I skimmed through it, agreed with a lot of the general principles, and learned some specific terms, but I don't think anyone is internalizing much from an online course, but also took way less than the 'expected time'. While it was cheesy, I think the old SHARP training with in person was more effective, but it's also a high LOE way that needs training to do properly and also took way more time. So the DLN is more efficient at ticking that box, if all you care about was time spent on being 'woke'.
People going into anything thinking it's a waste of time won't take on anything regardless of how you deliver it, and people railing against 'the woke agenda' that are getting pissed off they can't be assholes are probably the ones that need it the most, even if it's only so you can't point to the training as being completed so you can drop the hammer on them.
Getting rid of people is difficult, but I'm happy to have checked the boxes like this if it helps punt someone for being actively racist to coworkers, which sadly still happens.
I've taken god knows how many WHIMS courses, done a lot of safety orientations and all kinds of other things where I didn't learn anything new, and absolutely none of that has anything to do with DEI, but checking boxes is just part of any big organization. At one time it was also the first time I got any of that training and learned something, and frankly reminders of what you are supposed to do never hurt once in a while, as a lot of bad habits can settle in.
Are you going to pretend it's only the CAF that has 'don't be an asshole' refresher training as part of normal HR requirements? Cmon.
Comparing my experience in the private sector to that of my CAF experience, the amount of time I spend on this stuff is basically non-existent. It's "here is the policy, if you break it, it may be grounds for termination".
Do we have policies and procedures in place to deal with equity issues? Yes. Does it take up as much time as it did when I was a CAF member? Not even close.
We also have a large portion of the workforce that is paid by the hour. I've got a 105 employees who work for me and every cost is tracked. This stuff all falls under non-productive billable hours of work so it's important to keep it as concise and to the point as possible.
People railing against this stuff are pretending like it's new.
It's not new; however, it has evolved.
I pride myself on not being a racist or prejudiced asshole. So generally just click through as fast as possible; you know so I can get back to leading my people and helping them with their problems and issues.
You and
@markppcli miss my point. The problem with the CAFs efforts IMO is that it wreaks of tokenism which is exactly why these initiatives don't work. I've been out a few years and I'm not up to date on the latest offerings but when I was in, I do remember spending a lot more time than an hour or two on these topics.
Your last few comments have really made me ponder something - should the CAF (and govt in general) be run like a business or not?
In private industry, the goal is profit so if there is dead time, people should be doing something else so “unnecessary” (whatever it may be) stuff should be reduced.
So that’s fair, but then there is the counter argument that a military should not be structured like a business (just in time delivery, minimal staffing, that kind of stuff). Plus, the goal for the military isn’t to earn profit or even be the most efficient - or else we would just disband everyone when not actively in a war.
I have a differing opinion:
Does the Military have capital assets? Yes.
Does the Military have a multitude of functions? Yes.
Does the Military have an upstream and a downstream supply chain? Yes.
Does the Military have a diverse workforce? Yes.
Is the Military subject to audits? Yes.
The Military is the most serious business there is and if it wants to be the best it can be, it needs to adopt world class business practices so that the Nations sons and daughters are not ill-prepared for the missions they undertake.
A private company would not keep people around in case anything blows up (quite literally) and we need to send people elsewhere, nor store things in the off chance that they might be required.
We actually do keep people around for that believe it or not, and those are the people with the best job security in the business. When everyone else is getting furloughed, they still keep their job.
Then, there’s the blowback about the “MBA-ification of the CAF” (the whole ad with the executive coming out of the aircraft). So clearly there is another argument against running it like a business.
Hmm…
This is more of a CAF/GoC issue. The public sector attaches a level of importance to some of these certifications that isn't really warranted. Outside of Consulting, Finance/Banking, Govt, MBAs are not really required for high office.
I think the Military needs invest in its own programs that suit the profession of arms, like spending significantly more on War Colleges for Officers and enhancing the programs delivered to Senior NCOs.
