Andre Marin, CF Ombudsman, and beyond (merged)

[bossi]

Just in case you missed it, here‘s an article from the Ottawa Citizen today on the CF Ombudsman:

Double duty at DND

The Ottawa Citizen

The 59,000 members of Canada‘s Armed Forces seem to have found a friend in Andre Marin, the military‘s ombudsman. After just two years in the job, Mr. Marin has even earned an endearing nickname from the troops: "Budman." Still, his success at resolving complaints raises serious questions about who should be responsible for putting things right.

The ombudsman‘s office received nearly 1,300 complaints last year from serving members, their relatives, civilian employees at the defence department, reservists, cadets and retirees. Mr. Marin‘s staff of 34, which may double in size this year, closed 855 of those cases, and 80 to 90 per cent were resolved to the satisfaction of all concerned.

It‘s not surprising that in a tight-lipped profession such as the military, many people contact Mr. Marin‘s office with allegations of mistreatment. The rigid chain of command that marks any successful military is not geared toward easy complaint resolution. "Taking care of the troops" is a duty that seems to have fallen to a young ombudsman in a civilian suit.

But is that his job? Why, for example, is Mr. Marin, whose civilian rank is equivalent to a lieutenant-general (the second-highest rank in the military), using his resources to help admit a soldier to hospital for medical care that his immediate supervisors didn‘t think was warranted? In another successful case listed in Mr. Marin‘s annual report, "an investigator was able to ensure that the complainant received all his moving benefits." These are important issues to the individuals involved, but generals or their equivalent usually let junior commanders do junior commanders‘ work. How many of the 1,300 complaints should have never even gotten to Mr. Marin‘s desk?

In a meeting last week with the Citizen‘s editorial board, he hinted that many concerns should have been resolved by military commanders. "But there seems to be a strange and disturbing trend that when (our office) gets involved, the complainant‘s target of mistreatment is happy that we are," he admitted. Those who could have resolved an issue "just didn‘t know what to do ... they seemed to want (the ombudsman) to solve the problem."

In other words, the existence of an ombudsman has become an excuse for officers to avoid making dicey decisions or solving conflicts, even simple ones. That, presumably, is the opposite of the military culture Canada wants.

The rapid expansion of his office to deal with minor issues isn‘t Mr. Marin‘s fault. But he is also taking on other tasks that we are not sure should fall to him. For example, he believes 11 complaints of discrimination against women made to him in one year justify a major investigation to find out whether a larger trend is occurring. Given that the military is already doing a related probe, it isn‘t clear why he needs to launch one.

Still, he is confident that he is accomplishing the two goals set out by Defence Minister Art Eggleton: "To contribute to an open and transparent military, and contribute to the fair treatment of all military personnel." The recent scandal surrounding the lacing of a commander‘s coffee by his own soldiers suggests there is plenty for Mr. Marin to do. He told the Citizen that six major cases currently under investigation may be just as serious as the tainted coffee scandal. These kinds of cases should be the main focus of his efforts.

Mr. Marin‘s office budget grew from $1.3 million in year one to $2.6 million in year two. It could double again this year if his request for 30 more full-time investigators is accepted by the minister. A fixed budget would force tougher choices about which cases to accept and which, regrettably, must be refused. The military has the means, and the duty, to resolve many of its internal complaints itself. It shouldn‘t just slough them onto Mr. Marin. For his part, the ombudsman should focus on his core mandate. He can‘t be everyone‘s Bud.
- 30 -

 

[bossi]

And, here‘s another article (this time from the National Post):

Canadians encouraged to give a soldier a hug
Re-establish pride in Forces, ombudsman says

Kelly Cryderman, Southam News


Let soldiers know they are appreciated, Andre Marin says.


OTTAWA - Members of the Canadian Forces need a little more love and respect from the public, according to Canada‘s military watchdog.

Andre Marin, the Canadian Forces ombudsman, appealed to Canadians to let the military know they are appreciated.

Mr. Marin suggested that to re-establish pride in the military, Canadians must teach their children about the military‘s role in missions around the world, write to troops overseas and even pat them on the back when they see them on the streets.

"If we are feeling really outgoing, we can stop a Canadian service member on the street or in the mall just to say thanks," Mr. Marin said.

Canadians have to ask themselves how they‘ve contributed to an environment where some members are too ashamed to publicly acknowledge they‘re a part of the military, Mr. Marin said.

"A member of the Canadian Forces told me that even though his office was right across from the Rideau Centre [in Ottawa], he didn‘t go shopping there on his lunch hour because he didn‘t feel comfortable wearing his uniform in the mall."

