Fat troops on the street....

[Gunner98]

Fatwog Cpl GO!! says, "Those Sgts should have been tossed or forced to remuster a decade ago."  Sure remuster them to the purple trades.  Perhaps that is why there are so many fatsos in the purple trades, because they were drummed out of the Cbt Arms.

Other countries (US, UK, Aus) don't have a "compassionate" Human Rights Act - Canada does.

Solutions - the only way to establish defendable fitness standards is for MOSART to complete the work they began which is to establish Bona Fide operational requirements for each and every trade.  CHRA Tribunals will continue to enforce the "compassionate" rights until this is completed.

TCBH, FatWog Cpl - the Army Fitness Manual was a legitimate attempt to utilize "experts from the world of fitness" to begin to establish Bona Fide, defendable standards for the Army.  I haven't see a similar effort from the CSS, Air Force or Navy in this regard.

 

[Haggis]

This topic (by design or by coincidence) has received some outside attention:

PUBLICATION:  National Post
DATE:  2005.09.01
EDITION:  National
SECTION:  Editorials
PAGE:  A18
SOURCE:  National Post

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

All soldiers must pull their weight

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The primary function of armed forces should be national defence, at home and overseas, not social re-engineering. So it is ridiculous to consider changing Canada's military recruitment standards or redesigning military equipment just so that more women may qualify as soldiers. Where individual women can meet the strength, endurance and speed standards required of male recruits, there is no reason they should not serve. But it is women who must conform to the army, air force and navy's needs, not vice-versa.

The tender for a study on better integrating women into our armed forces, let Monday by the Department of National Defence (DND), contains some troubling foreshadowing. Granted, it is only a call for bids to conduct a study on women's role in our military -- a long, long way off from a formal policy proposal. But some of the wording in the tender hints at DND's mindset and direction. The successful bidder, for instance, will be asked to devise ways to "overcome strength limitations" faced by nearly all female soldiers. It will also be charged with suggesting modifications to military equipment -- making shipboard ladders with shorter ladder-rung spacing is given as an example -- that would make duty easier for female soldiers, sailors and airmen.

Where existing strength and fitness requirements are out of proportion to the tasks they were once set for, they should be changed. Artillery soldiers, for instance, seldom have to run their cannons from one site to the next. But the firing of modern artillery guns can still, to name but one example, require the lifting of heavy shells, again and again, sometimes for hours -- so modern standards cannot be watered down too far just to accommodate more women combatants (nor inadequate male recruits, for that matter).

Shirley Robinson, the former deputy head of women personnel at National Defence headquarters, has insisted times have changed and strength is no longer what it once was in the military. "Why is upper-body strength the overriding factor in this day and age?" Ms. Robinson questioned. "That's not the kind of war we're in now: We're in the kind of war where you're driving along in a Jeep and you get blown up."

It's true: If everything in a military mission goes according to plan, physical strength and endurance may not be as important as they once were. But in war, nothing ever goes according to plan. After a female soldier is thrown from her exploded patrol vehicle, does she have the upper body strength to hoist a wounded comrade over her shoulders and carry him to safety?

The average infantry kit still weighs more than 30 kilograms, and as technology adds GPS transponders, advanced communications gear and protective armour, it could exceed 40 kilos. At some point, female soldiers have to get out of the Jeep and carry it all, just like their male counterparts.

The physical standards for our military must still be based on the worst-case scenario, not the best-case: What skills, mental and physical, are crucial when anything that can go wrong, does? That, not politically correct gender concessions, should be the focus of recruitment efforts.

... and this from the National Post, no less.

 

[WogCpl]

Fatwog Cpl says, "Those Sgts should have been tossed or forced to remuster a decade ago."  





When did i say that?

 

[George Wallace]

Interesting article.  Shirley Robinson.  Doesn't she have a rather 'unusual' 'past' in the CF?

 

[Gunner98]

The National Post - a respectable rag - that is another thread. 

"But the firing of modern artillery guns can still, to name but one example, require the lifting of heavy shells, again and again, sometimes for hours."  All current and former Gunners wipe the drool from your cheeks - "hours" - yeah right.  Modern artillery SP have auto-loaders!

FatWog Cpl - please accept my apologies - it was a quote from GO!!  I will amend original post.

 

[WogCpl]

Thanks, Haggis. That is exactly what i was getting at with enforcement of the rules!

Gunner 98, i am not slamming the AFM, it seems like a good program to follow, progressive and relevent!

I know i am a lowly css trade but last time i looked i was still in the army

Thanks by the way, for the ammendment!

