# Military pushes overhaul of medal system



## GAP (11 Aug 2009)

Military pushes overhaul of medal system
Updated Tue. Aug. 11 2009 6:49 AM ET The Canadian Press
Article Link

OTTAWA -- The military is recommending an overhaul of its medal system to address a growing number of complaints that have overshadowed the glittering honours awarded to troops who serve overseas. 

National Defence has conducted a "sweeping review" and put forward recommendations for the federal cabinet which are expected to include the creation of a single medal to recognize all overseas service, The Canadian Press has learned. 

The military's senior policy adviser on medals and citations said the proposals are meant to simplify a system that has become "complicated" by different deployments, under different mandates. 

The confusion and lack of recognition for some soldiers has led to bitterness and the occasional letter of protest from members and their families. 

"We've done a major review that will have significant consequences in the way we recognize our people," said Maj. Carl Gauthier, who is in charge of creating new medals and modifying the rules for existing ones. 
More on link


----------



## PMedMoe (11 Aug 2009)

A single medal to recognize all overseas service?  So where does our distinction go?  Does this mean you won't see soldiers/sailors/airmen with numerous medals but only one or two?

I have a better idea, create a single medal to cover overseas service that is not already represented by a medal.  Oh yeah, and while you're at it, bring back the numbers for multiple tours.

Personally, I like this comment:



> "When we're in the business of medal design and medals criteria, we're in the business of drawing lines. *You either qualify or you don't.* We have to balance recognition for recognition for people and also the respect and integrity for the honour system. For the medals to be worth something, we have to make sure the criteria is clear, that is applied consistently and fairly for everyone."


----------



## Michael OLeary (11 Aug 2009)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> A single medal to recognize all overseas service?  So where does our distinction go?  Does this mean you won't see soldiers/sailors/airmen with numerous medals but only one or two?



Possibly with a return to the use of campaign clasps (bars) when individual operations deserve special recognition.


----------



## armyvern (11 Aug 2009)

Interesting article, but I wonder if it's indeed accurate.

While in Gagetown in June, the CDS did address Honours & Awards and the "lack of recognition" concerns being brought up by families and the CoC for certain tours.

He didn't mention a single tidbit about any so-called recommendations to go to a single medal for *all* overseas service, but he did mention that a recommendation was in the works to go forward that would see the addition of post-nominals in recognition of *all* tours in Afghanistan and elsewhere. That recommendation would see soldiers/sailors/airmen awarded with numerals authorized for wear on SWASM, GCS, & GCM and certain other Canadian Government issued medals (none of which are authorized post-nominals currently) in recognition of second and subsequent tours in that spefcific campaign/Op. 

The awarding of, or wearing of, post nominals on those medals is currently not authorized - thus troops and some families of our Fallen, have expressed concerns that they were not being properly recognized for their service.


----------



## Gunner98 (11 Aug 2009)

GAP said:
			
		

> Military pushes overhaul of medal system
> Maj. Carl Gauthier, who is in charge of creating new medals and modifying the rules for existing ones.



Jeez, I thought this was the purview of the DH&R, CMP and the GG's office and not a lowly Maj sitting in the bowels of NDHQ.


----------



## George Wallace (11 Aug 2009)

Frostnipped Elf said:
			
		

> Jeez, I thought this was the purview of the DH&R, CMP and the GG's office and not a lowly Maj sitting in the bowels of NDHQ.



Major Gauthier is in DH&R and works with the GG's office.  He is the successor to Mr Beattie (Ret'd), whom he understudied prior to his succession into the position.  On a side note, Mr Beatty, should anyone meet him, has marvellous stories as to how he designed Canadian Awards, such as the Order of Canada, while in the RCAF, and later the CF.  A very interesting man.



[Edit to correct spelling of Mr Beatty]


----------



## Edward Campbell (11 Aug 2009)

In conversations with both retired and serving people I have detected one area of “worry” about medals: divisiveness.

The concern is that we are headed towards a situation in which e.g. the SWASM, the GCS, the GSM and the SSM take on an “order of precedence” indicating the “value” of a person’s service.

Similar concerns about an “us versus them” problem have been expressed, now and again, here on Army.ca. I’m fairly sure it bothers some senior leaders. I have been told, directly, by some members that it – the idea that their service, having served where they were most needed, is to be less “valued” than that of another member - bothers the hell out of them.

