New Dress Regs 🤣

[Kilted]

Nope. We're too immature and stuffy. We'll need a complete cultural population culture shift. Husbands and wives are not going to be happy with spouses sharing coed showers, shitters and saunas on deployment or the hangar lines.

Fortunately spouses do not dictate military policy, as much as some wives think that they wear their husbands rank. I'm pretty sure that women would still be in the position they were in during WWII if military wives had anything to o with it. While I can't see co-ed anything coming around in the near future, there probably would be some advantages to it.

If anything we have probably moved further away from it. We definitely saw less mixed generdered sleeping arrangements after the start of Op Honour. To be honest, it some cases I think that they actually hurt unit cohesion and the inclusion of women.

 

[Eaglelord17]

Armies throughout history have had long hair, beards, and even mandatory moustaches. These things change with the fashion of the times, and that’s all it really is, just fashion. If fashion was important to warfighting, there’d probably be a sponsored masters programme at the London College of Fashion for us all to compete for.

Those things went the way of the dodo in the trenches of Flanders nothing to do with fashion.

Short hair kept lice and other hygenic issues from developing in the trenches. It also prevents hair from being caught in rotating equipment (a potential issue for maintainers). Being clean shaven (or only having a moustache) was due to the recently invented need to wear gas masks as they were fighting in chemical warfare. This is the origin of those regulations and what actually spurred the fashion post-war with so many returning soldiers being already used to shaving they just kept going with it.

We are slacking up on it again but we also haven’t been in a peer to peer war since Korea. If we were the regs would likely be going the other way, I know I wouldn’t be going around Ukraine without some CBRN equipment.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Fortunately spouses do not dictate military policy, as much as some wives think that they wear their husbands rank. I'm pretty sure that women would still be in the position they were in during WWII if military wives had anything to o with it. While I can't see co-ed anything coming around in the near future, there probably would be some advantages to it.

If anything we have probably moved further away from it. We definitely saw less mixed generdered sleeping arrangements after the start of Op Honour. To be honest, it some cases I think that they actually hurt unit cohesion and the inclusion of women.

Of course spouses don't. However they do vote. And there is no doubt, many service people, would leave the CAF, before leaving their spouse. Feel free to prove your hypothesis, if you wish. It's not necessary though.
Did the new mandatory training not become the standard, replacing Op Honour which was instituted by a deadbeat dad who was found guilty of obstruction? If it doesn't, it should. Every policy he has his name on, should be reviewed, brought up to date, renamed and signed by the new authority. Personally, I think anything with his name be searched for Somalia Inquiry style and box it up for that warehouse at the end of Raiders of the Lost Ark.

Meh. Getting carried away. Blood pressure still good.

 

[Halifax Tar]

As long as someone doesn't have to wear an SCBA, no problem. That basically rules out the entire sea going crew though, and anyone on a normal alongside duty watch, so really not practical. This one will be covered under the 'unless operational requirements require being clean shaven'.

Basic safety issue that we've done actually testing to prove with our specific SCBA. Clean shaven, people are able to do 20 minutes+ no problem (the firefighters can actually get 45 minutes out of it, but takes a lot of specific practice controlling breathing at high exertion).

With a day old stubble, dropped down to half that. Very quickly was below 5 minutes (ie essentially useless). Also, blows the seal, and allows stuff in. Positive pressure of the mask doesn't mean nothing gets in (and hot toxic smoke is also at a positive pressure), which we also demonstrated by actual testing.

For ref, we know people in real fires will get 10 minutes or sometimes less now even clean shaven, so we can't afford the drop, and no one wants to breath in hot toxic gas (even at small concentrations). Aside from carbon monoxide, most smoke is a giant toxic soup with things like hyrdogen cyanide, all kinds of acid gases etc involved.

CAF policy for SCBA is clean shaven, and that's to meet Canadian OSHA laws. RCN doesn't have authority to override that. C4 gas mask has similar requirements (for similar reasons) so it will be an operational requirement. Hopefully the RCN shows some institutional leadership and sends an accompanying message to reinforce that, as most people on ships have no idea what the relevant policies are.

Some ongoing discussions on religious accomodations to grow beards, but potentially means that person would not be able to fill most duty watch positions (which would be popular), and very few at sea positions. And in case anyone is curious, Sikh FFs etc generally just shave, and have a religious exemption, because no one wants their folks to die unnecessarily.

(And no, don't care that beards were allowed with the old Chemox, or that other navies allow it. We can always lead on basic safety.)

