Current Dress Regs

[btrudy]

The changes were not a recruitment thing. It was an equity thing, prompted by a briefing note drafted up by the Defence Women's Advisory Organization.

No one seriously expected it to start bringing a bunch of people in the door.

 

[dimsum]

https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadianForces/s/tyoUo7XLU8

 

[NavyHopeful]

There are plenty of things that we as a society allow or encourage or celebrate which many of our allies find distasteful. Too f'in bad. We're not doing it for them.

That is a very naive stance to take. I would hope its one you keep for this forum and not one you take with you on Expeditionary Operations.

One example I could see is having female officers in a command position.

Having seen other nations' military members dismiss / ignore a female OOW onboard ship because they don't allow women to serve in their military, it took the Captain to tell them that he trusted the OOW implicitly, and she had gone through a solid amount of training to get to where she was, and had earned his trust and respect in the handling of his ship.

I'm sure that these types of interactions happen on the reg, but because it is a cultural thing, we adapt and overcome.

 

[mariomike]

And yet, the recruits are not flooding in as predicted ...

Dispirit de corps​

What would appeal to the country’s young men and women? The answer, as laid down in the new CAF regulations, was that they “should reflect the changing norms in Canadian society. This will welcome a more diverse group of CAF members, which will benefit the CAF as diversity is a known force multiplier.”

Consider the new rule for hair: “Full or partial shaving of hair on the head is permitted. Colouring of hair is permitted. The wearing of wigs, locks, or hair extensions is permitted. Long hair is permitted but must be secured…in such a manner to prevent hair from falling in or covering the face when leaning forward.”

In other words, personnel can have any colour hair down to their shoulders when in uniform. In addition: “all styles of facial hair and sideburns are authorized. Facial hair may be braided/pony tail style and coloured.” At the same time, male and female “members may wear coloured nail polish, artificial nails, temporary lashes, and eyelash extensions.” In addition, men may wear skirts if they wish, so long as the hem falls below the knee.

If these new regulations worked to attract new and diverse recruits, they might be justified. Thus far, however, they have had no such effect. Recruitment continues to be slow while retirements increase. This is no surprise to those who have served (or somehow continue to serve).

Dispirit de corps - Legion Magazine

Given the lack of meaningful support, it’s easy to appreciate morale issues among the military’s rank and file

legionmagazine.com

Not to suggest there is anything wrong with CAF grooming standards. They no longer apply to me. But, reading the above, I could not help but fondly remember Cpl. Klinger on TV
( MASH ).

 

[Navy_Pete]

I think if they had kept the requirement that, regardless of length of hair, colouring etc, people still had to look neatly groomed and professional, this would have been fine.

To be fair, some people didn't look very professional before the reg changes, but with the reg changes some people looked like they stopped doing basic self grooming all together and it was pretty embarrassing. We're supposed to be a profession of arms, are supposed to act professional and get paid accordingly, but a lot of people looked disheveled and wrecked like they were rolling into pajama day at work, and wouldn't have flown at a McDonalds or something, let alone a lot of comparable professional workplaces.

 

[Infanteer]

It was the purple hair and coloured nails. More conservative countries (see Eastern Europe and the Middle East) and frankly, most of NATO think we look like fucking losers because of some of these bozos.

I can see you haven't read the TFSO for Op IMPACT, which places restrictions on grooming and appearance (to include died hair) for operations in that JOA.

 

[mariomike]

, and wouldn't have flown at a McDonalds or something, let alone a lot of comparable professional workplaces.

For reference to the discussion.

 

[Navy_Pete]

Kind of funny that a fast food restaurant has higher standards than the CAF for presentation, but had similar at a number of different manual labour jobs where you were representing the company. Even though you ended up looking like a wrung out hobo dog by the end of the long day in the summer doing landscaping, they definitely wanted you to start looking presentable when you were showing up to someone's home to do some work (especially the high end jobs).

Weird that with a push for recruiting, they didn't consider brand impact by having some guidelines for still looking neat and presentable while loosening what was allowed.

 

[captloadie]

Kind of funny that a fast food restaurant has higher standards than the CAF for presentation, but had similar at a number of different manual labour jobs where you were representing the company. Even though you ended up looking like a wrung out hobo dog by the end of the long day in the summer doing landscaping, they definitely wanted you to start looking presentable when you were showing up to someone's home to do some work (especially the high end jobs).

Weird that with a push for recruiting, they didn't consider brand impact by having some guidelines for still looking neat and presentable while loosening what was allowed.

They don't have higher standards, they just enforce the high standards better. Show up for work not complying with the standard, you might get a warning but a second time would be dismissal, especially if you're still on a probation period. After the probie period, the process is a little more drawn out, because in a unionized environment you're more protected, but could still face disciplinary measures (loss of pay, reduced hours, etc.)

We don't have those same immediate levers to pull. We can't doc someone's pay while they go home and change, and the disciplinary process is to onerous to be effective. And just yelling at someone while they stand at attention can be easily tuned out.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Kind of funny that a fast food restaurant has higher standards than the CAF for presentation, but had similar at a number of different manual labour jobs where you were representing the company. Even though you ended up looking like a wrung out hobo dog by the end of the long day in the summer doing landscaping, they definitely wanted you to start looking presentable when you were showing up to someone's home to do some work (especially the high end jobs).

Weird that with a push for recruiting, they didn't consider brand impact by having some guidelines for still looking neat and presentable while loosening what was allowed.

Luckily, we consign the majority of our CAF members to internal exile in remote parts of Canada so the public doesn't come across them much

FWIW, the (very) few CAF folks I've seen in public around here looked fairly 'normal' in their NCDs etc.