There’s some history about all this, and I suspect that some senior officers want to return to a (proven? established? just _comfortable_?) system wherein we have a general service medal, another “operational” service medal and specific campaign stars or bars, as necessary.


----------



## mariomike (11 Aug 2009)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> On a side note, Mr Beattie, should anyone meet him, has marvellous stories as to how he designed Canadian Awards, such as the Order of Canada, while in the RCAF, and later the CF.  A very interesting man.



Here is a link re: Mr Beattie:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_W._Beatty


----------



## basrah (11 Aug 2009)

Are people really that concerned over a piece of metal and cloth that you pin on your chest? I cant believe this is even an issue.

The majority of people in my unit couldnt care less about what medal goes where, and how many they have. It seems the only ones who are really concerned are those who perhaps didnt get the same sense of satisfaction from their tour. 

Sure, it may give the wearer a sense of pride to have all 5 different medals from Bosnia pinned to their chest, but how about the personal pride of a job well done.


----------



## vonGarvin (11 Aug 2009)

basrah said:
			
		

> Are people really that concerned over a piece of metal and cloth that you pin on your chest?


Yes we are.  It is formal recognition for a job well-done.  As Napoleon said, "Give me enough medals, and I'll win any war."


----------



## Edward Campbell (11 Aug 2009)

basrah said:
			
		

> Are people really that concerned over a piece of metal and cloth that you pin on your chest? I cant believe this is even an issue.
> 
> The majority of people in my unit couldnt care less about what medal goes where, and how many they have. It seems the only ones who are really concerned are those who perhaps didnt get the same sense of satisfaction from their tour.
> 
> Sure, it may give the wearer a sense of pride to have all 5 different medals from Bosnia pinned to their chest, but how about the personal pride of a job well done.




I think what you have said is how we *wish* everyone felt, but, I suspect that Midnight Rambler's response is very valid. Soldiers do *care* about their "gongs" and some sense of "value" - my service _merits_ a "better" medal than yours - is almost bound to creep in.

A serving member who has done a couple or three tours in Africa over the past few years - difficult, sometimes dangerous, frustrating and soul destroying tours - reports on being "looked down upon" by colleagues because there is no South West Asia Service Medal. That's the "real" war where the "real" soldiering is done; where promotions are to be earned; and so on. Maybe the member is just hypersensitive but I would not be surprised if the report is accurate.


----------



## Long in the tooth (11 Aug 2009)

We'll never make anybody happy with this one, and it always has been this way.  My father in law had his WW2 medals stolen.  He had spent almost 9 months in the Atlantic and Pacific but had neither star.  He had 'only' 150 days in the Atlantic so he didn't qualify.  However, if he had six months he would've gotten BOTH, as qualifying time for the Pacific Star dropped from 180 days to 30 days if he had the Atlantic Star....

And it's the same for qualifying time for hazard/overseas pay.  Those of us who did our careers in Canada start from zero, whereas guys who did the real hard time in Germany with their wives (or 2 or 3) and kids may have a hundred points.  And the SSM.

You'll never satisfy everyone!


----------



## Infanteer (11 Aug 2009)

An all-encompassing medal?  Wasn't that what the GCS was created for in the first place, with the GCM as backup?

So if I read this right, they want to merge the two into on all-singing, all-dancing medal?

Funny how the article portrays the SWASM vs the GCS for service in Kandahar.  The GCS is described as "coveted" while the SWASM was something they had to settle for.  That is not how things seemed in the press and even on these forums a few years ago.  The GCS was associated with Kabul and the SWASM was the "warfighting medal".  Of course, that perception has changed with time.

It sure would have been easier if they would have just stuck with the SWASM for all service in Afghanistan.

A combat badge and "Sacrifice Medal" were two things foreign to our "medal culture", but I suspect, after years of service on UN and NATO missions where each mission was represented by a medal that our military might not be keen on just adding bars to a single medal (go to Cyprus, get the Cyprus Medal; go to Croatia, get the UNPROFOR medal; go to Bosnia and get the Former Yugo medal, etc, etc).  Someone around here a while back put their money on the GCS not surviving the next tour because it wasn't unique to that mission - I suspect they may be right.


