Author Topic: GBA+ training  (Read 4869 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Flavus101

  • Member
  • ****
  • 12,005
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 210
Re: GBA+ training
« Reply #25 on: March 27, 2017, 16:11:43 »
Perhaps a more inclusive name for the programme is in order, that better describes it while not annoying many people, such as "Human Factors Analysis".

But then the optics would be all off for those that "matter"....

Offline Strike

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 22,216
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,350
  • Welcome to the Dead Parrot's Society.
    • The Home of the Salt, Lilly, Winstall (Wincentaylo) & Blouin Family Tree Website
Re: GBA+ training
« Reply #26 on: March 28, 2017, 10:40:21 »
But then the optics would be all off for those that "matter"....

Dude, seriously?  With that comment right there we can all tell that you have yet to take the training.
Don't piss me off.  I have two older brothers, work with a bunch of men, and I can kick their asses!
BOOT TO THE HEAD!

Offline NFLD Sapper

  • Mentor
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 264,721
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,888
  • CFSME Instr
Re: GBA+ training
« Reply #27 on: March 28, 2017, 11:32:14 »
IMHO what a joke this GBA+ training is, I just hit do the test and got 90%...
CHIMO!
First in, Last out
Sappers Lead the Way

Just tell your wife she owes your life to some Muddy Old Engineer,
Some dusty, crusty, croaking, joking Muddy Old Engineer

Offline Happy Guy

  • Member
  • ****
  • 5,370
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 130
  • Retirement is just around the corner!
Re: GBA+ training
« Reply #28 on: March 28, 2017, 11:47:18 »
Perhaps a more inclusive name for the programme is in order, that better describes it while not annoying many people, such as "Human Factors Analysis".
GBA and HFA are two different things.

Ref: https://www.google.com/search?q=human+factors+analysis&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b-ab&gfe_rd=cr&ei=04TaWKnwON-AkgWVk7TgDw
The Human Factors Analysis and Classification System (HFACS) identifies the human causes of an accident and provides a tool to assist in the investigation process and target training and prevention efforts.

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 212,616
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,711
Re: GBA+ training
« Reply #29 on: March 28, 2017, 11:59:05 »
I'm not 100% sold on GBA+ training being pushed down to the private corporal level (or even a bit higher) but I'd suggest taking a 'Bystander training' approach might be a hell of a lot more effective than forcing members to do an online quiz.  One where they can either share answer via cheat sheet or challenge the test.


There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline Loachman

  • Former Army Pilot in Drag
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 174,812
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,486
Re: GBA+ training
« Reply #30 on: March 28, 2017, 15:03:26 »
GBA and HFA are two different things.

Ref: https://www.google.com/search?q=human+factors+analysis&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b-ab&gfe_rd=cr&ei=04TaWKnwON-AkgWVk7TgDw
The Human Factors Analysis and Classification System (HFACS) identifies the human causes of an accident and provides a tool to assist in the investigation process and target training and prevention efforts.

Yes, and I know - we do the same thing in Flight Safety as well.

I didn't have any interest in putting a lot of thought to a new name, but don't think that the current one is brilliant so just threw that out.

Offline Flavus101

  • Member
  • ****
  • 12,005
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 210
Re: GBA+ training
« Reply #31 on: March 29, 2017, 12:51:38 »
Dude, seriously?  With that comment right there we can all tell that you have yet to take the training.

Apologies, my post wasn't clear.

When I stated those that matter I meant all the government folks who use the naming and framing of programs to gain political points.

I have taken the "training", I personally think it is a poor excuse for the word training, like jarnhamar I felt the Bystander method of training was much more effective. I've completed it twice actually as the first time I did it was simply to help explain to a few PLQ candidates why it was relevant to their course and then I had to complete it again a couple months later so that I could print off proof of completion (being silly and not doing that the first time).

Offline Strike

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 22,216
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,350
  • Welcome to the Dead Parrot's Society.
    • The Home of the Salt, Lilly, Winstall (Wincentaylo) & Blouin Family Tree Website
Re: GBA+ training
« Reply #32 on: March 29, 2017, 13:30:36 »
Apologies, my post wasn't clear.

