# beret without cap badge



## Maxadia (1 Nov 2012)

Is wearing a beret without a cap badge a chargeable offence? I cannot seem to find a regulation specifically stating that it is chargeable.  Only asking because I have been told to find a reference to the regulation that specifically states that.


----------



## Towards_the_gap (1 Nov 2012)

NDA 129???

That is totally off the top of my head, for I cannot seem to find an offence that says 

'in that the accused, wore, without a capbadge, a beret, thereby contributing directly to the collapse of western civilisation'


----------



## Maxadia (1 Nov 2012)

Towards_the_gap said:
			
		

> NDA 129???
> 
> That is totally off the top of my head, for I cannot seem to find an offence that says
> 
> 'in that the accused, wore, without a capbadge, a beret, thereby contributing directly to the collapse of western civilisation'



I hear ya.  Like I said, I can't find anything either.  Dress regs tell you how to where it, not specifically WHY, except that it is because that's the way it is done.


----------



## medicineman (1 Nov 2012)

Maybe look at the whole reason why thing - were they ordered to wear a beret with one in it for instance - then you could do disobeying a lawful command...there are formal directives stating what manner of dress you are to be in, etc.

129 would do the dress/deportment thing I suppose - "conduct to the prejudice of good order and discipline in that with malice aforethought the subj member showed up looking like a Bag O'Shyte, failing to note a lack of hatbadge in beret" sort of thing....my guess though, if someone is on the rampage to charge someone for that, there is likey an interesting backstory.  

MM


----------



## Eye In The Sky (1 Nov 2012)

What is the context of this alleged offence?  I recall my Basic, for example, we did not *earn* our capbadge (cornflake) until we passed the Week X "Rank and Saluting test".  So no capbadge at all until Week 5 IIRC.  I can't recall if the CFLRSers are getting theirs right off the bat now, haven't been there since '07.


----------



## dapaterson (1 Nov 2012)

QR&O vol 1 chapter 17 artcle 17.01 states: Members of the Canadian Forces shall wear the uniforms prescribed by the Chief of the Defence Staff.

The CF dress manual is issued on authority of the CDS.


Thus, if someone does not follow the dress regs, they are disobeying an order of the CDS.


----------



## my72jeep (1 Nov 2012)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> QR&O vol 1 chapter 17 artcle 17.01 states: Members of the Canadian Forces shall wear the uniforms prescribed by the Chief of the Defence Staff.
> 
> The CF dress manual is issued on authority of the CDS.
> 
> ...


Oh no it's Manual warfare, hull down and look out.


----------



## Shamrock (1 Nov 2012)

my72jeep said:
			
		

> Oh no it's Manual warfare, hull down and look out.



It's the kinder, gentler army.  It's now known as a pub crawl.


----------



## Maxadia (1 Nov 2012)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> What is the context of this alleged offence?  I recall my Basic, for example, we did not *earn* out capbadge (cornflake) until we passed the Week X "Rank and Saluting test".  So no capbadge at all until Week 5 IIRC.  I can't recall if the CFLRSers are getting theirs right off the bat now, haven't been there since '07.



That's the exact context.  Someone contested it, now we're looking it up.



			
				dapaterson said:
			
		

> QR&O vol 1 chapter 17 artcle 17.01 states: Members of the Canadian Forces shall wear the uniforms prescribed by the Chief of the Defence Staff.
> 
> The CF dress manual is issued on authority of the CDS.
> 
> ...



Curious if there is some way that wouldn't apply to a group of recruits on BMQ.  And before someone jumps on me for having a problem with this either way - I don't care.  I'm just doing what I was told to do. Just trying to be a good little brussel sprout.   :camo:


----------



## George Wallace (1 Nov 2012)

It is a convenient way to distinguish between a Recruit who has been taught to pay compliments and one who has not.


I have also been deployed where a member has lost or broken their hatbadge and worn a beret without it.  Some even remove their hatbadges prior to going on a patrol.

