# Dress reg's changed?



## trajectomologist (9 Feb 2005)

I'm a chick, broad, female... whatever. I have long hair and am perfectly capable of putting it in a bun or tucked up french braid for the field. 
I personally have had no reason to wear my hair down in a braid. I can wear a helmet, crew helmet, toque, beret even that new neck gator.
So why is it they came out with this rule... mbrs can wear their hair in a braid as long as it does not extend past the armpit in length. Heck you could even wear it in two braids if you want to. (ref... CANFORGEN #??)
I can understand if you really wanted to do that you could do it in the field, but it poses significant danger as soon as you start working on a vehicle or lighting an immersion heater. But in garrison, argh!
Girls, it looks horrible!!

Next point, hair... females are to have their hair tied up neatly in a bun or in a conservative short hairstyle so that it does not pass the bottom of the shirt collar in length. Okay, maybe its because I am in Ottawa and visit NDHQ frequently but my goodness!!! I have seen more pony tales, poorly tied up buns, messy/frizzy braids, long and I mean long hair wavin' in the wind like a shampoo commercial, even dreads!!! IN UNIFORM!!!! again... horrible!

I just don't get it. What's going on here? We have dress regulations, I'm sure of it. Don't even get me started on make-up...

Realistically, does anyone know what we can do about this? For the CF as a whole.


----------



## George Wallace (9 Feb 2005)

I think you have already alluded to the problem.  It is a CANFORGEN coming out of OTTAWA.  I have seen more disrespect for our Dress Regulations in the vacinity of NDHQ than anywhere else in my life.  Last week I saw an Army Officer in DEUs on his way to work, crossing from the buses at the Rideau Center to NDHQ, wearing a Gortex Combat Jacket.  

Gw


----------



## chriscalow (9 Feb 2005)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> I think you have already alluded to the problem. It is a CANFORGEN coming out of OTTAWA. I have seen more disrespect for our Dress Regulations in the vacinity of NDHQ than anywhere else in my life. Last week I saw an Army Officer in DEUs on his way to work, crossing from the buses at the Rideau Center to NDHQ, wearing a Gortex Combat Jacket.
> 
> Gw




Yes, I see this all the time down around CFRC Toronto and ASU Downsview.  It just looks bad.  The clerk at the medical desk has nasty cornrows and she doesn't look professional at all. It's a shame that this is the first time recruits are being exposed to the CF, and this is what they see.  (btw, I haven't been there once when she wasn't chewing a large wad of gum as well, really gross)


----------



## AmmoTech90 (9 Feb 2005)

George,

As bad as it may look that is an authorized (I hope interim) dress due to the fact that...err I'm not sure, the All Weather Overcoat is not stylish?  I recall seeing a message about it, and more realisticly I have seen Flag Car drivers here in Gagetown wearing that dress when driving RSMs.  I'll leave it at that.

D


----------



## winchable (9 Feb 2005)

Maybe if anyone, of any rank, were allowed to write anyone else of any rank up for poor haircuts things would change.

What could be more embarassing for a Colonel then to have a Private or Corporal write them up for a shyte hair day.

Either that or eveyrone regardless of sex should have shaved heads....no that'll scare people.


----------



## bridges (9 Feb 2005)

Hi everyone,

Yep - I can corroborate the goretex jacket-with-DEUs thing happening in Ottawa.  All officers and NCMs WO & up have to wear DEUs, and my understanding is that someone determined that the DEU coat doesn't provide enough protection in the winter.  Having tried it at -40 wind chill, I can concur!  Yeah, the gortex & dark green wool combo doesn't look the greatest - but it keeps you warm.  

Not a big fan of the braids either.  To my eye it just doesn't look professional or dignified, especially when your headdress is on.  JMHO.


----------



## GIJANE (10 Feb 2005)

yea, not a big fan either...there is this chic in our unit who wears two braids like Heidi, honestly i think it makes you look like a little girl. I had long hair and had no problems putting up, then i got tired of it and just chopped it off 


JANE


----------



## Strike (10 Feb 2005)

Maybe someone in the Navy can back this up.  It was my understanding that the braids came in to effect for health reasons -- wet hair in a bun for 12 hrs plus can cause some nasty growth.  I was told (by some Navy guys while I was in Halifax) that many women who had just come off watch at night where finding that by the end of the day they actually had mold in their hair.  They had to stay up all day and we all know the ship can be a damp environment in bad wx.  Just common sense.

Personally, when I'm in my flt suit I where a braid.  I'm around the aircraft so often and bobby pins and engines don't mix.  As for when I'm in DEUs, I always where a bun.

Of course, there are always people who flout the rules.  While in Winnipeg on course I saw a 2Lt with hair my length wearing it in a ponytail.  Someone must have said something because after that I always saw it in a braid.


----------



## garb811 (10 Feb 2005)

trajectomologist said:
			
		

> Okay, maybe its because I am in Ottawa and visit NDHQ frequently but my goodness!!! I have seen more pony tales, poorly tied up buns, messy/frizzy braids, long and I mean long hair wavin' in the wind like a shampoo commercial, even dreads!!! IN UNIFORM!!!! again... horrible!



...and that's just the male officers, don't get me started on the females! <bu-dah-bump!>   Thank you, I'm here til Thursday, try the veal!