Listen, take all your knowledge and schooling and sciency big words and get them out of the way of my unreasonably deep emotional attachment to my beard.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

Of course spouses don't. However they do vote. And there is no doubt, many service people, would leave the CAF, before leaving their spouse. Feel free to prove your hypothesis, if you wish. It's not necessary though.
Did the new mandatory training not become the standard, replacing Op Honour which was instituted by a deadbeat dad who was found guilty of obstruction? If it doesn't, it should. Every policy he has his name on, should be reviewed, brought up to date, renamed and signed by the new authority. Personally, I think anything with his name be searched for Somalia Inquiry style and box it up for that warehouse at the end of Raiders of the Lost Ark.

Meh. Getting carried away. Blood pressure still good.

This comment wins the internet today. The entire thing is so ridiculous it's almost comical

 

[Navy_Pete]

@Halifax Tar You'd just be surprised how often this comes up, and how many different people try and run around it. I like my beard too, but it's pretty hard to argue with the test results, so I just shave when I might have to mask up.

Was recently inferred that I was racist, anti-religious or generally intolerant (was a bit unclear who they thought I was discriminating against) for being opposed to religious accomodations/medical chits for beards with SCBA. I don't care if they get either or, just don't want anyone to get hurt, and we had a number of near misses already, so you can't plan on letting someone where a beard with an SCBA and go do firefighting.

The RCN: We want to make evidence based decisions!

Also the RCN : We don't agree with your evidence, and....uh tradition!

In this case it's not even in their swimlane to make the call (which is good) but always fun telling a GOFO it's not in their authority to do something.

 

[Halifax Tar]

@Halifax Tar You'd just be surprised how often this comes up, and how many different people try and run around it. I like my beard too, but it's pretty hard to argue with the test results, so I just shave when I might have to mask up.

Was recently inferred that I was racist, anti-religious or generally intolerant (was a bit unclear who they thought I was discriminating against) for being opposed to religious accomodations/medical chits for beards with SCBA. I don't care if they get either or, just don't want anyone to get hurt, and we had a number of near misses already, so you can't plan on letting someone where a beard with an SCBA and go do firefighting.

The RCN: We want to make evidence based decisions!

Also the RCN : We don't agree with your evidence, and....uh tradition!

In this case it's not even in their swimlane to make the call (which is good) but always fun telling a GOFO it's not in their authority to do something.

I'm not surprised how much this comes up at all. It's been a bone of contention since it was taken away from us.

On a more serious note how do Navies like the RN get around it ?

 

[Navy_Pete]

I'm not surprised how much this comes up at all. It's been a bone of contention since it was taken away from us.

On a more serious note how do Navies like the RN get around it ?

No one has a workaround; if other navies are fire fighting with beards they are 'accepting the risk' (which is easy to do when you aren't the one on the frontline and it's theoretical). There just isn't a good way to get a seal unless it's in direct contact with skin.

We know there is a significant impact on the effectiveness of the SCBA, to the point where it renders people useless for any firefighting activities. We also know that stuff will get into the mask when they don't have the seal, and if there isn't short term health impacts, all of that has long term impacts. And if someone in bunker gear goes down in a fire, extraction and rescue places everyone else at risk as well, so it's not even just the individual in danger.

I don't think it really matters what other navies do; we know it's an unnecessary risk that could get sailors killed, so why mess around? We already are rolling the dice with the reduced crews and poor material states.

We have several incidents a month, and a major fire every few years (which will increase as the fleet ages). We also have far smaller crews then we used to, so we really can't afford to have a large number of people unable to respond to fires (or hazmat spills). Each major fire we've had includes numerous people almost running out of air before getting out of the smoke filled zones, so pretty easy to see someone run out of air completely and becoming a casualty if we start allowing facial hair with SCBA.

And generally the people that won't be donning SCBA are in leadership positions, so IMHO, it would be BS for them to get beard waivers. Similarly, if someone gets some kind of religious accommodation for beards that means they can't do basic duty watch functions, and that increases everyone else's rotation, can't see how that will not result in some serious issues.

Honestly glad this one falls under ADM(IE) as the OPI for the CAF Regulatory Protection Program (RPP). Otherwise the RCN would do something stupid and likely kill people.

 

[Halifax Tar]

No one has a workaround; if other navies are fire fighting with beards they are 'accepting the risk' (which is easy to do when you aren't the one on the frontline and it's theoretical). There just isn't a good way to get a seal unless it's in direct contact with skin.

We know there is a significant impact on the effectiveness of the SCBA, to the point where it renders people useless for any firefighting activities. We also know that stuff will get into the mask when they don't have the seal, and if there isn't short term health impacts, all of that has long term impacts. And if someone in bunker gear goes down in a fire, extraction and rescue places everyone else at risk as well, so it's not even just the individual in danger.

