Research into different fitness standards for each element

[HItorMiss]

Evidently, there is a perception, I'm guessing, that some CF 'leaders' might (or, at least might want to) use physical fitness standards to discriminate based on age or sex - and that would violate charter rights which apply, equally, to the CF. If there was no such perception the there would be no reason to mention it. As with e.g. conflict of interest the CF must avoid unfairness and the perception of unfairness.

Someone mentioned that we you already have low fitness standards. That has always been the case: to ensure that the middle aged, female clerk would not be denied opportunity, in her part of the organization, just because she was unfit to be, say, a soldier in a combat engineer field troop. There is - and should be - a lowest common denominator which is applied absolutely without exception each and every person. There also need to be higher, specialized denominators for e.g. fighter pilots and infantry soldiers and so on.

If I read the original article correctly, the 'object of the exercise' is to ensure that we have the right standards for everyone - beginning with an appropriate 'lowest, common' one.

I disagree totally!

It is my opinion that there should not be a middle standard or even a low standard there should only be ONE standard and that standard should be the highest standard. Regardless of sex and age, You fail to meet the requirements you are gone, discrimination HELL YES! but we are not a civilian occupation. That middle age female clerk cannot meet the same requirements as me then you need to leave. and before anyone says anything I am missing a tricep and was hamstung in my left leg so seriously what is their excuse for not meeting a standard...oh and I am not 19-21 I am 30 not old but by no means the young buck in the herd.

The CF needs to stop being run like a civilian business using civilian law as our benchmark. It that very reason that is slowly killing our hollowed institution and again IMO making us a laughing stalk in the eyes of our Allies.

 

[aesop081]

That middle age female clerk cannot meet the same requirements as me then you need to leave.

I cant wait until you are 40.

using civilian law as our benchmark.

It is not civillian law....it is Canadian law. Get aquainted with what that means.








[/quote]

 

[HItorMiss]

Then Canadian LAW needs amending....There is such thing as amendments to LAW or exemptions...oh and it is Civilian law as there is also Military law it's a semantic

I am 30, 10 years to go, and I meet all the standards of my occupation and my speciality DESPITE serious physical imparment. Again I state what is thier excuse?ss

 

[aesop081]

or exemptions...

There already is an exception. Did you miss that in the previous posts or just feel like going off half-cocked ?

To be an exception, the CF needs to demonstrate that there is a valid, justifiable need for it. If not , the CF must follow Canadian Law like everyone else.

 

[aesop081]

oh and it is Civilian law as there is also Military law it's a semantic

CF members are subject to both the Canadian legal system and the military justice system. The CF must follow all Canadian law. The CF justice system exists and not too long ago, The SCC upheld the need for a CF justice system because there was.....you guessed it.....a bona fide reuirement for it.

 

[HItorMiss]

CF members are subject to both the Canadian legal system and the military justice system. The CF must follow all Canadian law. The CF justice system exists and not too long ago, The SCC upheld the need for a CF justice system because there was.....you guessed it.....a bona fide reuirement for it.

Right and I am saying National (Canadian) Law is civilain law, an argument of semantics.

As for exemptions I am saying the rules governing CF discrimination policy needs to be goverened by CF not by Cvilian standards. I trust the CF to set a policy that is fair and applicable tou OUR standrad of service and need in our job. We all are in the end Rifleman first and must be able to meet that standard before we move off to follow on trade specific training.

This is of course just my opinion and I have been accused before of being narrow minded and set to only a narow scope of view when it comes to this topic.

 

[aesop081]

Right and I am saying National (Canadian) Law is civilain law, an argument of semantics.

Far from being semantics. Your "civillian" law applies to everyone, military or otherwise.

As for exemptions I am saying the rules governing CF discrimination policy needs to be goverened by CF not by Cvilian standards.

You are in fact being narrow minded. The CF, just like police, firefighters and other organizations have to live within that laws of the land. We, the CF, just like them have unique requirements. Unless we can show what they are and justify why they are needed, then they dont really exist.

I trust the CF to set a policy that is fair and applicable tou OUR standrad of service

How many CF policies have you questioned in the few years i have known you ?

Yeah exactly......

 

[HItorMiss]

How many CF policies have you question in the few years i have known you ?

Yeah exactly......

You are right of course and I always will it's who I am I guess. But I do believe in the system to the exent that they would set a standard not so narrow as to to unachieveable by any means. Perhaps it's the final remants of the idealist in me from when I first joined.

