# Unit designation on the slip on



## Miliceman (13 Sep 2007)

Hi!

My unit (10 EG, or 10th FES) was upgraded to Regiment (35 RGC, or 35th CER) in last december. Since that, we don't get the unit designation for the slip on through the system. I know we can get some at cpgear.com, but $4.50 is quite expensive. And they don't give rebates on a huge amount (almost 200 pers X 3 ea. minimum).

If you knoy where I can try to find that, please let me know. Thanks!

gauthier525@videotron.ca
gauthier.jsf@forces.gc.ca


----------



## armyvern (13 Sep 2007)

Unfortunately federal contracting does not necessarily work as quickly as the CF does with it's redesignating.

CPGear ... is where I'd recommend; the price is pretty much the same as you'll find it elsewhere and they have supplied to the system before. If you are finding that cost factor too much, you can wait until your supporting clothing stores (I'd assume 5 Gs BN), eventually gets them in stock, because they will ... eventually.

Until then:

I need to ask, are you planning on buying these as a Unit out of Unit allocated funds?? Flashs are a national item. My suggestion would be to have your Unit QM staff submit a DND2227 demand for the required quantities to your supporting Base Supply. Give them the source of Supply (Ie CP Gear) and have them request national funding code (fin code) from the Supply Manager (SM) to pay for the purchase. This shouldn't be too difficult as they are a nationally managed item and thus funding should be covered as such vice using local resources.


----------



## Nfld Sapper (13 Sep 2007)

Why not wait until they are available in the system. My Reserve unit also has been redesignated but we still keep the old slip on titles. On paper we went from 56 Field Engineer Squadron to 56 Engineer Squadron but the slip ons still say 56 FD SQN.

EDITED TO ADD

Vern gave a better answer.


----------



## armyvern (13 Sep 2007)

Nfld Sapper said:
			
		

> Why not wait until they are available in the system. My Reserve unit also has been redeisgnated but we still keep the old slip on titles. On paper we went from 56 Field Engineeer Squadron to 56 Engineer Squadron but the slip ons still say 56 FD SQN.



Geez, you guys didn't even graduate to the "FES" (when you were 56 FES) on the slip-on like the NB Unit in these parts did??


----------



## Nfld Sapper (13 Sep 2007)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> Geez, you guys didn't even graduate to the "FES" on the slip-on like the NB Unit in these parts did??



What unit in NB? only 2 Reserve Engineer Units are in NS and NL


----------



## armyvern (13 Sep 2007)

Nfld Sapper said:
			
		

> What unit in NB? only 2 Reserve Engineer Units are in NS and NL



Hey, I could be wrong ... it could be an "FES" unit from anywhere ... I'm pretty sure Clothing Stores here in Gagetown has the largest selection of flashs you'll ever see anywhere in the Nation. We've got them all just in case you happen to need one while here on course. They take up more floor space than the gortex (slight eggageration here ...).

But really, I was sure Woodstock had an FES ... edited to add: a quick google reveals them as Arty types ... bwahahahaha.


----------



## Nfld Sapper (13 Sep 2007)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> Hey, I could be wrong ... it could be an "FES" unit from anywhere ... I'm pretty sure Clothing Stores here in Gagetown has the largest selection of flashs you'll ever see anywhere in the Nation. We've got them all just in case you happen to need one while here on course. They take up more floor space than the gortex (slight eggageration here ...).
> 
> But really, I was sure Woodstock had an FES ...



AES maybe but not an FES.

Interesting as I could not get the gals in the tailor shop to make my unit ones had to use the generic ENGINEERS one.

I know that 56 ES is taksed to form a Field Squadron in Freddy but still haven't heard any more on that front.


----------



## armyvern (13 Sep 2007)

Nfld Sapper said:
			
		

> AES maybe but not an FES.
> ...



I edited my last ... FAS/FES/AES ... stop it already dammit!!  ;D


----------



## Nfld Sapper (13 Sep 2007)

Yeah our slip-on has been confused with those of arty at times.


----------



## army outfitters (13 Sep 2007)

I have made these before. They are $2 each in this quantity plus GST and shipping but if it is free from the system why are you buying them?


----------



## geo (13 Sep 2007)

from the french version of this thread.....

I said :

Though I am not part of the supply chain, it should not take the time you claim.  12 months is ridiculous.
In the same way we order our name tags and get them within 6 weeks, there is no reason for it to take longer.

It is time for your unit to talk to 35 CBGs G4 and light a fire in the right place.


----------



## armyvern (14 Sep 2007)

geo said:
			
		

> from the french version of this thread.....
> 
> I said :
> 
> ...



Nametags are already on a contract though ... and that's the big difference.

But it would take this amount of time in this case. As it is a new flash, the contract to provide would have to be newly written. The specs done up, the contract amendment put into place and staffed through PWGSC ... and then agreed to by the contractor, and then staffed back down through PWGSC ...

Now, of course, if we could predict all the future names & name changes of Units, & what they will be called in the future ... we could add them all onto the contract call with one amendment ... but we can't.

The current contract calls for the contractor to provide "10 EG" flashs, not "35 RGC" flashs. If the CF wants them, the CF is going to have to play the game and amend that contract through PWGSC ... because, as it stands now, the contractor is obligated to provide ZERO in the way of "35 RGC" flashs, legally & IAW their current contract. They ARE complying with their contract obligations ... we want to change 'em, we get to ante up any PAY for that to happen (ie: the taxpayer -- contract amendments/cancellation fees are worth much money to the contractor -- that's why they all want that federal contract -- amendments/cancellations are where they make their big bucks!! Witness EH101/or even the cancellation of the requirement to provide that "10 EG" flash...) ... and that takes Adm time to do, especially when the CF does not do this on it's own but rather it must go through PWGSC.

