Author Topic: CAF Combat boots policy 2005-2018  (Read 256979 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 227,140
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,967
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: CAF Combat boots policy 2005-2018
« Reply #125 on: December 04, 2015, 10:06:29 »
The unofficial blessing for the tan ones came from the CoC in these terms when the issue of evading on foot with the issued tan boots was brought forward. "If you want to be comfortable, then spend your own money".

I now, like EVERYONE ELSE, own a set of bought tan boots.

Most recent published JIs (Aug '15) for the all-inclusive resort basically said "tan boots - COs discretion".  That is great and all, but the problem with that is the changing COs deal.  Bloggins could have worn something he paid for on ROTO 0 that the CO thought was jammy;  now he goes back on ROTO 2 and the CO says "nope!".

I am more disappointed at higher HQ level in Canada to not approve the SOI change to theatre aircrew so they get 1 pr of army hot weather boots.  I think the person who denied this should be made to put a pair of those tan cripplers on and then do a CSAR trg scenario for 12 hours.

Regardless of all this, people are going to buy their Magnums and stuff because they know the 'worst case scenario' and aren't going to reduce their chances of avoiding the orange pajama dance if the SHTF because someone at the Div or DSSPM doesn't get it
« Last Edit: December 04, 2015, 12:01:57 by Eye In The Sky »
"What a f$$kin' week!" - me, every Monday at about 1130hrs.

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 227,140
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,967
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: CAF Combat boots policy 2005-2018
« Reply #126 on: December 04, 2015, 11:02:47 »
Not quite sure how you came to the conclusion that if the CANEX sells boots, we can wear them. Well, partly true - just not in uniform. :

The CANEX does not write the dress regs, nor does the CANEX attend the CWO Conference.

Do you mean the National Defence Clothing and Dress Committee (NDCDC), [ The Chief of Defence Staff is advised on dress policies by a National Defence Clothing and Dress Committee (NDCDC), and, on matters which apply only to members allocated a specific environmental identity, by the principal commander of the applicable force].

CWOs might recommend and actually write/determine the DIs, but Command signs off on it.  Our Wing DIs are signed by the Wing Commander, which then gives subordinate commanders the authority to enforce.   

Quote
You are only permitted to wear in uniform what the regs allow, or what your CoC is willing to overlook or authorize, IAW CAF Regs and Orders.

FTFY  ;D

Quote
Now don't get me wrong - there are many many many soldiers from every rank and trade wearing non-issued boots. If your RSM is ok with you wearing SWATs or Magnums, then sure.

Knowing DIMSUMs rank, this is why I say that COMMANDERs (Wing Comd, COs, etc) have to 'sign off' on DIs.  Might seem unimportant but does a CWO have the authority to order a Capt or Maj to do something?  Put the COs signature on it...now its a different story.  Might seem like semantics to some, but this 'semantics' are important in the military IMO.

Quote
BUT... the fact is, by the book, we should not have anything on our feet other than issued boots. And if you have a medical chit, Clothing Stores will LPO you a pair of COTS, bur even then we still have to conform to a certain standard.

There are issues even in this though;  I had to tell the people I was dealing with at Clothing why the list of boots they provided me to 'pick from' didn't meet the applic standards (IAW the SAM) for the issued boots they were intended to replace.  A CWWB has to be both insulated and waterproof to be a CWWB;  they had none on the list.   ::) 

I am going to be honest with you; Clothing stores SHOULD be issuing the boots.  But THIS is where the Medical and Supply worlds have been ******* over people for so long now, some of those people have said "frig THIS crap" and either (1) gotten a chit so they can buy/wear their own boots or (2) just bought their own boots and wore them, not giving 2 shits what anyone thinks about it.

Before, special boots were a Medical system issue and paid for out of the Medical world fin codes.  Then the medical world pushed back and said it was a Supply issue and Supply would pay for it.  THIS is when the fucktardedness all started and people like me, who have been in LPO boots since 2003, have been getting the goddamn run-around every time I need new boots.

Case in point;  I have been TRYING to get my LPO winter boots replaced since JUNE 2015.  It is December and I DO NOT HAVE CWWBs.  That is NOT acceptable.  NOT ACCEPTABLE.  I have also been trying to get 1 pair of my LPO TCbs replaced.  I got those recently, just after the time I actually needed them.  WTF over?  I needed TCBs in July and August.  I got them in November.  In November, I needed CWBs.  Nope, none of those yet.  6 months.

I have been asked by multiple people...'why would you need CWWBs in July/Aug/Sep?".  Well, because planes can fly north and its cold up there?   ::)  Or hey, here's one;  BECAUSE WHOEVER DECIDED MY SOI DECIDED I SHOULD HAVE THEM.  Same as my parka that I have issued to me in June and July.    :brickwall:

Then the 'LPO boots are only SOI of 2 pair max'.  I'd heard that before as well; "show me on my SOI or the SAM where it says that".   :crickets:

The ONLY reason I did not staff a memo (which would have been supported with ref's and numerous emails over the last 6 months to accurately display how retarded this 'system' is when it is dysfunctional) is I was aware that the problem wasn't actually the Wing Clothing Stores staff;  the REAL issue was with 1 person at DSSPM who obviously knew SFA about how flying Sqn's operate. 

The way I see it, simple form is this:  someone has decided my SOI.  That part has been done.  If you are working at Clothing, no offence but I don't care what you think of that SOI.  The Air Force has said "you should have 2 pr of CWWBs, all the time".  If you work at Clothing, you really only need to do whatever you do to make sure I have my SOI.  You don't think I 'need' 2 pair of TCBs?  I don't care!  Someone already decided that.  :2c:

Quote
The fact that a member of the CAF could even ask the question "If the CANEX sells it, can we wear it?" is just... well.. wow.

