Fitness Standards

[aesop081]

So - is there enough of a need within the Air Force that it should adopt the BFT for EVERYONE (I'm thinking the maintainers, etcetera)

Personaly, i would say yes but that would certainly not be up to reality. I doubt the maintainers need it but the aircrews certainly do. That being said, the reality in certain inuts is that it is extreamly difficult for members to train for this and maintain it. Shift work for both aircrews and ground crews makes any group thing nearly impossible and individualy is just as difficult since we are so short of people qualified to sign for maintenance actions. Members end up speding their off time at the gym ( some of them anyways). Other than Tac Hel ( as far as i know), we are not even issued with the required gear. Unfortunately is some aircraft counities, operations run both abroad and at home simultaneously so we cant just stop to have group PT.

I dont know what a realistic solution is.......

 

[X-mo-1979]

The thing is the 13km march is the end all maximum and minimum all in one.If you come in at 1 hour or you scrape in the last second you pass.You reach exempt status.

The organization provides no motivation to surpass the standard of the 13km.In fact I can honestly say it serves no real purpose.It proves you can walk.And you walk either fast or slow.

The express test IMHO is a little higher of a standard.At least it is graded on a scale of fitness.Not a Pass or fail.I do understand most think it to be a much lower level than you would expect from a military,however the organization offers incentive for an exempt.Next year you would not have to do it.

I had heard rumblings of the 13km being thrown away while we were deployed,but alas I guess it was just rumor.

I'm a big fan of personal PT on my own time.However if I decide to not do anything and pass the standard what is the difference really?
Does it fall into job performance?Perhaps.However trying to nail someone for not being a fast runner or a fat slob would be problematic at best.Can you say redress!

Until the standard changes the 13km is the minimum and maximum.Someone through out history decided on that.It is easy to administer,easy to pass.

My question would be to you all is how is someone achieving the minimal standard by completing the maximum? (not that I agree but just a thought)

 

[Roy Harding]

That's a pretty interesting and valid point of view, X-mo-1979 - and one that I hadn't considered.  The "minimum" IS the "maximum" - you're quite correct. 

So what's the solution?  I seem to recall we tried little "shiny bits" for our uniforms some time ago - it was panned by the troops as the BS it was.  So, "shiny bits" are out.

Someone earlier (maybe you - I don't have time to look it up) suggested financial recompense of some kind.  I THINK that'd work for some - but not all (wouldn't have worked as motivation for me - although I would have happily accepted the cash.  I've never been motivated by money - as long as I've got enough to keep a roof over my head and dinner on the table, I'm happy - but that's the repressed hippy in me coming out, I think  )

How would YOU motivate the troops to exceed the "minimum/maximum" represented by the BFT?

 

[X-mo-1979]

I agree..that warrior badge just didn't work IMHO.

Monetary reward is great,however it would be ripe with corruption as was the warrior badge.(I.E that guy you know didn't get gold!!)

I have I believe motivated my guys to be stronger during PT.I offered a variety of PT...not running every Monday Wednesday Friday with a sport and a ruck march thrown in there.My leadership saw my passion for RESPONSIBLE physical training and allowed me to develop my subordinates in this field.
The response I got was great.And surprisingly from even the heavier set out of shape guys.They actually looked forward to a variety of PT instead of the constant revolving unchanging schedule.
I believe that many Jnco's and Snr NCO's have done this to great effect and improved the troops way beyond the minimum level.

However what does this really change?A mindset among these few young guys maybe.However this served as 1 year in their 25 year career.Next year they could easily end up somewhere where the revolving schedule of lowest denominator exists again.

My theory on the BFT is this.Its a walk.You can walk fast or slow.If there was a organizational change which instituted a new multi level standard,which also showed up on a PER with points awarded...that would ensure troops were putting more into PT.

Maybe a change to  a physical requirement for career courses.Nothing monumental that only allowed meatheads and uber runners into leadership positions.However something as a benchmark to discourage the lowest standard.They can have a standard for a jump course,I cannot see why the same couldn't be applied to ANY career course.

People need something to reach for to achieve higher IMHO.

These two examples have their issues logistically,and I understand implementing a new standard has its own problems.

Exceeding the maximum of a BFT is moot really.Exceeding the maximum would be coming in 2 sec before the cut off.

