 is not that unusual and whilst I do not agree with the sentiment that the best grade for a first report should be AP, there is nothing wrong with the grade.
  13. Quite easily infact.

    And while not common, I would say there is at least one in every Sqn in the Corps. You can be very compentant in your current job but not suitable for promotion. I've had Pte who were excellent at there job but who had no ability (or wish) to command soldiers. Likewise old and bold NCO who, for whatever reason, are not suitable to step up to the Mess.
  14. Very easy to be AP as the grade is a performance grade ie how you perform in your current rank and the other is a recommendation for your suitability/speed of promotion to the next rank.

    The soldier graded AP is one who is performing very well in all respects, showing potential for promotion but not yet ready to assume the next rank up. That could be because he is a Pte and not showing supervisary qualities (he doesn't have to - he is not graded on them) or it could be the very good full Cpl who is not quite ready for the jump in to the Sgts Mess.