# Headdress during public transit



## anjp (8 Jan 2011)

I recently completed my basic course in St-Jean and will be flying to my new unit via commercial air this coming week.  The instructions were to wear CADPAT with blue (air force) toque while in transit.  

Does this mean I wear my toque to the airport and then go bareheaded inside + on plane, and then toque again once we land?  Or does it mean I wear my toque to the airport, switch to the beret inside, and then back to the toque again once we land.  Obviously I'm not going to wear the toque indoors...but I'm not quite sure if bareheaded is OK either.  I know that headdresses can be removed while on public transit, but what about inside other buildings e.g. airport, taxi, etc.

Thanks in advance.


----------



## Occam (8 Jan 2011)

http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/land-terre/downloads-telechargements/reserve/dress-tenue/CF_dress_instructions_mod2008_0514.pdf

See page 2-3-3.

Common sense would dictate that you don't normally carry two sets of headdress, so one could excuse you for passing on the tuque in the airport and going bareheaded.

Now you have the dress manual so you have all the references.


----------



## ModlrMike (8 Jan 2011)

Occam said:
			
		

> http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/land-terre/downloads-telechargements/reserve/dress-tenue/CF_dress_instructions_mod2008_0514.pdf
> 
> See page 2-3-3.
> 
> ...



Good call on the Dress Manual.

Personally, I would still carry my beret, but maybe that's just me. Depending on how long one is in the terminal, the toque could get quite uncomfortable. You don't have to wear head dress on the aircraft.


----------



## chrisf (8 Jan 2011)

Occam said:
			
		

> Common sense would dictate that you don't normally carry two sets of headdress, so one could excuse you for passing on the tuque in the airport and going bareheaded.



Common sense? Good lord, what's that? Jokes aside, carrying two sets of headdress is not at all odd, I would instead consider it the norm.

To the original poster, we're currently in winter dress, which means the toque may be worn, not that it must be worn, you may certainly still wear your beret.

I would suggest that if you're going to be wandering around the airport for an extended period that yes, you should bring your beret, and wear it inside, if you feel your toque is too warm. For exact details on when and wear, the dress manual was posted.


----------



## Franko (8 Jan 2011)

Call me old school but unless you're working outside I'd be wearing your beret until seated in the plane.

My $0.02 worth

Regards


----------



## Fishbone Jones (8 Jan 2011)

Der Panzerkommandant.... said:
			
		

> Call me old school but unless you're working outside I'd be wearing your beret until seated in the plane.
> 
> My $0.02 worth
> 
> Regards



Bingo. Beret in public and removed once in the air. Replaced upon landing and until your in your cab.

General rule of thumb: Wear it if in public and not seated within a transportation vehicle. Once inside the vehicle, if the trip is more that fifteen minutes, take it off.

A beret shows your pride in your uniform. A touque, in public, makes you look like a janitor or a player in a pickup hockey game.


----------



## Sigger (8 Jan 2011)

recceguy said:
			
		

> A beret shows your pride in your uniform. A touque, in public, makes you look like a janitor or a player in a pickup hockey game.



I completely agree.


----------



## Occam (8 Jan 2011)

Am I to take it that the consensus is that the tuque should be worn in the field only, despite it being approved for winter wear with CADPAT at all times (according to the dress manual, anyways)?


----------



## chrisf (8 Jan 2011)

Doesn't sound like what I said at all...


----------



## Michael OLeary (8 Jan 2011)

Occam said:
			
		

> Am I to take it that the consensus is that the tuque should be worn in the field only, despite it being approved for winter wear with CADPAT at all times (according to the dress manual, anyways)?



It should be worn when the weather requires it , wherever you are, if you haven't been specifically required to wear a different headdress. For example, on Remembrance Day, even if it is cold, you probably will not be in toques for the parade. 

As for the particular question in this thread, I'd advise at least having your beret in your carry-on to wear when a headdress is appropriate and a toque isn't necessary, such as moving about inside the airports.  Also keep in mind that in the unlikely occurrence you get separated from your checked luggage, you won't want a toque to be your only headdress with that uniform for the few days it might take for your suitcases to catch up.


----------



## Occam (8 Jan 2011)

a Sig Op said:
			
		

> Doesn't sound like what I said at all...



Sorry...I meant consensus of the _old schoolers_.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (8 Jan 2011)

Occam said:
			
		

> Sorry...I meant consensus of the _old schoolers_.



Meaning?


----------



## dapaterson (8 Jan 2011)

recceguy said:
			
		

> Meaning?