I don't think it really matters what other navies do; we know it's an unnecessary risk that could get sailors killed, so why mess around? We already are rolling the dice with the reduced crews and poor material states.

We have several incidents a month, and a major fire every few years (which will increase as the fleet ages). We also have far smaller crews then we used to, so we really can't afford to have a large number of people unable to respond to fires (or hazmat spills). Each major fire we've had includes numerous people almost running out of air before getting out of the smoke filled zones, so pretty easy to see someone run out of air completely and becoming a casualty if we start allowing facial hair with SCBA.

And generally the people that won't be donning SCBA are in leadership positions, so IMHO, it would be BS for them to get beard waivers. Similarly, if someone gets some kind of religious accommodation for beards that means they can't do basic duty watch functions, and that increases everyone else's rotation, can't see how that will not result in some serious issues.

Honestly glad this one falls under ADM(IE) as the OPI for the CAF Regulatory Protection Program (RPP). Otherwise the RCN would do something stupid and likely kill people.

I'm not debating that the safety of the crew needs to be put first. But if the RN had a work around it might be worth investigating.

If it's just an assumption of risk then I'm not sure we need to travel down that route. But we sure seem ok with command assuming all kinds risks.

I remember near the the end of CHEMOX we use to have to carry a razor in our war bags if we had a beard.

You're point about religious exemptions WRT duty watches is interesting. I think we are seeing an up tick in utilization of that loop hole. Agreed, if you can't wear SCBA you shouldnt be on ships and if you can't be posted to a ship one should have to find a new place to work away from HFX or ESQ.

 

[daftandbarmy]

No one has a workaround; if other navies are fire fighting with beards they are 'accepting the risk' (which is easy to do when you aren't the one on the frontline and it's theoretical). There just isn't a good way to get a seal unless it's in direct contact with skin.

Gas masks are the same. As I recall we ruthlessly enforced shaving, even in the arctic, partially for that reason.

Regardless, it's nice to see that we're willing to sacrifice for our fashion statements these days

 

[Halifax Tar]

Gas masks are the same. As I recall we ruthlessly enforced shaving, even in the arctic, partially for that reason.

Regardless, it's nice to see that we're willing to sacrifice for our fashion statements these days

I've done many a gas hut with my beard and never had an issue. Remember our gas masks were designed during the heady times of pioneer beards.

 

[Underway]

Those things went the way of the dodo in the trenches of Flanders nothing to do with fashion.

Short hair kept lice and other hygenic issues from developing in the trenches. It also prevents hair from being caught in rotating equipment (a potential issue for maintainers). Being clean shaven (or only having a moustache) was due to the recently invented need to wear gas masks as they were fighting in chemical warfare. This is the origin of those regulations and what actually spurred the fashion post-war with so many returning soldiers being already used to shaving they just kept going with it.

We are slacking up on it again but we also haven’t been in a peer to peer war since Korea. If we were the regs would likely be going the other way, I know I wouldn’t be going around Ukraine without some CBRN equipment.

This is a tempest in a teapot. When it's operationally a safety or hygiene issue then the lower leadership is within their rights to amend the dress regulations for those reasons.

For example that beards are still not allowed on the ship. This policy is due to safety concerns regarding being able to properly wear fire fighting equipment. One could easily implement short hair if you deal with rotating equipment all the time if the simple solution of tying your hair back properly is too hard for people.

Operational dress and base dress are always different. If you're on base friggin wear what you want (within the Dress Policy of course). Operationally if there is a good reason you wear what you are told to.

 

[Navy_Pete]

@Lumber My point was it's a known safety issue, and that the lower leadership has already demonstrated that they don't have the necessary understanding of the RPP (units can't maintain the position, and most people have no idea it exists). This is one item lost by the removal of 651 FFs from the fleets, and the expertise not carrying over to Martechs when we got rid of HTs.

In this case, CRCN should demonstate some institutional leadership and provide clear guidance to the fleet so that it doesn't fall down to lower leadership to figure it out on their own, but not holding my breath.

 

[Underway]

I've done many a gas hut with my beard and never had an issue. Remember our gas masks were designed during the heady times of pioneer beards.

Yes because the gas hut is full of irritant dust particles not an actual gas. Chlorine/mustard gas would be sucked right past your beard hairs and into your lungs. As would viral agents.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

Yes because the gas hut is full of irritant dust particles not an actual gas. Chlorine/mustard gas would be sucked right past your beard hairs and into your lungs. As would viral agents.

