Daily wear - Work Dress vs Operational dress [Split from Sleeves up]
- Thread starter FSTO
- Start date
BDTyre
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 4
- Points
- 230
Throwaway987 said:
I've noticed the oxfords over the last several years (since the introduction of the new sole and fleece insole) have also had a coating on them that holds a shine well, but once you actually walk in the shoe it starts to separate and peel off, taking your shine with it and the leather underneath needs more effort than the coating. So for some time you're left with patchy looking shoes that don't polish quite right.
- Reaction score
- 18,781
- Points
- 1,280
Throwaway987 said:
The Aussies did have patent leather shoes issued, and their complaint was that once they got scratched or scuffed, that was it - nothing could bring them back. Unrelated, but hilarious, their soles were only glued on so in the Aus heat, they would peel off as you stepped off on parade.
They have these instead now - RM Williams Craftsman boots.
Eye In The Sky
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 3,780
- Points
- 1,160
CanadianTire said:
We don't have a lot of RSMs in the RCAF... ;D
8 bucks a piece, lasts me about a decade or so, good to go with CADPAT or flying suit. I bought a replacement that is a little better than the issued brown one on Ebay for when I need to wear tan stuff.
https://www.canex.ca/military-combat-belt-s-m.html
Eye In The Sky
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 3,780
- Points
- 1,160
CanadianTire said:
Same as the issued ankle boots, the polish doesn't bond to the leather quite right. I was told there is a wax coating/treatment applied to the leather, and to really get a good shine that holds well, you need to basically sand/strip the leather and then start the polish. I've got better things to do with my time...
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 60
The boots you posted seem pretty reasonable. Just wipe off the dust and dirt and you’re good to go. The intent being to obtain a reasonable appearance with the minimal amount of effort/time required. i.e. make it easier for the average CAF member to maximize their dress and deportment
I’ve got fairly nice Geox ones that are shiny black and I’ve never had to polish them in years. Just take them out of the travel bag and they’re good to go. I’m always slightly frustrated/disappointed with the CAF with wasting my time whenever I have to wear my oxfords. What kind of shoe requires transport in an ornate box to maintain their appearance?!
I’ve got fairly nice Geox ones that are shiny black and I’ve never had to polish them in years. Just take them out of the travel bag and they’re good to go. I’m always slightly frustrated/disappointed with the CAF with wasting my time whenever I have to wear my oxfords. What kind of shoe requires transport in an ornate box to maintain their appearance?!
Eye In The Sky
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 3,780
- Points
- 1,160
I was on course in Halifax recently; noticed more people seem to be going towards the patent leather oxfords for 3B. Seems like a good option for anyone who isn't keen on the polish upkeep gig.
- Reaction score
- 6,284
- Points
- 1,040
Throwaway987 said:
It's not terribly unusual to go with tshirts in the Navy side when you are doing something when it's this hot and you are outside working. You always have your second layer with you (the NCD jacket) so pretty easy to also carry the blue shirt. Not sure if that will stay the same with the new NCDs but can't see why that wouldn't work the same. Maybe a bit easier when you are in a self contained unit that's it's own real estate, but if you don't show common sense, make sure the sailors are in a comfortable order of dress, and make sure folks have sun screen, water, whatever, that's normally when you feel the wrath of Command for not looking after your people.
ps what is the ICE jacket?
Eye In The Sky
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 3,780
- Points
- 1,160
Is there any leeway given in the Army dress orders, like we have in 1 Div for hot Wx ops? Divs, Bdes, Regiments etc can establish their unit policy for Hot Wx Ops?
I only wear 2 piece flight suits; if the office is hot, I am allowed to take off my flight shirt and move around Sqn spaces. Hot Wx flying ops; the skipper can authorize deviation from the normal "dual layer shall be worn", and, again I can go down to just a t-shirt (with the common sense expectation my jacket, shirt, gloves come with me if I'm swapping seats or something).
ICE jacket is the (IIRC used to be OD, CADPAT now) combo of combat jacket/wind pants & parka/bib-overalls that has been out for the past decade + now for Army/AF types.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/96742839@N08/16539432889
I only wear 2 piece flight suits; if the office is hot, I am allowed to take off my flight shirt and move around Sqn spaces. Hot Wx flying ops; the skipper can authorize deviation from the normal "dual layer shall be worn", and, again I can go down to just a t-shirt (with the common sense expectation my jacket, shirt, gloves come with me if I'm swapping seats or something).
Navy_Pete said:
ICE jacket is the (IIRC used to be OD, CADPAT now) combo of combat jacket/wind pants & parka/bib-overalls that has been out for the past decade + now for Army/AF types.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/96742839@N08/16539432889
Attachments
- Reaction score
- 13
- Points
- 530
I’m not a Millennial and it was silly for anyone to even bring that element into this at any point.
Millennials aren’t the only ones who request and/or would like to see certain policies relaxed when the circumstance is relevant.
