New Dress Regs 🤣

[Navy_Pete]

I mean, I suppose it might be helpful from a messaging perspective, but the orders in place for safety reasons are still perfectly valid. The update to the dress instructions was, after all, quite clear on the point that safety trumps all. Heck, if specifically mentioned the respiratory protection policy as an example of such restrictions above and beyond dress regulations.

Not to mention that I think you're being a bit premature about the whole "Why isn't anyone saying anything", given that the new dress instructions still don't come into force for almost another month.

No, the 'why isn't anyone saying anything' has been a question for years, given that some bright light put out a NAVORD that allows religious accomodation for beards in SCBA providing the CO can 'demonstrate they can successfully keep a seal'. Which we tested, and found to be impossible if the person is actually moving around.

Because of the safety implications, there is no religious or medical exemption allowing beards (or goatees I guess under the new rules) in SCBAs, and that's consistent with OSHA regulations and Human Rights laws around reasonable restrictions for safety/operations. If you want to give someone a religious or medical chit, fill your boots, but then they are exempt from any duty that requires an SCBA (so basically any duty watch, most positions on ship etc). Its fundamentally counter to any push to reduce crew numbers though, as that basically requires everyone to be able to do basics like firefighting.

It just happened to come up again with the dress reg update, because the RCN is basically foxed and values QoL over safety and operational effectiveness (at least until something goes wrong, so CYA so you aren't annointed as the scapegoat).

 

[Eye In The Sky]

I disagree that it should be left up to unit safety orders; there are safety organizations for each element that should issue clarifying directives.

For example, the RCN safety folks should be reminding the RCN that people wearing SCBAs need to be clean shaven on the sealing area IAW the Respiratory Protection Program (RPP), which is a CAF wide one.

With no fire fighters on board, and with disbandment of HTs, very few people on ships have any idea the RPP exists (and even the NAVORD on religious accomodations missed it).

Unit safety level direction is only appropriate when the knowledge is at unit level. Some things require SMEs.

I just handed over UGSO to my replacement recently; I can say without hesitation that I would not want those type of issues to hit my desk as a UGSO.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Sounds great, still not something that needs to be, or should be part of dress regulations.

If there are deficiencies in the CAFs safely rules, or safety training/awareness those should be addressed in the safety rules/training.

I agree with this and with what NP was saying; for our Sqn there are Air Div authorities or RCAF ones that should be the OPI for these issues.

 

[Brad Sallows]

a positive military appearance

What is that, exactly?

 

[rmc_wannabe]

What is that, exactly?

A political answer to something that shouldn't be ambiguous?

 

[Eye In The Sky]

What is that, exactly?

Open more to interpretation than it was before the change some might argue?

The dress regs don't say "chewing gum in uniform is forbidden" anymore.

They do, however, and will, still say "CAF Dress Instructions shall be interpreted as follows: if an item is not included in these instructions, it is not authorized."

 

[SupersonicMax]

Open more to interpretation than it was before the change some might argue?

The dress regs don't say "chewing gum in uniform is forbidden" anymore.

They do, however, and will, still say "CAF Dress Instructions shall be interpreted as follows: if an item is not included in these instructions, it is not authorized."

So, a cyclist cannot shave their legs or arms because it is not stated in the dress manual? We also can’t eat in uniform…

 

[btrudy]

Open more to interpretation than it was before the change some might argue?

The dress regs don't say "chewing gum in uniform is forbidden" anymore.

They do, however, and will, still say "CAF Dress Instructions shall be interpreted as follows: if an item is not included in these instructions, it is not authorized."

Chewing gum is not an item of dress.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

So, a cyclist cannot shave their legs or arms because it is nt stated in the dress manual?

Exactly!

But seriously...I think some of the wording that was removed, vise revised, is going to be used contrary to the spirit/intent of the changes.

Not by me...but I see it happening.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Chewing gum is not an item of dress.

You might want to read the part on "deportment"...that is contained inside the CAF Dress Regulations...

Dress instructions | Section 2 Appearance - Canada.ca

Canadian Armed Forces Dress Instructions

www.canada.ca

I agree with RMC above; they've left some of this MORE open to interpretation and it would have been better if they had not.

 

[SupersonicMax]

You might want to read the part on "deportment"...that is contained inside the CAF Dress Regulations...

Dress instructions | Section 2 Appearance - Canada.ca

Canadian Armed Forces Dress Instructions

www.canada.ca

I agree with RMC above; they've left some of this MORE open to interpretation and it would have been better if they had not.