----------



## basrah (11 Aug 2009)

Midnight Rambler said:
			
		

> Yes we are.  It is formal recognition for a job well-done.  As Napoleon said, "Give me enough medals, and I'll win any war."



Personally, I know that the guys I served with know that I did a job well done, I dont care what people I dont know think or what their opinion is of what I have on my chest.

I was recently informed that I have received an additional medal for leadership under fire on this last tour, and to be honest, I dont want it. I know  I did a good job, and thats all that matters to me.


----------



## Otis (11 Aug 2009)

From a Navy perspective, one of the dissatisfier's has been overall days away from home. 

Someone who goes away to an Operational area for six months (180 days) gets a medal, while someone else who spends over 250 days away from home (non-consecutive ... i.e. 4 month tour overseas, 3 month exercise, 2 more months on a Soverignty Patrol) recieves nothing more than a few days off here and there.

Arguments can be made for potential danger level etc...and I'm not making any argument either way, I'm just adding another cause of dissatisfaction with the current system.

Otis

Sorry if there are spelling errors ... the spell check won't work on my DWAN computer!


----------



## the 48th regulator (11 Aug 2009)

basrah said:
			
		

> Personally, I know that the guys I served with know that I did a job well done, I dont care what people I dont know think or what their opinion is of what I have on my chest.
> 
> I was recently informed that I have received an additional medal for leadership under fire on this last tour, and to be honest, I dont want it. I know  I did a good job, and thats all that matters to me.




Ah yes the humble soldier, an attitude which I always say was a characteristic of all soldiers especially Canadian.

My complete quote can be found here, however, I have posted the exerpt on my concept of what our medals really stand for, and who they belong to;



			
				the 48th regulator said:
			
		

> Now, I was not upset by the civvy, or my nation.  But this is the way I look at it, our actions in uniform must be carefully thought out, as we represent our country.   I too am a  billboard for the achievements of my country.  My medals tell a story, not about me and what I have achieved, but what Canada has done and achieved.  All the medals that I wear is a story of where Canada has been.  When one wears a medal, that signifies that they were wounded, it shows that Canada had the muster to send its soldiers in a dangerous area.
> 
> It has nothing to do with me being selfish, however I am willing to take the brunt of those who wish to call me that.  Call my reasoning behind what I am saying as being a little too deep, I don't care.




dileas

tess


----------



## basrah (11 Aug 2009)

Otis said:
			
		

> From a Navy perspective, one of the dissatisfier's has been overall days away from home.
> 
> Someone who goes away to an Operational area for six months (180 days) gets a medal, while someone else who spends over 250 days away from home (non-consecutive ... i.e. 4 month tour overseas, 3 month exercise, 2 more months on a Soverignty Patrol) recieves nothing more than a few days off here and there.



So when I go on a 2 month BTE  I should get a medal simply because Ive been away from home for a while? No, because that is part of the training requirement of my job. Just because a soldier/sailor/airman spends time away from home should not mean a medal... thats just getting silly.

Personally, Im happy enough with a few days off here and there.


----------



## Michael OLeary (11 Aug 2009)

Midnight Rambler said:
			
		

> Yes we are.  It is formal recognition for a job well-done.  As Napoleon said, "Give me enough medals, and I'll win any war."



Actually, medals for operations are medals for "being there."
Meritorious service decorations and commendations are for "job(s) well done."
Bravery and valour decorations are for actions above and beyond the call of duty.

The problems that have evolved come when people want to keep subdividing the first group to also define who did what while "being there.".


----------



## Eye In The Sky (11 Aug 2009)

basrah said:
			
		

> So when I go on a 2 month BTE  I should get a medal simply because Ive been away from home for a while? No, because that is part of the training requirement of my job. Just because a soldier/sailor/airman spends time away from home should not mean a medal... thats just getting silly.
> 
> Personally, Im happy enough with a few days off here and there.



Not to start a dogpile but I pretty much agree with this point.  I don't think the CF needs a "time away from home doing my job" medal, do we?  IMO, the CD covers "service outside of a SDA".  

My  :2c:


----------



## PMedMoe (11 Aug 2009)

The article stated a "key proposal is the creation of an *overseas* service medal" not a "I've been on exercise" medal.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (11 Aug 2009)

Ack, mine was in reply to Otis's post earlier... 8)..again, not meant to start a downward spiral or chuck crap...



