WHY AN AGRESSIVE FIGHTING CULTURE IS IMPORTANT

[Roy Harding]

Brad:

Sorry for the lack of examples I promised.  Events overtook me yesterday, and I completely forgot about this thread.

More to follow later - you make good points (and deftly identified the Health Care comparison as a red herring).  I get the strange feeling we are in general agreement with each other - we're just couching our arguments in different language.

At any rate - I'm just doing my morning cruise through the forums, I'll give what you've said more thought throughout the day.


Roy

 

[Greymatters]

The least possible burden on others? What about helping out people in need and having some compassion? The CBSA, by arming its guards, is actively putting people out of jobs who cannot use weapons. These people will be unemployed as a direct result of new policies. In that case, it is the responsibility of the CBSA to make genuine efforts towards retraining these individuals, at the CBSA's expense, so they can continue their career. Their job is not "obsolete", as you say; and neither are they themselves "obsolete". By unfortunate circumstance, the job which they signed up for has been changed on them and they are entitled to retraining and a new job. 

Unfortunately, this is not held up in law - there may be a moral obligation, but not a legal one.  The onus can just as easily be placed on the individual.  "Hey pal, you waiting for a free handout?  How about anticipating change and getting some education upgrade on your own time?".  The CF has been telling us that for years, as have other organizations.

The CBSA, by arming guards, are actively identifying those who are not suited for what has become a dangerous job.  This is no surprise to CBSA members who lived the risks every day.  They had a choice where they could leave at any time.   As pointed out earlier, although they were hired to be processors, now the job description is changing and they are to become enforcers, which the writing has been on the wall for this for the last three years, no one can claim 'I didn't know" (although they can claim, "I didn't want to believe it"). 

There are a lot of people out there who cannot make this switch, and they are not legally entitled to retraining and a new job.  The reason organizations will do it is to retain persons who have aptitude for the job and understand the company culture, plus its a lot easier to retain and retrain than to advertise, interview and train.  In the end, you cant hold them accountable unless you make every organization accountable, which isn't going to happen.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Brad,
I noticed you nicely ducked my 'Airborne' question....

SKT,
......or simply don't have the aptitude to be armed............................I know many of my fellow CO's whom I wouldn't
let within 20 feet of anything that could even make a loud noise, however that doesn't mean they are not great CO's when its "time to go" with just our wits and body's.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

When conditions where I work change dramatically (as they have several times over the past few years), the "accommodation" is a choice to adopt and accept the new technologies and processes and structures, or to move along.  The private sector equivalent of an OT is a nice-to-have, not an expectation or obligation.

Please explain to me, and most other private sector taxpayers, why we should bear the cost of a benefit to others which we do not enjoy.  Why are public sector employees quantifiably weaker than private sector employees, and unable to cope with life?

Imagine if they rerolled your old unit into a mortar battery, I suspect retention and morale would be a problem. Asking people to use deadly Force instead of filling out paperwork is a significant change. Also the union has agreements for such changes with the government that has to be honoured. Turn over is fairly high in the Public Service and the proble will solve itself, also most government agencies are short of staff so finding new jobs for those that don't want to carry will not be as difficult as it would have been in the 90's. Keep in mind this is an newspaper article and therefore designed to create a stir, the mountain is likely not as big as it appears.

 

[Brad Sallows]

>I noticed you nicely ducked my 'Airborne' question....

I thought you were indulging in a rhetorical flourish.  We disbanded a unit, not a capability or a trade - the infantry retained some jump companies, and we certainly did retain infantry, and there were no suggestions that the opportunity be used to reduce head count.

The closest comparison which would make sense would be closure of some border posts, but that is not what is at issue.

 

[Brad Sallows]

>The least possible burden on others? What about helping out people in need and having some compassion?

The first way to help people in need is to not draw on the resources set aside for the needy.

The CBSA is not actively putting people out of work.  It is, frankly, ridiculous to accuse employers of putting their employees out of work when the employers are responding to changes in markets or requirements (as the case may be).

>Imagine if they rerolled your old unit into a mortar battery

I've been through one local office closure, one company breakup, one large downsizing, and a couple of other major reshuffling exercises.  I don't need to "imagine" the impacts of change.  Retention and morale is always a problem, even for minor shakeups.  At no time were grieving rooms, counsellors, and free rides home provided at company (as has happened at public) expense considered necessary to help emotionally fragile employees.  No one went home and got a rifle and came back to shoot the place up.  Of course, I suppose no one had developed a job-for-life, they-owe-me mentality.

 

[X-mo-1979]

No one went home and got a rifle and came back to shoot the place up.   

Not to make humour of work place shootings,however I dont think this would be a big threat with CBSA employees now would it.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Not to make humour of work place shootings,however I dont think this would be a big threat with CBSA employees now would it.

With the 12 lb long trigger pull, you would likely be able to put on your coat and walk out before they finished pulling the trigger.  ;D

 

[fraserdw]

They should turn border protection over to the RCMP and let the provinces hire their own provincial police forces.  As for the CBSA it is un-redeemable, I had this tough muscle bound 19 year old punk threaten to throw me in jail because I did not declare a 3 dollar t shirt.  He stated, "You are not such a tough tough soldier now, are you?  I can keep you out of the country or throw you in jail for this!"  Really, would you want this punk to have a weapon?

