• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

D.I.E. cis-het white men bun fight [Split from:SWO badge]

Weinie

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
2,328
Points
1,110
Look, I get it. You don't care about the problem because it doesn't affect you. And you resort to mockery of people who do care.

Sure as heck says a lot about you and your moral compass, or lack thereof, but you do you I guess.
You don't know me, and how the heck you could gauge my moral compass is laughable, if not a reflection on you. But you do you. Grandstand.
 
Last edited:

Jarnhamar

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
3,244
Points
1,060
[*]16 (1) It is not a discriminatory practice for a person to adopt or carry out a special program, plan or arrangement designed to prevent disadvantages that are likely to be suffered by, or to eliminate or reduce disadvantages that are suffered by, any group of individuals when those disadvantages would be based on or related to the prohibited grounds of discrimination, by improving opportunities respecting goods, services, facilities, accommodation or employment in relation to that group.

Under section 16 you could legally stop promoting white men, stop hiring white men, and give white men the worst postings over an under represented group.

Call it a special military operation program.


*removed a line
 
Last edited:

Haggis

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,596
Points
1,140
Naw, if we follow the same model as every other union, everyone under the EX level would be eligible to be part of a union. That kicks in at an equivalent of what, LCol? Col? One of the two.
Our union excludes everyone in positions equal to or higher than Pl Comd equivalent.

Our union is also highly selective and discriminatory in who they represent during collective bargaining. My specialty group is very small (roughly 200 out of 8,000). Over the last three rounds of collective bargaining we have submitted specialty specific demands, some of which would have benefitted the 8,000, which the union has rejected saying we "weren't worth the effort". Would a CAF union treat SAR techs, Ammo techs, Met Techs and other small MOSIDS thee way our union treats us? Maybe not at first....
 

ArmyRick

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
299
Points
880
@btrudy zero respect for your comments, zero respect for your mentality.

EVERYONE should be judged based on their performance. FULL STOP. When I joined the PPCLI in the early 90s, at battleschool, we had an old black OC and an old black sergeant major. WTF does that tell you? Maybe the CAF had advancement for the "non-whites" for like forever.

Your attitude is neither helpful nor wanted.
 

Weinie

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
2,328
Points
1,110
Sigh................ so older white males are the problem......................... I have a solution,,,,,,,,,,,,,kill them all.(Me included) When that doesn't work, find another stupid solution to the non-existential quandary that you and others have contrived. First world problems............reflect on that.
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
2,746
Points
1,010
If the system is set up such that cishet white men are more likely to end up in positions of power than people who aren't cishet white men, then yes, the system is itself inherently discriminatory.

Stop presenting one possible factor as the only factor. The most influential reason for the "face" of any work force is the desire of people to do that kind of work.
 

Booter

Full Member
Subscriber
Reaction score
588
Points
810
Under section 16 you could legally stop promoting white men, stop hiring white men, and give white men the worst postings over an under represented group.

Call it a special military operation program.


*removed a line
These types of initiatives are already out there in the wild elsewhere. Not as a like system wise practice- but that section is in use lots of places.

In the ways I’ve seen it used it’s not really a big deal but it’s definitely put some people in a corner.
 

TheMattHan

Guest
Reaction score
19
Points
180
Unionization!!!!!! Ummmm fucking no. You can all vote with your feet if you are not confident about your choice to sign X on the enrolment doc; I don"t want you or any contrary phuck to be beside me in a trench.
People have been voting with their feet, early 2000s CAF RegF was at about 85000 pers, now we're projected to be under 65000 a loss of around 20000 pers in 20ish years,. Another 40 years and there ain't gonna be nothing but a bunch of GoFos commanding units of nothing but empty positions. The CAF needs to evolve or it'll die out.
 

btrudy

Member
Reaction score
152
Points
610
Stop presenting one possible factor as the only factor. The most influential reason for the "face" of any work force is the desire of people to do that kind of work.

And ask yourself why it is that some people might not want to work in an organization with well publicized racism and sexism issues, or why women, racial or ethnic minorities, and LGBTQ folks who do want to join are more likely to end up leaving earlier than their cishet white male counterparts.

What factors are influencing the differences there in that "desire of people to do that kind of work"?

People have been voting with their feet, early 2000s CAF RegF was at about 85000 pers, now we're projected to be under 65000 a loss of around 20000 pers in 20ish years,. Another 40 years and there ain't gonna be nothing but a bunch of GoFos commanding units of nothing but empty positions. The CAF needs to evolve or it'll die out.