Would your 'superior' want to find a reason to charge them as well?

Sounds like someone is very anal.


----------



## medicineman (1 Nov 2012)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Sounds like someone is very anal RCR.



There, FTFY  ;D

MM


----------



## Maxadia (1 Nov 2012)

Someone wants cap badges on, someone wants them off until the test....I just want to dig a trench in between and get my head down.  :whiteflag:

 ;D

Drill test is this weekend.....Moot point at this time, me thinks.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (1 Nov 2012)

RDJP said:
			
		

> That's the exact context.  Someone contested it, now we're looking it up.



Oh boy!  I hope it was someone on the staff that contested it, not a candidate.  If it is a candidate, their new introduction to people should be "Hello, My Name is Stupid Gump.  People call me Stupid Gump."   ;D



> Curious if there is some way that wouldn't apply to a group of recruits on BMQ.  And before someone jumps on me for having a problem with this either way - I don't care.  I'm just doing what I was told to do. Just trying to be a good little brussel sprout.   :camo:



Dunno.  I was more worried about the stuff that mattered on Basic like "making it thru", and was proud to put my cornflake up after saluting several garbage cans (literally) while marching...just like everyone else did.   I always thought it was a good 'tradition' and it was one that found its way onto QL2/FELT/BMQ/whatever the name is or was courses when I was working courses.


----------



## Maxadia (1 Nov 2012)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> Dunno.  I was more worried about the stuff that mattered on Basic like "making it thru"...



Like I said, doesn't matter to me.  We were just told as a group to go find the reg.


----------



## Bzzliteyr (1 Nov 2012)

RDJP said:
			
		

> Like I said, doesn't matter to me.  We were just told as a group to go find the reg.



The reg that says they DON'T wear it or the reg that says they SHOULD wear it?


----------



## Fishbone Jones (1 Nov 2012)

Beret. The beret *shall * be worn evenly on the
head, with the sweatband 2.5 cm (1 in.)
above the eyebrows, *the badge centred over
the left eye,* and the crown pulled downward
to the right. The break of the sweatband shall
be worn centred at the back of the head, with
no draw string visible.

The beret shall be worn with the badge centred over the left eye.

You need a badge to centre it over the left eye.

Seems pretty clear to me.

The staff on this course should be using their time more effectivley and efficiently. People are wasting precious time with this stupid fuckery.


----------



## Maxadia (1 Nov 2012)

Bzzliteyr said:
			
		

> The reg that says they DON'T wear it or the reg that says they SHOULD wear it?



The one that says you could be charged for not wearing it.



			
				recceguy said:
			
		

> The staff on this course should be using their time more effectivley and efficiently. People are wasting precious time with this stupid fuckery.



That would be true if it was their time that was being wasted, but it's pretty easy to tell the recruits to come back next weekend with the info.
Not a big deal....I was just hoping if there was a regulation there specific to being charged, that someone could point it out.  I'll go with the point that the CDS authorizes dress policy, dress policy states a badge, therefore it should be worn unless you are going against the CDS.

And in the meantime, I will do whatever it is that I am instructed to do by the higher rank in front of me....just like Forrest. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NoptofKbQ04


----------



## PuckChaser (1 Nov 2012)

RDJP said:
			
		

> That would be true if it was their time that was being wasted, but it's pretty easy to tell the recruits to come back next weekend with the info.
> Not a big deal....I was just hoping if there was a regulation there specific to being charged, that someone could point it out.  I'll go with the point that the CDS authorizes dress policy, dress policy states a badge, therefore it should be worn unless you are going against the CDS.



You could word it better, in that disregarding the CF Dress Policy is disobeying a lawful command contrary to section 83 of the National Defense Act.


----------



## Maxadia (1 Nov 2012)

Well yes, that's a lot more succinct. Thanks.


----------



## Towards_the_gap (1 Nov 2012)

Don't screw around. Find the applicable NDA charge for mutiny/sedition.

'pte bloggins, by his refusal to wear his issued uniform in the correct manner, commited an act of treasonous mutiny....'