Adding more to the mix is the fact that leadership isn’t in consensus across the board, even those in high-profile, combat positions (pictures are worth a thousand words), so it’s hardly acceptable to come down on certain persons and/or a group of persons for wanting to be a tad more “comfortable” on occasion, especially when the humidex is reaching 40 by 1000 when they are fully aware that their comfort level (or lack thereof) is entirely in the hands of who’s calling the shots at their specific location.
Time and a place. Yes, there are absolutely instances where it’s necessary to ‘suck it up, buttercup’ and deal with it—whatever it is—Do what you’re told, no questions. That’s what you signed up for. But in the quiet, informal, tedious portions of duty, especially if under hot sun, or much higher-than-normal temps, treating one’s soldiers with just a tad of consideration can go a long way.
My CoC (which is RegF Army) have been quite reasonable. On the pde square, sleeves down always. Outside, cadpat shirt off and hat. Anywhere indoors with no AC, sleeves up and/or cadpat shirt off, depending.
That little bit of flexibility has really helped morale. (And despite what some may believe, positive morale is important *when the opportunity for boosting it a little bit exists.*) It leads to greater efficiency in job performance, improved cooperation amongst colleagues and heightened overall respect for superiors...thus, their jobs become slightly easier. And that’s not a bad thing. (‘Pretty common rule-of-thumb for any leadership role, anywhere—keep your subs happy and your job is going to be a hell of a lot easier.)
Again, yes. This is the military. There’s going to be many times where gripes and complaints, well, no one cares. Also, no one cares about one’s comfort level during certain aspects either. But a little discernment about when to implement the approach of ‘shut yer cake-holes, these are the rules and you’ll do what yer damn well told’ and when not to is entirely necessary.
Millennials aren’t the only ones who request and/or would like to see certain policies relaxed when the circumstance is relevant.
Adding more to the mix is the fact that leadership isn’t in consensus across the board, even those in high-profile, combat positions (pictures are worth a thousand words), so it’s hardly acceptable to come down on certain persons and/or a group of persons for wanting to be a tad more “comfortable” on occasion, especially when the humidex is reaching 40 by 1000 when they are fully aware that their comfort level (or lack thereof) is entirely in the hands of who’s calling the shots at their specific location.
Time and a place. Yes, there are absolutely instances where it’s necessary to ‘suck it up, buttercup’ and deal with it—whatever it is—Do what you’re told, no questions. That’s what you signed up for. But in the quiet, informal, tedious portions of duty, especially if under hot sun, or much higher-than-normal temps, treating one’s soldiers with just a tad of consideration can go a long way.
My CoC (which is RegF Army) have been quite reasonable. On the pde square, sleeves down always. Outside, cadpat shirt off and hat. Anywhere indoors with no AC, sleeves up and/or cadpat shirt off, depending.
That little bit of flexibility has really helped morale. (And despite what some may believe, positive morale is important *when the opportunity for boosting it a little bit exists.*) It leads to greater efficiency in job performance, improved cooperation amongst colleagues and heightened overall respect for superiors...thus, their jobs become slightly easier. And that’s not a bad thing. (‘Pretty common rule-of-thumb for any leadership role, anywhere—keep your subs happy and your job is going to be a hell of a lot easier.)
Again, yes. This is the military. There’s going to be many times where gripes and complaints, well, no one cares. Also, no one cares about one’s comfort level during certain aspects either. But a little discernment about when to implement the approach of ‘shut yer cake-holes, these are the rules and you’ll do what yer damn well told’ and when not to is entirely necessary.
OldSolduer
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 15,557
- Points
- 1,260
EITS:
When I was at Minto I authorized my RSS staff to work in TShirts during the hot months and the issue fleece in the colder months.
It worked.
Common sense prevailed. I think.
When I was at Minto I authorized my RSS staff to work in TShirts during the hot months and the issue fleece in the colder months.
It worked.
Common sense prevailed. I think.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 60
I appreciate your passionate response and I’ll respectfully respond from my point of view.
My own frustrations and concerns come from seeing an archaic institution failing to adapt to a changing generational mindset. We risk losing the future best and brightest, the ones who have the capability to leave, and being left with an increasing proportion of people who have no where better to go.
I believe that the changing demographics mean that “why” will become an increasing factor in ensuring compliance with orders and directive (in non-combat situations). I think of the times when I have personally had internal thoughts about a questionable order but knowing why soothed almost any hardship.
In your example of NBC training, my counterpoint is that the purpose of being uncomfortable in that dress is that it serves as training for future operations. It’s an easy sell and the “why” is reasonable. I do not believe that sleeves always rolled down in garrison is a comparable situation and it does not fulfil the “why” in the same obvious manner. In combat or deployed situation, the very context of the environment provides the “why” and there is mutual innate understanding that questioning is inappropriate.
In the second example of following orders, I believe that it is also a red herring. I am not suggesting that I personally contravene these orders. On the contrary, I’m relatively anal retentive person and I struggle with trying to convince others to follow all our policies in a world of limited time and resources. I am merely providing an explanation for why, on a population level, we are struggling to implement and enforce this order. Why are there LCols in conflict with a CWO over sleeves? Why are there reports of an Vandoo RSM on reddit stating the opposite of the CCA’s directives?