			
				Otis said:
			
		

> From a Navy perspective, one of the dissatisfier's has been overall days away from home.
> 
> *Someone who goes away to an Operational area for six months (180 days) gets a medal, while someone else who spends over 250 days away from home (non-consecutive ... i.e. 4 month tour overseas, 3 month exercise, 2 more months on a Soverignty Patrol) recieves nothing more than a few days off here and there.*
> 
> ...


----------



## Fishbone Jones (11 Aug 2009)

I'm going to step in here before things get out of hand.

If you wish to discuss the pros & cons like adults, this is the place. If your main talking point is 'You knew what you signed up for" or "I deserve it more than them", the whining post is out back and not on this forum.

Further posts not in line with the protocol may be removed without warning or explanation.

Milnet.ca Staff


----------



## Mick (11 Aug 2009)

"Defence sources say one of the key proposals is the creation of an overseas service medal, similar to the Volunteer Service Medal given to Canadian soldiers who served at least 18 months away from home during the Second World War."

To me, the above quotation reads as if overseas missions / operations will continue to be recognized with their own medals, in addition to the awarding of a general  "overseas service" medal which would also recognize overseas missions / operations not otherwise recognized by a medal.

Maybe an overseas service medal would not replace mission-specific medals , maybe it would supplement them, in order to fill gaps in the current system?  Anyways, that's just how I interpereted the article.


----------



## basrah (11 Aug 2009)

In my opinion, I think that after 2011 we will be doing a lot more UN / NATO old school peacekeeping style missions. ( I know ISAF is NATO, but I am refering to the Bosnia days here.) So there will be plenty of coloured ribbons to go around. 

As for the creation of another overseas general medal, all I want to know is:why bother? Yes, in WW2 there was a volunteer medal, but to compare Afghanistan and WW2 is... well, just right out of 'er. Times were different, the war was different, and the danger level was much higher. I feel that the more medals we create, the more we are encouraging the 'I was there, I did (insert blank). I can surely guess that thinking like this is why we got rid of that combat action badge. Everyone wants a piece of the glitter and gold.


----------



## George Wallace (11 Aug 2009)

basrah said:
			
		

> As for the creation of another overseas general medal, all I want to know is:why bother? Yes, in WW2 there was a volunteer medal, but to compare Afghanistan and WW2 is... well, just right out of 'er. Times were different, the war was different, and the danger level was much higher. I feel that the more medals we create, the more we are encouraging the 'I was there, I did (insert blank). I can surely guess that thinking like this is why we got rid of that combat action badge. Everyone wants a piece of the glitter and gold.



Your logic is shortsighted and faulty.

WW II was a completely different war from WW I.   WW I was a completely different war from the war fought a decade earlier in South Africa.

We have gone from newbies getting tired of Germany and Cyprus stories, to newbies being tired of Somalia and Rwanda stories, to newbies being tired of Bosnia and Kosovo stories, and soon, believe it or not, newbies who will be tired of hearing Afghanistan stories.  It is the nature of the beast.  It is the "Your course was not as hard as my course" type of reasoning that we see every day in our jobs.  

Here, we find a few have refined their focus onto 'medals'.


----------



## armyvern (11 Aug 2009)

mick said:
			
		

> To me, the above quotation reads as if overseas missions / operations will continue to be recognized with their own medals, in addition to the awarding of *a general  "overseas service" medal which would also recognize overseas missions / operations not otherwise recognized by a medal*.
> 
> Maybe an overseas service medal would not replace mission-specific medals , maybe *it would supplement them, in order to fill gaps in the current system*?  Anyways, that's just how I interpereted the article.



Uhmmm, isn't that why we have this medal?

The link includes a listing of it's "currently authorized" bars (such as "Pakistan 1989-1990") - nothing says additional bars can't be authorized for upcoming future missions/assignments. Our current Honours & Awards system thus already allows for what you have described above ...


----------



## Gunner98 (11 Aug 2009)

The risk with the 'who needs recognition, I don't!' mentality is as you weather, age and climb the ladder, you will wonder why you should recognize and reward your subordinates.  A culture rich with honours and awards maintains the history, traditions and respect for our profession of arms.


----------



## Jammer (11 Aug 2009)

Sooooo,
Would this gong cover 2RCR who have yet to be recognized for Haiti...or not?