----------



## 392 (1 Nov 2012)

RDJP said:
			
		

> Not a big deal....I was just hoping if there was a regulation there specific to being charged, that someone could point it out.  I'll go with the point that the CDS authorizes dress policy, dress policy states a badge, therefore it should be worn unless you are going against the CDS.



Before you do that, is there a School SOP that perhaps might lay out when / why / what? 

Wouldn't be the first time an exception was made based on something specific that didn't apply to the CF at large, but is auth specifically for certain times / places / reasons  :2c:


----------



## Maxadia (1 Nov 2012)

Capt. Happy said:
			
		

> Before you do that, is there a School SOP that perhaps might lay out when / why / what?
> 
> Wouldn't be the first time an exception was made based on something specific that didn't apply to the CF at large, but is auth specifically for certain times / places / reasons  :2c:



If that were the case, I would expect to have had that shown to us first, instead of asking us to prove a reg for being charged without one.

Then again, like my father-in-law says "Don't assume....makes an ass out of u and me."


----------



## cupper (1 Nov 2012)

recceguy said:
			
		

> Beret. The beret *shall * be worn evenly on the
> head, with the sweatband 2.5 cm (1 in.)
> above the eyebrows, *the badge centred over
> the left eye,* and the crown pulled downward
> ...



It still doesn't address the two situations brought up previously, Pte Bloggins hasn't been yet given his CF badge to put on the beret, and Cpl Wingnut removed his capbadge (presumes that it is removable) before going on patrol. 

One can still put the beret on and align it without the capbadge, as it is quite obvious where the badge would be if it were there.


----------



## McG (1 Nov 2012)

RDJP said:
			
		

> Someone wants cap badges on, someone wants them off until the test....


Who are the two "someones"?  That is more relevant in deciding what is okay or not.
This is something that the TE CO/Cmdt could make a decision either way.  Nobody will be getting charged for following that direction.


----------



## 2010newbie (1 Nov 2012)

RDJP said:
			
		

> If that were the case, I would expect to have had that shown to us first, instead of asking us to prove a reg for being charged without one.
> 
> Then again, like my father-in-law says "Don't assume....makes an *** out of u and me."



I know when I did BMOQ it was expected that each one of us had read the SOP's during the first couple weeks there. In the blue area they were posted near the elevators on every floor. It covers a ton of stuff and it may very well be in there.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (2 Nov 2012)

cupper said:
			
		

> It still doesn't address the two situations brought up previously, Pte Bloggins hasn't been yet given his CF badge to put on the beret, and Cpl Wingnut removed his capbadge (presumes that it is removable) before going on patrol.
> 
> One can still put the beret on and align it without the capbadge, as it is quite obvious where the badge would be if it were there.



You really ought to hang your 'Barrack Room Lawyer' shingle first. Not all berets have the obvious backing. Besides the reg doesn't say backing, it says badge. Did you get that part? If you even had a schmick and knew the regs, you'd know the reg that determines the placement of the badge. Once that placement has been determined, the rest of the reg comes into force.

Assholes of every stripe have, through the ages, tried to buck the idea of 'uniform' through perceived 'superior knowledge' of the misinterpretted facts. Some, and it's a great some, have served time in detention for trying to be an authority on a subject that they really aren't that cognizant of.

That would include expats that have been disassoiciated with the current regs and military for about ten or more years.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (2 Nov 2012)

RDJP said:
			
		

> That would be true if it was their time that was being wasted, but it's pretty easy to tell the recruits to come back next weekend with the info.



That makes it even more ludicrous and disgusting. That some course staff are getting their jollies by making candidates participate in their buffoonery is also unprofessional and needs a real hard look by the unit and standards. Wasting recruits time with cock instead of using the time constructively for real help and reinforcement of lessons already taught

If it were up to me, the staff would be researching their own charges and warnings.


