Keeping wounded in CF - merged super-thread

[the 48th regulator]

I have been trying to follow this thread but I don't really understand a lot of the issues at hand...

But one thing that just popped into my head that I think could be one of these "static" positions that a non-deployable soldier/sailor/airman or airwoman could be of a huge benefit to everybody would be as a ULO...

This is my 3rd year as an ROTP entrant. I have had at least 4 ULOs. It is generally a secondary duty, that really burdens people that have enough on their hands. There is a lot of in's and out's to learn, and generally when they start getting it down path we get a new ULO, and they go through the same learning curve. I've been blessed being in a small place where the ULOs generally don't have a ton of students under them, and so far for the most part they've done what they can. However, right now it's the station's chief clerk. We both agree that subsidized programs have more than a few wrinkles to iron out, and he has enough on his plate without babysitting (sometimes that's what it probably feels like) a bunch of people that really have little to no experience in the military, especially the many administrative things.

The best situation I had was a 2Lt who was awaiting medical release, as an "assistant ULO," and it was one of his primary duties. He did an unreal job, and as the PO2 said to the SEM, "I don't know what we're going to do with all these students without him." He went through the ROTP program, and spent maybe 2 years in the position. He made everything easier for everybody.

The solution to the problem was always easy, somebody needed it to be their primary duty, and actually spend at least a few years in the position so they could learn what they're doing before they're shuffled off somewhere else, but I could see why it couldn't be justified. But now, thinking about this, and about wounded soldiers, I think maybe it could be?

I realise there's not enough ULO positions to fill to solve the problem, but I dunno, I'm just throwing it out there. It's somewhat of an option?

And this is coming from somebody that's had a relatively good go with ULOs. There are many, many horror stories, I only have a few to speak of.

Having a brain fart....

What does ULO stand for?

Sorry.

dileas

tess

 

[ballz]

Not a brain fart at all...

University Liasion Officer.

They are responsible for assisting/handling students with their administration, career courses, school courses, finding EWAT (employment while awaiting training) positions between the end of school and the start of courses, the various "personal scenarios" that everybody is in, etc.

EDIT: Not just ROTP students, but UTPNCM, etc, all the subsidized education programs I believe.

 

[the 48th regulator]

Not a brain fart at all...

University Liasion Officer.

They are responsible for assisting/handling students with their administration, career courses, school courses, finding EWAT (employment while awaiting training) positions between the end of school and the start of courses, the various "personal scenarios" that everybody is in, etc.

EDIT: Not just ROTP students, but UTPNCM, etc, all the subsidized education programs I believe.

So, that would be akin to a Base personnel selection officer (BPSO),  correct?

dileas

tess

 

[MJP]

So, that would be akin to a Base personnel selection officer (BPSO),  correct?

No they are two seperate entities.

While on the surface it sounds like a good idea it truly depends on the base that the ULO belongs too.  In bases that don't have large amounts of ROTP/UTP, ULO is usually a secondary duty.  I find on Air Force bases the ULO position is used for their junior HR streamed Log Os to gain experience and it is a "tour/position" that they do before moving on to other things.  Like every other position that we have right now anyone of them could be tapped for some operational purpose.

 

[Edward Campbell]

So, that would be akin to a Base personnel selection officer (BPSO),  correct?

dileas

tess

Didn't used to be: the ULO was a sort of troop/platoon commander for the assorted ROTP etc at Civvy U, and it was, as was said, a secondary duty. Sometimes it was assigned to a grad student - a Capt or Maj doing a MSc or MA at the university, sometimes just to some poor bugger in the garrison who caught the colonel's eye. It was, as I recall - from a great distance, a thankless job.

If my memory serves the old COTC guys were looked after by their local reserve unit but ROTP were not, they relied upon the poor bloody ULO. Now that's all 30 or 40 years ago so ...

 

[ballz]

Didn't used to be: the ULO was a sort of troop/platoon commander for the assorted ROTP etc at Civvy U, and it was, as was said, a secondary duty. Sometimes it was assigned to a grad student - a Capt or Maj doing a MSc or MA at the university, sometimes just to some poor bugger in the garrison who caught the colonel's eye. It was, as I recall - from a great distance, a thankless job.

If my memory serves the old COTC guys were looked after by their local reserve unit but ROTP were not, they relied upon the poor bloody ULO. Now that's all 30 or 40 years ago so ...

I still think it may be a job that no one wants, and probably pretty thankless.... but like clerks that do a good job, I always try and let mine know that I appreciate it when they take care of something for me.

I don't think it would be so crappy for someone who had it as a primary duty. I know the 2Lt I talked about enjoyed it and was always motivated to help us out. It's probably crappy when you've got better things to be doing and don't have the time to deal with what seem like minor issues since you've got a heap of other stuff on your plate, but to the students it's not minor.

One example I can think of is a student who needed to change locations (and university) because of a sick family member. An admin nightmare, and she really had no idea how to start / what to do, and no one really had any answers for her. Never been to BMOQ at that point, no military training, no idea about memos, etc. I think that would be rewarding to be able help someone in that situation... I helped her and it was for me.

