# A "Why"  Dress Thread  split from OCdt Speaks at Freedom Rally



## OldSolduer (28 May 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> I_ suppose_ the mutiny stuff is bad but his biggest sin has to be dress and deportment.
> 
> Wearing a raincoat (when it's not even raining!) with a beret.
> Randomly wearing 82 pattern webbing.
> ...


OFF WITH HIS HEAD!!!!!!!! Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition  - or the Red Queen


----------



## kev994 (28 May 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> I_ suppose_ the mutiny stuff is bad but his biggest sin has to be dress and deportment.
> 
> Wearing a raincoat (when it's not even raining!) with a beret.
> Randomly wearing 82 pattern webbing.
> ...


Yeah, everyone knows that you’re not allowed to wear a rain jacket without a toque. Or was it the other way around? Maybe it was gloves?


----------



## Jarnhamar (28 May 2021)

kev994 said:


> Yeah, everyone knows that you’re not allowed to wear a rain jacket without a toque. Or was it the other way around? Maybe it was gloves?


----------



## dimsum (28 May 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Wearing a raincoat (when it's not even raining!) with a beret.


In some (definitely not all) seriousness, the rain jacket is probably one of the most versatile pieces of CAF outerwear


----------



## Kilted (28 May 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> View attachment 65297


Has anyone ever actually discovered why this is an actual thing?


----------



## kev994 (28 May 2021)

Kilted said:


> Has anyone ever actually discovered why this is an actual thing?


I think it’s a joke that too many people didn’t get and so now everyone thinks it’s a real thing.


----------



## dapaterson (28 May 2021)

If you think it's a joke there's a very non-zero number of Army MWOs and CWOs you should meet...


----------



## Kilted (28 May 2021)

dapaterson said:


> If you think it's a joke there's a very non-zero number of Army MWOs and CWOs you should meet...


And what would they say the reason for it would be?


----------



## Jarnhamar (28 May 2021)

Kilted said:


> Has anyone ever actually discovered why this is an actual thing?


Same school of thought that thinks MWOs and CWOs should decide kit lists instead of Sgts and Capts.



kev994 said:


> I think it’s a joke that too many people didn’t get and so now everyone thinks it’s a real thing.


Sadly it's a real thing on some bases.  A couple years ago in petawawa a new base CWO changed the rule to much rejoicing. Next change of command parade the rule was back on and enforced.


----------



## Kilted (28 May 2021)

And also, why does the army hate the rain jacket so much?


----------



## brihard (28 May 2021)

Kilted said:


> Has anyone ever actually discovered why this is an actual thing?



Because the army revels in the absurd so much that after enough years of being immersed in it, you stop realizing it's absurd. This happens at roughly the same point in one's career at which one is vested with the power to inflict absurdity.


----------



## OldSolduer (28 May 2021)

brihard said:


> Because the army revels in the absurd so much that after enough years of being immersed in it, you stop realizing it's absurd. This happens at roughly the same point in one's career at which one is vested with the power to inflict absurdity.


That's very true. It is an absurdity when its  + 28C and some knob MCpl/Sgt/ WO etc jacks you for having your sleeves up because its winter dress now. Common sense was there - but not where it counted.


----------



## Eaglelord17 (29 May 2021)

Spend enough time drinking the cool-aid you get to become the one brewing the cool-aid.

To be fair the Navy had (has?) the same thing as well, you just don't hear about it nearly as much. I remember being told I had to throw on a heavier jacket and toque when working outside in around zero on the upper decks because I was wearing gloves.


----------



## Haggis (29 May 2021)

If you wear a toque without gloves, people die.  Do you want that on your conscience?


----------



## FSTO (29 May 2021)

OldSolduer said:


> That's very true. It is an absurdity when its  + 28C and some knob MCpl/Sgt/ WO etc jacks you for having your sleeves up because its winter dress now. Common sense was there - but not where it counted.


How about when its +40 and high humidity and you're wearing arid combats (that look like a potato sack) that the sleeves are able to be rolled up and the TF-SM loses his mind when he sees you on VTC with your sleeves rolled up. I just laugh, point to my rank and the Naval Ensign on my shoulder and give him the virtual finger. The absurdity is strong in the CAF.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (29 May 2021)

SeaKingTacco said:


> It is, but IIRC, you can only do 2 years at the DB and then have to be transferred to another federal institution to finish your sentence.



IIRC, it's been while since that occurred;  Kyle Brown?


----------



## SeaKingTacco (29 May 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> IIRC, it's been while since that occurred;  Kyle Brown?


That is the specific case that I recall.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (29 May 2021)

I went thru Cornwallis with him;  he was often 'the example' for coursemates to follow; drill, kit and quarters, etc.

Where ever he is, I hope he has been able to move on in life.


----------



## kev994 (29 May 2021)

This is the Somalia scapegoat Brown?


----------



## Furniture (29 May 2021)

Eaglelord17 said:


> Spend enough time drinking the cool-aid you get to become the one brewing the cool-aid.
> 
> To be fair the Navy had (has?) the same thing as well, you just don't hear about it nearly as much. I remember being told I had to throw on a heavier jacket and toque when working outside in around zero on the upper decks because I was wearing gloves.


My personal favourite from the RCN occurred while doing a full day closed up for RAS during RAS WUPS in the West Coast Firing Area.  The dress was NCD without rain gear or weather jackets, because the people in the dump would be too warm working in them. So I stood in the wind and spray at the forward end of the bridge wing holding a course/speed board soaked to the bone and shivering...


----------



## Blackadder1916 (29 May 2021)

SeaKingTacco said:


> It is,  but IIRC, you can only do 2 years at the DB and then have to be transferred to another federal institution to finish your sentence.



There apparently have been some changes to the conventional wisdom that the first two years (less a day) of a sentence of imprisonment was served at Club Ed.   It's discussed In the notes to QR&O 104.04 – IMPRISONMENT FOR SHORTER TERM 



> (B) Service prisoners and service convicts typically require an intensive programme of retraining and rehabilitation to equip them for their return to society following completion of the term of incarceration. Civilian prisons and penitentiaries are uniquely equipped to provide such opportunities to inmates. Therefore, to facilitate their reintegration into society, *service prisoners and service convicts who are to be released from the Canadian Forces will typically be transferred to a civilian prison or penitentiary as soon as practical within the first 30 days following the date of sentencing*. The member will ordinarily be released from the Canadian Forces before such a transfer is effected.


----------



## brihard (29 May 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> I went thru Cornwallis with him;  he was often 'the example' for coursemates to follow; drill, kit and quarters, etc.
> 
> Where ever he is, I hope he has been able to move on in life.


Looks like his life went to shit and more or less stayed there. You see him around social media a bit, generally in the context of blaming everything on Mefloquine. I gather he’s been in and out of treatment and court.









						Life after Somalia: Kyle Brown, PTSD and the past
					

“You want to know what PTSD did to me? It's the great destroyer and stealer of happiness. The great usurper, it takes everything. "




					edmontonjournal.com


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (29 May 2021)

Furniture said:


> My personal favourite from the RCN occurred while doing a full day closed up for RAS during RAS WUPS in the West Coast Firing Area.  The dress was NCD without rain gear or weather jackets, because the people in the dump would be too warm working in them. So I stood in the wind and spray at the forward end of the bridge wing holding a course/speed board soaked to the bone and shivering...



But it works both ways, Furniture. Also on the West Coast, I've had forty to fifty sailors (including me) work hard on deck, overdressed, sweating like dogs and getting dehydrated because a single C.O., born and raised in Vancouver, could't tolerate being "cold" on an open bridge during evolutions and thus, countermanded the X.O./Coxn's choice of dress for the evolution. That as C.O. he could wear whatever he friggin wanted didn't seem to sink in with that particular bloke.

The obvious solution (to everyone except the RCN) is to admit that when you carry out evolutions *at sea and far from the public eye*, who cares if we are or not all  dressed the same way !!!!


----------



## dimsum (29 May 2021)

Oldgateboatdriver said:


> The obvious solution (to everyone except the RCN) is to admit that when you carry out evolutions *at sea and far from the public eye*, who cares if we are or not all dressed the same way !!!!


Frankly, I doubt the public cares if we're dressed the same way even when working* in the public eye.  

*not parades or ceremonial stuff, just going about doing our jobs


----------



## Furniture (29 May 2021)

Oldgateboatdriver said:


> But it works both ways, Furniture. Also on the West Coast, I've had forty to fifty sailors (including me) work hard on deck, overdressed, sweating like dogs and getting dehydrated because a single C.O., born and raised in Vancouver, could't tolerate being "cold" on an open bridge during evolutions and thus, countermanded the X.O./Coxn's choice of dress for the evolution. That as C.O. he could wear whatever he friggin wanted didn't seem to sink in with that particular bloke.
> 
> The obvious solution (to everyone except the RCN) is to admit that when you carry out evolutions *at sea and far from the public eye*, who cares if we are or not all  dressed the same way !!!!


I'm a firm believer in the RCAF way of doing dress, dress comfortably. If it's hot in January, don't wear a coat. If it's cold in July, wear a coat. If you're hot, and the person beside you is cold, then each of you can layer up or down to suit your comfort.


----------



## dapaterson (29 May 2021)

What is this treat people like reasonable adults concept of which you speak?


----------



## kev994 (29 May 2021)

Furniture said:


> I'm a firm believer in the RCAF way of doing dress, dress comfortably. If it's hot in January, don't wear a coat. If it's cold in July, wear a coat. If you're hot, and the person beside you is cold, then each of you can layer up or down to suit your comfort.


I can think of one guy who wore his rain jacket with his flightsuit year-round…


----------



## Kilted (29 May 2021)

I remember watching someone get jacked up for wearing his rain jacket in the field because the rain jacket "isn't a field jacket."


----------



## daftandbarmy (29 May 2021)

Kilted said:


> I remember watching someone get jacked up for wearing his rain jacket in the field because the rain jacket "isn't a field jacket."


----------



## Remius (29 May 2021)

Hoods.  Guys getting jacked up for wearing hoods. Hoods on the jackets we were issued…


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (29 May 2021)

Furniture said:


> I'm a firm believer in the RCAF way of doing dress, dress comfortably. If it's hot in January, don't wear a coat. If it's cold in July, wear a coat. If you're hot, and the person beside you is cold, then each of you can layer up or down to suit your comfort.



The original idea in the RCN - a long, long time ago - was that you promulgated dress for  an upper deck evolution because most sailors spend their whole day below deck and don't know the current weather when called on deck. This way, they would bring what they needed to be protected from the weather, if they then chose to wear it or not depended on individual taste.

But of course, just like the legendary Army tradition of having two soldiers guard a bench so no one sits on it that gets traced back after decades to an original order made because the bench had been painted, but nobody ever told the guards the need for their watch was over, the Navy quickly turned it into a uniformity of dress requirement where none was required. And it all goes down hill from there with officers who believe they can order the dress they want to wear, not what is required or comfortable.


----------



## dimsum (29 May 2021)

Oldgateboatdriver said:


> And it all goes down hill from there with officers who believe they can order the dress they want to wear, not what is required or comfortable.


I'm just glad that folks aren't in DEU for entering/leaving harbour, or for Officer of the Day.  No one is watching you come in or leave, and who thought wearing a cotton/poly (or all-poly) uniform as a first responder to a fire would be a good idea?


----------



## Haggis (29 May 2021)

Oldgateboatdriver said:


> The obvious solution (to everyone except the RCN) is to admit that when you carry out evolutions *at sea and far from the public eye*, who cares if we are or not all  dressed the same way !!!!


Members who relax their dress in the field or at sea - such as wearing toques - will do so in garrison or ashore. This erodes the fibre of cohesion and morale leading to a generalized breakdown of discipline and anarchy. Because of members like this, who care not for customs and teaditions, we have beards and bling and patches and people can even buy their own non-uniform boots and bras!  Soon, troops will even be asking for personalized name tags. Where does it end?


----------



## dimsum (29 May 2021)

Haggis said:


> Where does it end?


Us looking like a bunch of Elvises?


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (29 May 2021)

Haggis said:


> Members who relax their dress in the field or at sea - such as wearing toques - will do so in garrison or ashore. This erodes the fibre of cohesion and morale leading to a generalized breakdown of discipline and anarchy. Because of members like this, who care not for customs and teaditions, we have beards and bling and patches and people can even buy their own non-uniform boots and bras!  Soon, troops will even be asking for personalized name tags. Where does it end?



Actually Haggis, some of the most professional and competent people in the RCN are found in the submarine service. Yet, it is a service where "pirate rig" was the dress of the day. It varied from various colours of rugby jerseys - very popular with the officers - to just T-shirts for us diesel mechs and everything in between for the various other trades. In the submarines (at lest in my days - don't know about today) no-one cared about what you wore as long as you did your job competently,

Similarly, when I was a MARS officer, in the days of the old green work dress, then the black and wedgwood blue garrison dress, at sea in winter, I always wore a turtle neck cotton shirt under my uniform. Never heard a single comment about it and a few sailors did the same thing without any reproach. Again, as long as we did our job professionally, nobody cared.  

So where it ends is irrelevant.


... But these days are over, unfortunately.


----------



## Haggis (29 May 2021)

Oldgateboatdriver said:


> Actually Haggis, some of the most professional and competent people in the RCN are found in the submarine service. Yet, it is a service where "pirate rig" was the dress of the day.


But, but..... (we need a sarcasm emoji)

One of my SLP coursemates was a submariner. He was a little "off", but still a consummate professional.


----------



## OldSolduer (29 May 2021)

“Because we’ve always done it that way”


----------



## Kilted (30 May 2021)

Haggis said:


> Soon, troops will even be asking for personalized name tags. Where does it end?


I mean, I once saw troops with green nametapes ordered to go out and by hi-vis nametapes so that they would match everyone else.


----------



## Pelorus (30 May 2021)

Kilted said:


> I mean, I once saw troops with green nametapes ordered to go out and by hi-vis nametapes so that they would match everyone else.



This is something that irks me to no end in this organization. It speaks to a type of institutional bullying that shitty leadership gets away with because junior members are usually too often afraid of putting a target on their back (real or perceived), or rocking the boat when they just want to be the grey person and get their package signed off to move on with their careers.

I have certainly fallen victim to it a few times in the first half of my career, although I have heard rumours that it still exists even in the highest levels of the organization (peer pressure to buy special CANEX DEU belt buckles with branch/trade/etc insignia anyone?).

I have no problems buying your own kit if it's completely optional and one does it on their own initiative. I pay out of pocket for better quality sea boots and insoles because I find it completely worth it when standing on your feet for 12+ hours in a day. But forcing members to pay out of pocket for some novelty that only serves to placate the OCD of leadership when the system has failed to provide it in a timely manner is not on.


----------



## Kilted (30 May 2021)

I think that most troops still buy nametapes because they dont want to look new. It took me five years before I got issued nametapes, after requesting them more times then I can count.


----------



## Haggis (30 May 2021)

Kilted said:


> I think that most troops still buy nametapes because they dont want to look new. It took me five years before I got issued nametapes, after requesting them more times then I can count.


TANGENT
This phenomenon is not confined to the CAF. When I joined my LEA it took me forever to get nametapes for my body armour. So, I ordered my own from CP Gear. Both sets arrived the same day.
TANGENT ENDS.


----------



## dimsum (30 May 2021)

Haggis said:


> One of my SLP coursemates was a submariner. He was a little "off"


Isn't that redundant info?    



boot12 said:


> peer pressure to buy special CANEX DEU belt buckles with branch/trade/etc insignia anyone?


I always thought that was ridiculous, like people won't know right off the bat with your trade insignia on your uniform.


----------



## stoker dave (30 May 2021)

Ok, so I am going to join in with my perspective.    

As I have said earlier, its been decades since I wore a uniform and now typically work at construction sites.  So my experience may or may not be relevant.  

At the construction sites, PPE is specified.  Not wearing the PPE is a firing offence.  However, everyone has the right to a safe work place.  Anyone can stop work if conditions are unsafe.  So what does that mean?  It means while you have to wear the PPE, accommodations have to be made for temperature.  If the PPE leaves you either freezing or risking heat stroke, you have the right to stop work.  Any manager that does not recognize these conditions will likely be fired.  So if its cold, we make sure everyone has warm weather gear that meets the PPE requirements.  If its hot, we provide water, encourage water breaks, cooling breaks, whatever it takes. 

There is NO reason for a workplace to ever be unsafe.  And risk of hypo/hyper thermic is a safety issue.  

So I remain completely perplexed at how there can be an unsafe work place because someone ordered the wrong dress to be worn.  That is a safety violation.  Can someone help me understand?


----------



## dimsum (30 May 2021)

Mods, should we split this?


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (30 May 2021)

dimsum said:


> Mods, should we split this?


Done


----------



## OldSolduer (30 May 2021)

boot12 said:


> This is something that irks me to no end in this organization. It speaks to a type of institutional bullying that shitty leadership gets away with because junior members are usually too often afraid of putting a target on their back (real or perceived), or rocking the boat when they just want to be the grey person and get their package signed off to move on with their careers.
> 
> I have certainly fallen victim to it a few times in the first half of my career, although I have heard rumours that it still exists even in the highest levels of the organization (peer pressure to buy special CANEX DEU belt buckles with branch/trade/etc insignia anyone?).
> 
> I have no problems buying your own kit if it's completely optional and one does it on their own initiative. I pay out of pocket for better quality sea boots and insoles because I find it completely worth it when standing on your feet for 12+ hours in a day. But forcing members to pay out of pocket for some novelty that only serves to placate the OCD of leadership when the system has failed to provide it in a timely manner is not on.


So an NCO that's doing his/her job is bullying? Shitty leadership? Please enlighten me.

Insoles are one thing - I agree with you there. Good footwear is essential?


----------



## dimsum (30 May 2021)

Remius said:


> Hoods.  Guys getting jacked up for wearing hoods. Hoods on the jackets we were issued…


I mean, this is the same organization that views putting hands in pockets as bringing about the end of Western Democracy and our way of life...   

Or DEU shirts with breast (and hip, for the tunic) pockets that we aren't allowed to put stuff in.


----------



## mariomike (30 May 2021)

dimsum said:


> I mean, this is the same organization that views putting hands in pockets as bringing about the end of Western Democracy and our way of life...


Reminds me of something I read by a 20-year-old second lieutenant with the 103rd Infantry Division. He was wounded while fighting in Alsace, and was awarded the Bronze Star and Purple Heart.



> "Eisenhower had a reputation among his troops as an eminently decent man, friendly and sympathetic, an admiration that Ike elevated even further, by having the bravado to casually rest his hands inside his pocket and "violate the sacred Army injunction."


----------



## SeaKingTacco (30 May 2021)

dimsum said:


> I mean, this is the same organization that views putting hands in pockets as bringing about the end of Western Democracy and our way of life...
> 
> Or DEU shirts with breast (and hip, for the tunic) pockets that we aren't allowed to put stuff in.


Yeah. Why put the nice comfy fleece in the pocket, if we are not allowed to warm our hands there?


----------



## dimsum (30 May 2021)

SeaKingTacco said:


> Yeah. Why put the nice comfy fleece in the pocket, if we are not allowed to warm our hands there?


Sadomasochistic tendencies?


----------



## Pelorus (30 May 2021)

OldSolduer said:


> So an NCO that's doing his/her job is bullying? Shitty leadership? Please enlighten me.
> 
> Insoles are one thing - I agree with you there. Good footwear is essential?