Lighting a fire under 35 Bge's G4 won't make it happen any quicker because the only step the CF does is to write up the requirement for the new flash (& I suspect after one year this has already been done months & months ago...) ... the rest is outside of the CFs hands and authority to action. Ergo, the ability to go to the SM to ask for a national fin coding to pay for an LPO of the item while the contract amendment works it's way through the federal system.

Witness how long it took for the new Base CWO, Command CWO, CF CWO isignia to come into the system ... and those boys/girls are quite capable of lighting fires...


----------



## geo (14 Sep 2007)

All good points Vern.  That's whiy you're in Log and I'm not.... then again, 35 RGC has been some 2 to 3 years in the making.  They have been building up the second Sqn for something like 2-3 years.  Even if the formal unit change was done last December 2006, everyone in LFQA engineer branch has known what was coming down the pipe.


----------



## armyvern (14 Sep 2007)

geo said:
			
		

> All good points Vern.  That's whiy you're in Log and I'm not.... then again, 35 RGC has been some 2 to 3 years in the making.  They have been building up the second Sqn for something like 2-3 years.  Even if the formal unit change was done last December 2006, everyone in LFQA engineer branch has known what was coming down the pipe.



Yeah, but everything is always subject to last minute change no?? It isn't official 'til the paperwork's signed. Goodness, imagine if we paid money 2-3 years ago during the "unofficial period" to action a contract amendment to have them supply flashs for a Unit ... then the Unit name was changed later and we had to pay again to change it again; the Auditor General would have a field day!!


----------



## geo (14 Sep 2007)

Heh...
I woulda tried to get the contractor working on 5 RGC slipons titles to do a thousand with an additional 3 in front.


----------



## armyvern (14 Sep 2007)

geo said:
			
		

> Heh...
> I woulda tried to get the contractor working on 5 RGC slipons titles to do a thousand with an additional 3 in front.



Want his number?? Let me know how much he's going to charge you over and above the contract price ... because he WILL.  :-\


----------



## geo (14 Sep 2007)

Heh.... true


----------



## armyvern (14 Sep 2007)

geo said:
			
		

> Heh.... true



Sad, but true!! Heck, whoever owns the Company has kids to feed too you know!!  ;D


----------



## geo (14 Sep 2007)

( yeah - but it's the disposable gold spoons I object to  )


----------



## Miliceman (14 Sep 2007)

Thanks everybody for your intel.

I gonna tell my chain of command.


----------



## armyvern (14 Sep 2007)

De rien monsieur.


----------



## FEEOP042 (26 Sep 2007)

The reason is not the supply system. It is the Engineer Branch who makes the approval for the slip on. I am the RQMS at 33 CER formally 3 FES in Ottawa. I know I have been asking about ares and that is the bottom line on that. So when they approve it then it will go to DHH and they will send out the contract for them.

It should not take long if you as me since they are the ones who came up with changing all the Reserve units to CER's. It is just someone having the approval memo sitting in an in box on there desk!!!!!!!!!!


CHIMO


----------



## armyvern (26 Sep 2007)

FEEOP042 said:
			
		

> The reason is not the supply system. It is the Engineer Branch who makes the approval for the slip on. I am the RQMS at 33 CER formally 3 FES in Ottawa. I know I have been asking about ares and that is the bottom line on that. So when they approve it then it will go to DHH and they will send out the contract for them.
> 
> It should not take long if you as me since they are the ones who came up with changing all the Reserve units to CER's. It is just someone having the approval memo sitting in an in box on there desk!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> ...



Well yes, once it's officially approved, it then goes via DHH to the Supply Manager (SM) through the Supply system for contracting ... then comes into the Supply system for distribution.

It takes a while. Just like it always does. Like was said below, it won't make it to the Supply system though (ergo no contract or availibility) until it is officially approved.


----------



## dapaterson (26 Sep 2007)

I have a little knowledge of the changes to the Reserve Engineer units; the MND signed off the MOOs last December.  That was the day the change occurred legally.  The CFOOs have almost caught up (except for a glitch in one that has it being re-drafted even as we speak).

The lack of an overall co-ordinating directive for the process, which would have brought together all the details for the change, is a major failing in the whole process.  In reality, the name change is the easiest part of it... it's working out the DAs, signing authorities, powers of punishment... that make the whole thing difficult.


----------



## Nfld Sapper (26 Sep 2007)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> I have a little knowledge of the changes to the Reserve Engineer units; the MND signed off the MOOs last December.  That was the day the change occurred legally.  The CFOOs have almost caught up (except for a glitch in one that has it being re-drafted even as we speak).
> 
> The lack of an overall co-ordinating directive for the process, which would have brought together all the details for the change, is a major failing in the whole process.  In reality, the name change is the easiest part of it... it's working out the DAs, signing authorities, powers of punishment... that make the whole thing difficult.



Wouldn't they just "roll over" to the new designation? as it is essentially the same unit.


----------



## armyvern (26 Sep 2007)

Nfld Sapper said:
			
		

> Wouldn't they just "roll over" to the new designation? as it is essentially the same unit.



That's common dog; if we had that, they'd have had their slip-ons ages ago!!


----------



## Miliceman (30 Apr 2008)

With the fire of "Manege Militaire" here in Quebec City, everything change, and they are now willing to spend money in that. If you got some others place to get them, please let me know.


----------



## geo (30 Apr 2008)

The money that is going to be spent on rebuilding the armoury on Grande Allée does not come from the same funding as kit... unit titles.

As stated earlier, I believe you can order your own slip-on titles from CPgear


----------



## Miliceman (30 Apr 2008)

I ask this because they ask me to do, not on a personal basis.


----------

