Current Dress Regs

[RangerRay]

As long as it's formed to look like a real soldier and not this guy.

In his…er…defence…in the late 90’s I remember the berets issued to recruits had no material to work with, so they essentially looked like they were wearing felt beanies with a small piece of material stretched over that didn’t even touch the hat band. Sgts, WO’s and CSM’s raged but there was no more material to stretch.

There were a lot of eye-popping things about this guy’s D&D, but the shitty beret actually looked legit from what I remembered of my last year in.

 

[ueo]

Rumor around Borden that the demise of the "new" dress regs. is nigh. No more multihued hair, no more scruffy beards etc! Relative return to sanity IMHO. Anybody have definitive details on this

 

[WinnipegFella]

I wonder if this has something to do with the cryptic instagram story by the Army, something coming soon.

 

[Halifax Tar]

We have a thread for that...

Current Dress Regs

As long as it's formed to look like a real soldier and not this guy. In his…er…defence…in the late 90’s I remember the berets issued to recruits had no material to work with, so they essentially looked like they were wearing felt beanies with a small piece of material stretched over that...

army.ca

 

[captloadie]

Back when I first joined to grow a beard we had to submit a request form, have it approved and have our Chief review our beard in 3 weeks.

If it was patchy and looked like a mangy dog the Chief ordered you to shave and you couldn't grow a beard.

That was a good system we lost.

The only issue that I have with this process is that it treats having a beard, and being able to grow one in, as a privilege that can be dictated by someone else, and not like what it is - body hair. And here is my argument against treating if differently than any other body hair (within the confines of the dress regs). If an individual has alopecia, which leads them to have various bald spots on their head, or just hair loss in general that makes their head hair look thin, or sparse or uneven, would they be ordered to shave their head bald? No, they wouldn't, because it would be considered a medical or genetic condition, and everyone would learn to live with it.

 

[brihard]

So is there any update yet on when HOBOFORGEN will drop?

 

[Remius]

So is there any update yet on when HOBOFORGEN will drop?

I heard this week possibly with a Jun time frame for it to go into effect. (Time for showers and bathing for some)

 

[Navy_Pete]

The only issue that I have with this process is that it treats having a beard, and being able to grow one in, as a privilege that can be dictated by someone else, and not like what it is - body hair. And here is my argument against treating if differently than any other body hair (within the confines of the dress regs). If an individual has alopecia, which leads them to have various bald spots on their head, or just hair loss in general that makes their head hair look thin, or sparse or uneven, would they be ordered to shave their head bald? No, they wouldn't, because it would be considered a medical or genetic condition, and everyone would learn to live with it.

There are some real operational requirements that require people to be clean shaven so a mask can get a seal.

The problem is the institution can't grow a spine and enforce it, but anyone that is supposed to be fire fighting is an obvious example.

I know I harp on about this one, but the RCN now has about half the number of fires on an absolute basis compared to the USN, which is several orders of magnitude bigger. If they want to be Burn-y McBurnyface then they need to give their proverbial nuts a tug and make sure they are ready to respond, as they are shitting the bed on the prevention side of things.

 

[Halifax Tar]

The only issue that I have with this process is that it treats having a beard, and being able to grow one in, as a privilege that can be dictated by someone else, and not like what it is - body hair. And here is my argument against treating if differently than any other body hair (within the confines of the dress regs). If an individual has alopecia, which leads them to have various bald spots on their head, or just hair loss in general that makes their head hair look thin, or sparse or uneven, would they be ordered to shave their head bald? No, they wouldn't, because it would be considered a medical or genetic condition, and everyone would learn to live with it.

This dealt specifically with facial hair. Which at the time only the RCN and Pioneers were allowed to have, as per the dress manual at the time.

I'm not sure how it dealt with people with medical conditions.

 

[captloadie]

I get

This dealt specifically with facial hair. Which at the time only the RCN and Pioneers were allowed to have, as per the dress manual at the time.

I'm not sure how it dealt with people with medical conditions.

I get where you going with this, placing it in the pre beardforgen era. I heard though that many wanted to enforce the same type of rule after beards became authorized for every one.

NP: I get your point on this, and as you have said in previous posts, despite raising the concern at many levels, COs are accepting the risk (even if it isn't theirs to accept). Unfortunately, until there is a serious injury or death that can be linked directly back to a bad seal on a mask, individuals will continue to accept the risk (both personally for themselves, and the leadership on behalf of others).

 

[Halifax Tar]

I get

I get where you going with this, placing it in the pre beardforgen era. I heard though that many wanted to enforce the same type of rule after beards became authorized for every one.

For me personally, some people grow a shitty beard or wont keep it well kept through grooming. And if they are in either of those categories they should not be allowed to grow a beard in uniform.