Sorry for not being clear, I was specifically referring to the example that was brought up earlier of a member being ordered to pay out of pocket for something like a different colour variation of name tape so that they match the rest of the group.

If that person decides on their own accord without being pressured by superiors to pay out of pocket so that they blend in with their peers, sure, whatever. Being ordered to pay out of pocket for something so insignificant for the sake of uniformity because the institution can't procure name tags in a timely manner is another thing entirely IMO.

I agree good footwear is essential. The new sea boots are certainly good enough. I just personally find the difference after a long day at sea on your feet between the issued boots and a civvy boot/insole to be worth the money. Fortunately nobody in the Navy seems to really make a fuss about members wearing civvy boots so long as they are broadly similar to the issued ones (i.e. black, safety toe, etc.).


----------



## Kilted (30 May 2021)

boot12 said:


> Sorry for not being clear, I was specifically referring to the example that was brought up earlier of a member being ordered to pay out of pocket for something like a different colour variation of name tape so that they match the rest of the group.
> 
> If that person decides on their own accord without being pressured by superiors to pay out of pocket so that they blend in with their peers, sure, whatever. Being ordered to pay out of pocket for something so insignificant for the sake of uniformity because the institution can't procure name tags in a timely manner is another thing entirely IMO.
> 
> I agree good footwear is essential. The new sea boots are certainly good enough. I just personally find the difference after a long day at sea on your feet between the issued boots and a civvy boot/insole to be worth the money. Fortunately nobody in the Navy seems to really make a fuss about members wearing civvy boots so long as they are broadly similar to the issued ones (i.e. black, safety toe, etc.).


When I first joined many years ago I had to find the missing pieces to my DEU's on eBay, because my unit couldn't provide them. I needed up with a silver trade badge (I don't know how old that would be).  When I was promoted to Cpl I had to buy the DEU badges off eBay because my unit didn't have them. I even emailed logistic unicorps asking for them and they told me they weren't allowed to send them. Took me over a year to get a second slip-on, the next day I had my CSM rip my rank off on parade in order to promote someone else. I narrowly avoided having to show up for parade without a slip-on. All of this was over ten years ago, most of these issues have been fixed.


----------



## daftandbarmy (30 May 2021)

SeaKingTacco said:


> Yeah. Why put the nice comfy fleece in the pocket, if we are not allowed to warm our hands there?



Because 'Tease the Soldier'


----------



## CBH99 (30 May 2021)

Haggis said:


> TANGENT
> This phenomenon is not confined to the CAF. When I joined my LEA it took me forever to get nametapes for my body armour. So, I ordered my own from CP Gear. Both sets arrived the same day.
> TANGENT ENDS.


That’s just how it works no matter where one gets hired 😅


----------



## CBH99 (30 May 2021)

Kilted said:


> I think that most troops still buy nametapes because they dont want to look new. It took me five years before I got issued nametapes, after requesting them more times then I can count.


How on Earth cab making 2 name tapes for a new member take 5 bloody years??  

If that’s the case why not simplify our end of the operation & unit just order them all from CP gear upon enrolment 🤦🏼‍♂️


----------



## daftandbarmy (30 May 2021)

Haggis said:


> TANGENT
> This phenomenon is not confined to the CAF. When I joined my LEA it took me forever to get nametapes for my body armour. So, I ordered my own from CP Gear. Both sets arrived the same day.
> TANGENT ENDS.



Pffftt.... 

When I joined a Highland Regiment reserve unit as a brand new, Class A, 2Lt I was expected to be grateful for the opportunity to shell out immediately for a silver cap badge that, in today's currency, would probably run to $300: a month's pay or so I would guess. The OR's cap badges were on issue, Officers and SNCOs had to purchase theirs, and still do I believe.

Then there's the mess kit, brogues etc, all at your own expense.

This is still the case in most reserve units, of course.


----------



## RangerRay (31 May 2021)

Wow. Back in the 90’s, We could wear any combo of hat/coat/glove in the field that made me comfortable. We still whinged about not being able to use non-issued kit that was better quality or more comfortable.

Makes me appreciate my uniformed civy job that lets me wear any (operational) hat/glove/coat combo that’s comfortable.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (31 May 2021)

kev994 said:


> This is the Somalia scapegoat Brown?



Affirm.  Cornwallis was 32 years ago this coming summer for our platoon...


----------



## Haggis (31 May 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> Pffftt....
> 
> When I joined a Highland Regiment ......
> This is still the case in most reserve units, of course.


I hear you! Being a member of the oatmeal savages is expensive. Brogues, hose, kilts, skeahn dhu, ties, cap badges shoulder titles and, of course, mess kit which you may wear once a year. Sr NCOs used to get $300 upon promotion to Sgt to subsidize their mandatory regimental bling. I beleive that ended around 1985.


----------



## FJAG (31 May 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> Pffftt....
> 
> When I joined a Highland Regiment reserve unit as a brand new, Class A, 2Lt I was expected to be grateful for the opportunity to shell out immediately for a silver cap badge that, in today's currency, would probably run to $300: a month's pay or so I would guess. The OR's cap badges were on issue, Officers and SNCOs had to purchase theirs, and still do I believe.
> 
> ...


The Camerons issued me with pretty much everything except a skeahn-dhu and mess kit. Never did get the skeahn-dhu and wore my artillery mess kit to the mess dinners for four years much to the heartburn of the regimental senate. I think they all knew though that my tenure with them would end with my call to the bar.

😁


----------



## The Bread Guy (31 May 2021)

CBH99 said:


> ... why not simplify our end of the operation & unit just order them all from CP gear upon enrolment 🤦🏼‍♂️


There you go, making sense again ...


----------



## CBH99 (31 May 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> There you go, making sense again ...


Sorry!!  Sorry...  😬


----------



## Halifax Tar (31 May 2021)

UCR or SOCD time ?


----------



## dimsum (31 May 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> UCR or SOCD time ?


Lack of ranks/nametapes are bad, but I'm not sure it's "capability deficiency" bad.  

Happy to be corrected though.


----------



## Halifax Tar (31 May 2021)

dimsum said:


> Lack of ranks/nametapes are bad, but I'm not sure it's "capability deficiency" bad.
> 
> Happy to be corrected though.


No other avenue to address it, Town Hall bitching ?


----------



## dimsum (31 May 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> No other avenue to address it, Town Hall bitching ?


I think you misunderstood my comment.  It's definitely a UCR.  I'm not sure it's an SOCD.


----------



## Halifax Tar (31 May 2021)

dimsum said:


> I think you misunderstood my comment.  It's definitely a UCR.  I'm not sure it's an SOCD.


Fair.  

I've said it before I like the US model.  Initial issue is free, anything after that you pay for.  The money we throw out the door in "lost" clothing items is ridiculous. 

Right now there is a serious problem in in our LCMM/SM world and their ability to fill stock.  It goes way beyond clothing.


----------



## Remius (31 May 2021)

Anyone remember when knee pads were not allowed. On ISCC.  We would have our knees checked to make sure we weren’t wearing volleyball knee pads under our combats.


----------



## LittleBlackDevil (31 May 2021)

Remius said:


> Anyone remember when knee pads were not allowed. On ISCC.  We would have our knees checked to make sure we weren’t wearing volleyball knee pads under our combats.


I definitely remember this well during BOTC/BIOC at CFB Gagetown. Can't remember whether this ever came up when training with my regiment.

Also remember sunglasses not allowed.


----------



## daftandbarmy (31 May 2021)

Remius said:


> Anyone remember when knee pads were not allowed. On ISCC.  We would have our knees checked to make sure we weren’t wearing volleyball knee pads under our combats.



It was the same at the School of Infantry. Anyone caught wearing knee pads got a 'Red Chit'. Woe betide you if the DS could detect a knee pad through the small tears in your combat pants!

Coincidentally, one of my colleagues on Phase III Inf recently got a shiny new knee replacement


----------



## Eye In The Sky (31 May 2021)

CBH99 said:


> How on Earth cab making 2 name tapes for a new member take 5 bloody years??



At one point in time, the contract had expired (or so I was told at Wg Clothing Stores).  Name tags, however, were small potatoes for those of us who couldn't get rescue knives, flights suits, flying gloves, etc...


----------



## Halifax Tar (31 May 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> At one point in time, the contract had expired (or so I was told at Wg Clothing Stores).  Name tags, however, were small potatoes for those of us who couldn't get rescue knives, flights suits, flying gloves, etc...


Or parts to make propellers go around.  

Name Tags have been an issue for ever.  IMHO its a contracting issue.  SSO (Supporting Supply Organizations) or Base Supply's should be let to contract locally.  Last I heard there was a company in Winnipeg who had the contract for the CAF.  I stand to be corrected. 

Or if not local contracting, put it as a purchasable by points or cash item through Logistik Unicorps.


----------



## PuckChaser (31 May 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> Or if not local contracting, put it as a purchasable by points or cash item through Logistik Unicorps.


This is the solution to most of our next to skin or uniform issues. Put it on Logistik. Clothing Stores should only be for emergencies, field equipment and deployments. If there's a CTAT issue for flight suits/NCDs/CADPAT then ship it to the member's work address instead of their house for those items.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (31 May 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> UCR or SOCD time ?



I've never interfaced with SOCD, and only one time with UCR.  I also seen an item that was procured thru "UOR" and I think both UCR and UOR are more fucked than they are functional...

UCR; the crap-tastic Air Force desert safety boots.  I drafted a UCR submission for the LRP Det CO that was going to compliment the AAR Det UCR.  I don't think either got traction...and people just continued to buy and wear their own boots.  *NO ONE* wanted those cripplers on their feet in a SHTF situation.  Even stupider, those of us who wear LPO boots HAD to get safety toe ones because the Div said so.  Luckily, mine were composite ones from Reebok and fit great...but the bigger issue is the ONLY thing my trade needs safety toe for is handling search stores...which we carried ZERO of on IMPACT.

UOR; during IMPACT,  the brown issued T-shirt didn't measure up to ALSE/dual layer requirements.  A UOR was raised for suitable kit, with a recommendation for DriFire shirts.  I was issued the shirt...when I was back on a later Roto (can't remember 100% if it was Roto 2 or 4).  

I could have ordered the shirt myself and had it shipped in 1-2 weeks...


----------



## Halifax Tar (31 May 2021)

PuckChaser said:


> This is the solution to most of our next to skin or uniform issues. Put it on Logistik. Clothing Stores should only be for emergencies, field equipment and deployments. If there's a CTAT issue for flight suits/NCDs/CADPAT then ship it to the member's work address instead of their house for those items.


I don't know about Flight Suits but CADPAT and NCDs aren't CTAT.  That's a very common misconception and lead a lot of bases to buying massive shredders years ago, that now collect dust lol


----------



## Halifax Tar (31 May 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> UOR; during IMPACT,  the brown issued T-shirt didn't measure up to ALSE/dual layer requirements.  A UOR was raised for suitable kit, with a recommendation for DriFire shirts.  I was issued the shirt...when I was back on a later Roto (can't remember 100% if it was Roto 2 or 4).
> 
> I could have ordered the shirt myself and had it shipped in 1-2 weeks...


That, good Sir, is a staff work and LCMM problem.  

We waste a lot of time and money putting stuff through DRDC that our allies have already tested or are using and we should simply be able to inject it into the CFSS via SOI.


----------



## PuckChaser (31 May 2021)

Even more of a reason to have it on Logistik.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (31 May 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> I don't know about Flight Suits but CADPAT and NCDs aren't CTAT.  That's a very common misconception and lead a lot of bases to buying massive shredders years ago, that now collect dust lol


I am not really opposed to shredding of old CADPAT uniforms. We have enough problems without having uncontrolled CAF uniforms on the secondary market.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (31 May 2021)

PuckChaser said:


> This is the solution to most of our next to skin or uniform issues. Put it on Logistik. Clothing Stores should only be for emergencies, field equipment and deployments. If there's a CTAT issue for flight suits/NCDs/CADPAT then ship it to the member's work address instead of their house for those items.



That won't work for flying clothing.  Sometimes you need it quick, and the mbr needs to be able to walk into clothing stores and walk out with flying gear in hand. 

Maybe this would be ok for 2 CAD, but I don't see it working for 1 CAD, or at least not all Wings/Sqns.


----------



## SupersonicMax (31 May 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> That won't work for flying clothing.  Sometimes you need it quick, and the mbr needs to be able to walk into clothing stores and walk about with flying gear in hand.
> 
> Maybe this would be ok for 2 CAD, but I don't see it working for 1 CAD, or at least not all Wings/Sqns.


Your ALSE shop should be able to give you a loaner while you wait for your own.


----------



## PuckChaser (31 May 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> That won't work for flying clothing.  Sometimes you need it quick, and the mbr needs to be able to walk into clothing stores and walk about with flying gear in hand.
> 
> Maybe this would be ok for 2 CAD, but I don't see it working for 1 CAD, or at least not all Wings/Sqns.


That sounds like the emergency caveat... imagine how short that line would be if all the routine clothing stuff is online and you could be in and out in 10 mins if your flight suit rips when you're getting ready for a flight?


----------



## Eye In The Sky (31 May 2021)

.


----------



## dangerboy (31 May 2021)

PuckChaser said:


> This is the solution to most of our next to skin or uniform issues. Put it on Logistik. Clothing Stores should only be for emergencies, field equipment and deployments. If there's a CTAT issue for flight suits/NCDs/CADPAT then ship it to the member's work address instead of their house for those items.


DND is working on that with a new Operational Clothing & Footwear (OCFC2) contract out: Operational Clothing & Footwear (OCFC2) (W8486-206245/A) - Buyandsell.gc.ca


----------



## Eye In The Sky (31 May 2021)

SupersonicMax said:


> Your ALSE shop should be able to give you a loaner while you wait for your own.



Our ALSE shops don't hold flight suits etc....that is what clothing stores is for.


----------



## dimsum (31 May 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> Even stupider, those of us who wear LPO boots HAD to get safety toe ones because the Div said so.


Nowhere in the msgs did it say it had to be brought to theatre   

Someone I know may or may not have returned them after deployment, in their original boxes, without even trying them on.


----------



## SupersonicMax (31 May 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> Our ALSE shops don't hold flight suits etc....that is what clothing stores is for.


Our ALSE shop always has spare flight suits. 

Also, you should have three flight suits so if you need one changed, you should have two more to get your through until you have your third one again.


----------



## dimsum (31 May 2021)

dangerboy said:


> DND is working on that with a new Operational Clothing & Footwear (OCFC2) contract out: Operational Clothing & Footwear (OCFC2) (W8486-206245/A) - Buyandsell.gc.ca


So, are the fighter folks going to start wearing Canadian flight suits again?


----------



## Eye In The Sky (31 May 2021)

PuckChaser said:


> hat sounds like the emergency caveat... imagine how short that line would be if all the routine clothing stuff is online and you could be in and out in 10 mins if your flight suit rips when you're getting ready for a flight?



Not so much an 'emergency caveat' as bona fide operational requirements, for some people.  LRP line sqn crews are entitled to 4 flight suits, and they need them on hands at all times, and not just the crew holding High Ready posture.  It's not impossible to get a phone call while holding Ready 12 on a long weekend, and be packing your bags for a month long Det leaving in short order.


----------



## Kilted (31 May 2021)

PuckChaser said:


> This is the solution to most of our next to skin or uniform issues. Put it on Logistik. Clothing Stores should only be for emergencies, field equipment and deployments. If there's a CTAT issue for flight suits/NCDs/CADPAT then ship it to the member's work address instead of their house for those items.


If only they would put t-shirts and underwear on there.  Does anyone else's clothing store require a one-for-one exchange for those items?


----------



## Eye In The Sky (31 May 2021)

SupersonicMax said:


> Our ALSE shop always has spare flight suits.
> 
> Also, you should have three flight suits so if you need one changed, you should have two more to get your through until you have your third one again.



4 is our entitlement, and in a situation where you're only doing local flying and LRPFs, what you say above does and would work.

But, LRP goes out the door very quickly sometimes.  The situation I mentioned in my reply to PC above isn't fictional, it was my crew on Labour Day Weekend a few years ago.

On that Det, we were flying nights, sometimes back-to-backs, and the only viable laundry solution was to drop a bag off at a local place, and pick it up a few days later.  Working outside in the rain building/loading belly loads, uploading internal loads, and then putting patterns into the water can make a flight suit a "one mission deal".  2 flight suits aren't going to last too long, especially on Dets like CARIBBE.


----------



## dimsum (31 May 2021)

Kilted said:


> If only they would put t-shirts and underwear on there. Does anyone else's clothing store require a one-for-one exchange for those items?


Why would Clothing Stores want your used underwear?


----------



## Eye In The Sky (31 May 2021)

dimsum said:


> Someone I know may or may not have returned them after deployment, in their original boxes, without even trying them on.


 Mine were ok, by luck.  Reeboks, and actually fit with my orthotics...but it was by luck and not design.  My Skipper actually picked them up from Clothing for me the day before we left on R-0, and I tried them on the day we left.  Luckily...they fit.  

There's a whole other pre-story about us telling Clothing Stores "we need to start these LPOs for crew members who need them" as early in the process as we could, and them telling us they were going to do nothing until we had our CFPTPOs cut...and some swearing and stuff when, later, we were told "there is not enough time to get LPO boots"....


----------



## Remius (31 May 2021)

Kilted said:


> If only they would put t-shirts and underwear on there.  Does anyone else's clothing store require a one-for-one exchange for those items?


At first yes, then they said to just bring in the tag.  But then after a while realizing how dumb this was they just looked when you were issued your last sets.


----------



## Halifax Tar (31 May 2021)

What is an ALSE Shop ?


----------



## dimsum (31 May 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> What is an ALSE Shop ?


Aircrew Life Support Equipment - so helmets, O2 masks, etc.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (31 May 2021)

Remius said:


> At first yes, then they said to just bring in the tag. But then after a while realizing how dumb this was they just looked when you were issued your last sets.



I didn't even know 1 for 1 on next to skin was still 'a thing'.  the entitlement is "annual", at least in the RCAF/1 CAD.  I have a reminder in my Outlook calendar each year to remind me to 'get them' and get my socks from Logistik.  I rarely draw new sets of heavy weight long johns and "as needed" replacements on lightweight ones (base layer for flying)...never have an issue with those, either.


----------



## Kilted (31 May 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> I didn't even know 1 for 1 on next to skin was still 'a thing'.  the entitlement is "annual", at least in the RCAF/1 CAD.  I have a reminder in my Outlook calendar each year to remind me to 'get them' and get my socks from Logistik.  I rarely draw new sets of heavy weight long johns and "as needed" replacements on lightweight ones (base layer for flying)...never have an issue with those, either.


I think that it is a specific clothing stores that  has this policy.  I haven't tried recently.  They aren't particular close to wear I live and even though they serve about 90%+ reservists, they are only open during the day when someone with a full time job can't go in, unless they are going to skip a parade night to go in for the only night they are open.  Not to mention times that I have shown up and they are doing inventory for a week or two at a time.