----------



## Thirstyson (10 Feb 2005)

> I think you have already alluded to the problem.  It is a CANFORGEN coming out of OTTAWA.  I have seen more disrespect for our Dress Regulations in the vacinity of NDHQ than anywhere else in my life.  Last week I saw an Army Officer in DEUs on his way to work, crossing from the buses at the Rideau Center to NDHQ, wearing a Gortex Combat Jacket.



I cross that street in my DEUs almost every day in my gortex combat jacket, and I look great! Much better than earlier this year when I wore my old olive combat jacket


----------



## Big Foot (10 Feb 2005)

In reference to the goretex with CFs, even the highest ranking officers here at RMC wear that. I have seen both olive drab and CADPAT goretex worn with CFs. It looks a lot more comfortable than the gabardine but still, it doesn't look overly professional. however, given the choice, I'd take goretex over a gabardine any day. Its such a common occurance, I don't see why they should change it unless they made a goretex jacket similar to navy and air force jackets for the army. Just my thoughts on this.


----------



## bridges (11 Feb 2005)

LOL, MP 00161 !   

That's a good point about the bobby pins & aircraft engines.....   I recant my opinion about braids looking unprofessional - it looks like they can be the <i>most</i> professional choice in some circumstances.   Thanks for pointing this out!


----------



## trajectomologist (11 Feb 2005)

Strike,

I have never had  a problem with having my hair damp and in a bun for well, a day or so... sounds like an urban myth.

As for bobby pins, never worn 'em... they just fall out. But with enough jel/goop... whatever, anyone can have a tidy hairstyle.

cheers


----------



## PViddy (11 Feb 2005)

> even dreads!!!



You gotta be kidding!  i could see how that may look....not normal.

PV


----------



## JANE@home (11 Feb 2005)

trajectomologist said:
			
		

> Strike,
> 
> I have never had   a problem with having my hair damp and in a bun for well, a day or so... sounds like an urban myth.
> 
> ...



Ditto, never wore bobby pins, my hair was always tidy enough even without all the goop in it and also i've worn my hair for a day and taken it out and it was still wet and never have i found any mold....

Jane


----------



## Strike (12 Feb 2005)

> Ditto, never wore bobby pins, my hair was always tidy enough even without all the goop in it and also i've worn my hair for a day and taken it out and it was still wet and never have i found any mold....



But were you guys in a salt water environment?

Whatever.  The point is, bobby pins and a/c engines = bad!

I have my hair in a long braid anyway because I can still keep it tied when I put my helmet on.  I just put the braid under my jacket/LPSV/flt suit so it is out of the way.  It's not very long anyway.

My big pet peeve is when women wear a braid in DEUs.  It looks so unprofessional.

As for the dreads, I did see a woman with corn rows once, however she had gathered the "leftovers" into a bun.  It actually looked very neat.

BTW, you notice how the majority in this conversation are women? Guess the guys are scared that we'd jump all over them if they threw in an opinion.   ;D


----------



## Fishbone Jones (12 Feb 2005)

Strike said:
			
		

> BTW, you notice how the majority in this conversation are women? Guess the guys are scared that we'd jump all over them if they threw in an opinion. ;D



BTW, did you ever check the past posts? We had a large discussion on this stuff a while back and you guys are just going over the same old thing. Maybe that's why it's just the women here. ;D


----------



## qor556 (12 Feb 2005)

recceguy said:
			
		

> BTW, did you ever check the past posts? We had a large discussion on this stuff a while back and you guys are just going over the same old thing. Maybe that's why it's just the women here. ;D


 
yes i guess thats true, heres the link: http://army.ca/forums/threads/22553.0.html 

Well theres no problem with rehashing the issue.
BTW I don't know about you guys (females actually) but i can't get away without having like a million bobby pins in my hair at a time  
As for buns, i still opt for 'em, even on the field if it means having to lower my hair (a pain) whenever i put a helmet on, just looks better. I tried the whole 2 braid hairstyle as a joke at home but I looked too much like pipi longstocking.


----------



## Glorified Ape (12 Feb 2005)

Why not require close-cropped hair - it looks professional, it's hygenic, and it's substantially more difficult to get caught in anything or to set on fire. When did civvie hair-style concerns start becoming reasonable considerations for the CF? Need long, flowing hair? Don't join the CF. Seems simple enough.


----------



## BernDawg (12 Feb 2005)

I heartily concur with the above statement.  I have always believed that we should all be held to one standard of dress.  That includes hair-styles.  One way or the other.  Women could cut their hair or we should be able to grow ours out to accommodate current styles.


----------



## JANE@home (13 Feb 2005)

Glorified Ape said:
			
		

> Why not require close-cropped hair - it looks professional, it's hygenic, and it's substantially more difficult to get caught in anything or to set on fire. When did civvie hair-style concerns start becoming reasonable considerations for the CF? Need long, flowing hair? Don't join the CF. Seems simple enough.



Actually i cut mine off (it was way long) , i couldn't fit my helmet over my stupid bun so after the ex i went and cut it all off...ahhh....so much better now 

Jane


----------



## Glorified Ape (14 Feb 2005)

JANE@home said:
			
		

> Actually i cut mine off (it was way long) , i couldn't fit my helmet over my stupid bun so after the ex i went and cut it all off...ahhh....so much better now
> 
> Jane



Now if we could only manage to get long hair prohibited in the CF, we could spare others the suffering you experienced by having long hair.  ;D


----------



## Strike (14 Feb 2005)

I have a hard enough time finding a date as it is.  Now you want me to cut my hair?  Once the guy finds out what I do, well, we all know what he'd be thinking.  LOL.  BTW, I have a big head and look horrible with short hair.  (Done that already)


----------



## matt22 (14 Feb 2005)

(this is not designed to make anybody mad, but a sincere question)

If people are always so concerned with the fact that there is a gender gap in the forces, why does the administration not create "one set of standards" that everyone could follow. I believe that this might just be the way to deal with this situation without blowing it into something larger and out of context. Yes, it is a sacrifice, but thats the army.


