# Dishonourable Discharge?



## Bobert (1 Oct 2005)

I know I may sound crazy, but I'm a civilian so that is my defence. What is the real difference between a honourable and dishonourable discharge?


----------



## honestyrules (1 Oct 2005)

Let's say that if you get Dishonourable Discharge , you're hurting. You won't be able to work for the federal gov. anymore. Plus, you lose your pension...
You have to do something really wrong to get that ,like a criminal offence.


----------



## Michael OLeary (1 Oct 2005)

The Canadian Forces doesn't use the term "dishonourable discharge", that is an Americanism that has become common-place through media usage.

Release terms will be annotated on personnel files as follows:



> (4) Where an officer or non-commissioned member is released, the notation on his record of service shall be as follows:
> 
> (a) if he is released under Item 1(a), the notation "Dismissed with Disgrace for Misconduct" or "Dismissed for Misconduct", as applicable;
> 
> ...



The CF defines the terms of release in accordance with the Queen's Regulations and Orders. The release items in use are as follows:



> 1	Misconduct
> (a) Sentenced to Dismissal.
> (b) Service Misconduct.
> (c) Illegally Absent.
> ...



Source - http://www.admfincs.forces.gc.ca/admfincs/subjects/qr_o/vol1/ch015_e.asp#15.36


----------



## Neill McKay (1 Oct 2005)

Bobert said:
			
		

> I know I may sound crazy, but I'm a civilian so that is my defence. What is the real difference between a honourable and dishonourable discharge?



Neither term is used in Canada.  We say "release" or "dismiss", according to the circumstances.

Someone who is dismissed or released for misconduct will have his departure from the Service discribed by one of the following terms: Dismissed with Disgrace for Misconduct, Dismissed for Misconduct, or Released for Misconduct, depending on the exact circumstances (e.g. whether or not he was sentenced to dismissal by a court matrial).

A less severe, but still not desirable description of one's release is Service Terminated; this is used for those who, through their own failure, do not meet the standards of the Service.

Someone who leaves the Service for medical reasons, of his own volition, or for reasons such as retirement, personal difficulties that interfere with his service, or a handful of other reasons, is Honourably Released.

A more thorough explanation than mine can be found here: http://www.admfincs.forces.gc.ca/admfincs/subjects/qr_o/vol1/ch015_e.asp#15.01


----------



## gunner56 (4 Oct 2005)

???Gee,that's odd. My Statement of Service(dated15 Jun 78),and my dad's from WW2,both indicate "Honourable"on line 6(Type of Retirement or Discharge.


----------



## geo (4 Oct 2005)

Gunner,
do you want to re-enrol so you can find out what the current usage is?


----------



## gunner56 (4 Oct 2005)

Ya know,geo,I'd love to.The problem is...I'm 48,and I have type 1 diabetes.So I guess my only choice is CIC...if they'll have me,that is.


----------



## geo (4 Oct 2005)

pssst.... (CIC has no specific medical standards right now)


----------



## kincanucks (4 Oct 2005)

geo said:
			
		

> pssst.... (CIC has no specific medical standards right now)



While the medical standards for the CIC are not as high as the ones for other entry plans they do exist and people sometimes don't meet them.


----------



## gunner56 (4 Oct 2005)

My app is in,so I'm waiting as fast as I can.Next steps are medical and interview.Meanwhile...I'm enjoying C.I. status with 1292 LdSH cadets in Calgary.No.1 Corps in Alberta,ya know!


----------



## Michael OLeary (4 Oct 2005)

Neill McKay said:
			
		

> Neither term is used in Canada.  We say "release" or "dismiss", according to the circumstances.





			
				gunner56 said:
			
		

> ???Gee,that's odd. My Statement of Service(dated15 Jun 78),and my dad's from WW2,both indicate "Honourable"on line 6(Type of Retirement or Discharge.



I believe the two terms he was speaking of were "dishonourable" and "discharge."

We still use the term "Honourably Released".



> (4) Where an officer or non-commissioned member is released, the notation on his record of service shall be as follows:
> 
> (a) if he is released under Item 1(a), the notation "Dismissed with Disgrace for Misconduct" or "Dismissed for Misconduct", as applicable;
> 
> ...



http://www.admfincs.forces.gc.ca/admfincs/subjects/qr_o/vol1/ch015_e.asp#15.36


----------



## Neill McKay (4 Oct 2005)

gunner56 said:
			
		

> ???Gee,that's odd. My Statement of Service(dated15 Jun 78),and my dad's from WW2,both indicate "Honourable"on line 6(Type of Retirement or Discharge.



I can't comment on anything from 1978, but a document from the 1940s would have been issued by a Service that no longer exists, and was goverened by different regulations from those now in effect.


----------



## 1feral1 (4 Oct 2005)

I am sure mine says "until Hounorably relased".

Thats dated  in January 1995


----------



## Cloud Cover (5 Oct 2005)

Wesley H. Allen said:
			
		

> I am sure mine says "until Hounorably relased".



