All things beardy-2005 to 2018 (merged)

[armyvern]

So, because a memo was written, everybody that could potentially jack a person up knows?  Not likely.  The effect of telling a supervisor is the same.

As far as COs writing memos for haircuts...  I wouldn't expect a CO to write a memo to the Unit chief or the Adjudant to ask for permission to grow hair.  Nor would I expect any officers to do so.  The adjudant is a Captain in a Squadron, just like most other officers.

If you receive multiple phone calls for people growing their hair from over-zealous people doubting someone's integrity, your unit has some serious issues unrelated to dress.

Treat people like adults.  You could be surprised how most will act like adults and go the extra mile.

The memo is written exactly so that "those that would potentially jack a person up" are afforded the opportunity to know immediately upon presentation of the memo that troop is actually good-to-go.  But, you knew that already.

I didn't say shit about the CO - you did.  COs don't need to grant themselves permission.  The Adjt and the RSM, by virtue of their position and delegation in matters of dress from the CO, action these memos on behalf of the CO. But then, you knew that already too.

Has nothing to do with a Unit's or an individuals "integrity" - it has to do with someone -ANY member of the CAF, for whatever reasons, having their ass immediately covered when they are going to be "not in compliance with rules or policy".  It's why people carry beard chits, boot chits, hair chits, medical chits, excused PT chits, modified PT chits etc etc.  But then, you knew all that already too because you're supposedly an adult with TI. 

It's CAF-wide so you can get over your holier than thou bullshit any day now.  I guarantee you that people in possession of any number of chits etc are in your Unit with chits right now.  And, phone calls and queries DO happen even in the sacrosanct realm of the RCAF (experience talking here).  But, you know that too.

Let's just get away from issuing these chits for anything, at any time ... one day when you're CDS Max make that your task.  :

 

[SupersonicMax]

All the "chits" you mentionned are medical in nature.  Except growing hair.  You keep living in your world if shiny boots and neat hair.  I'll keep pushing my people up and running an efficient organization.  And trusting my people do the right thing.

 

[QV]

Isnt the CAF dress committee composed of a bunch of CWO?  Are there any other ranks on that? 

For the majority of CaF people that is like having your grandpa or grandmother dress you everyday. 

Dress regulations is something that can easily be improved/modernized.  But I suppose I will grow a pointy stash and wax it to a sharp upward angle... because that looks stellar. 

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Without taking side here, SSM, you are not quite correct.

First of all, the "beard" chit can be considered a "hair" one from your classification - so I won't comment other than say: try and not shave for a week without one in your pocket and see what happens  .

Second: the modified PT chits can be issued for reasons other than medical. I know because for the first five years of my career, I was the holder of a modified chit issued not by the medical personnel but by the PERI upon request from my University coach. I was competing in class A fencing at the national level (just below National team, with potential to compete internationally for Canada), and some exercises could work the wrong muscle groups. So I had a special set of exercises and was excused certain other ones - including push-ups - which pi**ed off quite a few instructors even if my own exercises were more stringent.

 

[Remius]

  You keep living in your world if shiny boots and neat hair.  I'll keep pushing my people up and running an efficient organization.  And trusting my people do the right thing.

Um, why can't it be both?

 

[Remius]

Isnt the CAF dress committee composed of a bunch of CWO?  Are there any other ranks on that? 

For the majority of CaF people that is like having your grandpa or grandmother dress you everyday. 

Yeah, because sometimes kids actually need to be told how to dress otherwise they end doing stupid things eventually like showing up at job interviews in ripped jeans or think that yoga pants are formal wear. Grandma and grandpa are normally right.  It just takes the kids a very long time to realise it.

 

[OldSolduer]

Yeah, because sometimes kids actually need to be told how to dress otherwise they end doing stupid things eventually like showing up at job interviews in ripped jeans or think that yoga pants are formal wear. Grandma and grandpa are normally right.  It just takes the kids a very long time to realise it.

Good points. We can have both....the good organization and proper dress and deportment.
OK here is the bottom line:

Corporals and privates don't get a say in dress policy. Not many people do get a say.

The purview of unit dress is the COs decision with input from his RSM. Beard growing is not within the CO's arcs.

For all of you that think its OK to grow a beard because you look cool, think again. I'm sure there are a few people more qualified than I that are concerned about CBRN and beards. If the seal isn't formed then casualties in a CBRN environment will ensue.

If you can't tell by now, I think even discussing it at NDHQ level is a waste of time and frickin retarded.

 

[ballz]

"Other professions" have more relaxed grooming standards not because their employers liked the idea, but because their unions took it to arbitration.

I think you are getting a bit too specific there... there are plenty of professions that don't have unions that also have a grooming standard more relaxed then ours. Lawyers, accounting, etc etc etc. They are more relaxed because the *employers* are practical people that care more about professional competence and certainly don't care enough about looks to employ people solely for the purpose of inspecting how people look. They have dress codes / expectations and the like as well, and the direct supervisors are responsible for everything in their organization. Perhaps we could adopt a similar system instead of employing people to add no more value than to inspect haircuts and jack people up for holding their coffee the wrong way while they walk from their car to the office.

