Air Force Fleece in an Army unit.

[GnyHwy]

I find it ironic and comical that some think that it is not necessary to have uniformity in our uniforms.  ;D

I use to be a badass rebel too, but now I am assimilated!

Like other have said, this is not a battle worth fighting, or that you can have any influence, or possibly win.  Your best bet is to obey orders right now, get promoted to CWO, and then you can let the troops run around like raped apes all you want.  I bet you won't though, because it will be your *** that will have to answer when the troops screw up.

You are right that there is a bigger issue than just dress regs.  It is impossible to have a clear standard when you have so many different people with differnet personalities.

It would be a lot better if they were all uniform.  ;D

 

[Shamrock]

I think it's been hinted at above - the CANAIRGEN would only apply to those who fall under the RCAF.  Those whose elements are air but are under the Canadian Army would be subject to LFCOs.

My element is, obviously, army.  But I am presently posted out of the Canadian Army.  I adhere to the instructions of my present command.  Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to prep my jeans for Casual Wednesday.

 

[ModlrMike]

Just as a side not I believe beret is authorized in RCAF 1A under certain circumstances I believe there was a topic on it ill try to locate.  The photo of the new base commander here in Borden has her wearing her beret in 1A

I think I saw a CANFORGEN last week that changed that. I recall that the wedge is the only auth head dress for 1A dress. I don't have access now, but I'm sure someone will can look it up.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

The uniformity argument doesn't fly with me.  If we were honest with ourselves about uniformity, we would go back to the uniforms from the 80s, plus with everyone sporting a sash, lanyards, funny hats with feathers and pom-poms, kilts, etc...

To me, it smells of envy: "I can't wear MINE in garrison, so nobody can! SO THERE!"

Your thoughts?  Has your RSM started panicking yet, between war stories from Lahr?

Sincerely,

A Contrarian

Really.

Your only posts so far have been about allowances, and being told what to do.....in the MILITARY (shock and horror).

You sure you are a Sr NCO in my beloved CF? 

Or just another entitled Gen Xer with a chip on your shoulder....

15 years service indeed.

 

[Brick Top]

I find it ironic and comical that some think that it is not necessary to have uniformity in our uniforms.  ;D

I use to be a badass rebel too, but now I am assimilated!

Like other have said, this is not a battle worth fighting, or that you can have any influence, or possibly win.  Your best bet is to obey orders right now, get promoted to CWO, and then you can let the troops run around like raped apes all you want.  I bet you won't though, because it will be your *** that will have to answer when the troops screw up.

You are right that there is a bigger issue than just dress regs.  It is impossible to have a clear standard when you have so many different people with differnet personalities.

It would be a lot better if they were all uniform.  ;D

Ahhh thank you.  Someone who actually addresses the original question with a thought, rather than by simply regurgitating policy.  This said, it is not a battle I am fighting; just a question I asked on a forum.  At work, I do what I am told.  But I'm not at work, so I can ask questions.  I apologise for offending for daring to question, or even suggesting that there might be a problem with our priorities. 

 

[Eye In The Sky]

I don't, personally, see it as not having the right priorities.  If you read thru Chap 1 of 265, it becomes obvious it is part of the duty of Commanders and the other indicatad players, such as the mbrs of the NDCC, to set dress policy.

Them failing to do so is a failure of their command responsibilities, isn't it? 

 

[Brick Top]

Really.

Your only posts so far have been about allowances, and being told what to do.....in the MILITARY (shock and horror).

You sure you are a Sr NCO in my beloved CF? 

Or just another entitled Gen Xer with a chip on your shoulder....

15 years service indeed.

Wow.  Really?  Calling me a liar because what?  I don't blindly accept that everything makes sense and that my "beloved CF" is perfect and flawless?  "Entitled Gen Xer".  Bravo.  Just what we need.  More inter-generational rivalry.

For a start, never did I talk about allowances, or mentioned being told what to do.  As indicated in my original post, I am only seeing people start spinning about it, but no orders have been issued.  Once they are, I'll follow and enforce them.  The point of my post was to assess what other peoples' positions were on the subject of trivial regulations that are often based on someone's personal tastes, and not operational needs or anything tangible whatsoever.

Another point being developed in this thread, is "are we as a organisation made up of individuals, focusing too much on small stuff when we have bigger problems?".  Problems like, say, the generation gap.  Boomers constantly looking down on anyone under the age of 40, and Xers just praying for the lot of them to retire.

