Current Dress Regs

[Kilted]

I just wouldn't want to see inspections getting out of hand. The CAF has had some challenges regarding matters of the nether regions.

I mean, pace sticks used to be used for that in Scottish regiments.

 

[markppcli]

Sure - I see them too. I don’t see them on CAF members though.

I have seen neck tattoos (not cultural ones) on CAF members. Years before the current dress regs. No one seemed bothered by that though, since they weren’t ordered to have them removed.

I do, basically daily. Metal band roadie / hells angles prospect is as common a look as homeless wizard.

I’ll add to your point about the Māori in the NZDF that they are much better at us in integration of their indigenous culture. But that is a whole other kettle of fish.

 

[captloadie]

I have no tattoos and do not understand the attraction. But that is just me.
Facial tats are a red line for me, a person who has them without a cultural reason has lost all credibility with me.

So judging a book by its cover are we? I would understand your argument if you said face tattoos are not congruent with the need to have a "professional look" due to the public duties in which the military is involved. But to write someone's credibility off just because they look different in my opinion isn't fair. As an employer desperate to find people to fill out ranks, if someone with face tattoos applied, made the cut, and had no disciplinary or academic issues on basic, why would we turn them away.

But, I would not authorize individuals to get face tattoos after joining.

 

[Cloud Cover]

Brazilian inspectors

Air Force... since many will be a landing strip.

 

[lenaitch]

So judging a book by its cover are we? I would understand your argument if you said face tattoos are not congruent with the need to have a "professional look" due to the public duties in which the military is involved. But to write someone's credibility off just because they look different in my opinion isn't fair. As an employer desperate to find people to fill out ranks, if someone with face tattoos applied, made the cut, and had no disciplinary or academic issues on basic, why would we turn them away.

But, I would not authorize individuals to get face tattoos after joining.

A lot of basic human nature is not being accounted for here. When looked at completely objectively, perhaps you are right, but if your are planning on being a partner in a law firm, a police officer, or any number of other public facing roles where a significant component is gaining and holding the public trust and confidence, including the military where you want the voting public to support spending billions and billions of their money on, perhaps showing up like this isn't a good plan.


Ask your 80 year old widowed mother if she wants to let one of these in her house at 3am to fix her failed furnace.

As an employee, you are a representative, the public face, of your employer, they people who pay you. Within the limits of labour law and the Constitution, they get to say what you look like. If it is booty shorts and beanie with a propeller, so be it or find another line of work.

It may not be right in a perfect world, but we're not there.

 

[Fabius]

So judging a book by its cover are we? I would understand your argument if you said face tattoos are not congruent with the need to have a "professional look" due to the public duties in which the military is involved. But to write someone's credibility off just because they look different in my opinion isn't fair. As an employer desperate to find people to fill out ranks, if someone with face tattoos applied, made the cut, and had no disciplinary or academic issues on basic, why would we turn them away.

But, I would not authorize individuals to get face tattoos after joining.

If it is acceptable for the organization to recruit someone with a face tattoo why is it not okay for someone already in to get one?
I don’t follow that logically, what am I missing?

 

[Jarnhamar]

I don't judge a book by it's cover but I know a crack head when I see one.

 

[dimsum]

A lot of basic human nature is not being accounted for here. When looked at completely objectively, perhaps you are right, but if your are planning on being a partner in a law firm, a police officer, or any number of other public facing roles where a significant component is gaining and holding the public trust and confidence, including the military where you want the voting public to support spending billions and billions of their money on, perhaps showing up like this isn't a good plan.

View attachment 84835
Ask your 80 year old widowed mother if she wants to let one of these in her house at 3am to fix her failed furnace.

As an employee, you are a representative, the public face, of your employer, they people who pay you. Within the limits of labour law and the Constitution, they get to say what you look like. If it is booty shorts and beanie with a propeller, so be it or find another line of work.

It may not be right in a perfect world, but we're not there.

The guy on the left has pretty amazing urban facial camouflage.

This should be mandated.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

So, as a leader, what have you done?

Great question....but I imagine there ill not be an honest answer. #fuckthemanohdamniamthemansowhatnow

 

[Halifax Tar]

Wrong thread... Deleted.

 

[Halifax Tar]

The guy on the left has pretty amazing urban facial camouflage.

This should be mandated.

I'm pretty sure it was also a camo scheme for WW1 ships.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Not really, The pattern is too regular.

 

[Rudburg]

The guy on the left has pretty amazing urban facial camouflage.

This should be mandated.

"Knight to upper left lip, check."