I recall from a management seminar that we should identify problems as systemic issues versus individual issues. I view the sleeve issues as a systemic one as it causes many reasonable individuals to run into the same issue time and time again. Should all these senior leaders all report to the release section as you suggest? Or could they be reasonable people trying to work with an unreasonable policy?
I disagree with your assessment on the slippery slope theory. I do not believe that questioning an impractical order means that you are automatically blinded to all sense of reason and judgement with more practical orders. Can it be possible that we’re talking about two different groups of people? Can people who lack attention to detail simply lack attention to detail and need to be rehabilitated or removed from the CAF?
My own frustrations and concerns come from seeing an archaic institution failing to adapt to a changing generational mindset. We risk losing the future best and brightest, the ones who have the capability to leave, and being left with an increasing proportion of people who have no where better to go.
I believe that the changing demographics mean that “why” will become an increasing factor in ensuring compliance with orders and directive (in non-combat situations). I think of the times when I have personally had internal thoughts about a questionable order but knowing why soothed almost any hardship.
In your example of NBC training, my counterpoint is that the purpose of being uncomfortable in that dress is that it serves as training for future operations. It’s an easy sell and the “why” is reasonable. I do not believe that sleeves always rolled down in garrison is a comparable situation and it does not fulfil the “why” in the same obvious manner. In combat or deployed situation, the very context of the environment provides the “why” and there is mutual innate understanding that questioning is inappropriate.
In the second example of following orders, I believe that it is also a red herring. I am not suggesting that I personally contravene these orders. On the contrary, I’m relatively anal retentive person and I struggle with trying to convince others to follow all our policies in a world of limited time and resources. I am merely providing an explanation for why, on a population level, we are struggling to implement and enforce this order. Why are there LCols in conflict with a CWO over sleeves? Why are there reports of an Vandoo RSM on reddit stating the opposite of the CCA’s directives?
I recall from a management seminar that we should identify problems as systemic issues versus individual issues. I view the sleeve issues as a systemic one as it causes many reasonable individuals to run into the same issue time and time again. Should all these senior leaders all report to the release section as you suggest? Or could they be reasonable people trying to work with an unreasonable policy?
I disagree with your assessment on the slippery slope theory. I do not believe that questioning an impractical order means that you are automatically blinded to all sense of reason and judgement with more practical orders. Can it be possible that we’re talking about two different groups of people? Can people who lack attention to detail simply lack attention to detail and need to be rehabilitated or removed from the CAF?
- Reaction score
- 7
- Points
- 230
The usual refrain of "orders are orders" might be true, but it's not without consequences. You can issue a stupid order and expect it to be followed, but in doing so you undermine the trust your personnel have in your leadership, and you increase the likelihood that those personnel are just going to say "fuck it, I've had enough of this stupid BS, I'm going to leave and get a nice cushy civvy job.
If one person thinks an order is stupid, that's probably that person's problem. If everyone with less time in than Christ thinks an order is stupid, that's the person who issued the order's problem. Just because someone has the legal authority to issue an order doesn't make that order "right" from either a moral perspective, or from the perspective of "is this a good idea"? That's what I'm seeing far too often: people issuing orders seemingly without bothering to consider the consequences of their actions, the impact that it will have upon the morale of their subordinates and the follow-on impact on retention and thus operational effectiveness of the Canadian Armed Forces.
Because, let's face it, no one really wants to continue working for an organization which continually comes up with really stupid rules that you have to follow that make no sense. No one wants to continue working for an organization that proves time and time again that they're deaf to the concerns of the people who have to follow said orders.
Far too many times when discussing issues like this, people always fall back on the tried and true "Orders are orders" and "If you don't like it get out", with the problem being that we're in the midst of a retention crisis, and far too many people are getting out, in no small part because they're tired of dealing with petty BS like this. At that point, it's not the member who's VRing's problem, it's the CAF's problem.
If one person thinks an order is stupid, that's probably that person's problem. If everyone with less time in than Christ thinks an order is stupid, that's the person who issued the order's problem. Just because someone has the legal authority to issue an order doesn't make that order "right" from either a moral perspective, or from the perspective of "is this a good idea"? That's what I'm seeing far too often: people issuing orders seemingly without bothering to consider the consequences of their actions, the impact that it will have upon the morale of their subordinates and the follow-on impact on retention and thus operational effectiveness of the Canadian Armed Forces.
Because, let's face it, no one really wants to continue working for an organization which continually comes up with really stupid rules that you have to follow that make no sense. No one wants to continue working for an organization that proves time and time again that they're deaf to the concerns of the people who have to follow said orders.
Far too many times when discussing issues like this, people always fall back on the tried and true "Orders are orders" and "If you don't like it get out", with the problem being that we're in the midst of a retention crisis, and far too many people are getting out, in no small part because they're tired of dealing with petty BS like this. At that point, it's not the member who's VRing's problem, it's the CAF's problem.
- Reaction score
- 2,849
- Points
- 940
I suspect that anyone getting out because dress regs proved too overwhelming will continue to bitch about their McDonalds or Walmart uniforms.gcclarke said:
Similar threads
