# Land Staff HQ changed dress of the day from DEUs to CADPAT to be more op focused



## quidam (16 Jun 2006)

Land Staff Ottawa recently changed their dress of the day from DEUs to CADPAT to be, and to be seen as more "operationally focused".  What do you think?


----------



## 2 Cdo (16 Jun 2006)

Don't know if it can actually change the "mind-set" of some of the people masquerading as leaders there.


----------



## George Wallace (16 Jun 2006)

I'd have to agree with 2CDO on this.  They are nowhere near an Operational Environment, so wearing CADPAT is a moot point.  We are not playing "Mr Dress Up", we are working as members of the CF.  Unless we are actually going to be firing rounds in the streets of Ottawa, against an enemy, HQ Staff can still wear DEU.  It is the mindset between the ears that has to be Operational, not the shirt that one is wearing.  

I suppose they will still observe 'Casual Fridays' like everyone else in Ottawa, so what is the point?


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (16 Jun 2006)

> I suppose they will still observe 'Casual Fridays' like everyone else in Ottawa, so what is the point?



It wouldn't have anything to do with not wanting to iron shirts and polish shoes, would it?  After all, why do that when you can wear PJs to work?   >


----------



## Michael Dorosh (16 Jun 2006)

quidam said:
			
		

> Land Staff Ottawa recently changed their dress of the day from DEUs to CADPAT to be, and to be seen as more "operationally focused".  What do you think?



Military dress has always reflected civilian dress. As more and more civvie companies move to "business casual" (a positive move IMO), it makes sense for the Army to adopt comfortable clothing for the office. Just as corporate dress involves a jacket and tie for meetings and public relations, so too can the staff officers use their DEU for same. Not really a big deal.

I am surprised that the wearing of headdress hasn't been scrapped yet. John F. Kennedy brought about the demise of the hat in the civilian world, and even policemen rarely wear forage caps anymore. Ditto the mailman who goes bareheaded or wears a ball cap. It's probably only a matter of time before headdress is also optional in office enviroments - in fact, most offices seem to work that way already, if the local CFRC is any indication.  I don't mean taking the hat off at the desk, I mean not even taking it to work at all.


----------



## George Wallace (16 Jun 2006)

Teddy Ruxpin said:
			
		

> It wouldn't have anything to do with not wanting to iron shirts and polish shoes, would it?  After all, why do that when you can wear PJs to work?   >



Haven't seen much of that in Ottawa yet.  In fact, the people I have seen in CADPAT over the last year, don't even brush the dust off their boots.  (Rideau Center, on the Buses, NDHQ, NDMC, etc. etc.)   >

The CF CWO ought to get out and jack up the whole lot....... ;D    (I know.......don't say it.)


----------



## The_Falcon (16 Jun 2006)

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> and even policemen rarely wear forage caps anymore.



Just to note Michael in Toronto and York Region, the coppers still wear their forage caps as often as practical (Fantino insisted on it).


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (16 Jun 2006)

> The CF CWO ought to get out and jack up the whole lot.......



Didn't someone try that about 10 years ago, hiding behind the potted plants at the entrance and leaping out to "surprise" offenders?     Heh...


----------



## Michael Dorosh (16 Jun 2006)

Hatchet Man said:
			
		

> Just to note Michael in Toronto and York Region, the coppers still wear their forage caps as often as practical (Fantino insisted on it).



Neckties, too? The Calgary Police started working to rule a few years ago during contract negotiations and ditched them...then put them back on....can't recall if they still wear them or not.


----------



## Wolfmann (16 Jun 2006)

Hatchet Man said:
			
		

> Just to note Michael in Toronto and York Region, the coppers still wear their forage caps as often as practical (Fantino insisted on it).



It's an insurance requirement for most police services, regardless if the Chief of Police likes them or wants them. We use to joke that if anyone got hit by a car, and his cap was on his dash, we'd throw it into the ditch for him. 

Honestly, operationally, the forage/peaked cap is useless. It does nothing to shield the wearer from the environment, it doesn't offer head protection, and it more or less bakes the officer's ears if they happen to be out in the sun all day (or out in the snow...frost bite).


----------



## GAP (16 Jun 2006)

Aside from the comfort level people visualize....does it not make more sense that if you are going to wear the uniform...wear it correctly. There's a lot of pride in that uniform and in the people wearing it.


----------



## George Wallace (16 Jun 2006)

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> Neckties, too? The Calgary Police started working to rule a few years ago during contract negotiations and ditched them...then put them back on....can't recall if they still wear them or not.


Probably the 'safety' factor.  Most professions who have the concerns of having their ties grabbed and used to strangle them, have switched to clip-ons.  That way the bad guy still has a 'target' to focus on, but a big surprise when he grabs a useless piece of fabric and gets taken down.


----------



## Haggis (16 Jun 2006)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> I'd have to agree with 2CDO on this.  They are nowhere near an Operational Environment, so wearing CADPAT is a moot point.  We are not playing "Mr Dress Up", we are working as members of the CF.  Unless we are actually going to be firing rounds in the streets of Ottawa, against an enemy, HQ Staff can still wear DEU.  It is the mindset between the ears that has to be Operational, not the shirt that one is wearing.
> 
> I suppose they will still observe 'Casual Fridays' like everyone else in Ottawa, so what is the point?



Canada Command, CEFCOM and CANSOFCOM all adopted "operational dress" from their inception.  The fact that they're all living in the nicest buidling in the NCR, while others are in facilites with far less amenities and no potable water speaks volumes about the mindset of the sharp end. ;D



			
				George Wallace said:
			
		

> In fact, the people I have seen in CADPAT over the last year, don't even brush the dust off their boots.