----------



## armyvern (11 Aug 2009)

Jammer said:
			
		

> Sooooo,
> Would this gong cover 2RCR who have yet to be recognized for Haiti...or not?



Retro-active awarding??

An interesting concept - would this medal thus then be retro-actively replacing the other medals awarded for overseas service since 2004 ... (*all * overseas service??) or owuld it be discriminatory and allow those who've recd GCS', GCMs & SWASMs in the interim to keep those original medals.

I highly suspect, that should a single medal be developed to recognize "all" overseas service, that any motion to "retroactively" award it to only "some" (IE Haiti, NEO: Lebanon Evac, DART: Turkey etc) of those overseas missions rather than "all" missions overseas which occured during the same time period would cause quite the uproar.

If this article is accurate - it doesn't matter what they do - it's going to cause a shitstorm.


----------



## Jammer (11 Aug 2009)

...a simmering fiasco a la CAB.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (11 Aug 2009)

Then there is the online petition that just got started for volunteering to serve, period.

http://www.gopetition.com/online/29996.html

Although online petitions seldom, if ever, rate any sort of recognition from the government.


----------



## basrah (11 Aug 2009)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Your logic is shortsighted and faulty.
> 
> WW II was a completely different war from WW I.   WW I was a completely different war from the war fought a decade earlier in South Africa.
> 
> ...



No, my logic is just fine. WW2 was completely different than any other war, as was WW1, and both were far more dangerous than anything we will face in modern days. Canadians didnt have to go, but they did, and for that they deserved a volunteer medal. If you joined up during these times, you were going to war. That is not the case since those days, with the potential exception of Korea. 

These days, you can join an infantry unit, regular, or reserve, and if you really dont want to go overseas, there are usually ways out of it. Postings, the Padre, or whatever, if you dont want to go, you can get out of it most of the time. 

Hey, why dont we just adopt the US system while we are tossing out medals. That way everyone can know you passed basic training, didnt get in trouble for a whole year, or any number of of strange things they give out ribbons for. While we are at it, lets standardize our head dress, just like the medals. No more unit insignia, after all, that may suggest that one person had done more than another.


----------



## Haggis (11 Aug 2009)

Frostnipped Elf said:
			
		

> The risk with the 'who needs recognition, I don't!' mentality is as you weather, age and climb the ladder, you will wonder why you should recognize and reward your subordinates.


 An attitude that was pervasive in the pre-Bosnia days.

I was once told by a Major I worked for that I had been recommended for an award for service at Oka/Akwesasne (he never told me what, though).  He told me he stopped it from going higher because "we don't reward our people for doing what's expected of them and, at your rank (I was a junior WO) we expect the very best".

Am I bitter?  Nooooo!


----------



## Jammer (11 Aug 2009)

basrah.

History 101
WW 1 Canada was firmly entrenched in the Commonwealth...ergo if Great Britain went to war Canada did as well, no questions.

Life 101
Hot metal flying at you from all directions is inherently dangerous no matter what the conflict.

Attitude 101
If you don't like it...get out.


----------



## gwp (11 Aug 2009)

The goal of the Special Service Medal and the General Service Star and Medal was to have one medal for multiple actions.

http://www.cmp-cpm.forces.gc.ca/dhr-ddhr/chc-tdh/chart-tableau-eng.asp?ref=SSM

http://www.cmp-cpm.forces.gc.ca/dhr-ddjr/chc-tdh/chart-tableau-eng.asp?ref=GCS

http://www.cmp-cpm.forces.gc.ca/dhr-ddjr/chc-tdh/chart-tableau-eng.asp?ref=GSM

It will be interesting to see what they are going to do that is new and different and accepted as fair by all concerned. The staff who are running with this are very thorough and thoughtful. On the other hand there is a political aspect to this as they respond to presures from Members of Parliament who receive complaints from constituents who feel that because they were one day short of the criteria or the plane didn't land they should still be eligible for the award. 



> Defence sources say one of the key proposals is the creation of an overseas service medal, similar to the Volunteer Service Medal given out to Canadian soldiers who served at least 18 months away from home during the Second World War.