You know what erodes the public's trust in the accounting profession? Things like the Enron scandal. The KPMG tax evasion scheme. Certainly not their haircuts.

For police, things like the Don Dunphy Inquiry, the High River gun grab, tazing a man to death in an airport, the ongoing sexual harassment scandal that the RCMP is facing, etc.

For the CAF, the Somalia Affair, the numerous soldiers dying of suicide after releasing from the CAF, the suicides of RMC cadets, and members in the training system including at CFLRS, the Sexual Misconduct fiasco we've found ourselves in, etc.

While the professional bodies of the accounting world spend their time worrying about how they can create better accounting standards that are more accurate and less prone to manipulation, or how they can instill sound ethics and values so these scandals don't happen, we worry about dress / bells / whistles and spend all of our time arguing about haircuts and beards. We've got bigger fish to fry.

 

[Loachman]

All the "chits" you mentionned are medical in nature.  Except growing hair.

I had one for boots due to fitting problems, not medical reasons.

One presumes that members authorized beards for religious reasons would have non-medical chits explaining those religious reasons.

Regardless, these chits exist, as has been explained, largely to protect individual members when interrogated about their hair, beards, and funny boots etcetera.

 

[Loachman]

I think you are getting a bit too specific there... there are plenty of professions that don't have unions that also have a grooming standard more relaxed then ours.

How many of those professions wear uniforms and require the same high levels of individual and group discipline in order to ethically and precisely apply violence and destruction, or the deterrent threat thereof, in order to enforce national aims?

For the CAF, the Somalia Affair, the numerous soldiers dying of suicide after releasing from the CAF, the suicides of RMC cadets, and members in the training system including at CFLRS, the Sexual Misconduct fiasco we've found ourselves in, etc.

Those do not seem, in my experience, to affect public opinion of us as sloppy personnel would. It is those in public in uniform that have the most effect on public opinion, as they have direct contact with the public. Appearances count when making impressions. Appearance factors will vary with viewers, obviously, but lines have to be drawn somewhere. Long hair for men, beards, chunky costume jewellery, gaudy make-up for women, brightly/unnaturally-coloured hair, brightly/unnaturally-coloured beards, huge earrings for women, earrings for men, those big dumb whatever-they-are-called, loopy, ring-like earlobe-inserts for men or women, gaudy make-up for men, tongue-splittings, facial piercings, facial tattoos, facial brandings, eyeball tattoos - tell me which should or should not be acceptable/considered professional/non-professional? Tell me where, along that sequence, the line should be inserted (feel free to re-arrange the sequence if that helps)?

Edited to add: plastic surgery to make ear tips look Vulcan/elfin.

 

[Remius]

While the professional bodies of the accounting world spend their time worrying about how they can create better accounting standards that are more accurate and less prone to manipulation, or how they can instill sound ethics and values so these scandals don't happen, we worry about dress / bells / whistles and spend all of our time arguing about haircuts and beards. We've got bigger fish to fry.

Indeed.  So why enforce things like saluting the war memorial.  Bigger fish to fry.  Or mixing kit?  Bigger fish to fry.  Or how about the troop walking in around downtown Ottawa without headdress on.  Bigger fish to fry.

You know what?  People are paid big bucks to fry those bigger fish.  They count on people like us to make sure the smaller fish get fried so they don't have to.  We are a professional military organisation.  That means sometimes you have rules for operations and the field and other times you have rules for garrison and sometimes those rules cross over to each other.  We don't get to pick the rules that suit us or the ones we agree with. If they change fine, if they don't, we enforce them. 

We're not accountants.  We're the CAF. 

 

[ballz]

Those do not seem, in my experience, to affect public opinion of us as sloppy personnel would.

Well, we'll just never agree on that one then. When I talk to people, they really aren't interested in talking about how great we all look in uniform, or how much better dressed we are compared to "x,y,z" profession. They sure do bring up the latest topics in the news, however.

Appearance factors will vary with viewers, obviously, but lines have to be drawn somewhere.

Indeed, as was alluded to in my original post.

Somewhere slightly different from where we are today in garrison, and vastly different from where we are today in the field.

You know what?  People are paid big bucks to fry those bigger fish.  They count on people like us to make sure the smaller fish get fried so they don't have to.  We are a professional military organisation.  That means sometimes you have rules for operations and the field and other times you have rules for garrison and sometimes those rules cross over to each other.  We don't get to pick the rules that suit us or the ones we agree with. If they change fine, if they don't, we enforce them.

When did this argument about " whether or not people who are paid to do "x" should do "x" " come from? You seem to be arguing about something that wasn't even being debated.

We're not accountants.  We're the CAF.

Of course, I forgot the #1 rule of the CAF debate club, the ultimate trump card.