Meaning either (a) you're a scholar or (b) you're old.

Possibly both.

(Though I've never thought of you as a scholar...)


----------



## PuckChaser (8 Jan 2011)

Occam said:
			
		

> Common sense would dictate that you don't normally carry two sets of headdress, so one could excuse you for passing on the tuque in the airport and going bareheaded.



I never leave home to go to work without my beret handy. Sure it sits in a pocket for 4 months when its cold, but you don't want to be "that guy" and need a beret for some indoor thing and not have it.


----------



## Navalsnpr (8 Jan 2011)

Fail to Plan, Plan to Fail!!  

Better to have it on you than not have it and require it.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (8 Jan 2011)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Meaning either (a) you're a scholar or (b) you're old.
> 
> Possibly both.
> 
> (Though I've never thought of you as a scholar...)


Thanks a lot dataperson, I think, and right back at you. 

I suppose us 'old schoolers' could have been more succinct for those that need the curly cue kiddy bracelets we see nursery school kids wearing at home and NDHQ. The majority of educated Canadians don't need point referenced instructions on what to wear in cold weather.

So for the people that work at lofty heights in Ottawa.

If you are walking, or standing, in a blinding snowstorm at -20, please wear your touque and save yourself from frostbite. Or brainfreeze, if you have your own. If you are walking from the door of your shack to the cab, from the cab into the airport, wear your beret. Do not sit in the airport\cab stand\bus station wearing a touque, wear your beret. People expect their military to look a certain way and present an image of professionalism. Looking like Big Joe Mufferaw isn't the way to do it.

Although given the myriad of uniform wearing habits of the supposed CF pers inhabiting the the Capital Region and the individualist habits of the same, thinking themselves above whatever the rest of have to do, I understand completely how there would be confusion when someone actually tells them what to do.


----------



## Pusser (9 Jan 2011)

I guess I'm really old school!  I can't imagine traveling on posting in CADPAT.  If they're being directed to travel in uniform, they should be in service dress.  What's the world coming to?


----------



## Fishbone Jones (9 Jan 2011)

Pusser said:
			
		

> I guess I'm really old school!  I can't imagine traveling on posting in CADPAT.  If they're being directed to travel in uniform, they should be in service dress.  What's the world coming to?



I didn't want to tackle that one and derail anything with too much info. I figured suffice to say, someone really needs to talk to whomever about their walking out policy.

It's fucked and will only lead to a further breakdown than we already have.


----------



## Occam (9 Jan 2011)

That's a nice rant, but it doesn't address the fact that the tuque is authorized winter dress with CADPAT.  If the powers that be were truly concerned about us looking foolish while walking around downtown Ottawa (or Toronto, or Halifax, or Edmonton, or...you get the point), they'd not have us walking around dressed like walking shrubbery in an urban environment.  The addition of a black, green or blue tuque is certainly not going to be tipping the public opinion of the CF.

I have an old beret which remains at work in the event that it's required for something, but otherwise I travel to and from work (via bus) in my tuque if the weather is cold enough.  The tuque was provided for *comfort* - an attribute which was largely ignored in previous versions of our uniforms.  I remember being forced to wear a peak cap in Halifax during the 75th anniversary year of the Navy because someone thought it would be nice to have us wear number 3's as walking out dress all year long.  Ever walked aross the MacDonald Bridge while wearing a peak cap in a snowstorm?  Let's not regress to that level of silliness again.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (9 Jan 2011)

Feel better? It's not a rant, and you don't want to go toe to toe on time, as you brought it up. 

So what do you wear when you don't have\ need a touque? Your old beat up beret?

No one is denying 'comfort'. When it calls for it, wear it. There is a time and place for everything. Ever seen street punks with touques in the summer? Release the regs on touques and you'll see CF pers with touques in the summer, just cause it looks 'gangster'. We have dress regs for a reason. After 25 some years, you should know, and accept, that.


----------



## Occam (9 Jan 2011)

The beret that's been retired from day to day use stays in my cubicle.  A good one goes on the noggin to go to/from work.

I know we have dress regs for a reason, and I follow them to the letter.  I won't get into what irks me about dress policy as that's way outside the topic of this thread.

For what it's worth, my lofty height is the second floor.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (9 Jan 2011)

Occam said:
			
		

> The beret that's been retired from day to day use stays in my cubicle.  A good one goes on the noggin to go to/from work.
> 
> I know we have dress regs for a reason, and I follow them to the letter.  I won't get into what irks me about dress policy as that's way outside the topic of this thread.
> 
> For what it's worth, my lofty height is the second floor.


