New Governor General Service Medal?

[medaid]

I don't know about gimme' medals. But, wouldn't it be nice to have some what of a recognition for your service, that you could wear later on? I mean, I KNOW we get certificates of service and things like that, (if we were good) and the memory of our service alone should satisfy some of us. But there are others who might think a medal for service, merely service in the CF. Yes, the CD is good enough for that. But there are some of us who could not, or was unable to serve the full 12 years. There are great troops who serve their initial engagements or in the PRes serve only 5 or 6 years, who I think, deserve a medal.

Maybe, it shouldn't be the GGSM. Maybe it could be a medal from a soldier's respective province that they're from. A sign of thank you from the province on behalf of a thankfull people.

I know a few years ago, there was a movement to create a SSM bar for CICs since the only medal they'll ever get normally is the CD, unless they've got them from a previous life of service. I haven't heard of anything then, I think it was kaibawsh'd.

I don't know, maybe it could be a good idea.

 

[dapaterson]

It is in truth not for glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are fighting, but for freedom – for that alone, which no honest man gives up but with life itself.

Sums it up rather nicely.  I do not serve for baubles and bangles.

http://www.constitution.org/scot/arbroath.htm

 

[Reccesoldier]

Ok I could probably rationalize one for enduring Dundurn ;D

This brings up the possibility of the "Lawfield Corridor Medal"

 

[Steel Badger]

This brings up the possibility of the "Lawfield Corridor Medal"

And the Meaford Service Ribbon with Poison Ivy Clasp

 

[Jc066]

And the Meaford Service Ribbon with Poison Ivy Clasp

...Don't for get about the tank rut's

 

[Danjanou]

This brings up the possibility of the "Lawfield Corridor Medal"

As long as we don't go back to this old idea
http://www.ipmscanada.com/fun-medals.html

Seriously after some reflection I'm now of two minds on this whole idea.

On the one hand the general consensus here is it seems to be a waste of time effort and money that could better be spent elsewhere and a logistics nightmare to undertake.

The initial issue would be how many?

How many persons have served since 1947?

Even if we put some conditions on it such as minimum 6 months service (sorry no gong for SYEP) we'd still be in the hundreds of thousands for the initial issue. Then after minting them then how do we issue them all?

On the other hand many persons served honourably for less than 12 years and through no fault of their own never were "entitled" to a gong for an overseas tour just because there were none available. Think of the post Korea pre FYG period, where the  options were Germany , Cyprus and/or the Mid East and lets be honest a lot of guys never saw them, or failed to qualify (Reservists on 60-90 day flyovers vs 180 days for the NATO/SSM). The others the Centennial medal, 125, Golden Jubilee etc we all know may have covered this, but not everyone got one and there are plenty of horror stories on the issue of the last two, many recounted on this forum

My father served in the late 1940' early 1950's in the RCN. Not long enough to qualify for a CD, and never went anywhere exotic, but he did his time. No one forced  him too, and he neve made a career of it, like many did. But he served, others chose not to. Maybe this is a nice way of honouring his and many thousands of others service.

I'd also find it nice to go into the Legion after a parade on Nov 11th with him with us both having the same decoration (OK those who know me know that's crap but you get the point  >).

Those of us who know what the pretty little ribbons stand for will never mistake this for a MMV will we. With the military's dark sense of humour soon we'll have an amusing and derogatory nickname for it right up there with the "medal for getting a medal (CPSM)" 12 years Undetected Crime Medal (CD)"  and the "Beer and Bratwurst Medal" (SSM/NATO). "The mini or training  CD" is a possibility . ;D

The design, ribbon colour I can live with BTW,  but the whole idea of a separate bar for each GG is ridiculous. If for some reason this comes to pass then drop that part at least. 

Incidentally  I would presume that should this come to pass it would rank lower in precedence to the CD, which would then become a true "long service" decoration and not the easiest "gimme" to get (for what it's worth I don't consider it a gimme I earned my CD and hung around long enough to get it, others didn't. It ain't an MSC but it's still mine). I can handle tacking it to the left of my 12 years undetected crime, but I really don't want to have all my medals remounted again, the guy who did it last time is now retired.

 

[pidd]

Whilst the awarding of trophies for hockey and football or literary this and that seem to have well found their place in the 'realm' of Rideau Hall, the decorations for service in the Canadian armed forces still remains, unless there is a change in the constitution (good luck) with the Crown, i.e., service to the Queen or King.  The GG can pin it on the soldier but she does so on behalf of the person she represents and from whom the decoration finds its authority.  Contrary to the notion and self-aggrandizing behaviour of some Vice-Regal types in the past few decades, it takes a coronation to put the crown on the head.