----------



## jwtg (2 Nov 2012)

I believe the dress regs also specify rules for the wearing of nametags/nametapes.  Is a recruit to be charged if they haven't been issued proper nametapes yet?  It took us almost over 2 months to get issued our proper nametapes to wear on CADPAT.  Many of my peers, all the way through BMOQ, never received their proper stitch-on nametapes for their NCDs.

I guess my point is that there is a proper, regulation-specified way to wear the uniform but those regulations don't necessarily match reality in the case of brand new members. It's possible they didn't consider recruits who don't quite have all their kit issued to them yet.  I imagine someone removing their cap badge because they feel like it, once they have been issued one, is more of a problem.

There are also regulations on the proper paying of compliments, including how and when a salute is to be performed.  If a recruit/OCdt doesn't yet know how to properly salute, should they be permitted to wear a cap badge and thus expected to salute? (Also, does anyone know if the regs specify you must have a cap badge to salute?  That's what I have been taught, but I also salute officers when I'm wearing a toque...)

It sounds to me like an oversight, but not a very important one because people don't usually care whether it's in the regs that a cap brass must be worn or not, in the case of new recruits.

**EDIT: 3 edits for clarity.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (2 Nov 2012)

Name tags can be fulfilled with a simple piece of masking tape and a magic marker, if need be.

Cap *badges* not being worn to show who has been taught how to salute is downright lazy and is brought about by people that don't want to be responsible in their job.

If people are that concerned then the saluting lesson should be taught to recruits on the first morning of basic.

For whatever reason this seems to be some sort of recent phenomenon. Thousand of personell have passed through recruit training, with cap badges being issued from the start and it hasn't caused the tit twisting angst that seems to be bothering some here and elsewhere.

If an officer can't tell a brand new recruit at a glance or confirm their suspicions with a single question, perhaps he should not have been issued a commissioning scroll in the first place


----------



## medicineman (2 Nov 2012)

recceguy said:
			
		

> Name tags can be fulfilled with a simple piece of masking tape and a magic marker, if need be.
> 
> Cap *badges* not being worn to show who has been taught how to salute is downright lazy and is brought about by people that don't want to be responsible in their job.
> 
> ...



Pssst - I went through Cornwallis in 88 - that was the norm then.  You had to earn the cornflake in 4th week by passing your saluting test and were given a buy until then if you gibbled up saluting an officer...if however you had a cornflake and screwed up saluting an officer, you were done like dinner.

Making someone earn their cornflake was one of those things to give them a sense of personal accomplishment as they went through recruit training.  Not sure what things are like now, but as a rule, we were generally confined to barracks/base for 4-5 weeks minimun anyway - we wouldn't be allowed out wearing no cornflake, as we'd be in a public place out of dress...in fact if you made it to 5th week and not earned it, you were recoursed and would likely remain CB'd until you unfrigged yourself.  Not sure how far back this went, but friends of mine that went through in earlier 80's were the same.

As for saluting first day of basic, most people can't come to attention, much less get a grip on saluting on the march, their first day  :nod: - my dad was an apprentice gunner many moons ago, and all they were told to do until they were formally taught at whatever drill class at whatever time frame their training sched had them learn saluting, was either to stand to attention or check arms and give an eyes left or right.

For me, I think earning your first badge, then getting to toss it when you get your trade badge, should be considered one of those little milestones in your military life - a big baby step as it were.

 :2c:

MM

Edited for speeling


----------



## Bzzliteyr (2 Nov 2012)

Let's clear some facts up here as I am a little slow:

This is a reserve BMQ run on weekends.

The course WO (or officer) feels that students SHOULD have their badges and has instructed the students (?) to find out why they aren't wearing them?

or, The course WO (or officer) feels the students SHOULD be wearing their cap badges and wants the course staff to find the answer as to what regs state they DON'T wear them?

I am trying to figure out who is potentially in trouble, student or staff?  What is the end result intended by whoever initiated this wild goose chase?

Thanks.


----------



## blackberet17 (2 Nov 2012)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> was proud to put my cornflake up after saluting several garbage cans (literally) while marching...