----------



## NCRCrow (14 Feb 2005)

Lets talk about dress Horror stories. 

I was on TD in Kingston for 2 weeks last summer and saw some amazing orders of dress.

While driving through the PMQ's, my co-pilot (Combat Arms type) :threat: said look at that. I slowed down. It was this OS (Ordinary Seaman) wearing slippers eating an apple with no headdress on his way to work.
I had to restrain my winger, as he tore Slippers a new hole. That was 0730 in the morning, needless to say we visited his WO for a coffee and chat and we arrived late to our conference.

The next morning we are at the messhall on the McNaughton side and this Pte. female in uniform walks in with a ring a ding in her nose. 

Geez, ol' infantry eagle eyes(co-pilot) spots her from a 30 yrds and loses it, old army style.We go back to the same school to talk to the same WO for another coffee.

Late for our conference again......... as we drive past the school at 1600, a platoon is doing foot drill and my co-pilot cracks a wry smile.

Another reason for braids for females at sea, is that hair dryers in the mess decks are way too loud and would not be appreciated.

as for NDHQ, What can u do????


----------



## Glorified Ape (15 Feb 2005)

Strike said:
			
		

> I have a hard enough time finding a date as it is.   Now you want me to cut my hair?   Once the guy finds out what I do, well, we all know what he'd be thinking.   LOL.   BTW, I have a big head and look horrible with short hair.   (Done that already)



Hey, I look dumb with a shaved head but what can you do? I get used to looking dumb - it happens pretty often. 



			
				oakley said:
			
		

> (this is not designed to make anybody mad, but a sincere question)
> 
> If people are always so concerned with the fact that there is a gender gap in the forces, why does the administration not create "one set of standards" that everyone could follow. I believe that this might just be the way to deal with this situation without blowing it into something larger and out of context. Yes, it is a sacrifice, but thats the army.



I think, though I could be wrong since I'm far from militarily experienced, that the discrepancies in standards between men and women were probably the result of over-capitulation to the PC crowd. Equality wasn't enough, it had to be equal access to all the good stuff, with as much avoidance of equality in the bad stuff as possible - like having to meet the same physical standards on entry and re-certification or having as strict guidelines on hair. I'm pretty sure the same thing happened with physical standards in the police and fire departments but I'm not absolutely positive. I recall some woman suing the government because the fire department's health standards were too difficult for women to reach. Boo-hoo - the standards are there for a reason.


----------



## Strike (15 Feb 2005)

> I think, though I could be wrong since I'm far from militarily experienced, that the discrepancies in standards between men and women were probably the result of over-capitulation to the PC crowd. Equality wasn't enough, it had to be equal access to all the good stuff, with as much avoidance of equality in the bad stuff as possible - like having to meet the same physical standards on entry and re-certification or having as strict guidelines on hair. I'm pretty sure the same thing happened with physical standards in the police and fire departments but I'm not absolutely positive. I recall some woman suing the government because the fire department's health standards were too difficult for women to reach. Boo-hoo - the standards are there for a reason.



Actually, it's only the fitness standards that are different, taking into account the different physiologies between men and women.  An example is that women tend to be able to do sit-ups w/o difficulty but, due to C of G, have problems w/ full push-ups.  Now, when it comes to something like the battle fitness test, the standards are the same, because the test is based on real world requirements.  This is pretty much the same way things are run for both police and firefighters.  The woman who sued the fire department did so because the fitness standards were not representative for men and women even though they already had a task/procedure based fitness test in addition to the fitness test.

Catch what I mean?

Ape,

As for the shaved head, personally, I like the look.


----------



## qor556 (15 Feb 2005)

Strike said:
			
		

> Actually, it's only the fitness standards that are different, taking into account the different physiologies between men and women.  An example is that women tend to be able to do sit-ups w/o difficulty but, due to C of G, have problems w/ full push-ups.  Now, when it comes to something like the battle fitness test, the standards are the same, because the test is based on real world requirements.  This is pretty much the same way things are run for both police and firefighters.  The woman who sued the fire department did so because the fitness standards were not representative for men and women even though they already had a task/procedure based fitness test in addition to the fitness test.
> 
> Catch what I mean?
> 
> ...



Good luck trying to find women to join the army then. Its difficult as it is and times have changed, thats going to go over really well if you need to tell all the women that are joining the army that they need to shave their heads first. Sure, there are going to be some that are OK with it, but realistically, the majority will not.

Except the fitness standard, as i said previously, on the field a soldier is a soldier... it should not be any different. Bullets do not care if you are male or female.

Anyways, during BIQ, SQ and on both genders are held at the same standard. Therefore shouldn't the fitness standard be the same? Its only logical.


