# Unit Shoulder Title Badges



## Matt_Fisher (26 Jan 2009)

Hi,

I posted this earlier in the Buy/Sell/Trade section of the forum, but I think it might get more response here in the Cadet section as it has more relevance as Army Cadets still wear their unit shoulder badges as part of the uniform, whereas with the CFs, these badges haven't been worn since the DEU was adopted in the mid 80's, and Garrison Dress was retired in the mid 90's.

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/83413.0.html

Cheers,

Matt


----------



## rwgill (2 Feb 2009)

Matt,

Army Cadet Corps may still wear the cloth shoulder flashes (curved colourful badges worn on sleeve) for the moment.  Soon, free of charge, each Corps will be issued its own unique badge indicating name and unit number.  Some units have already received them.

http://www.cadet-world.com/cwforums/attachment.php?attachmentid=4749&d=1216867729

Corps will not be required to stop wearing the other old ones for now, but things may change.


----------



## cdn031 (4 Feb 2009)

This is going over like a lead balloon with the kids as smacks of distancing them from their affiliate units.
I don't understand what is driving this - other than the powerul influence of the Air Cadet side, who have only a theoretical connection to their affiliates


----------



## rwgill (4 Feb 2009)

:  Do you walk around with tin foil on your head and preach about conspiracy theories?  It has nothing to do with the power of the Air side.  

If anything, this a FREE way to bring ALL Cadet Corps closer to the affiliated units.  DND will pay to have your Corps' number and name embroidered on the flash.  It's a free way to advertise your Corps as being 1234 Royal Canadian Regiment Cadets or 5678 Middle of Nowhere Ontario.  What is also great is that COs were asked to confirm the Corps' name and number.

Your affiliated unit, BTW, doesn't even wear these darn shoulder flashes anymore.  They haven't since army garrison dress went the way of the dodo.  Most of your cadets were still in diapers when garrison dress left us, others weren't born yet and won't notice much difference.  You are still permitted to wear the old affiliated unit ones if your heart so desires, but once you run out, does it really make sense to spend hard fundraised money on a badge?


----------



## cdn031 (4 Feb 2009)

Hey I like my fashionable Tin foil hat !!
(let's watch the cheap shots & stick to the topic)

As a League person you should know darn well what the first choice for this was - "Royal Canadian Army Cadets" + corps number - they only recently backed off on this to allow the Corps "Name" rather than specify the Affiliate unit name.
Note that DND is not rushing in to provide Cap Badges like they once did.

There is a specific agenda being advanced here - It is  "Unification" (which worked so well in the 70's).  The CPU is a step towards this with 80% of the content being common Sea/Air/Army

if you are involved with the League you know this is a hot item of discussion.


----------



## rwgill (4 Feb 2009)

We both know that "badges" are a DND responsibility.  The person who got the shoulder flash project going is a CIC officer, he is an Army CIC officer and has worked numerous years at the LHQ level, including being the CO of Cadet Corps.  The League can make recommendations, nothing more.  It never was a matter of the League "backing off".  It is a DND responsibility.

On the topic of cap badges:  There is a new embroidered RCAC cap badge which is also available for order and issue.  The embroidered badge is cheaper to manufacture, cannot be easily lost/stolen.  The new embroidered badge replaces the metal RCAC "cookie cutter" and both are provided by DND.  

For as long as I have been around, besides the RCAC "cookie cutter" the Cadet Corps has been forced to find its own affiliated unit cap badges.  Normally this has been accomplished through the affiliated unit either by the Corps purchasing them or by the AU "donating" them.  While a cadet, I wore RCEME.  Now where could I find a free RCEME cap badge in the 1980s and early 1990s?  DND provides the RCAC accouterments, while the individual Corps is responsible for the AU accouterments.

There are many hot items for discussion at the League at all levels, but in the end, the League can only change what it within its area of responsibility.  The League can only recommend changes to items which fall under DND's area of responsibility.


----------



## Matt_Fisher (4 Feb 2009)

rwgill said:
			
		

> :  Do you walk around with tin foil on your head and preach about conspiracy theories?  It has nothing to do with the power of the Air side.
> 
> If anything, this a FREE way to bring ALL Cadet Corps closer to the affiliated units.  DND will pay to have your Corps' number and name embroidered on the flash.  It's a free way to advertise your Corps as being 1234 Royal Canadian Regiment Cadets or 5678 Middle of Nowhere Ontario.  What is also great is that COs were asked to confirm the Corps' name and number.
> 
> Your affiliated unit, BTW, doesn't even wear these darn shoulder flashes anymore.  They haven't since army garrison dress went the way of the dodo.  Most of your cadets were still in diapers when garrison dress left us, others weren't born yet and won't notice much difference.  You are still permitted to wear the old affiliated unit ones if your heart so desires, but once you run out, does it really make sense to spend hard fundraised money on a badge?