In at least some parts of the CAF, common sense is allowed into the equation; if the CANEX SWATS look like military boots and others are wearing them (I am guessing you haven't been around a flying Sqn much) or other boots (I've seen SWAT, Magnums, Oakley, Matterhorn, etc) are being worn, then what is so surprising?  One thing I like about the RCAF over the Army when it comes to some kit, what matters more is if it works than "if it is the exact issued kit as Bloggins next to you has". 

Some of our stuff, we are required to wear;  ALSE, flying jacket/gloves/dual layer.  But I have a 4-color flashlight I bought at a PX that is superior to the issued one we get.  Should I have to use the issued one?  White light in an observer window is a bad idea sometimes.  Red is better;  I personally don't believe it is smart for me to potentially endanger a crew, aircraft and mission because I followed official policy and used only my issued white flashlight, IAW 'policy'.

Lots of people wear oxfords and windbreakers from the CANEX.  A lot of mess kit stuff is now available at the CANEX.  There are racks of belts, watch covers, FMP covers, boot bands, you name it, that are available at the CANEX for mbr's to buy; I've used some of it in the past in garrison, or in the field, without anyone batting an eye.

To extend that to include SWAT boots as well, especially for those who work primarily with flying Sqn's, isn't much a stretch at all when you think of it.

Quote
Now we have the LOTB. I have been issuing them out for about a month now, and you know what? Just more kit that everyone is bitching about.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing, the same way, over and over and expecting a different result.  ;D

Until the CAF and PWGSC and whoever accept that you can't make 1 kind of boot for 10,000 people, people will complain.  in 1995 when we had the old combat boots, before the days of TCBs and CWWBs and even Gortex socks, I dropped $125 USD on a pair of Matterhorn 10" Gortex field boots [which are frickin awesome boots!] while at the US Calvary store outside Ft Knox KY;  it was the best $ I had spent in a longggggggg time.  Was I authorized to wear them at the time, officially?  Nope.  After years of cold, wet feet did I particularly care?  Nope!  I didn't give a crap what anyone thought about my non-issued military looking, black, combat boots

20 years later, and we are still seeing people complaining that the boots don't work for them, buying their own, and the Uniformity Police reporting to sick parade with high blood pressure.

Insanity.
« Last Edit: December 04, 2015, 12:10:06 by Eye In The Sky »
"What a f$$kin' week!" - me, every Monday at about 1130hrs.

Offline Eagle Eye View

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 17,755
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 366
Re: CAF Combat boots policy 2005-2018
« Reply #127 on: December 04, 2015, 11:21:08 »
Eye In The Sky,

Very good post, I've had some of the same issues and frustations when it comes to the boots. Even worse when I went on Op Impact...that was a gong show.
Leadership and learning are indispensable to each other.

John F. Kennedy

Offline MJP

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 169,180
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,514
Re: CAF Combat boots policy 2005-2018
« Reply #128 on: December 04, 2015, 11:24:32 »
The briefer then went on with the "if you aren't wearing issued kit, the CAF and Veterans Affairs will not cover you".  This is, to my knowledge, pure and utter BULLSHIT.  I was injured on a jump on Basic Para back in in '92.  I filed my papers with DVA in the fall of 2005.  Never once was I questioned if I was wearing issued boots, gloves, helmet or any of that crap.  2 main questions were (1) did this happen during military time and (2) was it related to the performance of a military duty.

/Rant point off

I won't get into the boot issue because quite frankly my blood boils everytime it gets hashed out by how ****ed we are.

I fully agree with you on the you must wear issued or not covered bit.  VAC/SISIP do not give a Flying Frig about if the mbr was wearing issued gear or not.  This myth is perpetuated by a bunch of dinosaurs that were all told the same thing until it became gospel.  I have point blank emailed and talked to a number of reps that have all said that the wearing or not wearing of issued kit isn't a consideration for them.  They only care about if the injury was on duty or in a Special Duty Area.
Hope is not a valid COA

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 227,140
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,967
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: CAF Combat boots policy 2005-2018
« Reply #129 on: December 04, 2015, 11:34:16 »
Eye In The Sky,

Very good post, I've had some of the same issues and frustations when it comes to the boots. Even worse when I went on Op Impact...that was a gong show.

When our crew was getting kitted out, the first ones went thru and were issued the old style army hot weather boot, the tan colored one.  Then a few others got issued the new army one, the coyote brown ones.  THEN Ottawa and Wpg decided 'all shall get the desert safety boot", so the remaining people got the Mr Heavyfoot boots.  Then a few of us with orthotics got the Reebok safety boots.  4 different boots amongst a crew!!   :blotto:  No wait.  There were a few people who said "FTS!!" and bought Magnums.  So.  5 different styles. 

True story - one guy has 2 different 'boot size' feet.  Well, they didn't have the different sizes in the same model/style so they tried to give him one style for his right and a different style for his left foot.  He looked at whoever was working the counter and said "not happening'.   :rofl:  People would think you were hammered the night before if you walked around like that...1 tan boot, 1 coyote brown boot!  I laughed so hard I couldn't breathe when I heard about that!
« Last Edit: December 04, 2015, 12:13:32 by Eye In The Sky »
"What a f$$kin' week!" - me, every Monday at about 1130hrs.

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 227,140
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,967
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: CAF Combat boots policy 2005-2018
« Reply #130 on: December 04, 2015, 11:44:55 »
I won't get into the boot issue because quite frankly my blood boils everytime it gets hashed out by how ****ed we are.