That's because they can't see their feet! (It still kills me to see a tan beret on somene dressed in SpandoPAT.)

The idea behind putting WOs and above in DEU was to raise the standard of dress in the NCR, set an example for the junior ranks and provide a better public image for the CF. What has happened is the standard of dress has risen from abysmal to simply deplorable.  Shirts need to be pressed, hair has to be cut, boots need to be polished (not just dusted) and for God's sake, suck in that shyte locker or trade in your pants!

Casual Friday's are still all the rage.  Since I have no fashion sense, I wear a uniform 5 days a week.


----------



## Michael Dorosh (16 Jun 2006)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Probably the 'safety' factor.  Most professions who have the concerns of having their ties grabbed and used to strangle them, have switched to clip-ons.  That way the bad guy still has a 'target' to focus on, but a big surprise when he grabs a useless piece of fabric and gets taken down.



Thanks for the tip, George, but we had clip-ons in the Commissionaires when I was briefly with them out of University. I am sure the CPS wore them too - and still might.


----------



## Infanteer (16 Jun 2006)

Haggis said:
			
		

> The idea behind putting WOs and above in DEU was to raise the standard of dress in the NCR, set an example for the junior ranks and provide a better public image for the CF. What has happened is the standard of dress has risen from abysmal to simply deplorable.  Shirts need to be pressed, hair has to be cut, boots need to be polished (not just dusted) and for God's sake, suck in that shyte locker or trade in your pants!
> 
> Casual Friday's are still all the rage.  Since I have no fashion sense, I wear a uniform 5 days a week.



Moi aussi.  I see this alot in my locale, unfortunately.  Dress code is given, but not enforced.

"Operationally focused" my ass.  It's just a matter of being lazy.  The USMC has a very high standard of dress and you'd be hard-pressed to find a more operationally focused institution then that.


----------



## Infanteer (16 Jun 2006)

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> but we had clip-ons in the Commissionaires when I was briefly with them out of University.



So you DO have operational experience....


----------



## TMM (16 Jun 2006)

Stupid civi question alert!

I thought that CADPAT(any camo really) loses camo ability with repeated wash and wear. Since the stuff is costly enough why encourage people to wear it for no rational reason? Is there an overstock or something?


----------



## Michael Dorosh (16 Jun 2006)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> So you DO have operational experience....



More like research for my post-CF career...after CRA. That, and finding out BAs in History and Communications aren't immediately translatable in the job market without some kind of related job experiences...


----------



## North Star (16 Jun 2006)

Seeing as I'm currently posted to the Land Staff, perhaps I should comment. Or else maybe I should keep my mouth shut and let people rant...

I don't see a reason why the CL staff should wear CADPAT - I don't think it's cost effective to the CF in the end. Operational uniforms actually cost money, whereas CADPAT combats are relatively expensive ($45 CADPAT lightweight shirt versus $21 CF Green short sleeve). Considering my day doesn't involve me getting CLP/Gun Grease all over me (which CADPAT can take but the CF crap can't), it only makes sense. 

As for CEFCOM being in nice buildings, I disagree. I know part of CEFCOM is housed in weather-havens/warehouses and it's causing some concern. CANSOFCOM, however, has some snazzy office-space.


----------



## Infanteer (16 Jun 2006)

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> More like research for my post-CF career...after CRA. That, and finding out BAs in History and Communications aren't immediately translatable in the job market without some kind of related job experiences...


----------



## Haggis (16 Jun 2006)

North Star said:
			
		

> As for CEFCOM being in nice buildings, I disagree. I know part of CEFCOM is housed in weather-havens/warehouses and it's causing some concern. CANSOFCOM, however, has some snazzy office-space.



CEFCOM HQ is co-located with CANSOFCOM, one floor up.


----------



## Michael Dorosh (16 Jun 2006)

Hey, if I thought I could get as much mileage out of a single tour in the Balkans as you, I would have done it long ago...


----------



## Infanteer (16 Jun 2006)

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> Hey, if I thought I could get as much mileage out of a single tour in the Balkans as you, I would have done it long ago...



Hope I can look back and say the same 17 years from now.


----------



## Neill McKay (16 Jun 2006)

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> Military dress has always reflected civilian dress. As more and more civvie companies move to "business casual" (a positive move IMO), it makes sense for the Army to adopt comfortable clothing for the office. Just as corporate dress involves a jacket and tie for meetings and public relations, so too can the staff officers use their DEU for same. Not really a big deal.



Business casual, though, might be a golf shirt and casual trousers -- not too far from DEU 3B.  Wearing mechanic's coveralls, or similar working clothes, in an office is well beyond business casual, and combats are working clothes.



> I am surprised that the wearing of headdress hasn't been scrapped yet. John F. Kennedy brought about the demise of the hat in the civilian world



Urban legend, I'm afraid.


----------



## North Star (16 Jun 2006)

Really? All the CEFCOM people I know are located out at Startop....well, not the good Startop but outlying buildings. But then again, my friends are from "lowly places".


----------



## Michael Dorosh (17 Jun 2006)

Neill McKay said:
			
		

> Business casual, though, might be a golf shirt and casual trousers -- not too far from DEU 3B.  Wearing mechanic's coveralls, or similar working clothes, in an office is well beyond business casual, and combats are working clothes.


Good points, but I find my business casual - khaki pants or even dark coloured jeans (not denim) - more comfortable than wool dress pants, which is what the CF trousers are. 

Really, though, if we 'have' to find an equivalency in the civvie world, combats are more like medical scrubs than mechanics clothes - no one quibbles about a doctor wearing his OR clothes to the office once in awhile.


----------