 

[Roy Harding]

...
I have I believe motivated my guys to be stronger during PT.I offered a variety of PT...not running every Monday Wednesday Friday with a sport and a ruck march thrown in there.My leadership saw my passion for RESPONSIBLE physical training and allowed me to develop my subordinates in this field.
The response I got was great.And surprisingly from even the heavier set out of shape guys.They actually looked forward to a variety of PT instead of the constant revolving unchanging schedule.
I believe that many Jnco's and Snr NCO's have done this to great effect and improved the troops way beyond the minimum level.

...

People need something to reach for to achieve higher IMHO.

...

Bingo.  Thank you - you hit the nail on the head.

"People need something to reach for" and "many Jnco's and Snr NCO's have done this to great effect ".

That's it!  It takes LEADERSHIP - at the lowest possible level - to have troops who are "superior" to the "minimum standard".

What's the reward for doing so?  Pride.  Pride in belonging to a "kick ass section", or platoon, or coy, or Bn, or Bde.

I hate to bring it up again - because I realize it gets old after a while - but it illustrates the point perfectly.  In the Ab Regt, we EXCEEDED the "minimum CF standards" which existed at the time.  How come?  Because we were Airborne - and we took pride in that, and because we took pride in that, it was incumbent upon us as individuals to ensure that the Regiment was perceived as "elite" (although that was a verboten term at the time) by the rest of the CF.  I imagine a similar mindset is prevalent amongst CANSOFCOM troops today (even if it isn't officially sanctioned.)

The LEADERSHIP needs to inspire and motivate the troops to NOT be satisfied with the bare minimum - they need to instill PRIDE in the troops to achieve more.  And the methods of doing that are as numerous as the number of Jr and Sr NCOs in the CF.

It remains true that to train your soldiers to a "minimal standard" results in commanding "minimal troops".

The folks I feel sorry for are those serving in those field units (and they exist) which do not take pride in being "better" than the "minimum standard".  It is those folks who are physically injured, have their feet torn apart, and generally dread the BFT.  A little pride from their leadership (at all levels) would have them "walking in the park" like the soldiers they have the potential to be.

Or do I have it all wrong?

 

[Gunner98]

Roy,

Can infer from your post that no soldiers in AB Regt were unfit, chubby or unmotivated toward PT?

 

[X-mo-1979]

Bingo it is roy.
Not only does it come from being in a elite unit,it also comes from beating such units in runs etc.I can tell yah my guys were all grins watching another unit come running in while we were all stretching....and were suppose to be "out of shape" due to history...I.E fat Tankers.

Leadership (at the lower level) is key.

 

[blacktriangle]

What's the reward for doing so?  Pride.  Pride in belonging to a "kick *** section", or platoon, or coy, or Bn, or Bde.

Back in the MO my troop had an awesome MCpl who used to take us for PT. One parade night while doing a formation run, he actually had us all turn around and run backwards past another group, many of whom were clearly out of shape and several obese.

Was it a gongshow? Yep. But was I happy I was in his group, and not the other? You bet. Whenever that guy was around, we were second to none.

 

[armyvern]

That's a pretty interesting and valid point of view, X-mo-1979 - and one that I hadn't considered.  The "minimum" IS the "maximum" - you're quite correct. 

So what's the solution?  I seem to recall we tried little "shiny bits" for our uniforms some time ago - it was panned by the troops as the BS it was.  So, "shiny bits" are out.

Ahhh yes - the old Warrior Test. As I used to say to the ex as he harassed me due to my "silver" (I am not a runner - I am a swimmer) being below his "gold" standard (hey, when you're 2 RCR and have time in your day to do PT for 4 hours a day, you damn well should have a "gold" and be in good shape ...) ...

"So you can outrun me, but I score higher than you on the range every year and during the Warrior Test - at the end of the day it just doesn't matter how fast you can run - my bullet will catch up with you and I won't miss."

That really used to piss him off.

 

[PMedMoe]

Okay, this is off the Army Fitness Standard, after all, X-mo-1979 said it already, the BFT is the minimum and maximum.

Right now, my standard is the CF ExPres test.  For the last three years, I have achieved the exempt level, but still go and do it every year*.  Would this be considered exceeding the minimum standard?

*As an example to my subordinates and to prove I can still show them up, even though I'm older. 

 

[armyvern]

My theory on the BFT is this.Its a walk.You can walk fast or slow.If there was a organizational change which instituted a new multi level standard,which also showed up on a PER with points awarded...that would ensure troops were putting more into PT.

Interesting concept. I like it, but wonder how it would ever be implemented for the purple trades serving in LF posns.