And you know what?  I don't blame you at all!! 

The ONLY reason I did not staff a memo (which would have been supported with ref's and numerous emails over the last 6 months to accurately display how retarded this 'system' is when it is dysfunctional) is I was aware that the problem wasn't actually the Wing Clothing Stores staff

People need to remember that IF Supply has the item you need and IF it is on your SOI, they will issue it to you most of the time.  If they can't, they've usually been told not to by some HHQ.

Clothing Stores take the brunt of the heat from the individual members who come in.  If its a Wing, a majority of your Ops community are officers, SNCOs and WOs.  It is usually Cpls and Pte's are the counter who have to say "No/I can't/we don't have any/etc" and take the crap for the policies someone far removed from the operational world has implemented (and to be fair, sometimes they have no choice either). 

Members who are unhappy need to remember, the sup techs are the counter aren't dictating policy, they are doing their jobs in the left and right of arcs they are allowed to.  If you hare unhappy, don't stand at the counter and ***** at them.  Ask to see the Clothing Stores 2 I/c, or Clothing Stores Supervisor.   :2c:
« Last Edit: December 04, 2015, 12:16:59 by Eye In The Sky »
"What a f$$kin' week!" - me, every Monday at about 1130hrs.

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 305,781
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,195
Re: CAF Combat boots policy 2005-2018
« Reply #131 on: December 04, 2015, 11:47:42 »
The unofficial blessing for the tan ones came from the CoC in these terms when the issue of evading on foot with the issued tan boots was brought forward. "If you want to be comfortable, then spend your own money".

I now, like EVERYONE ELSE, own a set of bought tan boots.

We've already been given the whole "the CF bought you new boots so that's what you'll wear". Only new issue too, not older issued tan or brown boots.
The CF is a business first.
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline Fishbone Jones

    MSC -7245.

  • "Some people will only like you if you fit inside their box. Don't be afraid to shove that box up their ass."
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 281,442
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,683
    • Army.ca
Re: CAF Combat boots policy 2005-2018
« Reply #132 on: December 04, 2015, 11:50:41 »
Not quite sure how you came to the conclusion that if the CANEX sells boots, we can wear them. Well, partly true - just not in uniform. Let me expand on that:

The CANEX does not write the dress regs, nor does the CANEX attend the CWO Conference. You are only permitted to wear in uniform what the regs allow, or what your CoC is willing to overlook. Now don't get me wrong - there are many many many soldiers from every rank and trade wearing non-issued boots. If your RSM is ok with you wearing SWATs or Magnums, then sure. BUT... the fact is, by the book, we should not have anything on our feet other than issued boots. And if you have a medical chit, Clothing Stores will LPO you a pair of COTS, bur even then we still have to conform to a certain standard.

The fact that a member of the CAF could even ask the question "If the CANEX sells it, can we wear it?" is just... well.. wow.

Now we have the LOTB. I have been issuing them out for about a month now, and you know what? Just more kit that everyone is bitching about.

It's time you quit being so condescending in your posts. Your position allows you to speak to things supply. Not pass judgement on those who wish to expand their knowledge.

---Staff---
Corruption in politics doesn't scare me.
What scares me is how comfortable people are doing nothing about it.

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 227,140
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,967
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: CAF Combat boots policy 2005-2018
« Reply #133 on: December 04, 2015, 12:14:49 »
We've already been given the whole "the CF bought you new boots so that's what you'll wear". Only new issue too, not older issued tan or brown boots.
The CF is a business first.

Which is fine, until a MO determines, for medical reasons, that those boots are not suitable for a member.  No one in your CofC can override that.   8)

For years, I wore the old Mk IIs or IIIs with the issued insole (the flat, POS one that didn't really so SFA).  I went to the MIR with sore feet a few times; then I tried sneaker insoles.  Well, after they get destroyed in the field a few times from being soaking wet and falling apart, back to the junk issued ones that you can at least get thru an ADREP.

Well, that worked out well;  I developed 'fallen arches' or whatever it is called.  The CAF now pays for LPO boots and orthotics for me.  It has been since 2003 and I am CRA 2030.  27 years of paying for LPO boots and orthotics.  My orthotics are about $200 a pair every 2 years (I get 2 pr) or as needed.  My boots are about $200/pr for TCB, $250 for CWWB.  My TCBs are replaced about every 2 years, CWWBs about 5 years. 

All because, back in the day, they cheapened out on insoles. SMRT
« Last Edit: December 04, 2015, 12:27:43 by Eye In The Sky »
"What a f$$kin' week!" - me, every Monday at about 1130hrs.

Offline BinRat55

    ???

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 19,940
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,127
  • Lead by example.
Re: CAF Combat boots policy 2005-2018
« Reply #134 on: December 04, 2015, 12:40:36 »
CWOs might recommend and actually write/determine the DIs, but Command signs off on it.  Our Wing DIs are signed by the Wing Commander, which then gives subordinate commanders the authority to enforce.

My experience may not be as extensive as yours or others, but RSMs have always "enforced" D&D. Obviously anything pertaining to standing orders on a wing / base is signed off by the Commander, but enforced by his/her FSM.

...I had to tell the people I was dealing with at Clothing why the list of boots they provided me to 'pick from' didn't meet the applic standards (IAW the SAM) for the issued boots they were intended to replace.  A CWWB has to be both insulated and waterproof to be a CWWB;  they had none on the list.   ::)

So, nowhere in the SAM (that I can find) is there any indication of what the milspec standard should be for a boot, combat or otherwise. Actually, this is the only thing I can find:
"Special size safety footwear must meet the safety standards of the regulation footwear. Supply sections are under no obligation to procure brand name footwear. Wherever possible, the special size footwear should be the same color and materials as CAF issued footwear"

It is incumbent upon the BSupO / WSupO to ensure that the choices in the proverbial "list" of footwear eligible for purchase strictly adheres to all military specification to the best of the local economy's capability. This is always a sore point on our annual SAV.