 

[Navy_Pete]

I get

I get where you going with this, placing it in the pre beardforgen era. I heard though that many wanted to enforce the same type of rule after beards became authorized for every one.

NP: I get your point on this, and as you have said in previous posts, despite raising the concern at many levels, COs are accepting the risk (even if it isn't theirs to accept). Unfortunately, until there is a serious injury or death that can be linked directly back to a bad seal on a mask, individuals will continue to accept the risk (both personally for themselves, and the leadership on behalf of others).

Sure, and expect after some charges for COs and up for not following orders on top of negligence charges that might change. The institution is basically more concerned about people's feelings than operational requirements or combat effectiveness in some things (but not enough to stop beating them like rentals by spreading them thin with minimum crewing and overtasking the operational ships until they break).

But in the last year we've already had two ships flood alongside with no duty watch and only found out when someone saw it leaning on the jetty with no changes, so even then.

Like a BOI waiting to happen (for the RCN to bury like the others).

 

[Quirky]

The institution is basically more concerned about people's feelings than operational requirements or combat effectiveness

cough
Physical Fitness Standards
cough

 

[Navy_Pete]

cough
Physical Fitness Standards
cough

Need a sad laugh reaction! But yeah.

Even 3 years after long covid messing up my lungs, I still am in better shape than quite a few.

Edit: Come to think of it, I think facial hair interfering with mask seals may have been in the CHI BOI, so will look that one up tomorrow in the office in my hard copy.

 

[AKa]

I'm curious if anyone will start enforcing anything to do with dress. Part of the issue is that no one bothered even before they opened the floodgates. The folks who previously appeared rumpled and untidy moved to full-on slovenly. I was considered a hard-ass because I insisted that pers in 3Bs be clean and unrumpled, shirts and trousers needed to show evidence of being exposed to an iron, shoes/boots needed to be black, not grey. And this was years before standards disappeared.

Remembrance Day for the last few years has left me profoundly depressed as I see so many members who can't put an iota of effort into their dress for our most solemn day of the year. Last year, I almost lost it. I was behind a major with a scraggly little ponytail, a tunic that showed evidence that button failure was imminent, and his ill-fitting trousers showed no discernable crease and looked like they had been slept in. And sadly, he wasn't exceptional.

Standards are irrelevant unless they're enforced.

 

[QV]

Such a f*****g disgrace.

 

[Maxman1]

Need a sad laugh reaction! But yeah.

Like this?

 

[dimsum]

I'm curious if anyone will start enforcing anything to do with dress. Part of the issue is that no one bothered even before they opened the floodgates. The folks who previously appeared rumpled and untidy moved to full-on slovenly. I was considered a hard-ass because I insisted that pers in 3Bs be clean and unrumpled, shirts and trousers needed to show evidence of being exposed to an iron, shoes/boots needed to be black, not grey. And this was years before standards disappeared.

Remembrance Day for the last few years has left me profoundly depressed as I see so many members who can't put an iota of effort into their dress for our most solemn day of the year. Last year, I almost lost it. I was behind a major with a scraggly little ponytail, a tunic that showed evidence that button failure was imminent, and his ill-fitting trousers showed no discernable crease and looked like they had been slept in. And sadly, he wasn't exceptional.

Standards are irrelevant unless they're enforced.

Absolutely. But aside from the ponytail, that Major (and others like them) could have also been in a Remembrance Day ceremony in other years.

I have harped on this for a while now: This is a grooming/deportment issue, not a long/coloured hair or wearing earrings issue. You may not be able to correct them on having long hair, but creases in pants (either too few or too many) or rumpled shirts are definitely within the “correctable” parts. Also, you can look well-groomed and professional with long hair, but a bag of hammers with the perfect cookie-cutter CAF grooming standard pre-2018.

Having been a part of the “oh sorry we haven’t had pants/shirts/tunics in your size” excuse from Logistik in the past couple of years (thankfully I hoarded some from a while back and haven’t really changed sizes), I’m willing to give a pass on ill-fitting service dress. That is on Logistik.

 

[dapaterson]

Having been a part of the “oh sorry we haven’t had pants/shirts/tunics in your size” excuse from Logistik in the past couple of years (thankfully I hoarded some from a while back and haven’t really changed sizes), I’m willing to give a pass on ill-fitting service dress. That is on Logistik.

That is on ADM Mat and PSPC for not building an enforceable contract with Logistik.

 

[OldSolduer]

For me personally, some people grow a shitty beard or wont keep it well kept through grooming. And if they are in either of those categories they should not be allowed to grow a beard in uniform.

The senior leadership should have NEVER let the beard thing start. IT was a can of worms from the get go. Traditionally sailors and Pioneers had beards along with those who had a "beard chit" from competent medical authorities. THAT is the way it should have stayed. To rescind it NOW would be best.