 

[McG]

But one thing that just popped into my head that I think could be one of these "static" positions that a non-deployable soldier/sailor/airman or airwoman could be of a huge benefit to everybody would be as a ULO...

It becomes a question of finding a CO that wants to commit one established position to bring in an unfit individual to focus fully on a secondary duty.

 

[Pusser]

I guess things have changed.  When I was in ROTP, my ULO was one of two, who were responsible for all subsidized education candidates in Ontario.  They were based out of RMC and it was their primary duty.

 

[armyvern]

I have worked with Supply Techs and have a few of them as friends. I have seen the difference between the Sup Techs working in Shilo Manitoba, CFB Esquamalt, CFB Cold Lake and CFB Wainwright. I have also seen the difference of the Base Supply compared to a Front Line Unit. Ie CFB COld Lakes Base Clothing Stores, material management and the Sqn Stores. Along with CFB Shilo Base Supply and Regimental and Battery QM/ Supply.
I also had the short pleasure of working in the Company QM during the Forest fires in BC. Needless to say it is a thankless job that both My Warrent and myself did not fully appreciate till we were doing the job. Up at 0430 to get ready for issue of the day, nap just before noon, deliver food and supplys for noon, back get ready for return of troops. supper, clean and organize, nap then around midnight be up to get supplys from Brigade Supply, organize done around 02-0300hrs, Sleep back up at 0430 again.

You can have your job, but to say there is not room in your job or other jobs with in the CF s to employ injured members in a Base situation is not thinking like one should. I hope that one day you never get get hurt where the Miltary will terminate your employment.

I did say that there are numerous jobs on bases across Canada that could be staffed, Civilian or Miltary. That would not effect the operational status of the Military. Nor put a hinderance on your Non Operational jobs to get away from the Deployments.

But no matter what I say or try to explain it is falling on deaf ears, so be it that is why this is a discussion board.

Cheers all

Not a single person in this thread said ANY such thing. What was said, was that the employment needed to be TEMPORARY within those "static" (they do NOT exist) positions. Not only do we employ our injured Afghan vets in 'desk' positions, but we also MUST employ our TCat personnel into those same few select desk spots as those pers will be back into the Op dep cycle. This has already been discussed in this very thread.

Additionally, when you speak of 2nd line Sup, you are forgetting something else that can NOT be overlooked. I'll take Gagetown as an example because that particular spot houses the largest 2nd line Sup Coy in the nation. Of those 175 personnel, there exists a grand total of 9, (that's NINE) strictly desk jobs into which injured members and Sup Coy members on TCat can be accomodated. OH, AND when any 1st line Unit there needs to move one of their own injured/TCatted Sup techs out of the 1st line spots because they are pregnant or have a broken ankle and thus non-field-employable ... we lose a healthy bod out of Sup Coy (2nd line) to replace that 1st line pers who will then move into one of those 9 desk jobs.

You see, you talk about the difference with 2nd line not deploying en masse, but you neglect the fact that 2nd line Sup etc are housing all injured, accomodated, and TCatted Sup techs for the entire base --- even as we replace those TCatted (even for a temp period) with one of our healthy bods so that the 1st line work/exs/field gets done --- all the while still filling all those overseas slots. Every roto, of every tour that the CF is participating in.

Plus, someone injured in Afghan is also a pri hire for employment in the public service --- often within DND itself in a PS slot. There's already some working in Gagetown Sup who were in this position. Those jobs are non-deployable ... that's why public servants hold them instead of CF members ... and our injured get first kick at the can on those already and officially.

I don't know what else you want us to do, but at the end of the day, the CF MUST retain it's deployability; that IS why we exist after all.

 

[armyvern]

What an absolutely gut-wrenching topic. The poor bastards who get injured for Canada - bless them, thank them.  Its impossible to not be emotionally charged about this.

...

NB: when I joined in 1989, the only people with huge racks of medals were Siggies and Sup Techs, as they had deployed on every freaking UN mission imaginable. A select few Inf/Armd/Arty guys had the Cyprus medal, and an infinitesimal number of Offrs/CWO's had UN gongs from observer medals. The battalions simply didn't deploy anywhere buy Cyprus. If we don't get another mission after Kabul ends, we'll revert to that situation, and talk of one's worth being determined by the number of medals on his chest will dry up. (but since that's not yet the case, please note that I have 6 !)

If I could give you a + 1 000 000 for this post -- I would. Unfortunately, Mike is quite stingy with levels.

+300.

 

[Pusser]

Additionally, when you speak of 2nd line Sup, you are forgetting something else that can NOT be overlooked. I'll take Gagetown as an example because that particular spot houses the largest 2nd line Sup Coy in the nation. Of those 175 personnel, there exists a grand total of 9, (that's NINE) strictly desk jobs into which injured members and Sup Coy members on TCat can be accomodated. OH, AND when any 1st line Unit there needs to move one of their own injured/TCatted Sup techs out of the 1st line spots because they are pregnant or have a broken ankle and thus non-field-employable ... we lose a healthy bod out of Sup Coy (2nd line) to replace that 1st line pers who will then move into one of those 9 desk jobs.