I am going to be honest with you; Clothing stores SHOULD be issuing the boots.  But THIS is where the Medical and Supply worlds have been ******* over people for so long now, some of those people have said "frig THIS crap" and either gotten a chit so they can buy/wear their own boots or (2) just bought their own boots and wore them, not giving 2 shits what anyone things about it.

What I have seen is not Supply or the MIR screwing people over, it's the other way around. Cpl Bloggins doesn't want / like the boots we issue, goes to the MO and voila! Chit me dude. This is another critical fork. Cpl Bloggins thinks that now he has a chit he can go get any boots he wants. Not so. Chit goes to Clothing Stores, we annotate his docs, fill out the paperwork and send him to specific SOS... then we issue those to his docs. But all too often people do an end-run around us. So often in fact, that RSMs now over look it.

Before, special boots were a Medical system issue and paid for out of the Medical world fin codes.  Then the medical world pushed back and said it was a Supply issue and Supply would pay for it.  THIS is when the fucktardedness all started and people like me, who have been in LPO boots since 2003, have been getting the goddamn run-around every time I need new boots.

From the SAM: "When uniforms or other articles of clothing require special procurement. For example, a size not stocked at any level, B/W/S SupO shall confirm all requests prior to initiating procurement action. Prices are obtained from local manufacturers and procurement action is taken IAW procurement policy. B/W/S fund special size requirements from Command allotments. If an individual is undergoing training at a unit other than his home unit, funding for special size clothing, footwear, and equipment should be requested from the individual’s home unit."

And more to the point: "If after being fitted IAW measuring and fitting of footwear procedures an individual is found to have a foot size, which does not fall within the range of standard catalogue footwear sizes and does not require orthopaedic footwear, the individual will be provided with special size footwear regulated by DSSPM. B/W/S is responsible to fund these requirements through their Command allotments.

Case in point;  I have been TRYING to get my LPO winter boots replaced since JUNE 2015.  It is December and I DO NOT HAVE CWWBs.  That is NOT acceptable.  NOT ACCEPTABLE.  I have also been trying to get 1 pair of my LPO TCbs replaced. 

Were you given a reason? That IS an unusually long period of time for boots that can be purchased within a week... or sooner...

Then the 'LPO boots are only SOI of 2 pair max'.  I'd heard that before as well; "show me on my SOI or the SAM where it says that".   :crickets:

You will not find anything about an entitlement of LPO boots anywhere. Your scale of issue indicates you are entitled to boots. If I can't give you boots off the shelf (according to your entitlement) then we buy them. See my response above re: who pays...

The way I see it, simple form is this:  someone has decided my SOI.  That part has been done.  If you are working at Clothing, no offence but I don't care what you think of that SOI.  The Air Force has said "you should have 2 pr of CWWBs, all the time".  If you work at Clothing, you really only need to do whatever you do to make sure I have my SOI.  You don't think I 'need' 2 pair of TCBs?  I don't care!  Someone already decided that.  :2c:

You must have had a bad experience or two at Clothing... we really DON'T care what your scale entitles you to - if we have it, it's yours!

I am guessing you haven't been around a flying Sqn much

6 years in Gander - 3 with 103 SAR and 3 as the 2 IC and Wing Sup O... You want to discuss retardedness? Read the scale of issue for a SAR Tech. Then read it again in 3 weeks.

I won't get into flashlights, socks and underwear. The mess kit and PT strip found at the CANEX today? Well we don't ISSUE mes kit, medals and ribbons, do we? Windbreakers, fancy leather flight jackets... none are found on any Air Force scale of issue. So buy all you want. At the end of the day, I will wear what the dress regs authorize me to wear and my RSM "blesses"...

But maybe you haven't been around an army base much...


Never interrupt your enemy while he is making a mistake - Napoleon Bonaparte

Online cld617

  • Member
  • ****
  • 4,900
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 132
Re: CAF Combat boots policy 2005-2018
« Reply #135 on: December 04, 2015, 13:21:14 »
From the SAM: "When uniforms or other articles of clothing require special procurement. For example, a size not stocked at any level, B/W/S SupO shall confirm all requests prior to initiating procurement action. Prices are obtained from local manufacturers and procurement action is taken IAW procurement policy. B/W/S fund special size requirements from Command allotments. If an individual is undergoing training at a unit other than his home unit, funding for special size clothing, footwear, and equipment should be requested from the individual’s home unit."

And more to the point: "If after being fitted IAW measuring and fitting of footwear procedures an individual is found to have a foot size, which does not fall within the range of standard catalogue footwear sizes and does not require orthopaedic footwear, the individual will be provided with special size footwear regulated by DSSPM. B/W/S is responsible to fund these requirements through their Command allotments.

I'm going to take a stab at it and say these two statements apply to my current situation. I've had my feet measured, supply is telling me that a boot they have in stock should fit my feet however it feels too tight. I ask for a wider size, they say it's not available in stores or depo. A civilian worker claimed this means they're responsible to procure me something that fits, however stores 2 I/C has said "LPO is not an option" and then attempted to scare me off with a 1 year wait for special made to fit because they need to have 10 mbrs fitted at once. Am I being given the run around? I'm trying to finally have DND pay for the footwear I've been forced to pay for myself these last few years.