----------



## dimsum (31 May 2021)

Kilted said:


> They aren't particular close to wear I live and even though they serve about 90%+ reservists, they are only open during the day when someone with a full time job can't go in


----------



## dangerboy (31 May 2021)

Kilted said:


> I think that it is a specific clothing stores that  has this policy.  I haven't tried recently.  They aren't particular close to wear I live and even though they serve about 90%+ reservists, they are only open during the day when someone with a full time job can't go in, unless they are going to skip a parade night to go in for the only night they are open.  Not to mention times that I have shown up and they are doing inventory for a week or two at a time.


This is one of the reasons that DND is trying to get an online operational clothing contract. Plus it is silly that rights now I can get socks online but not T-shirts or underwear.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (31 May 2021)

dimsum said:


> So, are the fighter folks going to start wearing Canadian flight suits again?



Wearing a flight suit has become much too casual.  Maybe time to return to a more formal era.


----------



## dimsum (31 May 2021)

Blackadder1916 said:


> Wearing a flight suit has become much too casual.  Maybe time to return to a more formal era.
> 
> View attachment 65318



Don't give them ideas.


----------



## Edward Campbell (31 May 2021)

Blackadder1916 said:


> Wearing a flight suit has become much too casual.  Maybe time to return to a more formal era.
> 
> View attachment 65318


Speaking of more formal eras ... this happened in 1942, I think. My father came back to St Johns after having taken some pretty severe damage, from the elements, not the enemy. Part of the damage was that his improvised 'sea cabin' (a bunk just above the chart table) had been blown away and in it was his second uniform which, for some reason, he did not keep in his own cabin, and all his white shirts. He entered 'Newfie John' wearing his blue 'business suit' and a coloured wooden work shirt that someone had given him. As it happened then Capt (later RAdm) Harry Lay was in port visiting the Admiral (Leonard Murray) and he watched my father's ship limp in and he sent a message saying something like 'Captain report to the flag office ASP.' Now Harry Lay was a friend, something of a mentor for my father, and he was an excellent officer. I wrote an essay about his combat leadership the I was in staff college. Even though I had some 'first person' sources, the nicest things I could find about him in the Staff College's quite good library was that he was "demanding" and "acerbic." He has also a stickler for doing things in the right way and, in his opinion, the only right way to fight a war against a first-class enemy was in a clean white shirt and tie. My father reported to the HQ expecting, I suppose, to be asked about his damage ... instead he was upbraided for being less than properly dressed.


----------



## OldSolduer (31 May 2021)

dimsum said:


> Why would Clothing Stores want your used underwear?


Because we've always done it that way. Why else?

Seriously there is a reason why the CAF has weird and wonderful dress regulations, some of which are practical and some that are archaic and should be discarded - like the "if you're wearing a jacket you MUST wear gloves." 
A number of years ago we were having a company parade and it was -20. The Pl WO for one of the platoons was blasted by the CSM because his soldiers had toques on in garrison and not berets!!!!!! OH MY CHRIST its Winnipeg FFS


----------



## LittleBlackDevil (31 May 2021)

OldSolduer said:


> A number of years ago we were having a company parade and it was -20. The Pl WO for one of the platoons was blasted by the CSM because his soldiers had toques on in garrison and not berets!!!!!! OH MY CHRIST its Winnipeg FFS



Was the parade indoors or outdoors?

If indoors (i.e. inside Minto Armoury) I agree with the CSM ... I don't see any good reason to wear toques inside. It's not hard to carry your beret in a pocket and switch from toque to beret when you come indoors. You wouldn't wear your winter coat indoors.

If outdoors, then I agree with you.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (31 May 2021)

Blackadder1916 said:


> Wearing a flight suit has become much too casual. Maybe time to return to a more formal era.



I can think of operational overland (IMPACT), maritime surface (CARIBBE, Projection/Neon) and sub-surface (can't name that Op on here 👀) Dets I was on that, no question, we would have been more operationally effective if we'd _only been sporting ties_.  In fact I remember of few Flt Engr's saying "Skipper, can we tighten the dress regs up some?" on almost _every_ Det I've been on since joining The Borg MAG.


----------



## daftandbarmy (31 May 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> I can think of operational overland (IMPACT), maritime surface (CARIBBE, Projection/Neon) and sub-surface (can't name that Op on here 👀) Dets I was on that, no question, we would have been more operationally effective if we'd _only been sporting ties_.  In fact I remember of few Flt Engr's saying "Skipper, can we tighten the dress regs up some?" on almost _every_ Det I've been on since joining The Borg MAG.




See what happens when you don't do up your top button?


----------



## dimsum (31 May 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> I can think of operational overland (IMPACT), maritime surface (CARIBBE, Projection/Neon) and sub-surface (can't name that Op on here 👀) Dets I was on that, no question, we would have been more operationally effective if we'd _only been sporting ties_.


----------



## dapaterson (31 May 2021)

Got it.  Model YH01 is perfect for CADPAT Arid; YH06 when you're on exchange with the Brits; YH44 for TacHel; and YH14 for the day-to-day wear of the RCAF.









						Classic Men's Adjustable Bowtie Wedding Party Formal Necktie Business Adjustable  | eBay
					

Find many great new & used options and get the best deals for Classic Men's Adjustable Bowtie Wedding Party Formal Necktie Business Adjustable at the best online prices at eBay! Free shipping for many products!



					www.ebay.com


----------



## OldSolduer (1 Jun 2021)

LittleBlackDevil said:


> Was the parade indoors or outdoors?
> 
> If indoors (i.e. inside Minto Armoury) I agree with the CSM ... I don't see any good reason to wear toques inside. It's not hard to carry your beret in a pocket and switch from toque to beret when you come indoors. You wouldn't wear your winter coat indoors.
> 
> If outdoors, then I agree with you.


Outdoors - indoors we were in berets.


----------



## Edward Campbell (1 Jun 2021)

OldSolduer said:


> Outdoors - indoors we were in berets.



Caps, winter, peaked ridiculous


----------



## dimsum (1 Jun 2021)

Edward Campbell said:


> Caps, winter, peaked ridiculous


Someone's hunting wabbits.


----------



## stoker dave (1 Jun 2021)

OldSolduer said:


> A number of years ago we were having a company parade and it was -20. The Pl WO for one of the platoons was blasted by the CSM because his soldiers had toques on in garrison and not berets!!!!!!


Sorry to bang on the same drum over and over, but this is a SAFETY issue.  If it's that cold, you risk frostbite to your ears.  So you say "for the safety of the soldiers, we are wearing toques."  Call in whoever is responsible for safety (who is that?).  End of story.  I don't understand how obvious safety hazards don't get promptly addressed.  Where I work, you get fired for ignoring safety hazards and for not addressing safety hazards identified by workers.  There are laws about this and failure to comply with the law will may result in fines for the company:  no one wants that kind of bad press.  

You can read any newspaper and there is often a story about some workplace being fined for non-compliance with safety regulations (related to working at heights, working in excavations, confined space entry, etc.).  I don't see a failure to assure adequate clothing/consideration for the weather as any different.  Based on my understanding of the rules, what the CSM did in this instance was not only wrong but also illegal.


----------



## Halifax Tar (1 Jun 2021)

Wasn't there a regiment in Pet that had to endex early a couple years back because too many people failed to bring appropriate winter kit ?  RCDs, was that you ?


----------



## OldSolduer (1 Jun 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> Wasn't there a regiment in Pet that had to endex early a couple years back because too many people failed to bring appropriate winter kit ?  RCDs, was that you ?


This is the reason that the Regimental Sergeant Major in consultation with his Company Sergeants Major publish a kit list for exercise/operations.
This is the reason Commanding Officers direct their Company Commanders to inspect their soldiers kit. 
This is the reason PL WOs, Section Commanders and their 2 I/Cs are such knobs. I know cause I were one at one time. If a soldier goes down because of lack of proper kit and he/she has been issued it - then its on the Section Commander and up for not inspecting. If the kit was inspected and all good to go and he/she neglected to bring it then its on them.


----------



## Loachman (1 Jun 2021)

dimsum said:


> Aircrew Aviation Life Support Equipment - so helmets, O2 masks, etc.



Unless something has recently changed, as much pertains to passengers as well as crew - like aircraft survival kits and life rafts.


----------



## Loachman (1 Jun 2021)

Blackadder1916 said:


> Wearing a flight suit has become much too casual.  Maybe time to return to a more formal era.
> 
> View attachment 65318



I believe that I have one of those in my collection.

The buttons were a FOD hazard, so those *transport only* flying suits did not last long.


----------



## Loachman (1 Jun 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> we would have been more operationally effective if we'd _only been sporting ties_.



Not sure if that should be read as "if *only* we'd been sporting ties (in addition to flying suits)" or "if we'd *only* been sporting ties (and nothing else)_"..._


----------



## Loachman (1 Jun 2021)

dimsum said:


> Someone's hunting wabbits.



You were spared the indignity of the old green work dress winter baseball caps with black fur fold-up ear flaps.

Too many - *one* is too many - students on my PFT in Portage in January 1979 wore those fashion horrors.


----------



## FJAG (1 Jun 2021)

Loachman said:


> You were spared the indignity of the old green work dress winter baseball caps with black fur fold-up ear flaps.
> 
> Too many - *one* is too many - students on my PFT in Portage in January 1979 wore those fashion horrors.


I tried to find a picture of the damn things but it seems that none of us at the time allowed anyone else to take a photo of us wearing them.

🤦‍♂️


----------



## OldSolduer (2 Jun 2021)

FJAG said:


> I tried to find a picture of the damn things but it seems that none of us at the time allowed anyone else to take a photo of us wearing them.
> 
> 🤦‍♂️


They were horrendous. Whoever thought that one up had to have had a laugh thinking "Damn they actually bought these".


----------



## FJAG (2 Jun 2021)

OldSolduer said:


> They were horrendous. Whoever thought that one up had to have had a laugh thinking "Damn they actually bought these".


Bet you don't remember these little beauties:







They did have little earflaps inside that you were never allowed to unfold to actually keep your ears from freezing.


----------



## OldSolduer (2 Jun 2021)

FJAG said:


> Bet you don't remember these little beauties:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Actually LCol Gollner CO 2PPCLI made us wear them in the winter of 76-77. Base Clothing Stores was swamped with soldiers trying to obtain one.


----------



## FJAG (2 Jun 2021)

OldSolduer said:


> Actually LCol Gollner CO 2PPCLI made us wear them in the winter of 76-77. Base Clothing Stores was swamped with soldiers trying to obtain one.


When Benson was made MND in Jan 72 3 RCHA had to fire a salute for him in Winnipeg in the middle of what turned into a blizzard on the way back to Shilo. We had to wear these things (flaps neatly kept folded up and tucked out of the way so that we looked sharp and not warm)

🥶


----------



## sarahsmom (2 Jun 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> Wasn't there a regiment in Pet that had to endex early a couple years back because too many people failed to bring appropriate winter kit ?  RCDs, was that you ?


It was an early January snowshoe ruck march, one of those 4AM recall things that Pet used to do too many of under the old Bde Commander. Rumour has it when the troops showed up with missing kit someone said let's go for a ruck march and show them why they need all their kit. But the issue was they had a number of newly posted in troops who hadn't had their kitting appt at clothing, and that's why they had missing kit. Such a mess! Dragoon popsicles!


----------



## dimsum (2 Jun 2021)

FJAG said:


> I tried to find a picture of the damn things but it seems that none of us at the time allowed anyone else to take a photo of us wearing them.
> 
> 🤦‍♂️


This?


----------



## Old Sweat (2 Jun 2021)

As I remember, the ear flaps were sewn inside the cap, so that if your cap fit properly, the flaps could not be folded down to cover the ears. Being the Canadian Army, the correct size in sergeant major land sizing protocol was perched on top of one's head, and with the bottom of the cap an inch or two above the ears. And did I mention, we used to replace the buttons for the chin strap with regimental pattern and shine them, as well as spit polishing the chin strap and blocking the body of the cap for stiffness. In other words, we were cold, but oh so sharp.


----------



## dangerboy (2 Jun 2021)

In 1992 while with 3 PPCLI in Croatia we were issued with a UN version of a hat like that, very cheaply made. I don't think anyone actually wore it, we preferred the UN toque. Will have to look to see if I still have mine, stashed away in a box.


----------



## daftandbarmy (2 Jun 2021)

dangerboy said:


> In 1992 while with 3 PPCLI in Croatia we were issued with a UN version of a hat like that, very cheaply made. I don't think anyone actually wore it, we preferred the UN toque. Will have to look to see if I still have mine, stashed away in a box.



Because nothing says 'Canadian Peacekeeper' like a light blue toque, eh?


----------



## Blackadder1916 (2 Jun 2021)

Loachman said:


> You were spared the indignity of the old green work dress winter baseball caps with black fur fold-up ear flaps.
> 
> Too many - *one* is too many - students on my PFT in Portage in January 1979 wore those fashion horrors.



I thanked God in Heaven (well, I would if I believed in such claptrap) for the Elmer Fudd cap.  While you may have been able (as an OCdt) to leisurely stroll or drive from quarters to flight line to classroom on the bald prairie, those of us who had to march from barracks to school during one of the most horrendous winters of the 1970s in Borden credit it a good piece of kit (even if it looked stupid).  And yes, we wore it with the flaps down and also wore that horse blanket material greatcoat.  At least, once we got to Borden, we didn't have to continue wearing neckties with work dress as we had to do in Cornwallis.


----------



## FJAG (2 Jun 2021)

Blackadder1916 said:


> I thanked God in Heaven (well, I would if I believed in such claptrap) for the Elmer Fudd cap.  While you may have been able (as an OCdt) to leisurely stroll or drive from quarters to flight line to classroom on the bald prairie, those of us who had to march from barracks to school during one of the most horrendous winters of the 1970s in Borden credit it a good piece of kit (even if it looked stupid).  And yes, we wore it with the flaps down and also wore that horse blanket material greatcoat.  At least, once we got to Borden, we didn't have to continue wearing neckties with work dress as we had to do in Cornwallis.


As OCdts in Shilo in mid-winter we had to march, that's march son, a kilometre each trip from our quarters to our classroom to the mess back to the classroom, to the gun park, back to the mess and our quarters at least four times per day through snowbanks and howling winds (but mercifully not uphill ever because ... Shilo) wearing battle dress with ties.

We did however wear over boots (and frequently mukluks), arctic mitts, toques and parkas with the hoods up because we didn't have dumb leaders.

😁


----------



## Loachman (3 Jun 2021)

FJAG said:


> Bet you don't remember these little beauties:
> 
> They did have little earflaps inside that you were never allowed to unfold to actually keep your ears from freezing.



The picture will not open up for me for some reason. Is that the black-fur dress hat with the green flap on the left-hand side?


----------



## FJAG (3 Jun 2021)

Loachman said:


> The picture will not open up for me for some reason. Is that the black-fur dress hat with the green flap on the left-hand side?


Yes it is. I can't recall what it was something like the busby that the artillery band and our ceremonial gun crews wore (only green) and not so well formed. I think RMC had something like this too with a red flap.






🍻


----------



## daftandbarmy (3 Jun 2021)

FJAG said:


> Yes it is. I can't recall what it was something like the busby that the artillery band and our ceremonial gun crews wore (only green) and not so well formed. I think RMC had something like this too with a red flap.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yet another reason to be thankful when you're based in BC like, you know, not wearing the 1812 pin becasue we didn't exist back then


----------



## cavalryman (3 Jun 2021)

FJAG said:


> I think RMC had something like this too with a red flap.
> 
> 
> 🍻


Can confirm.


----------



## Loachman (3 Jun 2021)

FJAG said:


> Yes it is. I can't recall what it was something like the busby that the artillery band and our ceremonial gun crews wore (only green) and not so well formed. I think RMC had something like this too with a red flap.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The Franco platoon on my Chilliwack course would occasionally remove the flappy thing, pull the top of the hat up, and wear them sideways while marching and singing and carrying mops through the (then brand-new) shacks late in the evening.

They sold for $3.15 in Clothing Stores as an optional item. I bought a bunch one year and gave them to people as tea cosies for Christmas.

I found mine a few months ago. There was foam in the ear flap thing when new, but it had crumbled to dust and persistently leaks out now. The interior location of the ear flap was stupid as the hat would slide down one's head when they were deployed, but it was nice that they went all around the inside so that one could also keep one's eyeballs warm in very cold temperatures.

Why a northern country could not provide decent cold-weather hats is one of the great mysteries of all time.


----------



## Mick (3 Jun 2021)

FJAG said:


> Yes it is. I can't recall what it was something like the busby that the artillery band and our ceremonial gun crews wore (only green) and not so well formed. I think RMC had something like this too with a red flap.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


RMC called it the "astrakhan" if I recall correctly.  I preferred the dark blue toque - it was allowed to cover your ears, and looked less....ridiculous.


----------



## Mick (3 Jun 2021)

RMC PT toque...also fairly ridiculous.


----------



## SupersonicMax (3 Jun 2021)

Mick said:


> View attachment 65342RMC PT toque...also fairly ridiculous.


This ain't right. The pom pom is still attached.


----------



## Remius (3 Jun 2021)

Would have been in style in the 70s.


----------



## daftandbarmy (3 Jun 2021)

Loachman said:


> The Franco platoon on my Chilliwack course would occasionally remove the flappy thing, pull the top of the hat up, and wear them sideways while marching and singing and carrying mops through the (then brand-new) shacks late in the evening.
> 
> They sold for $3.15 in Clothing Stores as an optional item. I bought a bunch one year and gave them to people as tea cosies for Christmas.
> 
> ...



Probably for the same reason that the British Army didn't issue rain gear until 1985.


----------



## Mick (3 Jun 2021)

SupersonicMax said:


> This ain't right. The pom pom is still attached.


Good catch.  I was just sneaky I guess...


----------



## brihard (3 Jun 2021)

FJAG said:


> The Camerons issued me with pretty much everything except a skeahn-dhu and mess kit. Never did get the skeahn-dhu and wore my artillery mess kit to the mess dinners for four years much to the heartburn of the regimental senate. I think they all knew though that my tenure with them would end with my call to the bar.
> 
> 😁


Wait, which Camerons were you with?


----------



## OldTanker (3 Jun 2021)

WRT the cap, fur, ridiculous . . . as an O/Cdt I was on contact training at CFB Winnipeg in 1974. I lived in the Officers Mess on the west side of the runway and worked on the east side, so twice a day I had to do the walk along the south side of the runway. In the early winter the wind would howl down that runway straight from the North Pole, unimpeded. I can say I was very happy to have a cap, fur, ridiculous to wear instead of my black beret. And no parkas with hoods back then, just the green greatcoat. Other than one forgettable parade in Gagetown, that was the only time I wore this silly hat.


----------



## FJAG (3 Jun 2021)

brihard said:


> Wait, which Camerons were you with?


Coy Comd of A Coy Queen's Own Cameron Highlanders in Winnipeg from 1981-85 (although I was farmed out to Mil Area Prairie over the summers to run HQ Coy in Dundurn and to instruct on the Pre-Militia Staff course for the last two years.)

🍻


----------



## RangerRay (3 Jun 2021)

Loachman said:


> Why a northern country could not provide decent cold-weather hats is one of the great mysteries of all time.



Say what you will about this hat, but it’s warm, stylish, and has a rich history in the Canadian military and law enforcement, going at least as far back as the Yukon Field Force. It’s still used by the RCMP and most Canadian game warden agencies.


----------



## Loachman (3 Jun 2021)

I got mine issued a few years ago, but never had the opportunity to wear it except with mess dress.