Similar observations can be made for Base Supply, Base Foods and the BOR in Halifax and Esquimalt.  These organizations are essentially treated as the manning pools for all the log posititions in the ships.  They are often filled with personnel who are unfit sea.

On another note, I was in a directorate at NDHQ awhile back where not a single military member was available for a critical manning requirement.  Every person was either deployed, just back from deployment or already selected and in preparation for deployment.

 

[GAP]

Soldier launches court challenge of military policy
By Paul Turenne, QMI Agency
Article Link

WINNIPEG — A local soldier who lost both legs in Afghanistan has launched a constitutional court challenge against a Canadian military policy that forces permanently injured members out of service because they aren't combat-ready.

Cpl. Ryan Elrick lost both legs after his armoured vehicle hit a roadside bomb in Afghanistan in June 2006.

Despite his injury, Elrick wanted to remain in the military, and was therefore re-trained to become an intelligence officer.

He got top secret security clearance, performed duties normally reserved for people two ranks above him, and was praised in his formal evaluations for his "outstanding leadership," "excellent military bearing," and "adherence to high Canadian Forces ethics and values."

Then, in July 2010, a review of Elrick's file deemed him unfit for service because the loss of his legs put him in violation of a section of the National Defence Act that states all Canadian Forces personnel must be eligible for all duties at all times.

A Canadian military policy, known as universality of service, confirms in writing this includes combat duties, therefore making Elrick and other injured soldiers ineligible to serve in any capacity.


Elrick was officially discharged from the military in March.

Elrick filed a lawsuit with Manitoba's Court of Queen's Bench earlier this month arguing the policy is discriminatory and violates the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
More on link

 

[fake penguin]

I seriously feel bad for the guy. If the guy is doing an outstanding job as an intelligence officer ,then why not let him stay.Maybe there is something i do not understand. I hope it works out for him.

 

[Nauticus]

It sounds like he's served the country proud. We owe him our thanks.

But I don't think it's discriminatory that all members of a military force, who are soldiers first, be required to be combat ready.

Looks like we'll soon find out...

 

[ModlrMike]

It sounds like he's served the country proud. We owe him our thanks.

But I don't think it's discriminatory that all members of a military force, who are soldiers first, be required to be combat ready.

Looks like we'll soon find out...

I agree.

This issue has been tested many times in the past and found to be a reasonable limitation. While I'm sympathetic to his case, there are "Bone Fide Operational Requirements" (BFORs) that have to be satisfied by everyone in uniform.

 

[dapaterson]

I agree.

This issue has been tested many times in the past and found to be a reasonable limitation. While I'm sympathetic to his case, there are "Bone Fide Operational Requirements" (BFORs) that have to be satisfied by everyone in uniform.

...except we've already deployed amputees back to KAF.  So we've set the precedent that we can make "reasonable accomodations"  even on deployed operations for amputees to serve in the CF.

This could be a very interesting case, that I suspect will be appealed regardless of which side wins - all the way to the Supreme Court by 2015, I suspect.

 

[Strike]

...except we've already deployed amputees back to KAF.  So we've set the precedent that we can make "reasonable accomodations"  even on deployed
operations for amputees to serve in the CF.

This could be a very interesting case, that I suspect will be appealed regardless of which side wins - all the way to the Supreme Court by 2015, I suspect.

Those amputees have only lost one leg and were able to complete all the required fitness tests to get there.
One is an amputee below the knee and the other above.
Now, if this gentleman can pass all the tests, then I don't see how they could refuse him further service.

 

[dapaterson]

Those amputees have only lost one leg and were able to complete all the required fitness tests to get there.
One is an amputee below the knee and the other above.
Now, if this gentleman can pass all the tests, then I don't see how they could refuse him further service.

Ah, but in the past the CF refused to enrol single amputees.  We've now proven that we can make reasonable accommodations for single amputees, despite our previous claims.  So there is nothing to prevent their service.

Anything we say in this case will be viewed through that prism - past claims that have been disproven.


Medically, an amputee requires regular treatment, access to medical care, and access to prosthetics - regardless of whether they are lacking one or two limbs.  I suspect that the medical system classifies them the same.  So if they share the same medical categories, why can one continue to serve, while the other cannot?

 

[medicineman]

The medical category is one thing - the MEL's that accompany that category are what do the person in.  If there are limitations that violate the Universality of Service, they're on the way out.  Lots of trades have med cats that basically can be read as "Pulse and respiration required only", but they still have to be able to do a PT test and a number of other things.  If he can prove that he can, then he should be accomodated and his G/O factors should be adjusted...but if he can't, then he'll have to take his talents elsewhere.  Not personal, just business.

MM

Edited for grammar

 

[Armymedic]

I believe that based upon the spirit of the Charter and Constitution, he has a good case.

Personally, I feel our policy is fair, that you must be able to complete all universality of service be remain in the CF.

I believe it will go to the Supreme Court. It will be interesting to watch.