It is remarkable, I think, when one does compare the awarding of decorations with other-than-Commonwealth countries, the restraint from excess in our tradition that is so often not the case in the habit of Banana or 'People's' Republics.

Soldiers of the Great War received just three medals if they were 'in it' from 1914 on, and just two if from 1915-on, i.e., The 1914-1915 Star, the Victory Medal, and the British Service Medal, with no distinguishing medals for being wounded, going over the top, or filing papers at headquarters.  The government did award a 'pin' for 'Service At The Front' that carried some cachet among the vets who lived in/survived the trenches.

The 'Canadian Decoration' is meant to honour signficant years of service but perhaps something along the lines of the 'Defence Medal' in Australia is not a bad idea for anyone who put time in uniform...with the monarch on it as it properly should.

 

[HItorMiss]

I believe that the Wound strip in the Great war, there was never a medal for it.

 

[Reccesoldier]

I am completely and utterly against this.  Medals are supposed to signify something.  Even the maligned CPSM represents something (the appreciation of the population of Canada for our peacekeeping duties and the Nobel Prize we won), others have been inexpertly awarded and administered in the past but those days are long gone now.

The idea that members of the CF should get a medal for just doing their job's, with no real operational focus, tactical danger or personal hardship involved destroys the real reason any medal is awarded.

Yes, many who never made a life of this vocation served honourably for every single second they were in, of that there is no doubt, the difference lies in the continuance of that service, for better or worse.

The CD is the medal we all get for doing our jobs honourably when no one else is watching, anyone can do it for 6 months, or a couple of years but 12 years really does mean something.

 

[Blackadder1916]

Then after minting them then how do we issue them all?

They already went through that exercise for the Canadian Volunteer Service Medal for Korea(CVSMK), Special Service Medal (SSM) with NATO bar, and the Canadian Peacekeeping Service Medal (CPSM).  (Reminds me that I still have to apply for the CPSM)

Of note,  when the CVSMK (especially) and the CPSM were proposed stating that individuals who had served should be recognized by Canada with a "Canadian" medal reference was made to the Canadian Volunteer Service Medal which was a "Canadian" medal for WW2 service.  Interestingly, the criteria for the CVSM was  "persons of any rank in the Naval, Military or Air Forces of Canada who voluntarily served on Active Service and have honourably completed eighteen months (540 days) total voluntary service from September 3, 1939 to March 1, 1947".  Service outside Canada was not specifically required; those who served 60 days outside Canada received a 'bar' to the medal.  The Newfoundland version of the medal (which came out many years later) was only for service outside Newfoundland.  But then Canadians got the 'bar' for serving in Newfoundland.

The CVSMK was awarded only for service in the operational theatre.  There were many WW2 veterans who volunteered,  along with many others, in 1950 just as they had several years before.  Not all of them went to Korea, a notable one being Smokey Smith. 

Though we should not base the appropriateness of such an award on what other countries are (or are not ) doing, Australia instituted a similar medal last year and if the growing industry in the UK for 'commemorative' service medals is a measure there is certainly a considerable number of UK ex-servicemen who wish recognition for their time in uniform.

The more that I consider this proposal the less I am inclined to dismiss it out of hand as a vanity exercise from people who want one more, or at least one, medal so that they can play Mr. Dress-up.  Could I change my vote to 'maybe, I'm still thinking'.

 

[stealthylizard]

Perhaps another alternative is to give it to them upon release from the military starting at a certain date.  Retroactively would be too much of a bureaucratic nightmare in my opinion.

 

[warrickdll]

A lot of the technicalities (but not this actual news item) were covered in a similar topic:
Should everyone get a CD? (http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/40865.0.html)

A modified summary of the idea was to recognize service in the CF with a medal if meeting enough criteria to be "deemed to have served" and with bars at either each 5yr or 10yr increment. The actual issue of the medal would be upon release or after some specified time (maybe after 5 years).


A major point was to Not add a new medal, but to use (or replace) the existing CD with its existing tracking system. Those who had received the old CD could keep using it with its old bar system and post-nominals, those who receive the new one would have a different bar system and no post-nominals.


I would stay away from naming it "Governor General", or using the term "Volunteer".

 

[George Wallace]

I don't know about gimme' medals. But, wouldn't it be nice to have some what of a recognition for your service, that you could wear later on? I mean, I KNOW we get certificates of service and things like that, (if we were good) and the memory of our service alone should satisfy some of us. But there are others who might think a medal for service, merely service in the CF. Yes, the CD is good enough for that. But there are some of us who could not, or was unable to serve the full 12 years. There are great troops who serve their initial engagements or in the PRes serve only 5 or 6 years, who I think, deserve a medal.