II like it and it works and should have been standardized decades ago.

A means of attaching a cap badge to the front would be nice, and perhaps an operational dress version as well - can they grow CADPAT fur?


----------



## OldSolduer (3 Jun 2021)

RangerRay said:


> Say what you will about this hat, but it’s warm, stylish, and has a rich history in the Canadian military and law enforcement, going at least as far back as the Yukon Field Force. It’s still used by the RCMP and most Canadian game warden agencies.
> 
> View attachment 65345


AND Corrections here in Manitoba


----------



## dimsum (3 Jun 2021)

Loachman said:


> A means of attaching a cap badge to the front would be nice, and perhaps an operational dress version as well - can they grow CADPAT fur?


Don't give them ideas.



RangerRay said:


> Say what you will about this hat, but it’s warm, stylish, and has a rich history in the Canadian military and law enforcement, going at least as far back as the Yukon Field Force. It’s still used by the RCMP and most Canadian game warden agencies.


We do get issued them.  Mostly for DEU below zero, except for the folks up north where I think they can wear them with whatever, below zero.


----------



## Edward Campbell (3 Jun 2021)

Old Sweat said:


> As I remember, the ear flaps were sewn inside the cap, so that if your cap fit properly, the flaps could not be folded down to cover the ears. Being the Canadian Army, the correct size in sergeant major land sizing protocol was perched on top of one's head, and with the bottom of the cap an inch or two above the ears. And did I mention, we used to replace the buttons for the chin strap with regimental pattern and shine them, as well as spit polishing the chin strap and blocking the body of the cap for stiffness. In other words, we were cold, but oh so sharp.


Yep ... those were the good ol' days!


----------



## daftandbarmy (3 Jun 2021)

RangerRay said:


> Say what you will about this hat, but it’s warm, stylish, and has a rich history in the Canadian military and law enforcement, going at least as far back as the Yukon Field Force. It’s still used by the RCMP and most Canadian game warden agencies.
> 
> View attachment 65345



That, the bivvy bag and the metal mug are the three best things the Army ever issued....


----------



## Navy_Pete (3 Jun 2021)

RangerRay said:


> Say what you will about this hat, but it’s warm, stylish, and has a rich history in the Canadian military and law enforcement, going at least as far back as the Yukon Field Force. It’s still used by the RCMP and most Canadian game warden agencies.
> 
> View attachment 65345


Really appreciate it in Ottawa winters; suspect it's similarly awesome anywhere it gets below -15, as are the snow pants for the black 'not a parka' heavy weight navy coat. Now if I could just get issued winter gloves that are worth a damn I'd be set.

Got to say, really don't miss the bus commute in Ottawa with COVID. Wearing snow pants, heavy snowmobiling mukluks and a big winter coat because the STO bus may show up within a 5-90 minute window gets old quick.


----------



## lenaitch (3 Jun 2021)

RangerRay said:


> Say what you will about this hat, but it’s warm, stylish, and has a rich history in the Canadian military and law enforcement, going at least as far back as the Yukon Field Force. It’s still used by the RCMP and most Canadian game warden agencies.
> 
> View attachment 65345



The OPP has issued them since the beginning of time and still do even though they also issue toques.  The fur hat is warmer and makes a better pillow. 😁 They used to use their metal hat badge but now it has an integral embroidered badge (they only have to care about one badge).  I don't think the RCMP has ever had a badge on theirs.

The only thing I didn't like was the little bow on top.  I replaced the tie strings with snap fasteners.


----------



## dimsum (3 Jun 2021)

Navy_Pete said:


> Now if I could just get issued winter gloves that are worth a damn I'd be set.


I found the newer gloves (thicker with black fleecy liner) are better than the older gloves (wool liner).  YMMV.


----------



## DeweyDecimal (3 Jun 2021)

Loachman said:


> A means of attaching a cap badge to the front would be nice,



Remember when we used to put cap badges on tuques ?



Loachman said:


> and perhaps an operational dress version as well - can they grow CADPAT fur?



A once saw someone wear the fur hat with a flight-suit.  It was an interesting look.


----------



## DeweyDecimal (3 Jun 2021)

(double post)


----------



## dimsum (3 Jun 2021)

DeweyDecimal said:


> A once saw someone wear the fur hat with a flight-suit.  It was an interesting look.


I'm pretty sure 440 Sqn specifically allows that.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (3 Jun 2021)

That's it;  MAG should be flying with


dimsum said:


> I'm pretty sure 440 Sqn specifically allows that.



Not just 440...

From the CADOs, Vol 1, 1-006 Operational Dress, Para 5 (f)

5. The following headdress may be worn with RCAF flying clothing:
f. Yukon cap – may be worn with operational dress by members posted to Yellowknife, Goose Bay and JTF North during winter season.


----------



## dapaterson (3 Jun 2021)

So if you're only on TD to Goose Bay in January, you're not allowed to wear it?

Or, if you're posted to Yellowknife and on TD to Hickam AFB in February...


----------



## SeaKingTacco (3 Jun 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> That's it;  MAG should be flying with
> 
> 
> Not just 440...
> ...


Best hat, ever.

I bought a second one and put my old one in my winter survival gear. We tested them in the high Arctic on survival training. Far and away warmer and more comfortable than any other issue hat. 

FWIW, the white ”empire strikes back” hat was the worst. It froze up and reduced your ability to hear and see- all bad things in polar bear country…


----------



## Kilted (3 Jun 2021)

dimsum said:


> I'm pretty sure 440 Sqn specifically allows that.


I've seen a bunch of people wear them with combats in the winter, not authorized, but it happens.  Then again I have also seen it worn with a bathing suit and a bath robe in the middle of summer.


----------



## lenaitch (4 Jun 2021)

Kilted said:


> I've seen a bunch of people wear them with combats in the winter, not authorized, but it happens.  Then again I have also seen it worn with a bathing suit and a bath robe in the middle of summer.



Cousin Eddie.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (4 Jun 2021)

dapaterson said:


> So if you're only on TD to Goose Bay in January, you're not allowed to wear it?
> 
> Or, if you're posted to Yellowknife and on TD to Hickam AFB in February...



There's always someone who questions military common sense....


----------



## dapaterson (4 Jun 2021)

Military Common Sense is sort of like Military Ini, right?


----------



## dimsum (4 Jun 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> There's always someone who questions military common sense....


You know why there are seemingly ridiculous rules, like "there is no way someone would do that"...?


----------



## Eye In The Sky (4 Jun 2021)

We all know, if you are only on TD to Yellowknife, it's not as cold as it is for people posted there..."posted" -35 = "TD +5.


----------



## Haggis (5 Jun 2021)

RangerRay said:


> Say what you will about this hat, but it’s warm, stylish, and has a rich history in the Canadian military and law enforcement, going at least as far back as the Yukon Field Force. It’s still used by the RCMP and most Canadian game warden agencies.
> 
> View attachment 65345


My agency wears them with a hat badge.


----------



## lenaitch (5 Jun 2021)

dimsum said:


> You know why there are seemingly ridiculous rules, like "there is no way someone would do that"...?



I am told that it is specifically listed that you cannot have a forge at a RHU/PMQ. You just gotta know that at one time, somewhere . . .


----------



## dimsum (5 Jun 2021)

lenaitch said:


> I am told that it is specifically listed that you cannot have a forge at a RHU/PMQ. You just gotta know that at one time, somewhere . . .


Bringing it back to "why" and dress regs:

Funny enough though, there is nowhere that the Dress Instructions that say a shirt (DEU or otherwise) has to be worn tucked in    

I'm honestly not sure why someone hasn't challenged that yet.


----------



## Haggis (5 Jun 2021)

dimsum said:


> Bringing it back to "why" and dress regs:
> 
> Funny enough though, there is nowhere that the Dress Instructions that say a shirt (DEU or otherwise) has to be worn tucked in
> 
> I'm honestly not sure why someone hasn't challenged that yet.


Right now, a Cpl somewhere who just read your post is saying 'hold my beer".


----------



## dapaterson (5 Jun 2021)

Haggis said:


> Right now, a Cpl somewhere who just read your post is saying 'hold my beer".


Sounds more like a Capt(10) kind of thing...


----------



## Haggis (5 Jun 2021)

dapaterson said:


> Sounds more like a Capt(10) kind of thing...


Same personality... different Mess.


----------



## dimsum (5 Jun 2021)

repost


----------



## dimsum (5 Jun 2021)

Haggis said:


> Same personality... different Mess.


----------



## ModlrMike (7 Jun 2021)

dimsum said:


> Bringing it back to "why" and dress regs:
> 
> Funny enough though, there is nowhere that the Dress Instructions that say a shirt (DEU or otherwise) has to be worn tucked in
> 
> I'm honestly not sure why someone hasn't challenged that yet.


That's why they have pictures in the relevant chapters.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (7 Jun 2021)

dimsum said:


> Funny enough though, there is nowhere that the Dress Instructions that say a shirt (DEU or otherwise) has to be worn tucked in



Is there anything that states "hands shall not be in pockets"? 

I know there's something that says "get the bends out of those @I*{)@@@@ elbows!!!!!"


----------



## Blackadder1916 (7 Jun 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> Is there anything that states "hands shall not be in pockets"?



Yes.





__





						Dress instructions | Section 2 Appearance - Canada.ca
					

Canadian Armed Forces Dress Instructions




					www.canada.ca
				



*Behaviour.* Personnel in uniform shall comport themselves in a manner which projects a positive military appearance. Behaviour such as chewing gum, slouching, *placing hands in pockets*, smoking or eating on the street and walking hand in hand, *is forbidden*. This instruction’s objective is to project an image of a disciplined and self-controlled force.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (7 Jun 2021)

Is...is that a Private in the pic I linked to above?  Wait...no...it's.....omg.  An Officer, not setting a positive example!!

Smoking in uniform is prohibited....why are there smoke pits all over bases then?  

IF the CAF isn't going to actually enforce these _rules_...drop them ffs.


----------



## dangerboy (7 Jun 2021)

Not very professional in what looks to be a promotion.


----------



## Weinie (7 Jun 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> Is...is that a Private in the pic I linked to above?  Wait...no...it's.....omg.  *An Officer, not setting a positive example!!*
> 
> Smoking in uniform is prohibited....why are there smoke pits all over bases then?
> 
> IF the CAF isn't going to actually enforce these _rules_...drop them ffs.


More likely a wannabe pilot, who wanted to not talk with his hands. 

Full disclosure: I, as both an NCM and an Officer, stuck my hands in my pockets.

Full disclosure: I, as both an NCM, and an Officer, *smoked.*

Full disclosure: I, as both an NCM, and an Officer, chewed gum.

Fire mission, my grid, over.


----------



## dapaterson (7 Jun 2021)

Weinie said:


> More likely a wannabe pilot, who wanted to not talk with his hands.
> 
> Full disclosure: I, as both an NCM and an Officer, stuck my hands in my pockets.
> 
> ...



TL;DR: you were never a member of The RCR.


----------



## Weinie (7 Jun 2021)

dapaterson said:


> TL;DR: you were never a member of The RCR.


Perhaps your TL;DR was overcome by your quote/paste. But I digress.


----------



## SupersonicMax (7 Jun 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> Is...is that a Private in the pic I linked to above?  Wait...no...it's.....omg.  An Officer, not setting a positive example!!
> 
> Smoking in uniform is prohibited....why are there smoke pits all over bases then?
> 
> IF the CAF isn't going to actually enforce these _rules_...drop them ffs.


Just to be clear, smoking in uniform is not prohibited.  Just smoking on the street.


----------



## dimsum (8 Jun 2021)

Weinie said:


> More likely a wannabe pilot, who wanted to not talk with his hands.
> 
> Full disclosure: I, as both an NCM and an Officer, stuck my hands in my pockets.
> 
> ...




Want to stop aircrew from putting hands in pockets?  Issue American-style flight suits (no hip pockets).  The fact that they fit better is a bonus.


----------



## OldSolduer (8 Jun 2021)

dangerboy said:


> Not very professional in what looks to be a promotion.


You are very correct in that assessment


----------



## SupersonicMax (8 Jun 2021)

Did the person get promoted?  What effect did having hands in the pockets have on the task at hand?  Perhaps it doesn’t look good but it is besides the point of my question.


----------



## dimsum (8 Jun 2021)

SupersonicMax said:


> Did the person get promoted?  What effect did having hands in the pockets have on the task at hand?  Perhaps it doesn’t look good but it is besides the point of my question.


I also think it's a weird angle and the LCol wasn't expecting to be photographed.  I'm not a photographer but probably he was expecting the camera to be focused on the promotee and the person putting the rank slip on them, not him.

Why PA (or whoever) chose that picture is beyond me though.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (8 Jun 2021)

dimsum said:


> Why PA (or whoever) chose that picture is beyond me though.



That is part of the problem, and it's becoming common on CAF social media feeds (CAF Ops, RCN, RCAF...) to see CAF mbr's not following regs...and its becoming more obvious that leadership isn't doing their jobs enforcing things.  The PAO and civies who are putting pics up on these feeds are in need of some 'supervision'.

The other part of the problem is people being people, and not following rules.

I say, either relax the dress regs and amend the applic pubs...or enforce the rules as they are written.


----------



## Loachman (8 Jun 2021)

Or improve PAOs.


----------



## SupersonicMax (8 Jun 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> or enforce the rules as they are written.


How do you enforce someone with their hands in their pockets?  Charge? Talk? Admin measures?


----------



## Eye In The Sky (8 Jun 2021)

_get your hands out of you pockets *insert rank/name/_ _are your hands cold?_ 

It depends....do I know the person?  Is it a recruit course?  etc 

I've stopped people in the parking lot, coming in/out of buildings, etc for dress...deportment...not saluting Officers...all the things the CAF expects of me to enforce.  It's part of what I'm paid for...but I also use some common sense.  

If we start charging people for minor infractions, or throwing RMs at them....well I can't imagine that so I won't try to.


----------



## SupersonicMax (8 Jun 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> _get your hands out of you pockets *insert rank/name/_ _are your hands cold?_
> 
> It depends....do I know the person?  Is it a recruit course?  etc
> 
> ...


What tells you the individual in the picture wasn't reminded after the fact?


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (8 Jun 2021)

Isn't it possible the person he was looking towards just asked him to get the next promotion rank insignia ready?  

#outrageculture


----------



## Eye In The Sky (8 Jun 2021)

SupersonicMax said:


> What tells you the individual in the picture wasn't reminded after the fact?



Absolutely nothing...what tells you he was?


----------



## SupersonicMax (8 Jun 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> Absolutely nothing...what tells you he was?


Nothing but I didn’t assume he was or was not


----------



## Eye In The Sky (8 Jun 2021)

Here's the bigger issue, though.  There are ways we do things in the CAF;  but the rules don't get enforced equally.  A Maj with his hands in his pockets should be the same as a Pte doing it.

If it's 'the way it is', follow the policy.  Set a good example for your subs, enforce things as needed.  

If "no hands in pockets" is a stupid rule...remove it from 265 so it's not just Cpl/Ptes and OCdts/2Lts getting yammered at for breaking them...


----------



## stoker dave (8 Jun 2021)

The public may not know the ins and outs of the dress regulations, so minor infractions likely go unnoticed. 

But looking at the SIZE of some people waddling around in uniform, it makes them think that fitness standards are not being very well maintained.


----------



## mariomike (8 Jun 2021)

stoker dave said:


> But looking at the SIZE of some people waddling around in uniform, it makes them think that fitness standards are not being very well maintained.


Has the situation improved, gotten worse or remained the same over the last 16 years?









						Fat troops on the street....
					

One, two, another, and another, and another, and another........................ and another, etc.. see: only two




					www.milnet.ca
				



16 pages.


----------



## SupersonicMax (8 Jun 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> Here's the bigger issue, though.  There are ways we do things in the CAF;  but the rules don't get enforced equally.  A Maj with his hands in his pockets should be the same as a Pte doing it.
> 
> If it's 'the way it is', follow the policy.  Set a good example for your subs, enforce things as needed.
> 
> If "no hands in pockets" is a stupid rule...remove it from 265 so it's not just Cpl/Ptes and OCdts/2Lts getting yammered at for breaking them...


I think it goes to picking your battles.  We do not have the collective capacity to deal with every single infraction from the rule books. I'd say we have bigger fishes to fry than hands in the pocket...


----------



## Weinie (8 Jun 2021)

Loachman said:


> Or improve PAOs.


Sigh.......yes, it was the fault of the PAO, because after all we rule everything.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (8 Jun 2021)

SupersonicMax said:


> I think it goes to picking your battles. We do not have the collective capacity to deal with every single infraction from the rule books. I'd say we have bigger fishes to fry than hands in the pocket...



Maybe.  _But._..the QR & O doesn't give leaders that option (turn a blind eye) really, does it?  For mbrs of your rank, you rely a lot on guys like me to do the policing and day-to-day stuff like this.  

In some CAF units, you'll find the mbr who can't dress right, and follow simple instructions, and always have their kit squared away, is also going to be the person who makes you nervous on a range with live fire and movement.  

Or, to not recognize the CRIT sys alert that requires the RADAR to be powered off and specific CBs pulled, before a fire starts in the radome....

To me, it's not the question of 'if hands in pockets are right/wrong' (my job is to support my CofC and set positive examples and enforce...)...I take it more of the "lack of self-discipline/attention to detail" part.  

*THAT*...I care about.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (8 Jun 2021)

Weinie said:


> Sigh.......yes, it was the fault of the PAO, because after all we rule everything.



Serious question...who does vet pictures for the numerous CAF FB pages, etc?  They really should think twice about some of the pics posted...


----------



## Weinie (8 Jun 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> Serious question...who does vet pictures for the numerous CAF FB pages, etc?  They really should think twice about some of the pics posted...


The chain of command.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (8 Jun 2021)




----------



## SupersonicMax (8 Jun 2021)

Just like there is no leeway for speeding yet, minor deviations are accepted.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (8 Jun 2021)

SupersonicMax said:


> Just like there is no leeway for speeding yet, minor deviations are accepted.



Depends who catches you


----------



## Eye In The Sky (8 Jun 2021)

Here's the black and white of the subj, though....I'm all for changing/amending things like dress policy.  I remember when squareback haircuts were first permitted...there was the 'well its all going to hell now!!!!' crowd.  Now, we can buy our own boots, grow beards and partake in the funny lettuce.  Times change...whatever 'the regs' are...are the ones my CofC can rely on me to police...just like I'm supposed to do.  With the 'minor deviations' that suit the time/place.


----------



## Weinie (8 Jun 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


>


PAO's submit imagery to sp a particular narrative, whether it be a promotion, or an OP. Perhaps this was the only viable image from that particular event. Senior officers are not generally conducive to listening to a Cpl Image Tech who wants to frame things, or to a Capt PAO who wishes to stage events. We teeter between being PAO's, and getting described as commissars.

Notwithstanding that, anything that gets published does so with CoC authority. End, full stop


----------



## SupersonicMax (8 Jun 2021)

100% compliance and enforcement sounds great in theory.  In practice, it would likely consume your whole organization just to enforce the minutia of each rule not to mention, alienate the troops (excessive negative feedback).  I would rather focus on things that matter than hands in pockets or hair and boots standard.  As long as the rules, within a unit, are enforced equally, I don’t see a problem with that approach.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (8 Jun 2021)

SupersonicMax said:


> I would rather focus on things that matter than hands in pockets or hair and boots standard



And, you should be able to...if your NCOs are doing their job...which makes the WOs job easier...and so on.  It's a system and I've seen it work in 2 different DEUs now for a while.