Then we agree that soldiers\ airmen \ seamen dress the way the regs say and work from within to implement change when required, right?


----------



## CombatDoc (9 Jan 2011)

It could have been much worse than the toque vs beret debate, such as wearing a CADPAT uniform with a blue wedge (as used to be done until the dress regs were changed). :rofl:


----------



## Armymedic (9 Jan 2011)

First, the mbr who is asking the question, his CoC has disregarded the CFP 265 by allowing the member to travel in CADPAT. Second, they failed to explain that tuque should only be worn in winter outfit, which specifically means when the mbr has the coat on, the tuque may be worn in lieu of beret or other head dress. 



> Tuque. An environmental tuque may be
> worn as an alternative winter headdress
> with service dress (No. 3 orders), with
> topcoats and parkas during winter dress
> periods.



This is a failure of the CoC to both comply with CFP 265 and to properly instruct the mbr. Good on the above member to ask questions, although it should have been asked at the time of the instruction.

Finally, unless someone can specifically show otherwise, I have not seen nor can not find the specific direction in CFP 265 which requires all CF mbrs to wear head dress indoors. Stating this (until I am otherwise corrected), the young mbr above does not need a second head dress for his tpt as long as he is wearing his tuque with his coat anytime he is out of doors.


----------



## Michael OLeary (9 Jan 2011)

Rider Pride said:
			
		

> Finally, unless someone can specifically show otherwise, I have not seen nor can not find the specific direction in CFP 265 which requires all CF mbrs to wear head dress indoors. Stating this (until I am otherwise corrected), the young mbr above does not need a second head dress for his tpt as long as he is wearing his tuque with his coat anytime he is out of doors.



Page 2-3-3



> Non-Service Buildings. Headdress shall not normally be removed in any public place, including elevators. However, personnel may observe the custom practised by civilians in regard to the wearing of headdress in non-service buildings such as restaurants, theatres and civil courts. When on duty under arms as an escort in a civil court, headdress shall not be removed.



And for clarity, from page 1-11:



> “shall” shall be contrued as being imperative


----------



## chrisf (9 Jan 2011)

Occam said:
			
		

> Sorry...I meant consensus of the _old schoolers_.



Unrelated to the beret/toque issue, but funny thing about old schoolers. In my military experience, and in my civi work experience, old schoolers love to tell us how much better things were "back in the day". Then they die of cancer.


----------



## aesop081 (9 Jan 2011)

a Sig Op said:
			
		

> Unrelated to the beret/toque issue, but funny thing about old schoolers. In my military experience, and in my civi work experience, old schoolers love to tell us how much better things were "back in the day". Then they die of cancer.



And the funny thing about "new school" types is that they inevitably turn into "old school" types who tell the younger folks how better it was back in the day. Then, they die of cancer too.


----------



## chrisf (9 Jan 2011)

And god-willing, the replacement "new school" types will again learn from the mistakes of the predecessors.


----------



## ModlrMike (9 Jan 2011)

To quote someone smarter than me whose name I've forgotten:

"I never realized how smart my father was until I was his age."


----------



## infantryian (9 Jan 2011)

To quote mark Twain, "When I was 19 I couldn't believe how little my father knew. When I was 22 I couldn't believe how much he had learned in three years."


----------



## desert_rat (9 Jan 2011)

hehe the other saying I remember from a few years ago - loosely paraphrased: "teenagers, why not move out of your parents house now while you still know everything"


----------



## Armymedic (9 Jan 2011)

Michael O'Leary said:
			
		

> Page 2-3-3


Thanks Mike, I am thus informed.

Page 2-3-3: Which, interestingly, Section 3 is the "Religious and Spiritual Accommodation" section. Any wonder why it is not easy to find?


----------



## chrisf (9 Jan 2011)

I think most of you completely missed my point. 

There's a reason we don't do a lot of things "the old school" way. Working in an industrial  setting, I regularly hear the words "Well I've never worn [insert any sort of ppe here] and I'm not going to start now" from plenty of "old school" types. 

Talking of how they used to wash their coveralls in gasoline or varsol and why they don't understand why we can't do it now, how hearing protection is for wimps, and that safety glasses keep them from seeing what they're doing so they just don't wear them.

These are the people I'm referring to. They go deaf, blind, then die of cancer.

(And to relate this to the beret/toque conversation, some time ago, our SSM made orders to the effect of toques were not to be worn... or at least that's how the orders of the SSM were interpreted by a particular WO.... contrary to published winter dress instructions. Having had frostbite in my ears several times previously, and not being intersted in having it again, my response was to the effect of "well charge me".)


