RCN to introduce new Conduct Policy and new Alcohol Policy

[Monsoon]

If that Admiral does exist, and so chooses to speak up. He/She is a true leader and will earn the respect and admiration of his subordinates, for that is what a true leader is. Someone who earns respect vs. someone who uses pure rank for respect.

No - a true leader is the one who makes necessary decisions in the face of criticism and who doesn't look to win popularity contests. With all due respect to your right to have an opinion, you don't have the context needed to criticize this one. Go to sea first.

 

[Pusser]

Back in the mid 90's we went through a shake-up when a number of deployed personnel p***ed in the pickles and some very restrictive policies came down for all DCDS operations (i.e. two beers per person per day).  The Navy's first reaction was that since we already had a longstanding policy in effect (that as far as were concerned worked as we had had no issues - at that point), and so surely these new DCDS policies didn't apply to us?  We were told, no, if the ship was CHOPPED to a DCDS operation, then all the DCDS policies also applied.  So we formed a committee to study the issue.  I was the secretary of that committee and its major conclusion was that as long as our existing regulations (MARCORDs and SSOs) were enforced this was pretty much a non-issue.  One of the interesting things that came up though was an observation by the Command Chief and few others old enough to remember the days of the tot (period prior to 1 Apr 72).  The old chiefs pointed out that the Navy had had more problems with alcohol BEFORE the tot was stopped (i.e. when the only alcohol available to sailors was their daily ration).  To understand this, it is useful to know how things worked:

Up to and including 31 Mar 72:

1)  Only the Wardroom and CO had bars
2)  Sailors were restricted to their single daily tot
3)  Junior sailors had to either drink their entire tot in front of the issuing officer or mix it if they wanted to take it aside - they still had to drink it within the compartment where issued
4) C&POs were allowed to drink their tots neat
5)  Despite the restrictions, sailors (being the ingenious folks they are) found ways around the rules and often hoarded thier rations (there are tales of exploding coconuts full of rum that had been hidden in various places around the ship
6)  Tots were often "donated" or shared on special occasions (e.g. birthdays) to other sailors or even used as currency for the payment of debts ("sippers," "gulpers," etc).  Thus, it was possible for some sailors to receive more that a regular tot (1/2 gill) on some days and get drunk
7)  Sailors often tried to smuggle more alcohol on board
8 )  Not all sailors actually drew their daily ration and so there was an argument that it was losing its popularity.

1 Apr 72 and beyond:

1)  All three messes now had full duty-free bars
2)  The incentive to smuggle or hoard alcohol virtually eliminated due to reasonable access at low prices
3)  Reduction in disciplinary issues.

Providing a controlled environment where access to a legal substance is reasonable means that its consumption can monitored and controlled.  Trying to ban it altogether simply drives it underground and leads to a whole host of other problems.

To be honest though, I'm inclined to think this is much ado about nothing.  We're not removing alcohol from ships.  We are simply placing a new restriction on consumption AT SEA.  The reality though is that hardly anyone drinks at sea anymore anyway.  I'm not prepared to get too upset about this.

 

[MARS]

If that Admiral does exist, and so chooses to speak up. He/She is a true leader and will earn the respect and admiration of his subordinates, for that is what a true leader is. Someone who earns respect vs. someone who uses pure rank for respect.

The overriding assumption in this thread (and throughout the Navy) is that this Order originated from within the Navy's guardrails.

I heard something different, which may or may not be true.

If what I heard is correct, then Admiral Norman is demonstrating outstanding leadership in making the Order he was given, his own Order.

 

[The Bread Guy]

The overriding assumption in this thread (and throughout the Navy) is that this Order originated from within the Navy's guardrails.

I heard something different, which may or may not be true.

I have heard nothing, one way or another, but I wouldn't be entirely surprised if such an edict came from WELL "on high".