 

[buzgo]

A lot of this all goes back to the destruction of the PERI and PERO trades. From what I've been told ( I know alot of PSP and ex-PERI/O people) the Army basically decided that they would take PT matters into their own hands and come up with their own fitness standards/programmes. Since none of the other services wanted to use the PER trades, they were FRPd out of existance. This led to the creation of PSP and now we have all of the civilian fitness instructors who are very qualified (they must have a univ deg in PT) but don't have much say in things. The loss of the PERI trade has had a direct effect on the level of fitness in the CF...

So maybe the solution is to bring back the PERI and PERO trade. That way we can have MILITARY specialists who can enforce standards. Its obvious that the current system hasn't worked out well. The Army fitness manual is a good start, but if the will to adhere to it isn't there...

Maybe there are some ex-PERI or PERO types around that can correct me if I am wrong or add to what I've said.

 

[WogCpl]

I like your idea GO, but the fact of the matter there is that we would have a much smaller army. How many people can't do one pull up or bench a min of 65kg, but run the mile and a half in like 8 mins, and would therefore fail the coopers!

 

[Edward Campbell]

It is a matter of top level will.

I can assure you that the will to guarantee that senior officers take all their required French language training - during duty hours, and take their tests existed, and, I think, still exists.

It will require the Minister (not just the CDS) to say: "Physical fitness is mandatory; here are the standards, approved by the government; every person in the CF must meet the appropriate standards for their age and job - this is a condition of employment."

Anything less than that will leave us with the unsatisfactory status quo.  Such a minsiterial statement may lead to orders-in-council (cabinet regulations) to exempt DND from provisions of, literally, dozens of Acts and Regulations.  The entire equality industry will go ballistic and will lobby like the very devil to thwart any such effort.

This is an issue which individual soldiers, en masse, need to make their own and they should bombard MPs and the minister with e-mails and letters complaining about fitness levels, tests, time and so on.

Government will not move on this issue unless there is real, measurable pressure.  Some bad PR would help - it would be beneficial, albeit embarrassing, if a journalist (sp?) did an article, with photos about the fatties.  It would be better if it was on CTV.

 

[Haggis]

This led to the creation of PSP and now we have all of the civilian fitness instructors who are very qualified (they must have a univ deg in PT) but don't have much say in things.

I work in the same buidling with the CFPSA and regularly meet them in the gym during my own PT.  CFPSA is headed by an Air Force MGen, who does regular and vigorous PT (isee him quite frequently).  An oft discuissed topic in the gym is standards.

CFPSA does have a substantial "say" in setting fitness standards.  They have the task of developing standards that are viable (in terms of being validated, affordable in terms of time and equipment costs and "testable") relevant to the CF as a whole and achievable by the average CF member.  No easy task given the demographics of the CF in terms of age, gender and trade requirements.

Edward: 

All that being said, CFPSA can develop whatever standards are required and directed by the CDS and the Armed Forces Council.  It still falls upon the CO and the leadership (both military and civilian) to implement and enforce those standards as they exist.  There's the weak link.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Unlike the states I don't think we can affored to tell our soldiers shape up or leave.

What we should do is enforce fitness more.  We need to make a system lead by military personal. All jokes aside,  I doubt 35 year old soldiers are keep on going over to the gym at night and have a 19 year old PSP worker drag them around the gym. Maybe i'm wrong.  Set something up through the military, by the military. Leave civilians out of it.

To be fair, in the last 5 months i've seen a lot soldiers in petawawa who were over weight busting their balls after hours (and in the morning) doing runs and rucksack marches.  I think for a lot of these guys and girls the drive and want is there, they just need some help.

I know i am a lowly css trade but last time i looked i was still in the army

I think we've already covered how important it is to have CS and CSS trades in better physical condition (with more combat training) due to whats been going on in iraq.  Truckers make for a hell of a target.

 

[WogCpl]

I am 34 and have no problem with it, i guess it's all how you veiw training! those guys have been a great resource the last 4 or 5 years for me, lots of info. Unfortunately, i think that you have to threaten peoples jobs to get them of their butts.

Enforce the standard and lead by example. We are willing to enforce hair cuts and dress but not fitness that needs to change.

besides there would be less troops going to phisio, in a fitter army, with knee and back problems that the "army" caused not the 44 pound sh1t locker hanging over their belt!

 

[paracowboy]

besides there would be less troops going to phisio, in a fitter army, with knee and back problems that the "army" caused not the 44 pound sh1t locker hanging over their belt!

precisely. Fit troops have less injuries, fewer health issues, and are capable of performing their duties better/longer. We owe it to the taxpayers of this nation to ensure they are getting everything they pay for.

 

[Haggis]

Enforce the standard and lead by example. We are willing to enforce hair cuts and dress....