----------



## Sigger (9 Jan 2011)

IMO if it is anywhere up to and including -20 and you are walking around with a toque instead of your beret(other than in the field), you look like a goof.


----------



## PuckChaser (9 Jan 2011)

I'd rather look like a "goof" to you, and be warm when I'm outside in -15C weather then pretend to be hard and be outside without a jacket wearing a beret because it makes me look hardcore.


----------



## armyvern (9 Jan 2011)

Sigger said:
			
		

> IMO if it is anywhere up to and including -20 and you are walking around with a toque instead of your beret(other than in the field), you look like a goof.



That`s nice. And, I`ll point out, is simply your personal opinion.

My order to my troops here?? "It's cold. Wear your damn toques, that's why the CF issues them to you." 

Winter Dress: Toques are 100% ACCEPTABLE for wear as per the Dress Instructions --- whether any of us like it or not.


----------



## 57Chevy (10 Jan 2011)

desert_rat said:
			
		

> hehe the other saying I remember from a few years ago - loosely paraphrased: "teenagers, why not move out of your parents house now while you still know everything"



It actually goes: "Hire a student while they still know everything"


----------



## JMesh (10 Jan 2011)




----------



## Sigger (10 Jan 2011)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> That`s nice. And, I`ll point out, is simply your personal opinion.



By adding IMO, I already pointed out it was in my opinion.

They are absolutely acceptable. I just think they look goofy. 

Sigger OUT


----------



## armyvern (10 Jan 2011)

Well, I guess it`s better than looking like an I D 10T wearing a beret around and getting frostbite (and possibly charged by me for self-inflicted ...).



Point of note: I have yet to wear my toque here in Edmonton.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (13 Jan 2011)

Wear a toque while not in the field, or doing something "fieldish"?

I'd have to be ordered to...............


----------



## toughenough (13 Jan 2011)

I can't even believe this discussion. Some of these office dwellers are really THAT concerned of the low speed/high drag effect of having a beret in your right cargo pocket? Amazing.

To the original poster, who is fresh off BMOQ (or BMQ as it may be), err on the side of caution. Clearly there is some discrepancy by some members of our community. Don't wait to get jacked up in the airport by a crusty WO who hates OCdts. Wear the appropriate headdress for the environment you're currently in (IE a heated building), and be done with it.


----------



## Occam (13 Jan 2011)

toughenough said:
			
		

> I can't even believe this discussion. Some of these office dwellers are really THAT concerned of the low speed/high drag effect of having a beret in your right cargo pocket? Amazing.
> 
> To the original poster, who is fresh off BMOQ (or BMQ as it may be), err on the side of caution. Clearly there is some discrepancy by some members of our community. Don't wait to get jacked up in the airport by a crusty WO who hates OCdts. Wear the appropriate headdress for the environment you're currently in (IE a heated building), and be done with it.



Is this opinion based on your extensive military experience?  Some of these "office dwellers" have boots with more time in than you.

There is no discrepancy.  The tuque is approved winter dress.  The dress manual says: "10. Non-Service Buildings. Headdress shall not normally be removed in any public place, including elevators. However, personnel may observe the custom practised by civilians in regard to the wearing of headdress in non-service buildings such as restaurants, theatres and civil courts".  I would argue the custom practised by civilians with regard to the wearing of headdress in airports would be to remove it.  I'm willing to entertain arguments to the contrary.

Common sense would dictate that multiple items of uniform need not be carried.  I've heard of people getting jacked up for wearing a rain jacket on a cool, sunny day.  Why?  Because it's not raining.  If the parka is too warm, and just CADPAT will likely be too chilly, then wear your rain jacket - I defy anyone to find a regulation or order prohibiting it.  It's ludicrous to think that if it's raining in the morning when I go to work, but forecasted to be sunny and cool in the afternoon that I should be expected to wear my rain jacket in the morning, and lug around my parka until the rain stops.

Common sense isn't so common anymore, I guess.


----------



## toughenough (13 Jan 2011)

Occam said:
			
		

> Is this opinion based on your extensive military experience? Some of these "office dwellers" have boots with more time in than you.



Thanks for adding this to the conversation. Well done.

If their is no discrepancy, this thread would have one post answering the question, and one post from an admin locking the thread, as many before it have.

Is it unreasonable to suggest that when in doubt, err on the side of caution? Especially to a junior member? There's that common sense again...


----------



## Pusser (13 Jan 2011)

Occam said:
			
		

> Common sense isn't so common anymore, I guess.



