# Appropriate Dress for non-deploying HQs (Split:Return To Old Army Officer Rank Insignia)



## Pusser (26 Dec 2010)

I still haven't figured out why anyone working in a headquarters would be wearing anything other than service dress.  Neither CADPAT nor NCD are appropriate in an office.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (26 Dec 2010)

Pusser said:
			
		

> I still haven't figured out why anyone working in a headquarters would be wearing anything other than service dress.  Neither CADPAT nor NCD are appropriate in an office.



That has it's own thread already (although I'm not sure where).

Let's stay on topic.

Milnet.ca Staff


----------



## McG (28 Dec 2010)

It has been a frequent discussion, but I think it has always been tangents in other threads ... until now - thread split.

I think all our static institutional HQs should be in DEU.


----------



## quadrapiper (28 Dec 2010)

I'd add to that - to encourage this, DEU needs to be given a cut, cloth, and fit going-over to ensure it's comfortable and looks smart.

For one thing, get something (a fleece pullover, or the old-style ribbed pattern, maybe) to replace the new sweater. Even at my minimal levels of wear it gets very baggy and shapeless very fast - gone through three in four years, while the old ribbed sweater I picked up at sixteen and beat the hell out of still looks sharp.

Cough up a decent summer rig for the Army and Air Force, as well. There's still/already the tri-service tropical tan order of dress on the books; someone'd just have to authorize it as a summer rig for Air and Army (and pay for its issue, of course).


----------



## dimsum (28 Dec 2010)

quadrapiper said:
			
		

> I'd add to that - to encourage this, DEU needs to be given a cut, cloth, and fit going-over to ensure it's comfortable and looks smart.
> 
> For one thing, get something (a fleece pullover, or the old-style ribbed pattern, maybe) to replace the new sweater. Even at my minimal levels of wear it gets very baggy and shapeless very fast - gone through three in four years, while the old ribbed sweater I picked up at sixteen and beat the hell out of still looks sharp.
> 
> Cough up a decent summer rig for the Army and Air Force, as well. There's still/already the tri-service tropical tan order of dress on the books; someone'd just have to authorize it as a summer rig for Air and Army (and pay for its issue, of course).



Second the old v. new sweater.  I'm still trying to find an old AF one since the new one (which is already intentionally too small) stretches too much.  I saw a senior officer (AF) in the tans while overseas recently and had to ask some of the other people what it was.


----------



## medicineman (28 Dec 2010)

I can't say I'd think we'd look that good wandering around in shorts and knee socks, to be honest, the words "Fashion Nightmare" come to mind...my 3B's are comfy enough as is thanks.

MM


----------



## dimsum (28 Dec 2010)

I might have seen something different then.  It was the same cut as the 3Bs, just in tan.  Come to think of it, I remember seeing it in Shake Hands With The Devil (Roy Dupuis version).


----------



## quadrapiper (28 Dec 2010)

3D, at least according to my copy of the 265, includes trousers. The shorts are optional.


----------



## medicineman (28 Dec 2010)

There is a tropical dress with shorts as well as the long pants - don't forget that the timeline of the movie in question was early 90's, when the Army still wore tan summer uniforms.  I don't think we need to go back to tans - Air Force actually has summer weight uniforms and the Army 3B's aren't that bad that we need to change out.  The money spent on that could be used for more important things.

And I stand corrected on the shorts issues.


----------



## dapaterson (29 Dec 2010)

StarTop road folks were the first to decide that the base Orders did not apply to them, and moved into CADPAT to demonstrate their "operational focus".  The Army HQ wannabes quickly did the same.

It has nothing to do with "an operational focus" and everything to do with too many staff being too lazy to press and polish their day to day clothes.

Unfortunately, Comd CFSU(O) is a Colonel, and the HQs that are lodgers are commanded by generals with varying numbers of leaves on their shoulders.

Here's a question, though: what's the cost differential between DEU and CADPAT?  By wearing out a lot of CADPAT a*s-first in the chairs in NDHQ (and in the chairs in the four Land Focre Area HQs) are we not spending money on NP that could find a much more productive use?


----------



## High Lander (29 Dec 2010)

"StarTop road folks were the first to decide that the base Orders did not apply to them, and moved into CADPAT to demonstrate their "operational focus".  The Army HQ wannabes quickly did the same."
Strike 1 - It wasn't a question of whether the "Orders' applied to them.  Commanders have the "authority" to determine orders of dress as they deem appropriate as long as it conforms with CF guidelines.  As for the Army, to use the term "wannabes" is inappropriate.  The Army truly struggled with the view of itself and how others viewed it coming out of the '90's and into the new millenium.  The Army went back and forth on this issue a couple of times actually.  It has more to do with a lack of institutional confidence.