So individual cadet units must procure, at their own expense, the shoulder badges of their affiliated units?  These are not centrally funded and allocated by DND?


----------



## cdn031 (4 Feb 2009)

I was not referring to this as a League idea - the League has voiced concerns over it - to DND / DCadets . There appears to be a perenial effort to "standardize" the Army Cadet uniform to look exactly the same, like the Air side, which is why I cite them.

Cadet Corps were issued Affiliate UnitCap badges at one time -  thru the 80s & early 90s I believe  - NSNs for each. They were manufactured from time to time for extinct units like RCEME.  God knows I filled out enough of those little forms to bulk order them. Gone, along with other important things, like orderable First Aid supplies etc. If your unit was not ordering these while you were a cadet in the 80's & 90s someone was not effectively using the supply system.

The Metal RCAC "Cookie cutter" is at the end of its supply and corps who require the metal one (Like those with cadets that need turbans) are being advised to horde these.

I wish we could get your Army CIC officer working on the Shoulder Flash project to work on more pressing needs, like a servicable Cadet Field uniform. With supply of OG107 all but gone, we are in a real pinch. I heard even the summer Camps are in very short supply.

Matt
Yes this is true - expenses are being downloaded over the years and this is one of them.
Luckily we have a few suppliers - including Army Outfitters here in Toronto that can produce these in bulk
Sadly little effort is going into repairing these gaps with the affiliate units. Methinks DND would be very happy just having the units wear
generic Headdress  and generic "Royal Canadian Army Cadets" flashes


----------



## rwgill (4 Feb 2009)

Affiliated unit shoulder flashes are not free.

Some Corps have received, as a gift, shoulder flashes from the affiliated unit.  In many cases they are the left overs from the short lived garrison dress of the Canadian Army.  Once those stocks are depleated, the Corps then has a decision to make:  Wear the generic looking Army Cadet flash or purchase/manufacture more affiliated unit badges.  I know of an Ottawa area Corps which had more affiliated unit flashes made.  The cost was $7 per badge ($14 per cadet).  The Corps paraded in the 100s.  Compounded by the fact that cadets like to trade these badges, the cost could be too much for the average Corps.

Affiliated Units control what can and cannot be worn as accoutrements by the Cadet Corps.  A Cadet can be affiliated to 1 RCR unit, but the 1 RCR CO can refuse to allow the cadets to wear the cap badge (for example).  Some affiliated unit COs do restrict the wearing of certain accoutrements.

There are also Cadet Corps who have shoulder flashes made which are unique to the Corps (as opposed to the regiment).  There are several pictured here:
http://www.armycadethistory.com/shoulder_titles.htm


----------



## rwgill (4 Feb 2009)

GridNorth said:
			
		

> I was not referring to this as a League idea - the League has voiced concerns over it - to DND / DCadets . There appears to be a perenial effort to "standardize" the Army Cadet uniform to look exactly the same, like the Air side, which is why I cite them.


Conspiracy theory.



			
				GridNorth said:
			
		

> Cadet Corps were issued Affiliate UnitCap badges at one time -  thru the 80s & early 90s I believe  - NSNs for each. They were manufactured from time to time for extinct units like RCEME.  God knows I filled out enough of those little forms to bulk order them. Gone, along with other important things, like orderable First Aid supplies etc. If your unit was not ordering these while you were a cadet in the 80's & 90s someone was not effectively using the supply system.


There were NSN and Corps did order them..........I will not deny that.  When we switched from RCEME to EME, our cap basdges were ordered through the affiliated unit.



			
				GridNorth said:
			
		

> I wish we could get your Army CIC officer working on the Shoulder Flash project to work on more pressing needs, like a servicable Cadet Field uniform. With supply of OG107 all but gone, we are in a real pinch. I heard even the summer Camps are in very short supply.


That is already in the works and has been since October/November.  He is a Cadet-World member and even asked for suggestions 




			
				GridNorth said:
			
		

> Yes this is true - expenses are being downloaded over the years and this is one of them.


Untrue


			
				GridNorth said:
			
		

> Sadly little effort is going into repairing these gaps with the affiliate units.


The relationship between cadets and the affiliated unit is the responsibility of the two COs.  An affiliated unit is not responsible for a Cadet Corps...............in any way, shape or form.


----------



## cdn031 (4 Feb 2009)

rwgill said:
			
		

> Conspiracy theory.


Cute slogan, but "where's the beef?" to cite another slogan. Do you get the League meeting minutes? This keeps coming up.



			
				rwgill said:
			
		

> Untrue


Substantiate. I have records of our operating costs in the 80's and I know what we spend today. We were not buying Cap Badges and Shoulder flashes with Cadet Funds. they were provided. there are several other expendable supplies available then that we buy now. Fuel, rations, Hell I Even requisitioned sniper slings by NSN and used them for the Anshutz rifles. The Army kicked in alot more back then.


----------



## rwgill (4 Feb 2009)

GridNorth said:
			
		

> Cute slogan, but "where's the beef?" to cite another slogan. Do you get the League meeting minutes? This keeps coming up.


It does keep coming up along with a series of other not-so-good-smelling theories.  Far too many people are coming up with these theories, and those are sometimes the same people who do not read everything released.  There are also League members who against Corps participating in SOT projects, while "Contacting a Deployed Soldier" is part of the CPU :

I can see how one could have come to such a conclusion, as some of the reasoning given for the switch in flashes was that "it was working for Sea and Air Cadets".  The truth is, it is working for Sea and Air Cadets, but we are keeping it entirely an army-solution to a uniquely army-problem.




			
				GridNorth said:
			
		

> Substantiate. I have records of our operating costs in the 80's and I know what we spend today. We were not buying Cap Badges and Shoulder flashes with Cadet Funds. they were provided. there are several other expendable supplies available then that we buy now. Fuel, rations, Hell I Even requisitioned sniper slings by NSN and used them for the Anshutz rifles. The Army kicked in alot more back then.


I am not denying that you have received them, but there was no real requirement for you to be given them.  I have worked in supply too and I have ordered all sorts of nice things, because I have a NSN.  Just because you ordered something and received something in the past, it does not mean that you were entitled to it or supposed to receive it.  We have brand new OG ECW parkas and overalls in our supply.  We shouldn't have them, but we do.

The finical requirements of Cadet Corps have changed, no argument from me there.  The way the money is calculated is also different and in most cases, Cadet Corps are receiving MORE money.  How you spend it is up to you (more or less).


----------



## cdn031 (4 Feb 2009)

Hmmmm well that answers things clearly. (not)

You can understand why a reasonable person on the cross town bus (Lord Denning joke) might conclude that DCDTs might have a unification agenda:

1) Hard (& nearly secret) push on the new CPU with 80+% Commonality with Air & Sea Cadets
2) Common Conceptual Framework on Cadet Rank progression (Linked to CPU)
3) Any criticism of 1 or 2 met with hostility
4) Elimination of Element specific standards (Like NSCE)
5) Push to Adapt Corps Number type flashes, no funding or relief on Regimental Badges/headdress
6) Elimination of authorization to wear Scottish kit outside of Pipe Bands (Cutaways)
7) extermination of the Army specific Smallbore & Fullbore programs (outside of Summer Camp)
etc etc

Occam's razor: The simplest theory is the more informative one
or

If it walks like a duck 
and it talks like a duck
Its very likely to be waterfowl.


----------



## Neill McKay (4 Feb 2009)

GridNorth said:
			
		

> Hmmmm well that answers things clearly. (not)
> 
> You can understand why a reasonable person on the cross town bus (Lord Denning joke) might conclude that DCDTs might have a unification agenda:
> 
> ...



I suspect the motivation behind all of this is the saving of a few bucks, rather than any intention to unify the cadet programme.


----------



## cdn031 (4 Feb 2009)

N. McKay said:
			
		

> I suspect the motivation behind all of this is the saving of a few bucks, rather than any intention to unify the cadet programme.



Thats the same thing - one org is cheaper to run


----------



## rwgill (4 Feb 2009)

GridNorth said:
			
		

> Hmmmm well that answers things clearly. (not)
> 
> You can understand why a reasonable person on the cross town bus (Lord Denning joke) might conclude that DCDTs might have a unification agenda:


  I suggest that you begin to pay attention to everything that is posted on CadetNet.



			
				GridNorth said:
			
		

> 1) Hard (& nearly secret) push on the new CPU with 80+% Commonality with Air & Sea Cadets


a.Drill  b.Leadership c.Methods of Instruction d.Citizenship e.Physical Fitness f.Air Rifle Marksmanship . ALL of these are and always have been common for the three elements.  What has not been common is the amount of lessons assigned to each.  Example:  old Green Star drill had something like 18 periods, yet Air Cadet level 1 had some 21 periods and taught the exact same thing.



			
				GridNorth said:
			
		

> 2) Common Conceptual Framework on Cadet Rank progression (Linked to CPU)


We had three organizations with a common chain of command, with three completely different promotion policies.  Prior to the new policy, a PO1, WO and FSgt were all the same rank, but all had different training levels.



			
				GridNorth said:
			
		

> 3) Any criticism of 1 or 2 met with hostility


You can't argue against common sense.  



			
				GridNorth said:
			
		

> 4) Elimination of Element specific standards (Like NSCE)


As was stated in all correspondance regarding NSCE, NSCE and the PO Boards are done with, however something is coming.  There will be a new 5th level for Army Cadets (Master Cadet).  The training and testing is planned to be conducted at the Zone, Region, CSTC and National levels.  It will be done at things like Expeditions and such.



			
				GridNorth said:
			
		

> 5) Push to Adapt Corps Number type flashes, no funding or relief on Regimental Badges/headdress


When was the last time that your affiliated unit wore these things?  



			
				GridNorth said:
			
		

> 6) Elimination of authorization to wear Scottish kit outside of Pipe Bands (Cutaways)


You were never ever permitted to wear CF cut-aways.  Cadet Corps were supposed to tailor the Cadet Jacket.  Many Cadet Corps did not read the rules 



			
				GridNorth said:
			
		

> 7) extermination of the Army specific Smallbore & Fullbore programs (outside of Summer Camp)
> etc etc


Smallbore has been out of LHQ mandated training for quite some time.  Largebore even longer.  Smallbore is still part of Optional training.  C7 (largebore-ish) is still permitted.



			
				GridNorth said:
			
		

> Occam's razor: The simplest theory is the more informative one


You seem to be really digging deep for these theories and going nowhere.

If it walks like a duck 
and it talks like a duck
Its very likely to be waterfowl.

[/quote]


----------



## gwp (5 Feb 2009)

GridNorth said:
			
		

> Hmmmm well that answers things clearly. (not) You can understand why a reasonable person on the cross town bus (Lord Denning joke) might conclude that DCDTs might have a unification agenda:
> 1) Hard (& nearly secret) push on the new CPU with 80+% Commonality with Air & Sea Cadets
> 2) Common Conceptual Framework on Cadet Rank progression (Linked to CPU)
> 3) Any criticism of 1 or 2 met with hostility
> ...


Most of the above is the result of the extremely wide range project of the 1990's called "The way ahead project" (if you seach the cadet.ca website you will find several issues of the monthly publication that tracked the project)  The "Way Ahead Project" involved thousands of cadets, hundreds of CF Cadet Instructors, and the Leagues.  There is no conspiracy.  That project was spawned by a report by the Canadian Forces Review Services which looked at the "business model" of the cadet program as it has studied a wide range of Department Services.  

There has been no reduction in the support to the Cadet Organizations by the CF.  The program is funded for 70,000 cadets.  Right now we are 15,000 short.  So the program is arguably over funded.  

To respond to your list
1.  A large part of the cadet program is common by the nature of the program. (gen cadet know, drill, etc.)
2.  Should have been done a long time ago -- it's back to the future
3.  What is there to understand.  The last 40 years have been an anomoly.  
4.   A cadet is a cadet is a cadet again -- it's back to the future
5.  No push, an alternative approach to an outmoded and unsustainable system.  
6.  Cadets are cadets. 
7.  The smallbore marksmanship progam is unsustainable as most ranges were found to be unhealthy for youth due to lead contamination. Constructing a properly ventilated indoor is very expensive. There is no particular value added with a universal large bore program that is also not supportable.

Regarding a field uniform for cadets.   Coveralls worked 40 years ago.  There has never been a separate field uniform provided for cadets.


----------



## Neill McKay (5 Feb 2009)

GridNorth said:
			
		

> Thats the same thing - one org is cheaper to run



It is one organization, and has been since unification of the Canadian Forces.  We deliver three training programmes, just as we always have.

I'm usually the first person to grumble about "bloody Hellyer" whenever I see purple in a place where it doesn't belong, but this just isn't one of those times.


----------



## quadrapiper (6 Feb 2009)

gwp said:
			
		

> There has been no reduction in the support to the Cadet Organizations by the CF.  The program is funded for 70,000 cadets.  Right now we are 15,000 short.  So the program is arguably over funded.


And we're bleeding CIC, at least for the summer training. Anyone on here not overly employed for the summer?


			
				gwp said:
			
		

> 1.  A large part of the cadet program is common by the nature of the program. (gen cadet know, drill, etc.)
> 2.  Should have been done a long time ago -- it's back to the future
> 3.  What is there to understand.  The last 40 years have been an anomoly.
> 4.   A cadet is a cadet is a cadet again -- it's back to the future
> ...