----------



## George Wallace (15 Feb 2005)

Dress and Deportment in the CF has fallen down in the last fifteen years.  RSMs are not doing their jobs.  As for Cbt Coats being worn over CFs, again the RSMs have dropped the ball.  40 below in Ottawa is no excuse, as most of these guys are only walking from their office to a warm staffcar or to catch a OC Transpo Bus.  I am sure that the issue Gabardine is warm enough for that.  We have to wear it on Remembrance Day or on an Honour Guard waiting for one of those clowns to arrive fashionably late.  RMC types wearing that Mixed Dress futher points to the degradation of our Dress Codes.  

AS for PC policies.  We started with Turbans, and then went to allowing Natives to wear Braids, so why not women?  I believe in a strongly enforced Dress Code, not this nonsense.  It can lay some of it's roots in SHARP Trg and that DIFFERENTIAL Trg where everyone is an 'X' or a' Y'.  BULL!  We wear a UNIFORM so that we are uniform.  Don't promote our differences.  That promotes bias and prejudice.  Promote what makes us the SAME.  In the past, when two Canadian Soldiers approached a body of foreigners on Tour our Professionalism showed in our Uniformity.  Now if we approach as two different 'types', it can cause an incident.  A Palestinian may for instance treat a distinctly Jewish Canadian Soldier in a more hostile manner than if his only distinguishing marks were those of a Canadian Soldier (Neutral).   That "X" and "Y" bullshit is wrong - We should be showing that we are all "Green" (or Blue in the Air Force and Navy).

GW


----------



## buzgo (15 Feb 2005)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Dress and Deportment in the CF has fallen down in the last fifteen years.  RSMs are not doing their jobs.  As for Cbt Coats being worn over CFs, again the RSMs have dropped the ball.  40 below in Ottawa is no excuse, as most of these guys are only walking from their office to a warm staffcar or to catch a OC Transpo Bus.  I am sure that the issue Gabardine is warm enough for that.  We have to wear it on Remembrance Day or on an Honour Guard waiting for one of those clowns to arrive fashionably late.  RMC types wearing that Mixed Dress futher points to the degradation of our Dress Codes.



I'm pretty sure that there was a CANFORGEN released about the coat issue. No one dropped the ball. I've seen CWO Losier (NDHQ CWO) wearing his and he enforces dress policy (attempts to I guess) at NDHQ.


----------



## George Wallace (15 Feb 2005)

signalsguy

Think of what you just said......the RSM in charge of NDHQ who enforces dress policy........

As for a CANFORGEN....perhaps there is; but why?  Could it be that someone wanted to justify their wearing a form of Mixed Dress because they don't like to wear a long coat and scarf in the city?

On another point....what happened to those CANEX Parka's we could buy to wear with our CF if we didn't find the Gaberdine appropriate?  I see Air Force Pers wearing theirs.

Don't try to kid a kidder....  ;D

GW


----------



## childs56 (15 Feb 2005)

I for one have worn the good old gaberdiene to and fro work while marching in -40 weather. I have to say the gortex sure makes a difference. Not to mention if it rains out while cold. All whining aside it is a standard of dress, the old coat really does not cut it for keeping you warm i was shovelling snow last year in the same -40 weather with my gaberdien and it was to the point it really got cold. Not to menton the people at NDHQ should have jackets that arent full of dirt and cam paint as they never see the field, Unless visiting the park is the field. Bottom line here is we need a standard of dress, it may make considerations as to what and where a female can do or a some one of different descent can do, or wear the bottom line is we all need to look as professional as we can at all times. If yuou wear a turban make sure it is the proper one for the job you are doing, a bright orange one in the field does not make me feel to confident about your right to wear one, yes it happend.  if you have to have a nose piercing then for god sakes take it out before you come to work, i dont want to see it. as for the braid issue. in all my time of working in and outside of the military i have been told for any females to keep their hair up and out of the way, ie in a bun or hair net, so as not to get caught on something, sure would suck to get your long hair caught in the breech of a .50cal while firing or the rad fan of a MLVW while checking the transmission fluid level. The comment about bobby pins on the flight line is true, the same can be said about your hair not being up and out of the way, it can may and will get caught in soem form of equipment sooner or later, i seen the after math of a female after her hair got caught on a drill press not a nice picture, had she of had it tied back liek it was suppose to have it would have never got caught..
we have so many excuses for why we need to have things a certain way and we strive to change things so that it is more convienent for ourselves. we never really look at the affects it has on the people we work with, and their morale or safety. 
At the end of the day lets all be as professional as we can. And stop whining about how the military wronged me by not allowing my nose piercing or my long hair. And guys if you look like you should be in a 60's concert think about how much you want to be part of an organization that requires you to maintain a level of discipline not sought by most. cheers
UBIQUE


----------



## GIJANE (16 Feb 2005)

Strike said:
			
		

> I have a hard enough time finding a date as it is.   Now you want me to cut my hair?   Once the guy finds out what I do,  well, we all know what he'd be thinking.   LOL.   BTW, I have a big head and look horrible with short hair.   (Done that already)



You lost me...what would they be thinking?? I couldn't care care less if men knew what i did  (for a living) 

Jane


----------



## Glorified Ape (16 Feb 2005)

Strike said:
			
		

> Actually, it's only the fitness standards that are different, taking into account the different physiologies between men and women.   An example is that women tend to be able to do sit-ups w/o difficulty but, due to C of G, have problems w/ full push-ups.   Now, when it comes to something like the battle fitness test, the standards are the same, because the test is based on real world requirements.   This is pretty much the same way things are run for both police and firefighters.   The woman who sued the fire department did so because the fitness standards were not representative for men and women even though they already had a task/procedure based fitness test in addition to the fitness test.
> 
> Catch what I mean?
> 
> ...