 

[Naval Reservist]

The overriding assumption in this thread (and throughout the Navy) is that this Order originated from within the Navy's guardrails.

I can only form an opinion based on what ive heard. Unfortunatly, what ive heard is that this was solely a move to further advance his career.

 

[jollyjacktar]

The overriding assumption in this thread (and throughout the Navy) is that this Order originated from within the Navy's guardrails.

I heard something different, which may or may not be true.

If what I heard is correct, then Admiral Norman is demonstrating outstanding leadership in making the Order he was given, his own Order.

We all answer to somebody, even the adults.  I have no doubt he was given some marching orders and is supporting his CoC by carrying it on and out.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

I can only form an opinion based on what ive heard. Unfortunatly, what ive heard is that this was solely a move to further advance his career.

I am going to step in here and say: I highly doubt Adm Norman is advancing his career.

The problem I have with this edict (whatever it's original source, and I have my suspicions as well) is that it punishes the majority at the expense of the minority and it speaks to an almost unbelievable mistrust in both sailors and the chain of command in general.

We have been told since the beginning of time the a ship us more than piece of steel: it is our home.

We spend months inside it, often enduring great discomfort. this makes home somewhat less "homey".

I also predict we will see in increase in illegal drinking onboard and problems with alcohol downtown. The Law of unintended consequences being what it is...

 

[Jarnhamar]

I also predict we will see in increase in illegal drinking onboard and problems with alcohol downtown. The Law of unintended consequences being what it is...

The last smoker I went to was a brigade sized smoker. The brigade commander lifted the 2 beer limit and told us there was no beer limit for the night but to be responsible and act like soldiers. The onus was on leadership to step in if and when we needed to.  We had a couple very minor issues but nothing news worthy, not bad for a brigade with a no alcohol limit.

The RCNs new policy is lazy leadership.

 

[Monsoon]

I can only form an opinion based on what ive heard. Unfortunatly, what ive heard is that this was solely a move to further advance his career.

I've met the man; you've heard incorrectly. It's never too soon to learn the lesson that the more knowledgeably someone speaks on a topic in the mess, the less he is likely to actually know about it.

 

[Stoker]

I'll wade in on this one as I was recently in a foregin port where more time and enough sailors got into trouble.  The amount of beer consumed beween the 3 messes was the low side of a couple of dozen entire visit. As expected everyone scattered and drank ashore, people were warned, no incidents. People got drunk but caused no trouble. Overall the policy is working as intended. I suspect the amount of money the ships fund will take in due to mess sales will take a dive based on what I have seen first hand.

 

[Stoker]

I can only form an opinion based on what ive heard. Unfortunatly, what ive heard is that this was solely a move to further advance his career.

Let me get this straight, you with zero experience and as your profile says a OS is making the opinion that the Commander of the RCN brought in this policy to advance his career? My advice for you is don't listen to rumours and trust your superiors. You are a OS, you don't have the experience or right to state opinions. I would love to have you in my department, lad.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

As one who have known the Admiral from way back when, I can certify that he cares not about advancing his career, but only acting as an honourable officer at all times.

I would sail in the tightest spots anytime with Admiral Norman.

 

[Naval Reservist]

Let me get this straight, you with zero experience and as your profile says a OS is making the opinion that the Commander of the RCN brought in this policy to advance his career? My advice for you is don't listen to rumours and trust your superiors. You are a OS, you don't have the experience or right to state opinions. I would love to have you in my department, lad.

It's funny, I thought the whole point of a non-affiliated forum was to engage in discussion and share opinions. The fact that im an OS really shouldnt matter here (please read this post about use of rank on the forum http://army.ca/forums/threads/64170.0.html). As per my right, in a working enviorment while onduty or likewise you would be right. However, this in an online forum and freedom to express my opinions is something I hold dear.

On a more related note; after discussions here it seems the opinions I formed about Admiral Norman based on what has been talked about in the mess were fortunatly wrong. Thanks to the fact I shared my opinion I have learned a great deal about the Admiral. I dont regret what I said at all, even if my view of him has or has not changed.

