New Dress Regs 🤣

[Pieman]

Bad cliques are different of course and I don’t think they will suddenly become a problem based on personal grooming relaxations

Hopefully not.

 

[OldSolduer]

Sure they would; it’s their troop, and they way you describe it the red streak would be rather easy to see.

Small cliques have been happening forever and aren’t necessarily a bad thing. I am far more loyal to my crew than I am the Comd RCAF or some other senior RCAF mbr. Why wouldn’t I be? They are the ones who are going to pull my fat ass out of the aircraft if we ditch and are sinking. Comd RCAF will be on the news reading a script approved by a PAO or PMO staffer.

Bad cliques are different of course and I don’t think they will suddenly become a problem based on personal grooming relaxations.

As far as recorded history says the soldier fights for who is beside him/her and not for "King and Country".

 

[Brad Sallows]

I suppose the markers (eg. grooming standards) follow the establishment of a bad clique, not vice versa.

The RSM and the CSMs see its forming with possible negative consequences.

Back to the ideas raised in this US service paper. If the institution (leaders) doesn't stay on top of asserting its values, soldiers may assert their own.

 

[mariomike]

Looks like the Sun is not on board with the new look.

MSN

www.msn.com

it will inevitably leave the Canadian public, and any aspiring recruit, with the impression there is something shameful with wearing the traditional Canadian military uniform.

 

[kev994]

Looks like the Sun is not on board with the new look.

MSN

www.msn.com

I bet if the project was canceled today the Sun would be outraged about that too.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

Looks like the Sun is not on board with the new look.

MSN

www.msn.com

This government could say the Earth was round and The Sun would post a counter opinion.

They're very much clear where they fall within media bias.

 

[OldSolduer]

This government could say the Earth was round and The Sun would post a counter opinion.

They're very much clear where they fall within media bias.

Yes it does align with a lot of peoples views. Better than the fawning some media publish.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

Yes it does align with a lot of peoples views. Better than the fawning some media publish.

Not arguing that. Balanced media is a hallmark of democratic society.

I was merely pointing out that "the Sun not liking this new policy" is not as earth shattering and people think; it would be a akin to finding out the Pope was a Catholic.

 

[btrudy]

Balanced media is a hallmark of democratic society.

I mean, yes, but you achieve that by having media sources with low levels of bias, not by having extremely biased sources on "both sides" of any issue.

The Sun does not contribute towards a balanced media ecology. They're doing their damnedest to actively unbalance it..

 

[Weinie]

I mean, yes, but you achieve that by having media sources with low levels of bias, not by having extremely biased sources on "both sides" of any issue.

The Sun does not contribute towards a balanced media ecology. They're doing their damnedest to actively unbalance it..

One could say the same about the Star. You need to seek out multiple reporting/opinions to get a fuller picture.

 

[Quirky]

Media is a cancer who’s sole purpose is to sell advertising.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

I mean, yes, but you achieve that by having media sources with low levels of bias, not by having extremely biased sources on "both sides" of any issue.

The CBC does not contribute towards a balanced media ecology. They're doing their damnedest to actively unbalance it..

Also true?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

 

[markppcli]

Just run of the mill brain washing.

Can you imagine a civilian employee losing 2 and a half weekends seeing their family because their hair slightly touched their ears? And the option to argue meant you become a pariah with a bullseye painted on your back. Finish it off with a looming threat of getting posted and have to uproot your family.

Sorry out of curiosity where do you work so I can add it to places to never be posted to ever ?

 

[Fishbone Jones]

This government could say the Earth was round and The Sun would post a counter opinion.

They're very much clear where they fall within media bias.

HuffPost, CBC, McLeans, Red Star, G&M....etc, likewise.

I would rather someone question the government motives than just regurgitate the PMO talk points.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

HuffPost, CBC, McLeans, Red Star, G&M....etc, likewise.

Oh don't get me wrong, I know media is biased across the spectrum. This is why I teach my kids to have more than 2 sources when forming an opinion on something.

 

[Furniture]

Oh don't get me wrong, I know media is biased across the spectrum. This is why I teach my kids to have more than 2 sources when forming an opinion on something.

Indeed, if you agree with everything you read in the news, you're not reading enough variety of news sources.

 

[TacticalTea]

Oh don't get me wrong, I know media is biased across the spectrum. This is why I teach my kids to have more than 2 sources when forming an opinion on something.

