DBA's on the IS Roster

#1
Is anyone else out there fed up of seeing all these other cap badges sitting around at Warrant level in IS posts? A certain Sqn in Elmpt has no fewer than 40 odd WO's most of whom have no intention of transfering to the Corp. Anyone want to justify this or add comment? :twisted:
 
#2
Not sure what your issue is matey. They are filling DS1 posts which are E2, ie, non Royal Signals fixed. Are you implying that the posts should go to R Signals and done by IS Ops?
 
#3
It woulld seem that yet gain I have got my wires crossed.........apologies to any DBA's and App Ops I have offended with this thread..........I really ought to check my facts first.....SORRY!! :oops:
 
#4
What a rare fellow you are! Never admit to anything, especially in the Signals :wink:
 
#5
If these DBAs are filling non Royal Signals posts then why are they have been allocated places on Supvr IS cses? :?:

Shouldn't they have a seperate career structure? instead of taking posts and appointments from existing IS Ops.
 
#6
:p
 
#8
The very unfortunate thing about the DBA’s is while their ability to write a CV is unquestioned, what (if any) skills are required, and where were those skills attained? Are we running a club for SNCO’s without portfolio? What makes the DBA precious? Or could your posts be manned by a thrusting Cpl with some database experience?

The very unfortunate thing about the App Op is while their ability to write a CV wasn’t as good as the DBA, what (if any) skills are required, and where were they attained? What makes the App Op precious? Or could your posts be manned by a thrusting LCpl with some applications experience?

Dying to have the answer to this and so much more!
 
#10
Hillbilly,

As far as I’m aware the greater majority of IS Supervisors have volunteered to fill the appointment so they could be challenged and stimulated for the remainder of their careers, bearing this in mind, why would you think that they would volunteer to fill a post that an IS Operator is able to do?
 
#11
The IS Sup, and the DBA are 2 completly different things, each has been designed for a different purpose as far as i can tell. What i'm failing to understand is why DS1 posts were not manned by the IS trade in the first place. Some training may have been required initially, but in the long run this wealth of experience would have remained in the trade, as well as giving the Roster a much needed boost in the higher ranks. I dont have a downer on the people manning the posts, good luck to them, its simply my opinion that DS1 could have been manned from within the IS trade and should have been manned from within the IS trade.
 
#12
BM...unfortunately there were not sufficient IS Ops to fill the posts in the time required hence the widening of the field to utilise expertise in other arms. The future......well that's another matter :wink:
 
#13
Well there would have been enough IS Ops if they had more courses to take the people who wanted to transfer. But then maybe if they didn't fill non-IS posts with IS Operators they wouldn't need to find others elsewhere. :cry:
 
#15
Oldie.... take yer ear defenders off 8O. Not everyone who wanted to transfer was up to the standard required to transfer. Shortage of courses was never a problem, shortage of people with the aptitude coming forward for selection for transfer was.

If your criticism is that the Corps should have grasped this nettle 2-3 years ago and gone for direct recruiting then rather than next year then I'll vote for you. As to the decision to directly recruit now that took some vision, faith and drive led by the wee fella from Stranraer I'm definitely voting for him :wink:
 
#16
Once again this is a prime example of the Corps not knowing what it wants!!! To set the record straight the Corps did initialley fill the DBA slots at Cpl and Sgt level. For some unknown reason though they spent shed loads of money training these dba's and then forgot all about them. As one of these people who was trained I have tried in vain to pick up a job as a DBA, only to be told "Sorry mate you are an IS Op, you can no longer fill a DBA slot". Cheers for the ten grands worth of courses in Oracle, I'm sure I'll find use for the experience I gained in Civvy strasse!!!!
 
#17
I think the main problem here, going back to the original statement is that IS is a hobby that most of us (soldiers of all cap badges, civilians) have and should never have been considered a career opportunity by anyone other than those who can program down to machine code level.

People should be encouraged to leave school with whatever an O level is called now, in Information Technology as well as the old favourites of Maths and English. We could incorporate a consolidation package in Basic Signalling skills (ECDL can be achieved in a week), use bespoke packages or OST and finally rid ourselves of this excuse for a trade.

The topography and administration of any network could be run by a class 1 Technician or FofS who understand what the propgation speed of a NAND gate actually means. I mean how did we manage to use all these applications, create databases and networks before the birth of the IS trade group?!!

Here endeth the rant :evil:
 
#18
Well, you never know...we might still end up going down the generic operator trade in the future. I believe that there are influences at HQ SOinC who intend to propose an amalgamation of the op trades incl IS "engineer". Since IS is becoming a fundamental part of the way we do business then perhaps it should be central to our operator training.

Personally, in less than a decade from now I reckon the RS/AS Ops and IS Engr will merge into the CIS Engineer and the YofS and Supvr (IS) will turn into the YofS (CIS). Rather than feel threatened, it should allow people the flexiblity to have the core skills to carry out jobs at the many wierdly diverse units around. Look at Cormorant - there's no RS Op, so that means those guys at 2 and 30 SR need to do what might be so-called "AS and IS Op" jobs. Maybe it'll allow us to better justify a move into specialist pay huh?

And, as we move into "card out - card in" equipment relacement methods, the technical/engineering skillsets of the FofS will start to become more and more difficult for younger lads to get into, as they won't have the same expertise of in-depth technical repairs etc. Inst Techs will soon catch 'em up. In a few years, becoming a FofS will become even more technically challenging than it is now. But I'm no steenking tech so maybe I'm talking arrse!! :wink:

As for the "combat" trades (snigger...) - as we see more joint service establishments, our logistics will eventually dwindle to where stores and driving jobs will be provided by the RLC.

Bet you a tenner....

PD :)
 
#20
blue_tooth said:
man you riled me, so much i did not read the rest,cussup fool, sorrry!
Riled you so much it took 4 years to formulate a response?
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
bluebells Seniors 7
PoisonDwarf Royal Signals 10
S Royal Signals 22

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top