Oh we used to dream of salutin' garbage cans! Woulda' been a step up to us. We used to salute a drain pipe, runnin' from the washrooms on the top floor. We used to salute it whenever someone flushed too, and the pipe would leak! Garbage cans!? Hmph.

With full respect to Monty Python's Four Yorkshiremen sketch...


----------



## Nfld Sapper (2 Nov 2012)

blackberet17 said:
			
		

> Oh we used to dream of salutin' garbage cans! Woulda' been a step up to us. We used to salute a drain pipe, runnin' from the washrooms on the top floor. We used to salute it whenever someone flushed too, and the pipe would leak! Garbage cans!? Hmph.
> 
> With full respect to Monty Python's Four Yorkshiremen sketch...



Psst.... we had to salute a stain on the wall..... you gents had it good with garbage cans and drain pipes...

 ;D


----------



## Bluebulldog (2 Nov 2012)

NFLD Sapper said:
			
		

> Psst.... we had to salute a stain on the wall..... you gents had it good with garbage cans and drain pipes...
> 
> ;D



......a dry stain?....luxury.......

 :rofl:


----------



## WrenchBender (2 Nov 2012)

medicineman
 :goodpost: I completely agree.

WrenchBender


----------



## Eye In The Sky (2 Nov 2012)

medicineman said:
			
		

> Pssst - I went through Cornwallis in 88 - that was the norm then.  You had to earn the cornflake in 4th week by passing your saluting test and were given a buy until then if you gibbled up saluting an officer...if however you had a cornflake and screwed up saluting an officer, you were done like dinner.
> 
> Making someone earn their cornflake was one of those things to give them a sense of personal accomplishment as they went through recruit training.  Not sure what things are like now, but as a rule, we were generally confined to barracks/base for 4-5 weeks minimun anyway - we wouldn't be allowed out wearing no cornflake, as we'd be in a public place out of dress...in fact if you made it to 5th week and not earned it, you were recoursed and would likely remain CB'd until you unfrigged yourself.  Not sure how far back this went, but friends of mine that went through in earlier 80's were the same.
> 
> ...



Good post, and I agree with the "earning it gives a sense of accomplishment" stuff, having experienced it AND doing this on BMQs I was staff on.

Our saluting test was pretty simple when I did it in '89, 12 Platoon, 8930 (hoo rah!).  We were in a single file.  One of the staff, in my case a MS NWT, was at the front of the line and he'd asked several question on rank like "I am in a Navy uniform and I am wearing a crown on my sleeve, what rank am I", that kind of stuff.  Once he was satisfied, he'd tell you to carry on.  There were 3 big garbage cans lined up on the road, each one with an instructor beside it.  We'd march down the road, and salute to the left, right as we passed the cans.  If you f&&ckedit up, off you'd go to the back of the line.  At the end of the 'saluting lane', you'd halt, pause 2 3, salute to the front IIRC.  Now,the shorter the line got, the more it was full of the dopies who kept screwing it up. The last few going throw had us howling with the *drill* they were doing.  ;D

After everyone was thru, we had a Platoon parade, and our cornflakes were presented to us from our Coy 2 I/C, who for us was an attractive young AF Capt, who I remember well because...she was the first Officer I saluted.  Oh and she was smokin hot in her AF blue SS shirt.   8)

It wasn't a big deal in hindsight, but we were all pretty pround of ourselves AND we got to meet our Coy 2 I/C  :nod:


----------



## cupper (2 Nov 2012)

recceguy said:
			
		

> You really ought to hang your 'Barrack Room Lawyer' shingle first. Not all berets have the obvious backing. Besides the reg doesn't say backing, it says badge. Did you get that part? If you even had a schmick and knew the regs, you'd know the reg that determines the placement of the badge. Once that placement has been determined, the rest of the reg comes into force.
> 
> Assholes of every stripe have, through the ages, tried to buck the idea of 'uniform' through perceived 'superior knowledge' of the misinterpretted facts. Some, and it's a great some, have served time in detention for trying to be an authority on a subject that they really aren't that cognizant of.
> 
> That would include expats that have been disassoiciated with the current regs and military for about ten or more years.