Maybe, it shouldn't be the GGSM. Maybe it could be a medal from a soldier's respective province that they're from. A sign of thank you from the province on behalf of a thankfull people.

I know a few years ago, there was a movement to create a SSM bar for CICs since the only medal they'll ever get normally is the CD, unless they've got them from a previous life of service. I haven't heard of anything then, I think it was kaibawsh'd.

I don't know, maybe it could be a good idea.

There is so much wrong with this argument in my eyes.  It sounds like someone who's only aim in life is to "collect" trinkets.  After Service, Servicemembers are given their certificates and pins to recognize their time in the CF.  What more do they want?  A medal that they can wear once a year? 

The pin can be worn on a jacket year round.

Why not join the Legion, a Regimental Association, the Air Force Association or any other like organization and buy their blazer and pocket crest and wear it to all their functions?  That would give you something to wear and puff out your chest more often than wearing a medal once a year on Remembrance Day under a heavy overcoat.

Crying for a medal for experimenting with the CF for a couple of years, and finding it was not to your liking sounds too petty and selfish to me.  The CD is for "Dedicated Service" over a fixed period of time.  Why create a medal for those who didn't have the 'dedication to Serve'?  It sounds rather petty to me.

If you are proud of your Service, no matter how long, join an Association and participate there.  Wear the jacket and crest of your affiliation.  Don't worry about trinkets and bobbles.  By the way, there are also Service and other medals awarded by the Legion.  Join the Legion and collect some of them.

 

[Reccesoldier]

The idea of a medal that everyone gets is completely 180 degrees out of synch with the entire reason d’être of medals, honours and awards. 

They are not, and never were, intended to be given to everyone.  To do so makes them absolutely worthless, both to the wearer and the observer.  Think about how some view the SSM (NATO), now multiply that derision by 1000 and you have the status of the medal proposed.

If they come up with this and I'm still serving I will not wear it, display it or even acknowledge that I have it.

 

[niner domestic]

+1 George!

To add to your comments, if one can not afford a blazer or crest, there is always the Regimental, Branch or Mil Col tie that can be worn.  I most often wear collar and tie to functions and it's the tie that generates the most conversation, questions or identifying other members.  Nice thing about a tie is that it can be worn everyday with a suit, jacket or just a collar. 

 

[geo]

Recce...
Remember the Centenial, 125th, the Jubilee and the Diamond jubilee medal (or recent notoriety)

During WW2 there was the dastardly volunteer medal

Both WWs had Victory medals that became EBGOs

This proposed new medal is not going to everyone- you still have to stick around for a couple of years.........

 

[Reccesoldier]

Recce...
Remember the Centenial, 125th, the Jubilee and the Diamond jubilee medal (or recent notoriety)

During WW2 there was the dastardly volunteer medal

Both WWs had Victory medals that became EBGOs

This proposed new medal is not going to everyone- you still have to stick around for a couple of years.........

So what is it... The CD light?  CD wannabe? The Not-So-Long Service Medal?  How about the RTU/RTM medal.

The point is that it's issue will be almost so automatic as to make the medal itself worthless.  From the Bible (CFP 200)

12. Proposals to establish a new, military, national
honour must comply with the following guidelines in
addition to those in paragraph 9:

<snip>

b. Additional principles to be observed are:

(1) eligibility – no new honour should
adversely affect eligibility for existing
ones;

  There goes the whole changing the CD idea.

(2) respect – fundamental to the concept of
honours is that they carry prestige and
that their raison d'être is to recognize an
accomplishment commanding the
respect of members of the military, the
general public and the person honoured;

  It is argueable that this proposed medal would make that cut either.

(3) equitability – if an honour is bestowed for
duty under certain circumstances, similar
kinds of duty and circumstances should
be rewarded to prevent dissatisfaction
over unequal and unfair treatment; and

  We have a winner as this new medal would only ask that a person serve and still be breathing.

(4) credibility – to be credible, an honour
must represent a worthy endeavour and
must not represent routine duty, a factor
related to respect.

  There we have it folks.  In my humble (or not so humble)opinion this effectively kills the idea.

Georges point about gongs, baubles and shiny bits is absolutely correct. 

In my job I run into more than my fair share of people, some serving and some not whom I call "Medal Detectors".  Some of these people have very impressive credentials, war service and the whole nine yards, but as soon as they start whining that they are "only 53 days short of the CD" and that they should get it because "the governor General has a CD and what the hell did she ever do" then all their other accomplishments seem to fade away and are overshadowed by this chest thumping and self aggrandizement..