Never been to Ottawa, have you??? ;D

 

[Infanteer]

Shirley Robinson, the former deputy head of women personnel at National Defence headquarters, has insisted times have changed and strength is no longer what it once was in the military. "Why is upper-body strength the overriding factor in this day and age?" Ms. Robinson questioned. "That's not the kind of war we're in now: We're in the kind of war where you're driving along in a Jeep and you get blown up."

It's true: If everything in a military mission goes according to plan, physical strength and endurance may not be as important as they once were. But in war, nothing ever goes according to plan. After a female soldier is thrown from her exploded patrol vehicle, does she have the upper body strength to hoist a wounded comrade over her shoulders and carry him to safety?

Well, I'll say right now that Shirley Robinson is smoking crack and needs to stay in her lane....

 

[2 Cdo]

Infanteer, bang f'ing on!

 

[Gunner]

Col Stogran's Physical Training Policy for the Canadian Forces Joint Operations Group


I have long been an advocate of the need for rigorous physical training; in fact, I was once referred to in a national newspaper article as a "training fanatic", a label that I am particularly proud of. I can't say, however, that I am particularly proud of the standards for physical fitness in the Canadian Forces, because in the past twenty years we have slowly eroded our standards to the point where current standards don't require any training in order to achieve.

The CF Express, originally intended as an entry level test to provide service personnel with confirmation that they were healthy enough to embark on an exercise program and, indeed, to provide them with an "Exercise Prescription" to commence physical training. It has now become a standard. The Army has a weight load test that more than a training objective has become a right of passage for anyone deploying on a mission. It is a standard that requires very little if any training to attain and most people are capable of achieving if they can afford to be LOB for a couple of days afterward. Recognizing the problem with physical fitness, the CF has employed all sorts of Subject Matter Experts to try to identify a standard that is job specific and hence justifiable. We have looked at fitness tests such as digging trenches and loading ammo boxes on trucks. I consider this to be a resource intensive waste of time.

The purpose of this memo is to outline the CFJOG policy on physical fitness training.   It has also been suggested that the standard of fitness that we currently maintain has proven itself on operations. That could be; however, I was once told by someone who had served in Bosnia and noted that when he saw a military person in civilian attire who was overweight he found that the majority of the time that person was a member of the Canadian Forces. I have participated in operations in Afghanistan where our coalition partners suffered a significant number of casualties due to the heat and altitudes of the Afghan frontier. We suffered none, because of the standard of physical fitness that the members of the Battle Group maintained out of professional and personal pride. Having said this, I came back from Afghanistan with a new appreciation for the importance of physical fitness, but not for the reason one might think.

On the 17th of April, 2002, Major Schmidt of the US Air Force dropped a 500 pound precision guided bomb on the troops of A Company, 3PPCLI, who were   training at Tarnak Farms in Kandahar, Afganistan. Four soldiers were killed instantly and eight others injured. Of the latter, Sergeant Lorne Ford was the most seriously injured. Having lost an eye in the attack and nearly losing his leg, were it not for the combat trauma first aid administered on the scene and the speedy DUSTOFF to the US Army Medical Facility "CHARLIE MED" Sergeant Ford would have died. After a long night in the operating room, the surgeon who stitched Sergeant Ford back together told me that the only reason he was still alive was because Sergeant Lorne Ford was one of the fittest soldiers he had ever seen on his operating table.

I submit that if we are serious about putting troops in harm's way, we must be serious about doing everything we can, before during and after a deployment to ensure the health and welfare of our personnel. The CF holds up its end of the bargain by offering the best possible health services to its members in garrison and on operations, and every base is provided first class fitness training facilities. I would be prepared to argue that all service personnel should be obligated to maintain a high standard of aerobic and anaerobic fitness to stay in the CF, in return for the health services and employment we are provided, even though running, push-ups, chin-ups and sit-ups may not be job-specific. I say this because, in my view, a service person who maintains a rigorous fitness training regime, aerobic and anaerobic, is more likely to come back from a mission healthier, physically
and mentally, than if that person were not fit in the first place, especially if that person is wounded on operations.

I don't have the authority to set another standard of physical fitness, but I do have the authority to ensure that every member of the JOG is given the opportunity and the encouragement to pursue a rigorous fitness training regime. My attitude and policy towards Physical Training is as follows:

* Anybody who wishes to participate in a sport or athletic endeavour during lunch hour shall be entitled to do so between 1130 hours and 1330 hours daily, barring operational or training imperatives.

* The times and places of physical fitness training outside normal working hours will be determined mutually by the member and the EXPRES evaluator. To the extent practicable, these times and places shall be annotated on form DND 279 -- CF EXPRES and approved by the commanding officer (CO). This physical training shall be considered as fulfilling the military requirement for participation in the CF EXPRES Program even when conducted outside normal working hours. More insight into liability associated with PT is included on this website.