I think I get you - the problem was that women who could complete the task-based fitness test were being excluded because of the universal standards in the general fitness test? I seem to remember heart-rate ceilings being one of the main problems. Whether that's a good reason to lower the standards is debatable, I guess. While passing the task test does imply an ability to do the things necessary to the job, the physical demands of the job in practical application often exceed the standards required by a task test, from what I understand. 

As for the CF, push-ups and such should be the same, I think. If I have to be able to run my weight to a minimum of 6 in the shuttle run, why does a female only have to reach 4? If I have to do at least 19 push-ups, why only 9 for women? I realise it's easier for men to do 19 push-ups (on average) than a women but should we start lowering the physical standards for heavy-set or short men and women because they have to work harder to reach standard? Maybe I'm off base, as I said - I haven't been in long. 

As for the shaved heads, did you mean you like them on women? We had a female infantry ocdt. on IAP with us (another platoon) and she went the shaved-head route. I thought she looked better than I do with a shaved head since she didn't have a mean cowlick like mine and her head was a nicer shape. I thought the troops looked alot sharper without pony tails, buns, hair nets, or whisps of hair sticking out from under their berets and helmets, not just because it was neater but because they all looked the same (or as close as you can get).


----------



## combat_medic (16 Feb 2005)

I have very long hair, and wear it in a bun all the time. The only time I have ever worn a braid is to fire weapons in the prone position. The bun tends to push my helmet over my eyes, and is a b*tch when trying to keep a sight picture, same with the old Gilligan-stule bush cap (no problems with the new Tillie hat though). 

However, yes, I've seen plenty of people abuse the dress regs, men and women alike. I like having a little flexibility in regs for different situations. It's nice to be able to wear a little (tasteful) makeup for a formal mess dinner, and also nice to not have to shove your hair under a helmet in the field, but it can be taken too far, and I that's probably why God invented the CSM - to keep us all in line when it comes to dress and deportment. 

Oh, and any mold that would grow in your hair in a bun, would grow just as well inside a braid. Let's just dispell that myth right off the bat.


----------



## Strike (17 Feb 2005)

> As for the shaved heads, did you mean you like them on women? We had a female infantry ocdt. on IAP with us (another platoon) and she went the shaved-head route. I thought she looked better than I do with a shaved head since she didn't have a mean cowlick like mine and her head was a nicer shape. I thought the troops looked alot sharper without pony tails, buns, hair nets, or whisps of hair sticking out from under their berets and helmets, not just because it was neater but because they all looked the same (or as close as you can get).



Ape,

I meant on guys.  I was trying to boost your ego a bit. ;D

Quite a few guys in my unit have shaved heads.  Some because they are losing their har and others because it feels better under their helmet.  Me?  I throw my braid under my flt suit and the LPSV pretty much holds it there.

As for the whole fitness standard (not task standard) thing, the whole thing is flawed to some extent anyway, as previously pointed out, when considering HR and body side/shape.  I could go on but I would only end up getting mad and going off on a tangent.  Suggest if anyone wants to discuss that then another thread should be started.


----------



## Glorified Ape (17 Feb 2005)

Strike said:
			
		

> Ape,
> 
> I meant on guys.   I was trying to boost your ego a bit. ;D
> 
> ...



Good idea, as for the ego boost - thanks, though I'll see if your opinion's changed should you ever actually see my head.  ;D


----------



## dogger1936 (2 Dec 2010)

Hi guys. Driving down Montreal road today I saw 3 per's (all maj and above) wearing their cadpat green gortex jacket over thier DEU. Has something changed to allow this or as  Isuspect these members displaying poor dress to our public in the national capital region?


----------



## AmmoTech90 (2 Dec 2010)

It is allowed (at least in the NCR).  Good practice or not, who knows, take it up with someone on the dress committee.

I suspect it is because the Navy and Air Force are comfortable winter jackets and Army people are too cheap to keep getting the all-weather coat dry cleaned.

Anyone got a Canex parka they are willing to part with and is still in respectable shape btw?


----------



## dogger1936 (2 Dec 2010)

AmmoTech90 said:
			
		

> It is allowed (at least in the NCR).  Good practice or not, who knows, take it up with someone on the dress committee.
> 
> I suspect it is because the Navy and Air Force are comfortable winter jackets and Army people are too cheap to keep getting the all-weather coat dry cleaned.
> 
> Anyone got a Canex parka they are willing to part with and is still in respectable shape btw?



Thanks I learned something new! I had no idea it was allowed.


----------



## OldSolduer (2 Dec 2010)

dogger1936 said:
			
		

> Hi guys. Driving down Montreal road today I saw 3 per's (all maj and above) wearing their cadpat green gortex jacket over thier DEU. Has something changed to allow this or as  Isuspect these members displaying poor dress to our public in the national capital region?


Its an Ottawa thing. I personally think its very unprofessional, BUT the Land Force doesn't want to spend money on garrison type stuff and rightly so. Now if I were the CDS....I'd be saying we issued you a CF Green overcoat....bloody well wear it. But I'm not.


----------



## medicineman (2 Dec 2010)

It's not just an Ottawa thing - I see it pretty much everywhere I go (out here included).

