Suggested changes to CAF TOS [split from changes to dress]

[jollyjacktar]

Teager, the navy is facing a two issues at the same time, yes, recruiting and retention.

They're having difficulty in attracting new folks into the engineering trades.  My old trade, HT, never had that problem we were always successful in attracting recruits and remusters.  The Stokers, were not being able to bring in more than what was leaving, not even close.
That trend is continuing, even with the new trade.

Add onto that retention.  The release rate for legacy HT remains about 3 times pre amalgamation rates.  What they're losing is the experienced guys and a great deal of the juniors, tomorrow's leaders. 

For those who have moved on in civilian life and are pensioned.  To seriously think they might be attracted to take a huge pay cut and come into a new trade that has the thinnest of bread slices on that shit sandwich is laughable at best.

The number of releases for Chiefs this past week has been staggering.  The bleeding continues.

 

[Petard]

I recall this subject coming up during a PD session given by Dave Grossman ("On Killing" author), to 2 RCR before they deployed to Afghanistan in 2007.
Near as I can remember, the discussion came up during the Q and A part of his presentation, near the end of the day

Basically the question centered on why does the military fixate on things like hair style. He had an interesting response, that basically turned it around to those asking the question, on why was it important to them that the military appease the vanities of their ego. That set a bit of murmur going, but the general response was that it seemed unnecessary. So he followed it up that, in his view, in certain elite organizations such as SFOR units, the professional bar is so high it doesn't need markers and rituals to establish reliability to regulations and procedures. But to the larger general soldierly there has been a tradition of imposing this ritual, as a demonstration of willingness to follow orders, however mundane they may be. And many of the general soldier tasks are very mundane. He further went to ask those who want to challenge this at where they would draw the line: drill with arms, barrack inspections? If you're unwilling to do something as harmless as getting your hair cut, or performing drill movements, what do you do to demonstrate your willingness, and reliability, to perform the more difficult responsibilities (or even the mundane ones).

I think he had a valid point, especially when you consider how the public would view this. These things evolved and remained as a means to ensure the public sees the military as having enforced discipline.  That it's not readily accepted by those joining the military does not mean we should necessarily abandon the idea in hopes of improving recruiting.

Some here have touted the Dutch example, even suggesting they're better because of it. There's no proof of that, and in this RAND paper it is clear their military is facing challenges similar to ours. So no example there that relaxed hair style is helping with recruiting or retention either
www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/technical_reports/2010/RAND_TR690.pdf

The Germany military, briefly in the 70's, allowed very relaxed hair regs, mostly because they were dealing with a very large conscript army at the time. But even here they abandoned the idea for a couple of sound operational reasons
www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/the-german-hair-force-a-failed-experiment-in-military-manes-a-744992.html

 

[Halifax Tar]

Teager, the navy is facing a two issues at the same time, yes, recruiting and retention.

They're having difficulty in attracting new folks into the engineering trades.  My old trade, HT, never had that problem we were always successful in attracting recruits and remusters.  The Stokers, were not being able to bring in more than what was leaving, not even close.
That trend is continuing, even with the new trade.

Add onto that retention.  The release rate for legacy HT remains about 3 times pre amalgamation rates.  What they're losing is the experienced guys and a great deal of the juniors, tomorrow's leaders. 

For those who have moved on in civilian life and are pensioned.  To seriously think they might be attracted to take a huge pay cut and come into a new trade that has the thinnest of bread slices on that crap sandwich is laughable at best.

The number of releases for Chiefs this past week has been staggering.  The bleeding continues.

HHT that's so sad...

Scandinavian countries amoungst others have had operators, operating, operationally (yes, I said that) for years with more contemporary "grooming standards"  I am not sure what the hub-ub is about. 

Just FYI our current C4 CBRN mask designed while Pioneers were alive and well.  If it will work for them, or they found a way to make it work, then it will be fine now in my opinion.

Not to mention the RCN in particular.  Other Navies use similar systems to the Dragger and they are ok with beards, I am not sure why we have to go crazy about things.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

I am not sure why we have to go crazy about things.

Because we have wayyyyy too many people sitting around in HQs and the like with no 'real' jobs?

Because we are, largely, not involved with any 'real' operations on a large scale?

Because we think we need to 'change' so people outside the military like us more and want to join us?

 

[jollyjacktar]

Petard, l suggest the short hair requirement wasn't "developed", it was a necessity for hygiene and wound management in the trenches of the first world war.

At any rate, looking at many of the Brits in the sandbox, they were sporting fairly thick doos and it didn't seem to slow them down in either effectiveness or professionalism.  I'm not totally convinced your argument holds full weight.