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 227,140
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,967
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: CAF Combat boots policy 2005-2018
« Reply #136 on: December 04, 2015, 13:50:05 »
So, nowhere in the SAM (that I can find) is there any indication of what the milspec standard should be for a boot, combat or otherwise.Actually, this is the only thing I can find:
"Special size safety footwear must meet the safety standards of the regulation footwear. Supply sections are under no obligation to procure brand name footwear. Wherever possible, the special size footwear should be the same color and materials as CAF issued footwear"

Having read thru the SAM I was aware of this.  However, having also read Flight Comment, 2008, Issue 3 I was also aware of the Air Force Personnel Footwear article written by the RCAF DAP ALSE Officer, Maj England.  The article begins on Page 27 of the PDF, but the CEMS Project boot specs are covered on both pages 27 and 28:

- Air Force boots are constructed entirely from leather (p27).

- all the boots “feature a speed lacing system; a three part sole for shock absorption; a modified sole for anti-FOD, POL and penetration resistance; flame resistance; safety toes; waterproofing; and wicking characteristics” (p28).

- The Cold Wet Weather Boot (CWWB) will cover the -25°C to +10°C range “in all operating locations.” The boot sole is designed much like a winter tire, with a softer compound that will more easily grip icy surfaces without becoming a FOD hazard.

- The Temperate Combat Boot (TCB) will address the +10°C to +30°C range and will have a harder rubber compound sole, providing the appropriate amount of cushioning in warmer climates.

- The Desert Combat Boot (DCB) will protect Air Force personnel in extreme heat environments (+30°C and above).

- Of note, the ECWB and CWWB have a Gore Tex liner within the boot wall, providing the Wet Weather resistance, whereas the TCB and DCB are made with breathable liners, thus providing the appropriate wicking in moist/warm environments.

I provided the young Avr Supp Tech I was dealing with this info and article as he wasn't even IN the CAF when the article was written  ;D.  None of the boots I was told I could pick from were CWWBs so that told me the Avr didn't know the SAM wording either OR the CEMS boots specs.  I was trying to help him out, believing it was my job to provide info to substantiate my request for additional boots to be added to the approved list.

Quote
It is incumbent upon the BSupO / WSupO to ensure that the choices in the proverbial "list" of footwear eligible for purchase strictly adheres to all military specification to the best of the local economy's capability.

Which I pointed out to them, there was none on the LIST they provided, but at least one model of Bates their supplier could get DID meet the CWWB specs and was actually less $ than a pair of Danners that were on the list that were Gortex but not insulated.   I recommended the Bates Model 2284 be added (the 2274s were already there but lacked the 200g Thinsulate, basically, to make them suitable to the -25).  AFAIK it didn't happen but I am getting them because I 'pushed' asked for actual CWWBs. 

Quote
What I have seen is not Supply or the MIR screwing people over, it's the other way around. Cpl Bloggins doesn't want / like the boots we issue, goes to the MO and voila! Chit me dude. This is another critical fork. Cpl Bloggins thinks that now he has a chit he can go get any boots he wants. Not so. Chit goes to Clothing Stores, we annotate his docs, fill out the paperwork and send him to specific SOS... then we issue those to his docs. But all too often people do an end-run around us. So often in fact, that RSMs now over look it.

Okay, I do believe this is happening also.  But is this the exception, or the rule?  I have been doing special size/LPOs for 12 years and I have never tried to end-run anyone.  In fact, it was a MWO PA who referred me to the base foot clinic, who then referred me to a podiatrist, who said "this guy will need orthotics".  My arches will never 'fix themselves', yet I am required to bring in a new chit from physio every 2 years because why?  Honest 'customers' like me aren't trying to screw people over, we are honestly just trying to get the kit the RCAF says we should have to do our jobs.  Try to remember that please.  If someone like me is coming in and has been wearing LPOs for orthotics for over a decade, I think it is safe to assume I am not end-running anyone.  Some of us are in LPOs because we were referred, assessed and treated thru the MIR/H Svcs Centers.  I had no idea my feet were messed up until the PA said "holy crap".

Quote
From the SAM: "When uniforms or other articles of clothing require special procurement. For example, a size not stocked at any level, B/W/S SupO shall confirm all requests prior to initiating procurement action. Prices are obtained from local manufacturers and procurement action is taken IAW procurement policy. B/W/S fund special size requirements from Command allotments. If an individual is undergoing training at a unit other than his home unit, funding for special size clothing, footwear, and equipment should be requested from the individual’s home unit."

And more to the point: "If after being fitted IAW measuring and fitting of footwear procedures an individual is found to have a foot size, which does not fall within the range of standard catalogue footwear sizes and does not require orthopaedic footwear, the individual will be provided with special size footwear regulated by DSSPM. B/W/S is responsible to fund these requirements through their Command allotments.

Yup.  Command allotments right?  So Wing Supply would be buying mine thru an RCAF fin code no? 

Quote
Were you given a reason? That IS an unusually long period of time for boots that can be purchased within a week... or sooner...

Yes, a certain person at DSSPM said '1 pr per regardless of SOI until the LOTB is out'. 

Quote
You will not find anything about an entitlement of LPO boots anywhere. Your scale of issue indicates you are entitled to boots. If I can't give you boots off the shelf (according to your entitlement) then we buy them. See my response above re: who pays...

Which was my response ref: SOI.  I think I pissed a few people off when I was talking about the SAM and SOIs.  Jedi Mind Tricks don't often work with me; if I don't know the policy but what you say sounds like BS to me, I will go find the policy and then come back with it.  In this case, because I had already played the silly game with FLOG before being posted to my current Wing, I knew what the SAM and SOI wording was.   

Quote
You must have had a bad experience or two at Clothing...