MM


----------



## OldSolduer (2 Dec 2010)

medicineman said:
			
		

> It's not just an Ottawa thing - I see it pretty much everywhere I go (out here included).
> 
> MM


Not in Winnipeg or shilo


----------



## medicineman (2 Dec 2010)

Excellent...now we just have to find (a) if this is a local thing and or (b) if it isn't, who's the goober that's allowing this to go on - it is mainly officers I see dressing like this.  I wear either my sweater and or my CANEX windbreaker if something over top is required, as a combat jacket makes you look like a tard (or a Russian, not sure which is worse).  I have my garbedeen as well, but it rarely gets cold enough to need it.

MM


----------



## JMesh (2 Dec 2010)

From CFP 265, Ch 6 (2008-05-14), page 2-1-4A/2-1-4B

17A. The optional wearing of Navy, Army and Air
Force operational Gore-Tex parkas with DEU No. 3
orders of dress are authorized:

a. for all Navy personnel, the Navy Gore-Tex
parka shall not be worn with No. 3B
(summer dress) (NSN 8415-21-920-2414);

b. for all Army personnel, those items are:

(1) the common olive green parka,
extreme cold weather (NSN 8415-21-
870-5571);

(2) the Improved Environment Clothing
System (IECS) parka, extreme cold
(NSN 8415-21-913-5335);

(3) the coat, cold weather (NSN 8415-21-
913-5333); and

(4) the forthcoming Canadian Army
Disruptive Pattern (CADPAT) parka
and coat;

c. for all Air Force personnel the intermediate
jacket (NSN 8415-21-910-8219) and the
cold weather parka (NSN 8415-21-910-
8195).


----------



## dogger1936 (2 Dec 2010)

Perfect! Thanks for that!

I'm willing to bet MOST who see it for the first time near blow a gasket. I know I've never seen it in Petawawa, Gagetown or Edmonton. It made my Snr NCO blood boil.....on that I shoulda known the dress reg..MY BAD!!


----------



## Occam (2 Dec 2010)

medicineman said:
			
		

> Excellent...now we just have to find (a) if this is a local thing and or (b) if it isn't, who's the goober that's allowing this to go on - it is mainly officers I see dressing like this.  I wear either my sweater and or my CANEX windbreaker if something over top is required, as a combat jacket makes you look like a tard (or a Russian, not sure which is worse).  I have my garbedeen as well, but it rarely gets cold enough to need it.
> 
> MM



You just answered your own question.  Ottawa is a lot colder than Esquimalt, and the reason you see officers wearing it is probably a fallout effect from Ottawa.  Working dress for WO and above in Ottawa is DEU, unless you're one of the "operational dot com" people at Startop.  The rest of the unwashed masses wear CADPAT to/from work most of the time.  Personally, I don't see a problem with the CADPAT jacket over DEU...although I wish they'd adopt more easily readable slip-on rank insignia like us AF types.  Nothing like seeing the maple leaf without chevrons under it until you're nearly past them...



			
				JMesh said:
			
		

> From CFP 265, Ch 6 (2008-05-14), page 2-1-4A/2-1-4B
> 
> 17A. The optional wearing of Navy, Army and Air
> Force operational Gore-Tex parkas with DEU No. 3
> ...



There you have it.


----------



## medicineman (2 Dec 2010)

It does look dumb - makes you wonder why we were issued the overcoats  :.

I guess I don't gotta like it, just gotta deal with it.

MM


----------



## FDO (3 Dec 2010)

As far as I'm concerned if your in the field, on a ship or working on a flight line then operational dress (NCDs, CADPAT) is what you should wear. If your in an office in the middle of downtown Ottawa (or any other city) you should be in DEUs. There is no reason you need to blend in with your surroundings in a office!!


----------



## Occam (3 Dec 2010)

Retired FDO said:
			
		

> As far as I'm concerned if your in the field, on a ship or working on a flight line then operational dress (NCDs, CADPAT) is what you should wear. If your in an office in the middle of downtown Ottawa (or any other city) you should be in DEUs. There is no reason you need to blend in with your surroundings in a office!!



That's all fine and dandy until you're posted to Ottawa and you have to drive a truck....or pull a 50-pair cable coated with Tube-Lube through a conduit...or crawl on your hands and knees wiring up cubicles for power & data.  If the CF wants to reimburse people for screwing up their DEU while doing the above jobs, that's fine...but I think the money could go to better uses.


----------



## Michael OLeary (3 Dec 2010)

dogger1936 said:
			
		

> Perfect! Thanks for that!
> 
> I'm willing to bet MOST who see it for the first time near blow a gasket. I know I've never seen it in Petawawa, Gagetown or Edmonton. It made my Snr NCO blood boil.....on that I shoulda known the dress reg..MY BAD!!



The war must be over, we're back to arguing about dress in garrison.    ;D


----------



## Journeyman (3 Dec 2010)

Michael O'Leary said:
			
		

> The war must be over, we're back to arguing about dress in garrison.    ;D


And with the inevitable pendulum-swing from " :yellow: _We Support the Troops_," to "soldiers and dogs keep off the lawn," the 'low-shoe mo-fos' in NDHQ will distance themselves from the CADPAT-wearing hooligans, and will insist on DEU for all.    :nod:


----------



## FDO (3 Dec 2010)

Occam said:
			
		

> That's all fine and dandy until you're posted to Ottawa and you have to drive a truck....or pull a 50-pair cable coated with Tube-Lube through a conduit...or crawl on your hands and knees wiring up cubicles for power & data.  If the CF wants to reimburse people for screwing up their DEU while doing the above jobs, that's fine...but I think the money could go to better uses.