 

[blacktriangle]

They should turn border protection over to the RCMP and let the provinces hire their own provincial police forces.  As for the CBSA it is un-redeemable, I had this tough muscle bound 19 year old punk threaten to throw me in jail because I did not declare a 3 dollar t shirt.  He stated, "You are not such a tough tough soldier now, are you?  I can keep you out of the country or throw you in jail for this!"  Really, would you want this punk to have a weapon?

Where was this, I want to meet the guy.

 

[midget-boyd91]

They should turn border protection over to the RCMP and let the provinces hire their own provincial police forces.  As for the CBSA it is un-redeemable, I had this tough muscle bound 19 year old punk threaten to throw me in jail because I did not declare a 3 dollar t shirt.  He stated, "You are not such a tough tough soldier now, are you?  I can keep you out of the country or throw you in jail for this!"  Really, would you want this punk to have a weapon?

What about the many provinces, and all the territories depend on the mounties for their own protection? Here in Nova Scotia, we have no border crossings by land, and the entire province (aside from a few local departments) are entirely mounties.
 That '19 year old punk'.. every profession has their problems with some employees. One experience with a single 'punk' is no way to judge the entire CBSA.

 

[fraserdw]

Woodstock Post, last summer.  But when you think of it, the current Border Agents are just not able to function as the type of future agents Canada will require.  The current culture is run from trouble and the union will protect me.  It would be simliar to sending Base CE Branch Union employees Overseas and leaving the infantry to do lawns and building repairs.  A whole new Border Police is required; trained to law enforcement standards and non-unionized para-military with a strong protection mandate.  We need this soon as the US will soon be dumping more Mexicans across the border.  The current agents run from anyone and anything that may pose a threat while harassing people they know are not a threat. 

The incident in Van Airport is classic the border agents all took off leaving passengers and customers to fend for themselves until minimum wage security guards showed up, had that Polish guy been a real threat alot of folks would have been hurt.  No, the culture at CBSA is damaged beyond repair and the enforcement side should be stood down.

 

[fraserdw]

"What about the many provinces, and all the territories depend on the mounties for their own protection? Here in Nova Scotia, we have no border crossings by land, and the entire province (aside from a few local departments) are entirely mounties."

Most provinces pay enough to the Federal government to set up their own police forces and have more cops to go around because RCMP charges a very high preimum on use.  New constables cost about 150,000 per issue (50,000 is the actual wage).  For provinces, it is convenient not to have to act as an employer but the down side is that Federal issues take precedence drawing off local RCMP resources, RCMP career issues can leave detachments short (although the province still pays whether the member position is filled year round or not just that he filled the position for part of the year.  If you pay for 10 cops you will receive an average of 8.5 year round) and the Federal government sets the staffing and policing priority.  If a local detachment does not want to deal with a local issue then they appeal to the Federal chain of command and the Federal government can deny policing on local issues.  The RCMP is fine police force if you do not mind having the Prime Minister of Canada in Ottawa deciding where and when your local police will police.

As for judging CBSA, the news on them speaks volumes.  Plus I have had two relatives that I would not be reference for them on joining the army become "agents".

 

[Roy Harding]

"What about the many provinces, and all the territories depend on the mounties for their own protection? Here in Nova Scotia, we have no border crossings by land, and the entire province (aside from a few local departments) are entirely mounties."

Most provinces pay enough to the Federal government to set up their own police forces and have more cops to go around because RCMP charges a very high preimum on use.  New constables cost about 150,000 per issue (50,000 is the actual wage).  For provinces, it is convenient not to have to act as an employer but the down side is that Federal issues take precedence drawing off local RCMP resources, RCMP career issues can leave detachments short (although the province still pays whether the member position is filled year round or not just that he filled the position for part of the year.  If you pay for 10 cops you will receive an average of 8.5 year round) and the Federal government sets the staffing and policing priority.  If a local detachment does not want to deal with a local issue then they appeal to the Federal chain of command and the Federal government can deny policing on local issues.  The RCMP is fine police force if you do not mind having the Prime Minister of Canada in Ottawa deciding where and when your local police will police.

As for judging CBSA, the news on them speaks volumes.  Plus I have had two relatives that I would not be reference for them on joining the army become "agents".

fraserdw:

Have you got sources for any of the statistics you posted above (cost per RCMP position, average RCMP manning rate of of 85%, etcetera)?  Your profile is also empty - some information there may go a long way toward establishing your credibility here.


Roy Harding
Milnet.ca Staff

 

[fraserdw]

Corrected, see profile.  Keep in mind I am throwing out one solution to start a debate on a subject ignored by our government; Border Security.  I argue that a Federal police force should police in the Federal AOR and the provinces and towns should find their own solution other than Federal hand outs.  Of course, there are economies of scale to be gained where the Federal force would look after cross province border issues, tactical response; canine and air support; as well as criminal science support.  That way the provinces and towns could concentrate their resources on basic community policing and making safer communities for us all.  Then we can start securing our border with the US using high quality law enforcement officers rather than the armed clerks (as mentioned above) because the drugs, weapons and persons coming across that border at high profits to organized crime are the greatest threats we as nation face.