# Single mom now facing medical release from military



## Halifax Tar (13 Jun 2017)

Acting Sub-Lt. Laura Nash is on her way out of the military after being given what she says is an utterly impossible, unfair choice.

The single mother says she was called into a meeting with two superior officers, both of them women, in late 2013 and claims she was told she had too many "family issues."

She faced a training deadline to go to sea and was given six weeks to decide between her child and her career as a warship navigator. 

"The decision broke me," Nash, 33, told CBC News in an interview. "I couldn't make the decision. It was a catch-22. I didn't want to live without my child, but I needed a means of supporting him and so I didn't want to lose my job."

Last week, the Liberal government released its defence policy which set goals of increasing the representation of women in uniform, more respectful treatment and greater career flexibility.

More on link.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/military-single-moms-1.4157353


----------



## Lightguns (13 Jun 2017)

This is why we need to militarize the Great Lakes again, so sailors can commit to an 8 hour day can sail too!  Seriously, I was part of a service couple back in the early 80s when you served at the pleasure of the Queen and the CSM.  I was PPCLI and my wife Fd Amb, we made it work.  Unfortunately, I suspect that the HRC will take her side and you will see a benefit for full time sitting services in the same way we paid for dogs for deployed singles.  It is gonna add a billion to the defence deficit each year.......


----------



## jollyjacktar (13 Jun 2017)

Lightguns,  you were part of a couple.  I know from experience how difficult it is to be in and a single parent.  I had to hire a nanny in my case as I was a shift worker,  thankfully I had some help from family at the expense and it wasn't a long term situation.  To be fair, we're both long service members and I have seen the system fuck over people too many times, I'm sure you did too.  Why shouldn't there be more compassion and flexibility?  Somethings about service life could be less draconian and brought into the 21st century.


----------



## captloadie (13 Jun 2017)

I also know plenty of single parents that have made it work, and it does require sacrifice. The member in the article was a MARS officer for God's sake. Did she not realize she would need to go to sea? Why didn't she put in for an OT to something that could possibly offer a little more stability. From the sounds of the article, she had been given plenty of time before she was given the ultimatum to sort out her personal life. She didn't. Is that someone who we want serving in a Leadership position?


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (13 Jun 2017)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Lightguns,  you were part of a couple.  I know from experience how difficult it is to be in and a single parent.  I had to hire a nanny in my case as I was a shift worker,  thankfully I had some help from family at the expense and it wasn't a long term situation.  To be fair, we're both long service members and I have seen the system frig over people too many times, I'm sure you did too.  Why shouldn't there be more compassion and flexibility?  Somethings about service life could be less draconian and 21st century.



Too often, what we are seeing is a lack of common sense from the Chain of Command.  

It's most apparent in the training system and junior rank levels of the NCM and Officer Corps where the expectation seems to be you do what your told and shut up about it.

Why was ASlt Nash's OT paperwork lost/stalled by the CoC?  Why was she expected to send her child to Belleville while she deployed to sea?  How much notice was she given that she deployed to sea?

I've seen it occur multiple times in the Army where members are tasked last minute for no other reason that nobody wanted to commit until the 11th hour and actually have to make a decision.  It's happened about 6 times in the last 4 months here where people are tasked last minute on a task that has been sitting in CFTPO for months and nobody had moved on it.

Meanwhile, the higher HQ(s) I've been at don't work like this at all, getting people to do anything at my particular L2 requires an act of parliament and any order is simply an opportunity to start a discussion.  

From my chair, the main problem seems to be leadership not applying basic battle procedure to their job(s).  You know that whole mission analysis thing where you find out what your assigned and implied tasks are?  And then actioning them using the resources at your disposal?



			
				captloadie said:
			
		

> I also know plenty of single parents that have made it work, and it does require sacrifice. The member in the article was a MARS officer for God's sake. Did she not realize she would need to go to sea? Why didn't she put in for an OT to something that could possibly offer a little more stability. From the sounds of the article, she had been given plenty of time before she was given the ultimatum to sort out her personal life. She didn't. Is that someone who we want serving in a Leadership position?



She did put in for an OT and the paperwork went in to the training system toilet.  I work in the training system, we generally treat new people like garbage.


----------



## captloadie (13 Jun 2017)

I should have read the article. I only went with what was quoted.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (13 Jun 2017)

To the extent that the CBC story is correct (they say she was going to sea to pursue her job of warship navigator, which is incorrect: As A/Slt, she was unqual and was going to do her qualification as a BWK), I am not ready to blame her for choosing MARS. From the story, it seems she became a MARS NCDT, then met the future father, got pregnant and had a child expecting the father to be around. It didn't work out and the father left. Then, apparently, her request for transfer to logistics was approved but not processed properly, or something and fell through.

Without commenting one way or the other, there are two things to consider here: (1) whether we like it or not, in break-ups, the women still overwhelmingly are the ones that end up caring for children left behind - and Oprah's network "Date my Dad" be damned, so the dad's should perhaps be held to a higher level of participation; and, (2) In the current society, there are more and more couples that have children, then break-up, so in the military too we are seeing more and more single parents trying to balance both aspects of their lives.

This said, as it is more and more common, and since all of us in the military can be called upon to go somewhere for a while, why shouldn't the support system be able to provide, at a reasonable cost to the serving member, for those unusual situations we find ourselves in?


----------



## Lightguns (13 Jun 2017)

BWT would be understandable then, I heard from my navy relatives that BWT grants no quarter to candidates.  If still under training and unable to train, what do you do?  The system is haphazard at best.  I know of one single parent trainee who had achieved the rank of Cpl (from 2Lt), 2 different classifications, 4 different trades and 7 years of service without completing any trades training due to family issues before the system left the individual go.


----------



## Remius (13 Jun 2017)

I'm not sure an OT would have solved the issue as said member would have to have gone on trades training for an extended period as well away from home.  

And Logistics was always the default OT for training failures or VOTs at the cadet level making it very difficult to either get into that trade or OT to it because that's what everyone did.  At least back in the earlier part of this century (things may have changed though since then).


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (13 Jun 2017)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> To the extent that the CBC story is correct (they say she was going to sea to pursue her job of warship navigator, which is incorrect: As A/Slt, she was unqual and was going to do her qualification as a BWK), I am not ready to blame her for choosing MARS. From the story, it seems she became a MARS NCDT, then met the future father, got pregnant and had a child expecting the father to be around. It didn't work out and the father left. Then, apparently, her request for transfer to logistics was approved but not processed properly, or something and fell through.



I've seen this happen enough that I generally believe the CBC story.  New members generally get taken advantage of because they don't understand military policy or administration.  



> Without commenting one way or the other, there are two things to consider here: (1) whether we like it or not, in break-ups, the women still overwhelmingly are the ones that end up caring for children left behind - and Oprah's network "Date my Dad" be damned, so the dad's should perhaps be held to a higher level of participation; and, (2) In the current society, there are more and more couples that have children, then break-up, so in the military too we are seeing more and more single parents trying to balance both aspects of their lives.
> 
> This said, as it is more and more common, and since all of us in the military can be called upon to go somewhere for a while, why shouldn't the support system be able to provide, at a reasonable cost to the serving member, for those unusual situations we find ourselves in?



I completely agree OGBD.



			
				Lightguns said:
			
		

> BWT would be understandable then, I heard from my navy relatives that BWT grants no quarter to candidates.  If still under training and unable to train, what do you do?  The system is haphazard at best.  I know of one single parent trainee who had achieved the rank of Cpl (from 2Lt), 2 different classifications, 4 different trades and 7 years of service without completing any trades training due to family issues before the system left the individual go.



Military HR is stuck in 1960 and pretends the entire military demographic is a white, Anglo-Saxon, late-teens early twenties male.  

A heavy investment will need to be made in qualitative approaches in the coming years as right now the military is almost entirely quantitative in its approach to management.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (13 Jun 2017)

captloadie said:
			
		

> I also know plenty of single parents that have made it work, and it does require sacrifice. The member in the article was a MARS officer for God's sake. Did she not realize she would need to go to sea? Why didn't she put in for an OT to something that could possibly offer a little more stability. From the sounds of the article, she had been given plenty of time before she was given the ultimatum to sort out her personal life. She didn't. Is that someone who we want serving in a Leadership position?