Like I said If your in an office.....

Obviously doing dirty jobs would be the same as operational. I didn't think I needed to go through ALL the tasks that would require operational dress! I was hoping we could use our common sense about this one. But yes I agree even in the middle of downtown Ottawa there are some that NEED to be in other than DEUs.


----------



## Biggoals2bdone (3 Dec 2010)

This is about the dress regs but not the cadpat jacket with DEU.

i've seen/heard many different things depending on the base i'm at, or who i'm talking to, i'm wondering if it actually is written black on white (or whatever permutation you like) if the CADPAT fleece sweatshirt is to be worn UNDER regular combats (which would be ridiculous IMHO...why put a rank flap on it to!) or if it can replace the combat shirt or be worn overtop of it. 

I've looked, but for some reason the computers at work never let me download the whole manual!  :threat:


----------



## JSR OP (3 Dec 2010)

Biggoals2bdone said:
			
		

> if the CADPAT fleece sweatshirt is to be worn UNDER regular combats (which would be ridiculous IMHO...why put a rank flap on it to!) or if it can replace the combat shirt or be worn overtop of it.



Ah, the question that comes up year after year after year....


----------



## PMedMoe (3 Dec 2010)

Biggoals2bdone said:
			
		

> i'm wondering if it actually is written black on white (or whatever permutation you like) if the CADPAT fleece sweatshirt is to be worn UNDER regular combats (which would be ridiculous IMHO...why put a rank flap on it to!) or if it can replace the combat shirt or be worn overtop of it.



Most bases only allow it as an outer garment when in the field.
There's nothing specific in the Dress Regs except for this:



> 4. Base commanders or commanding officers
> may authorize or restrict the wear of operational
> dress in messes and institutes and other
> designated areas.


----------



## George Wallace (3 Dec 2010)

Biggoals2bdone said:
			
		

> This is about the dress regs but not the cadpat jacket with DEU.
> 
> I've seen/heard many different things depending on the base I'm at, or who I'm talking to, I'm wondering if it actually is written black on white (or whatever permutation you like) if the CADPAT fleece sweatshirt is to be worn UNDER regular combats (which would be ridiculous IMHO...why put a rank flap on it to!) or if it can replace the combat shirt or be worn overtop of it.
> 
> I've looked, but for some reason the computers at work never let me download the whole manual!  :threat:



I am sure that if you find another version of the manual, (look at the file size) you will be able to find the complete manual.

If you want to get pickie; why is there a rank flap on the CADPAT shirt, if you are going to wear a jacket, parka or rainjacket over it?   >  Why is there a rank flap on the parka, if you are going to wear a cam cover over it?  >  >


----------



## Occam (3 Dec 2010)

Retired FDO said:
			
		

> Like I said If your in an office.....
> 
> Obviously doing dirty jobs would be the same as operational. I didn't think I needed to go through ALL the tasks that would require operational dress! I was hoping we could use our common sense about this one. But yes I agree even in the middle of downtown Ottawa there are some that NEED to be in other than DEUs.



Just making sure you're aware that with very few exceptions, that's all there is in Ottawa - offices.  The guys who fix your computers work in offices.  The folks who pull cable work in offices.  The truckers at Uplands dwell in cubicles too, when they're not in their vehicles.

Blanket rules dealing with just about anything don't work particularly well in the NCR.


----------



## George Wallace (3 Dec 2010)

Topic merged.

As you can see, we have been discussing these points for the last decade.


----------



## dogger1936 (3 Dec 2010)

Michael O'Leary said:
			
		

> The war must be over, we're back to arguing about dress in garrison.    ;D



 ;D
If it makes it any better ...I was up getting a MRI on a injury sustained by those ******** over there!


----------



## Michael OLeary (3 Dec 2010)

dogger1936 said:
			
		

> ;D
> If it makes it any better ...I was up getting a MRI on a injury sustained by those ******** over there!



Hopefully not too serious, and that you'll make a full recovery.

But is does add the irony of contrasting the many posts we've seen about how guys "over there" feel they should have a free hand in choosing what they wear, when and how; and now are coming home to complain about people in the NCR are not following dress regs.    ;D


----------



## PMedMoe (3 Dec 2010)

Michael O'Leary said:
			
		

> complain about *people in the NCR* are *not following dress regs*.    ;D



C'mon, that's like shooting fish in a barrel.  They're just so easy to pick on.

Personally observed:

Maj wearing fleece as an outer garment (NOT at Connaught Ranges, either);

Officer (Capt?) with shirt sleeves rolled to mid-forearm (this _could_ be an Air Force thing as I also observed it in Trenton);

Several females in CADPAT with _huge_ purses  (why one would be needed at all is beyond me);

.......the list goes on.     :


----------



## dapaterson (3 Dec 2010)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> C'mon, that's like shooting fish in a barrel.  They're just so easy to pick on.
> 
> Personally observed:
> 
> ...



Let's talk women's shoes in DEU...  is there a standard?  And do 4" stilettos meet it?


----------



## Journeyman (3 Dec 2010)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> And do 4" stilettos meet it?


 Hell yes!   :nod:


----------



## PMedMoe (3 Dec 2010)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Let's talk women's shoes in DEU...  is there a standard?  And do 4" stilettos meet it?