When I stated those that matter I meant all the government folks who use the naming and framing of programs to gain political points.

I have taken the "training", I personally think it is a poor excuse for the word training, like jarnhamar I felt the Bystander method of training was much more effective. I've completed it twice actually as the first time I did it was simply to help explain to a few PLQ candidates why it was relevant to their course and then I had to complete it again a couple months later so that I could print off proof of completion (being silly and not doing that the first time).

Coolio.   ;D
Don't piss me off.  I have two older brothers, work with a bunch of men, and I can kick their asses!
BOOT TO THE HEAD!

Offline MCG

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 185,230
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,393
Re: GBA+ training
« Reply #33 on: March 29, 2017, 14:35:03 »
Perhaps a more inclusive name for the programme is in order, that better describes it while not annoying many people, such as "Human Factors Analysis".
I proposed "Diversity Based Analysis" because I noticed that is what the course claimed it was about.  I noticed a lot of people go into the course with opinions formed and minds closed because of the "G".  The course also contributed unnecessary pages to explaining that it was about more than "G" and that it was not an employment equity course.  When the name of your programme closes minds and causes confusion as to aims, then it may be time to come up with a new name.

IMHO what a joke this GBA+ training is, I just hit do the test and got 90%...
I also noticed that most people seem to be taking this route of skipping the training and passing the test.  If you actually take the training, there is an interesting teaching point that states organizations should create their own tailored training as opposed to relying on generic packages.  ... good thing we are using the generic government of Canada package and not something CAF or L1 specific.

Offline NFLD Sapper

  • Mentor
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 264,721
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,888
  • CFSME Instr
Re: GBA+ training
« Reply #34 on: March 29, 2017, 14:42:15 »
I proposed "Diversity Based Analysis" because I noticed that is what the course claimed it was about.  I noticed a lot of people go into the course with opinions formed and minds closed because of the "G".  The course also contributed unnecessary pages to explaining that it was about more than "G" and that it was not an employment equity course.  When the name of your programme closes minds and causes confusion as to aims, then it may be time to come up with a new name.
I also noticed that most people seem to be taking this route of skipping the training and passing the test.  If you actually take the training, there is an interesting teaching point that states organizations should create their own tailored training as opposed to relying on generic packages.  ... good thing we are using the generic government of Canada package and not something CAF or L1 specific.


Well I did skim over the material....
CHIMO!
First in, Last out
Sappers Lead the Way

Just tell your wife she owes your life to some Muddy Old Engineer,
Some dusty, crusty, croaking, joking Muddy Old Engineer

Offline Loachman

  • Former Army Pilot in Drag
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 174,812
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,486
Re: GBA+ training
« Reply #35 on: March 29, 2017, 14:58:01 »
I proposed "Diversity Based Analysis" because I noticed that is what the course claimed it was about.  I noticed a lot of people go into the course with opinions formed and minds closed because of the "G".  The course also contributed unnecessary pages to explaining that it was about more than "G" and that it was not an employment equity course.  When the name of your programme closes minds and causes confusion as to aims, then it may be time to come up with a new name.

A perfect match to my opinion.

Offline dapaterson

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 361,035
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 14,523
Re: GBA+ training
« Reply #36 on: March 29, 2017, 15:00:04 »
... good thing we are using the generic government of Canada package and not something CAF or L1 specific.

The challenge: How long would it / will it take the CAF to develop its own material?  Would it be better to wait for something better, or to cross the start line with a 65% solution while working on our own?
This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Let me check my Giveashitometer. Nope, nothing.
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 174,435
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,299
Re: GBA+ training
« Reply #37 on: March 29, 2017, 15:46:51 »
The challenge: How long would it / will it take the CAF to develop its own material?  Would it be better to wait for something better, or to cross the start line with a 65% solution while working on our own?

I would say *wait*.  A 65% solution isn't a solution IMO. 

Offline MCG

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 185,230
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,393
Re: GBA+ training
« Reply #38 on: March 29, 2017, 17:53:25 »
It is a little of column A and a little of column B.  WO and offr should be able to take the generic course and apply it.  As a prerequisite to PLQ, it is not helping.  But, as noted in the CANFORGEN, this training has been made a prerequisite for NCO leadership courses but it is integrated into officer leadership courses.  I assume the generic Government of Canada package is not what is being taught in either Army or Joint staff colleges.  Have we really not had time to make our own training package yet?