 

[QV]

At the end of the day, are we writing the Canadian Forces Dress Instructions to appease foreigners, or are we trying to write something that works for Canadians?

There are plenty of things that we as a society allow or encourage or celebrate which many of our allies find distasteful. Too f'in bad. We're not doing it for them.

Are we writing dress policy to appease 20%?

The CAF has lost credibility, internally and internationally, with this track. All to appease what, 20%?

 

[MilEME09]

Are we writing dress policy to appease 20%?

The CAF has lost credibility, internally and internationally, with this track. All to appease what, 20%?

Let's be honest, the lost credibility of the CoC has almost 0 to do with dress regs. Now toxic leadership on the other hand, housing? Etc....

 

[CountDC]

We are not talking about the same things...

I am talking about people looking unprofessional, you keep going back to ops and/or safety issues.

There is a difference between being told "stand down, you got that wrong", and "We have received a harassment complaint from S3 Bloggings that you made inappropriate comments about their personal appearance. This made them feel unsafe in the workspace, so you are going to work from home until the UDI is finished".

Interesting enough I have worked with 3 people that went through the "inappropriate comments" scenario and although it was a nightmare for them the first 2 both stuck to their guns and were ready to do it again but slightly differently. One was a MCpl back when females were to wear neutral colour bras that informed a Cpl he was working with that hers was not at dress standards as it could be fully seen through the paper thin blouses they wore at that time (she wore black). The change he made was that if he ever had to do it again he would do it in an office with a female MCpl as a witness to what was said instead of in the open office. The third one was restricted from contact with the complainant but was still able to go to his office.

Looking unprofessional or safety it still comes down to the people that could and should take action are not because they are more concerned about getting slapped. Do it properly and the harassment complaint should go away in short order (key wording - should). Never go one on one, have a proper witness (not your best friend) at the meeting and stick to professional conduct. Cpl Bloggins I have noticed that your hair does not look very professional as it is never combed along with being at the length it is to be tied back but you have it hanging loose. Tomorrow when you come to work please comb it and tie it back. Although it is not always that cut and dry of a situation the basic session is there, presented issue and expected corrective action with witness to confirm that is what you presented to the member. Go ahead, file the harassment complaint, here is the documentation signed by me, the witness and the member detailing the session we had. Have a nice day and let me know the result. Oh, want me to WFH? Ok, I need a computer, maybe a phone if you want to call me, desk and chair would be nice or I could just wait a few days then go to the medics about my horrible back pain and oh yeah, as everything is online now I need internet service paid for. Yeah extreme, have not gone that far myself (I did do the phone part) but I have paid the bills for members to have a desk setup in their residence as they were asked to WFH for a period.

It's a sign of our so-called progression, 20 to 40 years ago people weren't afraid to make the calls. Now almost everyone is afraid and has to analyse the crap out of everything before doing anything to make sure they don't accidently offend anyone. Can't really blame the new people as that is what they have been taught and trained. I can however still be annoyed that we have become that way.

Not getting the issue with WFH until the UDI is finished. I could certainly handle WFH for a month or so, can I pick July.

Are we writing dress policy to appease 20%?

The CAF has lost credibility, internally and internationally, with this track. All to appease what, 20%?

Is it 20%? Seems high.

 

[Navy_Pete]

They don't have higher standards, they just enforce the high standards better. Show up for work not complying with the standard, you might get a warning but a second time would be dismissal, especially if you're still on a probation period. After the probie period, the process is a little more drawn out, because in a unionized environment you're more protected, but could still face disciplinary measures (loss of pay, reduced hours, etc.)

We don't have those same immediate levers to pull. We can't doc someone's pay while they go home and change, and the disciplinary process is to onerous to be effective. And just yelling at someone while they stand at attention can be easily tuned out.

They absolutely do have higher standards, and they also back up management's ability to enforce them. On the flip side they would also likely hold management accountable for not enforcing safety/food standards issues (for liability if nothing else) so works both ways. Do you think McDonalds would care if you claimed to be a viking and where getting hair all over the food, or getting it too close to the fryers?

Definitely a good and bad way to correct people for not meeting the standard, but hard to enforce anything when the BGHs kneecap you anyway.

 

[OldSolduer]

Is it 20%? Seems high.

I would estimate 5% or less.

 

[OldSolduer]

Let's be honest, the lost credibility of the CoC has almost 0 to do with dress regs. Now toxic leadership on the other hand, housing? Etc....

Not just dress, toxic leadership, etc but there are a number of things that are huge dissatisfiers in every job. Poor leadership OR LACK of leadership is a major issue IMO.

 

[MilEME09]

Not just dress, toxic leadership, etc but there are a number of things that are huge dissatisfiers in every job. Poor leadership OR LACK of leadership is a major issue IMO.

You mean we shouldn't of forced anyone with QL5 and a pulse on PLQ because we lacked leaders? Say it ain't so!

 

[Jarnhamar]

Was there an issue or incident where Canadians were kicked off a parade for the late queen because of our appearance?

 

[dimsum]

Was there an issue or incident where Canadians were kicked off a parade for the late queen because of our appearance?

Were the “old” new dress regs even out then? The funeral was in mid-Sep 2022.

 

[dimsum]

My big takeaway from this change is that “don’t judge a book by its cover” wasn’t a lesson hoisted in by many folks.

Honestly, if we’re going to be comparing to the civilian understanding of “professional”, all those folks with sleeve tattoos would be deemed “unprofessional”. In some cultures (Japan for instance), that is a huge no-no, more so than pink hair. But no one is arguing for banning visible tattoos.