But to you, questioning anything, under any circumstances, is an affront to the sanctity of the CF in your eyes, correct?

 

[Brick Top]

I don't, personally, see it as not having the right priorities.  If you read thru Chap 1 of 265, it becomes obvious it is part of the duty of Commanders and the other indicatad players, such as the mbrs of the NDCC, to set dress policy.

Them failing to do so is a failure of their command responsibilities, isn't it?

True, it is within the scope of their duties/responsibilities.  But in this case, it's not a regulation YET.  They're just mulling it over.  Which means they are spending time and energy to come up with a rule based on their OWN personal taste, under the auspices of uniformity/combating individuality (which it isn't in the first place, just a different uniform, but a uniform nonetheless).  That's what I mean by misaligned priorities.

 

[PViddy]

  I think I saw a CANFORGEN last week that changed that. I recall that the wedge is the only auth head dress for 1A dress. I don't have access now, but I'm sure someone will can look it up.

You're correct.

CANAIRGEN 19/12 AIR FORCE 30/12: RCAF HEADDRESS POLICY//COIFFURE DE L ARC

"...REFS: A. CANAIRGEN 15/11 REINSTATEMENT OF ROYAL CANADIAN AIR FORCE
B. A-DH-265-000/AG-001, DATED: JUN 11

1. AS INDICATED IN REF A, THE RCAF NAME WOULD BE REINTRODUCED IN A PHASED APPROACH. PART OF THAT PROCESS INCLUDES THE SAFEGUARD OF THE TRADITIONAL IMAGE OF THE RCAF. THIS IMAGE INCLUDES THE WEARING OF THE WEDGE CAP AS THE OFFICIAL RCAF HEADDRESS. AS SUCH THE WEARING OF THE RCAF BLUE WEDGE CAP WITH NO COLOURED INSERT WILL BE MANDATORY FOR ALL MEMBERS WEARING THE RCAF ORDER OF DRESS 1 AND 1A.  THE WEAR OF OTHER HEADDRESS WITH OPERATIONAL AND SERVICE DRESS WILL BE IN  ACCORDANCE WITH REF B"

Well we're sort of on the topic of outerwear, i did a survey that popped up last year on logistik-unicorps about a winter outerwear jacket.  It seemed like they were looking to create something other than the gaberdine or current authorized operational gortex parka worn with DEU.  Would this fleece be it ?


Cheers,

PV

 

[Brick Top]

Your correct.

CANAIRGEN 19/12 AIR FORCE 30/12: RCAF HEADDRESS POLICY//COIFFURE DE L ARC

"...REFS: A. CANAIRGEN 15/11 REINSTATEMENT OF ROYAL CANADIAN AIR FORCE
B. A-DH-265-000/AG-001, DATED: JUN 11

1. AS INDICATED IN REF A, THE RCAF NAME WOULD BE REINTRODUCED IN A PHASED APPROACH. PART OF THAT PROCESS INCLUDES THE SAFEGUARD OF THE TRADITIONAL IMAGE OF THE RCAF. THIS IMAGE INCLUDES THE WEARING OF THE WEDGE CAP AS THE OFFICIAL RCAF HEADDRESS. AS SUCH THE WEARING OF THE RCAF BLUE WEDGE CAP WITH NO COLOURED INSERT WILL BE MANDATORY FOR ALL MEMBERS WEARING THE RCAF ORDER OF DRESS 1 AND 1A.  THE WEAR OF OTHER HEADDRESS WITH OPERATIONAL AND SERVICE DRESS WILL BE IN  ACCORDANCE WITH REF B"

Well were sort of on the topic of outerwear, i did a survey that popped up last year on logistik-unicorps about a winter outerwear jacket.  It seemed like they were looking to create something other than the gaberdine or current authorized operational gortex parka worn with DEU.  Would this fleece be it ?


Cheers,

PV

Actually, the dress manual never allowed a beret with 1 or 1a. The directive indicated above was issued, as was explained to me, because of the very thing I mentioned earlier; folks running around with berets on.  That CANAIRGEN came out to clarify what most already knew.

As for wearing the fleece with DEU, the order directly addresses that.  It is forbidden.  I believe the item Logistic is looking at is something similar to the Canex jacket, which is good, given that the blue Goretex jacket has been out of the system for some time. 