----------



## Jarnhamar (8 Jun 2021)

Sometimes when no one is around I wear my arcteryx touque in my office, no jacket. Sometimes I even close my door, undo my bottom button and Rouleau-roll my sleeves.


----------



## dimsum (8 Jun 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Sometimes when no one is around I wear my arcteryx touque in my office, no jacket. Sometimes I even close my door, undo my bottom button and Rouleau-roll my sleeves.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (8 Jun 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Rouleau-roll



Magical, best post of the day.


----------



## Kilted (12 Jun 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Sometimes when no one is around I wear my arcteryx touque in my office, no jacket. Sometimes I even close my door, undo my bottom button and Rouleau-roll my sleeves.


Sometimes I take my mask off when no one else is arould.


----------



## markppcli (13 Jun 2021)

I just want a piece of paper that tells me when I'm allowed to wear an OTW shirt as opposed to this vague "when you're wearing armour / training" unit level policy. As quite frankly i'm just not fast enough at shirt changes for it to be instant when i'm out of fighting kit.


----------



## OldSolduer (14 Jun 2021)

markppcli said:


> I just want a piece of paper that tells me when I'm allowed to wear an OTW shirt as opposed to this vague "when you're wearing armour / training" unit level policy. As quite frankly i'm just not fast enough at shirt changes for it to be instant when i'm out of fighting kit.


Yes I can understand your dilemma. IMO there are too many people involved in dress policy. That’s the COs purview in consultation with the RSM.

On Fridays I wear a red tshirt under my blue uniform shirt in contravention of dress regs. A rebel I know.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (14 Jun 2021)

Kilted said:


> Sometimes I take my mask off when no one else is arould.


You maniac! You will kill us all!


----------



## Kilted (14 Jun 2021)

OldSolduer said:


> Yes I can understand your dilemma. IMO there are too many people involved in dress policy. That’s the COs purview in consultation with the RSM.
> 
> On Fridays I wear a red tshirt under my blue uniform shirt in contravention of dress regs. A rebel I know.


I sometimes wear a green shirt with a picture of a cat throwing a grenade on it.


----------



## dimsum (14 Jun 2021)

Kilted said:


> I sometimes wear a green shirt with a picture of a cat throwing a grenade on it.


Some folks I know have worn this in CADPAT and flight suit   









						Buy and sell on the world's most socially driven marketplace | Storenvy
					

Discover unique and inspired goods from real authentic brands. Sell on a socially driven marketplace. Open up a free custom storefront. Get a custom URL




					propgun.storenvy.com


----------



## daftandbarmy (14 Jun 2021)

dimsum said:


> Some folks I know have worn this in CADPAT and flight suit
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Aircrew were always the easiest to get information from during E&E/tactical questioning exercises as they invariably had a squadron t-shirt on, or something like that, e.g.,:

"Number, rank, name, date of birth, oh, I see you're from XYZ squadron? You know that you've just told us your unit without even realizing it. Anything else you'd like to share?"


----------



## Blackadder1916 (14 Jun 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> Aircrew were always the easiest to get information from during E&E/tactical questioning exercises as they invariably had a squadron t-shirt on, or something like that, e.g.,:
> 
> "Number, rank, name, date of birth, oh, I see you're from XYZ squadron? You know that you've just told us your unit without even realizing it. *Anything else you'd like to share?*"



Yes, it's surprising the info you can get from an individual's belongings.


----------



## dapaterson (14 Jun 2021)

You have Omer's T-shirt?


----------



## Weinie (14 Jun 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> Aircrew were always the easiest to get information from during E&E/tactical questioning exercises as they invariably had a squadron t-shirt on, or something like that, e.g.,:
> 
> "Number, rank, name, date of birth, oh, I see you're from XYZ squadron? You know that you've just told us your unit without even realizing it. Anything else you'd like to share?"


Or just call the local 5 star  hotel.


----------



## medicineman (15 Jun 2021)

Blackadder1916 said:


> Yes, it's surprising the info you can get from an individual's belongings.


Need to get one or more of these...might come in useful when dealing with asshat consultants or certain clientele


----------



## OldSolduer (15 Jun 2021)

medicineman said:


> Need to get one or more of these...might come in useful when dealing with asshat consultants or certain clientele


Or senior management. There are few leaders here


----------



## medicineman (16 Jun 2021)

OldSolduer said:


> Or senior management. There are few leaders here


Certainly few where I used to work...


----------



## Maxman1 (3 Jul 2021)

Kilted said:


> I remember watching someone get jacked up for wearing his rain jacket in the field because the rain jacket "isn't a field jacket."



On an advance party for a weekend ex in Burwash, when it was cold and raining at night, a (notoriously batshit ex-CSOR) warrant chirped someone wearing a rain jacket, "It's not cold, it's not raining, why are you wearing a jacket?"

The following ex, he stopped training to jack up about a hundred troops for wearing jackets when it was cold and windy in Pet, saying "Put a rock in your boot! Get hard!"


----------



## brihard (3 Jul 2021)

Maxman1 said:


> On an advance party for a weekend ex in Burwash, when it was cold and raining at night, a (notoriously batshit ex-CSOR) warrant chirped someone wearing a rain jacket, "It's not cold, it's not raining, why are you wearing a jacket?"
> 
> The following ex, he stopped training to jack up about a hundred troops for wearing jackets when it was cold and windy in Pet, saying "Put a rock in your boot! Get hard!"


These are the people so damaged by the military that they could not function outside of it.


----------



## Haggis (3 Jul 2021)

Maxman1 said:


> "Put a rock in your boot! Get hard!"


OMG!!!  I haven't heard that one in _forever_... all the way back to my ISCC, I think.  What memories that brings back.  I can't wait to tell my EAP lady about that on Monday.


----------



## daftandbarmy (3 Jul 2021)

Maxman1 said:


> On an advance party for a weekend ex in Burwash, when it was cold and raining at night, a (notoriously batshit ex-CSOR) warrant chirped someone wearing a rain jacket, "It's not cold, it's not raining, why are you wearing a jacket?"
> 
> The following ex, he stopped training to jack up about a hundred troops for wearing jackets when it was cold and windy in Pet, saying "Put a rock in your boot! Get hard!"


----------



## OldSolduer (3 Jul 2021)

brihard said:


> These are the people so damaged by the military that they could not function outside of it.


How true. The transition can be tough for those that don't realize most civilians could give a rat's ass if you were a Warrant or whatever. They might be impressed by a General but in this day and age I doubt it.


----------



## daftandbarmy (3 Jul 2021)

OldSolduer said:


> How true. The transition can be tough for those that don't realize most civilians could give a rat's ass if you were a Warrant or whatever. They might be impressed by a General but in this day and age I doubt it.



I interact regularly with civilians, at work and elsewhere, and have about 40 years military experience. Not counting my 4 years with Army Cadets.

I discovered that they really, really respect people with prior military service. 

As long as you're not a c*nt.


----------



## OldSolduer (3 Jul 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> I
> 
> I discovered that they really, really respect people with prior military service.
> 
> As long as you're not a c*nt.


Yes most do but like I said they don't really care if you were a WO or  a Cpl


----------



## daftandbarmy (3 Jul 2021)

OldSolduer said:


> Yes most do but like I said they don't really care if you were a WO or  a Cpl



Neither should the retired member.

I encounter retired NCMs (as well as Senior Officers) from time to time and have to explain to them that they aren't awful just because they aren't a General.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (6 Jul 2021)

Weinie said:


> Or just call the local 5 star hotel.



I know there's a myth that 'aicrew always stay in 5 star hotels...';  I just want to clear up this myth.  We do not _always stay in hotels_.

I've also had to stay in cottages (Scotland hotels are full at times...)  Pulling on some inner strength...I made it thru that Det.


----------



## Remius (6 Jul 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> I interact regularly with civilians, at work and elsewhere, and have about 40 years military experience. Not counting my 4 years with Army Cadets.
> 
> I discovered that they really, really respect people with prior military service.
> 
> As long as you're not a c*nt.


I have to agree with that.


----------



## Weinie (6 Jul 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> I know there's a myth that 'aicrew always stay in 5 star hotels...';  I just want to clear up this myth.  We do not _always stay in hotels_.
> 
> I've also had to stay in cottages (Scotland hotels are full at times...)  Pulling on some inner strength...I made it thru that Det.


The horror, the horror.


----------



## mariomike (7 Jul 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> I interact regularly with civilians, at work and elsewhere, and have about 40 years military experience. Not counting my 4 years with Army Cadets.
> 
> I discovered that they really, really respect people with prior military service.


When I hired on at my career department, I don't think the '46'ers - men who had been in the war - were particularly awestruck that I was in the militia. 

It was more the other way around.   

The PRes did not generally come up in conversation at work. However, the fact I disappeared for two weeks every summer - before having enough seniority to bid for "prime time" vacation - did not go unnoticed.  

But, at least the vets could see I was clean cut. "Smile and a shoeshine." And, being an MSE Op helped. Especially when I later transitioned into the bus division.


----------



## Navy_Pete (8 Jul 2021)

Kilted said:


> I remember watching someone get jacked up for wearing his rain jacket in the field because the rain jacket "isn't a field jacket."


Hahaha, funny story, the Navy created a new blue rain jacket, based on the RN pattern rain jacket (that they wear all the time). Can't find a picture, but they are dark blue and look pretty sharp.

Because it relplaced our old canary suits, we're only supposed to wear them on the ship. That may have changed recently, but getting jacked up while walking through downtown Ottawa for wearing my rain coat with DEUs in heavy rain on a warm spring day was probably the moment when it became just a job. When I showed up to a meeting with DGs soaked to the skin, rain coat in hand a few other people's souls died from lack of common sense in our uniform rules.


----------



## Kilted (8 Jul 2021)

In my unit slightly before I joined, a Sgt on a February exercise in -30 weather went around 25 minutes before H-Hour and told everyone to take their gloves off, so that they could more effectively use their weapons.


----------



## daftandbarmy (8 Jul 2021)

Kilted said:


> In my unit slightly before I joined, a Sgt on a February exercise in -30 weather went around 25 minutes before H-Hour and told everyone to take their gloves off, so that they could more effectively use their weapons.


----------



## Kilted (8 Jul 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


>


The people who told me that story were completely afraid of him.  He left a couple of years after I joined, I managed to avoid him for the most part.


----------



## daftandbarmy (8 Jul 2021)

Kilted said:


> The people who told me that story were completely afraid of him.  He left a couple of years after I joined, I managed to avoid him for the most part.



I had a Pl Sgt like that once. 

I'm pretty sure they used him as a model for Sgt. Barnes in the movie 'Platoon'. I like to think that I helped end his career in my regiment.


----------



## Kilted (8 Jul 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> I had a Pl Sgt like that once.
> 
> I'm pretty sure they used him as a model for Sgt. Barnes in the movie 'Platoon'. I like to think that I helped end his career in my regiment.


Just wait for the class action lawsuit for general harassment, the government will be broke.


----------



## OldSolduer (8 Jul 2021)

Kilted said:


> In my unit slightly before I joined, a Sgt on a February exercise in -30 weather went around 25 minutes before H-Hour and told everyone to take their gloves off, so that they could more effectively use their weapons.


And like The Champ I says "pardon"? Who the fuck was this moron? 

Easy solution - train with gloves on no matter what type of weather.


----------



## Remius (8 Jul 2021)

Kilted said:


> In my unit slightly before I joined, a Sgt on a February exercise in -30 weather went around 25 minutes before H-Hour and told everyone to take their gloves off, so that they could more effectively use their weapons.


Sadly someone probably did that to him and he was too stupid to even ask why.  Sigh.


----------



## Haggis (8 Jul 2021)

Gloves reduce your ability to use your weapons effectively.
Toques and hoods reduce your hearing and peripheral vision allowing the enemy to approach you undetected.
Rain suits are noisy and give away your position.
Boots, rubber, clumsy, will make you less agile.
Wearing a scarf inhibits your ability to fire from the prone position.
Warm food makes you sleepy and less alert.
And hundreds of other myths rumoured to make you harder to kill.


----------



## cavalryman (8 Jul 2021)

Haggis said:


> Gloves reduce your ability to use your weapons effectively.
> Toques and hoods reduce your hearing and peripheral vision allowing the enemy to approach you undetected.
> Rain suits are noisy and give away your position.
> Boots, rubber, clumsy, will make you less agile.
> ...


Fight naked. Scare the enemy by showing him your junk.


----------



## Loachman (8 Jul 2021)

cavalryman said:


> Fight naked. Scare the enemy by showing him your junk.


Woad.











						Songbook: Ancient Britons (The Woad Song) - Wikiwood
					






					wychwood.wikidot.com


----------



## Maxman1 (8 Jul 2021)

Haggis said:


> OMG!!!  I haven't heard that one in _forever_... all the way back to my ISCC, I think. What memories that brings back. I can't wait to tell my EAP lady about that on Monday.



Even better, he was wearing a jacket at the time. He also said "Stop being reservists!"

He's also infamous for saying "Dress cold to stay warm." The _idea_ he's (probably) going for is to layer down before physical exertion to avoid overheating, sweating and freezing, but the way he says it is just dumb.


----------



## Kilted (8 Jul 2021)

Loachman said:


> Woad.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


This is really the only way I can respond to that:


----------



## OldSolduer (9 Jul 2021)

cavalryman said:


> Fight naked. Scare the enemy by showing him your junk.


I do believe the Celts and Gauls did that when they fought.


----------



## dimsum (9 Jul 2021)

OldSolduer said:


> I do believe the Celts and Gauls did that when they fought.


I'm assuming most of their battles were fought in the summer then


----------



## daftandbarmy (9 Jul 2021)

dimsum said:


> I'm assuming most of their battles were fought in the summer then



Define a 'Scottish Summer'...


----------



## dimsum (9 Jul 2021)

From RCN social media.  Is the RCAF Ensign patch a thing now?  It looks pretty awesome.


----------



## Journeyman (9 Jul 2021)

dimsum said:


> Is the RCAF Ensign patch a thing now?


You say that like the Air Force actually has dress regs.

            "Regulations"


----------



## Eye In The Sky (9 Jul 2021)

Why would it matter if it's authorized or not?  People just do what they want anyways...and the CAF Social Media folks post it not having a clue  





__ https://www.facebook.com/RCAF.ARC/photos/a.10150142814416237/10157918285586237
			








__ https://www.facebook.com/RCAF.ARC/photos/a.10150142814416237/10156789614411237
			




[edit: link removed per members request]


----------



## dimsum (9 Jul 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> Why would it matter if it's authorized or not?  People just do what they want anyways...and the CAF Social Media folks post it not having a clue


I don't get what's wrong with the last 2 pictures.


----------



## SupersonicMax (9 Jul 2021)

I like how we’re equating braids and pony tails momentarily in front to leadership failures…

i am not a woman but I could see how a braid or pony tail would have a tendency to swing in front when the head is turned.


----------



## PuckChaser (9 Jul 2021)

My COVID flow is all over the place right now so I can definitely relate.


----------



## Navy_Pete (9 Jul 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> [quoted post removed by moderator]


In his defence the newer DEUs I've gotten are so incredibly crap quality. I've had the same pant size my whole career and the new ones hang on me just like that without massive tailoring. They are so cheap I'm not sure if it's worthwhile in COVID to get it done. And a new tunic also looks awful and is really weirdly cut, so had to be totally rejigged by the tailor. Similary a lot of people are having a hard time with keeping the weight off while working from home so not really a surprise to see someone with a tight tunic at this point, so context is somewhat important. I'm not going to harp on someone for a random photo posted on twitter as I have no idea on what's going on with that person, or when the random photo was taken and dropped onto the desk of some PA. There is some video of me in one of the recruiting videos looking a bit disheveled; the arsehole cameraman was in the way when we were trying to recover from a fire and I'd been awake for about 30 hours.


----------



## SupersonicMax (9 Jul 2021)

They may be (minor) breaches of dress policy but I would definitely not equate those to leadership failures.  Like it was said in an earlier post by Navy_Pete, there is a context to a picture, which you are lacking.  I would refrain from making judgement based on a single frame, unless you 100% adhere to the dress policies yourself, 100% of the time.  Doubtful.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (9 Jul 2021)

SupersonicMax said:


> They may are be (minor) breaches of dress policy but I would definitely not equate those to leadership failures. Like it was said in an earlier post by Navy_Pete, there is a context to a picture, which you are lacking. I would refrain from making judgement based on a single frame, unless you 100% adhere to the dress policies yourself, 100% of the time. Doubtful.




Like I said...you're definition of a leadership failure doesn't seem to be in line with the CAF policy (which I what I've based mine on since...CLC in '93 or so, I guess).

A Cpl (an NCO) is in DEU and looks like a bag of shit, next to a CWO who is sharply turned out.  Did the Cpl not do Basic?  Because that is where NCMs are taught how to properly wear DEU. 

Drop the dress regs, we'll look like the Michigan Militia and those groups...or enforce them.  It really is that simple...


----------



## daftandbarmy (9 Jul 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> Like I said...you're definition of a leadership failure doesn't seem to be in line with the CAF policy (which I what I've based mine on since...CLC in '93 or so, I guess).
> 
> Context...what fuckin' context.  A Cpl (an NCO) is in DEU and looks like a bag of shit, next to a CWO who is sharply turned out.  Did the Cpl not do Basic?  Because that is where NCMs are taught how to properly wear DEU.
> 
> Drop the dress regs, we'll look like the Michigan Militia and those groups...or enforce them.  It really is that simple...



Speaking of the Militia 









						Canadian soldiers march with weapons at Toronto Khalsa Day Parade | Watch News Videos Online
					

Watch Canadian soldiers march with weapons at Toronto Khalsa Day Parade Video Online, on GlobalNews.ca




					globalnews.ca


----------



## Eye In The Sky (9 Jul 2021)

That was different variety of 'leadership failure'... a decision by someone who should have been issued the "_Stu Pedidiot_" nametag...😁


----------



## SupersonicMax (9 Jul 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> Like I said...you're definition of a leadership failure doesn't seem to be in line with the CAF policy (which I what I've based mine on since...CLC in '93 or so, I guess).
> 
> A Cpl (an NCO) is in DEU and looks like a bag of shit, next to a CWO who is sharply turned out.  Did the Cpl not do Basic?  Because that is where NCMs are taught how to properly wear DEU.
> 
> Drop the dress regs, we'll look like the Michigan Militia and those groups...or enforce them.  It really is that simple...


What is the CAF policy defining leadership failure?


----------



## Eye In The Sky (9 Jul 2021)

*NOT* doing this stuff, for a start...that's the CAF basic expectation, of all Officers, regardless of rank, of trade/classification, position...the NCM one is similar, of course.

That's a good starting benchmark for the CAF to aim for at this point.  I'll enforce whatever regs the CAF issues...just like the CAF expects me to.

Is this (dress) a serious/major leadership failure?  Not compared to some of the other...issues...that are "in the news" as of late.  But that doesn't mean it should get a 'pass' either.


----------



## SupersonicMax (9 Jul 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> *NOT* doing this stuff, for a start...that's the CAF basic expectation, of all Officers, regardless of rank, of trade/classification, position...the NCM one is similar, of course.
> 
> That's a good starting benchmark for the CAF to aim for at this point.  I'll enforce whatever regs the CAF issues...just like the CAF expects me to.
> 
> Is this (dress) a serious/major leadership failure?  Not compared to some of the other...issues...that are "in the news" as of late.  But that doesn't mean it should get a 'pass' either.


There is no way to 100% enforce 100% of the rules.  Nor have I ever seen anyone adhere to 100% of the rules 100% of the time.  Asking for this much is unrealistic and foolish. A pony tail that is in front is very, very minor for me and I wouldn’t blink an eye on someone that does this once.  If it becomes a trend and there is a history of defying orders?  Yes.


----------



## LittleBlackDevil (9 Jul 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> Yup, they are leadership failures.  I know you don't think so, but the CAF policy is what you're in opposition to, not me.  You're not stating the actual problem which you call "braids and ponytails".  The real problem is Officers and NCMs not doing their jobs correctly;  doing things the way the CAF expects them to be done (found in policy), and ensuring their sub's are doing that as well.  _*THAT *_is a leadership failure.
> 
> "Swinging to the front" when the head is turned doesn't seem to be what's happening though, is it?  Do you always 'explain' away things that aren't IAW policy?
> 
> ...



Just chiming here to say I agree with you Eye in the Sky for the most part, and don't have much to add. It may seem like a small thing to some, but dress regulations are there for a reason and ought to be adhered to. It is a very basic part of leadership IMO to ensure that subordinates are aware of and comply with dress regulations.

The first photo with the braids over the should while apparently looking down to attach a patch to velcro, could possibly be a brief moment in time that it accidentally fell over her shoulder so for now I'd let that pass ... but the second photo I think your analysis is correct. As I understand it neither you nor anyone else is calling for a court martial here.

I would argue that a formal photo that then gets posted on social media is in the same nature of severity as a "trend" or "history of defying orders" because this is defying orders in a very specific scenario where it is know the photo will be put out for the public to see.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (9 Jul 2021)

SupersonicMax said:


> What is the CAF policy defining leadership failure?



Not answering the exact question but...sorry it took me so long, I couldn't remember the exact Chap's and passages.  Obviously, some cherry-picked ones from the total of 164 pages... Leadership in the Canadian Forces CONCEPTUAL FOUNDATIONS 


To motivate and guide behaviour, values cannot be only
words on paper. To be credible, they must be a living part of
CF culture. This means that CF leaders must exemplify commitment
to institutional values, must embed them in policies
and practices, and must reinforce them through their
actions. In short, leader integrity is critical in establishing
and maintaining a values-based culture and organizational
climate. Integrity, what some military scholars and ethicists
call the master value, ensures that what we strive to achieve
on behalf of the CF we do in ways that are worthy of military
professionals.

It has been said that in order to transform a civilian into
a disciplined soldier, the soldier must “upon entering the
service, come to live in his relation to command, and to
respect it much as he does the force of gravity, or the march
of time.”31 The training régime within the CF is one of the
positive means designed to instill the habit of obedience.
As well, the personal example of the leader, including his or
her integrity, skill, and knowledge, is another important
factor.

In very general terms, leaders in the CF – both formally
appointed leaders and emergent leaders – are responsible
for: accomplishing the mission, structuring and integrating
teams and units for optimum efficiency and co-ordination,
ensuring member well-being and commitment, establishing
and maintaining capabilities to adapt to change, and regulating
conduct in accordance with the value systems of the
Canadian military ethos. Many of these responsibilities are
reinforced in the statements of duties found in regulations
and in the role expectations symbolically communicated
through warrants and commissioning scrolls.


----------



## daftandbarmy (9 Jul 2021)

OK, I never used to know anything about pony tails but - thanks to this thread - now I can't unsee this sh*t... thanks alot!


----------



## MARS (9 Jul 2021)

At LEAST 1 of those photos looks to be a professionally staged PA photo.  Given the relative  newness of being able to wear ponytails in uniform - at least for your non-RCN folks - and our ongoing efforts at attracting and recruiting more women, it would not surprise me in the least if the photographer specifically had the ponytail positioned in front, as a branding mechanism to make this new style option better known putside rhe CAF and dispel the very real notion that we are stuck in some 1950s idea of what a woman's hairstyle should be.   Pics of the backs of womens heads  showing the 'correct' way would not accomplish that objective...and I would argue it should definitely be an important  objective right now.

I vividly recall in 2014, a RCN ship on the Op NANOOK deployment hosted the PM.  A pic was taken of him on the forecastle, underway with the Naval Jack hoisted at the forecaslte position. A whole hockey sock of RCN CPOs had metldowns and complained loudly about how it was not strictly IAW the Manual of Ceremony, completely and utterly oblivious to the simple concept of 'Public Affairs'.


----------



## OldSolduer (9 Jul 2021)

From a retired CWO/RSM:

The Corporal is not properly dressed. Who ever his section commander or what ever he  has for an immediate superior failed. Leadership failure on the surface. There may be underlying issues like a TCat or PCat.

These matters are best handled somewhat discretely these days. A private conversation stating the Standard, The Faults and Remedies needs to happen.

In the Olden Days - a phrase my kids used to use - the CSM or Pl WO would testily dress you down in front of your peers. You can try this these days but be prepared to defend your actions.


----------



## dimsum (9 Jul 2021)

MARS said:


> Pics of the backs of womens heads showing the 'correct' way would not accomplish that objective...and I would argue it should definitely be an important objective right now


Now I'm just getting mental images of PAOs thinking "how do I get pics of backs of women's heads".

Anyway, I guess I'm going to look for the RCAF Ensign patch for my uniform


----------



## MARS (9 Jul 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> If I showed up for a H & A dressed like that...I'm betting someone is going to tell me I look like a bag of shit, bag of hammers, "insert descriptive statement here".  And they'd be right.
> 
> Mindset...how I am at the Sqn and how I am sitting in my den, at home, miles away from "anything CAF"...they're not the same, but if you want to link them...feel free.
> 
> Point still stands and is accurate on the DEUs.  That isn't the CAF standard; full stop



It is indeed a leadership failure on the part of that member's Unit Chief!

This is an MPC H&A.  Clothing stores for the NCR is in Quebec, the border to which was closed for non essential travel for the last while.  I personally do not consider getting my monkey suit appropriately tailored during a global pandemic where a whole lot of folks haven't, for a variety of valid reasons (as validated by the current abeyance of Force Testing), been keeping up their PT routine - to be essential business. 

So yes, EITS, I fully agree - some senior NCM somewhere in that member's CoC neglected to look out for the morale and welfare of their subordinate by enquiring if their DEUs were GTG and thus failed to hold this ceremony in something like Operational Dress, which is the current order of dress for NDHQ, which in turn has likely embarrassed that member unnecessarily.  Moreso since this has now been posted to the internet where the shame is forever.  What a clown show this organization can be sometimes.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (9 Jul 2021)

MARS said:


> What a clown show this organization can be sometimes.



100%.

For all the good things happening (beards, boots, pay raises...) we're slipping back in other areas.  The older I get, the more I want to just 'exist' in my own little part of the RCAF and put blinders on to anything not related to it.


----------



## SupersonicMax (9 Jul 2021)

EITS,

Have you ever been in a situation where your parade boots were dirty from walking in a gravel/dirt parking lot after rain?  If so, you were in contravention of the Dress Manual.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (9 Jul 2021)

No I have not ever had dirty parade boots.  But if I did...what Chap/Sect/Para of 265 I am contravening?


----------



## OldSolduer (9 Jul 2021)

SupersonicMax said:


> EITS,
> 
> Have you ever been in a situation where your parade boots were dirty from walking in a gravel/dirt parking lot after rain?  If so, you were in contravention of the Dress Manual.





Eye In The Sky said:


> No I have no ever had dirty parade boots.  But if I did...what Chap/Sect/Para of 265 I am contravening?


Before we all get in a urination contest - see I did learn stuff along the way - the Leadership Principle of "Use your common sense" should have been the 11th Principle. 

This is a case where it should apply.


----------



## SupersonicMax (9 Jul 2021)

OldSolduer said:


> Before we all get in a urination contest - see I did learn stuff along the way - the Leadership Principle of "Use your common sense" should have been the 11th Principle.
> 
> This is a case where it should apply.


To use “common sense,” you need context.  There was no provision made for context in the discussion scolding people on PA pictures.


----------



## OldSolduer (9 Jul 2021)

SupersonicMax said:


> To use “common sense,” you need context.  There was no provision made for context in the discussion scolding people on PA pictures.


A fair point. 

What's the solution to the problem then?


----------



## SupersonicMax (9 Jul 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> No I have no ever had dirty parade boots.  But if I did...what Chap/Sect/Para of 265 I am contravening?


You must be some kind of wizard to never have had dirt or dust on your parade boots, EVER!!

The section is para 20 in section 2.


----------



## SupersonicMax (9 Jul 2021)

OldSolduer said:


> A fair point.
> 
> What's the solution to the problem then?


Solution?  Before admonishing someone for dress, perhaps it’d be useful to understand the context behind the “why” someone may be out of dress and show leniency and flexibility when someone acts in good faith.


----------



## OldSolduer (9 Jul 2021)

SupersonicMax said:


> Solution?  Before admonishing someone for dress, perhaps it’d be useful to understand the context behind the “why” someone may be out of dress and show leniency and flexibility when someone acts in good faith.


I'd agree with that. Mind you there still will be a reprimand but milder.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (9 Jul 2021)

Not a wizard...I just can't get something dirty that doesn't even exist....better read  your ref again.


----------



## SupersonicMax (9 Jul 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> Not a wizard...I just can't get something dirty that doesn't even exist....better read  your ref again.


Here’s the paragraph, in French:

“
Chaussures

Les souliers de cuir, les richelieus, les escarpins et les bottillons doivent être propres et bien cirés en tout temps.”

The definition of “botillons” in French is “Petite botte, dont la tige monte au-dessus de la cheville.”

If that doesn’t include parade boots, I don’t know what would.  I can’t believe you are arguing that your parade boots (or whatever you call them) are not covered by this paragraph.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (9 Jul 2021)

Not sure what to tell you, except "pay attention to detail".


----------



## SupersonicMax (9 Jul 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> There is no such thing as parade boots.  Not sure what to tell you, except "pay attention to detail".


Parade boots (_bottes de parade_) is a colloquial term for boots ankle (_bottillons_), which is widely used outside of the dress manual. I am surprised I have to explain this to you, derailing the intent of the thread on the way.


----------



## LittleBlackDevil (9 Jul 2021)

MARS said:


> This is an MPC H&A.  Clothing stores for the NCR is in Quebec, the border to which was closed for non essential travel for the last while.  I personally do not consider getting my monkey suit appropriately tailored during a global pandemic where a whole lot of folks haven't, for a variety of valid reasons (as validated by the current abeyance of Force Testing), been keeping up their PT routine - to be essential business.



What are the valid reasons for not keeping up a PT routine? 

I ask honestly, not trying to be a jerk. I understand that you can't go to the gym -- I haven't been to a gym since early March of 2020 -- but why shouldn't can't people still do jogging, rucking,  pushups, air squats, and other such good things at home (or on streets around their home)? I believe even the strictest stay-at-home orders made allowances for outdoor exercise.

Especially from a CAF perspective I am missing why it is acceptable to let one's self go. I can understand cancelling the Force Testing because testing involves contact with others.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (9 Jul 2021)

SupersonicMax said:


> Parade boots (_bottes de parade_) is a colloquial term for boots ankle (_bottillons_), which is widely used outside of the dress manual. I am surprised I have to explain this to you, derailing the intent of the thread on the way.



You don't need to explain anything to me...I've known for 32 years there are ankle boots, but no parade boots.

I think, honestly, it's evident that you are the one who figured out there's no such thing as _parade boots_ in the course of your own posts and my verbal cues.  _"LEVEL 3 - Student completed the task, making only minor errors. Student required minimal verbal cues to analyze and/or correct errors...the errors may not be serious, but they prevent the student from being as effective as they should be_...".  

You did say, specifically, parade boots;  here's the link, in case you need to refer back to your post.    A "Why"  Dress Thread  split from OCdt Speaks at Freedom Rally

Derailing the thread?  You must have _experienced that differently_.   I can't help it if your detail(s) aren't correct.  You asked me about parade boots, I answered.  You referred me to CFP 265, Ch 2, Sect 2, Para 20...again, there is no 'parade boots' found there.  Like I suggested...attention to detail. 

Enjoy your weekend...


----------



## Navy_Pete (9 Jul 2021)

LittleBlackDevil said:


> What are the valid reasons for not keeping up a PT routine?
> 
> I ask honestly, not trying to be a jerk. I understand that you can't go to the gym -- I haven't been to a gym since early March of 2020 -- but why shouldn't can't people still do jogging, rucking,  pushups, air squats, and other such good things at home (or on streets around their home)? I believe even the strictest stay-at-home orders made allowances for outdoor exercise.
> 
> Especially from a CAF perspective I am missing why it is acceptable to let one's self go. I can understand cancelling the Force Testing because testing involves contact with others.



Physical injuries, mental health issues, long COVID, etc. etc etc. Also appearance doesn't always track with fitness. I'm tall and skinny but after not being able to breathe properly for a year after getting sick betting most overweight people could outrun me, and generally kick my ass on a FORCE test, but I guess at least my uniform fits properly. Really happy to be in recovery now but holy crap did a year of inactivity/illness really crush my fitness level.

In any case, we probably shouldn't be slagging someone off for a PR photo, bit of a dick move.


----------



## SupersonicMax (9 Jul 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> You don't need to explain anything to me...I've known for 32 years there are ankle boots, but no parade boots.
> 
> I think, honestly, it's evident that you are the one who figured out there's no such thing as _parade boots_ in the course of your own posts and my verbal cues.  _"LEVEL 3 - Student completed the task, making only minor errors. Student required minimal verbal cues to analyze and/or correct errors...the errors may not be serious, but they prevent the student from being as effective as they should be_...".
> 
> ...


Just like a F-18 or CF-18 or CP-140 do not exist in official documentations, “parade boots” is colloquially used and understood by the vast majority.  It should not detract from a conversation like it has.  But it detracted enough for you to avoid answering a question…

I just asked an aviator if he knew what “parade boots” were.  He knew.  I expect you also knew what it meant but someone picked an argument over colloquial terms vs official terms.  Because something is colloquial doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (9 Jul 2021)

SupersonicMax said:


> CP-140 do not exist in official documentation










Unless...it _does_ exist in official documentation...


----------



## SupersonicMax (9 Jul 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> Unless...


Notice there is no dash.  If you want to be anal, we have CP140s, not CP-140s because a CP-140 is not “a thing.”


----------



## Eye In The Sky (9 Jul 2021)

SupersonicMax said:


> Notice there is no dash.



 CP-140 Aurora | Aircraft | Royal Canadian Air Force


----------



## SupersonicMax (9 Jul 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> CP-140 Aurora | Aircraft | Royal Canadian Air Force


The “-“ is used for PA purposes but if you look in any technical documentations, it is not there.  It is a colloquialism.

“There’s one more point about aircraft names. Sometimes you might see the five-character alpha-numerical designation (CC-130, CT-114, etc.) written with a hyphen and sometimes without. The official designation is without the hyphen, which is the way the designations are written in official DND documents and internal communications. But that little piece of punctuation is added in communications destined for audiences outside the Canadian Armed Forces.”

(News Article | What IS that RCAF bird called?)


----------



## Remius (9 Jul 2021)

We have dress regs or we don’t.  Time and place and common sense should always be considered.  Situations can vary.  Pictures don’t always tell the whole story.

Anecdote.  Before beards were allowed we enforced no beards.  Medical chits exempted of course but we still enforced proper grooming.  Ensured chits were up to date etc.

When beards were allowed, some troops thought the senior NCOs were going to lose their minds for some reason.  Most of us grew beards and wore them correctly.  Properly groomed.  To show them the standard.  Some junior guys were surprised.  Not sure why.  We enforced the regs.  Beard, no beard.  I don’t care one way or another on a professional level.  If it’s in the dress regs we try to follow those rules.  Same reason I won’t accept a civilian belt in DEUs or half assed tied knot tie or whatever.   If the rules change for those things I’ll enforce them accordingly.  Until then, using good judgement, we shouldn’t let things slide.


----------



## SupersonicMax (9 Jul 2021)

To go back to “parade boots” being an unofficially accepted term, it is even in the Communications and Electronics Branch Standing Orders manual, released by a MGen….

https://cmcen-rcmce.ca/wp-content/uploads/CE-Branch-Standing-Orders-2020-1.pdf page 95.


----------



## daftandbarmy (9 Jul 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> CP-140 Aurora | Aircraft | Royal Canadian Air Force


----------



## Eye In The Sky (9 Jul 2021)

SupersonicMax said:


> But that little piece of punctuation is added in communications destined for audiences outside the Canadian Armed Forces.”



😁   _Now you see it...._


----------



## Eye In The Sky (9 Jul 2021)

😁 _*Now you don't.*_..


----------



## SupersonicMax (9 Jul 2021)

Communities tend to use the the colloquial versions (which is fine).  I think you’re starting to realize that using colloquialisms is okay and should not detract from the conversation.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (9 Jul 2021)

SupersonicMax said:


> CP-140 is not “a thing.





			Canadian Military Journal Vol. 21, No. 2
		







						CP-140 Aurora fleet modernization and life extension - Canada.ca
					

The Aurora fleet is Canada’s primary airborne intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance aircraft. It has been modernized with a world-class integrated mission suite with state-of-the-art avionics, communications systems, computer networks, and sensors.




					www.canada.ca
				




It's 'a thing' on my 1000hrs Certificate...that my CO presented me at a Sqn H & A years ago (that, I will add, my DEUs were properly turned out and my parade ankle boots were polished for 😁as I know those things ended up "on the internet").



SupersonicMax said:


> I think you’re starting to realize that using colloquialisms is okay and should not detract from the conversation.



I think you're starting to realize I matched your foolish question (about dirt on parade boots...) with my own foolishness.  😁


----------



## SupersonicMax (9 Jul 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> I think you're starting to realize I matched your foolish question (about dirt on parade boots...) with my own foolishness.  😁


It is not foolish.  It was a personal way to show you that you need to use context (which you cannot get from a single frame) in enforcing dress standards.  Calling those “leadership failures” without knowing all the facts is immature.


----------



## cavalryman (9 Jul 2021)

And all of a sudden, I'm looking at my pepper shaker wondering whether I need to sift through it for droppings. But don't mind me. I'm just an old Army guy.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (9 Jul 2021)

Remius said:


> We have dress regs or we don’t. Time and place and common sense should always be considered...We enforced the regs. Beard, no beard. I don’t care one way or another on a professional level. If it’s in the dress regs we try to follow those rules. Same reason I won’t accept a civilian belt in DEUs or half assed tied knot tie or whatever. If the rules change for those things I’ll enforce them accordingly. Until then, using good judgement, we shouldn’t let things slide.



This links in to the point I have been, perhaps poorly, trying to make.  

- NCOs and Warrant/Petty Officers do the bulk of the "policing".  Common sense...always.  operational context?  I care if my subs uniform (which is ALSE now, in my mind...) is serviceable, worn IAW orders (dual layer stuff)  and approved relaxations, and if reqr'd...sanitized.  

- Normal working day in sqn lines...add in "thread free, patches IAW the CADO"...

- Function where we're in the Maytag suit?  buttons and badges are correct, pressed, lint free...all the normal stuff I consider 'standard'.  Not because of some 'personal standard' of mine...because of the CAF standard.  If a CAF mbr has done basic (Reg Force), they know how to wear DEU.  I know Res is a little different...

Whatever the regs are...enforce them.  If something don't make sense anymore...remove it from the regs.  Do I care where a pony tail is?  Not personally...as long as it is safe.  BUT...my job, one of them, is to check for and correct these things.  If I ignore it...and the SCWO, or WCWO etc sees me 'turning a blind eye'...I'll be answering to them.  And I already know that conversation;  "we don't get to determine the policy...but we are expected to enforce it".


----------



## Eye In The Sky (9 Jul 2021)

cavalryman said:


> And all of a sudden, I'm looking at my pepper shaker wondering whether I need to sift through it for droppings. But don't mind me. I'm just an old Army guy.



What else have to go to do on a Friday evening?  Free entertainment!!


----------



## Eye In The Sky (9 Jul 2021)

LittleBlackDevil said:


> What are the valid reasons for not keeping up a PT routine?
> 
> I ask honestly, not trying to be a jerk. I understand that you can't go to the gym -- I haven't been to a gym since early March of 2020 -- but why shouldn't can't people still do jogging, rucking, pushups, air squats, and other such good things at home (or on streets around their home)? I believe even the strictest stay-at-home orders made allowances for outdoor exercise.
> 
> Especially from a CAF perspective I am missing why it is acceptable to let one's self go. I can understand cancelling the Force Testing because testing involves contact with others.



I'm trying to picture living in Ottawa, Toronto, etc in 'dense' population areas, large apt/condo buildings, etc...and convincing myself in the spring of 2020 when the pandemic kicked off...or thru the follow-on _waves_....that going from "apt/condo" to the street was a worthy risk.  I'm not sure I would have done it...I know what the 'Command intent' was but...for people to assume that risk/benefit, I don't blame anyone who decided 'not worth it'.  

Many people would have had to make 'contact with others', even indirectly in elevators etc...just to get 'to the street'.  WAG on my part but...I know at first, my grocery store trips were 'calculated events' to avoid the masses...


----------



## Kilted (9 Jul 2021)

Ok, so is the issue with the ponytail the fact that it was too long or that it was over her shoulder in the picture? If it is the fact that it is over her shoulder in the picture, is it not possible that the PA involved told her to do it to drive home the fact that she is female and to show the new dress policy? 

I wouldn't be surprised in if in the future males won't be allowed to correct dress issues with females, or the risk of a sexual harassment complaint becomes too great to make it worthwhile. 

At another uniform job I've had in the past I was told to correct males, but not say anything to females because apparently noticing something about a uniform=looking at someone inappropriately.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (9 Jul 2021)

Kilted said:


> Ok, so is the issue with the ponytail the fact that it was too long or that it was over her shoulder in the picture? If it is the fact that it is over her shoulder in the picture, is it not possible that the PA involved told her to do it to drive home the fact that she is female and to show the new dress policy?



Pony tails are to be worn IAW the dress instr.  It isn't.

PAs don't have the authority to deviate on their own, and how would showing a ponytail on the shoulder 'show the new dress policy'..when that isn't the dress policy?

Para's 1 - 4.  Dress instructions | Chapter 1 Command, control and staff duties - Canada.ca

Some of us, me being the vocal one on here, obviously, are tired of being responsible for enforcing regs that aren't being applied across the board.  Change em, drop em...whatever....but this '_2 or 3 standards_' stuff is absolute bullshit.


----------



## dapaterson (9 Jul 2021)

Let's simplify: a single hair standard, men and women.


----------



## cavalryman (9 Jul 2021)

Beards and ponytails for everyone!


----------



## mariomike (9 Jul 2021)

dapaterson said:


> Let's simplify: a single hair standard, men and women.


Those six pages were fun while they lasted.  









						Is it time for gendered hair standards to go?
					

I was actually interested in the difference between CF members and the cadets. I think there would be an undeniable argument for male and female cadets to have a single standard. I was surprised that they still have gendered standards which are enforceable by denying membership. Shocking...




					www.milnet.ca
				




LOCKED


----------



## kev994 (9 Jul 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> Why would it matter if it's authorized or not?  People just do what they want anyways...and the CAF Social Media folks post it not having a clue
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Just so I’m following… did the pictures change? For the top one I see a SARTech with his sleeves pushed up… that’s been authorized for like 2 years now.


----------



## MJP (9 Jul 2021)

cavalryman said:


> Beards and ponytails for everyone!


and earrings


----------



## Kilted (10 Jul 2021)

Not going to lie, you have completely lost me with the ponytail thing as no one actually explained what the issue is. From what I have gathered, it appears that women are not allowed to turn their heads for fear of their ponytails touching their shoulders. 

I could be wrong on this one...but that's what it looks like to me.


----------



## Kilted (10 Jul 2021)

SupersonicMax said:


> Solution?  Before admonishing someone for dress, perhaps it’d be useful to understand the context behind the “why” someone may be out of dress and show leniency and flexibility when someone acts in good faith.


Reminds me of a story I heard of guys coming back into KAF after a couple months of heavy fighting being jacked up by the Camp Sergeant Major for having beards.


----------



## Maxman1 (10 Jul 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> Speaking of the Militia
> 
> 
> 
> ...



A guy on my DP1 was part of that parade. Trying to explain why it looked bad was like talking to a brick wall.


----------



## Kilted (10 Jul 2021)

Maxman1 said:


> A guy on my DP1 was part of that parade. Trying to explain why it looked bad was like talking to a brick wall.


If they had done it without tac vests and marched normally, it probably wouldn't have been an issue. Although, it's not typically the type of parade you would have rifles on.


----------



## Eaglelord17 (10 Jul 2021)

dapaterson said:


> Let's simplify: a single hair standard, men and women.


Men, Women, Sikh, Muslim, Natives, etc. If we are all equal and expect to be treated equally, why do we insist on separate standards?


----------



## Haggis (10 Jul 2021)

Eaglelord17 said:


> Men, Women, Sikh, Muslim, Natives, etc. If we are all equal and expect to be treated equally, why do we insist on separate standards?


I think, more correctly, some separate standards are imposed upon us in the names of diversity and inclusion.  The intent is to broaden the appeal of the CAF to under-represented segments of society to meet certain recruiting targets established for political reasons so that the CAF is representative of the country it serves.  While that's a laudable goal, it has never really been attained.


----------



## kev994 (10 Jul 2021)

Kilted said:


> Not going to lie, you have completely lost me with the ponytail thing as no one actually explained what the issue is. From what I have gathered, it appears that women are not allowed to turn their heads for fear of their ponytails touching their shoulders.
> 
> I could be wrong on this one...but that's what it looks like to me.


There’s a maximum length, I think it’s the armpit, so she needs to either cut it or wear it higher so that it falls higher, but that second option doesn’t work if she needs to wear a helmet on the plane.


----------



## Halifax Tar (10 Jul 2021)

I'm always astounded that people don't know you are supposed to bring your DEUs into the tailor shop for proper fitting. 

Pet peeve... DEU pants that are to long and bunch up at the ankle


----------



## dapaterson (10 Jul 2021)

As I read the folks here dumping on someone and trotting out various policies to justify their words,  my eyes are drawn to the first volume of the Queen's Regulations and Orders, chapter 19, article 19.13...



> No officer or non-commissioned member shall rebuke any person in the presence or hearing of anyone junior to that person in rank, unless a public rebuke is absolutely necessary for the preservation of discipline.


----------



## daftandbarmy (10 Jul 2021)

dapaterson said:


> As I read the folks here dumping on someone and trotting out various policies to justify their words,  my eyes are drawn to the first volume of the Queen's Regulations and Orders, chapter 19, article 19.13...



I'm reminded of a couple of COs who were quite comfortable jacking people up in front of everyone for minor issues, mainly just to prove 'I am the Alpha'. Must be good for your career as they're both doing very well right now career-wise.

Respect-wise, not so much of course...


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (10 Jul 2021)

dapaterson said:


> As I read the folks here dumping on someone and trotting out various policies to justify their words,  my eyes are drawn to the first volume of the Queen's Regulations and Orders, chapter 19, article 19.13...



Well, there goes officer of the watch training.


----------



## Kilted (10 Jul 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> I'm always astounded that people don't know you are supposed to bring your DEUs into the tailor shop for proper fitting.
> 
> Pet peeve... DEU pants that are to long and bunch up at the ankle


Not everyone has access to a tailor.  We lost our only tailor for our brigade.  I had to pay $75 just to get the badges put on a new DEU jacket.  I don't know what tailoring pants would cost, fortunately, I don't wear them.


----------



## Jarnhamar (10 Jul 2021)

Sometimes I get the impression that the military didn't know what to do with MWOs and CWOs so they were like uhh yea it's super important to freak out like a maniac over small dress and deportment things. Go.


----------



## OldSolduer (10 Jul 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Sometimes I get the impression that the military didn't know what to do with MWOs and CWOs so they were like uhh yea it's super important to freak out like a maniac over small dress and deportment things. Go.


The duties of CSM and RSM are more than dress and deportment. To concentrate on dress and deportment is folly I think. Taking care of the soldiers and officers is paramount IMO


----------



## mariomike (10 Jul 2021)

Eaglelord17 said:


> Men, Women, Sikh, Muslim, Natives, etc. If we are all equal and expect to be treated equally, why do we insist on separate standards?


Human Rights?  🤷‍♂️


----------



## Maxman1 (11 Jul 2021)

Kilted said:


> If they had done it without tac vests and marched normally, it probably wouldn't have been an issue. Although, it's not typically the type of parade you would have rifles on.



I tried to explain that to him, but he wouldn't listen.


----------



## Eaglelord17 (11 Jul 2021)

Haggis said:


> I think, more correctly, some separate standards are imposed upon us in the names of diversity and inclusion.  The intent is to broaden the appeal of the CAF to under-represented segments of society to meet certain recruiting targets established for political reasons so that the CAF is representative of the country it serves.  While that's a laudable goal, it has never really been attained.





mariomike said:


> Human Rights?  🤷‍♂️



My thoughts are much simplier. I understand what the goal is but the 'special exemption' has never sat well with me. If it is acceptable to jack one person up for say long hair but not another who is doing the same job with long you have a problem and are discriminating. The solution to make it acceptable is to modify the standards to one set standard for all. Either long hair is acceptable or it isn't. Either Turbans are acceptable or they aren't. Either beards are acceptable with one set standard or they are not. I know it is a radical concept for the CAF to have one standard applied evenly across the board, but they would be surprised to find most people (especially the people they need/want to recruit) are very accepting of those types of changes.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (11 Jul 2021)

Kilted said:


> Not going to lie, you have completely lost me with the ponytail thing as no one actually explained what the issue is. From what I have gathered, it appears that women are not allowed to turn their heads for fear of their ponytails touching their shoulders.
> 
> I could be wrong on this one...but that's what it looks like to me.



This is the current CAF direction;  right, wrong, too restrictive...or otherwise...this is the wording.

_Pony tail shall be worn in the centre of the back. Hair shall be a maximum length when gathered behind the head and does not extend below the top of the armpit._


----------



## Eye In The Sky (11 Jul 2021)

Dress policy...personally, I think many aspects of the current policy are archaic.   CAF Beard policy-CANFORGEN 158/18

But, my _personal_ opinion doesn't count for much as work, right?  There's rules for many things, dress is one of them and the current regulations tell us if we're supposed to enforce them...or not.  We're all expected to enforce the rules as they exist.

Operations are different than photo ops.  I know many people who bought and wore their own boots flying over the IMPACT JOA and have zero issue with that;  but that probably wouldn't go over so well on a parade, right?  We used to call that "being smart about being stupid', same as when we wore our american rainjackets in the field in G-town in the early 90s..._after_ we were thru the range control gates.  No one was dumb enough to wear them on base.

I've said it two dozen times or so...change the regs to the 'actual' desired standard...or enforce the ones that exist.  Part of my job is to correct the ones I see...and if they don't matter, change the policy so I don't have to waste my time doing that. 

Shit, or get off the pot, NDCDC...maybe start with deleting para's 8-10, Chap 1 of 265, thanks.

DAP, your ref to 19.13?  This might help you out some....I'm sure that stretch really hurt...👊


----------



## mariomike (11 Jul 2021)

Eaglelord17 said:


> My thoughts are much simplier.


It was not my thought. Or, opinion.

It was my - guess - as to what could possibly be going through their minds.

 You asked a question, I typed in a two-word guess. I was careful to end it with a question mark, rather than a period. Because I'm not psychic, or an expert.

My personal "thoughts"?  Like yours, mine are also pretty simple.

They could likely be found in whatever grooming standards were in effect when I joined.

Yes, I understand they likely would not be popular with some on the internet forums of today.

Also,  possibly not in sync with Human Rights?  🤷‍♂️


----------



## Fishbone Jones (11 Jul 2021)

🍿 This thread has more humorous twists and turns than a Mel Brooks movie.😆


----------



## Kilted (11 Jul 2021)

Eaglelord17 said:


> My thoughts are much simplier. I understand what the goal is but the 'special exemption' has never sat well with me. If it is acceptable to jack one person up for say long hair but not another who is doing the same job with long you have a problem and are discriminating. The solution to make it acceptable is to modify the standards to one set standard for all. Either long hair is acceptable or it isn't. Either Turbans are acceptable or they aren't. Either beards are acceptable with one set standard or they are not. I know it is a radical concept for the CAF to have one standard applied evenly across the board, but they would be surprised to find most people (especially the people they need/want to recruit) are very accepting of those types of changes.


If we do go to one hair standard, does that mean that either all women must have short hair, or all men must have long hair?  Or is it a choice where we will see everyone basically doing whatever they what?  Which in reality, in a lot of cases is what we already have.  If long hair is mandatory, then we will start to see religious exceptions for short hair.


----------



## SupersonicMax (11 Jul 2021)

Kilted said:


> If we do go to one hair standard, does that mean that either all women must have short hair, or all men must have long hair?  Or is it a choice where we will see everyone basically doing whatever they what?  Which in reality, in a lot of cases is what we already have.  If long hair is mandatory, then we will start to see religious exceptions for short hair.


Allow all standards already included in the dress manual to be followed by anyone (a man that wants a pony tail can have one and a female that wants short hair can have it too).


----------



## Weinie (11 Jul 2021)

SupersonicMax said:


> Allow all standards already included in the dress manual to be followed by anyone (a man that wants a pony tail can have one and a female that wants short hair can have it too).


Shouldn't the end result be how well the person with the ponytail or short hair performs the job? I'm not particularly fussed over whether someone meets the perfect caricature of the epitome of the desired CAF personage, I have dealt with chubby folks who were amazing at their jobs, bags of shyte who delivered (and sucked) , and super soldiers who folded under pressure. At the end of the day, I looked at them to do their job. Full stop.

The tangent this thread has taken is ridiculous. Look around you, measure the effect of what your folks deliver, (notwithstanding their dress/deportment/appearance) and then determine what really matters.


----------



## SupersonicMax (11 Jul 2021)

Weinie said:


> Shouldn't the end result be how well the person with the ponytail or short hair performs the job? I'm not particularly fussed over whether someone meets the perfect caricature of the epitome of the desired CAF personage, I have dealt with chubby folks who were amazing at their jobs, bags of shyte who delivered (and sucked) , and super soldiers who folded under pressure. At the end of the day, I looked at them to do their job. Full stop.
> 
> The tangent this thread has taken is ridiculous. Look around you, measure the effect of what your folks deliver, (notwithstanding their dress/deportment/appearance) and then determine what really matters.


I agree with 100% you Weinie.  However, some people view making sure people adhere to the dress manual at all times their life mission.  I have always been fairly lenient when it comes to dress standard.  I don’t really care than someone has longish hair, or that someone works 8 hours a day every day as long as their job is done effectively, on time and they don’t complain when it comes time to work longer hours/do more work.  I let people be adult and manage themselves until their prove they need closer supervision.
I always found we (the CAF) spent way too much time enforcing dress rather than focusing on what really matters: the work we are paid to do.


----------



## Weinie (11 Jul 2021)

SupersonicMax said:


> I agree with 100% you Weinie.  However, some people view making sure people adhere to the dress manual at all times their life mission.  I have always been fairly lenient when it comes to dress standard.  I don’t really care than someone has longish hair, or that someone works 8 hours a day every day as long as their job is done effectively, on time and they don’t complain when it comes time to work longer hours/do more work.  I let people be adult and manage themselves until their prove they need closer supervision.
> I always found we (the CAF) spent way too much time enforcing dress rather than focusing on what really matters: the work we are paid to do.


I somewhat *agree* that there has to be a minimum standard (for entry). But to enforce that standard at a level that questions the ability/capability precludes some to serve(or continue to serve) within the org, or to unilaterally castigate them, is idiotic. 

At the end of the day, we need to support Ops. Who cares what the Cpl/MCpl/Sgt who effectively *enables *Ops looks like, according to the dress manual? FFS.


----------



## dimsum (11 Jul 2021)

Weinie said:


> I have dealt with chubby folks who were amazing at their jobs, bags of shyte who delivered (and sucked) , and super soldiers who folded under pressure. At the end of the day, I looked at them to do their job. Full stop.


Agreed.  Unfortunately not everyone has that knowledge/experience, and the US media representation of the military has created some subconscious biases.


----------



## PuckChaser (11 Jul 2021)

Every professional military or paramilitary (Police, Fire, EMS, CBSA, etc) have some sort of dress and grooming standards. If your supposition is that we need to completely bin those as useless, I'd argue you completely miss the point on why those dress and grooming standards exist in the first place. Even in the paragon of non-conformity CANSOF, I've noticed those folks walking about all have some sort of standard on garrison where it makes sense. If you're suggesting our dress and grooming standards are archaic and need an update, I'm right there with you. There's also an appropriate way to handle dress/deportment issues in a quiet, adult conversation. Flying off the handle is classic loudership, and isn't required unless the individual isn't tracking the nice guy approach.

At the end of the day, people's first impression of you is your dress and deportment. If you can't figure out how to wear your hair or keep your boots clean, then what other details are you lacking in your operational performance?


----------



## Weinie (11 Jul 2021)

PuckChaser said:


> Every professional military or paramilitary (Police, Fire, EMS, CBSA, etc) have some sort of dress and grooming standards. If your supposition is that we need to completely bin those as useless, I'd argue you completely miss the point on why those dress and grooming standards exist in the first place. Even in the paragon of non-conformity CANSOF, I've noticed those folks walking about all have some sort of standard on garrison where it makes sense. *If you're suggesting our dress and grooming standards are archaic and need an update, I'm right there with you. There's also an appropriate way to handle dress/deportment issues in a quiet, adult conversation. Flying off the handle is classic loudership, and isn't required unless the individual isn't tracking the nice guy approach.
> 
> At the end of the day, people's first impression of you is your dress and deportment. If you can't figure out how to wear your hair or keep your boots clean, then what other details are you lacking in your operational performance?*


Agree somewhat with your post.

The CAF represents a persona that is judged, and likely should be. But maybe grooming and how we reflect ourselves demonstrates dated thinking. (After all, the folks who make policy have, on average umpteen years of service and have been "influenced" by their previous experiences. )

I am speaking to how we judge pers internal to our CAF construct, If the person is valuable, and delivers in an Ops construct, should we chastise him/her for how they look?


----------



## FJAG (11 Jul 2021)

Let's face it, the short military haircut has its roots in the WW1 and thereabouts when it was introduced as a way of preventing disease, head lice etc. Military standards before that were considerably different and more mirrored the hair prevalent in society. 










And then there was this during the sixties and seventies:





And who in the Canadian Army at any time from the 1940s to 2000 would have thought we'd ever look like this:






One thing that always annoyed me when I was still in the Reg F was the daily occurrence of 40 year-old men telling twenty to thirty-year old men that their hair's too long. In a way I guess we're showing real progress: now we have forty-year old men telling twenty to thirty-year old women that their pony-tail is too long or in the wrong place.

The standards are arbitrary and based on what a bunch of old guys sitting around a table thinks looks right. We all like neat and clean but sometimes the whole thing gets a little too anal.

😉


----------



## mariomike (11 Jul 2021)

> Every professional military or paramilitary (Police, Fire, EMS, CBSA, etc) have some sort of dress and grooming standards



They understand the taxpayers - who we want to vote for politicians who support strong pay and benefit packages for the uniformed services - expect us to look good. Especially if you are being sent into their homes.


----------



## PuckChaser (11 Jul 2021)

Weinie said:


> I am speaking to how we judge pers internal to our CAF construct, If the person is valuable, and delivers in an Ops construct, should we chastise him/her for how they look?


I think there's 2 issues here:

1. We need to update our dress and grooming standards to a more modern, professional standard that is accepted by society. There's lots of room for improvement here, but until we do so CFP 265 is the law of the land and our Snr NCOs need to enforce it... when it makes sense and is appropriately handled. Easier said than done on the 2nd part.

2. This is the complex one, and I think this is where you're going. Someone is great at their job but is unhealthy, overweight and looks like a 4 button claymore in their DEU. Should they be chastised? Not publicly. Here's the rub though, that individual should be encouraged by leadership in a positive manner to work on their fitness levels as a push to move them from good to great/excellent. You can be the best widget operator in the RCAF but if you look like you're about to have a jammer walking up a flight of 5 stairs people will (fairly or unfairly) judge that person before they've even spoken to them. Its also going to be career limiting, especially if they're promoted into the Snr NCO/Snr Officer world and is expected to lead by example. Like it or not our profession does require a certain level of fitness. The more appropriate way to handle this case is for leadership to speak to the individual and take a personal interest in helping them see the benefits from leading a healthy lifestyle and positively reinforce/acknowledge any efforts they're making to get better.


----------



## Kilted (12 Jul 2021)

One thing that I have learned from Covid is that I hate long hair, there is nothing worse than it getting in my ears. Then again, I didn't effect my ability to do my job (as long as I was wearing a headdress to keep it under control) or start voting  Green Party or something weird like that. 

That being said, it wasn't ideal. Does anyone really want to do an extended period in the field with long hair?  Although if you're there long enough it won't make much of a difference.


----------



## FJAG (12 Jul 2021)

Kilted said:


> One thing that I have learned from Covid is that I hate long hair, there is nothing worse than it getting in my ears. ...


I'm the same way. I keep my hair quite short and in fact shorter then when I served in regiments in the seventies, but then longer hair was part of society. Short hair is now quite in as it was for the most part in the fifties and sixties which started with brush cuts as a thing before hippieness took hold. 

I remember too that in the seventies we kept our "military" hair very short but every time we worked with a Brit regiment one couldn't help but notice how shaggy they were compared to us.

Things change. One standard does not fit all.

🍻


----------



## Halifax Tar (12 Jul 2021)

Our dress standards are out of date and completely unaligned with the youth we should be aiming to recruit.  If a woman can do my job with long hair why cant I do my job with long hair ?  IMHO Our dress regs are only one gender based challenge away from being shattered.  We should get out in front of if. 

Fitness tests... Most places (Police and Fire) only do them on enrollment.  Perhaps we should do the same.  I am not really sure what our current tests prove.  I don't think anything will change.  We're a reflection of Canada.  We will still have the Uber fit folks, the gelatinous blobs; and the vast majority middle ground folks. 

On policing the standards, what ever they are.  As mentioned in the CAF Sexual Assault thread it comes down to basic discipline.  If I cant rightly expect people to dress accordingly and if we don't enforce something as simple as that, how do we expect our leaders to be confident or empowered enough to tackle big issues WRT discipline ?


----------



## mariomike (12 Jul 2021)

FJAG said:


>





FJAG said:


>





Halifax Tar said:


> Fitness tests... Most places (Police and Fire) only do them on enrollment.


Maybe depends on the municipality / department? The one I was familiar with,

"Must be physically capable of performing the required duties." That is throughout your career.

Prospective recruits, members returning to work, and special operations teams are all sent for fitness testing.

Members returning to work who did not pass the fitness test were not returned to 9-1-1 operations.

To maintain my Ontario Class CZ driver's license I had to submit a medical report from my doctor every three years.

( Sorry about the photos. I was not able to remove them. )


----------



## daftandbarmy (12 Jul 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> Our dress standards are out of date and completely unaligned with the youth we should be aiming to recruit.  If a woman can do my job with long hair why cant I do my job with long hair ?  IMHO Our dress regs are only one gender based challenge away from being shattered.  We should get out in front of if.
> 
> Fitness tests... Most places (Police and Fire) only do them on enrollment.  Perhaps we should do the same.  I am not really sure what our current tests prove.  I don't think anything will change.  We're a reflection of Canada.  We will still have the Uber fit folks, the gelatinous blobs; and the vast majority middle ground folks.
> 
> On policing the standards, what ever they are.  As mentioned in the CAF Sexual Assault thread it comes down to basic discipline.  If I cant rightly expect people to dress accordingly and if we don't enforce something as simple as that, how do we expect our leaders to be confident or empowered enough to tackle big issues WRT discipline ?



"Truly then, it is killing men with kindness not to insist upon physical standards during training which will give them maximum fitness for the extraordinary stresses of campaigning in war."

S.L.A. Marshall


----------



## OldSolduer (12 Jul 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> "Truly then, it is killing men with kindness not to insist upon physical standards during training which will give them maximum fitness for the extraordinary stresses of campaigning in war."
> 
> S.L.A. Marshall


Being physically fit will help you be mentally fit. I was in the infantry and the more fit you were the better soldier you were when it came to crunch time.


----------



## OldSolduer (12 Jul 2021)

OldSolduer said:


> Being physically fit will help you be mentally fit. I was in the infantry and the more fit you were the better soldier you were when it came to crunch time.


I should add that in the 80s and 90s we - infantry  - never prepared our troops to deal with casualties to our own side. We stopped talking like soldiers and started using bureaucratic language. IMO we did our troops a disservice.


----------



## lenaitch (12 Jul 2021)

mariomike said:


> Maybe depends on the municipality / department? The one I was familiar with,
> 
> *"Must be physically capable of performing the required duties." That is throughout your career.*
> 
> ...



This mirrors what is in the Ontario Police Services Act, but it is only enforced in the negative.  There is no periodic testing.


----------



## mariomike (12 Jul 2021)

lenaitch said:


> This mirrors what is in the Ontario Police Services Act, but it is only enforced in the negative.  There is no periodic testing.


I guess the way ours looked at it was if you passed the fitness test to get the job, and since then worked 40 hours every week, year after year, on operations, that proved you were fit!  

Sort of a Catch-22.


----------



## LittleBlackDevil (13 Jul 2021)

Navy_Pete said:


> Physical injuries, mental health issues, long COVID, etc. etc etc. Also appearance doesn't always track with fitness. I'm tall and skinny but after not being able to breathe properly for a year after getting sick betting most overweight people could outrun me, and generally kick my ass on a FORCE test, but I guess at least my uniform fits properly. Really happy to be in recovery now but holy crap did a year of inactivity/illness really crush my fitness level.
> 
> In any case, we probably shouldn't be slagging someone off for a PR photo, bit of a dick move.



Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't significant injuries or mental health exempt individuals from PT/FORCE test in normal times? My question was meaning why would healthy people stop doing PT during COVID? 

@Eye In The Sky gave the example of living in a built-up urban area an being scared of possibly encountering people in the hallways, stairwells, or elevator. That doesn't explain to me why you can't do pushups, squats, lunges, etc. in one's apartment? I've been doing a lot of routines over the last year that can be done in a bedroom and it's a pretty decent workout.


----------



## daftandbarmy (13 Jul 2021)

LittleBlackDevil said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't significant injuries or mental health exempt individuals from PT/FORCE test in normal times? My question was meaning why would healthy people stop doing PT during COVID?
> 
> @Eye In The Sky gave the example of living in a built-up urban area an being scared of possibly encountering people in the hallways, stairwells, or elevator. That doesn't explain to me why you can't do pushups, squats, lunges, etc. in one's apartment? I've been doing a lot of routines over the last year that can be done in a bedroom and it's a pretty decent workout.



Last year I climbed a local peak with some of my troops. Everyone was outside, apart, in the fresh air, and masked up when required. I even got a little lecture about the SOPs to make sure that I didn't screw up.

They begged people not to take photos in case they got shared around and the CO & RSM found out, which means they would get into trouble. Alot of trouble.

An excellent example of a particular approach to leadership that drives the wrong behaviour.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (19 Jul 2021)

Weinie said:


> At the end of the day, we need to support Ops. Who cares what the Cpl/MCpl/Sgt who effectively *enables *Ops looks like, according to the dress manual? FFS.











						‘A Perfect Storm.’ The Michigan Plot Lays Bare the Dangers of Ignoring the Far-Right Threat
					

The nationwide threat posed by homegrown far-right extremists has deepened since the 9/11 attacks




					time.com
				












						Members Right Wing Paramilitary Group Editorial Stock Photo - Stock Image | Shutterstock
					

Find the editorial stock photo of Members Right Wing Paramilitary Group, and more photos in the Shutterstock collection of editorial photography. 1000s of new photos added daily.




					www.shutterstock.com


----------



## Weinie (19 Jul 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> ‘A Perfect Storm.’ The Michigan Plot Lays Bare the Dangers of Ignoring the Far-Right Threat
> 
> 
> The nationwide threat posed by homegrown far-right extremists has deepened since the 9/11 attacks
> ...


Ummmmm, that's a bit of stretch, to dispute my point, wouldn't you say?


----------



## Eye In The Sky (19 Jul 2021)

Nope.  You said:



> Who cares what the Cpl/MCpl/Sgt who effectively *enables *Ops looks like



What do you think will happen if this "dress regs aren't important" stuff goes too far?

People not following, not enforcing dress regs...why does it irk me?  Not because of the dress regs so much...what REALLY grinds me is the lack of basic obedience, giving the middle finger to the basic leadership idea of "leading by example"...especially when it is in black and white that is part of any CAF members duties...including GOFO and Senior Officers.

THAT...is really the bigger issue, in the CAF ; an open lack of discipline and obedience...pony tails and earrings are minor.


----------



## brihard (19 Jul 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> Nope.  You said:
> 
> 
> 
> What do you think will happen if this "dress regs aren't important" stuff goes too far?


The troops will be plotting to kidnap the governor of Michigan, _obviously_. From loosened enforcement of dress regs it's basically walk out the door, turn left, third door down the hall on your right and you're at outright seditious conspiracy.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (19 Jul 2021)

Or....if you were being reasonable, you ease up on the drama and realize that the examples used were for "_the standard is, there is no standard"_ for dress". 

Not where you went. I thought the subj was 'dress', not 'conspiracy'...I thought the context that existed was sufficient.


----------



## dapaterson (19 Jul 2021)

brihard said:


> The troops will be plotting to kidnap the governor of Michigan, _obviously_. From loosened enforcement of dress regs it's basically walk out the door, turn left, third door down the hall on your right and you're at outright seditious conspiracy.



So we're assuming it's 31 CBG (which shares the largest land border with Michigan of any CAF formation) that will go rogue?

That's... not an entirely unreasonable assumption.


----------



## brihard (19 Jul 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> Or....if you were being reasonable, you ease up on the drama and realize that the examples used were for "_the standard is, there is no standard"_ for dress".
> 
> Not where you went.  'Cause no one is talking about "conspiracy" stuff...except you.  I did, however, link to the bigger issue I've see, based on 32 years of changes;  lower discipline and obedience in the CAF.  I hope we're not going to start arguing that THOSE aren't important in a nations' Armed Forces....


Dude, you literally linked to a story about a hard right militia conspiracy to kidnap the governor of Michigan on a thread about dress and deportment, and asked "What do you think will happen if this "dress regs aren't important" stuff goes too far?" While I don't think for a second you intended it to be taken seriously in that manner, it was still a bit of a reductio ad absurdum on your part.

Now that you've clarified a bit more, I think I understand that you were referring more to the physical appearance of a rag-tag militia, but without you making that explicitly clear, it seemed a bit of hyperbolic fear mongering was at play. It was a bit silly, and I'm not sure you yet realize it was a bit silly.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (19 Jul 2021)

Ok...I'll take the hit.  I should have posted the pics, not the links only...or at least a short sentence for context.


----------



## Remius (19 Jul 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> Ok...I'll take the hit.  I should have posted the pics, not the links only...or at least a short sentence for context.


Lol.  I was wondering as well but the pics do make sense.  The article not as much.


----------



## daftandbarmy (19 Jul 2021)

brihard said:


> Now that you've clarified a bit more, I think I understand that you were referring more to the physical appearance of a_* rag-tag militia,*_ but without you making that explicitly clear, it seemed a bit of hyperbolic fear mongering was at play. It was a bit silly, and I'm not sure you yet realize it was a bit silly.



Dude, I'm in the room


----------



## Eye In The Sky (19 Jul 2021)

Remius said:


> Lol. I was wondering as well but the pics do make sense. The article not as much.



Ya...I shouldn't post in a 'dress' thread when I'm reading "RFN launching wpns" threads.


----------



## brihard (19 Jul 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> Dude, I'm in the room


Yeah, but you’re _our_ rag-tag militia.


----------



## Weinie (19 Jul 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> Nope.  You said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I sorta get your point. I am a 60 yr old Officer. I shine my shoes, press my uniform, and have haircuts religiously. I maintain the CAF standard, as varied as it is. I also like beer, so I will never be featured in a recruiting poster. My six pack from my twenties has evolved into a keg. I am also pretty good at my job, appearance be damned.

My point was that we don't need to be all Dolph Lundgren lookalikes, with impeccably tailored uniforms from "A Few Good Men"  to be effective. As I stated earlier, some of the best soldiers I have met (and I assume sailors, and AF pers) don't fit that profile, but they do get the really important shit done, and at the end of the day, that is what I expect from them.


----------



## brihard (19 Jul 2021)

FJAG said:


> And who in the Canadian Army at any time from the 1940s to 2000 would have thought we'd ever look like this:


Fitting that this account of our descent into savagery should feature a Cameron.


----------



## daftandbarmy (20 Jul 2021)

Weinie said:


> I sorta get your point. I am a 60 yr old Officer. I shine my shoes, press my uniform, and have haircuts religiously. I maintain the CAF standard, as varied as it is. I also like beer, so I will never be featured in a recruiting poster. My six pack from my twenties has evolved into a keg. I am also pretty good at my job, appearance be damned.
> 
> My point was that we don't need to be all Dolph Lundgren lookalikes, with impeccably tailored uniforms from "A Few Good Men"  to be effective. As I stated earlier, some of the best soldiers I have met (and I assume sailors, and AF pers) don't fit that profile, but they do get the really important shit done, and at the end of the day, that is what I expect from them.



"You can always tell an old soldier by the inside of his holsters and cartridge boxes. The young ones carry pistols and cartridges; the old ones, grub."

- George Bernard Shaw


----------



## daftandbarmy (20 Jul 2021)

brihard said:


> Fitting that this account of our descent into *Oatmeal *savagery should feature a Cameron.



There, FTFY


----------



## FJAG (20 Jul 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> "You can always tell an old soldier by the inside of his holsters and cartridge boxes. The young ones carry pistols and cartridges; the old ones, grub."
> 
> - George Bernard Shaw


I'm pretty sure that the magazine pouches tailored into our old combat shirts and jackets were specifically designed for beer cans. Field tests confirmed that. The side pockets were also suitable for broetchen and bockwurst. Again, field tested and confirmed.

😉


----------



## Kilted (20 Jul 2021)

FJAG said:


> I'm pretty sure that the magazine pouches tailored into our old combat shirts and jackets were specifically designed for beer cans. Field tests confirmed that. The side pockets were also suitable for broetchen and bockwurst. Again, field tested and confirmed.
> 
> 😉


I wore them as OpFor and used them for magazines once. I realized very quickly that the mags like to fall out of those pockets. Never again. 

I remember many years ago that the different pieces of winter kit were identified by the number of beers they could old. Also, apparently you can fit two tall boys and a subway footlong inside if a Carl Gustaf.


----------



## Loachman (21 Jul 2021)

FJAG said:


> I'm pretty sure that the magazine pouches tailored into our old combat shirts and jackets were specifically designed for beer cans.
> 
> 😉



One can fit a lot of beer cans or bottles into a flying suit as well, but the pair in each lower leg pocket will leak when one sits down comfortably if they are open.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (22 Jul 2021)

Weinie said:


> My point was that we don't need to be all Dolph Lundgren lookalikes, with impeccably tailored uniforms from "A Few Good Men" to be effective. As I stated earlier, some of the best soldiers I have met (and I assume sailors, and AF pers) don't fit that profile, but they do get the really important shit done, and at the end of the day, that is what I expect from them.



Agree, and I was never (that I know of) speaking to the "poster person look"...I'm not an image used in recruiting materials, either.  

Attended (virtually) a WComd/WCWO townhall today;  one of the topics/question brought up was dress regs, specifically if and when the CAF will be moving to dress regs that aren't gender-based.  The short answer was "it is being looked at, and you'll know when we know".

There's a Div Comd/Div CWO virtual townhall tomorrow (for our communities, SAR and LRP) and I'd not be surprised if the question is asked there was well.


----------



## daftandbarmy (22 Jul 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> Agree, and I was never (that I know of) speaking to the "poster person look"...I'm not an image used in recruiting materials, either.
> 
> Attended (virtually) a WComd/WCWO townhall today;  one of the topics/question brought up was dress regs, specifically if and when the CAF will be moving to dress regs that aren't gender-based.  The short answer was "it is being looked at, and you'll know when we know".
> 
> There's a Div Comd/Div CWO virtual townhall tomorrow (for our communities, SAR and LRP) and I'd not be surprised if the question is asked there was well.



Pfffftttt.... we Scottish Regiments have been setting the standard for centuries, of course. 


Get with the prrrrrogram lads and lassies!


----------



## FJAG (22 Jul 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> Pfffftttt.... we Scottish Regiments have been setting the standard for centuries, of course.
> 
> 
> Get with the prrrrrogram lads and lassies!


I don't know about your Scottish Regiment but in mine back in the early eighties--when we had no female infantryman--the only females in the regiment who were clerks and loggies wore CF pantsuits on parade while all us men wore kilts. Oh the irony!


----------



## Eye In The Sky (22 Jul 2021)

SAR Techs in kilts...jumping into a scene with....well, let's hope they adhere to the 'dual layer' stuff.


----------