Mr. Marin contrasted the mood in Canada with that in the United States, where Canadian members stationed at Norad headquarters in Colorado Springs comment on how nice it is to walk into a store and get a discount just because they are members of the military.

"We the public have to recognize that we can‘t have it both ways," he said. "You can‘t refuse to support the Forces because we don‘t like the idea of war, and then in the next moment turn around and expect our military to rush into places where we wouldn‘t dream of going."

Canadians have a feeling of "ambivalence" toward the military, he said, which in part stems from media coverage the military has received over the past several years. Negative stories "barrage us on all sides."

He says CF-18 pilots were described as "too fat to fly" by the media, and stories about rusting toilets on Hercules aircraft -- which was attributed to the poor aim of some in the crew -- seemed to be a source of "great amusement" to the media.

In Somalia, he said, stories of bravery and dedication were overshadowed by the scandals that plagued the mission.

However, Mr. Marin said some of the negative coverage resulted in positive changes in the military, and even still there is a "profound shift in attitudes" needed within the Canadian Forces itself.

The ombudsman‘s office, created two years ago, has the power to investigate any allegations of misconduct within the military.

In the spirit of recognizing the good work the Forces does, Mr. Marin said he is creating a new Ombudsman Award for Excellence, to give public recognition to those members who display exemplary ethics.
- 30 -

Dileas Gu Brath
Mark Bossi, Esquire

 

[garb811]

Although nothing is on the DND nor on the Ombudsman's own website, it appears he is stepping down on 1 Apr 05.  

Love him or hate him, he certainly knew how to bring an issue to the attention of the public at large and while I thought some of the issues he addressed were more flash than bang, he did some definite good with some of the other issues.

The new Ombudsman will be...?

Toronto Star Article.

Dec. 16, 2004. 01:00 AM

Marin to be Ontario ombudsman
Spent five years as military watchdog

Succeeds retiring Clare Lewis


ROBERT BENZIE
QUEEN'S PARK BUREAU

André Marin, Ottawa's military watchdog and former head of the Special Investigations Unit, is the new Ontario ombudsman.

In a signal the Legislature wants an activist to succeed retiring ombudsman Clare Lewis, 65, the government has turned to the headline-grabbing former Ottawa crown attorney.

Marin, 39, who became the federal government's first military ombudsman five years ago, gained prominence in the late 1990s as director of the SIU, the provincial agency that investigates deaths or serious injuries involving police.

Marin was credited with turning around the oft-criticized civilian agency in his 22 months there. Late last month, Marin visited Canadian troops in Afghanistan and reported that soldiers patrolling in Kabul are "just plain exhausted."

The Ontario ombudsman's office independently investigates complaints by individuals about provincial departments.

The ombudsman reports to the Legislature.

"It's got enormous potential. We're going to be putting the office on the map ... with investigations into issues that affect Ontarians," Marin said.

He met yesterday with Premier Dalton McGuinty and plans meetings with Conservative Leader John Tory and New Democratic Party Leader Howard Hampton.

"Clare Lewis rebuilt the position of the office and now it's time to branch out," said Marin, noting he will begin April 1 and plans to be an aggressive investigator, especially in areas of health and education.

"There can be no substitute for a field investigation."

Marin, who often sparred with defence ministers during his tenure as military watchdog, said he is not afraid of stepping on the toes of the powerful.

Government House leader Dwight Duncan said the new ombudsman was a popular choice among all three parties.

"This was agreed to by an all-party committee and obviously there were Liberals on that committee and it was a unanimous decision," he said.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

The new Ombudsman will be...?

Scott Taylor?

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Great! So I suppose all the initiatives he was investigating will now be shelved and forgotten, till the new guy dusts them off, redoes them and....... oh wait, time for another NEW Ombudsman. We'll never get anything settled at this rate.

 

[bossi]

Although nothing is on the DND nor on the Ombudsman's own website, it appears he is stepping down on 1 Apr 05.   ... The new Ombudsman will be...?

It's interesting that we have to find out stuff like this in the media, vice official sources ...
(i.e. last item in the Media section of the Ombudsman's website is dated 29 Sep 04 ...)

Actually, the math doesn't add up ... (from the Ombudsman section of his website):

André Marin was appointed the first Ombudsman for the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Forces (DND/CF) on June 9, 1998. He officially took office on June 15, 1998 for a three-year term and was re-appointed for a period of five years, effective on June 15, 2001.

 

[Sapper6]

What do you think about the CF Ombudsman's imminent departure as reported by Scott Taylor?

 

[KevinB]

I'll take D for $1000    ;D

 

[Horse_Soldier]

How about a more relevant poll:

Who gives a flying fuck about this in the first place? >

 

[MikeM]

I like that poll better

 

[Sapper6]

That's it Horse, now we've got the juices flowing!  Obviously, you're not one to sit on the fence. 