Not that those purple trades (which are deeply red these days) even have time for PT 5 days per week (in some locations - not even 3 times per week), but they DO get the BFT done each year.

My wondering is really about "how to implement and incorporate" your suggestion at the national level where purple trades all sit before the same trade merit boards regardless of posting or uniform colour. Does the Sup tech wearing a blue uniform (or green, or black) serving on an Army base not get promoted because he only achieved the "minimum" on an Army test while some Navy (or Army or Air) Suppy serving on a ship achieved a bare pass or an "exempt" on an Express test?

We'd still have to have some way to relate the Army test over to the Express test for those purple trades.

Currently, the Army's (bare minimum & maximum all-rolled-into-one) BFT "pass" equates to an "exempt" on PERs which is equal to another purple trades "exempt" PER score from an Air or Naval location; the Army minimum (which is an "exempt" on the PER) test is accorded higher PER points than a minimum "pass" on Express for PER purposes.

The purple world would have to see an 'equation' that allows comparison between the different testing results for Army to both other elements as we do compete with those other elements for postings/promotions/positions - when it affects careers ... it must have some way to 'compare'. We can't just forget the other elements exist as perhaps the hard army trades can (being that they are also army managed [us Army Sup techs serving on Army bases aren't even 'Army' managed] and aren't compared to those serving in other elements with other fitness testing modes).

 

[ruckmarch]

Okay, this is off the Army Fitness Standard, after all, X-mo-1979 said it already, the BFT is the minimum and maximum.

Right now, my standard is the CF ExPres test.  For the last three years, I have achieved the exempt level, but still go and do it every year*.  Would this be considered exceeding the minimum standard?

*As an example to my subordinates and to prove I can still show them up, even though I'm older. 

You've seen some of the European fitness standards for females vs males right?

I know in the UK, women have to do a longer 20MSR than men, perhaps you can ask to be tested using the men's standard to archieve your exempt?

 

[PMedMoe]

You've seen some of the European fitness standards for females vs males right?

I know in the UK, women have to do a longer 20MSR than men, perhaps you can ask to be tested using the men's standard to archieve your exempt?

And your point is??

I get exempt.  How do you know what level I attain? 

Oh, last time I looked, I was in Canada, not Europe.  :

 

[ruckmarch]

And your point is??

I get exempt.  How do you know what level I attain? 

Oh, last time I looked, I was in Canada, not Europe.  :

My point? You mentioned that you keep taking the test every year, even though you get exempt. Sounds like you are looking for a harder challenge?

As an older person myself, I always find level 10 a good level to brag about.

 

[Roy Harding]

Roy,

Can infer from your post that no soldiers in AB Regt were unfit, chubby or unmotivated toward PT?

Nope.  But in my experience it was rare - and it was usually self-correcting because of the aforementioned (perhaps misplace, but real nevertheless) pride.

 

[PMedMoe]

My point? You mentioned that you keep taking the test every year, even though you get exempt. Sounds like you are looking for a harder challenge?

I explained why I do it every year in the first post (read the small print).

As an older person myself, I always find level 10 a good level to brag about.

Good for you.

 

[Roy Harding]

ruckmarch:

Tone it down - read the previous posts by recceguy and me - this is NOT about chest thumping.

Moe:  don't take the bait!


Roy Harding
Milnet.ca Staff

 

[Gunner98]

Roy has guided this revived thread with these statements over the last week or so:

"The question in my mind - however - is what those folks who failed were doing there anyway.  This SHOULD have been taken care of prior to deployment."

"The question is - should meeting the "minimum standard" be enough?  Not to mention - should meeting the minimum standard be made "easier" in some way?"

"But I do think that there was (when I retired in '04) an attitude, especially amongst Army CSS folk (and I was one - so don't play that card), that meeting the "minimum standard" (which is what the BFT is) was "acceptable".  It's THAT attitude that I'm railing against."

"ANYBODY on strength of ANY field deployable unit who needs to "work up" and "plan" for a BFT is not doing part of their job.  It (the BFT) should be viewed as a "walk in the park" - because that's what it is, for field soldiers."

I would suggest from my combined 25+ years in both Cbt Arms and CSS/Med units that the standard/expectation is set by the CO/RSM. The work-up trg is set as a sub-unit goal to build group fitness/morale. When it comes to judging/establishing unit fitness goals it will depend on the personal fitness level of CO/RSM (or Bde Comd/RSM). Some will set examples by leading and other will be tail end charlies.