1. Agreed. Mostly. As long as element-specific material isn't lost, or relegated to institutional memory... Field Gun drill, for one. Waiting to see new D&C Inst course for RCSC.
2. Agreed (this is wierd... agreeing, more than once, with *gwp*). Not too sure about the whole fifth-year thing, or the "developmental periods" approach. Wait and see on full CPU implementation, really.
3. Have noticed this, at levels too low to be DCdts influenced. Damn annoying, but some people just like their Little Red Book.
4. Couldn't care less if it's a PO1 Exam, NSCE, and whatever the Air types did (if anything...), or a single "Senior Cadet Test" with only the hard skills varying by element - but this one's a definite loss.
5. Lousy deal - especially since the new flashes look like gash. Couldn't they have been done in whatever the RCArmyCdts' facing colours are, if such a things exist? Red backing with green type?
6. Not sure where you heard this... I thought Scottish-affiliated cadet corps could still do the all-hands Highland thing, NPF allowing. If true, perp should be confined to small tartan-covered room, fed haggis, and forced to listen to pipes and Burns poems. "A cadet's a cadet" just doesn't cut it, with affiliated regimental traditions and dress. A wise sort at DCdts would have authorized the cutaway CF jacket, as the cadet jacket is, possibly, the single ugliest piece of "dress" uniform in Canada - and only gets worse when cut away for Highland wear.

Of course, confusing the efforts of overly PR-conscious or simply PC persons at higher headquarters with the CPU doesn't do any good. The uninformed general public doesn't know uniforms - unless cadets go for the Canadian Rangers look, or big letters across the back ("CADET," like FBI raid jackets), nothing on the uniform front will cause Joe Bloggins to note a distinction.

7. Never got the point of cutting authorization for specific training, just because higher headquarters doesn't want to pay for it. So it's a different way of doing the same thing? If some corps, garrison, or region wanted to cover largebore shooting, why stop them? As for smallbore, it should really be in the new "complementary" training syllabus. 


			
				gwp said:
			
		

> Regarding a field uniform for cadets.   Coveralls worked 40 years ago.  There has never been a separate field uniform provided for cadets.


And there's never been a situation like this one... where, as supplies of the old version disappeared, cadets were told that "no, you can't wear even discarded versions of the new." Pity the Army CL didn't take over a limited contract for OG.


----------



## rwgill (7 Feb 2009)

quadrapiper said:
			
		

> 6.  A wise sort at DCdts would have authorized the cutaway CF jacket, as the cadet jacket is, possibly, the single ugliest piece of "dress" uniform in Canada - and only gets worse when cut away for Highland wear.



CF jacket, in all forms, was only authorized for a Cadet Chief Warrant Officer.  Is was never authorized for Pipe Bands or Highland Cadet Corps.  NOW, it not authorized for cadets in any shape or form.

The cadet jacket can be easily modified without any real cost.


----------



## quadrapiper (7 Feb 2009)

rwgill said:
			
		

> CF jacket, in all forms, was only authorized for a Cadet Chief Warrant Officer.  Is was never authorized for Pipe Bands or Highland Cadet Corps.  NOW, it not authorized for cadets in any shape or form.


Quite aware of that - merely suggesting that the change should have been to formalize the status quo - extend the authorization for wear of the DEU tunic to Highland-uniformed cadets, especially the musicians.

Ah, well... I guess the thing to do (for corps authorized by their AfU...) now is come up with full dress or patrol blues for bands, guards, flag parties, and Sgts & WOs in "command" positions.


----------



## cdn031 (8 Feb 2009)

rwgill said:
			
		

> CF jacket, in all forms, was only authorized for a Cadet Chief Warrant Officer.  Is was never authorized for Pipe Bands or Highland Cadet Corps.  NOW, it not authorized for cadets in any shape or form.



Yes and in a Scottish unit we are lucky if we can parade the RSM in a Kilt, due to the cost of the Kilt. 
It Looked OK with the CF cutaway - now it just looks silly with a cutaway Cadet "safari" jacket, So I doubt we will carry that on.

There's a bit of a theme developing in the last 10 years in the Cadet Movement. 
One part "Boil the frog"  (incremental negative change) ("INC" my new acronym!)
one part issuing directives without considering the actual consequence (i.e. that Cadets are not to wear field dress en route to an exercise, but  to change into environmental clothing/OG107 etc only at the training area...)
Not-so-sensible thinking is not new to Military orgs, but the pendulum usually swings back under enlightened leadership. I wonder when our pendulum will swing?


----------



## rwgill (8 Feb 2009)

Grid North, What tartan do you wear?  There may be other sources for solutions to your kilt problem.


----------