S6

 

[Laps]

Ombudsman...  Never had to deal with him so I don't really care. 

Maybe that is because I never had anything to complain about, except: equipment (or lack thereof), late pay raise, lack of funding, lack of flying hours, being away 7 months out of the year...

Best of luck with your future endeavors Mr Marin

 

[a_majoor]

I have mixed feelings about the Ombudsman's office, as I ended up being under investigation from same.

The circumstances were as follows: I instructed a BOTC course in St Jean, and everything went well. I was respected by my troops and peers, took 2nd, 3rd and a disproportionate number of "top third" candidates in my platoon, and got an excellent PER for my trouble.

Two years later, and totally out of the blue, two clowns from said office show up to "investigate" the conduct of the platoon staff due to one of my former candidates having "broken" in RMC. It seems this person had issues which caused him to wash out, and having exhausted the normal avenues of recourse, seemed to be trying to find someone to pin it on (i.e. me).

I wasn't about to have any of this nonsense (and it only became clear after I began asking them some pointed and detailed questions of my own), and my responses to their questions and my commentary thereafter either closed this mess, or at least convinced them I wasn't the one going to take this lying down.

My point? IF there was a problem, then the chain of command had plenty of time to observe and correct on the spot at CFLRS (and they were on us like hot glue, so it wasn't like they had no idea what was happening). They were satisfied with my work, The Ombudsman's office should have been aware of this with their inquiries at CFLRS, but the Ombudsman's office was being used like some ambulance chasing lawyer to find a ground for complaint IMO.

Cheap tricks like this just demean the purpose of the office, and I for one would much rather see the chain of command be shortened and strengthend rather than try to weave a series of parallel "1-800" chains of command...

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

(first post in a while) Frankly, good riddance...

What grated with me was the "equivalent to LGen" talk that came out of his office, the huge salary, and the number of witch-hunts his staff engaged in (a_majoor's war story is a good example).  

IMHO, the office was a good idea at the outset but became a sounding board for the usual collection of complainers and "poor me" shirkers that we see from time to time.    :crybaby:

BTW - Loved Scotty Taylor's idea for a replacement!    :

 

[Michael Dorosh]

(first post in a while) IMHO, the office was a good idea at the outset but became a sounding board for the usual collection of complainers and "poor me" shirkers that we see from time to time.  :crybaby:

But I wonder if it isn't worth catering to the 99 whiners, if it means catching 1 genuine case of a really terrible officer or NCO who is ruining careers, stealing, or other reprehensible acts?  If the Ombudsman is on the ball, then he will see the whiners for what they are.  You're going to have those 99% types with or without the ombudsman; having a seperate entity saying "too bad, so sad" (as long as they do that) is probably a good thing, at least as far as deflecting criticism from the Forces.  I wish I would have had access to an Ombudsman many years ago, for legitimate concerns that I felt were not being addressed by my chain of command, despite redress of grievance letters and even parading before the Adjutant and CO.

 

[KevinB]

I have wondered recently how many of the whiners started off as a legitmate complaint that were ignored for so long that they simply became malcontents?

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

Good points, but take a look at his recent trip here to Kabul as an example...    I wasn't in theatre for it, but he created a s**tstorm simply by listening to "overworked" people complaining.  Good photo/media op though...

I agree that there's always going to be a few people getting shafted by a system as complex as the CF, which is why I thought the original idea was decent.  Some sort of vetting process would be in order, though.  For example, personnel are not supposed to take issues to the Ombudsman until the normal courses for redress have been utilized.  I can cite specific examples (but won't here) where this hasn't been the case and the Ombudsman's office has become involved immediately - acting as an advocate for a member's complaints.

 

[Bartok5]

Teddy,

Exactly!   If the Ombudman's office simply becomes yet another "alternative" avenue for pursuit of "ïndividual beefs", then it's value becomes significantly degraded.   The baseline concept of an Ombudsman is to mediate issues that cannot be adequately resolved to the satisfaction of all concerned parties through normal military processes.   In the case of the CF, those would be individual or collective issues that have not been addressed to the aggrieved's satisfaction through the normal chain of command, the formal grievance system, or the harassment investigation/mediation process. 

Unfortunately, what we have instead of the above is a grand-standing "do gooder" supporter of the "downtrodden ranks", trumpetting every single issue of nebulous substance, while at the same time applying a bureaucratic civilian's perspective to the military environment.   It is a recipe for disaster, not to mention untold wastage of taxpayer's money.  