I think we should switch to CS Grenades. Nothing encourages the digging of shell scrapes, or in this case, the shaving of beards, like effective incoming fire

 

[Underway]

I think we should switch to CS Grenades. Nothing encourages the digging of shell scrapes, or in this case, the shaving of beards, like effective incoming fire

Mmm, digging a shell scrape while puking due to CS. Sounds like the army!

@Lumber My point was it's a known safety issue, and that the lower leadership has already demonstrated that they don't have the necessary understanding of the RPP (units can't maintain the position, and most people have no idea it exists). This is one item lost by the removal of 651 FFs from the fleets, and the expertise not carrying over to Martechs when we got rid of HTs.

In this case, CRCN should demonstate some institutional leadership and provide clear guidance to the fleet so that it doesn't fall down to lower leadership to figure it out on their own, but not holding my breath.

Last town hall I was at an LS asked about beards at sea and where the policy comes from. The CRCN said as long as he is in that position that's the policy because he wasn't willing to accept that risk. Now, this may be a case of not pointing fingers (good leadership, I hate leadership by default) or it might be the CRCN has made it his policy based on other organization regs. Either way, I think everyone can agree the discussion ended there. Roger out sir, I'll grab my razor.

 

[Eaglelord17]

This is a tempest in a teapot. When it's operationally a safety or hygiene issue then the lower leadership is within their rights to amend the dress regulations for those reasons.

For example that beards are still not allowed on the ship. This policy is due to safety concerns regarding being able to properly wear fire fighting equipment. One could easily implement short hair if you deal with rotating equipment all the time if the simple solution of tying your hair back properly is too hard for people.

Operational dress and base dress are always different. If you're on base friggin wear what you want (within the Dress Policy of course). Operationally if there is a good reason you wear what you are told to.

The argument train as you fight could come into play here. As the Russians are showing, poor training=dead troops. If your always practicing the best standards that's one less thing you have to worry about when the bullets start flying.

Personally I don't really care what the regulations are as long as they are the same for everyone. That means no religious exemptions, racial exemptions, sex based exemptions, etc.. If one troop is allowed a turban every troop should be allowed a turban. If one troop is allowed a ponytail every troop should be. If Females are allowed earrings everyone should be. Etc. The fact there hasn't been a charter challenge on sexism, racism, or discrimination based off religion to our dress regs at this point is surprising.

 

[Underway]

The argument train as you fight could come into play here. As the Russians are showing, poor training=dead troops. If your always practicing the best standards that's one less thing you have to worry about when the bullets start flying.

Personally I don't really care what the regulations are as long as they are the same for everyone. That means no religious exemptions, racial exemptions, sex based exemptions, etc.. If one troop is allowed a turban every troop should be allowed a turban. If one troop is allowed a ponytail every troop should be. If Females are allowed earrings everyone should be. Etc. The fact there hasn't been a charter challenge on sexism, racism, or discrimination based off religion to our dress regs at this point is surprising.

I'm not seeing the disconnect you are.

I'm posted to a ship. It's an operational environment. I shave. I'm posted to a field unit and go into the field I'll follow whatever operational safety/hygiene rules that exist. Training how you fight is related to equipment rather than whether I have purple hair and ear spacers. "Best standards" relate to TTP, doctrine, and equipment. If the purple hair is causing a problem then training will demonstrate why and give me an opportunity to mitigate that problem. So next time I'll make it CADPAT colored and tuck most of it under my helmet.

 

[Kilted]

I'm not seeing the disconnect you are.

I'm posted to a ship. It's an operational environment. I shave. I'm posted to a field unit and go into the field I'll follow whatever operational safety/hygiene rules that exist. Training how you fight is related to equipment rather than whether I have purple hair and ear spacers. "Best standards" relate to TTP, doctrine, and equipment. If the purple hair is causing a problem then training will demonstrate why and give me an opportunity to mitigate that problem. So next time I'll make it CADPAT colored and tuck most of it under my helmet.

I'm waiting for people to start dyeing designs and pictures into it. I wonder how long it will be until the traditional items start to show up?

 

[OldSolduer]

Yes because the gas hut is full of irritant dust particles not an actual gas. Chlorine/mustard gas would be sucked right past your beard hairs and into your lungs. As would viral agents.

Sarin and other lethal agents as well. The use of CS is to ensure your drills are correct and give you confidence in yourself and the equipment.

In 1986 we put an orthodox Sikh through basic. We could not get his respirator to seal correctly.

Beards are ok in garrison but if there is a CBRN threat….