Discrimination

[golgo1313]

Long time dweller, first time poster. 

I have an issue and I'm not sure if this is the correct forum for it.  If it's not I apologize.  Long story short,  I work in a section that is a lot more physical than the other sections at my unit.  Like everyone, I've had my few injuries, but nothing that ever warranted a chit more than a week, and I NEVER used any injury to get pulled out of any field ex's.  I've put in 2 years in the section and put a request to move to a different section to learn a different aspect of my job.  The section I'm looking to get put into is going to be entering it's training cycle this year, and my knowledge/experience would be an asset.  Everyone in my immediate CoC supports the move, but the SSM disagrees.  His claim is that I would be a liability due to my chit history, and sending me to a section that is out of training cycle and is on their way to being dissolved into the other sections. 

My question is: How can anyone say that I am not suited for a less physical job as my chit history shows I could be a liability.  To me, that is the same as saying that I'm a liability because I'm black, or saying that someone is a liability because they are a woman; when clearly neither is a factor for any aspect of the job. 

The way I see it is I'm being penalized for normal wear and tear from Rucking long distances with heavy weight.  If I've passed the CF Express Test and scored decently on the Coopers test, how can my medical history dictate anything?  The SSM isn't a medical practitioner, so how can he pass judgement based on chits? 

This sounds like I'm being a baby about not getting what I wanted but without getting into exact details, I'm being penalized for sacrificing a lot of blood, sweat and tears.

 

[PuckChaser]

If you've got a book of med chits in 2 years, your SSM might have a point in being concerned. Some people just have bad luck, and others are overtly prone to getting hurt. Have you asked for a meeting with the SSM through your CoC? Sounds like the next logical step would be to explain your injury history and demonstrate how what you're working on to help limit injuries.

Comparing an injury history to racial discrimination is way off the mark here, the CF is allowed to change people's employment or kick them out for medical limitations. Your SSM wants whats best for that section, and if he puts someone in there who he thinks is going to be injury prone and therefore an admin burden, he's not going to do it. You need to prove otherwise.

 

[golgo1313]

The SSM said this to me directly when I met with him.  Thats how I know about it in the first place. 

The thing is, I have no medical limitations.  Right now and for the last long while I've been fit for duty.  There are people in that specific section I'm looking at going to that are chit riders who will get chits for everything.  From getting out of parades to field exercises. 

To me, it seems like the SSM decided that "This guy doesn't want to be in such and such a section.  He doesn't want to to be here?  I'll put him somewhere else he doesn't want to be".  For a Sqn SSM to decide on someone's career progression based on past chit history seems ludacris to me.  If I was on a tcat or something then I'd understand. 

 

[Journeyman]

Right up front let me say that no one here can give you a complete answer, or one you'd prefer to hear, because we have only one side of the story -- and that side is decidedly lacking in some basic details: are the chits for the same ailment or all over the place?  Are there any other factors that you deem unimportant but may be weighed in the SSM's decision? 

Warning:  prepare to be unhappy with this response.

Nonetheless.......

.....the SSM disagrees.  His claim is that I would be a liability due to my chit history

The SSM's interest is clearly the success of the section being ramped up; it's not to punish you personally.

..... because I'm black, or saying that someone is a liability because they are a woman; when clearly neither is a factor

You're right, they're not factors.  However, your SSM apparently has reason to believe that your MIR track-record is a factor.

Being black or a woman isn't negotiable (with the exceptions of Michael Jackson or sex-change surgery).  While most of us are born in a hospital, some people perhaps choose to spend more time there than others -- again, we have no idea what all your chits are for. 

Put yourself in the SSM's boots with the major concern being the section's viablity; is it possible that you are being seen as: 
a) someone with recurring medical problems that could cause you to be pulled out at a critical time? 
b) a malingerer? (Again, we're talking about how he may perceive you.  Is there a dark side to the reason your CoC was so supportive of you moving on?)

The way I see it is I'm being penalized for normal wear and tear from Rucking long distances with heavy weight.

If everyone in your Sqn is doing ruck marches, but you're the only one with a history of chits that is obviously noteworthy, that isn't "normal."

The SSM isn't a medical practitioner, so how can he pass judgement based on chits?

That's what he gets paid for.  Outside the scope of direct treatment, which includes prescribing recovery,  the medical staff "advise" with "decide" being the prerogative of the chain of command.

To me, it seems like the SSM decided that "This guy doesn't want to be in such and such a section.  He doesn't want to to be here?  I'll put him somewhere else he doesn't want to be".

Again, while he likely balanced your desires with the section's needs, your wishes come a distant second to operational requirements.  It's not personal.

For a Sqn SSM to decide on someone's career progression based on past chit history seems ludacris to me

Perhaps your career progression would be better served by being the best soldier possible in the new section.  Go on, prove him wrong.

seems ludacris ludicrous to me

One's a lame rapper; the other one is pride in literacy.

I'm being penalized for sacrificing a lot of blood, sweat and tears.

  :warstory:  or    :    your call.


Minor edit

 

[golgo1313]

I wasnt looking for the answer I wanted.  I was looking for an answer.  I understand the other perspective.  Just asking about whether or not a chit history can be used against a healthy troop by an SSM.

What I wasnt looking for was smart ass answers about literacy.  Take your dick-ish comments elsewhere Journeyman.  No need for your further input. 

 

[George Wallace]

I wasnt looking for the answer I wanted.

It would appear that indeed you were.

