Out-of-shape soldiers a 'national threat'

[Old EO Tech]

I'm not sure how things are today, but waaay back when a CO's performance was 'measured' against many things.

If one's unit finished very high or very low on the fitness matrix that fact might make it on to a PER. If, on the other hand, one's unit got anything less than fully satisfactory mark on the annual MTI (Mechanical (including weapons), Telecommunications and Instruments) inspection it would appear on the CO's PER. I can recall, as a NCO, junior officer, sub-unit OC and CO, the efforts we made to "pass" the MTI. My recollection of the efforts we put into fitness and sports, including tests, is that it was substantially less.

If that's still the case then I have no doubt that the troops, especially the supervisory NCOs, understand and weigh their priorities accordingly.

Staff inspections/Annual Technical Inspections are still part of LEMS doctrine, but in the past 20 years few Bde Comd have used these as the tools they are supposed to be.  So in the end the success of being a CO/OC is how your unit can perform the tasks the Bde Comd has given you, or in some cases like Op LENTUS tasks from the Area Comd.  And since OC/CO's only get 2 years to prove their merit, the rest of us get shoved into a continual cycle of high Op tempo, even if we are supposed to be in a reconstitution year.  But this is another topic :-/

And as to the old GOC inspections....completely useless as a measure of unit operational effectiveness :-/

Jon

 

[Old EO Tech]

There is a difference between Cbt Arms in garrison, who train to maintain their skills, and CSS soldiers in garrison, who actively employ their skills in garrison.

CSS soldiers have clear deliverables and tasks in garrison.  For example, if vehicles are not maintained, the unit VOR goes up and operational readiness is clearly, quantifiably diminished.  If an infantry platoon doesn't do a periodic refresher on MGs, the impact isn't visible or quantifiable, and a commander can't see it.

So a commander will order his support soldiers to lower his VOR.  Since we aren't issued more than 24 hours in a day, leaders have to prioritize tasks within that time.  And if soldiers have to work 10 hours a day in garrison they'll do so, plus add in a few Saturdays.  So PT may get pushed to the right - because their commanders have given higher priorities to their troops.

Commanders have three COAs:

(1) Request additional resources;
(2) Accept a higher VOR;
(3) Accept less PT.

COA (4), more PT and lower VOR, results in burnt out CSS soldiers - particularly when they see their Cbt Arms brethren and sistren sliding out at 15h00, when they've still got another 3 hours of work ahead of them.

This is exactly the world that I live in and what my original post on PT and PER points was based on.  I'm in no way saying that PT and fitness is not important to every soldier or that we don't need a "fitness culture".  But for some us, especially in 1 CMBG, were the Bde Comd is very much aware of the Bde VOR, we sometimes have to make tough decisions.  And COA 1 doesn't happen until the VOR is critical and all local resources have been exhausted, aka everyone does nothing but production 10 hours a day, 7 days a week, which of course means you have already acted on COA 3 :-/  COA 2 is unlikely to an option when you are TF 1-13 or the Bde IRU.  So unless we all of a sudden buy all our new LVM Project vehicles that are under warranty, the VOR situation is going to get much worse before it starts getting better in 2017-2020.  And for us in RCEME/Logistics, balancing workload and PT(and everything else) is going to be an increasing challenge with a rusting out/crumbling fleet in the CA.

Jon

 

[Old EO Tech]

I can see it now;

Bde Comd- WTF do you mean I only have one aev and six tanks available for for ex ANAL RAM???
CO Strats and 1CER-  Sorry sir,  but a least everyone got their PT in
Bde Comd-  Oh, we'll, good enough then, ex cancelled

;D

Said no Bde Comd Ever

 

[Old EO Tech]

I think what Infanteer was trying to say was fitness shouldn't be a suggestion, it should be an expectation.  If you have too much work to do during the day then find some time before or after work to get it done but not doing PT because you have "too much work to do" simply doesn't cut it.  We always tell soldiers that the minimum standard is there but they should be trying to achieve more yet when push comes to shove we are all so accepting of mediocrity.  By linking fitness to CFPAS you are giving people an incentive to want to be fit and this to me seems like a logical method to making people get serious about fitness.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over ad expecting different results.  We seem to be doing this an awful lot with our fitness in the CF.  I wonder if this is due to us not wanting to admit that we have a substantial portion of our organization that is overweight and out of shape?  Every time I walk around the NCR and I see some CF member walking around in size XXXXL combats I die a little on the inside.  It tarnishes the uniform and degrades our image as a professional military force.