I wasn't playing barracks room lawyer. I was making an observation that what was posted did not cover the two situations which were previously noted. The implied question was how do you address those specific cases. Situations that I'm pretty sure those of us who are current or former members are familiar with and may well have encountered during our careers.

Regardless of how long they have been out of the service or where they currently reside. :nana:

If you would like me to play barracks room lawyer, I'm pretty sure I could come up with a long diatribe that you could spend countless hours ripping apart. And I would then point out how you need to work on your subtlety, as it took me no time at all to understand that you were calling me a bad name.  :sarcasm:


----------



## Fishbone Jones (2 Nov 2012)

cupper said:
			
		

> I wasn't playing barracks room lawyer. I was making an observation that what was posted did not cover the two situations which were previously noted. The implied question was how do you address those specific cases. Situations that I'm pretty sure those of us who are current or former members are familiar with and may well have encountered during our careers.
> 
> Regardless of how long they have been out of the service or where they currently reside. :nana:
> 
> If you would like me to play barracks room lawyer, I'm pretty sure I could come up with a long diatribe that you could spend countless hours ripping apart. And I would then point out how you need to work on your subtlety, as it took me no time at all to understand that you were calling me a bad name.  :sarcasm:



It's one thing I've never been accused of, is being subtle.

And on that line yes, I was taking the piss out of you 

I apologise. 

Over celebrating the addition of a new male generation to the family name :blotto:


----------



## cupper (2 Nov 2012)

recceguy said:
			
		

> It's one thing I've never been accused of, is being subtle.
> 
> And on that line yes, I was taking the piss out of you
> 
> ...



No prob. I figured there was some piss taking going on too.

Congrats on the arival Recceguy 2.0


----------



## X Royal (4 Nov 2012)

recceguy said:
			
		

> For whatever reason this seems to be some sort of recent phenomenon. Thousand of personell have passed through recruit training, with cap badges being issued from the start and it hasn't caused the tit twisting angst that seems to be bothering some here and elsewhere.


As already pointed out this is not a recent phenomenon. When I went through Cornwallis in 1978 it was the practice.


			
				recceguy said:
			
		

> That makes it even more ludicrous and disgusting. That some course staff are getting their jollies by making candidates participate in their buffoonery is also unprofessional and needs a real hard look by the unit and standards. Wasting recruits time with **** instead of using the time constructively for real help and reinforcement of lessons already taught
> 
> If it were up to me, the staff would be researching their own charges and warnings.


I agree 100%.


			
				RDJP said:
			
		

> That would be true if it was their time that was being wasted, but it's pretty easy to tell the recruits to come back next weekend with the info.
> Not a big deal....I was just hoping if there was a regulation there specific to being charged, that someone could point it out.  I'll go with the point that the CDS authorizes dress policy, dress policy states a badge, therefore it should be worn unless you are going against the CDS.
> And in the meantime, I will do whatever it is that I am instructed to do by the higher rank in front of me....just like Forrest.


As this is a reserve course I'd like to know what authority the staff has to assign homework?
When off duty (& not being paid or on DND property or in uniform) you are not subject to the NDA.
You have no obligation to work for free.
Are the staff willing to authorize paid time for this research. I doubt it.


----------



## blackberet17 (4 Nov 2012)

Bluebulldog said:
			
		

> ......a dry stain?....luxury.......
> 
> :rofl:



Nicely played


----------



## Shamrock (4 Nov 2012)

X Royal said:
			
		

> As this is a reserve course I'd like to know what authority the staff has to assign homework?
> When off duty (& not being paid or on DND property or in uniform) you are not subject to the NDA.
> You have no obligation to work for free.
> Are the staff willing to authorize paid time for this research. I doubt it.