 

[aesop081]

But I do believe in the system to the exent that they would set a standard not so narrow as to to unachieveable by any means.

Yet you openly question the validity of the EXPRES test.........

 

[HItorMiss]

Because the Express test is set to a standard to accept the mediocre as in within Canadian law to be non discriminatory. Were we (The CF) allwoed to discriminate on a physical fitness standrad the express test or the test created would be less of a joke.

 

[aesop081]

Because the Express test is set to a standard to accept the mediocre as in within Canadian law to be non discriminatory. Were we (The CF) allwoed to discriminate on a physical fitness standrad the express test or the test created would be less of a joke.

The CF , within the scope of Canadian law, can set whatever standard it wants, as long as it can prove it is required. There is nothing in Canadian law that says that the CF cannot have high fitness standards.

Furthermore, what evidence does anyone here have that any test comming from this research, would be more of a joke ?

If anything, an PT test that is representative of my MOC would have higher requirements in the pushup and sit up parts of the test because, we need more upper body strenght to lift sonobouys at 2Gs or hoist a person from the water during a rescue. I dont run anywhere unless shit realy went south.

 

[DVessey]

This seems to me to be a lazy man's approach to fitness.
"Let's train to do solely one thing, and one thing only, and target only the muscles and reflexes that are required for work." Screw that!

Talk to any Sig Op and they'll tell you that your job as a soldier changes at the drop of a hat.

Case in point, last week I spent a day dismantling furniture and moving it to R&D, the next day I was doing server maintainence. Some days  I can be humping a 5-22 or setting up a mast antenna or simply sitting in front of a screen killing time. How in the hell does someone plan a PT programme around a job that has so many odd tasks and fills multiply roles?

I think this waste of money.

CrossFit (aka Combat Fitness Program). The whole point of the program is NOT to be specific.

 

[Rodahn]

How in the hell does someone plan a PT programme around a job that has so many odd tasks and fills multiply roles

And herein lies the crux of the problem, in that everybodies rolls are different. Defining ones requirements of fitness level is by an average is futile,. Each trade has specific levels of requirements... Having stated that, the basic level during "basic training" is something that all personnel should be able to achieve.

 

[Greymatters]

Each trade has specific levels of requirements...

Quite true - but we are not seeking an 'average'.  We should be seeking a minimum standard, even if its a piss poor one compared to some of the more active trades.  Once a member passes the minimum for basic, they must take the next test (with presumably higher and specific pass requirements) as required for their specific trade.  It must also be applicable to every single member regardless of age, try and figure that one out!

 

[Rodahn]

Quite true - but we are not seeking an 'average'.  We should be seeking a minimum standard, even if its a piss poor one compared to some of the more active trades.  Once a member passes the minimum for basic, they must take the next test (with presumably higher and specific pass requirements) as required for their specific trade.  It must also be applicable to every single member regardless of age, try and figure that one out!

Over all I concur, however, what would happen if a clerk is posted to a static unit for 5 - 6 year period? Hence the basic requirement... I know that I, as a combat diver had to pass specific requirements over an above thumperhead's needs, however requirering that all thumperheads  pass said requirements is not feasible, nor realistic..

"to add" and the above is within a single trade specification...

 

[armyvern]

Over all I concur, however, what would happen if a clerk is posted to a static unit for  5 - 6 year period? Hence the basic requirement... I know that I, as a combat diver had to pass specific requirements over an above thumperhead's needs, however requirering that all thumperheads  pass said requirements is not feasible, nor realistic..

I'm at a static unit. Pri 6 manning in LFC.

But, we deploy pers as individual augmentees for Afg and other UN/UNMFO tours ... all the time. Not all of them are getting lots of 'advance warning' either. I don't know a support trade out there that isn't subject to the exact same thing.

The long and the short ... even as a support trade, and even while in a static unit, we've got to be at a minimum standard (and, preferably -exceeding that minimum standard) that will enable us to perform our primary operational tasks - not our primary static tasks - because you just never know when the shit is going to hit the fan. I'd have given the same answer on Sept 10th 2001 as well.

I really hope it doesn't take another wake-up call for our "masters" in the "rights" world to figure that out. 

 

[aesop081]

Personaly speaking......

If deploying and universality of service is the main concern ( as it should be) then the BFT should be the standard for everyone in the CF. The march, the fireman;s carry, trench dig and all.

The EXPRES test proves jacks**t IMHO.

I completed the survey for project SOAR and its wasnt that bad a questionair and i hope that the people who should be filling it out (those having just deployed to TFA) have done so and have answered honestly.

 

[Adamant]

This concept was already argued about extensively in another thread.  And the following message:

http://forums.air-force.ca/forums/threads/76434/post-723401.html#msg723401

We could spend as much time on PT as Combat Arms folk, but to what benefit to anybody? Those who think that we should have a choice: we can do that, certainly, but at the cost of fifty percent of the helicopter support that you are currently getting (which is nowhere near enough, but that's a subject for other threads and I've already ranted about the reasons for that previously). Every minute spent running around is a minute less spent fixing or flying. We cannot afford to spend time on things that do not contribute to our primary purpose.

And for those of you carrying on with this "lowest common denominator" stuff, let's all go to one common medical standard, too. As LCD is not good enough, we can adopt the highest medical standard CF-wide: Pilot. Enjoy your early pensions, those of you who fall below that (presuming that you got past the recruiters in the first place).

Seems to have the most logical conclusion.  Having one fitness standard is about as logical as having one medical standard.  Air Crew, Divers,etc.., all have medical requirements way higher than the vast majority of members who might see the inside of the MIR every 5 years.

Having specific trade / element fitness AND medical requirements just makes sense.

 

[muffin]

Next stop - soldiers saying they cant perform tasks they are expected to reasonably do because its "not in my job description".  Like a lot of civilians already working for DND...

Ive seen them, and there are loopholes, which is what this guy is talking about...

I can't speak for all civi DND, but my job description has the "and other tasks as deemed necessary by the Division" type clause in it
It's hard to say "That isn't in my job description" when "everything else they tell you to do" is the last line.  ;D

Also, for Public Servants, if a higher than baseline physical standard is required for a position, it is asked for. If the position calls for someone to be able to lift 100lbs repeatedly etc, then that's what you ask for. It's not descrimination - it's common sense. I couldn't do - and I'd kill myself trying. The Law allows for this sort of thing, so I don't see how someone could claim discrimination if they don't meet a higher standard in the CF. If the job required me to be able to run 10K with 80lbs on my back - then I'd better be able to do it! I don't know why anyone would want to argue that. The standards aren't there to be "mean" - they are there to make sure you aren't going to hurt yourself (or anyone you work with!) 

I am not sure I understand the idea behind this SOAR thing... I read through this thread, and then read the article from the Maple Leaf and re-read the article on the Navy (1st post)
When I read these two articles, I understood them to apply to individual trades with the idea of increasing the standards on a trade specific basis. I took the comment regarding the "legality" of the testing as the reason for the individual testing, vs just having a board decide what the standards should be. I didn't read anywhere that they would lower the current standard, only that as required, they would increase it.
From the article:
If it turns out that people aren't fit enough for their occupation, "then, I'm sorry, but we're going to have remedial fitness; we're not just going to just kick you out of the Forces if you can't do it," he said.

This reminds me of something I vaguley remember being given in Part 1 medicals that outlined physical tasks that were specific to my trade... "walk up and down 100's of steps dozens of times a day" or something similtar was one for Int... I remember thinking that was an odd thing. I had to check a box saying I could do it - but it was never tested. Perhaps they are going to start to manage these things from a physical standard perspective, vice a "honour system" medical.

There are already trades and/or positions that have higher requirements than the express test - this could just make more of them.

Am I way off base?

Maybe there could be some positions for wounded members who can't meet the requirements of thier trade due to a combat injury - instead of medically releasing them. (Do they have something like this now?)

 

[Eye In The Sky]

I was looking for something else, but found this one today...


CANFORGEN 156/08 CDS 022/08 151834Z AUG 08
CF HEALTH AND PHYSICAL FITNESS STRATEGY
UNCLASSIFIED

REFS: A. CANFORGEN 198/05
B. CANFORGEN 002/07
C. CANFORGEN 042/08
D. CF HEALTH AND PHYSICAL FITNESS STRATEGY

FURTHER TO REFS A, B, AND C, I AM PROUD TO ANNOUNCE THE OFFICIAL LAUNCH OF THE CANADIAN FORCES HEALTH AND PHYSICAL FITNESS STRATEGY (REF D). THIS STRATEGY PROVIDES THE MOTIVATION, AWARENESS, SUPPORT AND ACCOUNTABILITY TO ENHANCE AND SUSTAIN A FIT AND HEALTHY FIGHTING FORCE. IT IS MY INTENT TO STRENGTHEN THE CULTURE OF HEALTH AND PHYSICAL FITNESS ACROSS THE CF

MILITARY PERSONNEL MUST MAINTAIN THE HIGHEST STANDARDS OF HEALTH AND PHYSICAL CONDITIONING THROUGHOUT THEIR CAREER TO PROVIDE THEM WITH THE STAMINA AND ENDURANCE TO SUCCESSFULLY PERFORM AMID PHYSICALLY AND MENTALLY DEMANDING OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS. HEALTHY AND PHYSICALLY FIT SAILORS, SOLDIERS, AIRMEN AND AIRWOMEN ARE LESS PRONE TO FATIGUE AND INJURY AND ARE THEREFORE MORE EFFECTIVE IN CARRYING OUT THEIR CRITICAL MISSION TASKS

IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CF TO DEVELOP AND SUSTAIN A STRONG, HEALTHY AND FIT CF. THIS BEGINS WITH LEADERS WHO ARE FULLY COMMITTED TO A QUOTE CULTURE OF HEALTH AND PHYSICAL FITNESS UNQUOTE, SETTING THE EXAMPLE FOR EVERYONE TO TAKE THEIR HEALTH SERIOUSLY AND CHOOSE A LIFESTYLE DEDICATED TO EATING WELL, ENGAGING IN REGULAR PHYSICAL FITNESS ACTIVITIES, MAINTAINING A HEALTHY WEIGHT AND LIVING ADDICTION FREE

EFFECTIVE 01 APRIL 2008, SOME OF THE IMPACTS OF REF D INCLUDE:

THE CHAIN OF COMMAND WILL PROVIDE THE TIME, RESOURCES AND PROGRAMS TO SUPPORT CF PERSONNEL TO ADOPT AND MAINTAIN A HEALTHY LIFESTYLE AND PHYSICAL FITNESS

REGULAR, PRIMARY RESERVE, OUTCAN AND REMOTELY POSTED PERSONNEL WILL ALL COMPLETE ANNUAL FITNESS EVALUATIONS

IAW REF C, POINTS WILL BE AWARDED FOR EXPRES TEST RESULTS AT MERIT BOARDS

PSP FITNESS AND SPORTS STAFF WILL PROVIDE RESOURCES FOR SPECIALIZED AND REMEDIAL TRAINING

CF PERSONNEL WILL BE PROVIDED THE NECESSARY TOOLS (STRESS MANAGEMENT, COPING SKILLS, AND BEHAVIOURAL COUNSELLING, ETC) TO MAINTAIN A HEALTHY AND ADDICTION-FREE LIFESTYLE

INDIVIDUAL TRAINING AND EDUCATION RELATED TO HEALTH AND FITNESS WILL BE BETTER INTEGRATED INTO CF PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

COMMITMENT TO A LIFELONG HEALTHY LIFESTYLE WILL IMPROVE MORALE AND PERSONAL WELL-BEING, AND CONTRIBUTE TOWARD SUCCESS IN OPERATIONAL MISSIONS AND TASKS. THE CF WILL PROVIDE PROGRAMS AND SUPPORT TO ALL CF PERSONNEL AND THEIR FAMILIES TO FOSTER THEIR INTEREST AND MOTIVATION FOR MAINTAINING AND SUSTAINING A LONG-TERM COMMITMENT TO A PHYSICALLY FIT AND HEALTHY, ACTIVE LIFESTYLE

MILITARY PERSONNEL MUST POSSESS THE HEALTH AND PHYSICAL FITNESS NEEDED TO FUNCTION IN COMPLEX AND DEMANDING ENVIRONMENTS AND THIS STRATEGY PAVES THE WAY TOWARDS GENERATING A FORCE THAT IS HEALTHY AND FIT TO FIGHT. I EXPECT YOUR SUPPORT AND COMMITMENT IN IMPLEMENTING THIS STRATEGY

REF D IS AVAILABLE ONLINE AT HTTP://HR.OTTAWA-HULL.MIL.CA/DOCS/HRMIL-DOCS/PDF/CF(UNDERSCORE)HEALT H(UNDERSCORE)FITNESS(UNDERSCORE)E.PDF. HARD COPIES WILL SOON BE DISTRIBUTED ACROSS THE CF. ENQUIRIES REGARDING REF D MAY BE DIRECTED TO XXXXX XXXX, DMPSC 2-2, XXX-XXX-XXX, XXX.XX(AT SIGN)FORCES.GC.CA

SIGNED BY GEN WJ NATYNCZYK, CDS