And I would agree that fitness is an expectation.  And I am fine with telling my subordinates that if Pl/Coy/Unit PT is not good enough for them personally to meet there fitness needs then they need to work out on their own time.  But I am against using PER scoring to "encourage" this.  We already have an OL policy that gives PER points and punishes people that can't get language training because of unit Op Tempo, or lack of manning, we don't need to break the system more by adding a PT sliding PER scale.  And for who ever said that this would only add 5% to a PER, that is the world in a national merit board were a single point by 5 board members can mean the difference between being top 10 and being in the 30's.  5 % is a huge differentiator, just wait until the sliding scale for MWO/CWO SL kick in, you won't see any uni-lingual CWO and few MWO any more....

Jon

 

[Old EO Tech]

I keep seeing this argument - if we have to do PT for 30-45 minutes, everything goes to crap.  It's just thrown out there.  I look at the ESR every day and have commanded CSS soldiers (including Maint Pl).  Busy? yes.  But the rifle companies can get just as busy during the week and they do have stuff to do in garrison.  The VOR is more a function of lack of parts - our ESR is largely "W/P".

Our unit CSS soldiers have no problems maintaining an active PT program while still doing their job, so I'm still not buying it.

I wish I had that luxury, my VOR/AFV Gun State is not all W/P, my CO had to send me an email to put in writing that he was ungrounding all vehicles overdue mandated inspections, so that we could deploy on Op LENTUS, to southern AB to help our fellow citizens in need.  I was already doing this for the 3 Ex's during the spring in WX, were the risk in a training area is lower of a vehicle fails.

Yes the Rifle/CS Coy's can get busy, but as stated if they cut back on trg to make PT happen it is not particularly visible.  The VOR state is on the CO/Bde Comd/Area Comd slides every week as it directly effects their operational capability.

And just for the record my Maint Pl is doing PT 5 days a week right now, but if I see that I can't meet the units goals for the summer training or fall Ex's, PT as well as everything else will be cut back.  And this is an authorized COA that is in the signed official Unit Maintenance Plan. I could enact it now and the threshold is a 20% VOR, and I'm at 50% after we re-grounded all the over due inspection vehicles after returning from High River.

Jon

 

[UnwiseCritic]

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over ad expecting different results.  We seem to be doing this an awful lot with our fitness in the CF.  I wonder if this is due to us not wanting to admit that we have a substantial portion of our organization that is overweight and out of shape?  Every time I walk around the NCR and I see some CF member walking around in size XXXXL combats I die a little on the inside.  It tarnishes the uniform and degrades our image as a professional military force.

I couldn't agree more

I won't touch on some points as a lot have been brought up already. But I think we could solve a lot of our problems by installing a fitness test at the recruiting center. And if someone can't meet the standards set show them the door or just defer them until they reach the fitness level. In truth I think it would hurt our recruiting numbers a lot. But hey if part time soldiers have to do it why not make the full time people do it. (The excuse they have is valid to a degree but I don't think it is a good enough excuse too exclude reg force members for the same test)

I also think they should get rid of the double standard. Men and women should have to do the exact same amount! That is true equality. (Being politically correct all the time is destroying our military)

As well as different trades should have to meet a different levels of fitness maybe group combat arms vs non-combat arms into two different levels of required fitness. Perhaps it's not "fair" but in all reality what is expected of an infanteer to a clerk physically is a lot different. So have different standards. Now would be the perfect time as all Im hearing on this site is how many applicants there are for engineers and infanteers.

 

[UnwiseCritic]

Also I think the excuse of "But I won't have enough time to do my work" seems legit at first glance. But I bet a bunch a fit mechanics get more done in the day than obese mechanics. You'll feel better and be able to maintain a higher work capacity.