 

[warrickdll]

(1) eligibility – no new honour should
adversely affect eligibility for existing
ones;
  There goes the whole changing the CD idea.

The CD itself replaced similar medals of varying criteria - so the idea of changing it is probably still in.

...
The CD is for "Dedicated Service" over a fixed period of time.  Why create a medal for those who didn't have the 'dedication to Serve'?
...

Actually, the CD (when first awarded) shows that a person had 1 year more "Dedication" than a person serving 11 years, and 1 year less "Dedication" than a person serving 13 years.


The CD does not mark the difference between those who had the "dedication to Serve" and those who didn't.

(4) credibility – to be credible, an honour
must represent a worthy endeavour and
must not represent routine duty, a factor
related to respect.

Granted, that is the most convincing reason against the idea that I've seen, however, the rationality of the CD has the same problem. The 12 year criteria for the CD is no more or less valid than if the criteria was 5 years or 25 years.


This proposed GGVSM is a bad idea if the CF ends up with a medal for serving in the CF and a separate medal showing how long that service was.

But, this proposed GGVSM is a better idea than the CD.

I just can't imagine some committee sitting around, and someone saying "Hey! What we really need is a medal for people who have served for 12 years, with bars at 22 years, 32 years, etc..".

On their own, both the CD and the proposed GGVSM each are light on justification. Combined though - I see more than enough validity.

 

[Michael OLeary]

I just can't imagine some committee sitting around, and someone saying "Hey! What we really need is a medal for people who have served for 12 years, with bars at 22 years, 32 years, etc..".

Actually, the CD was created to replace eight different long service awards that were then in use.  The intent was to actually reduce the administration required to manage such a diverse selection of awards for the same thing.  12 years was the lower end of the eligibility requirements (for the Effieincy Decoration).

“Prior to the CD, Canadian service personnel had been eligible for any one of eight separate long service awards, depending on which service they were enrolled in and what rank they held. There was the RCN Long Service Medal, the Royal Canadian Navy Voluntary Reserve (RCNVR) Long Service Medal and the RCNVR Officer's Decoration for members of the navy. The army had the Army Long Service and Good Conduct Medal, the Efficiency Medal and the Efficiency Decoration. Those in the air force were eligible for the RCAF Long Service and Good Conduct Medal or the Air Efficiency Award.

Brooke Claxton, the Canadian minister of Defence from 1946 until 1954, had a keen interest in honours and awards and was the central supporter of plans for a unique Canadian long service award. Clerical staff at the Department of National Defence had long complained that administering the various separate long service awards was time-consuming and complex, and plans for a separate Canadian long service award emerged from DND in 1947.

Through Order-in-Council 6335, Cabinet approved the establishment of the Canadian Forces Decoration on 15 December 1949, and a submission was forwarded to King George VI. The King approved the creation of the CD on 8 March 1950.” – The Canadian Honours System, Christopher McCreery, 2005

 

[warrickdll]

...
Actually, the CD was created to replace eight different long service awards that were then in use.  The intent was to actually reduce the administration required to manage such a diverse selection of awards for the same thing.  12 years was the lower end of the eligibility requirements (for the Effieincy Decoration).
...

I see the intent... but the 12? Do you have a different source for the E.D.?


From: http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/40865/post-349795.html#msg349795

A summary (also from http://www.forces.gc.ca/hr/dhh/honours_awards/engraph/long_service_e.asp?cat=3, and http://www.vac-acc.gc.ca/remembers/sub.cfm?source=collections/cmdp/mainmenu/group11):

  - Regular Navy Officers: No Awards.
  - Reserve Navy Officers: At 20 years.

  - Regular Navy Other Ranks: At 15 years, and then every 15 years (no postnominals).
  - Reserve Navy Other Ranks: At 12 years, and then every 12 years (no postnominals).


  - Regular Army Officers: No Awards.
  - Reserve Army Officers: At 20 year, and then every 20 years.

  - Regular Army Other Ranks: At 18 years, and then every 18 years (no postnominals).
  - Reserve Army Other Ranks: At 12 years, and then every 6 years (no postnominals).


  - Regular Air Force Officers: No Awards.
  - Reserve Air Force Officers and Other Ranks: At 10 years, and then every 10 years (no postnominals).

  - Regular Air Force Other Ranks: At 18 years, and then every 18 years (no postnominals).

Notes:
  - At first the Air Force appears to have used the Army awards
  - IIRC Navy Good Conduct chevrons were for 3, 8, and 13 years.