"Here's a question, though: what's the cost differential between DEU and CADPAT?  By wearing out a lot of CADPAT a*s-first in the chairs in NDHQ (and in the chairs in the four Land Focre Area HQs) are we not spending money on NP that could find a much more productive use?"
With the dissolution of the Clothing Allowance and the switch to a points system both types of clothing impact NP so the point is somewhat moot.  Of greater concern should be an analysis of what is being worn and in turn reducing the stock holdings of what is not being worn because this is wasted money on shelves.

As for folks being too lazy to iron or polish, try not to generalize.  The Staff don't get a vote, they do what they are told to do and when told it is CADPAT they wear it.  When told it is DEU they wear it and talke care of it.  The same people who don't maintain a sharp set of DEU's are the exact same people who don't police up their CADPAT uniofrm and wearing dirty boots and more often than not they are the same ones who are out of shape so the ball keeps rolling downhill.  Policies don't make bad soldiers, they are bad on their own.


----------



## dapaterson (29 Dec 2010)

High Lander said:
			
		

> "StarTop road folks were the first to decide that the base Orders did not apply to them, and moved into CADPAT to demonstrate their "operational focus".  The Army HQ wannabes quickly did the same."
> Strike 1 - It wasn't a question of whether the "Orders' applied to them.  Commanders have the "authority" to determine orders of dress as they deem appropriate as long as it conforms with CF guidelines.  As for the Army, to use the term "wannabes" is inappropriate.  The Army truly struggled with the view of itself and how others viewed it coming out of the '90's and into the new millenium.  The Army went back and forth on this issue a couple of times actually.  It has more to do with a lack of institutional confidence.



Having read the CFSU(O) standing orders on dress, there is a slight degree of wishy-washyness.  However, the direction is pretty clear:



> Unless otherwise directed, in accordance with the paragraph above, all Officers and Warrant Officers shall wear an appropriate order of service dress (Nos. 3a to 3c inclusive);



The Base Commander sets dress policies.  The dot COMS decided long ago that rules do not apply to their bloated, inefficient staffs, and thus chose to ignore the dress policies.  The Army commander, LGen Caron, then sent a note to the CDS.  "Since my folks interact with the dot COMs, they should therefore be in CADPAT too."

Bad logic.  Bad example.  And speaking with any number of folks on the Land Staff today their preference for CADPAT that has never graced a range or training area is explained by "it's a zero maintenance uniform".  (PS:  I was on the Land Staff when the transition occured, and still have many friends there.)



> "Here's a question, though: what's the cost differential between DEU and CADPAT?  By wearing out a lot of CADPAT a*s-first in the chairs in NDHQ (and in the chairs in the four Land Focre Area HQs) are we not spending money on NP that could find a much more productive use?"
> With the dissolution of the Clothing Allowance and the switch to a points system both types of clothing impact NP so the point is somewhat moot.  Of greater concern should be an analysis of what is being worn and in turn reducing the stock holdings of what is not being worn because this is wasted money on shelves.



Let's put this in simple terms:  a paid of CADPAT pants go for roughly $100; DEU pants for $42.56.  (I'm not on the supply system so I can't get the exact quote on CADPAT; the DEU cost is from the Logistik website).  Assuming equal wear, the CADPAT costs the department twice as much to maintain.  In choosing the lazy uniform, the Army (and dot COMs) are costing the department thousands of unnecessary dollars.



> As for folks being too lazy to iron or polish, try not to generalize.  The Staff don't get a vote, they do what they are told to do and when told it is CADPAT they wear it.  When told it is DEU they wear it and talke care of it.  The same people who don't maintain a sharp set of DEU's are the exact same people who don't police up their CADPAT uniofrm and wearing dirty boots and more often than not they are the same ones who are out of shape so the ball keeps rolling downhill.  Policies don't make bad soldiers, they are bad on their own.



Having been in the NCR for over a decade I will say that those who take good care of their uniforms are the exception, not the rule.  Badly scuffed shoes.  Shirts whose backs resemble nothing more than topographical maps, with wonderful patterns of relief.  Improperly ordered ribbons.  Incorrect formation identifiers.  And few who seem to give a damn about any of it.