No, I disagree.  The requirement to be prepared for a duty isn't a duty unto itself - and being prescribed homework is being told hold to be prepared for the upcoming classes.  I base this on the Reserve requirements to complete OPMEs and AJOSQ - they don't get paid to do it, yet they are most certainly expected to.

You're certainly correct in the limitations of disciplinary action against them if they haven't finished their homework.  Administrative actions, however...


----------



## X Royal (6 Nov 2012)

Shamrock said:
			
		

> No, I disagree.  The requirement to be prepared for a duty isn't a duty unto itself - and being prescribed homework is being told hold to be prepared for the upcoming classes.  I base this on the Reserve requirements to complete OPMEs and AJOSQ - they don't get paid to do it, yet they are most certainly expected to.
> 
> You're certainly correct in the limitations of disciplinary action against them if they haven't finished their homework.  Administrative actions, however...


And what PO on the recruit course does researching "beret without cap badge" fulfill?
I've taught many & never issued homework as in research. Yes have uniform ready & haircut ect but not research on military law/rules and regulations. 
What they needed to know on the course we taught. All evaluated PO's where based on the lessons taught.
Studying for tests was also expected.


----------



## Shamrock (6 Nov 2012)

So, ordering a review of provided material is acceptable for Reserivsts during off-duty hours provided it does not require any further work.  I see no issue in this revision being in a prescribed format -a study booklet - with mandatory completion.

For example:

Unacceptable: Find the regulation that states a soldier must wear a cap badge and under what conditions.  Which sections of the NDA do non-compliance violate?

Acceptable: As covered in EO 102.04, must a soldier wear a cap badge?  As covered in EO 102.01, what powers are available to his commanders should the soldier not comply?


----------



## Fishbone Jones (6 Nov 2012)

Shamrock said:
			
		

> So, ordering a review of provided material is acceptable for Reserivsts during off-duty hours provided it does not require any further work.  I see no issue in this revision being in a prescribed format -a study booklet - with mandatory completion.
> 
> For example:
> 
> ...



This is a Reserve BMQ.

What you are suggesting, for basic recruits, falls under the heading of COCK.


----------



## Bluebulldog (6 Nov 2012)

recceguy said:
			
		

> This is a Reserve BMQ.
> 
> What you are suggesting, for basic recruits, falls under the heading of ****.



While most reserve BMQ candidates are students, and giving extra curricular assignments to look up and find obscure knowlege may seem ok, since they only have school outside of it. Giving candidates "Homework" to be done on their own time, is a bit much. Many are older, and indeed have family and career commitments which fill their lives outside their Friday night to Sunday afternoon BMQ. 

Having said that......I recall being given an "assignment" having to write out the Rank Structure ( PTE - General) 100 times because some numpty kept calling the course WO ( a Sgt), a "Master Seargent".....but it did achieve the desired results, and happened to fall in line with remedial training on the PO for Rank structure........


----------



## Shamrock (6 Nov 2012)

recceguy said:
			
		

> This is a Reserve BMQ.
> 
> What you are suggesting, for basic recruits, falls under the heading of ****.



Oh, do get over yourself.  A study guide is not that onerous.


----------



## blackberet17 (6 Nov 2012)

Picking up on Bluebulldog's comment...

As a Basic Recruit, on a Reserve BMQ, we were given homework. To study up on our Regiment, its traditions, etc.

When I was the Crse O on the BMQ a year later (we were short pers for a newly minted 2Lt to be doing it, but I had an awesome WO, so Standards approved), I assigned the same homework.

We did have the whole week to do the homework, after all.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (6 Nov 2012)

Shamrock said:
			
		

> Oh, do get over yourself.  A study guide is not that onerous.



Onerous or not has nothing to do with it. I've ran more courses that you've been on sunshine. I know when candidates are being screwed around.


----------



## the 48th regulator (6 Nov 2012)

The OP has asked to lock the thread, as He's satisfied with the answer(s).

Locked.

dileas

tess

milnet.ca staff


----------