This not particularly novel. The trick will be determining the length of time and whether domestic support of the operation will apply or not. (i.e. with or without a clasp) The Canadian Volunteer Service Medal for WWII 

http://www.vac-acc.gc.ca/remembers/sub.cfm?source=collections/cmdp/mainmenu/group04/cvsm

and the Korea Volunteer Service Medal are the precedents for such an award. The KVSM does not have a clasp and was retroactive 35 years (1991) after the fact when Korea Vets lobbied for the award.

http://www.vac-acc.gc.ca/remembers/sub.cfm?source=collections/cmdp/mainmenu/group04/cvsmfk

A similar EBGO (Every bloke got one) is the WWI Service and Victory Medal 
http://www.vac-acc.gc.ca/remembers/sub.cfm?source=collections/cmdp/mainmenu/group03/bwm

http://www.vac-acc.gc.ca/remembers/sub.cfm?source=collections/cmdp/mainmenu/group03/vm18

and the WWII Commonwealth War Service Medal.

http://www.vac-acc.gc.ca/remembers/sub.cfm?source=collections/cmdp/mainmenu/group04/wm45

The "Sacrifice Medal" which has been discussed here at length seemed to be an attempt to do too much. It became political as individuals complained about retroactivity, its place alongside or instead of the wound stripe, and the definition of "in the face of an enemy". For the person who is deemed ineligible those all seem very subjective decisions in a circumstance where no malice is intended.

http://www.gg.ca/honours/medals/hon04-sm_e.asp

No matter what ... when it comes to Orders, Decorations and Medals, it is impossible to please everyone a condition that has become more difficult in a culture of entitlement.


----------



## George Wallace (11 Aug 2009)

basrah said:
			
		

> Hey, why dont we just adopt the US system while we are tossing out medals. That way everyone can know you passed basic training, didnt get in trouble for a whole year, or any number of of strange things they give out ribbons for. While we are at it, lets standardize our head dress, just like the medals. No more unit insignia, after all, that may suggest that one person had done more than another.



The American Awards System is different from ours.  The Americans may have a lot of "Ribbons", however, not all of them are "medals".


----------



## basrah (11 Aug 2009)

Jammer said:
			
		

> basrah.
> 
> History 101
> WW 1 Canada was firmly entrenched in the Commonwealth...ergo if Great Britain went to war Canada did as well, no questions.
> ...



Thread 101
Stay on topic. 

I may be new around here, but dont attempt to preach to me about attitude or experience in the military. I am not here to boost my ego, or make myself feel better about my service.

The biggest problem, and Im sure Ill get flak for this, is those who deserve medals get them or they dont, but they know they did a good job and dont need a stupid piece of cloth to tell them they did a good job, those who dont deserve them get jealous because they feel left out and dont share the same sense of self satisfaction.




Can someone just lock this thread... it is going nowhere


----------



## the 48th regulator (11 Aug 2009)

basrah said:
			
		

> Thread 101
> Stay on topic.
> 
> I may be new around here, but dont attempt to preach to me about attitude or experience in the military. I am not here to boost my ego, or make myself feel better about my service.
> ...



Brother,

You are feeling the same as anyone who has served.

Come here after you have left.  Then I want you to review what you have said.

I have posted my views on medals.  And I will say this.  Your views are bang on, for someone wearing the chaps, six shooter and poncho.

But don't judge those of us that have left the range.

Trust me, once you have left the life, your views will change.

dileas

tess


----------



## 1feral1 (11 Aug 2009)

basrah said:
			
		

> WW2 was completely different than any other war, as was WW1..... Canadians didnt have to go, but they did,



Lest we forget that conscription was in Canada during both wars.

All war is dangerous regardless of the time, only the technology improves as time advances, and lessons learned also.

OWDU


----------



## Michael OLeary (11 Aug 2009)

Overwatch Downunder said:
			
		

> Lest we forget that conscription was in Canada during both wars.



But, lest we mislead those who haven't researched it, it was not general conscription and it was not in effect throughout either war.

First World War



> Taken on strength units in France 	24,132


http://regimentalrogue.com/rcr_great_war_soldiers/rcr_and_the_msa.html

Second World War



> Few conscripts saw combat in Europe: only 2463 men reached units on the front lines. Out of these, 79 lost their lives.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscription_Crisis_of_1944

And, to keep the thread on its original topic.  Those who served under the Military Service Acts received the same medals as those who volunteered.