Just to point out a few things WRT your points...not taking sides, just offering info from the article (I've nothing else to go on...).

_Nash never expected to be in such a difficult position. A former champion kayaker, she joined in 2010 and was in a relationship when she became pregnant. Nash was comfortable with the notion her child's father could take care of him while she was at sea.

But her relationship dissolved in 2012 and, in order to keep up with the demands of training and military life, she was forced — frequently — to send her boy, Ronin, who is now six, to her parents in Belleville, Ont. where they cared for him.
_

Sounds like she had been recruited for MARS, then got pregnant, thought the boys father would look after him while she did her thing and that plan didn't work out.

Small details but they can be important to our perceptions sometimes.


----------



## kratz (13 Jun 2017)

Remius said:
			
		

> And Logistics was always the default OT for training failures or VOTs at the cadet level making it very difficult to either get into that trade or OT to it because that's what everyone did.  At least back in the earlier part of this century (things may have changed though since then).



LogO remains a default fallback for many and viewed as an easy OT. The reality is, with specific degrees these days, the useful employability of an OT and the career progression is more limited than past years. The modern applicant with the right degrees for DEO, or accepted for ROTP tend to be more desirable to the trade, making an OT / VOT even more difficult for training failures.


----------



## Remius (13 Jun 2017)

And a lot of the story is incomplete. 

Playing devil's advocate: 

How many times was training deferred?  How many times was she accommodated due to her circumstance over the 4 years? 

The doctor refused to sign off on a transfer.  Why is that?  Maybe there is a reason we aren't being made aware of. 

I agree that the CAF needs to try and adapt to society's ever changing face but how long can we keep untrained personnel for? Like I mentioned, even she OTed how would she have suddenly been able to go on training or deploy or go on something like Maple Resolve? 

Anyways, I think there is more to this than just the cut and dry presentation that CBC is presenting.


----------



## Lumber (13 Jun 2017)

kratz said:
			
		

> LogO remains a default fallback for many and viewed as an easy OT. The reality is, with specific degrees these days, the useful employability of an OT and the career progression is more limited than past years. The modern applicant with the right degrees for DEO, or accepted for ROTP tend to be more desirable to the trade, making an OT / VOT even more difficult for training failures.



Kratz,

Degree requirements for LogO changed, again, back in February. All degrees are once again acceptable:

(DWAN) http://cmpapp.mil.ca/dpgr/downloads/Entry_Standards/english/RegF/ES_REGF_E_LOG_00328.pdf


----------



## Remius (13 Jun 2017)

Lumber said:
			
		

> Kratz,
> 
> Degree requirements for LogO changed, again, back in February. All degrees are once again acceptable:
> 
> (DWAN) http://cmpapp.mil.ca/dpgr/downloads/Entry_Standards/english/RegF/ES_REGF_E_LOG_00328.pdf



Which is what it used to be but the reality is an ideal degree gets you more chances than an acceptable one.  Which is what Kratz was saying. Making the OT process to Log O difficult due to that.  Compund that with the many people trying to OT with an acceptable degree vice an ideal one and you can see how difficult that particular OT is.


----------



## Nudibranch (13 Jun 2017)

As an organization CAF just needs to be more flexible in VOT and, frankly, VR before contracts are over. 

Because you know what happens when we're not? These people medicalize and get out anyways, only with a med pension. There was nothing organically wrong with this woman, her life circumstances changed to where MARS really was a bad fit, she couldn't find another way out and went the med route (and once she rang that bell, she couldn't unring it at will - that's the part where the MO didn’t sign off on the transfer, because no MO would). 

From my experience on the coast MARS trg is especially bad at this "they succeed or they break" mentality. Just let them go if they want to go - it ends up being more expensive to the system to hold them until they break. *That's* where we need more flex, and that's not single-parent specific.


----------



## Lumber (13 Jun 2017)

Nudibranch said:
			
		

> As an organization CAF just needs to be more flexible in VOT and, frankly, VR before contracts are over.
> 
> Because you know what happens when we're not? These people medicalize and get out anyways, only with a med pension. There was nothing organically wrong with this woman, her life circumstances changed to where MARS really was a bad fit, she couldn't find another way out and went the med route (and once she rang that bell, she couldn't unring it at will - that's the part where the MO didn’t sign off on the transfer, because no MO would).
> 
> From my experience on the coast MARS trg is especially bad at this "they succeed or they break" mentality. Just let them go if they want to go - it ends up being more expensive to the system to hold them until they break. *That's* where we need more flex, and that's not single-parent specific.



Maybe they should make MARS a sub-specialty. You join as a LogO, then go MARS (Log-M), and if you can't hack it as a MARS Officer, you just revert back to Log.

Or we could change the whole structure, and make MARS, Log and Engineering all start at the same point, and then they could all sub-specialize from there. We could call it something generic, like... Surface Warfare Officer. And then you could sub-specialize for Operations, Logistics, or Engineering................................


----------



## Lightguns (13 Jun 2017)

Lumber said:
			
		

> Maybe they should make MARS a sub-specialty. You join as a LogO, then go MARS (Log-M), and if you can't hack it as a MARS Officer, you just revert back to Log.
> 
> Or we could change the whole structure, and make MARS, Log and Engineering all start at the same point, and then they could all sub-specialize from there. We could call it something generic, like... Surface Warfare Officer. And then you could sub-specialize for Operations, Logistics, or Engineering................................



It seems to me that by having to go to sea to be qualified MARS officers are limiting their employability.  Certainly this training can all be done in simulators or a phone app......  From a Timmy's...........


----------



## Remius (13 Jun 2017)

Lightguns said:
			
		

> It seems to me that by having to go to sea to be qualified MARS officers are limiting their employability.  Certainly this training can all be done in simulators or a phone app......  From a Timmy's...........



Or a wading pool with toy boats and someone to yell at you?


----------



## Nudibranch (13 Jun 2017)

Remius said:
			
		

> Or a wading pool with toy boats and someone to yell at you?



As long as there's yelling, you're getting 90% of the training benefit.

But seriously, this isn't MARS-specific. MARS is a good example, but certainly not the only trade training people medicalize out of when VOT/VR is blocked.


----------



## dimsum (13 Jun 2017)

Lumber said:
			
		

> Maybe they should make MARS a sub-specialty. You join as a LogO, then go MARS (Log-M), and if you can't hack it as a MARS Officer, you just revert back to Log.
> 
> Or we could change the whole structure, and make MARS, Log and Engineering all start at the same point, and then they could all sub-specialize from there. We could call it something generic, like... Surface Warfare Officer. And then you could sub-specialize for Operations, Logistics, or Engineering................................



Shhh....don't give people ideas.


----------



## ballz (13 Jun 2017)

Nudibranch said:
			
		

> As long as there's yelling, you're getting 90% of the training benefit.
> 
> But seriously, this isn't MARS-specific. MARS is a good example, but certainly not the only trade training people medicalize out of when VOT/VR is blocked.



Plenty of cases of the green welfare program at the Inf School.... I know of guys that had been on PAT Pl for literally 5 years as a 2Lt before they could get rid of them.


----------



## daftandbarmy (13 Jun 2017)

Nudibranch said:
			
		

> As an organization CAF just needs to be more flexible in VOT and, frankly, VR before contracts are over.
> 
> Because you know what happens when we're not? These people medicalize and get out anyways, only with a med pension. There was nothing organically wrong with this woman, her life circumstances changed to where MARS really was a bad fit, she couldn't find another way out and went the med route (and once she rang that bell, she couldn't unring it at will - that's the part where the MO didn’t sign off on the transfer, because no MO would).
> 
> From my experience on the coast MARS trg is especially bad at this "they succeed or they break" mentality. Just let them go if they want to go - it ends up being more expensive to the system to hold them until they break. *That's* where we need more flex, and that's not single-parent specific.