 

[Teager]

I wasnt looking for the answer I wanted.  I was looking for an answer.  I understand the other perspective.  Just asking about whether or not a chit history can be used against a healthy troop by an SSM.

What I wasnt looking for was smart *** answers about literacy.  Take your dick-ish comments elsewhere Journeyman.  No need for your further input. 

Hey Journeyman did provide a warning to his response that you may be unhappy with his response.

 

[golgo1313]

Yeah, I suppose that should have said "looking for the answers I wanted.".  I wasnt aware that Pulitzer prized winning authors scanned these forums looking for grammatical errors.  Good on ya though. 

If you do not have anything to say pertaining to the subject at hand, move on. 

 

[George Wallace]

Yeah, I suppose that should have said "looking for the answers I wanted.".  I wasnt aware that Pulitzer prized winning authors scanned these forums looking for grammatical errors.  Good on ya though. 

If you do not have anything to say pertaining to the subject at hand, move on.

When you registered for this site, you were required to read the Army.ca Conduct Guidelines.  Again, appearances are that you did not.  Just to clarify something for you; we strive to have a site where posters are 'professional' and use proper English in the written form.  If you do not want to abide by the rules as set out, we can easily remove your access to the site.  Your choice.


George
army.ca Staff

 

[Journeyman]

What I wasnt looking for was smart ass answers about literacy.

That's what you took from the entire post?  :not-again:

 

[golgo1313]

Hey Journeyman did provide a warning to his response that you may be unhappy with his response.

I wasnt unhappy with the response.  I asked for information.  Got an answer, asked for further clarification and mentioned that the need for smart ass comments was nil.

 

[golgo1313]

That's what you took from the entire post?

It is not. I read your entire post.  Its the only thing I felt warranted a comment. 

 

[golgo1313]

George Wallace:  You are going to bring up forum guidelines and policies and refer to the one thing that I misspelled?  Truly a fine job you are doing! 

I came looking for clarification.  I received your opinions, and frankly didnt need any sarcastic, smart ass remarks.  That is all.

 

[Bzzliteyr]

The need for smart ass answers are always nil but just like in the real army, the chances of them happening are very high.

I've been on the receiving end of being told "no" for something and then questioning why that decision was what it was.  As young troops we don't have the "big picture". We only see what we have right in front of us.  Maybe the SSM was told that there were certain qualifications needed for the move and you lack them?  Maybe he is trying to push you to imporve as a soldier by giving you a goal to work to?  Maybe he just plain hates you?  Who knows.

You said he's sending you into a section that is going to be dissolved and put into the other sections so isn't there a chance you go there?  Be hopeful, be the best soldier you can be for yourself and someday you'll get the kickass jammy taskings that you wanted.

Good luck.

 

[golgo1313]

The need for smart *** answers are always nil but just like in the real army, the chances of them happening are very high.

I've been on the receiving end of being told "no" for something and then questioning why that decision was what it was.  As young troops we don't have the "big picture". We only see what we have right in front of us.  Maybe the SSM was told that there were certain qualifications needed for the move and you lack them?  Maybe he is trying to push you to imporve as a soldier by giving you a goal to work to?  Maybe he just plain hates you?  Who knows.

You said he's sending you into a section that is going to be dissolved and put into the other sections so isn't there a chance you go there?  Be hopeful, be the best soldier you can be for yourself and someday you'll get the kickass jammy taskings that you wanted.

Good luck.

Thank you for your help.  I figured there may have been a bigger picture, but the reasoning was just off to me.  It didn't seem right so I figured I'd ask.  Thanks for your insight.

 

[Jarnhamar]

I wasnt looking for the answer I wanted.  I was looking for an answer.  I understand the other perspective.  Just asking about whether or not a chit history can be used against a healthy troop by an SSM.

If a soldier had a long list of medical chits I'd personally take it into a big consideration whether I supported a request depending on the nature of the request.

For example if someone spent most of a 4 year period in an infantry battalion bouncing from one medical chit to the other I wouldn't support them applying to be a firefighter, do selection or something else physically demanding.

 

[Bzzliteyr]

If a soldier had a long list of medical chits I'd personally take it into a big consideration whether I supported a request depending on the nature of the request.

For example if someone spent most of a 4 year period in an infantry battalion bouncing from one medical chit to the other I wouldn't support them applying to be a firefighter, do selection or something else physically demanding.

Interesting... I have heard the opposite...

Units accepting and encouraging their members that serve no purpose to get out and do nothing somewhere else.

 

[George Wallace]

George Wallace:  You are going to bring up forum guidelines and policies and refer to the one thing that I misspelled?  Truly a fine job you are doing! 

I came looking for clarification.  I received your opinions, and frankly didnt need any sarcastic, smart ass remarks.  That is all.

That is not all.

You are on a private forum, which has members who monitor it for the owner.  If you want to have an attitude, and not play nice, you will not remain on this site.  Simple.

KISS

 

[George Wallace]

Interesting... I have heard the opposite...

Units accepting and encouraging their members that serve no purpose to get out and do nothing somewhere else.

And that attitude has led to the demise of Regiments.

 

[Loachman]

I came looking for clarification.  I received your opinions, and frankly didnt need any sarcastic, smart ass remarks.  That is all.

So you've never been ribbed, or ribbed anybody else, before, in your whole life?

I can understand your shock and dismay, then.

We're not just a bunch of teddy-bear-cuddlers here.

Rel - a - a - a - a - x, mon.