The sooner we can put Hillierisms like the dot COMs, static domestic HQs in CAPDAT, over-recruiting infantry, and generally running like a cult of personality instead of a professional military behind us, the better.


----------



## McG (29 Dec 2010)

quadrapiper said:
			
		

> Cough up a decent summer rig for the Army and Air Force, as well. There's still/already the tri-service tropical tan order of dress on the books; someone'd just have to authorize it as a summer rig for Air and Army (and pay for its issue, of course).


For all the heat in the air conditioned offices of our static HQs in Canada, there is no requirement for another order of dress.  If you are fit & look after your uniform, the short-sleeved shirt and pants look perfectly fine and are not too warm.  If anything, the Army guys need something other than Cadpat & more utilitarian than the gabardine to wear as a winter coat with the DEUs ... the Air Force and Navy both have DEU coloured versions of the combat coat.

... or at least formally direct that the gabardine will be worn and that CADPAT shall not mix with DEU on a single wearer.


----------



## quadrapiper (29 Dec 2010)

MCG said:
			
		

> For all the heat in the air conditioned offices of our static HQs in Canada, there is no requirement for another order of dress.  If you are fit & look after your uniform, the short-sleeved shirt and pants look perfectly fine and are not too warm.


Just remembered seeing some comments on here from Army types bemoaning the lack of a non-green summer rig. No dog in that fight.


			
				MCG said:
			
		

> If anything, the Army guys need something other than Cadpat & more utilitarian than the gabardine to wear as a winter coat with the DEUs ... the Air Force and Navy both have DEU coloured versions of the combat coat. ... or at least formally direct that the gabardine will be worn and that CADPAT shall not mix with DEU on a single wearer.


Wouldn't be a bad idea. The parkas seem to be a cross-over item for naval pers, being auth for wear with both NCD and DEU; not too sure why the AF got a DEU one, and the Army didn't: logically, the AF would be wearing their pattern of CADPAT parka as well. 

Perhaps a truly winter-weight DEU tunic would be helpful - or maybe authorize wearing the sweater underneath the current pattern? Assuming you get two tunics (I did, in the spin-the-wheel game of CIC initial kitting), tailoring one to allow for an under-layer makes sense.

Some quality review as far as footwear would be excellent, too - I've never worn the new-pattern angle boots, but have seen a number with sewn-in creases around the toe, where the uppers meet the sole (ditto with the new-style oxfords, of both colours), and noticed (running clothing stores for cadets) that the new ones seem to wear out faster than the old boots.


----------



## aesop081 (29 Dec 2010)

The AF currently has no issued blue jacket to wear with DEUs other than the gabardine. The Canex blue jacket is optional and purchased by the member. Those of us who were issue the blue gortex prior to the introduction of CADPAT have retained them but new personel are not issued with those.


----------



## George Wallace (30 Dec 2010)

quadrapiper said:
			
		

> Just remembered seeing some comments on here from Army types bemoaning the lack of a non-green summer rig. No dog in that fight.Wouldn't be a bad idea. The parkas seem to be a cross-over item for naval pers, being auth for wear with both NCD and DEU; not too sure why the AF got a DEU one, and the Army didn't: logically, the AF would be wearing their pattern of CADPAT parka as well.
> 
> Perhaps a truly winter-weight DEU tunic would be helpful - or maybe authorize wearing the sweater underneath the current pattern? Assuming you get two tunics (I did, in the spin-the-wheel game of CIC initial kitting), tailoring one to allow for an under-layer makes sense.
> 
> Some quality review as far as footwear would be excellent, too - I've never worn the new-pattern angle boots, but have seen a number with sewn-in creases around the toe, where the uppers meet the sole (ditto with the new-style oxfords, of both colours), and noticed (running clothing stores for cadets) that the new ones seem to wear out faster than the old boots.



Once upon a time the CANEX Parka was the authorized outerwear for wearing over the CF uniform, for those who prefered not to wear the issue Gabardine.  As for foot wear, there are rubber overboots for both shoes and boots.  The excuse to wear CADPAT instead would have been totally invalid then, could still be today had the CANEX still sold the parka/someone in the top rungs had declared the CANEX parka passé.


----------



## dapaterson (30 Dec 2010)

You've got i t backwards:  Once wearing the CADPAT jacket was authorized, CANEX saw sales slump, so they discontinued the parka.


----------