I am all for a CF Ombudsman as a recourse of last resort for those who truly feel that they have been short-changed AFTER pursuing all available MILITARY means of redress.   Where I have a problem is with a system that sets itself up as a "Parallel alternative" to the existing military mechanisms for redress.   And the latter is precisely what the outgoing Ombudsman did.   He trumpeted himself as being external to the military system, and thereby established himself as a magnet for the failed shite-disturbers who could not obtain the time of day from a rational (and generally fair) system of adjudication.   Unfortunately, when you attract a deluge of whining and baseless crap, the legitimate cases tend to get lost in the overall mix.   In other words, I am convinced that by setting his office up as an "alternate" avenue rather than a "court of last resort", Marin immediately lost all legitimacy.   His staff have simply become a 3-ring circus, deluged by accusations where grievors who knew they wouldn't stand a chance in the face of extant miiltary processes immediately sought the "civilian route".    What is missing is the requirement to "go through these steps first" in order to winnow out the abject flakes and "straw-graspers".   The Ombudsman should be reserved exclusively for those who have not achieved success through the military processes, and believe that a "second look" is warranted.   Instead, we now have a parallel chain for grievances right from the outset.   No good can come of that.

Just my thoughts on the matter.   I've met Andre Marin, and was underwhelmed by his grasp of military matters (to say the least).   In fact, when I first met him a couple of years ago during a mess function featuring numerous other civilian "big wigs", I did not recognize him.   He and I had a rather "colourful" conversation where I distinctly recall (quite unwittingly) voicing a few rather unfavourable opinions about his very office and the civilian DND bureaucracy as a whole.   As best I can remember, we parted company with Mr. Marin in a rather wide-eyed/taken-aback posture.   It was very shortly after the fact that a friend of mine brought to my attention whom I'd been talking to.   I never lost a second of sleep.   At the end of the day, if you don't want to hear the truth (as I see it) then don't ask me.

Bottom line?   I think the CF can benefit from an Ombudsman.   However, that office needs to be a "court of last resort".   Not a parallel grievance chain, nor a "do-gooding" crusader organization.   The latter (which are the present case), simply undermine a very functional chain of command that has already withstood the test of time.    

For what its worth.

 

[Cloud Cover]

Unfortunately, what we have instead of the above is a grand-standing "do gooder" supporter of the "downtrodden ranks", trumpetting every single issue of nebulous substance, while at the same time applying a bureaucratic civilian's perspective to the military environment.   It is a recipe for disaster, not to mention untold wastage of taxpayer's money.  

I am all for a CF Ombudsman as a recourse of last resort for those who truly feel that they have been short-changed AFTER pursuing all available MILITARY means of redress.   Where I have a problem is with a system that sets itself up as a "Parallel alternative" to the existing military mechanisms for redress.   And the latter is precisely what the outgoing Ombudsman did.   He trumpeted himself as being external to the military system, and thereby established himself as a magnet for the failed shite-disturbers who could not obtain the time of day from a rational (and generally fair) system of adjudication.   Unfortunately, when you attract a deluge of whining and baseless crap, the legitimate cases tend to get lost in the overall mix.   In other words, I am convinced that by setting his office up as an "alternate" avenue rather than a "court of last resort", Marin immediately lost all legitimacy.   His staff have simply become a 3-ring circus, deluged by accusations where grievors who knew they wouldn't stand a chance in the face of extant miiltary processes immediately sought the "civilian route".    What is missing is the requirement to "go through these steps first" in order to winnow out the abject flakes and "straw-graspers".   The Ombudsman should be reserved exclusively for those who have not achieved success through the military processes, and believe that a "second look" is warranted.   Instead, we now have a parallel chain for grievances right from the outset.   No good can come of that.

All good points, and hence the need for a self regulating profession governed by statute and uniformly enforced by those with long standing service, and not those from the outside. I have met Mr. Marin as well, and I agree about the look on his face when reaility sinks in, but lets not forget that he never once suggested he was going about his job from the perspective of military experience. I got the impression he didn't know what to expect when he arrived, and I strongly suspect he will leave not fully assured that he knew the consequences of what he was doing all along. This is not enitrely his own fault, since it was my understanding the OMO was frequently  engineered into issues of questionable merit by gripers as well as the CoC.

 

[Sapper6]

Devil59,

Well put, I too was not impressed when Mr Morin came and visited us on Op APOLLO.  I found him woefully out of synch with what we were doing as soldiers on that particular mission and in general.  Although, I believe some of his investigations have produced some good for the soldier, I can't help but think he was more interested in 'looking good' and ensuring his office got the accolades he thought were deserved.  Finally, no one should go to the ombudsman until he/she has shown that the Chain of Command has been given a reasonable chance to resolve the issue.

DevilEcho29