Yes, there is a standard and no, 4" stilettos do not meet it.  

Much as JM would like to see differently.   


From the Dress Regs:



> with a standard (not spiked or wedged) heel approximately 5 cm (2 in.) in height.



I guess some people are quite lenient with "approximately".  No different than the AB I picked up a week ago for her hair length (below the bottom of the collar - no chit).

Although, I did find out that I _can_ wear patent leather pumps:



> With women’s skirt, beige or black plain-pattern nylons; black leather/patent leather pumps.


   ;D


----------



## Biggoals2bdone (3 Dec 2010)

Wallace as idiotic as your argument was...i'm still compelled to answer.  I made the comment about the Fleece having a flap, because then that would imply it can be worn over the combat shirt, because your most outer layer other then the white TACTICAL camo has to have a rank designator on it.  Me saying why put a rank flap if its meant to be worn as an UNDERGARMENT is completely warranted, because you don't see rank flaps on our TSHIRTS and LONG JOHNS do you?  As mentioned there's a rank flap on the combat shirt because it can be worn as an outer layer, yes you can wear a jacket over it...but come summer time when no jacket is needed you will wear only that shirt (+ undershirt) therefore you need to be able to have a rank designator on it, I didn't think I needed to explain something so simple.


----------



## George Wallace (3 Dec 2010)

That's OK.  I figured a "simple" question required a "simple" answer, as this topic has been covered almost biannually by folks like you who never cease to question why when they don't like the answers or direction given.


----------



## OldSolduer (4 Dec 2010)

Biggoals2bdone said:
			
		

> Wallace as idiotic as your argument was...i'm still compelled to answer.  I made the comment about the Fleece having a flap, because then that would imply it can be worn over the combat shirt, because your most outer layer other then the white TACTICAL camo has to have a rank designator on it.  Me saying why put a rank flap if its meant to be worn as an UNDERGARMENT is completely warranted, because you don't see rank flaps on our TSHIRTS and LONG JOHNS do you?  As mentioned there's a rank flap on the combat shirt because it can be worn as an outer layer, yes you can wear a jacket over it...but come summer time when no jacket is needed you will wear only that shirt (+ undershirt) therefore you need to be able to have a rank designator on it, I didn't think I needed to explain something so simple.



I may not be a mod, but I know a smart a** when I see one.


----------



## Kat Stevens (4 Dec 2010)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> I may not be a mod, but I know a smart a** when I see one.



You should, I've been here for years.


----------



## George Wallace (4 Dec 2010)

Regarding wearing of Fleece:

CANFORGEN regarding fleece kit

Fleece Top

Search "Wearing Fleece" brings up a couple dozen topics.


----------



## OldSolduer (4 Dec 2010)

I think the answer is pretty apparent, at least to me:

In garrison Fleece shall be worn under the combat shirt.

In the field, the RSM usually directs how fleece shall be worn.


----------



## Nfld Sapper (4 Dec 2010)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> I think the answer is pretty apparent, at least to me:
> 
> In garrison Fleece shall be worn under the combat shirt.
> 
> In the field, the RSM usually directs how fleece shall be worn.



Kinda like how the old Sweater,Wool,Itchy, Green was worn under the combat shirt eventhough it had epaulets....


----------



## Biggoals2bdone (4 Dec 2010)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> I may not be a mod, but I know a smart a** when I see one.



I respond in kind to what I receive.

I won't snap to all proper and like to someone who follows me around on here and CONSTANTLY tries to get a rise out of me.  He's made it a history of getting in my face, so to speak for no apparent reason.

Like the saying goes respect is earned.  Just like you can dislike a man/person, but still respect the rank, I respect the fact that he's been on these boards longer then I have and that odds are he's older and higher ranking in the CF, but a) rank is not a factor on here, and b) I wont just take crap sittin down, and i'd rather just hekeep his distance from me altogether.


----------



## navymich (4 Dec 2010)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> Although, I did find out that I _can_ wear patent leather pumps:
> ;D



Saw your quote from the regs on this.  Is it new?  Then again, I haven't looked through it completely in a long time, usually just bits and pieces.  But I am sure that you didn't used to be able to wear patent.


----------



## Thompson_JM (6 Dec 2010)

Can I wear Paten Leather Footwear too?


It'll make polishing a whole lot easier.....  ;D


----------



## armyvern (6 Dec 2010)

airmich said:
			
		

> Saw your quote from the regs on this.  Is it new?  Then again, I haven't looked through it completely in a long time, usually just bits and pieces.  But I am sure that you didn't used to be able to wear patent.



It must be new; only air and naval uniformed females were allowed to wear patent leather pumps last time I checked (although I have seen a few Army types [usually Jr Officers] wearing them).


----------



## PMedMoe (6 Dec 2010)

The quote is from Chapter 6, Appendix 1, Annex B:  ARMY BRANCH AND REGIMENTAL Nos. 2 AND 2A ORDERS OF DRESS - so I'm guessing it means only with Mess Kit.

However, in Annex E of the same chapter it states:  



> 10. Pumps, black or (navy) white:
> 
> a. Civilian plain pattern, leather or patent leather, oval vamp, closed toe and heel, displaying no decorative features and with a standard (not spiked or wedged) heel approximately 5 cm (2 in.) in height.
> 
> ...


----------