* Standards of aerobic and anaerobic fitness are offered at the end of this page and members of the JOG are encouraged to train towards their Personal Best. Those personnel who achieve 65%, 75% and 85% in their respective category shall be formally recognized for their accomplishment.    

* This Personal Best programme is entirely voluntary, and members should not feel coerced or compelled to participate. However, Commanders who promote this programme and have demonstrated success in encouraging voluntary participation and progress in physical fitness standards will have their leadership acknowledged in their PER.

* While CF EXPRES remains the only official standard in the CF, all units and personnel are encouraged to undertake the Army Fitness Training programme with a view to ensuring that everyone can complete the 13   kilometer Battle Fitness Test without becoming a casualty afterwards.   Frequent weight-load marches are encouraged. Start off with an extremely light rucksack and progressively add weight until the required standard is achieved without injury. Train, don't strain.

* The CF Programme of Aerobic Excellence should be promoted in all units.

* Unit sports days, programmes, ongoing competitions such as squash ladders, and events are strongly encouraged

* Individuals or teams who are prepared to represent the JOG and the CF in elite competitions and sporting events will be given whatever support the JOG can offer

* Finally, any special accomplishments in the area of physical fitness should be widely heralded and reported.

 

[Infanteer]

* This Personal Best programme is entirely voluntary, and members should not feel coerced or compelled to participate. However, Commanders who promote this programme and have demonstrated success in encouraging voluntary participation and progress in physical fitness standards will have their leadership acknowledged in their PER.

There is where the change will start - convincing leaders to do more leading.  Hats off to Colonel Stogran for leading from the front. 

 

[Britney Spears]

It still baffles me why anyone in our line of work even needs their leaders to tell them to get in shape. Why would you WANT to be unfit and in the army at the same time? Fit soldiers are more likeley to survive ob the battlefield than fat, unfit ones, isn't it a pretty simple issue of self preservation? What do these people want? A memo from the CDS explaining this to them?  ???

 

[bossi]

It still baffles me why anyone in our line of work even needs their leaders to tell them to get in shape. Why would you WANT to be unfit and in the army at the same time? ...

A person was just promoted where I work - the buttons on his CADPAT shirt should be registered as Restricted Weapons (or, in the context of this thread ... Prohibited).

So, why did he get promoted (especially when he's never been on an operation ...)?
Simple:  Because somebody higher up was hoodwinked (by the staff).

"Leaders are people who do the right thing. Managers are people who do things right."
- Warren G. Bennis

Here we arrive at a crucial point:  Staff are supposed to understand, anticipate, and execute the intent of the commander ... however ... it's a human failing - kinda like that commercial where the kid is supposed to buy something at the store, but comes home with some shiny thing that "caught his eye" ...

Most people join the military in order to serve - to defend their country, and to defend people who can't defend themselves.  However, somewhere along the way ... a few people wander off, and start placing themselves ahead of other things ... But, I digress ...

The larger issue is that people simply forget why they wear a uniform - they simply lose sight of The Aim.  It happens.

So, how do we remind ourselves on a daily basis ... ?

I adopted General Rick's words as my signature block at work:

"We're not the public service of Canada, we're not just another department.
We are the Canadian Forces, and our job is to be able to kill people."
-- General Rick

However ... somebody pointed out that it was too aggressive ... hmmm ...
(once again, I suggest some people have lost siight of The Aim).

Another example:  I was recently told by a senior officer that he has little patience for negativity (hmmm ...) while another called me a "naysayer" (... hmmm ... so, in other words, you only want me to say "yes" ... ?)

"A 'Yes Man' on a staff is a menace to a commander.
One with courage of his convictions is an asset."
-- MGen Orlando Ward, 1934

So what?
It all boils down to Selection and Maintenance of the Aim:
Are you here to collect shiny things, or are you hear to "walk the walk".

"Waste no time arguing what a good person should be. Be one."
- Marcus Aurelius Antoninus

Every once in a while, I catch myself whining just a little bit too much (I'm human).
Most often, I eventually shut up and get back to work ...
No - it doesn't make it any easier when I see others promoted ahead of me (especially galling when they're less qualified, less experienced, and less competent ...).
However - did I join for promotions ...?
No.
Why do I stay?
Because if I don't, there'll be one less person who remembers The Aim ...

"You don't get ahead by fighting your way to the top.  You get ahead by helping others to the top.  When you help others, they elevate you to successively higher levels of leadership."
- William A. Cohen, Ph.D., MGen (ret), The Stuff Of Heroes