There's a saying in Quebec... If you want to get the news, you read the Journal de Montréal, and if you want a second opinion, you read the Journal de Québec.

The joke being, of course, that they're owned by the same parent company. But hey! That's 2 sources!

 

[TCM621]

I'm wondering if troops will start creating their own dress and deportment looks within the regiments. The new regulations seem to allow a great deal of variations which allows for creating cliques. For example, you are now in 12 Troop. We wear our hair like so, our beards are trimmed like so, we have a red streak in our hair on the right side. etc. etc. You dress different then you are not a team player. Anyone seeing that kind of thing happen? I suspect this may happen as a way of creating uniformity at a smaller level which might contribute to creating a more effective sense of belonging/loyalty to a troop. The older regulations would not allow for that kind of individalization within the ranks. If it becomes true then there are positive and negative attributes to creating cliques. The negative part being cliques possibly creating hazing ritutals as they create their own group identities. Oh boy, anyone else see how this could spin out of control?

I brought that up in a town hall recently. Every base and unit have always a slightly different standard despite the dress regs being pretty black and white (more so 20 years ago). The toques and gloves thing is a prime example, it hasn't been in the dress regs for well over a decade yet every year someone decides to make a thing of it. I also know people who have been required to wear a uniform walking in their whole career while I have almost never been required.

Now the only standard is to QUOTE look professional UNQUOTE and it sure as hell won't be Cpl Bloggins who gets to decide what is professional. When I brought it up the answer was along the lines of we all know what professional looks like but this thread, the ones on Reddit and discussions I have had at work tell me there is a huge difference in what people think is professional. The dress manual was like the drill manual, it was a simple set of instructions to ensure everyone did things the same. When I joined I could read exactly how to get my hair cut, roll my sleeves, blouse my boots and wear to mount my rank insignia. If I followed the book, I was good. Over the years it got less and less specific, and people started to let things slide. Instead of having your sleeves rolled 4 fingers wide above the elbow, you started to see leadership with sleeves clumsily rolled to their elbows with dirty boots. Now, if I stood 10 random people in a line at work some of them would be wearing non issues Tshirts from other squadrons, some of them would have the leather worn off the toe of their boots and some would be wearing the ECU with some wearing old style combats. I can guarantee that I will see someone after the new regs come into effect that looks like a hobo. Long unkempt hair (as opposed to the short unkempt hair you see now) possibly with odd colours, scraggly beard, face tattoos, old combats and beat up boots. Maybe it will be less that 1-2 percent of the Forces that do that but that is all it will take to make us look like a joke.

 

[SupersonicMax]

I brought that up in a town hall recently. Every base and unit have always a slightly different standard despite the dress regs being pretty black and white (more so 20 years ago). The toques and gloves thing is a prime example, it hasn't been in the dress regs for well over a decade yet every year someone decides to make a thing of it. I also know people who have been required to wear a uniform walking in their whole career while I have almost never been required.

Now the only standard is to QUOTE look professional UNQUOTE and it sure as hell won't be Cpl Bloggins who gets to decide what is professional. When I brought it up the answer was along the lines of we all know what professional looks like but this thread, the ones on Reddit and discussions I have had at work tell me there is a huge difference in what people think is professional. The dress manual was like the drill manual, it was a simple set of instructions to ensure everyone did things the same. When I joined I could read exactly how to get my hair cut, roll my sleeves, blouse my boots and wear to mount my rank insignia. If I followed the book, I was good. Over the years it got less and less specific, and people started to let things slide. Instead of having your sleeves rolled 4 fingers wide above the elbow, you started to see leadership with sleeves clumsily rolled to their elbows with dirty boots. Now, if I stood 10 random people in a line at work some of them would be wearing non issues Tshirts from other squadrons, some of them would have the leather worn off the toe of their boots and some would be wearing the ECU with some wearing old style combats. I can guarantee that I will see someone after the new regs come into effect that looks like a hobo. Long unkempt hair (as opposed to the short unkempt hair you see now) possibly with odd colours, scraggly beard, face tattoos, old combats and beat up boots. Maybe it will be less that 1-2 percent of the Forces that do that but that is all it will take to make us look like a joke.

And what will be the effect on their work?

Why do we care that someone looks like this?



Or this?