Posted on Sep 3, 2018
1
1
0
A little background: I have a BS and MS degree in IT security management as well as 6 years experience in the field. However, I am currently a Dental Tech (68E). I have been in for 11 years now and currently working on my Warrant packet for 170A (Cyber Tec). I just recently found out that the Army offers a direct commission program for the cyber field but with the stipulation that you have to apply as a civilian and must not be active. I wanted to know if anyone had an opinion on if to stay and try for warrant or roll the dice and ETS to Direct commission.
Cyber
IT Specialist
Warrant Officers
Officers
Re-enlistment
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 4
4
4
0
Personally, I think you should first evaluate whether it’s worth it to become a commissioned officer versus a warrant officer. As a commissioned officer, you’ll wind up having to do a lot of management, a lot of staff time, and you’ll have “ticket punch” requirements such as serving as a commander, serving as an S3/XO, etc. If that’s what you want to do, great. However, if you’d prefer to remain more hands-on and up-to-date in your field, becoming a warrant officer is the better option. Also, if you become a warrant officer, the Army will restart your 30-year clock when you become a WO-1. I know several warrant officers who retired as CW-5’s with a total of 40 years of service and 100% of their base pay as a pension.
That being said, anything you do without a contract in place is a gamble, but at this point in time, with your degrees and six years of experience, you should have an excellent chance for a direct commission into the Cyber Corps, possibly as a CPT / O-3. But is that what you really want? I recommend that you closely examine the commissioned and warrant officer career paths before making your choice. Also, have a look at promotion rates and pay scales, and carefully consider where you’d like to be when you retire. I think you’ll see that retiring as a CW-5 with 40 years in and a 100% retirement is a pretty attractive career goal.
That being said, anything you do without a contract in place is a gamble, but at this point in time, with your degrees and six years of experience, you should have an excellent chance for a direct commission into the Cyber Corps, possibly as a CPT / O-3. But is that what you really want? I recommend that you closely examine the commissioned and warrant officer career paths before making your choice. Also, have a look at promotion rates and pay scales, and carefully consider where you’d like to be when you retire. I think you’ll see that retiring as a CW-5 with 40 years in and a 100% retirement is a pretty attractive career goal.
(4)
(0)
CW4 Angel C.
You’re spot on on WO’s being technical hands on officers. However, many of us also do staff jobs, XO duties, and even command company and detachments. I was dual staff and shop OIC for several years and a few different jobs. We also do a lot more management than many people realize. While the commander is responsible for all his equipment in his Battery/Company, Battalion, and Brigade it’s us WO’s that do most of the equipment management with the support of our NCO’s. But yes of course S4’s do their part as well. We don’t manage as many personnel as Battery/Company Commanders but we do manage personnel. Retirement pay for a W5 with 40 years in sounds good but the competion is fierce and there’s a bunch of luck involved in it. In today’s Army CWO’s with a second time non-select have about 6 months to get out and as a W5 if you’re not in a W5 slot working in certain strategic positions you get 5 years max as a W5.
(1)
(0)
LTC Martin Glynn
Angel C., thanks, that's good insight. The guys I knew who reached 40 years were CW5's, but if a CWO has ten years as an NCO, is it possible to reach 40 years as a CW4? Actually, 10 years of NCO service plus 20 years of CWO service (30 years total), would be a great retirement, and anything above that is really icing on the cake, isn't it?
(1)
(0)
CW5 (Join to see)
You're allowed a total of 30 years Warrant Officer Service. I changed over at 7 years TIS meaning that I can only do a total of 37. I dont plan to do that though. 30 is enough.
(2)
(0)
3
3
0
WO1 Jose R. my two cents. The reason I think they want "civilian" applicants is to get extensive civilian experience and their innovation. My fear for you is if you got all the way out, then applied, your application for direct commission may get passed over. I say may. I think doing a warrant packet is the safer route.
(3)
(0)
LTC Jason Mackay
WO1 Jose R. I think if you became a Cyber Warrant, that would set you up to seek a commission. I know two NCO-Warrant-Commissioned Officers who made that series of transitions. One was Ordnance (TMDE) the other was Transportation (Water Craft).
Which ever you do, I think you need to sit down with the recruiters and work it through. All the risks, rewards, etc.
Which ever you do, I think you need to sit down with the recruiters and work it through. All the risks, rewards, etc.
(2)
(0)
LTC Jason Mackay
SGT Colin Aamot - all that may be true, although not convinced, the issue here is the SSG is considering breaking service to seek a direct commission which may not be there and to get experience, where if he goes Warrant, it's well defined experience and he doesn't have to break Service.
Direct commissioning is a bitter pill to swallow. Do you recruit (maybe) the right people and accomplish the mission without alienating the other 99% of the Army that had to earn it the hard way? How many of these direct commissions will separate at the first opportunity? How many will we have to separate because they are so unhappy with life inside the Army? You have an unknown and untested person that you're affording immense responsibility and authority. I am sure this and other issues played into the JCS decision. There is nothing to say that this isn't just a pilot to see if there is sufficient depth and interest in civilian industry to hang the hope on this program.
Direct commissioning is a bitter pill to swallow. Do you recruit (maybe) the right people and accomplish the mission without alienating the other 99% of the Army that had to earn it the hard way? How many of these direct commissions will separate at the first opportunity? How many will we have to separate because they are so unhappy with life inside the Army? You have an unknown and untested person that you're affording immense responsibility and authority. I am sure this and other issues played into the JCS decision. There is nothing to say that this isn't just a pilot to see if there is sufficient depth and interest in civilian industry to hang the hope on this program.
(1)
(0)
LTC Jason Mackay
SGT Colin Aamot - no argument we are playing catch up. Just have reservations about lateral entry of leaders in a complex organization that at the end of the day has to fight and win the nation's wars. On day one, that laterally appointed O5 has to walk, talk, eat, shit, shoot, decide, and lead on par with the Battalion Commander with 20+ years of tacit Army knowledge and skill....that they are there in direct and general support of. Perhaps the JCS wisdom here was that the lateral entry O1/2 doesn't have the same hill to climb. They'll be younger and have longevity. They'll enter and forge a way ahead.
I will stipulate that you will say that they bring the knowledge and skills acquired in the private sector. I believe that's the stated goal of the program. Unless that private sector entity closes with and destroys the enemy in close combat, it's just not the same. There will be learning on both sides to make it work.
I will stipulate that you will say that they bring the knowledge and skills acquired in the private sector. I believe that's the stated goal of the program. Unless that private sector entity closes with and destroys the enemy in close combat, it's just not the same. There will be learning on both sides to make it work.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
My own thoughts for you are to consider what you want to do in the Cyber CMF. As the other officers have chimed in, a lot of the officer side will be more management. One of the required pieces of training is the cyber ops planners course, and the majority of the positions for the officers are as the CND managers. My squad leader on the civilian side loves doing the cyber stuff, but when we're on mission, he gets to play battle captain and doesn't get to touch the keyboards that the rest of the team including our warrants are doing. His guidance is invaluable, but you can tell he's itching to get on a keyboard.
Warrants are meant to be the system architects, the technical experts. The officers are meant to be our leaders. Figure which direction you want to lean and what lines up with your long term goals.
Warrants are meant to be the system architects, the technical experts. The officers are meant to be our leaders. Figure which direction you want to lean and what lines up with your long term goals.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google