Eye In The Sky said:
I flip the coin on the whole lot of it. Is beards and who can grown their hair long REALLY the biggest issues we face? I am like my WCWO. I am so ******* tired of the talk about beards. Seriously if the most grave issue that a group of people can bring up at a Wing townhall is beards we as a military are so far into the hurt locker it’s more than concerning.
The problem is we, the CAF, has allowed it to become a problem. We have let people game the system by trumping up excuses to get medical chits.
I was at a briefing where the senior medical staff of a major base stated they didn't even have control of the issue anymore; when they started to crack down on chits, a dermatologist in the city next to the Base realized there was money to be made and started providing "specialist" chits that the Base surgeon had no choice but to accept. So now the latest is we are going to "enforce" the rule that a no shaving chit means no shaving at all in order to lessen the incentive to fake a problem to grow a beard. So we have people with beards that start under their eyeballs and continue right on into their chest hair; how professional and uniform looking is that? We also have inconsistent wording on shave chits. I've seen it vary from "no shaving" all the way to, "shaving as tolerated by member's skin condition"...
Fortunately we have the DAOD on religious accommodation which is already the go-to for those who want a beard (and usually there is a caveat thrown in about hair length as well)...which they get to decide what it looks like IAW their "religion" (Can't wait to see someone with the braided ponytail beard a la Vikings on some self identified Norse pagan).
The RCAF fleece was designed as outerwear from the get go. Epilauttes for rank slips on and Velcro for name tapes etc. The army designed it differently with a different intended use.
Really? The Army did? Only piece of "non-outwear" I've been issued that has an epulate, and none of my "underwear" has an epulate. I've heard a dozen different reasons on what the intent was, and why it can't be worn as outer wear, none of them make any sense (a Bde SM proclaimed it was sleep wear only). Even the official fallback now, that it doesn't have a nametape, doesn't hold water. My gabardine, nylon DEU rainjacket or DEU parka don't need a nametag, yet somehow I can wear those a-ok as outerwear. End of the day, there is no "reason" we couldn't wear it as outerwear, other than a few people who can't admit that maybe a bad call was made when the item was originally issued.
As for why the troops "waste time" in townhalls with the senior leaders about this stuff, it's pretty simple. They have formed the opinion that the message isn't being passed up the chain because "someone" doesn't like the idea. They are right, "someone" doesn't like the idea, unfortunately they are right at the top and more concerned with historical rank, velcro army qualification badges on CADPAT (conveniently combat arms centric), patrol blues, cuff links...
As someone pointed out, these are zero cost, zero effort initiatives we could give the troops to show them we are listening and can move forward with the times instead of constantly looking and moving backwards...