 

[KTown Cowboy]

Updated

Ref: CAF Dress instructions | Section 2 Appearance - Canada.ca PRINCIPLES While ceremonial standards may apply in certain circumstance, the CAF policy on appearance is premised on four principles: safety, operational effectiveness, inclusion, and a reflection of changing societal norms. These principles, listed in priority, are defined as

a. Safety. All members of the CAF are responsible to ensure that the safety of personnel is not compromised.
b. Operational effectiveness. At no time should clothing or personal appearance adversely affect the operational capability of a CAF member or their team.
c. Inclusion. The practice of providing equal access to opportunities and resources, where all members have a sense of belonging and are encouraged to be their authentic selves. Leaders are to treat with dignity and respect to all personnel under their care. In some cases, additional accommodations may be needed. Specific accommodations in respect of this policy are regulated under DAOD 5516-3.d. Societal Norms.

The CAF is a microcosm of Canadian society. As much as is possible, policies applying to CAF members, including standards of dress, should reflect the changing norms in Canadian society. This will welcome a more diverse group of CAF members, which will benefit the CAF as diversity is a known force multiplier.

HAIR a. Hair shall not prevent the proper wear of a military headdress or protective equipment. Hair must be worn so that without headdress the member’s face is visible. Full or partial shaving of hair on the head is permitted. Colouring of hair is permitted. The wearing of wigs, locks, or hair extensions is permitted. Long hair is permitted but must be secured accordingly when extending below the top/ridge of the shoulder in such a manner to prevent hair from falling in or covering the face when leaning forward. Acceptable accessories to secure hair include, but are not limited to, clips, barrettes, bobby pins, fabric elastics, elastic bands, and hair nets.
b. In cases where Safety and/or Operational effectiveness may be compromised, or where a hairstyle is associated with a cultural, religious or spiritual belief that does not align with this policy, members are to refer to DAOD 5516-3 and section 3 of this chapter.
c. Facial Hair. All styles of facial hair and sideburns are authorized. Facial hair may be braided/ponytail style and coloured. Accessories to secure facial hair include but are not limited to: barrettes, bobby pins, fabric elastics, elastic bands, and hair nets. Commanders of commands, task force commanders and commanding officers retain the right to order restrictions on the wearing of a facial hair and sideburns to meet national regulations such as DAOD 5021-1, Respiratory Protection or other operational requirements.

SPECIFIC GUIDANCE FOR CEREMONIAL OCCASIONS WHILE WEARING DRESS ORDER #1The following amplification is provided for all CAF members when in all Ceremonial orders of dress (No 1):

a. Footwear will be worn as per environment/regiment/branch and corps dress instructions.
b. Over garments will be worn as per environment/regiment/branch and corps dress instructions. Medals are not to be worn on over garments (parka, gabardine, and windbreaker).
c. Hair that extends below the service dress jacket collar shall be secured in one of the following styles: 1. In a bun; or 2. A single braid; or 3. Double braids centred to the back; or 4. Multi braids, or locks, be pulled back to the centre of the back or equally positioned along the shoulder blades and secured; or 5. When hairstyle, or hair type, does not allow a member to adopt one of the aforementioned hairstyles, member must discuss with the Chain of Command to find a hairstyle that can be secured accordingly.

 

[captloadie]

If it is acceptable for the organization to recruit someone with a face tattoo why is it not okay for someone already in to get one?
I don’t follow that logically, what am I missing?

I thought about this while I was typing that part out. I agree with the majority here that individuals who get huge face tattoos, at the time they choose to get those tattoos, are probably not what we are looking for as military personnel. Or they were you ng and stupid and got stars tattooed over their eyes because it was a cool fad at the time. However, individuals mature, take on different responsibilities in life, and some may regret the ink later in life. Those individuals may feel a calling to serve their nation in uniform and turn out to be dedicated CAF members.

On the flip side, a serving CAF member who thinks getting face tats is something they should be allowed to do is likely someone we should be looking at how much they understand and are dedicated to the organization.

And for those saying that if an individual wants to join, they should get the tats removed, you obviously hasn't researched the cost, the pain involved, or the often less than perfect outcomes that results.

 

[FSTO]

So judging a book by its cover are we? I would understand your argument if you said face tattoos are not congruent with the need to have a "professional look" due to the public duties in which the military is involved. But to write someone's credibility off just because they look different in my opinion isn't fair. As an employer desperate to find people to fill out ranks, if someone with face tattoos applied, made the cut, and had no disciplinary or academic issues on basic, why would we turn them away.

But, I would not authorize individuals to get face tattoos after joining.

Maybe I was a bit harsh on assessing face tat folks but really, at what point does a person think that getting a cool saying imprinted on the forehead is a good career move?

 

[mariomike]

Ask your 80 year old widowed mother if she wants to let one of these in her house at 3am to fix her failed furnace.

Or, her bedroom.

Receiving a "focused physical examination".

Her support as a customer / taxpayer / voter is needed for the pay, benefits and working conditions you deserve.