 

[Stoker]

It's funny, I thought the whole point of a non-affiliated forum was to engage in discussion and share opinions. The fact that im an OS really shouldnt matter here (please read this post about use of rank on the forum http://army.ca/forums/threads/64170.0.html). As per my right, in a working enviorment while onduty or likewise you would be right. However, this in an online forum and freedom to express my opinions is something I hold dear.

On a more related note; after discussions here it seems the opinions I formed about Admiral Norman based on what has been talked about in the mess were fortunatly wrong. Thanks to the fact I shared my opinion I have learned a great deal about the Admiral. I dont regret what I said at all, even if my view of him has or has not changed.

If you don't want to be squared off in a post don't post your rank on your profile. I take issue with you making claims about the leadership of the RCN, and at the end of the day is your boss too. Like we are always told talk to what you know, not what you think you know.

 

[medicineman]

What I THINK the Chief meant to say was this - there are opinions and then there are informed opinions...there's a huge difference.  You're at the beginning of your career and have likely been handed a bunch of mis/disinformation by a bunch of disgruntled mess mates who only see/hear what you want to see/hear.  As you've stated is your right here, you've come in and opined something...however, that was based on very little knowledge and without much in the way of critical thinking - something many folks here value, both for the forum and for the CAF.  All CS is suggesting is to get ALL the facts before opining on something here, lest you get jumped on for it.  Same goes for at work.  As the old saying goes, we have two ears and only one mouth for a reason - keep the two open and working BEFORE allowing the singleton to engage.

MM

Edit to add - Chief - I think you sort of beat me to the punch.

 

[Stoker]

What I THINK the Chief meant to say was this - there are opinions and then there are informed opinions...there's a huge difference.  You're at the beginning of your career and have likely been handed a bunch of mis/disinformation by a bunch of disgruntled mess mates who only see/hear what you want to see/hear.  As you've stated is your right here, you've come in and opined something...however, that was based on very little knowledge and without much in the way of critical thinking - something many folks here value, both for the forum and for the CAF.  All CS is suggesting is to get ALL the facts before opining on something here, lest you get jumped on for it.  Same goes for at work.  As the old saying goes, we have two ears and only one mouth for a reason - keep the two open and working BEFORE allowing the singleton to engage.

MM

Edit to add - Chief - I think you sort of beat me to the punch.

Cheers MM, my crustyness is out in full force today.

 

[Monsoon]

As per my right, in a working enviorment while onduty or likewise you would be right. However, this in an online forum and freedom to express my opinions is something I hold dear.

Please note that your "freedom to express [your] opinions" is limited when that opinion is libellous. You might want to take a look at this thread if you want to know why experienced users of this board avoid attributing accusations against public individuals by name: http://army.ca/forums/threads/99046.0

I'm quite certain that the good Admiral isn't going to do anything similar, but his personal restraint is certainly no reason for us to abuse a man who's been one of the better commander's we've had in the past 20-odd years.

 

[medicineman]

Cheers MM, my crustyness is out in full force today.

No worries  ,

MM

 

[Jarnhamar]

However, this in an online forum and freedom to express my opinions is something I hold dear.

Just a point to note on that matey. I know of a senior NCO in the army who was fined $1500 for comments he made on his personal facebook page.  We all grow up running around shouting freedom of speech and it's a free world but in practice things become a bit more convoluted, especially when dealing with the military where many a mindset are still stuck in the 50's and 60's.

 

[Jed]

Just a point to note on that matey. I know of a senior NCO in the army who was fined $1500 for comments he made on his personal facebook page.  We all grow up running around shouting freedom of speech and it's a free world but in practice things become a bit more convoluted, especially when dealing with the military where many a mindset are still stuck in the 50's and 60's.

Now that is sage advice.