- Reaction score
If you are injured as a direct result of not wearing your plates in the issue vest, you may not be eligable for SISIP benefits.
Jammer said:If you are injured as a direct result of not wearing your plates in the issue vest, you may not be eligable for SISIP benefits.
Jammer said:When it comes to safety systems there is very little room for interpretation. As Puck will recall the BG RSM directed that the shoulder protectors would be worn with the frag vest as well. it was the first time I had ever worn them, however the dictum that it was a lawful order was a very convincing argument. Ergo, if the BG RSM sez so...it will be done...period.
ObedientiaZelum said:It was a rumor (started by a CoC I would imagine) that wearing non-issued BEW (oakleys) would result in SISIP not covering the member if they lost an eye. "that's why you can't wear oakleys, troops"
Jammer said:You're missing the point BW-7.
Not wearing the plates in the issued vest was/is a direct violation of BG policy...therefore in a Report of Medical Injuries if it states you were not wearing issued safety systems when it was possible for you to do so...you might be "hooped". Like it or not...there it is.
Beadwindow 7 said:No, I had the point. If you're told to wear issued gear in a certain manner, fine. When guys ask why, you can tell them "Because you've been ordered too." There it is. Guys don't do it, 129. Wether you agree with the original order doesn't matter. That's fine.
My issue is with the token answer many higher-ups will give when asked "Why can't I wear oakleys/swats/plate carrier/polk-a-dot thongs" is "Because if you get hurt, SISIP won't pay you out"
I have never seen an official statement that says if you're hurt while wearing non-issue kit/no PPE, that you will lose out on a SISIP payout. And I'm pretty sure a lot of people who use the threat haven't either. Now I could very well be wrong, and I'll be checking the fine print of my SISIP policy when I get home. But I have never seen anyone in any CoC back up the threat with a clear-cut official document.
At least with "Because The army/the RSM/I told you so" there's a reason that's not based off a common belief.
Jarnhamar said:The SORD chest rigs are pretty solid including being issued and used by some units in the CAF. They have some different variant setups too like rifleman,machine gunner and commander (which is just a few different pocket options).
Really you'd only need something that can swap out two side pouches in order to accommodate 2 C9 boxes or C6 belts.
I'm not a big fan of randomly switching soldiers through weapon systems and positions.