 

[Underway]

I welcome changes to the regs for beards and hair.  And I don't think of it as a recruiting and retention issue (because dress is a minor thing unless its culturally significant).  Its an equality issue.

Look at hair and beard rules for men.  Why have specific rules for beards and hair for religious reasons (Sikhs and First Nations)?  It makes no sense.  Just make all the hair and beard rules the same for everyone.  It eliminates the creation of an "other" in the CAF.  Exceptions for "different cultural groups" for the perception of political correctness/inclusiveness sake are monstrously irritating for everyone involved.  It singles out those who are different and irritates those who perceive that the "hair growing" group are getting special treatment. 

This of course leads to negative perceptions of the special group and friction.  I have heard it dozens of dozens of times in the CAF, where people bitch about the different dress standards walking the line of racial overtones (and in a few cases well over the line).  Get rid of that stupidness.

There are also plenty of dress regs we barely even follow, tattoos and chains around the neck are two of the most glaring examples.  Hair standards for women are another one (mainly because most don't really know what they are and the male NCO's almost never go after a females for bad hair).

Frankly a bunch of tattooed, heavily bearded, long haired PPCLI (because you know they'll be the first to change to that look, certainly not the RCR or the VanDoo's  ;D) attacking a position would be terrifying.

 

[Underway]

Not to mention the RCN in particular.  Other Navies use similar systems to the Dragger and they are ok with beards, I am not sure why we have to go crazy about things.

Dragger policy is because in the operating manual the Dragger folks "recommend clean shaven" to work better with the system.  The RCN says a recommendation is what we will take to avoid the potential liability should someone have a smoke inhalation issue and we didn't follow all the recommendations from the manufacturer.  The folks who made that policy know full well a beard will work with the Dragger.

 

[NavalMoose]

"There are also plenty of dress regs we barely even follow, tattoos and chains around the neck are two of the most glaring examples.  Hair standards for women are another one (mainly because most don't really know what they are and the male NCO's almost never go after a females for bad hair)."

Not to mention rings, or is that ok for Generals?

 

[Petard]

Petard, l suggest the short hair requirement wasn't "developed", it was a necessity for hygiene and wound management in the trenches of the first world war.

At any rate, looking at many of the Brits in the sandbox, they were sporting fairly thick doos and it didn't seem to slow them down in either effectiveness or professionalism.  I'm not totally convinced your argument holds full weight.

There was a time when recruits, to the British military, were actually expected to have long hair, even getting extensions if required. This is from an old BBC documentary, but the purpose is described clearly at about the 11 minute mark
https://youtu.be/hLVG-EA-N5Y


I still think Grossman's challenge was a good discussion point: besides hair styles, what else should be abandoned?

 

[SeaKingTacco]

There was a time when recruits, to the British military, were actually expected to have long hair, even getting extensions if required. This is from an old BBC documentary, but the purpose is described clearly at about the 11 minute mark
https://youtu.be/hLVG-EA-N5Y


I still think Grossman's challenge was a good discussion point: besides hair styles, what else should be abandoned?

I like Underway's point that this will do away with all of the incesant cultural and religious exemptions that have sprung up around dress regs.

Petard's point is also a good one: why do we do certain things in the military a certain way? Are they for good reasons? Are there other, better ways?

We should always be challenging ourselves as a institution to do better. On other hand, if a certain thing has worked well for a couple of Millenia (I am thinking foot and arms drill), we should be careful about about just chucking that away. With relaxed grooming standards, we may in fact need even more basic team building exercises in our training.

 

[Navy_Pete]

Dragger policy is because in the operating manual the Dragger folks "recommend clean shaven" to work better with the system.  The RCN says a recommendation is what we will take to avoid the potential liability should someone have a smoke inhalation issue and we didn't follow all the recommendations from the manufacturer.  The folks who made that policy know full well a beard will work with the Dragger.

We did some of our own testing with and without beards on the Dragger.  Folks with beards tended to leak by air on the face seal by when actually doing anything, and their bottles only lasted about 10 minutes. Not really much use for anything.

Ironically the terrible baggy tailoring made the NCD jacket a much more effective protective system against fire; the ugly blind date bags and folds everywhere create natural air pockets that are great insulators, which makes more of a difference then the nomex.

 

[jollyjacktar]

There was a time when recruits, to the British military, were actually expected to have long hair, even getting extensions if required. This is from an old BBC documentary, but the purpose is described clearly at about the 11 minute mark
https://youtu.be/hLVG-EA-N5Y


I still think Grossman's challenge was a good discussion point: besides hair styles, what else should be abandoned?