 

[MikeL]

In truth I think it would hurt our recruiting numbers a lot. But hey if part time soldiers have to do it why not make the full time people do it. (The excuse they have is valid to a degree but I don't think it is a good enough excuse too exclude reg force members for the same test)

When Reg Force applicants had to do a PT test as part of the process, did it really hurt recruiting numbers that much?  When I got into the Reg Force the PT test during the recruiting process was still there, and a large number of applicants still got in.

I'm sure those who fail in the recruiting process get a bit of a reality check as well, and realize they need to start preparing for the military and work out(among other things). IMO, it is better to have those who are not fit, fail in the recruiting process instead of BMQ.  If the CF gets serious about instilling a culture of fitness, it should begin right from the start(recruiting process) and continue on from there.

 

[UnwiseCritic]

When Reg Force applicants had to do a PT test as part of the process, did it really hurt recruiting numbers that much?  From my limited scope of what I saw, there was still a large number of applicants getting in, and we all did a PT test before getting in.  If someone seriously wants to get into the Military, they will make the effort to exercise and meet the minimum standard at least.


I'm sure those who fail in the recruiting process get a bit of a reality check as well, and realize they need to start preparing for the military and work out(among other things). IMO, it is better to have those who are not fit, fail in the recruiting process instead of BMQ.  If the CF gets serious about instilling a culture of fitness, it should begin right from the start(recruiting process) and continue on from there.

I completely agree, especially with your last sentence. But I'm not quite sure the CF wants too instill a fitness culture... From what I've heard the FORCE test is a step in the wrong direction. I only thought it would hurt recruiting numbers because why else would they have changed it. Or is my common sense getting the better of me?

 

[daftandbarmy]

I think I am outside the formal BMI margins and I still tend to like to climb mountains over 10,000ft in altitude, but I guess that doesn't count.

Mt Shasta earlier this month: Groovin' at 14,179ft

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

Ok, this thread has been getting a lot of feedback from different elements and trades which I can only view as a good thing as it broadens the discussion.  Thanks to the last few posts from Cupper and EO Tech I have a greater appreciation of what you guys do during your day to day and maybe I was seeing this problem through my Infantry Officer lenses and not being objective enough.

I will agree with you on a point that the CFPAS system is most definitely not perfect and that is it necessarily right that something like French can hold a person back in career progression?  I don't necessarily think it is but if the CF believes this then should they not also place the same emphasis on fitness?  I don't necessarily see it as unfair.  That person simply took the time to make themselves a little bit more competitive by improving their fitness.  Our career progression isn't perfect by any means but that 25% that includes french, PD, education and should include fitness is the only objective portion of your PER score, everything else is totally subjective and dependent on how you are judged by your superiors at the merit boards.  Is fitness not something that should be judged objectively?  Is it right that 75% of a persons score on their PER is totally subjective?

I think we need to answer a question and that question is:  Is the military failing to produce physically fit soldiers?  If the answer is yes then how do we correct this?  If you believe the answer to be yes then clearly our present system is not working and needs to be changed/amended/updated.  What changes would you make to the system?  If you think we are good enough as is then state your case as to why?

Some COAs I have noted:

dapaterson suggested getting leadership buy in and using the PER system.  This could work but it would require we convince our respective corps to use the PER system as it was originally intended. 

Another suggestion was more strict enforcement of the FORCE test; however, some have pointed out that the test is easier then the old tests and although "scientifically validated" and I use those terms loosely, I remain skeptical that it will actually improve the fitness of our forces. 

Another suggestion was to stamp this right out at the recruiting centers.  I personally like this one a lot as I am of the belief that if you don't start your career off fit you will never be fit as their is never enough time to play catch up. 

Finally Infanteer suggested we tie fitness to career progression with CFPAS.  I also like this COA as it would set in stone exactly what you need to do to get the maximum points and would foster competition.  It is simple and to the point and doesn't leave any grey areas. 

I am wondering about your thoughts on these and why they would or wouldn't work? 
 

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

I think I am outside the formal BMI margins and I still tend to like to climb mountains over 10,000ft in altitude, but I guess that doesn't count.

Mt Shasta earlier this month: Groovin' at 14,179ft

At 5'11 195lbs I am also overweight by BMI, as someone said earlier BMI is pretty much a useless statistic when looking at a specific individual

 

[kratz]

[quote author=Eye In The Sky]
 
The PT or die mentaliy pissess me off as a CSS whenever this topic comes up.

Most of my comments have already been made by others, but EITS suggestion is one of the best I have seen that would work for many CSS positions. What most are advocating for is a cookie cutter solution that is not possible in a job with as many operational environments as we work in. Reading the desire to push for that "cookie cutter" solution is just as frustrating.[/quote]

 

[Kat Stevens]

I spent a goodly portion of my latter years in the army as an armoured engineer.  There was a ton of heavy lifting to be done, climbing up and down the vehicles all day long, and so on.  No, not every day was a strongman competition, but enough of them sure as hell were.  Our crews were 2 man, and more often than not crew comds were Sgt/MCpl, so in garrison it was a one man job to maintain those beasts.  The policy in 1 CER was that the driver was handed over to the techs if his C/S was on the floor, and they were on the floor a lot.  A few people here may have done Leopard maintenance in the past, but for those who haven't, let me tell you the last thing in the world you want to do after busting your bag all day standing on a concrete floor is to go to the gym and bust it some more.  You want to get your feet up and convince yourself you want to go back and do it again tomorrow.

I know I said I was bowing out, mea culpa

 

[kevincanada]

I spent a goodly portion of my latter years in the army as an armoured engineer.  There was a ton of heavy lifting to be done, climbing up and down the vehicles all day long, and so on.  No, not every day was a strongman competition, but enough of them sure as hell were.  Our crews were 2 man, and more often than not crew comds were Sgt/MCpl, so in garrison it was a one man job to maintain those beasts.  The policy in 1 CER was that the driver was handed over to the techs if his C/S was on the floor, and they were on the floor a lot.  A few people here may have done Leopard maintenance in the past, but for those who haven't, let me tell you the last thing in the world you want to do after busting your bag all day standing on a concrete floor is to go to the gym and bust it some more.  You want to get your feet up and convince yourself you want to go back and do it again tomorrow.

I have to agree with this. I'm on the road by 6am, at work for 7am, leave work at 3:30pm and home from 4:30 to 5:00pm.  I now have a few hours and do it all again tomorrow.  I have steel toe/plated boots on and hard hat.  I get home, toes, heels muscles on side of legs, knees, and shoulder muscles are all stiff, sore and once in a while a sharp pain.

I am on concrete all day.  My muscles are tight and very strong, now at a state of rest my breathing is slightly laboured, and I can tell my heart is working over time.  Before I took this job 2 months ago I was running 35k a week, plus hours of weight lifting weekly.  Now my Running is 5km to 10km a week and no weight lifting and always in a state of fatigue.  It takes 2 days to recover after a 5 day week.  By the time I'm rested it's Monday again.  I try to fit Cardio in on weekends.

Edit: I'm working in a high rise building, awaiting BMQ.

 

[dapaterson]

The FORCE test is validated as a test of the tasks every CF member must be able to perform.  Full stop.

Somewhere I have a copy of the matrix produced from the study, which illustrates the correlations between the elements of the FORCE test and the core tasks.  For what it is designed and intended to do, FORCE meets the remit and is validated.

 

[Infanteer]

I think I am outside the formal BMI margins and I still tend to like to climb mountains over 10,000ft in altitude, but I guess that doesn't count.

Mt Shasta earlier this month: Groovin' at 14,179ft

Fatso....

 

[GnyHwy]

At 5'11 195lbs I am also overweight by BMI, as someone said earlier BMI is pretty much a useless statistic when looking at a specific individual

I'll also add, most professional athletes from the big 4 sports will fail BMI, miserably.  Most of those guys could also squeeze all of our heads like a zit too!

There is value to being a good runner, but if all you are doing is running to a fight where you'll get your head kicked in, then that is not much good either.

 

[Edward Campbell]

I'll also add, most professional athletes from the big 4 sports will fail BMI, miserably.  Most of those guys could also squeeze all of our heads like a zit too!

There is value to being a good runner, but if all you are doing is running to a fight where you'll get your head kicked in, then that is not much good either.

Officers shouldn't run ... it make the troops nervous. 

 

[GnyHwy]

Run down a _______ one of those cows vs. walk down and ________ 'em all!