I fully agree with your whole post and is essentially what I would do, but come on!  Since when did common sense have anything to do with what we do? ;D

Crusty old chief:  "You're late! - - - - - -Sir."

Young sub-lieutenant:  "No I'm not.  I was told to be here at 0800 Chief."

Crusty old chief:  "You should have been here at 0750.  - - - - - - - Sir."

Young sub-lieutenant:  "Then you should have told me to be here at 0750."


----------



## Pusser (13 Jan 2011)

toughenough said:
			
		

> Thanks for adding this to the conversation. Well done.
> 
> If their is no discrepancy, this thread would have one post answering the question, and one post from an admin locking the thread, as many before it have.
> 
> Is it unreasonable to suggest that when in doubt, err on the side of caution? Especially to a junior member? There's that common sense again...



Do you poke sleeping bears too?


----------



## OldSolduer (13 Jan 2011)

You know this is a ridiculous conversation here. Vern has it right, toques are issued and to be worn when its cold.

For those of you who think that you should wear a beret in garrison at all times, try standing on parade in Winnipeg in January when its -30C in a beret. Good luck with the CF 98 explaining why your ears got frostbite.

Common sense people! Use it!


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (13 Jan 2011)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> You know this is a ridiculous conversation here. Vern has it right, toques are issued and to be worn when its cold.
> 
> For those of you who think that you should wear a beret in garrison at all times, try standing on parade in Winnipeg in January when its -30C in a beret. Good luck with the CF 98 explaining why your ears got frostbite.
> 
> Common sense people! Use it!



That's all friggin' dandy when its -30 in Winnipeg, but how about when its +14 in Windsor?.........well hey, it is winter dress time and I like my toque. :


----------



## Michael OLeary (13 Jan 2011)

It has always surprised me how some people try to identify the earliest point at which they can “safely” remove their headdress in any location or event. It would be impracticable for the Dress Regulations to list every single possibility for absolute clarity; common sense, awareness of custom and tradition, and awareness of chain-of-command expectations remain a necessity. Some of those are picked up through specific instruction, some by following the examples of those around you, and still others by trial and error. Erring on the side of caution is seldom a poor choice.

Based on my own opinion (fully acknowledging that others may approach things differently) and experience, I would offer the following:

The customs of civilians wearing or removing hats is based on the days when a gentleman wore a hat as a matter of course, removed it only when social custom dictated, and tipped it to passing ladies. A man's hat was removed to dine (at home and in restaurants), for religious ceremonies (churches, but not synagogues where headdress is customarily worn), and in court. Hats were kept on during normal transactions of business with others, in and out of doors, and were generally part of a man's attire when there wasn't cause to do otherwise.  There were, of course, removed in relaxed circumstances, at home or in one's own office or workplace. The traditional rules on hats were not based on modern habits with wannabee-gangster-punks wearing baseball caps backwards, or the habit of stripping a toque from one's head as soon as you get into a warm space.

Some enclosed spaces may be treated the same as an equivalent outdoor space. For example, many armouries have expectations that the drill floor will be treated as a parade square and headdress will normally be worn on and about the floor.  The wide open spaces of a mall or airport may be considered similarly and headdress worn, even though the Dress Regulations are not specific about it. When in such an area, if entering a dining establishment, etc., revert to the observations above.

Some, perhaps, seek that first opportunity to remove headdress in order to avoid having to salute.  It's a poor reason because it doesn't excuse the expectation to pay compliments by other actions. There are even some areas where the removal of headdress to minimize the perceived disruption by continual saluting within a “captive” group of service members has been made the norm: the concourses of NDHQ and the interior of Fort Frontenac in Kingston come to mind as examples.

The wearing of a toque when the weather is cold enough has become the expected norm. It does not, however, completely excuse the individual from considering if a different headdress might be more appropriate at some time during their day. Wearing a toque because you'll be outside for most of the day doesn't make it improper to be wearing it for a short visit to the BOR or another indoor space. Choosing to make it your daily headdress because it's winter and you don't feel like carrying a second hat may not be the best choice if you have to meet members of the public, or report to a senior officer's office wearing it. Just as the Dress Regulations can't predict every possible place you might have to figure out what hat to wear, it can neither describe every possible workplace circumstance.

All I, or anyone here, can suggest is: be aware of the Dress Regulations, be aware of any local expectations, and be prepared to justify your own decisions. To be prepared for the unexpected, carrying an extra soft cap, or having a spare at your workspace, is not an onerous task.


----------