In the case of those who deployed to Camp Julien and were subsequently made to do a BFT resulted from the Contingent Comd learning that soldiers who had failed pre-deployment screening were still being deployed - some with serious medical issues. The fact that their COs had still signed off on the DAG form goes back to paragraph 1 - it is a command responsibility.

I served as a field grade officer in the same CSS unit under 3 different COs - their style, fitness level and visible participation in fitness varied greatly. One was/is a National caliber athlete, one was somewhat physically abused former cbt arms officer (like me) and one an older female. Likewise their RSMs (collectively 5 individuals filled the job including A/RSMs covering during deployments of the RSM) also varied in these traits.

This obviously leads to a different standard and planned activity for CO/RSM's weekly PT sessions. Since this event was the main (memorable) interaction on a weekly basis between CO/RSM and their troops, it left an indelible impression on everyone involved. These encounters formed opinions by the senior leadership of the soldiers’ capabilities while in garrison. Likewise it showed the soldiers how hard a CO and his subordinate leaders were willing to work to set the example for the same soldiers they were ultimately observing/judging for PDR/PER purposes.

The attitude of a unit is set by the cultural environment and visible execution of standards to which soldiers are held. Does this need to vary by rank and position?

The culture in the Army starting in 2003 was based on this mission statement for LFDTS - "Mission. Maintain oversight on individual training activities across the Army and provide advice to the Comd LFDTS on all issues relating to the implementation of “One Army, One Standard.” Which lead to this tag line - "The army, training to one standard." (see article - http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/caj/documents/vol_06/iss_3/CAJ_vol6.3_07_e.pdf)

Today's tag line is "One Army, One Team, One Vision." 

I think this has resulted in a self-fulfilling mindset that says there is no maximum or minimum standard - there is indeed only one standard for the army, as one team with one vision.

Edited several times to fix grammar and flow.

 

[X-mo-1979]

Interesting concept. I like it, but wonder how it would ever be implemented for the purple trades serving in LF posns.

Not that those purple trades (which are deeply red these days) even have time for PT 5 days per week (in some locations - not even 3 times per week), but they DO get the BFT done each year.

My wondering is really about "how to implement and incorporate" your suggestion at the national level where purple trades all sit before the same trade merit boards regardless of posting or uniform colour. Does the Sup tech wearing a blue uniform (or green, or black) serving on an Army base not get promoted because he only achieved the "minimum" on an Army test while some Navy (or Army or Air) Suppy serving on a ship achieved a bare pass or an "exempt" on an Express test?

We'd still have to have some way to relate the Army test over to the Express test for those purple trades.

Currently, the Army's (bare minimum & maximum all-rolled-into-one) BFT "pass" equates to an "exempt" on PERs which is equal to another purple trades "exempt" PER score from an Air or Naval location; the Army minimum (which is an "exempt" on the PER) test is accorded higher PER points than a minimum "pass" on Express for PER purposes.

The purple world would have to see an 'equation' that allows comparison between the different testing results for Army to both other elements as we do compete with those other elements for postings/promotions/positions - when it affects careers ... it must have some way to 'compare'. We can't just forget the other elements exist as perhaps the hard army trades can (being that they are also army managed [us Army Sup techs serving on Army bases aren't even 'Army' managed] and aren't compared to those serving in other elements with other fitness testing modes).

Good points.What I would be suggesting would require a national organizational change.The coopers test is  a good example.It can be given a numbered score,and tests a broad range of fitness.I don't understand why we can't have one standard for all units in the CF.For sure 1 RCR are going to have a higher unit score.No doubt.However with one fitness standard everyone gets the same test,and are scored against their peers.

As you said about purple trades not getting PT 5 times a week,we are in the same boat.

A coopers test(style) across the CF where your score is placed in a box on your PER,would achieve a higher level of fitness in our forces.
To go on your 6B-you have to pass the coopers test(or other well balanced fitness test) to a preset standard.

Units could have a min score due to occupational requirements I.E Med Tech's a min of 75 points a ammo tech 50.For example only.
And yes  I do understand the amount of problems out of my realm of knowledge to implement something like this.

 

[GAP]

While the different scales of measuring fitness are interesting, we are getting away from the basic premise that ALL personnel must be in such a physical shape as to .......do what?

Operate as a basic rifleman where extenuating situations warrant....?
        you are trained on firing a rifle, thus are expected to be able to operate one in extraordinary situations, even though your trade does not normally do that.
   
    Pass an arbitrary level of fitness to presume the entire force is capable of going on operation, or only for physical well being...?