----------



## 1feral1 (11 Aug 2009)

Mick, 

I was ONLY making a point, and I am fully aware of the history of conscription in Canada in both wars. If anyone wants to google or research this, then fine.

I am not stirring any type of pot, or saying anything to cheapen anyone's military service, opinions aside, we're all on the same team here.

OWDU


----------



## Disenchantedsailor (12 Aug 2009)

basrah said:
			
		

> So when I go on a 2 month BTE  I should get a medal simply because Ive been away from home for a while? No, because that is part of the training requirement of my job. Just because a soldier/sailor/airman spends time away from home should not mean a medal... thats just getting silly.
> 
> Personally, Im happy enough with a few days off here and there.



Ok I know I'm jumping in late on this one.  Having spend time in both elements.  Don't judge the other until you have sailed, flown, or lived in the mud with them.  The Navy has no equivelant to BTE,  the conduct multiple multinational type events combined with interdiction operations, thats right operations, and sovereignty patrols.  Especially if you happen to sail on a command platform where you might just spend the odd weekend at home.  Not so diffrent from a workup and deployment cycle. Except that all of thier operations and trg take place outside of Canda, there is no hospital for someone who breaks an ankle. No role 3. Yes they may not be under fire everyday.  but think if the ship springs a leak, or lights on fire,  it has happened, sailors have lost thier lives.  The threat is very real to them. the exception is when it goes real bad fore them, theres no fast air, no guns, no armour to bail them out. The ship sinks all 300 die. As for a long sea service award, I say no but that is an opinion for someone with 7 years sea time before jumping ship so to speak.


----------



## kratz (12 Aug 2009)

I am reluctant to speak up and post around here as the Senior Pers and even the SMEs beat me to it most of the time anyhow. 

On H&R (Honors & Recognition) I have a view that is not common. When I joined in '93, it was not uncommon to view most senior staff with a CD and a couple gongs. This experience and the culture I felt I entered of the CF set the feeling that having earned the CD was "enough" and anything else was "extra". While I experienced this feeling, I mean no disrespect, I am posting an honest, open opinion.

I have always stood when a VC entered the room, but would I respect a 5star vetran over another who served? This is where the debaet is going when we talk about this years down the road.


----------



## Long in the tooth (12 Aug 2009)

The CVSM was not awarded for 18 Months away from home.  Get your fact straight!!!!


----------



## PMedMoe (12 Aug 2009)

Otto Fest said:
			
		

> The CVSM was not awarded for 18 Months away from home.  Get your fact straight!!!!



True.  From Veteran's Affairs:

The Canadian Volunteer Service Medal (CVSM) was established on October 22, 1943 and issued in recognition of *eighteen months of voluntary service* in the Canadian Forces.

The medal was granted to persons of any rank in the Naval, Military or Air Forces of Canada who served on Active Service from September 1939 to March 1947 and were honourably discharged, retired from service or killed in action, in which case the medal was awarded posthumously. In addition, *those who served outside of Canada for a total of 60 days, continuous or intermittent, were awarded silver bars with a maple leaf at its centre*. These bars were often called clasps and were worn on the ribbon along with the medal.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (12 Aug 2009)

> . . . In addition, those who served outside of Canada for a total of 60 days, continuous or intermittent, were awarded silver bars with a maple leaf at its centre. These bars were often called clasps and were worn on the ribbon along with the medal.



And added as just an interesting curiosity - service in Newfoundland counted as overseas service.  But as my Grandfather used to say - he preferred the Americans to the Canadians; the Yanks might have been more annoying but they spent more money.


----------



## PMedMoe (13 Aug 2009)

Blackadder1916 said:
			
		

> And added as just an interesting curiosity - service in Newfoundland counted as overseas service.  But as my Grandfather used to say - he preferred the Americans to the Canadians; the Yanks might have been more annoying but they spent more money.



Ah, yes, but Newfoundland wasn't part of Canada then.


----------



## Long in the tooth (13 Aug 2009)

On a personal note, twenty years ago I had two medals, even the RSM had only three.  Now there are Jr NCOs with half a dozen.  My aunts were awarded three medals without leaving Canada, while my father in Italy picked names from a hat, just like my Queen's Golden Jubilee medal.

I'm proudest of my Second Bar to the CD.  Thank God minor punishments are removed after a year!