By God Wes, that sounds painful. Poor Bloke. What was the first lasing like? ;D


----------



## 1feral1 (5 Oct 2005)

Wes


----------



## geo (5 Oct 2005)

Honourably released......... sounds like a marksmanship principled


----------



## Cliff (5 Oct 2005)

Bobert said:
			
		

> I know I may sound crazy, but I'm a civilian so that is my defence. What is the real difference between a honourable and dishonourable discharge?



Most people and employers couldn't care less about the military or what your service record says. Just the same, an honourable is still the way to go.


----------



## dutchie (5 Oct 2005)

Cliff said:
			
		

> Most people and employers couldn't care less about the military or what your service record says. Just the same, an honourable is still the way to go.


The less relavant your service is to the job you're applying for, the less likely they are to dig into that service. However, if you apply for a job and are hoping to use your experience in the forces as an asset, you betcha they'll look into your service. IE- when you need your CF experience the most, it may prevent you from getting that job.

In any case, most employers will ask you why you left the CF and any other jobs. They want to see if there is a pattern, good or bad. You're pretty much hooped once they ask.

In the end, you can kiss any fed gov job goodbye if you dick around your CF career.


----------



## Jaxson (5 Oct 2005)

Cliff said:
			
		

> Most people and employers couldn't care less about the military or what your service record says. Just the same, an honourable is still the way to go.




Its not so much that they dont care, its more or less they do need someone whose trained to blow up bridges, fix tanks or shoot a machine gun while running, to work in an office, unless its the post office


----------



## Fishbone Jones (5 Oct 2005)

Cliff said:
			
		

> Most people and employers couldn't care less about the military or what your service record says. Just the same, an honourable is still the way to go.



Unless it's a Federal, or in some cases a Provincial, job and you are released under either 1 or 2. In those cases it will be near impossible for you to gain employment. As well, if released under 1 or 2, don't bother bidding on any government contracts either.


----------



## Bobert (5 Oct 2005)

Michael O'Leary said:
			
		

> The Canadian Forces doesn't use the term "dishonourable discharge", that is an Americanism that has become common-place through media usage.
> 
> Release terms will be annotated on personnel files as follows:
> 
> ...



What is the difference bettween points 1 and 2.


----------



## dutchie (5 Oct 2005)

Bobert said:
			
		

> What is the difference bettween points 1 and 2.


 I assume you mean what's the difference between misconduct and unsatisfactory service. Well, without cracking my dictionary, or logging on to the DIN, here's my layman's definition:

misconduct: willfully doing something contrary to Q R & O's/CFAO's/NDA. IE- pissing all over your bosses desk, stealing, habitually late/absent (without leave). Basically, you do something you know is wrong. You went to DB, were charged, etc.

unsatisfactory service: you're a screw up. You're just not good at your job. You flunk out of every class you've taken. Basically, you try, but you are not meeting standard, and you're punted.

That's how I understand it. Perhaps someone has the official definition and can post it.


----------



## Michael OLeary (5 Oct 2005)

Bobert said:
			
		

> What is the difference bettween points 1 and 2.



Go to the provided source link.

Scroll down to "TABLE TO ARTICLE 15.01"

Read the "Special Instructions" column giving additional information on each release item.


----------



## 1feral1 (5 Oct 2005)

Civvy job wise, if you do not declare your military service, even if your were dismissed in disgrace, they'll never know in the first place, unless you are applying for certain government jobs, and only then if they do a 'search' which in most cases they don't anyways. Complacency rules in the public service. Thats just how it is. yes, I am speaking of expereince in both provincial (Sask) and federal levels, and for some members of the public service who have excellent service conducting their duties by the book, I am not tarring all of you with the same brush.

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## cdnguy111 (11 Mar 2015)

What happens when you fail your course, like boot camp or the actual trades training that comes after? What does a dishonorable discharge mean and does it make it so you can't work for the gov't? Please explain! Thanks! 

Does this effect getting federal, provincial or municipal governments or is it all 3? Thanks guys!


----------



## GreenWood (11 Mar 2015)

Normally you can get put on the next course, or you re-muster to a different trade, depends on the situation.


----------



## medicineman (11 Mar 2015)

A "dishonourable" discharge is one that is usually the result of a sentence of a disciplinary action...there are other release actions that are a result of not being able to deal with military life, administrative issues, etc.  Is someone threatening you with something because you're not doing well on a course?

MM


----------



## Pusser (11 Mar 2015)

You would not be "dishonourably discharged" for failing a course.  Furthermore, we don't actually use that term (it's an Americanism).  The closest equivalent terms we use are "dismissal" and "dismissal with disgrace."  Both of these are punitive in nature and are usually a result of misconduct (e.g. something criminal - failing a course is not considered misconduct).  If you are found "unsuitable for further service" and "released" as a result (e.g. repeated failure to meet a certain standard), it will generally be with honour.  Any normal release for reasons other than misconduct should not affect future employability in the Public Service (however, being honourably released as an administrative burden for being a raging alcoholic doesn't look good on a resumé), but may affect your ability to re-enrole in the CF at a later date.


----------