Rule #1 - We are infallible, they've been telling me this for years... Therefore we are too superior to learn anything about anything from another organizations.

 

[OldSolduer]

Indeed.  So why enforce things like saluting the war memorial.  Bigger fish to fry.  Or mixing kit?  Bigger fish to fry.  Or how about the troop walking in around downtown Ottawa without headdress on.  Bigger fish to fry.

You know what?  People are paid big bucks to fry those bigger fish.  They count on people like us to make sure the smaller fish get fried so they don't have to.  We are a professional military organisation.  That means sometimes you have rules for operations and the field and other times you have rules for garrison and sometimes those rules cross over to each other.  We don't get to pick the rules that suit us or the ones we agree with. If they change fine, if they don't, we enforce them. 

We're not accountants.  We're the CAF.

That's why NCOs are promoted.....to look after the 5 Ds so officers can concentrate of planning, etc.
We all learn in basic training why we f$cking shave. Two reasons - three if you count hygiene. First is a neat clean MILITARY appearance, second is so your REPIRATOR will seal correctly. Ask the RCN folks how many on board ship have beards.

This idea of "let's grow beards" is a result of a few memes celebrating beards on the net. It's a fad that will pass.

So if you want to grow a beard, and have no medical or religious reason to do so.......

 

[Loachman]

I stopped shaving one day and got kicked out of the CF the very next day.

 

[ballz]

So if you want to grow a beard, and have no medical or religious reason to do so.......

No problemo, just don't act surprised when people leave and then hold studies, working groups, and town halls where Colonels and CWOs sit around and ponder why we can't retain good people. rancing:

 

[Remius]

This idea of "let's grow beards" is a result of a few memes celebrating beards on the net. It's a fad that will pass.

This statement right here is why people want beards.  Or they see SOF guys sporting beards.  I made a joke to a friend of mine from that world who was clean shaven, asking if he was shaving now because everyone else started growing beards in the CAF.  [

 

[Remius]

No problemo, just don't act surprised when people leave and then hold studies, working groups, and town halls where Colonels and CWOs sit around and ponder why we can't retain good people. rancing:

Because they'll figure out that they quit because the military made them shave and cut their hair? Yeah, my response is maybe they should have researched what exactly they were joining...

If someone quits over that they never should have joined.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

I will only put one comment out here and then retire:

If a neat, clean, military appearance is what counts in public, then please explain to me why we dress like bunch of slobs by wearing on a daily basis and out in public the sloppiest uniform we have: The friggin CADPAT or NCD?

op:

And Hamish: We used to be able to have a beard on board warships, so long as we could demonstrate that we could get a seal without assistance of any product (such as cheating with vaseline). The main reason it was removed was complaints of unfair treatment by those whose beard did not permit seal being told to shave, so we decided that's it no beards onboard ship. During a shore posting: have them as much as you want.

Funny as it may seem - even though we do carry our gas masks with us onboard ship - they are not the big worry. When under NBC attack, we stay inside the ship in what is known as Citadel condition. It is a centralized whole ship air filtration system that provides positive pressure so any leakage is out instead of in. The main reason for checking on status of beards was the fire fighting breathing apparatus - Chemox - they could not work if no proper seal as they relied on a close loop rebreathing process - and if you introduced any gasoline vapour (such as from vaseline ) in the close loop, you could actually cause the container of chemicals to explode.

 

[ballz]

Because they'll figure out that they quit because the military made them shave and cut their hair? Yeah, my response is maybe they should have researched what exactly they were joining...

If someone quits over that they never should have joined.

Because they worked for a bunch of dinosaurs that were out of touch with the rank and file and incapable of adapting to change until failure gives them no other choice, who's only answer to any of their legit gripes whether it's dress and deportment or whether its why our training fucking sucks is, "This is the CAF. This is what it is, this is what is always has been and always will be. If you don't like it, you should get out."

Who would want to work for those kind of people?

 

[Remius]

Because they worked for a bunch of dinosaurs that were out of touch with the rank and file and incapable of adapting to change until failure gives them no other choice, who's only answer to any of their legit gripes whether it's dress and deportment or whether its why our training ******* sucks is, "This is the CAF. This is what it is, this is what is always has been and always will be. If you don't like it, you should get out."

Who would want to work for those kind of people?

When the rules change I'll follow them and enforce them.  Some people refuse to for personal reasons.  That's wrong.  It's that simple.  Troops like to have their mobile devices out in class or on the firing point or wherever.  Does this mean I'm out of touch by telling them to put it away or maybe, just maybe they are out of touch with what they should be doing?  The organisation has changed the rules before and will do it again, but as a leader its my job to make sure the rules in place are followed.  I don't ignore the guy with a nose piercing who shows up or the guy who shaves his girlfriend's name into his hair.  So when the Navy TDO here shows up to work in Combats I will tell her that she is out of dress, not "it's ok, as long as you are comfortable".  And yes I will tell whoever to get his hands out of his pockets or stop leaning against whatever wall they think they are holding up etc etc.