I believe some of it was that I knew the policy, and there was already a LOT of people pissed off at supply because they couldn't get boots.  What they didn't understand was that problem wasn't actually from Wing Supply, it was something imposed down from DSSPM (you probably know who would be dealing with LPO boots there, so no need to say her name).  I was pissed at one point and ended up talking with the Clothing NCO/IC (Sgt) who explained why things were happening. 

Quote
But maybe you haven't been around an army base much...
  I sometimes wish that WAS true!  I've only been wearing the blue head wallet since '07.  8)
"What a f$$kin' week!" - me, every Monday at about 1130hrs.

Offline ArmyVern

    is awake.

  • Army.ca Myth
  • *****
  • 207,926
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,545
Re: CAF Combat boots policy 2005-2018
« Reply #137 on: December 06, 2015, 10:05:40 »


Okay, I do believe this is happening also.  But is this the exception, or the rule?  I have been doing special size/LPOs for 12 years and I have never tried to end-run anyone.  In fact, it was a MWO PA who referred me to the base foot clinic, who then referred me to a podiatrist, who said "this guy will need orthotics".  My arches will never 'fix themselves', yet I am required to bring in a new chit from physio every 2 years because why?  Honest 'customers' like me aren't trying to screw people over, we are honestly just trying to get the kit the RCAF says we should have to do our jobs.  Try to remember that please. If someone like me is coming in and has been wearing LPOs for orthotics for over a decade, I think it is safe to assume I am not end-running anyone.  Some of us are in LPOs because we were referred, assessed and treated thru the MIR/H Svcs Centers.  I had no idea my feet were messed up until the PA said "holy crap".



Just want to deal with the bold bit.  I wouldn't say it's the exception - probably 50/50.  Yes, you need a new chit every 2 years and "we" realize that your arches won't fix themselves. But, we mere sup tachs don't "know" what your particular medical issue is and whether or not your condition will fix itself.  We are not privvy to that bit of "protected" medical information.  And, boot chits are issued for a myriad of foot issues.  It is the medical side of the house that requires the chit every 2 years (thus it is included in our SOPs) because, although your specific condition may not correct itself, it also affords the medical side a scheduled date with you to ensure your condition hasn't actually gotten worse. 

Works both ways.
Hard by MCpl Elton Adams

If you or someone you love is having difficulty & would like to speak to someone who has been through a similar experience, who understands, & will respect your need for privacy and confidentiality, contact OSISS toll-free at 1-800-883-6094. You can locate the peer closest to you by logging on to www.osiss.ca, clicking on “Contact us” link & then choosing the “Peer” or “Family Support Network”. Help IS out there.

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 227,140
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,967
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: CAF Combat boots policy 2005-2018
« Reply #138 on: December 06, 2015, 11:43:38 »
Okay, that makes sense.  In the case of someone like me, when I had to go to physio and book an appointment to see someone for a new chit, the medical pers I saw said "this is stupid that you have to come back for me to tell you your feet didn't fix themselves". 

Maybe have a "temp chit" and a 'permanent chit'?  I'd be a perm chit type and I would be able to stop wasting some people's time, mine included.   :2c:

FWIW, that person I am talking about from DSSPM (I think you know who I mean...) said in an email to me it was "her policy", so a DSSPM one, for the chit every 2 years requirement.   :dunno:

It's a clusterfuck for me to get some of the kit I need to do my job, boots being the top of the list.  I have enough actual stuff to do;  I shouldn't have to devote hours and hours and hours to chasing my tail to get something like boots.  Here I sit 6 months later, in December, still without CWWBs.  Something is broken.
"What a f$$kin' week!" - me, every Monday at about 1130hrs.

Offline ArmyVern

    is awake.

  • Army.ca Myth
  • *****
  • 207,926
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,545
Re: CAF Combat boots policy 2005-2018
« Reply #139 on: December 06, 2015, 11:53:00 »

FWIW, that person I am talking about from DSSPM (I think you know who I mean...) said in an email to me it was "her policy", so a DSSPM one, for the chit every 2 years requirement.   :dunno:


It is "her" policy in that it is the one she has to follow.  "Our" (IE: Supply's policy) is devolved from the medical side of the house for medical footwear chits.  They work hand-in-hand.  You just took her too "literally". 

And, you would also recognize her from our time in Gagetown as she was my "footwear" Cpl there ... think back for a visual!!  I trained her well.   ;D
Hard by MCpl Elton Adams

If you or someone you love is having difficulty & would like to speak to someone who has been through a similar experience, who understands, & will respect your need for privacy and confidentiality, contact OSISS toll-free at 1-800-883-6094. You can locate the peer closest to you by logging on to www.osiss.ca, clicking on “Contact us” link & then choosing the “Peer” or “Family Support Network”. Help IS out there.

Offline ArmyVern

    is awake.

  • Army.ca Myth
  • *****
  • 207,926
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,545
Re: CAF Combat boots policy 2005-2018
« Reply #140 on: December 06, 2015, 11:57:41 »
BTW, footwear has been broken for eons ... every sup tech knows it.  There's not a sup tech I know who does not believe the only proper fix is a "boot allowance".  My posts here from 2003ish will indicate that has been my position for over a decade now.  But, I have also posted the reasons why that will never happen despite it's requirement - and no one in DND or the CAF will change those reasons.

Believe you me, the broken footwear system (and shoddy boots themselves) is just as frustrating for us suppies.  We do not get off on ******* around the troops.
Hard by MCpl Elton Adams

If you or someone you love is having difficulty & would like to speak to someone who has been through a similar experience, who understands, & will respect your need for privacy and confidentiality, contact OSISS toll-free at 1-800-883-6094. You can locate the peer closest to you by logging on to www.osiss.ca, clicking on “Contact us” link & then choosing the “Peer” or “Family Support Network”. Help IS out there.