The only item that would not also prohibit you from chewing gum in civilian clothes is this one:

1. Conduct. Personnel in uniform shall comport themselves in a manner which projects a positive military appearance.

You’d have a hard time convincing me that chewing gum projects a negative military appearance.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

For comparison, here are the "old" and "new" version of Ch 2, Sect 2:

Old

DEPORTMENT

1. Responsibilities. Pursuant to QR&O 17.02, the deportment and appearance of all ranks, in uniform or when wearing civilian attire, shall on all occasions reflect credit on the CAF and the individual. It is the responsibility and duty of all officers, warrant officers and non-commissioned officers to ensure that, by their vigilance, actions and example, the policies, regulations and instructions contained herein are adhered to by all ranks.

2. Behaviour. Personnel in uniform shall comport themselves in a manner which projects a positive military appearance. Behaviour such as chewing gum, slouching, placing hands in pockets, smoking or eating on the street and walking hand in hand, is forbidden. This instruction’s objective is to project an image of a disciplined and self-controlled force.

3. Military Presence. Personnel in uniform shall be well groomed, with footwear cleaned and shone, and uniform cleaned and properly pressed. In particular, buttons, fasteners and zippers shall be kept closed; pockets shall not be bulged; items such as glasses, glass cases, sun-glasses, pens, pencils, key rings or paper shall not be visibly extended nor protrude from pockets or be suspended from waist belts or pockets; personal cell phones that are conservative in appearance may be worn; headphones shall not be worn; ear buds may be worn when travelling on public transit only. CAF personnel wearing civilian clothes on military installations and in military groups or settings shall dress and comport themselves at all times as befits members of a disciplined, cohesive force.

New

DEPORTMENT
1. Responsibilities. Pursuant to QR&O 17.02, the deportment and appearance of all ranks, in uniform or when wearing civilian attire, shall on all occasions reflect credit on the CAF and the individual. It is the responsibility and duty of all CAF members to ensure that, by their vigilance, actions and example, the policies, regulations and instructions contained herein are adhered to.

2. Conduct. Personnel in uniform shall comport themselves in a manner which projects a positive military appearance.

3. Military Presence. CAF personnel wearing military uniform and civilian clothes on military installations and in military groups or settings shall dress and comport themselves at all times as befits members of a professional, respectful, disciplined, cohesive force.

* I'm hoping they revise and amplify #2; that is very open to interpretation.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

The only item that would not also prohibit you from chewing gum in civilian clothes is this one:

1. Conduct. Personnel in uniform shall comport themselves in a manner which projects a positive military appearance.

You’d have a hard time convincing me that chewing gum projects a negative military appearance.

I'm not trying to convince you that because I don't think it does.

I used that example because it was in the 'old' version...but the new, simplified version is so simplified it is too vague (IMO).

Much like the Leave Policy Manual was needed to bring some standardization to leave practices across the CAF...the dress regs should do the same. If I get out of my car and walk into the Sqn chewing gum, nothing will be said to me. Will the same be true for Pte Bloggins at one of the infantry battalions, or on course in Borden?

So, this is why I think some of the changes are going to cause issues (they have left it to open to interpretation). I could care less about gum unless someone is having a bubble blowing contest or something...

 

[Furniture]

For comparison, here are the "old" and "new" version of Ch 2, Sect 2:

Old

DEPORTMENT

1. Responsibilities. Pursuant to QR&O 17.02, the deportment and appearance of all ranks, in uniform or when wearing civilian attire, shall on all occasions reflect credit on the CAF and the individual. It is the responsibility and duty of all officers, warrant officers and non-commissioned officers to ensure that, by their vigilance, actions and example, the policies, regulations and instructions contained herein are adhered to by all ranks.

2. Behaviour. Personnel in uniform shall comport themselves in a manner which projects a positive military appearance. Behaviour such as chewing gum, slouching, placing hands in pockets, smoking or eating on the street and walking hand in hand, is forbidden. This instruction’s objective is to project an image of a disciplined and self-controlled force.

3. Military Presence. Personnel in uniform shall be well groomed, with footwear cleaned and shone, and uniform cleaned and properly pressed. In particular, buttons, fasteners and zippers shall be kept closed; pockets shall not be bulged; items such as glasses, glass cases, sun-glasses, pens, pencils, key rings or paper shall not be visibly extended nor protrude from pockets or be suspended from waist belts or pockets; personal cell phones that are conservative in appearance may be worn; headphones shall not be worn; ear buds may be worn when travelling on public transit only. CAF personnel wearing civilian clothes on military installations and in military groups or settings shall dress and comport themselves at all times as befits members of a disciplined, cohesive force.