 

[AKa]

Updated

Ref: CAF Dress instructions | Section 2 Appearance - Canada.ca PRINCIPLES While ceremonial standards may apply in certain circumstance, the CAF policy on appearance is premised on four principles: safety, operational effectiveness, inclusion, and a reflection of changing societal norms. These principles, listed in priority, are defined as

a. Safety. All members of the CAF are responsible to ensure that the safety of personnel is not compromised.
b. Operational effectiveness. At no time should clothing or personal appearance adversely affect the operational capability of a CAF member or their team.
c. Inclusion. The practice of providing equal access to opportunities and resources, where all members have a sense of belonging and are encouraged to be their authentic selves. Leaders are to treat with dignity and respect to all personnel under their care. In some cases, additional accommodations may be needed. Specific accommodations in respect of this policy are regulated under DAOD 5516-3.d. Societal Norms.

The CAF is a microcosm of Canadian society. As much as is possible, policies applying to CAF members, including standards of dress, should reflect the changing norms in Canadian society. This will welcome a more diverse group of CAF members, which will benefit the CAF as diversity is a known force multiplier.

HAIR a. Hair shall not prevent the proper wear of a military headdress or protective equipment. Hair must be worn so that without headdress the member’s face is visible. Full or partial shaving of hair on the head is permitted. Colouring of hair is permitted. The wearing of wigs, locks, or hair extensions is permitted. Long hair is permitted but must be secured accordingly when extending below the top/ridge of the shoulder in such a manner to prevent hair from falling in or covering the face when leaning forward. Acceptable accessories to secure hair include, but are not limited to, clips, barrettes, bobby pins, fabric elastics, elastic bands, and hair nets.
b. In cases where Safety and/or Operational effectiveness may be compromised, or where a hairstyle is associated with a cultural, religious or spiritual belief that does not align with this policy, members are to refer to DAOD 5516-3 and section 3 of this chapter.
c. Facial Hair. All styles of facial hair and sideburns are authorized. Facial hair may be braided/ponytail style and coloured. Accessories to secure facial hair include but are not limited to: barrettes, bobby pins, fabric elastics, elastic bands, and hair nets. Commanders of commands, task force commanders and commanding officers retain the right to order restrictions on the wearing of a facial hair and sideburns to meet national regulations such as DAOD 5021-1, Respiratory Protection or other operational requirements.

SPECIFIC GUIDANCE FOR CEREMONIAL OCCASIONS WHILE WEARING DRESS ORDER #1The following amplification is provided for all CAF members when in all Ceremonial orders of dress (No 1):

a. Footwear will be worn as per environment/regiment/branch and corps dress instructions.
b. Over garments will be worn as per environment/regiment/branch and corps dress instructions. Medals are not to be worn on over garments (parka, gabardine, and windbreaker).
c. Hair that extends below the service dress jacket collar shall be secured in one of the following styles: 1. In a bun; or 2. A single braid; or 3. Double braids centred to the back; or 4. Multi braids, or locks, be pulled back to the centre of the back or equally positioned along the shoulder blades and secured; or 5. When hairstyle, or hair type, does not allow a member to adopt one of the aforementioned hairstyles, member must discuss with the Chain of Command to find a hairstyle that can be secured accordingly.

Why, for goodness sake can't they specify that accessories controlling the hair be of a neutral/muted colour? The vivid pink scrunchies and embellished clips look really inappropriate.

 

[Fabius]

I thought about this while I was typing that part out. I agree with the majority here that individuals who get huge face tattoos, at the time they choose to get those tattoos, are probably not what we are looking for as military personnel. Or they were you ng and stupid and got stars tattooed over their eyes because it was a cool fad at the time. However, individuals mature, take on different responsibilities in life, and some may regret the ink later in life. Those individuals may feel a calling to serve their nation in uniform and turn out to be dedicated CAF members.

On the flip side, a serving CAF member who thinks getting face tats is something they should be allowed to do is likely someone we should be looking at how much they understand and are dedicated to the organization.

And for those saying that if an individual wants to join, they should get the tats removed, you obviously hasn't researched the cost, the pain involved, or the often less than perfect outcomes that results.

I appreciate the response. I’m thinking that approach might actually be a common one but I’m not of the opinion that it’s actually a good basis for policy.

Personal choices have affects and whether or not a person regrets their tattoo decisions is highly subjective and not something that can be really considered in generating policy.

What is it about a facial tattoo that is incongruent with an understanding of the CAF and ones dedication to it? How does that manifest itself as different between the two individuals with facial tattoos.

I’m not a fan of tattoos period, but I’m of the opinion that our policies need to have adherence to a logical and consistent standard that stays away from subjectivity as much as possible.

Edited to fix some weird grammar

 

[Halifax Tar]

Not really, The pattern is too regular.