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 227,140
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,967
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: CAF Combat boots policy 2005-2018
« Reply #141 on: December 06, 2015, 12:36:18 »
It is "her" policy in that it is the one she has to follow.  "Our" (IE: Supply's policy) is devolved from the medical side of the house for medical footwear chits.  They work hand-in-hand.  You just took her too "literally".

Oh.  Well, all I know is the Physio folks I always end up seeing say they don't get why I need a new chit, and I have to 'schedule an appointment' just to get to see them, which was seen as a waste of their time.  Supply says the one I had was older than 2 years...so off I went.   I am just the monkey in the middle.   ;D

Quote
And, you would also recognize her from our time in Gagetown as she was my "footwear" Cpl there ... think back for a visual!!  I trained her well.   ;D

Same last name then?  I am drawing a complete blank.  As soon as I got issued my first pair of reading glasses my memory started going...

Now that you mention it...the email was something I could have pictured you writing though.   >:D   You could almost sense where the swearing was in the first draft, but then removed.   ^-^

BTW, footwear has been broken for eons ... every sup tech knows it.  There's not a sup tech I know who does not believe the only proper fix is a "boot allowance".  My posts here from 2003ish will indicate that has been my position for over a decade now.  But, I have also posted the reasons why that will never happen despite it's requirement - and no one in DND or the CAF will change those reasons.

Believe you me, the broken footwear system (and shoddy boots themselves) is just as frustrating for us suppies.  We do not get off on ******* around the troops.

Aside from 2 individuals I've dealt with in the past, I believe that.  I mentioned in a post above, the counter staff are doing the job the way they are told to and take lots of the flak from mbrs.  I've seen it and advised people to talk to the 2 I/c or Clothing Supervisor, who can explain the 'whys' and other stuff. 

People need to remember that IF Supply has the item you need and IF it is on your SOI, they will issue it to you most of the time.  If they can't, they've usually been told not to by some HHQ.

Clothing Stores take the brunt of the heat from the individual members who come in.  If its a Wing, a majority of your Ops community are officers, SNCOs and WOs.  It is usually Cpls and Pte's are the counter who have to say "No/I can't/we don't have any/etc" and take the crap for the policies someone far removed from the operational world has implemented (and to be fair, sometimes they have no choice either). 

Members who are unhappy need to remember, the sup techs at the counter aren't dictating policy, they are doing their jobs in the left and right of arcs they are allowed to.  If you are unhappy, don't stand at the counter and ***** at them.  Ask to see the Clothing Stores 2 I/c, or Clothing Stores Supervisor.   :2c:
« Last Edit: December 06, 2015, 12:44:54 by Eye In The Sky »
"What a f$$kin' week!" - me, every Monday at about 1130hrs.

Offline Tcm621

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 13,505
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 772
Re: CAF Combat boots policy 2005-2018
« Reply #142 on: December 06, 2015, 20:22:16 »
I have been using after market boots for more than a decade and the supply system has paid for them. They are issued so I have never understood why I can't be entitled to an exchange when they where out like everyone else? Instead they send me to physio who have nothing to do with the reason I need special boots. I always get them but it ends up wasting a bunch of everyone's time.

Offline Quirky

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 8,565
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 282
Re: CAF Combat boots policy 2005-2018
« Reply #143 on: December 07, 2015, 00:32:33 »
I find it ridiculous that you need to have a medical "excuse" to wear the nicer boots. My feet fit perfectly fine in the issued garbage, but they hurt everyday walking around on hard floors. I'm almost five years on my "illegal" magnum safety boots without soreness or unnecessary pain. The magums are exactly the same as what mostly everyone that is on a chit wears. So I'm supposed to wear the crap that gives me  foot and some days, knee, soreness because I can? I'll spend $200 every 5 years not to walk around in pain, I'd rather prevent a medical issue, not adapt to it.

Offline ArmyVern

    is awake.

  • Army.ca Myth
  • *****
  • 207,926
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,545
Re: CAF Combat boots policy 2005-2018
« Reply #144 on: December 07, 2015, 00:40:31 »
I have been using after market boots for more than a decade and the supply system has paid for them. They are issued so I have never understood why I can't be entitled to an exchange when they where out like everyone else? Instead they send me to physio who have nothing to do with the reason I need special boots. I always get them but it ends up wasting a bunch of everyone's time.

Well, don't keep blaming the supply system. There's more than just us involved in it.  The boots suck; we get it.  All the bitching in the world isn't going to get a boot allowance though. 

I'm really not going to sit here and post all the myriad of outside influences involved in footwear as I've posted them all umpteen times before on this site; they haven't changed.

Everyone just keep on blaming supply though; we've got big shoulders and will bear the brunt of your ire with the shitty boots ... the same shitty boots we get to wear. 
Hard by MCpl Elton Adams

If you or someone you love is having difficulty & would like to speak to someone who has been through a similar experience, who understands, & will respect your need for privacy and confidentiality, contact OSISS toll-free at 1-800-883-6094. You can locate the peer closest to you by logging on to www.osiss.ca, clicking on “Contact us” link & then choosing the “Peer” or “Family Support Network”. Help IS out there.

Offline BinRat55

    ???