New

DEPORTMENT
1. Responsibilities. Pursuant to QR&O 17.02, the deportment and appearance of all ranks, in uniform or when wearing civilian attire, shall on all occasions reflect credit on the CAF and the individual. It is the responsibility and duty of all CAF members to ensure that, by their vigilance, actions and example, the policies, regulations and instructions contained herein are adhered to.

2. Conduct. Personnel in uniform shall comport themselves in a manner which projects a positive military appearance.

3. Military Presence. CAF personnel wearing military uniform and civilian clothes on military installations and in military groups or settings shall dress and comport themselves at all times as befits members of a professional, respectful, disciplined, cohesive force.

* I'm hoping they revise and amplify #2; that is very open to interpretation.

I think #2 is just about perfect.

This is where the "member ought to have reasonably known" comes into play. Wearing earbuds walking to work in uniform? Professional. Dancing to your music while listening to your earbuds and walking to work in uniform? Unprofessional.

Many organizations outside the CAF manage to get their people to behave in a professional manner without spelling things out in excruciating detail.

 

[Jarnhamar]

You’d have a hard time convincing me that chewing gum projects a negative military appearance.

What if someone was in your office and you were giving them shit for something and they were smacking away on their wad of grape hubba-bubba?

Or receiving remedial measures/being charged?

 

[Eye In The Sky]

I think #2 is just about perfect.

This is where the "member ought to have reasonably known" comes into play. Wearing earbuds walking to work in uniform? Professional. Dancing to your music while listening to your earbuds and walking to work in uniform? Unprofessional.

Many organizations outside the CAF manage to get their people to behave in a professional manner without spelling things out in excruciating detail.

One of the problems will be with the types who are dead against these changes and will use that vague wording to their advantage.

Remember when BEARDFORGEN came out and Snr mbr's were putting their own "spin" on it? There wasn't much vague about beards and yet...

Then there will be the 'push the envelope' types who will dance with their earbuds in...arguing their point.

Vague isn't always good. "Start the engines" wouldn't be a good checklist item on an Aurora...details are important and helpful so there's no guessing.

 

[SupersonicMax]

What if someone was in your office and you were giving them shit for something and they were smacking away on their wad of grape hubba-bubba?

Or receiving remedial measures/being charged?

Honestly? This is more something about basic respect and courtesy (making noise during a conversation) rather than something about military appearance. My initial reaction would be the same as a civilian than as a CO: “Can you please stop chewing loudly?” If the person didn’t stop, I’d just have have more options as a CO than a civilian.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

For the record...I chew gum daily, flying or not flying. Have for years...many years.

On parade? Nope. at Morning Prayers? why not.

 

[SupersonicMax]

One of the problems will be with the types who are dead against these changes and will use that vague wording to their advantage.

Remember when BEARDFORGEN came out and Snr mbr's were putting their own "spin" on it? There wasn't much vague about beards and yet...

Then there will be the 'push the envelope' types who will dance with their earbuds in...arguing their point.

Vague isn't always good. "Start the engines" wouldn't be a good checklist item on an Aurora...details are important and helpful so there's no guessing.

Except that when you want to be detailed, and say things like “If it’s not in the manual you can’t do it,” you better have everything you possibly want to allow in that manual or it’ll lose credibility and people won’t follow it. If you have enough details go cover all scenarios, it becomes a massive document that people can’t fully internalize and apply. I prefer the “let people be adult, including those that enforce discipline” approach. And course correct those that abuse (on both sides of the spectrum). My direction to people is to stop caring about how people look and focus on real discipline and performance (ie: can people do their job effectively and consistently).

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Except that when you want to be detailed, and say things like “If it’s not in the manual you can’t do it,” you better have everything you possibly want to allow in that manual or it’ll lose credibility and people won’t follow it. If you have enough details go cover all scenarios, it because a massive document that people can’t fully internalize and apply. I prefer the “let people be adult, including those that enforce discipline” approach. And course correct those that abuse (on both sides of the spectrum. My direction to people is to stop caring about how people look and focus on real discipline and performance (ie: can people do their job effectively and consistently).

I can't say there is anything there I disagree with, and hopefully we won't see a repeat of the BEARDFORGEN baloney on Sept 6th and moving forward.