Offline dapaterson

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 361,035
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 14,523
Re: GBA+ training
« Reply #39 on: March 29, 2017, 18:04:27 »
It is a little of column A and a little of column B.  WO and offr should be able to take the generic course and apply it.  As a prerequisite to PLQ, it is not helping.  But, as noted in the CANFORGEN, this training has been made a prerequisite for NCO leadership courses but it is integrated into officer leadership courses.  I assume the generic Government of Canada package is not what is being taught in either Army or Joint staff colleges.  Have we really not had time to make our own training package yet?

Well, it's seven years since DND bought the old Nortel buildings, and the first folks are just getting settled in.  If it takes that long to move across town...
This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Offline Thucydides

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 180,355
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,070
  • Freespeecher
Re: GBA+ training
« Reply #40 on: March 31, 2017, 00:05:17 »
Well, it's seven years since DND bought the old Nortel buildings, and the first folks are just getting settled in.  If it takes that long to move across town...

Well part of the delay was due to the Chinese.....

We don't have that excuse for lots of other things, though.
Dagny, this is not a battle over material goods. It's a moral crisis, the greatest the world has ever faced and the last. Our age is the climax of centuries of evil. We must put an end to it, once and for all, or perish - we, the men of the mind. It was our own guilt. We produced the wealth of the world - but we let our enemies write its moral code.

Offline Thucydides

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 180,355
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,070
  • Freespeecher
Re: GBA+ training
« Reply #41 on: March 31, 2017, 01:02:20 »
I also noticed that most people seem to be taking this route of skipping the training and passing the test.  If you actually take the training, there is an interesting teaching point that states organizations should create their own tailored training as opposed to relying on generic packages.  ... good thing we are using the generic government of Canada package and not something CAF or L1 specific.

Funny how diversity can only be explained using generic, one size fits all programs.......
Dagny, this is not a battle over material goods. It's a moral crisis, the greatest the world has ever faced and the last. Our age is the climax of centuries of evil. We must put an end to it, once and for all, or perish - we, the men of the mind. It was our own guilt. We produced the wealth of the world - but we let our enemies write its moral code.

Offline Tcm621

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 4,800
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 564
Re: GBA+ training
« Reply #42 on: March 31, 2017, 12:44:15 »
The challenge: How long would it / will it take the CAF to develop its own material?  Would it be better to wait for something better, or to cross the start line with a 65% solution while working on our own?
Consider GBA has been around for 20 years and we don't have CAF specific material, I'll say at least 30 years.

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk


Offline Happy Guy

  • Member
  • ****
  • 5,370
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 130
  • Retirement is just around the corner!
Re: GBA+ training
« Reply #43 on: March 31, 2017, 12:54:49 »
I actually went through the course instead of skipping the material and directly writing the test.  I'm glad that I did.  Most of us tend to pay lip service to courses such as these but as I read into this I learned some new things.  Perhaps this is because I am the very proud father of two young females adults that I decided to pay attention.

Remember when the female Officer Cadet complained that her kit didn't fit correctly?   Well the proper application of GBA+ probably would have greatly improved the chances of having kit that fits females.  We would have probably learned not to develop the combat bra.  It is not just about females but diversity too.  A growing part of population do not have European origins.  The application of GBA+ at the onset for recruiting may help.

Cheers

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Let me check my Giveashitometer. Nope, nothing.
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 174,435
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,299
Re: GBA+ training
« Reply #44 on: March 31, 2017, 14:42:44 »
Remember when the female Officer Cadet complained that her kit didn't fit correctly?   Well the proper application of GBA+ probably would have greatly improved the chances of having kit that fits females.  We would have probably learned not to develop the combat bra.  It is not just about females but diversity too.  A growing part of population do not have European origins.  The application of GBA+ at the onset for recruiting may help.
Cheers

What about short slight build males? Or short, husky males?  Back to the *its not about females* point I keep making, that people are saying its not only about females and then substantiating that with examples about females only. 