Thanks for posting that link.  I haven't watched that series for a long time, it's excellent and now l have my evening set thanks to you.  :cheers:

I have now caught up to minute 11 and have viewed your point.  Certainty shear them like sheep for the basic training period, trades training perhaps to a lesser degree.  But once they've finished all the moulding required, is it really necessary? 

Just like when you're in cells.  The initial stripping of all privilege is backed off, little by little as the detainee "earns" more leeway.  I think much the same could be done with hair requirements etc too if there remained a steadfast need to shear upon entering the forces.  Every stick needs to have some carrot to balance things out.

 

[quadrapiper]

We did some of our own testing with and without beards on the Dragger.  Folks with beards tended to leak by air on the face seal by when actually doing anything, and their bottles only lasted about 10 minutes. Not really much use for anything.

Were the beardless folks properly clean-shaven, or stubbly? Have heard comments from boatswains and others suggesting stubble's even worse than a grow-in beard.

 

[Journeyman]

Have heard comments from boatswains and others suggesting stubble's even worse than a grow-in beard.

I've heard a few women say the same thing.  I didn't realize they were discussing respirators.   

 

[Cloud Cover]

I've heard a few women say the same thing.  I didn't realize they were discussing respirators. 

Coffee on the keyboard, again...

 

[Jarnhamar]

Not to be doom and gloom but the more our military emulates a college/university environment the more I think we're going to suffer if shit hits the fan and we want to send our forces out the door to live in a shit hole and have people try to murder them.

I'm really not expecting the world to end because of changes to the dress regs. In all honestly I'm glad in so far as the current stuff is right out of the 50s and 60s.  30 seconds after the new dress regs are announced we'll have people pushing the new limits to see what they can get away with. Typical shit.

I still think about our recruiting ethos and the direction this may be indicative of where we are heading. Again, if attracting more Canadians to the military is one of the reasons for this then we really need to look at revamping our shitty recruit system first and foremost.

Great we might get a dude to join because he can keep his goatee and look sick in selfies but what about the half dozen smart and fit potential members that lost interest because we took so long to process their application. Or we didn't have room for them on a serial but 12 members who did make it are now getting paid to get in shape in warrior platoon.


I know that's a lot to extrapolate from long hair ;D  Maybe my reservations has more to do with the feminist military garbage, guess I'll see.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Thanks for posting that link.  I haven't watched that series for a long time, it's excellent and now l have my evening set thanks to you.  :cheers:

I have now caught up to minute 11 and have viewed your point.  Certainty shear them like sheep for the basic training period, trades training perhaps to a lesser degree.  But once they've finished all the moulding required, is it really necessary? 

Just like when you're in cells.  The initial stripping of all privilege is backed off, little by little as the detainee "earns" more leeway.  I think much the same could be done with hair requirements etc too if there remained a steadfast need to shear upon entering the forces.  Every stick needs to have some carrot to balance things out.

In the British Army, after this initial 'sheep shearing' period in basic training, hair styles tended to revert to what was relatively normal for most civilian environments. No one wanted to look like a convict in the pub when off duty.

The reason for longer hair in Northern Ireland, or on other operations/ longer term deployments, was more about lack of access to a proper barber than anything else IMHO. Weeks on operations with longer hair was a real pain.

However, amusing results were achieved when self-appointed 'platoon barbers' went to work, on occasion, which was worth watching.  ;D

 

[tabernac]

No lots of currently serving members on those pages don't like it either.

Which page? I wish to engage those dinosaurs in verbal combat. Their stagnant views need to rooted out like weeds.

The number of releases for Chiefs this past week has been staggering.  The bleeding continues.

The navy will continue to bleed until it has noticeably changed for the better. A "...bloody war or a sickly season..." would do much to remove the old guard with their antiquated mentality.

 

[jollyjacktar]

The navy will continue to bleed until it has noticeably changed for the better. A "...bloody war or a sickly season..." would do much to remove the old guard with their antiquated mentality.

Well, actually the guys l was speaking of are not the antiquated dinosaur types you're thinking of.  Their leaving will be a loss of corporate knowledge and leadership that's not easily replaced.  I wouldn't be mourning the loss of dinosaurs.

 

[FSTO]

Well, actually the guys l was speaking of are not the antiquated dinosaur types you're thinking of.  Their leaving will be a loss of corporate knowledge and leadership that's not easily replaced.  I wouldn't be mourning the loss of dinosaurs.

Oh the confidence of the young and .........