Training people to kill other people, without getting killed yourself, sounds really tricky. Maybe we should just forget it


----------



## Nudibranch (14 Jun 2017)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Training people to kill other people, without getting killed yourself, sounds really tricky. Maybe we should just forget it



We certainly ought to when the person being trained decides this just isn't for them, to the point of seeking escape to the JPSU. 
If we let them go slightly before that point, we might at least end up with a functional paper pusher.


----------



## Lightguns (14 Jun 2017)

Nudibranch said:
			
		

> We certainly ought to when the person being trained decides this just isn't for them, to the point of seeking escape to the JPSU.
> If we let them go slightly before that point, we might at least end up with a functional paper pusher.



Did you miss the last decade?  There ain't no rear areas.


----------



## Nudibranch (14 Jun 2017)

Lightguns said:
			
		

> Did you miss the last decade?  There ain't no rear areas.



Did you miss reality? There are a lot areas that don't deploy at the rate that the Navy does - I've had 2.5 deployments  in 8 years, and if anything I actively seek to go.


----------



## Remius (14 Jun 2017)

Nudibranch said:
			
		

> Did you miss reality? There are a lot areas that don't deploy at the rate that the Navy does -



public service?


----------



## Lightguns (14 Jun 2017)

Remius said:
			
		

> public service?



That likely would have been the best place, putting your deployment problems in the log br only makes things tougher for the now fewer deployable people in the log br.  The same goes for any other branch or corps, no trade should be a dumping ground.


----------



## Journeyman (14 Jun 2017)

Lightguns said:
			
		

> Did you miss the last decade?  There ain't no rear areas.


Ah, well that explains the CADPAT with well-worn butts in Ottawa.    :nod:


----------



## Lightguns (14 Jun 2017)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> Ah, well that explains the CADPAT with well-worn butts in Ottawa.    :nod:



Perhaps, and, heading down a rat hole, but I also recall a casualty within the line of sight of those well worn butts.  CADPAT, well worn or new makes you a target right here at home, in this current international struggle.  I concur with you and can recall an RCAF signals officer who arrived as a 2Lt and retired LCol having worked nowhere in the CF but 101 Colonel By Drive, that's a failure of command.  Again, though, there is little room on the "purple" trades for accommodating desk riders who cannot be employed operationally because of their own personal circumstances, it leaves the rest more over tasked, more stress and creates additional family stress for those who serve unconditionally.


----------



## gryphonv (14 Jun 2017)

Just a thought, and its a bit off the topic.

But would it be feasible of having a support tier (maybe new reservist class) that is never asked to deploy, but still technically be military) Maybe like a National Guard. . This could help limit the public service component, give an easier way to transition permanently broken troops without having to medical them out of the system (not all people on medical want to leave).

I know reservist only deploy if they volunteer (under current rules). But I feel we currently have way too many intelligent people with great skills, lose their job and be sent away because they became broken in some way, or can't meet some part of universality of service.


----------



## Nudibranch (14 Jun 2017)

gryphonv said:
			
		

> I know reservist only deploy if they volunteer (under current rules). But I feel we currently have way too many intelligent people with great skills, lose their job and be sent away because they became broken in some way.



I think a long (even very long) period of accommodation for those trained useful people should be considered, for as long as they can work within their MELs. So they could stay employed within RegF on accommodation, without actually erasing the Universality of Service line in the sand (which IMO it would be a disaster to relax).

Untrained assets and people who are too ill to work effectively, or those the CAF doesn’t need, would be released within the usual timeline.

We do have an accommodation period for those on release PCATs currently but it tops out at 3 yrs I think.


----------



## gryphonv (14 Jun 2017)

Nudibranch said:
			
		

> We do have an accommodation period for those on release PCATs currently but it tops out at 3 yrs I think.



Yeah when I was released it was 3 years, but you had to ask for it, and it wasn't guaranteed. It could be denied or approved for any number of reasons, not always making sense.


----------



## CountDC (14 Jun 2017)

Accommodation can be done but does have to be carefully managed.  If too many are done then you end up deploying the same people and eventually they will burn out and become accommodation cases so eventually you have no one left to deploy.

VOT to log would have required her to go to Borden for trade training so she would have had the same issue thus not a complete solution. For some "I  am a single parent" has become a mantra to mean I shouldn't be sent anywhere or made to work hours I don't want to.

As far as the child goes - many single parents in the military are dealing and have been for years.  

Assistance is available and was at the time.

Ref: CBI 209.335 Family Care Assistance (effective Jun 2003)

FCA is designed to help offset child and family care costs incurred by the CF member in excess of those costs paid during normal working hours. FCA is a non-taxable benefit, which is limited to single members and service couples.  

Seems to me there is more to this story than we are getting out of the article.


----------



## Navy_Pete (14 Jun 2017)

This is a shitty situation, and I feel bad for her, but she was in a hard sea trade and didn't have a family care plan that would have allowed her to even reach her basic qual.  That can take several years with a lot of time away for MARS.  VOT may have been an option, but for the doctor to not sign off on it, there was probably a pretty significant reason.

I've had a few sailors that have gotten out due to similar changes in their family situation.  You can accommodate them up to a certain point when they are trained and can go for instructor positions etc, but you can't run the same people into the ground all the time with all the sea time and get larger retention problems (which we already have for a lot of trades).

It's unfortunate, but the life isn't for everyone, and not everyone can be accommodated indefinitely.  I'm sure there is more to the story, so won't comment either way.  Hopefully in the long run this works out for her for the better; it sounds like she was probably going to great lengths to try and make it happen and that must have been a huge amount of extra stress.


----------



## Strike (15 Jun 2017)

This is why I come here.  This has to be the most varied and well thought out replies to this article I've seen online thus far.

Here's my take:

1.  We have to be careful to use the whole "I was able to manage so she should be able to" BS.  Or any variation thereof. ("I know lots of people that make it work.")  You know what?  I know lots of people that make their marriages work, or can co-parent with their Ex, or get along with their Ex or whatever.  But I don't discount anyone who is having relationship issues or going through a bad divorce because of it.  Because everyone brings something different to the mix and everyone's issues are unique.

2.  Unfortunately (and I say this with all due respect to the Navy, especially as I have a family member who is there) the MARS/MARE training system is messed up.  When I read this article my first thought was "Not again."  I have a colleague who went through a similar issue - not a single parent thing, but just being treated like crap when her training wasn't going well and she tried transferring to a trade better suited to her.  It resulted in an HRC where it was found that many of her documents had been destroyed or altered for no other reason than to keep her from transferring to another trade that had been very proactive in trying to help her.  I have another who also had a huge uphill battle to remuster to AERE because, again, when her training on the Navy side wasn't going well, she tried to be proactive and find something better suited.  She was still under obligatory service and didn't want to spend her remaining time as a make-work project when she could get qualified somewhere else and be useful.

Don't forget - she wasn't pregnant when she started training.  She also didn't expect to have to raise her child alone.  We can easily bring up that her parents should still be able to take care of her son when she's away, but they also still work full time and he's now school age.  Let's also examine the timeline:
9 months on shore while pregnant;
A year off for MATA/PATA; (1 yr, 9 m)
At least another 6 months on shore after returning while waiting for her paperwork to come through taking her off TCAT; (2 yr, 3 m)
6 months everything is good (it's an assumption - 2 yr, 6 m)
6 months trying to deal with the split (another assumption based on the article stating that her relationship fell apart after 2 years - 2 yr, 9 m)

Let's include training delays trying to fit her into a course, time off due to MH reasons (because I'm sure anyone who has ever split with someone, especially when they have a small child, would agree that it takes a huge mental toll), and right there you're probably talking at least 3.5-4 yrs without being in a fixed training stream.

If she's ROTP and paid back her pension after her MATA/PATA and she's quickly coming to the end of her obligatory service.  So it would be easier, administratively, for the Navy to let her bleed off her time than to try and get her into a new trade.  Looking at her initial timeline in the article, she likely joined as DEO, but just thought it might be something else to think about.


----------



## daftandbarmy (15 Jun 2017)

Lightguns said:
			
		

> Did you miss the last decade?  There ain't no rear areas.



Especially on a warship, or in a jet, or behind a bayonet, or something like that. 

Which is why we've probably sold a couple of generations of people a bill of goods by claiming that you can have a well balanced work/ family life while training to fight and win modern wars. This is largely BS, of course.

This woman is likely a victim of fraud of the highest order, I would argue, perpetrated by a couple of decades worth of various kinds of civilian, and civilianized, managers of a military that is trying to be one thing to its civilian population, and quite another to the increasingly dizzy array of modern, well equipped, cunning and wholly ruthless adversaries we face around the globe.

'Charlie's idea of R&R was a little rat meat mixed into his rice'... indeed. We would do well to remind ourselves of that from time to time or the ones who will suffer most will, of course, be the thousands of misled teenagers we commit to the next global conflict.


----------



## Halifax Tar (15 Jun 2017)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Especially on a warship, or in a jet, or behind a bayonet, or something like that.
> 
> Which is why we've probably sold a couple of generations of people a bill of goods by claiming that you can have a well balanced work/ family life while training to fight and win modern wars. This is largely BS, of course.
> 
> ...



:goodpost:


----------



## Jarnhamar (15 Jun 2017)

Strike said:
			
		

> 1.  We have to be careful to use the whole "I was able to manage so she should be able to" BS.  Or any variation thereof.


Yup that's brutal. When you have a CSM telling you he's single and has no kids so he doesn't care about your family problems. "You chose to have a wife and kids, you don't see me with those problems do you?".  Nope. And you'll be the only one at your DWD party too.



> 2.   It resulted in an HRC where it was found that many of her documents had been destroyed or altered for no other reason than to keep her from transferring to another trade that had been very proactive in trying to help her.


The military sure can be vengeful. It's amazing how much power the chain of command has to utterly ruin someones life or turn it upside down because a CFTPO task needs a name.



I'm all about supporting and helping families and I've on occasion treated mbrs with families different to try and accommodate them but on the other spectrum I've seen how unfair that can be too.   Someone doesn't have their life sorted out so other people pick up the slack, including (I've seen) someone do 3 back to back to back deployments. I think there comes a point where the economy of effort of supporting one soldier at the cost of multiple others isn't worth it.


----------



## Kat Stevens (15 Jun 2017)

I sympathize with this woman, truly, and it sounds to me like she's been fucked over by the system, or certain butt nuggets within it.  As far as expectations go, when I joined in 1979 as a dumb 18 year old, I expected to be CDS when I was 40. Turns out, I was right, but CDS stood for Corporal Driving Some officer. Anyone who joins with expectations will most assuredly have karma take a giant shit on them.


----------



## Jarnhamar (15 Jun 2017)

Great post Kat.


----------



## brihard (15 Jun 2017)

CountDC said:
			
		

> Accommodation can be done but does have to be carefully managed.  If too many are done then you end up deploying the same people and eventually they will burn out and become accommodation cases so eventually you have no one left to deploy.



Yup. The RCMP has had to recently completely revamp disability management. The organization is much more beholden to accommodation policy and attentive to DTA law than the CAF, and it does not have UoS. This has definitely shifted a great deal of burden onto those who are fully operational. There are a TON of members being accommodated on medical categories (very similar TCAT/PCAT system) who perform generally useful roles, but can't kit up and take calls. Most of this oerhead has to be borne by the mid to large sized detachments so that the little 3 or 4 man posts keep fully operational members- but it's resulted in communities being policed by less than two thirds of the numbers they should have. Not pretty.

The military is obviously quite different in some ways, but one of those ways is that because of how... selective our chains of command can be in how they actually apply law and policy, we are going to continue to face serious complaints over failures to accommodate, and the impact on operational troops is just going to get worse.


----------



## ModlrMike (15 Jun 2017)

I'll probably get flamed for this... but I think we're overlooking the necessary dose of reality here...

1. Circumstances change, and competing priorities... compete. The employer can only manage your personal circumstances so much. At some point one may be forced to make the hard choice. That's called life. What's the old saying... life is what happens when you're busy making plans?

2. She should have no expectation that reclassifying to another occupation will result in her never having to deploy. It that's her goal, then she's proceeding under a significant misapprehension. She should not expect that others pick up her share of the load by deploying in her place.

3. I know this sounds harsh, but her child is apparently six. That means she's probably got at least eight years of service, and is still not at OFP. There's only so long the CF can hang on to people, regardless of how tragic their circumstances might be.

4. I'm not unsympathetic to her plight, but I can't help but feel that perhaps she didn't hear what she wanted to, and is now blaming others for not solving her problems. There comes a point in life where you must take control of your own issues and get on with it. Where you accept that you are the architect of your own success or failure. I'm willing to accept that there may have been issues with her CoC, but still...

5. I have my asbestos underwear handy...


----------



## TCM621 (15 Jun 2017)

Mike, I think point 4 is the most relevant. Accommodation should really be for two main purposes. The first is to retain skills and experience. Retaining a 20 year vet for a few years provides a benefit to the CAF. It is my understanding that this person was unqualified, so what skills and experience can the CAF benefit from? The second point is to retain people who have been injured on the job in order to make their transition to civilian life easier. The classic example being accommodating a person until they reach 10 years of service and can draw a pension. While it is possible she got pregnant on the job (it's happened before), it isn't an injury caused by her service. 

Everything beyond that is, or should be, an exception to the rule. If she was a competitive candidate for VOT and someone sabotaged that, that is a whole other can of worms. That person(s) should be on charges and her application considered as if it had gone through originally. That kind of stuff happens far too often still and based on my experience the officer world (especially MARS) is worse than most.


----------



## gryphonv (15 Jun 2017)

I went through MARS training around the same time this lady was starting there. I knew her but didn't know her personally.

I have to admit MARS is one of the hardest trades to transfer out of, especially if you start passing courses. I ran into a point during trades training that I was having difficulty in passing. During my TRB my instructor who told me one thing, flipped flopped on what they said they were going to say to the Board and blindsided me with something else. 

I was already thinking about requesting to get out of the trade. This solidified my feelings. During the TRB they offered me retraining and I requested to be ceased trained and processed with a COT. The board wasn't too pleased by this and told me if I switched all I would be offered is Combat arms (even though they had no knowledge on what I may or may not be offered.) They were trying to scare me into accepting their recommendation to be re coursed. 

Long story short I stuck to my decision and transferred out. It was a COT which are a lot easier to process than a VOT. But if they gave me that much trouble during a COT I know how hard it would be to VOT out of MARS. 

I never regretted for one day leaving MARS. I was fortunate I failed one part of trades training, at the time I didn't know that, but looking back several years later I know how lucky I was.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (15 Jun 2017)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> . . .  That means she's probably got at least eight years of service, and is still not at OFP. . . .



Close, according to her LinkedIn page https://ca.linkedin.com/in/laura-nash-4a7a519 she has seven years, six months service.  And then there is a little more of her story on the webpage for her business https://houseboots.ca/pages/the-story


----------



## Kat Stevens (15 Jun 2017)

They're Uggs. Man Uggs. They're Muggs. yuckers.


----------



## dimsum (16 Jun 2017)

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> They're Uggs. Man Uggs. They're Muggs. yuckers.



Don't knock Uggs for indoor slipper wear.  I have a pair of ankle-height ones and they're awesome.  

I'd never wear them outside though.


----------



## Strike (16 Jun 2017)

Blackadder1916 said:
			
		

> Close, according to her LinkedIn page https://ca.linkedin.com/in/laura-nash-4a7a519 she has seven years, six months service.  And then there is a little more of her story on the webpage for her business https://houseboots.ca/pages/the-story



Side business means nothing.  I could name a dozen women in the CAF right now who also work through MLMs and other means on the side.

I'm glad someone with experience in the trade spoke up.  I've not had first hand experience in that but have a few friends that have.  Much better for someone to tell their story directly.


----------



## daftandbarmy (21 Jun 2017)

Dimsum said:
			
		

> Don't knock Uggs for indoor slipper wear.  I have a pair of ankle-height ones and they're awesome.
> 
> I'd never wear them outside though.



I suppose they qualify as operational clothing in the RCAF though, much like Billy Bishop used to strafe the Hun is his Jammies


----------



## Blackadder1916 (21 Jun 2017)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> . . .  like Billy Bishop used to strafe the Hun is his Jammies



And how the Hun got in his jammies, he was never able to properly explain!


----------



## Halifax Tar (22 Jun 2017)

*I had to let my daughter go because of my job in the Canadian military*

http://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/single-parent-military-1.4169806

Whenever I am asked if I recommend military life to other women, my answer is always categorically: no.

This usually surprises people who know me because I am a vocal feminist, a bit of a tomboy and a six-year veteran of the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF). I believe to my core that sex and gender do not, and should not, limit what you can do in life. But women and the armed forces just don't mix.

_More on link_

Interesting article


----------



## Lightguns (22 Jun 2017)

Good article, basically she explains that if you join UOS is the guiding principle of your employment, not your family, not your mood, nor race, gender or political affiliation.  Recruiters should be telling the full truth.  Accommodations can be made but not right out of the gate.  One of the most effective things we could do to make the C of C more responsible for it's human resource decisions is to include Regular Force positions in unit budgets.


----------



## McG (22 Jun 2017)

Lightguns said:
			
		

> One of the most effective things we could do to make the C of C more responsible for it's human resource decisions is to include Regular Force positions in unit budgets.


I think you would find such a move would quickly work in the opposite direction you want.  Currently, COs support retaining people because they know career manages cannot fill positions if they fall vacant (we don't have enough people).  So a broken person becomes better than no person, and it costs the unit nothing.  As soon as you create a dollar value opportunity cost for a CO to retain somebody, you will start to find units that take the money and dump the human.


----------



## Jarnhamar (22 Jun 2017)

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> *I had to let my daughter go because of my job in the Canadian military*
> 
> http://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/single-parent-military-1.4169806
> 
> ...



Lots or character assassination and allegations over Facebook I've seen from this story. Also the good ol' I never complained once when I was posted bla bla (ya right).


----------



## FSTO (22 Jun 2017)

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> *I had to let my daughter go because of my job in the Canadian military*
> 
> http://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/single-parent-military-1.4169806
> 
> ...



Well that recruiter who told the whopper of a lie should be charged.


----------



## ModlrMike (23 Jun 2017)

FSTO said:
			
		

> Well that recruiter who told the whopper of a lie should be charged.



You presume that it's the recruiter who's lying in this story. People don't generally tell tales that make themselves look bad.


----------



## FSTO (23 Jun 2017)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> You presume that it's the recruiter who's lying in this story. People don't generally tell tales that make themselves look bad.



True, my mistake. For her to believe that she would be able to be a medic and never go to the field is very naive. Then most people who first join the CAF have many misconceptions of what they are getting into.


----------



## Remius (23 Jun 2017)

Back in the day, being a recruiter was being able to manage people's expectations. Many would only hear what they wanted.  We had to be very careful how we worded things and we never made any promises.  It was very frustrating dealing with people that wouldn't listen despite being told something.  The worst, from my time recruiting in Ottawa were spouses of serving members hoping to be posted in Petawawa to be with their significant other. They almost all wanted to be clerks, supply techs or postal techs.  They would all ask about being posted to Pet.  They would all be told the same thing that they could be posted anywhere they were needed. They would keep asking if it could be Pet.  If a recruiter made the mistake of saying yes it was a possibility but not a guarantee, the only thing they heard was the yes part and would tune out the the rest.

This happened a lot with other things as well.  So when I read these stories and the mention what a recruiter said to them I take it with a grain of salt.  I nearly lost it once with an applicant that argued with me about the fact that med tech support never deployed to the field.  It turned I to a one way conversation very quickly but he was never convinced about anything I said or showed him.  He just never wanted to go to the field and convinced himself that he knew better.


----------



## Strike (23 Jun 2017)

FSTO said:
			
		

> True, my mistake. For her to believe that she would be able to be a medic and never go to the field is very naive. Then most people who first join the CAF have many misconceptions of what they are getting into.



I think part of the problem with the naiveté might be that we just aren't in the news the way we were when we were doing a combat mission in Afghanistan.  And so people quickly forget what it means to be in the military.  For the average Joe coming off the street they likely don't understand that, just because we don't have one massive deployment going on that they are familiar with (nobody cares that we have a bunch of smaller ones) we are still always on the go with courses and exercises and whatever.

And as Remius said, sometimes people just hear what they want to hear when they're being told what the job is all about.


----------



## daftandbarmy (23 Jun 2017)

Remius said:
			
		

> This happened a lot with other things as well.  So when I read these stories and the mention what a recruiter said to them I take it with a grain of salt.  I nearly lost it once with an applicant that argued with me about the fact that med tech support never deployed to the field.  It turned I to a one way conversation very quickly but he was never convinced about anything I said or showed him.  He just never wanted to go to the field and convinced himself that he knew better.



As a recruiter, can you not then refuse their application and go tell them to find a job at the Subway down the road?


----------



## mariomike (24 Jun 2017)

Remius said:
			
		

> I nearly lost it once with an applicant that argued with me about the fact that med tech support never deployed to the field.



The Applicant must not have read the online Med Tech job description.



			
				Remius said:
			
		

> He just never wanted to go to the field and convinced himself that he knew better.



Hopefully, the Interviewer would discuss that under "your understanding of the job you selected."

•Read the section “Life in the CF”
•Research the jobs you have listed on your application.
•Prepare answers to the following common questions: 
◦Where does basic training take place? For how long?
◦Where does the occupational training take place for the jobs you are interested in?
◦How long will you be in training before you are completely qualified?
◦What is the role of your preferred job in the Forces?
◦Where might you serve?
◦What do you like about the jobs you listed on the application?
◦What are the negative elements of the jobs you listed on the application?
http://www.forces.ca/en/page/applynow-100


----------



## Messerschmitt (24 Jun 2017)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> As a recruiter, can you not then refuse their application and go tell them to find a job at the Subway down the road?



You can always "lose" it. Had several friends who's applications were "lost" and they were not the annoying kind of folks. Also, I've had my share of experiences with recruiters and they definitely don't know it all and often make mistakes in what they say (and genuinely losing paperwork, or maybe it get's lost in the system, who knows). So it's a 2-way street.


----------



## mariomike (24 Jun 2017)

Messerschmitt said:
			
		

> You can always "lose" it. Had several friends who's applications were "lost" and they were not the annoying kind of folks. Also, I've had my share of experiences with recruiters and they definitely don't know it all and often make mistakes in what they say (and genuinely losing paperwork, or maybe it get's lost in the system, who knows). So it's a 2-way street.



Those sound like clerical errors, rather than an applicant not reading the job description.


----------



## Starlight1 (24 Jun 2017)

While I feel for the situation these 2 women have found themselves in, and can see that there was much in the process beyond their control, what I fail to understand is the victim mentality and little personal accountability.  When your chosen career becomes no longer compatible with a family life that is acceptable to you, there are choices to be made.  If you can't meet the requirements of the job, it's time to consider other options.  Seriously.  Many of us have done that.  I released from the Reg F when my kids were small as it was in the family's best interests.  I came back to Res F and eventually Reg F when I could meet the expectations.  I'm not a single parent, but with a Reg F spouse, there is a lot of time when you have to parent alone for extended periods.  Robust family care plans are crucial if you don't have the other parent around.  

Clearly these are multiple factors in each of these cases, and the organization/CoC has been less than helpful according to the articles.  I have issue with what I see is a sense of entitlement that the system owes them something (aside from all the benefits of a medical release) when they are no longer able to do the job.


----------



## daftandbarmy (26 Jun 2017)

mariomike said:
			
		

> Those sound like clerical errors, rather than an applicant not reading the job description.



Or the actions of conscientious recruiters who know that someone isn't suitable, but don't have the formal tools to say 'no, go back to the skateboarding park', or words to that effect.


----------



## CountDC (26 Jun 2017)

I  only know personally one single person that was adversely affected by the military to the point of needing to choose between it and their child.  That person was male with custody of his daughter that restricted him to the province the mother lived in.  When the military posted him out and would not change it when  asked he submitted his release.  He didn't cry about it or blame the military as he understood the military can not accommodate everyone's wishes.  He transferred to the reserves and took a class b job so he could have it his way.


----------



## gryphonv (26 Jun 2017)

CountDC said:
			
		

> I  only know personally one single person that was adversely affected by the military to the point of needing to choose between it and their child.  That person was male with custody of his daughter that restricted him to the province the mother lived in.  When the military posted him out and would not change it when  asked he submitted his release.  He didn't cry about it or blame the military as he understood the military can not accommodate everyone's wishes.  He transferred to the reserves and took a class b job so he could have it his way.



I know personally many people who's families ended in divorce, lost custody of children, etc due to complications from Military Service.Some people make it work, but in the end the military lifestyle still puts a lot of stress on families. It's not always the main factor but it almost always is a contributing factor. 

I personally will never think bad on a person for deciding that their family is more important then their career.


----------



## CountDC (27 Jun 2017)

but in the end it is a matter of personal choice.  I hate it when people blame the military for all their issues when it is a matter of choice.  We choose to stay or go on a regular basis based on our wants,  needs and own situation. On a regular basis we assess our situation to determine what is best for us and make our choice.  I have had occasion where release was a close choice based on the situation I was in but then a change occurred that resulted in me staying. 

I am also not overly fond of the "I am a single parent" mantra.  There is only so long that card can be played after becoming a single parent.  At some point you do have to straighten up and determine the plan ahead whether it is to find another career or someone to care for your child while you are away.   If you can't find someone then there is short term possibilities such as compassionate postings to help but it is still something you have to find the solution for.


----------



## gryphonv (27 Jun 2017)

I agree, ultimately they need to be responsible for their own decisions. 

But I think the crux of the problem starts at recruitment. We have had recruiters that tell applicants things that may not be completely true, many of these applicants dont find out how untrue those statements were until well into their trade training. We have a political push trying to promote how good we are to single parents among other things.

I'm not saying all recruiters are like this, but it is far more common to hear about lies or misinformation recruitment told some applicants. 

This situation was different because she became a Single Mom after she was already in, probably something outside of her control.

In the end the military is a great career but it can be very difficult for some more than others. We shouldn't sugar coat this just to get people to sign up.


----------



## daftandbarmy (27 Jun 2017)

gryphonv said:
			
		

> In the end the military is a great career but it can be very difficult for some more than others. We shouldn't sugar coat this just to get people to sign up.



You mean like our recent recruiting campaign?

Canadian Armed Forces targets millennials with new campaign

Effort marks the organization's first recruitment campaign in four years

Drummond says the armed forces aims to hire 10,000 new recruits per year and has to do so by reaching millennials who are looking for personal fulfillment through work. “Luckily the armed forces is truly a job that does that.”

http://marketingmag.ca/advertising/canadian-armed-forces-targets-millennials-with-new-campaign-137710/


----------



## gryphonv (27 Jun 2017)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> You mean like our recent recruiting campaign?
> 
> Canadian Armed Forces targets millennials with new campaign



I haven't watched the video or really followed the new campaign, but in the end we do need to recruit people, and unfortunately Millennials will have to be the biggest pool of recruits. And recruiters have to 'sell' it. I just feel it can be done better, maybe have a little less applicants but also have less people who believe things that are simply not true, and or feel they were lied to. 

A big problem I've noticed is the outward migration after people do their initial contracts, I'd rather find ways to keep more of those people in vs need to replace them with green recruits. I think the best way to that starts with being as brutally honest as possible during recruitment.


----------



## Journeyman (27 Jun 2017)

gryphonv said:
			
		

> ..... she became a Single Mom after she was already in, probably something outside of her control.


Damn you, Immaculate Conception.

Crusades, assorted Inquisitions, the Reformation.... and now,_ this_.   When will the madness end?


----------



## TCM621 (27 Jun 2017)

The single biggest thing we can do to recruit quality people is make the process shorter. I was processed in 2 months when everything was by paper or message traffic, 8 months to a year is unacceptable. The quality applicants have options and while some, who really, really want to be in the forces, will stick it out most will move on to another job opportunity because they need a job now, not a maybe in a year. 

When you add in huge wait tines for courses, you are getting people at the operational units that are jaded towards the CF. It took me more than a decade to really and truly jaded. These people don't want to stay in past their initial. Again the good ones have options, so we end up with people who really want to be here and people who can't think of anything better to do. Look around your workplace and see what you think the ratio of the former to the latter is.


Back on topic a bit:

Can anyone tell me how a family care plan is supposed to help? It seems to be the go to response when command wants you to do things that have a potentially devastating effect on your family. I can plan all I want to but at a certain point, barring emergency, i just can't afford to have daycare on 24 standby. My wife can't up and leave her job when it is convenient for the military (although if it is an operational requirement, she does her part to make it work).


----------



## gryphonv (27 Jun 2017)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> Damn you, Immaculate Conception.
> 
> Crusades, assorted Inquisitions, the Reformation.... and now,_ this_.   When will the madness end?



Becoming a mother is quite in her control, becoming a single mother is in the control of the sperm donor.


----------



## Jarnhamar (27 Jun 2017)

gryphonv said:
			
		

> Becoming a mother is quite in her control, *becoming a single mother is in the control of the sperm donor.*



I'd say women can be equally guilty of breaking up relationships.


----------



## Journeyman (27 Jun 2017)

gryphonv said:
			
		

> Becoming a mother is quite in her control, becoming a single mother is in the control of the sperm donor.


Yes, and we're now on our fourth page of suppositions where little is known, but it's OK to say that Recruiters are habitual liars, she should be allowed to transfer into any other classification to be an Admin burden there (and cause other people to pick up her share of deployments, etc), and if we want to recruit more people, then we better lower all of our standards.

We don't know, but....
- _maybe_  she turned out to be an absolute bitch, driving the 'sperm donor' [  : ] away;
- _maybe_  he said "I'll respect you in the morning," "I've been sterile since birth," and "shucks, I can't even spell STD";
- _maybe_  some recruiter said "sign here, there's never any training outside of babysitting hours." 

I have my doubts, but it's all meaningless.

I guess I'm old school, but I think being responsible for one's own behaviour is an admirable trait .... especially for someone in the military, particularly a potential officer.  How many years more of unemployable but paid service, with her making no progress on her personal circumstances, should taxpayers be on the hook for?


----------



## gryphonv (27 Jun 2017)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> Yes, and we're now on our fourth page of suppositions where little is known, but it's OK to say that Recruiters are habitual liars, she should be allowed to transfer into any other classification to be an Admin burden there (and cause other people to pick up her share of deployments, etc), and if we want to recruit more people, then we better lower all of our standards.
> 
> We don't know, but....
> - _maybe_  she turned out to be an absolute *****, driving the 'sperm donor' [  : ] away;
> ...



I never said once we should lower our standard, and I'm sure the majority of people here feel our standards have already gotten too low.

What I did say on this topic are either things I seen first hand (MARS trade with respect to COT/VOT), and many jaded people who felt they were deceived by recruiting when they originally applied, and seeing more then a few new recruits totally oblivious to the life style they have implanted themselves to. There are failures happening and it is easiest to trace to failures to recruitment/initial training. 

This is an unfortunate situation, it should of never got to the point where it was reported with the CBC. She is probably to blame for that as I doubt anyone in the chain tipped them off, that is one thing I cannot defend. Without knowing all the details its hard to really assign blame. One thing though, hard sea trades are arguably the less accommodating when it comes to family issues. 

The sad thing is there is a military image that is sold to the public en mass, and then there is a true image that is really only experienced from within. The two rarely mesh well.


----------



## Navy_Pete (27 Jun 2017)

This was one of the great things with the old NOAB program (Naval officer assessment boards).  After the recruiting centres did some screening, you would go to one coast or the other and get run through some extra testing and assessment by the navy, but also have the chance to talk to people in the trades you were going into to get the ground truth.

About half the group I went with got either screened out or decided it wasn't for them, so it was probably overall quite an effective program.  It would have been different pots of money though, so it would have shown as a cost (rather than a cost savings by doing some simple math).

Probably wouldn't have made a difference for the naval officer, but talking to a field medic would have saved this lady a lot of grief.


----------



## SJBeaton (27 Jun 2017)

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> *I had to let my daughter go because of my job in the Canadian military*
> 
> http://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/single-parent-military-1.4169806
> 
> ...


----------



## Remius (27 Jun 2017)

In case anyone hasn't figured it out yet, the Military isn't for everyone.  Men and women equally.


----------



## Jarnhamar (27 Jun 2017)

Remius said:
			
		

> In case anyone hasn't figured it out yet, the Military isn't for everyone.  *Men and women equally.*



You're missing about 61 genders there pal  ;D


----------



## George Wallace (27 Jun 2017)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> You're missing about 61 genders there pal  ;D



 >

Can you list them?   [


----------



## Messerschmitt (28 Jun 2017)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> >
> 
> Can you list them?   [



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66sb9NCq9eI


----------



## Remius (28 Jun 2017)

http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/i-sexually-identify-as-an-attack-helicopter


----------



## Strike (28 Jun 2017)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> Yes, and we're now on our fourth page of suppositions where little is known, but it's OK to say that Recruiters are habitual liars, she should be allowed to transfer into any other classification to be an Admin burden there (and cause other people to pick up her share of deployments, etc), and if we want to recruit more people, then we better lower all of our standards.
> 
> We don't know, but....
> - _maybe_  she turned out to be an absolute bitch, driving the 'sperm donor' [  : ] away; *So that means dad is allowed to ignore that he has a kid too?[/i]*_
> ...


_

If old school is hanging on to sexist beliefs and putting the blame on the woman when there is a dad out there somewhere that also should take responsibility then, yes, you're old school.

Break Break

And to the earlier poster who mentioned that even the most robust family care plans can fall apart and that it's impossible to have a babysitter of daycare provider on 24 hr call, I just had that perfect storm a couple of weeks ago.

It was a Monday and the husband had just left for a 5 day run.  My parents had spent the weekend in Ottawa and were driving home.  I was helping out with an Ex on base and was in a building that didn't allow cell phones and there were very few dedicated external lines, and none where I was working.  At about 10 a.m. the baby decided to spike a fever of 103.2 and the daycare tried to get a hold of someone for two hours.  I didn't find out until I went to lunch.  Talk about getting the stink eye when I showed up to take her home._


----------



## daftandbarmy (28 Jun 2017)

Remius said:
			
		

> http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/i-sexually-identify-as-an-attack-helicopter



And the logical next step: https://www.redbubble.com/people/spacelake/works/24745688-attack-helicopter-gender?grid_pos=3&p=t-shirt&style=mens


----------



## Journeyman (28 Jun 2017)

Strike said:
			
		

> If old school is hanging on to sexist beliefs and putting the blame on the woman when there is a dad out there somewhere that also should take responsibility then, yes, you're old school.


I'm saying we have only her side of the story, and the parts she is willing to tell.


Any thoughts on the part of my post you chose to ignore?





			
				Journeyman said:
			
		

> How many years more of unemployable but paid service, with her making no progress on her personal circumstances, should taxpayers be on the hook for?


----------



## Strike (28 Jun 2017)

Honestly, I didn't even address it because of the utterly sexist slide of your comments about the "what if's."

And in my first post to this thread I had a nice little timeline that kind of explained why, in the three years from the time she joined to the time she was told to choose between her kid and the job, she wouldn't have been able to finish her training, because everyone kept going on about how it doesn't take 7 years to get trained.  In reality, her issues with the job started 3 years after joining.  Then the MH issues started because the MARS training system is broken when it comes to dealing with people who want to transfer out.  And we all know that, if there's an MH issue, the CAF (as a whole) tries to stabilize the situation before releasing the member.  So now she's getting out in a month.

So if you want to blame anyone for holding on to her, then blame the medical community for making sure she is stable before they let her go.  Or blame the MARS training system for treating people trying to transfer out like crap (which they do).  Or blame the baby-daddy who, even if they broke up on bad terms, wasn't man enough to take care of his own kid when mom had to go away.  Then, when you've blamed all of them, blame her for at least trying to find ways to make it work (sending her boy to her parents, finding a trade that would get her closer to home and a better support system, etc.).

http://army.ca/forums/threads/125973/post-1492372.html#msg1492372


----------



## Strike (28 Jun 2017)

And in reply to your PM because you decided to block me  :

That's funny, because I heard the opposite.

But who cares why they split?  Fact is, daddy doesn't seem to be trying to take care of his own boy because, what, he's got a grudge against mom?

Anyway, when this first came out I wasn't even thinking about the whole single parent woe-is-me thing.  All I thought was that the school needs to sort itself out because that is the 4th time I've heard of them giving someone a hassle because they wanted to switch out of the trade.  In fact one of my friends brought a complaint to the HRC and it was discovered (because she kept a ghost file) that they had willfully changed some of her documents and destroyed others in an effort to discredit her.  They even then tried posting her to the east coast on OJT while she was going through treatment for breast cancer and still recovering from surgery.


----------



## McG (28 Jun 2017)

Strike said:
			
		

> Honestly, I didn't even address it because of the utterly sexist slide of your comments about the "what if's."


There were two posts with sexist slides.  You have overlooked one in your concerns, and the other appears to me as deliberate juxtaposition toward the first post.  You are supposed to see the comments are not okay, and then recognize it is probably also not okay to write-off the father as "sperm donor" and assume relationship failure is his fault.  I get that the technique was brash, but the point seems valid.



			
				Strike said:
			
		

> Or blame the baby-daddy who, even if they broke up on bad terms, wasn't man enough to take care of his own kid when mom had to go away.





			
				Strike said:
			
		

> But who cares why they split?  Fact is, daddy doesn't seem to be trying to take care of his own boy because, what, he's got a grudge against mom?


Or maybe he's not being given the option because mom has a grudge against him?  The news article does not get into the detail of if he was willing or had even been asked.  We are not told if the father left mother and child, or if mother with child left father.  There is no coverage of custody arraignments nor court decisions.  To arrive at the conclusions that you have made, do you have facts unavailable to other readers of this thread?

But perhaps the details of how she became a single parent are not germane to this subject.  Perhaps gender is not even germane to this subject?  People become single parents – it happens in different ways and it can happen regardless of one’s status as either mom or dad.  Do we need to look at this topic any more broadly than the troubles of a single parent in the training system?


----------



## Strike (28 Jun 2017)

MCG  You're right.  I swung the pendulum to the other side.  I should have finished it off by pointing out the hypocrisy of that statement thus making my point why the previous one was just as bad.  The morale of the argument being that, if you're going to blame one, then be ready to blame the other.  Otherwise don't blame either side because, you're right, we don't know the whole story.  Even those who might have an "in" have been given conflicting information, right Journeyman?


----------



## Jarnhamar (30 Jun 2017)

I reread the story. How was Nash singled out and harassed for being a female? 


While I'm not sure if it's the case I think CAF members have to realize if they goto  mental health and display significant enough issues then there is a chance they'll be released and can't just smile and say everything is good to go.

I know a couple members who seemed to think they could hop into mental health then hop out but got a crappy surprise.


----------



## BeyondTheNow (30 Jun 2017)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> I reread the story. How was Nash singled out and harassed for being a female?
> 
> 
> While I'm not sure if it's the case I think CAF members have to realize if they goto  mental health and display significant enough issues then there is a change they'll be released and can't just smile and say everything is good to go.
> ...



A few thoughts on your comments, which will form a bit of a tangeant, so I apologize in advance. 

I'm speaking on my own experiences *only* and the reason I'm putting my 2 cents in is because I don't want members to be scared off from utilizing CAF's MH services if they feel they need it. 

I was a pretty big disaster for a while. I won't go into details, but I'll simply say it wasn't pretty. I was a mess. There were multiple circumstances which contributed to my mental decline (interior and exterior), but I was able to recognize that I was crashing big-time, and sought out MH. Let me tell you, they were a god-send and I was fortune to have fantastic medical staff in my corner also. 

I was extremely fearful that my career was going to be in jeopardy, and I was terrified of the stigma surrounding person's needing help, which unfortunately, still exists openly in some people's minds, both in CAF and otherwise. But I knew my personal well-being was more important, and decided to do what was best for me with an attitude of, 'F it, I need to play this hand and let the rest of the cards fall as they may.'

My career did not suffer, I wasn't kicked out and I was seeing mental health for the better part of a year combined. MH and medical staff were able to get things under control, I'm no longer on medication (was on meds for almost 2 years), and I'm pretty much back to normal. 

I don't know the details of other's situations and I'm saddened to read of your comments. But I am a huge advocate of the MH services available. They worked with me, they were patient with me and I don't regret my decision to seek them out in any fashion.


----------



## PuckChaser (30 Jun 2017)

I think Jarnhamar might be alluding to people using the MH system who may not exactly need it, as a means to get out of work. The system works wonders who those who need it, and success stories like yours help encourage those that need it to get the help they need.


----------



## BeyondTheNow (30 Jun 2017)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> I think Jarnhamar might be alluding to people using the MH system who may not exactly need it, as a means to get out of work. The system works wonders who those who need it, and success stories like yours help encourage those that need it to get the help they need.



Ah yes, I can see that now. I initially interpreted it in another light and thought to encourage readers not to be hesitant to use the system out of fear of repercussions.


----------



## George Wallace (30 Jun 2017)

For every story like this, we can see hundreds of stories of single parents managing.  This is one story that has been leapt upon by the MSM and they are selling papers, but not necessarily telling the whole story.  If they didn't sensationalize it, they would be out of jobs.


----------



## The Bread Guy (30 Jun 2017)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> For every story like this, we can never see hundreds of stories of single parents managing ...


That's more like it ...


----------



## mariomike (30 Jun 2017)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> For every story like this, we can see hundreds of stories of single parents managing.



We have read some of them here,

CF member as a single parent-on course, deployed ect... [MERGED] 
https://army.ca/forums/threads/50191.125
6 pages.

Joining The Canadian Forces  
OP: "I have to make arrangements to have my daughter taken care of (single mother)..."
https://army.ca/forums/threads/87512.0

Looking for Opinions  
OP: "I became a single mother  and was looking for a stable source of income."
https://army.ca/forums/threads/110585.0

Leaving Children For Training, Etc. -Merged
https://army.ca/forums/threads/32203.50
4 pages.

need some help figuring out a mess im in  
http://army.ca/forums/threads/90446.0
OP: "my parents informed me they could no longer watch my 2 1/2 yr old daughter. being a single mom that is a problem. so while my platoon was graduating I had a red flagged vr to get home asap."

Child Care - Before, During and After Basic- Merged  
https://army.ca/forums/threads/46873.0

Single parenting in the CF - A personal story
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/60342.0.html

Single parenting in the CF - Another personal story
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/83897.0.html

why bother?
OP: "Here's me... a 24 year old single mother of 2..."
https://army.ca/forums/threads/28806.0

OP: "Hypothetical scenario/Question, would a single parent be able to enrol in the CAF? If so are they provided some kind of assistance for child care while they are on course?"
https://army.ca/forums/threads/124592.0

OP: "I won't be applying for a year and a half however, as I have to make arrangements to have my daughter taken care of (single mother) and complete my high school." 
https://army.ca/forums/threads/87512.0

OP: "Also being a single mom, is childcare or something similar provided by the force?" 
http://army.ca/forums/threads/106181.0/nowap.html

Single parent
https://www.google.ca/search?q=site%3Aarmy.ca+single+personal&sourceid=ie7&rls=com.microsoft:en-CA:IE-Address&ie=&oe=&rlz=1I7GGHP_en-GBCA592&gfe_rd=cr&ei=PxBsWMavJoKN8QeTvqOgAw&gws_rd=ssl#q=site:army.ca+%22single+parent%22

etc...


----------



## Eye In The Sky (1 Jul 2017)

I have to say that, the media picks up on this...single parent stuff.  How many MSCs are there where one parent is *living the single parent life while serving*.  I don't see the media all up in arms about THOSE *single parents*.  They also face the *suck it up, or 1 of you release/give up your career* choice.

*Selective Sympathy*?


----------



## kratz (21 Jan 2019)

Reference:  CBC.ca

Our friendly neighbourhood CBC is rolling out this story again.
The headline is pure clickbait:




> Military looking to avoid a 'black eye' by stalling human rights complaint, lawyer says
> Single mom Laura Nash says she was called on the carpet for having too many 'family issues'
> 
> Murray Brewster · CBC News · Posted: Jan 21, 2019 4:00 AM ET | Last Updated: 3 hours ago
> ...



more at link:  CBC.ca

I'm glad the report includes both sides of the topic (Ms. Nash and the CAF):



> But she said she proposed specific fixes.
> 
> "They are very, very simple, easy changes to make," she said. "There is nothing difficult. There is no undue hardship that will happen to the military for tweaking some of these policies."
> 
> The proposed policy changes Nash recommended include subsidized travel for single parents and improved access to on-base child care.



and



> Maj. Travis Smyth, a spokesman for the chief of military personnel, said there are a number of existing programs single parents can access now under the military's Family Care Assistance plan, which is designed to offset increases in child care costs due to extended absences. Other services are available through Canadian Forces Morale and Welfare Services, he said.
> 
> "They deliver a wide range of services and programs to support the physical, social, financial and mental wellbeing of the [Canadian Armed Forces] community," Smyth said in an email.



Even my wife, currently RegF asked, "How many businesses are required to offer benefits that she is asking for?"


----------



## Rifleman62 (21 Jan 2019)

> ....who served in the navy from 2010 to 2017 but did not complete her training as a maritime warfare officer....



Does that mean that other than her basic officer trg, she did not complete any classification trg? If that's the case, deducting her basic trg time (language trg??), she was unemployable for at least 5+ years?

What civilian org would put up with that?


----------



## Jarnhamar (21 Jan 2019)

> Nash told CBC News she believes the military is trying to sabotage her complaint by keeping the file open — retribution, she said, for the embarrassment she caused it by taking her story public.



I'd believe it too. 



			
				Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> Does that mean that other than her basic officer trg, she did not complete any classification trg? If that's the case, deducting her basic trg time (language trg??), she was unemployable for at least 5+ years?
> 
> What civilian org would put up with that?



Yea that's pretty messed up and unrealistic expectations of a job in the military.


----------



## Journeyman (21 Jan 2019)

Most comments on the CBC article AREN'T the expected anti-military babble.    :stars:


----------



## Halifax Tar (21 Jan 2019)

This is going to have to be handled very delicately.  

The ramifications of this out come could be huge if it finishes not in the military's favor.


----------



## daftandbarmy (21 Jan 2019)

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> This is going to have to be handled very delicately.
> 
> The ramifications of this out come could be huge if it finishes not in the military's favor.



We've worked with the MFRCs in a couple of places. They are fantastic, and are absolutely committed to helping people like this.


----------



## Halifax Tar (21 Jan 2019)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> We've worked with the MFRCs in a couple of places. They are fantastic, and are absolutely committed to helping people like this.



No doubt, the MFRCs do great work.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (21 Jan 2019)

nice to see the PM taking an unbiased stance on it.... :


----------



## blacktriangle (21 Jan 2019)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> nice to see the PM taking an unbiased stance on it.... :



Well he does come from a profession where serving 8 years and achieving nothing is par for the course...


----------



## MilEME09 (22 Jan 2019)

So 7 years in and couldnt get the time for courses to become an officer. So she lacked a family care plan, and couldnt balance her career and her family well. Thats what im getting here


----------