Exactly. As it is, we're to a large degree acting as a giant subsidization for other employers. We'll take people in, spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to train them up, and then give them a shitty work environment, move them around to places with massive COLs without actually adjusting for that, and then act all shocked when they leave to work for folks who'll pay them and treat them better.
 

dimsum

Army.ca Legend
Mentor
Reaction score
3,866
Points
1,260
You can vote with your feet if you disagree with the decision of a majority of your coworkers to form a union for the purposes of collective bargaining.
I'm not disagreeing, but I would actually like a survey of the percentage in the CAF who would really want that.

but

Only if they also understand what a union means, including the union dues, responsibilities, etc. I've never been in a union job, so all I know is from 3rd hand information.

My civilian friends who are in union jobs are either pro (if they're in the union itself) or anti (they feel their union doesn't do squat). So...I'm conflicted.


Exactly. As it is, we're to a large degree acting as a giant subsidization for other employers.
I would also like to see the stats on the percentage of folks who went 20-25 years in the "good old days" vice the folks who left for other jobs.

I suspect that percentage is not as high as people think.
 

Bruce Monkhouse

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
2,115
Points
1,260
And ask yourself why it is that some people might not want to work in an organization with well publicized racism and sexism issues, or why women, racial or ethnic minorities, and LGBTQ folks who do want to join are more likely to end up leaving earlier than their cishet white male counterparts.

What factors are influencing the differences there in that "desire of people to do that kind of work"?



Exactly. As it is, we're to a large degree acting as a giant subsidization for other employers. We'll take people in, spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to train them up, and then give them a shitty work environment, move them around to places with massive COLs without actually adjusting for that, and then act all shocked when they leave to work for folks who'll pay them and treat them better.


So what??? Get in, learn something, serve your country, get out, and let new young blood learn.

Works for me......
 

btrudy

Member
Reaction score
152
Points
610
So what??? Get in, learn something, serve your country, get out, and let new young blood learn.

Works for me......
I mean, it's great for the person I guess.

Less so for the organization which actually kinda needed to use the skills they taught that person.
 

Weinie

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
2,328
Points
1,110
People have been voting with their feet, early 2000s CAF RegF was at about 85000 pers, now we're projected to be under 65000 a loss of around 20000 pers in 20ish years,. Another 40 years and there ain't gonna be nothing but a bunch of GoFos commanding units of nothing but empty positions. The CAF needs to evolve or it'll die out
And ask yourself why it is that some people might not want to work in an organization with well publicized racism and sexism issues, or why women, racial or ethnic minorities, and LGBTQ folks who do want to join are more likely to end up leaving earlier than their cishet white male counterparts.

What factors are influencing the differences there in that "desire of people to do that kind of work"?



Exactly. As it is, we're to a large degree acting as a giant subsidization for other employers. We'll take people in, spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to train them up, and then give them a shitty work environment, move them around to places with massive COLs without actually adjusting for that, and then act all shocked when they leave to work for folks who'll pay them and treat them better.
sigh.....yes, we are all magnificently evil, and only manifest our evilness when the CAF is not looking, I have spent my 39 plus years in uniform trying to outwit the "man".

Cishet is not a term that I ascribe to. I do not care what you follow, but my feelings should matter, apparently they do not.
 

Good2Golf

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
7,751
Points
1,360
So what??? Get in, learn something, serve your country, get out, and let new young blood learn.

Works for me......
I mean, it's great for the person I guess.

Less so for the organization which actually kinda needed to use the skills they taught that person.

So by your logic, if white males are bad for the organization, why is the CAF even still teaching skills to them? Let them move on from the CAF, as Bruce Monkhouse suggests, and then simply replace them with the proper proportion of demographics of new CAF members — problem solved!
 

Weinie

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
2,328
Points
1,110
sigh.....yes, we are all magnificently evil, and only manifest our evilness when the CAF is not looking, I have spent my 39 plus years in uniform trying to outwit the "man".

Cishet is not a term that I ascribe to. I do not care what you follow, but my feelings should matter, apparently they do not.
 

SupersonicMax

Army.ca Veteran
Mentor
Reaction score
1,224
Points
1,110
Stop. But why do we exist then? We are the CAF. We will have some folks who see a trench in anger and, rightfully, fight to defend it, I will concur. If you can't see that, get the phuque out, good riddance. If we are not capable of doing that, then get used to speaking a foreign language.
Sure, some people do that and that’s important work. But it’s not the only important work.

Not sure if you’re saying that if I can’t dig a trench and defend it I should get out but I never dug a trench, I have no desire to do and I am pretty sure I never will.
 

Bruce Monkhouse

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
2,115
Points
1,260
I mean, it's great for the person I guess.

Less so for the organization which actually kinda needed to use the skills they taught that person.
No.....its actually good for the organization. When the bubble bursts someday the most important folks we'll have are the ready to go instructors.

As far as the other kife in this thread, om with EITS, treat everyone with respect and dignity and creame, whatever face/orientation it has, will rise to the top eventually.

And like many good folk I know, everyone will know they EARNED it.
 
Top