 

[Eye In The Sky]

True, it is within the scope of their duties/responsibilities.  But in this case, it's not a regulation YET.  They're just mulling it over.  Which means they are spending time and energy to come up with a rule based on their OWN personal taste, under the auspices of uniformity/combating individuality (which it isn't in the first place, just a different uniform, but a uniform nonetheless).  That's what I mean by misaligned priorities.

Would not that be part of the decision making process ??? 

Seriously, take a moment to read 265 Chap 1.  Each command has its on Dress Committee, etc...their job and function is to mull these things over, make recommendations to the Commander for decision, when decisions are made they get signed off and dress regs amended.  I don't think the RCAF CWO, for example, is making recommendations based on his own sense of AF fashion appeal.  I don't see a conspiracy theory here, just people doing their jobs.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Well we're sort of on the topic of outerwear, i did a survey that popped up last year on logistik-unicorps about a winter outerwear jacket.  It seemed like they were looking to create something other than the gaberdine or current authorized operational gortex parka worn with DEU.  Would this fleece be it ?


Cheers,

PV

No, the CANAIRGEN (Para 4) specifically states the AF fleece is not auth for wear with DEU.


UNCLAS

CANAIRGEN 011/12

REF: A-DH-265-00/AG-001 CF DRESS INSTRUCTIONS

SUBJECT: ROYAL CANADIAN AIR FORCE (RCAF) FLEECE JACKET

1. THE CLOTHING AND EQUIPMENT MILLENNIUM STANDARD (CEMS) PROJECT ANNOUNCES THE FIELDING OF THE NEW RCAF FLEECE JACKET

2. THE RCAF FLEECE JACKET IS EXPECTED TO BE AVAILABLE THROUGH CLOTHING STORES IN FALL 2012 FOR ALL RCAF PERSONNEL IAW SCALE D01-341AA

3. ENTITLEMENT WILL BE QTY 1 EACH FOR ALL RCAF PERSONNEL AND SUPPORTING PERSONNEL FROM LAND OR NAVAL ENVIRONMENTS WHILE EMPLOYED WITH THE RCAF

4. THE RCAF FLEECE JACKET IS TO BE WORN WITH APPROPRIATE RANK SLIP-ONS AND NAME TAPES AND IS AUTHORIZED AS AN OUTER GARMENT FOR WEAR OVER OPERATIONAL DRESS, BOTH IN THE WORK AREA AND TO/FROM WORK, BUT NOT AUTHORIZED FOR WEAR WITH DEU.

5. NOTE THAT THE RCAF FLEECE JACKET IS ANTISTATIC BUT NOT FIRE RETARDANT. THE RCAF FLEECE JACKET IS SUITABLE FOR FLIGHT LINE WEAR BUT NOT AUTHORIZED FOR AIRCREW IN-FLIGHT WEAR

6. REF A, CF DRESS INSTRUCTIONS, WILL BE AMENDED SHORTLY BY THE OFFICE OF THE RCAF CWO TO REFLECT THE ADDITION OF THE FLEECE JACKET. DIVISION COMMANDERS ARE TO UPDATE THEIR DRESS ORDERS ACCORDINGLY

 

[Nfld Sapper]

Well the ARMY now has:

DSSPM2 is introducing a new Army winter parka to be worn with DEU.

The new parka will be available to all ARMY members as an optional item on Clothing Online with no additional points allotted. Expected delivery times will be between 12-16 weeks. Distribution in limited quantities is expected to begin in January 2013. with initial priority to Tier 1 personnel.

 

[Journeyman]

The point of my post was to assess what other peoples' positions were ......

Well then, I guess you're in luck; other peoples' positions on your post seem pretty obvious.

 

[GnyHwy]

True, it is within the scope of their duties/responsibilities.  But in this case, it's not a regulation YET.  They're just mulling it over.  Which means they are spending time and energy to come up with a rule based on their OWN personal taste, under the auspices of uniformity/combating individuality (which it isn't in the first place, just a different uniform, but a uniform nonetheless).  That's what I mean by misaligned priorities.

Believe it or not, they probably haven't spent that much time at all thinking about.  It was probably a very easy and quick decision. 

What will take time is if they have to explain their reasoning to every Tom, Dick, and Harry, which they shouldn't have to, and are not obligated to do.  An even worse time killer is to have to continuously correct and remind people of the rules that were set out previously.

 

[392]

..... That's what I mean by misaligned priorities.