----------



## gwp (13 Aug 2009)

Otto Fest said:
			
		

> On a personal note, ...... while my father in Italy picked names from a hat, just like my Queen's Golden Jubilee medal.


Recipients for the QGJM were not selected at random.  There was a specific set of criteria that was based on rank and time in.  While the system was not perfect it was a vast improvement over the non-system for the CAN 125 or the QSGMs and previous commemoratives.  Further, there is a body of CF members who received the QGJM from sources outside the CF such as from their Member of Parliament or Lieutenant Governor.  

For the general population
http://www.gg.ca/honours/medals/hon04-qegj_e.asp

For CF members
http://www.cmp-cpm.forces.gc.ca/dhr-ddhr/chc-tdh/chart-tableau-eng.asp?ref=GoldenJubilee
Canadian Forces members must be recommended by the Chief of Defence Staff to the Government of Canada. Selection is computer generated and distributed proportionally to Regular and Reserve members (including Cadet Instructors, Canadian Rangers and Honorary Positions) by component, rank, Military Occupation and years of service. CANFORGEN 024/02 CDS 017 refers.

FROM THE CANFORGEN


> THIS PROGRAM IS AN IMPORTANT AND SIGNIFICANT ONE FOR MEMBERS OF THE CF, AND IT IS IMPORTANT THAT THE DISTRIBUTION BE AS FAIR AND OBJECTIVE AS POSSIBLE. A RANGE OF SELECTION PROPOSALS WERE CONSIDERED, AND IT HAS BEEN DETERMINED THAT THE MEDALS WILL BE DISTRIBUTED PROPORTIONATELY BY DEU, RANK AND YEARS OF SERVICE, BASED ON THE RETIREMENT BASE ELECTION DATE. PROPORTIONALITY BY MOCS WILL BE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATIONS. THE PROGRAM WILL APPLY TO LT/SLT AND ABOVE AND PTE(T)/A-B AND ABOVE WHO ARE SERVING AS OF 6 FEB 02. EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION WILL BE ENSURED FOR THE REGULAR FORCE, PRIMARY RESERVE, CIC, RANGERS, AND HONORARY APPOINTEES. THE LARGEST SINGLE RECIPIENT GROUP WILL BE THE CPL RANK. WORKING GROUPS WILL BE FORMED TO REVIEW THE SELECTION OF RECIPIENTS


----------



## armyvern (13 Aug 2009)

gwp said:
			
		

> Recipients for the QGJM were not selected at random.



No, you're right.

My grandfather recd one - not surprising given that he was the Returning Officer (and a true blue Tory) in that used-to-be true blue Tory riding headed up by used-to-be-Tory independant Bill Casey.



The Liberals should jump all over this and turn it into a news story on a slow day (lots of those lately apparently), given that my grandfather is a direct descendant of the last heretic burned at the stake in England ...  :


----------



## Haggis (13 Aug 2009)

The officer who adminstered the computer generated selection process for the QGJM wasn't even a CF member.  She was a USAF exchange officer, a major, and one VERY smart lady. Moreso, she was deemed ineligible for one herself.  How's that for a complete lack of bias?

In the end, though, units had to vet the recipient list prior to the submissions to the GG's office. This was to ensure that the nominees, selected as they were by computer, were of good moral character, somewhat deserving and, (in some cases) still alive.


----------



## mariomike (13 Aug 2009)

Blackadder1916 said:
			
		

> And added as just an interesting curiosity - service in Newfoundland counted as overseas service.  But as my Grandfather used to say - he preferred the Americans to the Canadians; the Yanks might have been more annoying but they spent more money.



My father was on the "Triangle Run" during the war and admired the people of St John's. He did say that the merchants overcharged both American and Canadian servicemen.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (14 Aug 2009)

Otto Fest said:
			
		

> I'm proudest of my Second Bar to the CD.  Thank God minor punishments are removed after a year!



Comments such as this always brings to mind an anecdote (that I related in another thread) about what a WW2 veteran thought of the CD. http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/47050/post-409156.html#msg409156


----------



## Haggis (14 Aug 2009)

"Just a CD"  also garners a huge amount of dedication.  I have tremendous resspect for the member with "just a CD" who consistently gets things done for 12, 22, 32 years.  In many cases s/he's more valuable than the member with two rows of bling who got things done long ago, but little else since.


----------