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 19,940
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,127
  • Lead by example.
Re: CAF Combat boots policy 2005-2018
« Reply #145 on: December 07, 2015, 06:59:31 »
I find it ridiculous that you need to have a medical "excuse" to wear the nicer boots. My feet fit perfectly fine in the issued garbage, but they hurt everyday walking around on hard floors. I'm almost five years on my "illegal" magnum safety boots without soreness or unnecessary pain. The magums are exactly the same as what mostly everyone that is on a chit wears. So I'm supposed to wear the crap that gives me  foot and some days, knee, soreness because I can? I'll spend $200 every 5 years not to walk around in pain, I'd rather prevent a medical issue, not adapt to it.

We have 74 sizes in the new LOTB to make you and every other soldier (without a bonafide deformity or medical issue) happy. You are definitely entitled to your opinion... if your feet fit, have you tried investing in a good set of insoles? I realize that it's an expense you shouldn't have to incur, but $20-30 is better than $200.
Never interrupt your enemy while he is making a mistake - Napoleon Bonaparte

Offline PuckChaser

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 925,425
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,223
    • Peacekeeper's Homepage
Re: CAF Combat boots policy 2005-2018
« Reply #146 on: December 07, 2015, 07:47:06 »
We have 74 sizes in the new LOTB to make you and every other soldier (without a bonafide deformity or medical issue) happy. You are definitely entitled to your opinion... if your feet fit, have you tried investing in a good set of insoles? I realize that it's an expense you shouldn't have to incur, but $20-30 is better than $200.
Are those sizes in mondo point again? If so, the CAF will likely be buying me COTS boots again, unless they are radically different design. The joys of falling between one of those 74 sizes, and buying a standard 9.5D Rocky boot and having it fit like a glove.

Offline Old and Tired

  • Donor
  • Member
  • *
  • 13,400
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 198
  • Just a Dumb A** radop
Re: CAF Combat boots policy 2005-2018
« Reply #147 on: December 07, 2015, 08:07:18 »
Well, don't keep blaming the supply system. There's more than just us involved in it.  The boots suck; we get it.  All the bitching in the world isn't going to get a boot allowance though. 

I'm really not going to sit here and post all the myriad of outside influences involved in footwear as I've posted them all umpteen times before on this site; they haven't changed.

Everyone just keep on blaming supply though; we've got big shoulders and will bear the brunt of your ire with the shitty boots ... the same shitty boots we get to wear. 


Vern, I don't blame Supply Techs for the Crap they are forced to issue, just like I don't blame the Previous Base Commander in Halifax for the BS that comes out of Treasury Board about Pay Parking.  I had a conversation with a recently retired relative who was our ADM Fin CS and I under stand your pain about boot allowance and why it will never happened.  This point came up after dinner one night.  I told him point blank that the Army needs to stop buy **** boots and kit (Load Bearing stuff mostly), Kev asked why I wasn't wearing the new LOTP.  Point blank I told him that I did for a month.  After they fell apart because of poor quality materials and quality control, I went back to wearing my Rocky's
We have 74 sizes in the new LOTB to make you and every other soldier (without a bonafide deformity or medical issue) happy. You are definitely entitled to your opinion... if your feet fit, have you tried investing in a good set of insoles? I realize that it's an expense you shouldn't have to incur, but $20-30 is better than $200.

BinRat, it's not the 74 sizes that are the problem for most of us, the problem is that the Boots themselves are HORRIBLE.  They are poorly made, using unacceptable materials. If they can not stand up to the use and abuse that soldiers will, inevitably, give them then they have FAILED, miserably.  If they fail then most soldiers (I do not have enough experience with RCAF or RSN ops to tell) will continue to buy and wear their own.  I don't think I've worn an issue set of boots for more than a month since Bosnia in 1994 when I got my first set of Matterhorns.  Haven't looked back since and one has given me grief for it.
If you can keep your head while all about you are loosing theirs, obviously you don't understand the complexity of the problem.

"Hey, Andy, watch this; it'll gonna be really cool........"

Offline BinRat55

    ???

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 19,940
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,127
  • Lead by example.
Re: CAF Combat boots policy 2005-2018
« Reply #148 on: December 07, 2015, 11:41:44 »
BinRat, it's not the 74 sizes that are the problem for most of us, the problem is that the Boots themselves are HORRIBLE.  They are poorly made, using unacceptable materials. If they can not stand up to the use and abuse that soldiers will, inevitably, give them then they have FAILED, miserably.  If they fail then most soldiers (I do not have enough experience with RCAF or RSN ops to tell) will continue to buy and wear their own.  I don't think I've worn an issue set of boots for more than a month since Bosnia in 1994 when I got my first set of Matterhorns.  Haven't looked back since and one has given me grief for it.

As repetitive as I seem to be here, the 74 sizes are just that - 74 sizes. Quirky said in his post that his boots fit fine. Can't do better than that. I have soldiers come in to Clothing and say "These boots don't fit." I do my best... they can't come in and say "These boots suck - I want a different pair" (well, some do...) but as Vern stated - we are at the mercy of the system - both PWGSC and the medical system.

We need to utilize the UCR system to the best of our ability. "This boot sucks" is going to get a UCR shredded. "The lacing gave way in 3 separate pairs (model# here) during A / B and C. I attempted to do E, F and G with no solution"

If enough people use the system correctly, the system will work correctly.
Never interrupt your enemy while he is making a mistake - Napoleon Bonaparte

Offline Sheep Dog AT

  • The Fly in Someone's Ointment - Giggity
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 58,120
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,219
Re: CAF Combat boots policy 2005-2018
« Reply #149 on: December 07, 2015, 11:45:47 »
These boots are brand new. We collectively shouldn't be filling out UCRs. These boots passed all the rigours tests. There should be no flaws. No systematic failures.
Apparently infamous for his one liners.
Oh Giggity Well...........Giggity