Offline Strike

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 22,216
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,350
  • Welcome to the Dead Parrot's Society.
    • The Home of the Salt, Lilly, Winstall (Wincentaylo) & Blouin Family Tree Website
Re: GBA+ training
« Reply #45 on: March 31, 2017, 14:59:36 »
What about short slight build males? Or short, husky males?  Back to the *its not about females* point I keep making, that people are saying its not only about females and then substantiating that with examples about females only.

Unfortunately it's that mentality that disregards that the shoulder and hip ratio of women is different to men, so just shrinking the height of a ruck will not make it fit a woman better.

It's also forgetting that every month (more or less) a woman's body goes through menses so keeping people in the field with only a bush or long flights in a plane with only a curtain for privacy is less than ideal.

It's that a woman's bone density is much lower than that of a man, so they are more prone to stress fractures if they don't have the proper equipment (not all footwear is equal after all).

It's that the first generation Japanese guy that you just recruited is also taking care of his parents, as is the custom, and posting him to the middle of nowhere where there are no other Japanese speakers for his parents to mix with is a recipe for failure and that guy is only going to be in for a minimum time if nothing better comes along. (yes, I understand this is culture, not gender, but some of the things that need to be considered)
Don't piss me off.  I have two older brothers, work with a bunch of men, and I can kick their asses!
BOOT TO THE HEAD!

Offline Remius

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 62,285
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,266
Re: GBA+ training
« Reply #46 on: March 31, 2017, 15:16:41 »
What about short slight build males? Or short, husky males?  Back to the *its not about females* point I keep making, that people are saying its not only about females and then substantiating that with examples about females only.

I gave you a non-just-female  example previously.

I get that you didn't like the training and don't think it's of any value.  That just tells me you didn't take the training or likely skipped to the test.  The web training had plenty of examples that were not just females.

There is going to be some policies that will disproportionately affect women more than men when it comes to the CAF because the gender analysis has always been historically shitty in our organisation catering for the most part to men only because the CAF is predominantly male.  The + part adds another element that can include culture, background etc etc

You are not going to get the answer you want here.  Probably because we aren't explaining it properly and a combination of you not getting it.

I suggest you go to the GBA+ site and read the FAQ and ressources.  If you still don't get it, nothing here will be of any help to you.

For now I get the feeling you're just trolling.
Optio

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Let me check my Giveashitometer. Nope, nothing.
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 174,435
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,299
Re: GBA+ training
« Reply #47 on: March 31, 2017, 16:01:42 »
Unfortunately it's that mentality that disregards that the shoulder and hip ratio of women is different to men, so just shrinking the height of a ruck will not make it fit a woman better.

It's also forgetting that every month (more or less) a woman's body goes through menses so keeping people in the field with only a bush or long flights in a plane with only a curtain for privacy is less than ideal.

It's that a woman's bone density is much lower than that of a man, so they are more prone to stress fractures if they don't have the proper equipment (not all footwear is equal after all).

It's that the first generation Japanese guy that you just recruited is also taking care of his parents, as is the custom, and posting him to the middle of nowhere where there are no other Japanese speakers for his parents to mix with is a recipe for failure and that guy is only going to be in for a minimum time if nothing better comes along. (yes, I understand this is culture, not gender, but some of the things that need to be considered)

What I am saying it what I said wayyy back earlier in the thread.  If this GBA+ training was actually being applied (using the same example, kit fit for females), and was all inclusive for *anyone except the average weight/height male*, the kit considerations would consider other *people* like I'd mentioned; short skinny/short husky men.  I didn't say it would NOT include consideration for females, just that only going the "what about females" would stop short.  Because short skinny/short husky males have issues with kit designed for "average height/weight males" as well.  That's the point.  My issue is, in that example of the female cadet, no one goes the step beyond the "maybe this is a problem for females" to the "hey maybe this is actually a problem for some males too, who aren't the average height and weight we are basing this stuff off of".  Now its a more comprehensive and inclusive look at the problem.  Trust me, I've had enough male subordinates, students, etc that have been short and stocky, etc that also have some real issues with the way kit like rucksacks and manpacks fit.  It isn't limited to females and it was a real issue for some people, including males, long before this female Cadet mentioned it.  I'm not sure why her question is viewed as some epiphany ???