Discipline (including self discipline to follow direction) is the most basic foundation of everything the CF does - even if you cannot see that following dress instructions falls into that. What's next - going to decide / debate / post online for comments whether C team following the order to take the trench is an aligned priority?

A lot of the traditional "worries" Warrant Officers have about beans, bullets and discipline originally stemmed from those specific items having a very visible place in maintaining a credible, lethal fighting force. These days, with the advancement of technology, sometimes those specifics aren't as visible (if at all), but they are still the basic building blocks of a successful field force (and by field force, I also include our RCAF and RCN brethren). In my job, I have the ability to make judgement calls on things like dress that fall within the arcs I have been given, but just like when I am told to take the trench, whether I agree with it or not is irrelevant - part of my job as a WO is to support the Chain of Command's decisions and orders as long as they are lawful.

I have no issues with a SNCO trying to figure out the "whys" behind the "whats" to be a more informed leader (and I make every attempt possible to explain to my SNCOs the reasoning behind why we're doing what we're doing), but I do have problems with defaulting to what appears to be complaining in the absence of an answer deemed worthy of your time and effort. The answer has already been laid out clearly in quotes from the 265 (I am paraphrasing): Local Comds can make their own specific dress instructions based off the dress manual in their own locations. If your CoC decides you have to wear / not wear a specific item in uniform, then that is what they are fully authorized to do, and have the NDA behind them to support it. Full stop.

At some point, you may be exposed to "the institution", and then a lot of the misaligned priorities you speak of will suddenly become clearer. As has already been mentioned a couple of times now, when you become a CWO, and your job is now to lead and advise the institution, initiate those changes.


In the meantime, the energy you have expended trying to come up with reasons not to follow lawful commands or to find workarounds could have been put to much better actually supporting your CoC as is your job as a SNCO. There are ways to get "the system" changed, and complaining on an internet forum ain't it  :2c:

 

[Retired and Broken]

Actually, the dress manual never allowed a beret with 1 or 1a. The directive indicated above was issued, as was explained to me, because of the very thing I mentioned earlier; folks running around with berets on.  That CANAIRGEN came out to clarify what most already knew.

Not entirely true. Sar Techs and MP's were authorized to wear beret's in 1a...I am not sure about the "blue" beret issue. I am not sure how the MPs feel about this, but the Sar Tech trade feels like it got kicked in the face in the name of uniformity. To us, this policy is the same as asking army members to remove their capbadges and replace with the Cornflake... or ditch the maroon berets and put on a dirty leg ;D beret so every one matches etc. (In 1a's of course) I'd love to see how those would go over in a combat unit.

So Brick Top I somewhat agree with you, as  I am currently a little bent out of shape myself when it comes to "uniformity", however, in the end, it is the policy of those who "matter" and I have a shiny new blue wallet in my tunic pocket.

It's not the end of the world (close though!  ) and neither will be wearing a jacket instead of a fleece...in the end we still get paid twice a month.

 

[PViddy]

  No, the CANAIRGEN (Para 4) specifically states the AF fleece is not auth for wear with DEU.

Seen.  Thank you also for the Ref.  Based on that Logistik Army Jacket, i'm gonna guess that ours is going to similiar, just in a nicer colour  ;D

cheers,

PV

 

[CombatDoc]

On ROTO 3-10, there was an alarming number of MWOs and CWOs deployed to KAF - to the tune of 100+ judging from the global address list.  As the old cliché goes: "An inspection ready unit never passes combat, and a combat ready unit seldom passes inspection."

Really, Brick Top?  Where you on Roto 3-10?  I ask because I was, and your assertion that there were 100+ MWO/CWO deployed to KAF seems a mite high to me.  In terms of CWO, I figure that there were around 12ish maybe, one per unit RSM plus the TF RSM.  The units in KAF also would have had MWOs - I had two but most would have had around one per company as CSM, so figure 2-3 per unit.  For the combat arms units, these folks were OTW much of the time.  Your inference that there was an excessive number of CWO/MWOs in KAF jacking up the troops for chicken$%^& does not jive with my observations.

 

[Precept]

I got a call from supply a couple of months ago that a Fleece Sweater came in for me. Thinking it was a black one, I went over to pick it up. Turns out the Wing Commander authorized Army folks to wear the "AF Fleece" while on the Wing. I haven't taken it out of the bag and will probably never wear it. It's quite common around the wing though. Mostly from office workers.