As for the posting stuff, I think some of this is starting to go down the lines of "anyone who isn't English speaking Caucasian" is going to get some special consideration.  What if Pte Johny is looking after his grandmother, because *insert reason here*.  Does he get the big F-U because its not on the list of "approved cultural considerations"?   I dunno.  We're creating a society of special snowflakes.  I know people who are forced to go IR because there is no job for their wife, or their kids are in the last years of school, etc.  They are given special consideration.  I'm having a hard time with the cultural stuff, because it seems to include everyone but Pte Johny, the English speaking fair-skinned guy looking after his grandmother but gets posted to *insert location here* anyways.  That isn't the best example but...I've been reading DL material for most of the day. 

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Let me check my Giveashitometer. Nope, nothing.
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 174,435
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,299
Re: GBA+ training
« Reply #48 on: March 31, 2017, 16:21:27 »
I gave you a non-just-female  example previously.

Actually, no you didn't.  I gave you one, after modifying yours a wee bit.  Remember?  http://army.ca/forums/index.php/topic,125436.msg1481484.html#msg1481484 

Quote
I get that you didn't like the training and don't think it's of any value.  That just tells me you didn't take the training or likely skipped to the test.  The web training had plenty of examples that were not just females.

Truth be told?  I was in theatre when I did it, and someone who wasn't on the pointy end there came up with some arbitrary date it had to be done by (no idea why, however...).  By the time it trickled down to my level, I was just stepping back into Ops after being up for XX hours and completing post-mission *stuff*.  I found out this had to be done *ASAP* to meet some dobbers time schedule, so I did it before getting to my rack.  All of that considered, I gave it the due attention I felt it was worth at that time.  I had bigger and more important fish to fry at that point in time and being 100% swept up and bought into *yet another XYZ program* wasn't even on my list of 'things I really need to care about right now'.

Quote
There is going to be some policies that will disproportionately affect women more than men when it comes to the CAF because the gender analysis has always been historically shitty in our organisation catering for the most part to men only because the CAF is predominantly male.  The + part adds another element that can include culture, background etc etc

I think someone said it earlier, this might be a beneficial thing at the higher levels.  I don't see it being very applicable at the crew/platoon level, to be honest.

Quote
You are not going to get the answer you want here.  Probably because we aren't explaining it properly and a combination of you not getting it.

Oddly enough, I never said I was asking a question, did I?  I am trying to make a point.  *If the female cadet raised a question about kit not fitting females right because it is designed for the average male CAF member, then chances are if you asked the NON-average size Males if they have issues with the kit, they also will...and that data can also be added to come up with an even MORE comprehensive solution that takes into account *everyone who isn't an average size male*.  Including females and the short skinny/short stocky males. 

Why am I making that point?  Because people are saying (you included) *its not just about females* and then looking at an issue (in this case, how kit fits) only as it applies to females.  And it should be about males other than average size ones, too.

And I say that because I've served with short guys who had a real problem in the field carrying heavy loads in the standard 82 pattern rucks, carrying a radio and ammo and platoon stores etc etc and had the crap torn out of their sides and lower backs etc.  I don't know why this question from the female Ocdt is being regarded as some epiphany;  half the guys on my CLC in '93 could tell you *the issued kit doesn't fit everyone so well!* after they were humping pers and platoon kit around for XX days.

Seriously, that's the point.  It started out at the first with mostly the intention of light humour at the top of the first page and now...

Quote
For now I get the feeling you're just trolling.

M'kay.   ::)
« Last Edit: March 31, 2017, 16:43:11 by Eye In The Sky »

Offline Tcm621

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 4,800
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 564
Re: GBA+ training
« Reply #49 on: March 31, 2017, 16:42:12 »
Short guy who hated the 82 pattern ruck chiming in. There was literally no way to make that fit me with out my back pad being down by my butt. Well actually on top of my butt pack which would have had to be down by my hamstrings to have the ruck flat on my back. No one gave a crap about my problems back then, this only is getting traction now because of gender.

There are a lot of problems, philosophically, with GBA+ but I don't have time to go through them all right now. I'll try and type up a detailed post later.

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk