Author Topic: "Unionizing" the CF (merged)  (Read 79766 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mo-litia

  • Banned
  • Full Member
  • *
  • -135
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 279
    • The Loyal Edmonton Regiment Homepage
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #50 on: March 09, 2005, 03:32:44 »
That doesn't surprise me at all, Infanteer. I was having trouble trying to wrap my head around the concept of a military union in a nation that had been conquored by the Nazis.  Good to hear that us 'pointy stick' types tend to think alike regardless of our nationality.

I can't trash the Dutch army though; the Netherlands still spends more of their GNP on their army than we do... :crybaby:
"LET THE EASTERN BASTARDS FREEZE IN THE DARK"
- Popular Alberta bumper sticker from the Trudeau era; placed here in homage to all Liberals across Canada

OPTION A:
http://www.conservative.ca/

OPTION B:
http://www.separationalberta.com/
------------------------------------------

Offline DBA

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 7,520
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 341
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #51 on: March 09, 2005, 09:07:36 »
Can only find some old information, MS Encarta94 says about Dutch Defense: "All males must serve from 14 to 17 months in the armed forces. In the late 1980s, conscripts made up almost half the 103,600 members of the Dutch armed forces."  In a mandatory service situation having something like a union or a more powerful ombudsmen isn't such a bad idea. There would also in general tend to be a large difference in attitudes in the volunteer longer serving members compared to those in for the fairly short mandatory service period.
It is not worth an intelligent man's time to be in the majority.  By definition, there are already enough people to do that. --  G.H. Hardy

Offline pbi

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 32,680
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,641
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #52 on: March 09, 2005, 09:12:35 »
Unions exist because leadership fails. Period.

If you doubt me, check out successful, happy non-union firms in this country and see what makes the difference: leadership. We could go on for hours about the abysmal lack of any kind of leadership in the civvy workplace (including, I'm sorry to say, the protective services...) but I think I've made my point.

All the arguments against unions posted here are good ones. My grandfather was a   skilled machinist in the aircraft industry for years, and was a union man. When approached about the possibility of being a shop steward, he declined. He told me that in his opinion the union had long ago lost sight of what it was created for, and was more interested in looking after its power than anything else.

Besides, I challenge you to find an organization the size of the CF that offers as many benefits, protections, and is as hard to fire anyone from as   the CF. As well, a form of "protection" exists in the WO/Senior NCO class, who have no real equivalent in the civiilian workplace.

My guess is that this supposed "30%" of people who want a union contains very few Army people, and even fewer combat arms. It is probably made of those whiners who joined the military as "a job" and don't like being told what to do when they would rather just sit on their asses.

Mo-litia: I don't know where you get the basis for your crack about HQs, but I've spent a few years in units (both Res and Reg) and in HQs   and IMHO overall the number of people working late, taking work home or coming in on weekends is much higher in HQs than it is in units. Enjoy your time in battalion: when it's over, it's over.

Cheers.
The Nation that makes a great distinction between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting done by fools. ...

The true measure of a man is what he would do if he knew he never would be found out...

Offline mo-litia

  • Banned
  • Full Member
  • *
  • -135
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 279
    • The Loyal Edmonton Regiment Homepage
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #53 on: March 09, 2005, 09:41:42 »
pbi - it was meant as a joke. Don't think I'm trying to play super soldier... ;)
"LET THE EASTERN BASTARDS FREEZE IN THE DARK"
- Popular Alberta bumper sticker from the Trudeau era; placed here in homage to all Liberals across Canada

OPTION A:
http://www.conservative.ca/

OPTION B:
http://www.separationalberta.com/
------------------------------------------

Offline pbi

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 32,680
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,641
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #54 on: March 09, 2005, 11:52:19 »
Ok-point taken. :)

Cheers
The Nation that makes a great distinction between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting done by fools. ...

The true measure of a man is what he would do if he knew he never would be found out...

Offline NiTz

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 100
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 427
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #55 on: March 09, 2005, 13:14:32 »
For you info. only, the union is very costly too. I pay 31.25$ A WEEK for union dues! It was 18.45$ a couple of years ago but some clowns in quebec city decided to go out with signs for 8 months, and we had to pay for them and thats worse : we'll have to pay this until the loan is cleared. But we don't know the amount of the loan.. it's ridiculous. So, union dues, placed on a annual basis, now cost me 1625$ a year.  ::)  awful


Cheers!

Nitz

Offline Acorn

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 770
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 852
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #56 on: March 09, 2005, 19:50:45 »
At least you can claim union dues on taxes. I wish compulsory "club memberships" (mess dues) were treated that way.

Infanteer's experience with the Dutch is much the same as mine. I found they can be very agressive troops. As well, a Dutch Sgt Maj I worked with for a few years explained to me that the union is more like a professional association, and was originally put in place to prevent the abuse of conscripts and improve the overall QOL of the troops. It's mandate still remains as such.

I have no idea whether they paid a monthly "fee" to be allowed to grow their hair. I do remember seeing some of them in the early '80s in Germany, and there was a fair representation of long-haried soldiers.

Acorn
"Liberal societies cannot be defended by herbivores. We need carnivores to save us." - Michael Ignatieff, The Lesser Evil

Offline Cloud Cover

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 12,950
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,188
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #57 on: March 09, 2005, 19:56:33 »
At least you can claim union dues on taxes. I wish compulsory "club memberships" (mess dues) were treated that way.

Incorporate yourself and claim the dues as business expenses, along with your computer and internet connection to view army.ca!![professional development and training expense].
You're right. I Never  Met A Motherfucker Quite Like You, or someone as smart as you.  Never ever will, either.

Offline recceguy

    A Usual Suspect.

  • At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child – miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied, demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless. Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats. -P.J. O’Rouke-
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 236,532
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 17,358
  • doddering docent to the museum of misanthropy
    • Army.ca
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #58 on: March 09, 2005, 20:14:50 »
At least you can claim union dues on taxes. I wish compulsory "club memberships" (mess dues) were treated that way.

Acorn

I have my Mess Dues receipt marked Mess Assessment. I've been claiming it for years as Professional Dues and never been questioned and have always had it accepted. Maybe I'm just lucky.
“I am a Canadian, free to speak without fear, free to worship in my own way, free to stand for what I think right, free to oppose what I believe wrong, or free to choose those who shall govern my country. This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind.”

John G. Diefenbaker

Offline Allan Luomala

  • Banned
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • -20
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 637
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #59 on: March 09, 2005, 20:45:46 »
Ref Dutch soldiers: I worked with a tank platoon in Bosnia in 2000, and we asked about the hair deal (most of them had hair shorter than the average Canadian soldier). The sgt said that they sign some form of agreement that they won't embarrass the Royal Dutch Army while serving overseas, and having "unmilitary" style of hair falls under that. They were extremely good soldiers, and I would work with them over US, UK or any other soldiers. Germans were also very good. Most of the Dutch soldiers (again, soldiers, not REMF's) basically mocked the union idea.

Mess dues: When I mentioned claiming them once when I had my taxes done by H & R Block, they said that you can't, and since they will back you if you are audited, I would go with them on that.

A little while back there was some clown who sent an email around the DIN wanting to start up some "association" to protect CF members from "The Man". I could only fathom a guess as who would be the President of this "association". Hmmmm. I could also see the incessant (moreso than now, which staggers the imagination) whinging about how shitty we are treated (3 meals a day in the field and on course, a paycheck GUARANTEED every 2 weeks, usually 4 and a half day workweeks (less if you count sports afternoons, Tp Leaders hours, mess meetings, etc, etc). Yeah, I could get this kind of money on civvy street with a grade 12 education. Anybody who suggests forming a union in the CF should be shot with a ball of their own crap, and be forced to work in a minimum wage job for a month, and then see what they think about forming a union, which would only suck out "association" or union dues out of us, for nothing in return (I somehow couldn't see us going on strike, so strike pay is out.....).

As mentioned, we already have an Ombudsman, so it's not like we're some sweatshop, pumping out goods for Kathie Lee Gifford or anything. And frankly, I don't think I would be able to restrain my rage if one of my troops threatened to go to the "shop steward" when I told him to do his job  :threat:

Al

Offline Cloud Cover

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 12,950
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,188
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #60 on: March 09, 2005, 20:46:55 »
I have my Mess Dues receipt marked Mess Assessment. I've been claiming it for years as Professional Dues and never been questioned and have always had it accepted. Maybe I'm just lucky.

The only possible category under section 8. (1)(i) of the Income Tax Act that would make mess dues an allowable deduction is sub-para (v) which requires that the purpose of the mess membership is an association of public servants the primary object of which is to promote the improvement of the member's conditions of employment or work. That doesn't sound like any mess in the CAF that I am aware of, and in any event it has already been judicially determined that members of the CF are not public servants by any stretch- unlike their civilian counterparts.     

AFAIK, service in the CF is not considered to be a form of professional employment under which the payment of the membership due is necessary to maintain a professional status (other than one in which it is a requirement to hold a licence- [doctor, lawyer, certain engineers, nurses and a few others.) Your T-4 slip should indicate in a box any annual professional, union or like dues that you may deduct.

I think you have been lucky, indeed. [not that it's a big deal for the 20 bucks in tax you save at the end of the year.]  

I am starting to think that if a military mess was converted into a not for profit corporation, shares subscriptions could be offered based on rank instead of paying dues. This way, some of your capital is preserved. The NPC would be obligated to purchase back your shares if a member cashes out of the mess.
« Last Edit: March 09, 2005, 21:11:44 by Whiskey 601 »
You're right. I Never  Met A Motherfucker Quite Like You, or someone as smart as you.  Never ever will, either.

Offline ArmyRick

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 25,610
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,951
  • What the????
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #61 on: March 09, 2005, 21:20:11 »
A union for the army. No. NO. NO FREAKIN WAY !!!

Here is the logic. What rules in the National Defence Act allow your supervisors (I hate that word) and/or leaders to abuse their authority? What extra vacation time do we neeed in the service?

Wake up call people. Those of you with civilian employment expirience know what I am talking about.

How about we change the rules of garrison life for combat arms so we do mandatory 44 hour work weeks and lets cut that vacation back to 2 weeks maximum vice the luxurious 20-25 annual days + weekends + stat holidays (annual days can only be used monday to friday and not on stat days either). Oh and lets ditch that short, compassionate and special leaves that can be authorized by your CO. So a service member who expiriences usually 5-7 weeks off each year will now be down to 2 weeks total.

Hey thats what the labour rules are.

Forget good training exercises because they would be a risk. Too much liability.

Come to think, can all exercises because where is the CF going to get the money for all that over time? Our customer, the govt of Canada will not foot the bill. Or maybe to meet this need we can shrink the army down to one brigade.

Come on, troops. We have it good in the military. We are well paid and looked after. Try working a civilian manual labour job for three weeks and compare us to that.

The stuff we need is what no union can get us. New AFVs, no helicopters, more troops and updating the existing stuff we have.

  
I am NOT a privileged white man by virtue of being male or white. I am privileged because I am alive and exercising my right to be who I am!

Offline PPCLI Guy

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 126,965
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,823
  • It's all good
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #62 on: March 10, 2005, 08:28:36 »
Anybody who suggests forming a union in the CF should be shot with a ball of their own crap, and be forced to work in a minimum wage job for a month, and then see what they think about forming a union, which would only suck out "association" or union dues out of us, for nothing in return
Al

Great post!
"The higher the rank, the more necessary it is that boldness should be accompanied by a reflective mind....for with increase in rank it becomes always a matter less of self-sacrifice and more a matter of the preservation of others, and the good of the whole."

Karl von Clausewitz

KOMODO

  • Guest
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #63 on: March 10, 2005, 10:51:32 »
I'm not in favour of a union but some things need to be addressed.

1. You pay UI all your career and never receive any.

2. You get injured on a tour and become 100% disabled. You apply to VAC and receive a full
pension. OK now what about the SISIP YOU PAID FOR (LTD). You would not get a cent from them.
Reason, they claw back any payment from the VAC. Accordingly, VAC is an award for your pain and suffering and NOT a Disable pension as per say.

3. This issue is being addressed as we speak in the modern day veteran charter. As a Cf member
and having completed 4 tours I have seen to many good soldiers lose there careers over medical
and not get the SISIP AS THEY PAID FOR.

4. As for the people that come in here whining, lets say Id rather be sitting at a desk in the warm than doing paper stuff all my career than the army stuff that have destroyed my health.

5. Final point,  DON'T ROCK THE BOAT BECAUSE ONE DAY YOU WILL BE IN IT.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2005, 10:55:53 by KOMODO »

c4th

  • Guest
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #64 on: March 10, 2005, 11:44:15 »
How about we change the rules of garrison life for combat arms so we do mandatory 44 hour work weeks and lets cut that vacation back to 2 weeks maximum vice the luxurious 20-25 annual days + weekends + stat holidays (annual days can only be used monday to friday and not on stat days either). Oh and lets ditch that short, compassionate and special leaves that can be authorized by your CO. So a service member who expiriences usually 5-7 weeks off each year will now be down to 2 weeks total.

Rick,   Don't even think stuff like that.   Some idiot is going to read that and screw us, or we'll get 50,000 recruits jamming up the recruiting system!

I'm not in favour of a union but some things need to be addressed.
1. You pay UI all your career and never receive any.

You would be eligible for EI upon the termination of your contract.  

2. You get injured on a tour and become 100% disabled. You apply to VAC and receive a full
pension. OK now what about the SISIP YOU PAID FOR (LTD). You would not get a cent from them.
Reason, they claw back any payment from the VAC. Accordingly, VAC is an award for your pain and suffering and NOT a Disable pension as per say.

LTD clawbacks are a reality in union and non-union world.   IMO most benefit packages are pretty much
scams to get employees to accept lower pay, even though the employee pays for it.  

4. As for the people that come in here whining, lets say Id rather be sitting at a desk in the warm than doing paper stuff all my career than the army stuff that have destroyed my health.

My civvy office job will be available as soon as my CT to 031 goes through.   Send me a private message and I will tell you where to send your resume.   BTW, at the end of my last tour I was in pretty close to the best physical shape of my life.   My vision was better.   Had money in the bank, and no signs of stress.   Trust me, civvy street destroys your health and it's boring.

Offline NewCenturion

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 0
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 351
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #65 on: March 10, 2005, 13:53:49 »
I'm not in favour of a union but some things need to be addressed.

1. You pay UI all your career and never receive any.

2. You get injured on a tour and become 100% disabled. You apply to VAC and receive a full
pension. OK now what about the SISIP YOU PAID FOR (LTD). You would not get a cent from them.
Reason, they claw back any payment from the VAC. Accordingly, VAC is an award for your pain and suffering and NOT a Disable pension as per say.

3. This issue is being addressed as we speak in the modern day veteran charter. As a Cf member
and having completed 4 tours I have seen to many good soldiers lose there careers over medical
and not get the SISIP AS THEY PAID FOR.

4. As for the people that come in here whining, lets say Id rather be sitting at a desk in the warm than doing paper stuff all my career than the army stuff that have destroyed my health.

5. Final point,   DON'T ROCK THE BOAT BECAUSE ONE DAY YOU WILL BE IN IT.
CF ombudsman released a report which looked into concerns regarding SISIP and VAC you should go to their site and review their conclusions, one of which was to cease the practice of deducting SISIP based on your VAC.  http://www.ombudsman.forces.gc.ca/reports/special/sisip-toc_e.asp
"There never was a time when, in my opinion, some way could not be found to
prevent the drawing of the sword."
- General Ulysses S. Grant

Offline NewCenturion

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 0
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 351
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #66 on: March 10, 2005, 14:06:15 »
Ref Dutch soldiers: I worked with a tank platoon in Bosnia in 2000, and we asked about the hair deal (most of them had hair shorter than the average Canadian soldier). The sgt said that they sign some form of agreement that they won't embarrass the Royal Dutch Army while serving overseas, and having "unmilitary" style of hair falls under that. They were extremely good soldiers, and I would work with them over US, UK or any other soldiers. Germans were also very good. Most of the Dutch soldiers (again, soldiers, not REMF's) basically mocked the union idea.

Mess dues: When I mentioned claiming them once when I had my taxes done by H & R Block, they said that you can't, and since they will back you if you are audited, I would go with them on that.

A little while back there was some clown who sent an email around the DIN wanting to start up some "association" to protect CF members from "The Man". I could only fathom a guess as who would be the President of this "association". Hmmmm. I could also see the incessant (moreso than now, which staggers the imagination) whinging about how shitty we are treated (3 meals a day in the field and on course, a paycheck GUARANTEED every 2 weeks, usually 4 and a half day workweeks (less if you count sports afternoons, Tp Leaders hours, mess meetings, etc, etc). Yeah, I could get this kind of money on civvy street with a grade 12 education. Anybody who suggests forming a union in the CF should be shot with a ball of their own crap, and be forced to work in a minimum wage job for a month, and then see what they think about forming a union, which would only suck out "association" or union dues out of us, for nothing in return (I somehow couldn't see us going on strike, so strike pay is out.....).

As mentioned, we already have an Ombudsman, so it's not like we're some sweatshop, pumping out goods for Kathie Lee Gifford or anything. And frankly, I don't think I would be able to restrain my rage if one of my troops threatened to go to the "shop steward" when I told him to do his job   :threat:

Al

Great post, when I mentioned my experience with the Dutch at the beginning of this thread I should have stated that they were conscripts, my apologies.. anyway Allan your 100% right , for all the bitching we do as soldiers we have it pretty good (9% in total pay raises this year). I make over 62 grand a year and the benefits: medical, dental I don't have to wait in line for medical specialists, I can take leave when ever I want. Not to mention the life experience. Why would we need a union to come in here and screw it all up?
"There never was a time when, in my opinion, some way could not be found to
prevent the drawing of the sword."
- General Ulysses S. Grant

KOMODO

  • Guest
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #67 on: March 10, 2005, 17:58:00 »
to 04
Never compare us military to the civilian world. We are a bread of our own. Don't bring  weekend warrior attitude from the civilian side and think the military runs the same way. We work hard,play hard.
Sure there is down time and you find things to due but it all pays out in the end when you are deployed and little time off  except R and R. Yes we get a pay check every 2 weeks. A good pay raise too. Its about time. Remember the early 90s when the pay freeze was on.Tough times for the junior ncms.We made it through.As a civie union, on the picket line!!!!!!!

Cheers
Sniper(4 C K)

Offline Allan Luomala

  • Banned
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • -20
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 637
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #68 on: March 10, 2005, 19:28:43 »
One comment ref UI (or EI): People tend to get the impression that we should get back what we put into EI. The I stands for Insurance. If people wrecked their car every 26 weeks (or whatever the length of time is) and wanted a new one, their insurance rates would go up, so why should people be able to go on EI all the time without paying higher premiums than people such as ourselves who rarely if ever claim EI (BTW, I'm on Parental Leave right now, so I've been able to recoup some of what I've paid into for my whole adult life (18+ years)).

I'm glad that there is a EI program as it protects the average worker, but like any program out there, there are people who abuse it no end, and also there are people who could conceivably never use it in their entire life (if they are lucky).

Al

Offline GO!!!

  • Fallen Comrade
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 0
  • Posts: 1,851
  • Often have I regretted my speech, never my silence
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #69 on: March 10, 2005, 20:05:13 »
It has been addressed several times that a union would not be required if the leadership was "doing their job"

My question is, how can the leadership do their job when they are shuffled in and out like so many cards? I have seen 3 Pl comds in the last year, not one of which who bothered to learn the names of anyone but the s**t disturbers in his pl. I've also seen CSMs come in and tell troops in their own coys that they were just here to punch a ticket before going back to ______(Wx, the hill, Ops - take your pick)

There has been a breakdown in leadership.

On the issue of days off - how many people on this forum have been promised days off for various extra duties - only to return and find out that the last guy left and "forgot" to tell him?

As to the 5-7 weeks a year off - I want your job! Due to "operational requirements" I was not permitted more than 4 days of leave consecutively last year - and never on more than 2-3 days notice.

My glorious unit has decided that all troops will bring coveralls, PT gear and cbts to work all the time- every day. We are unable to ascertain even what clothes we wear the next day!

Unit cohesiveness - means bringing in a group of guys every time a Coy goes somewhere in order to bring it up to strength. I have had a different section for every exercise over the last 3 years - try writing a fair PER for a guy!

Of course airing these beefs makes one "disloyal" or means that they have a "bad attitude", ensuring that the leadership that week will never hear it, or if they do, take it as anything other than griping.

However, beefs without a solution are gripes. SOOOOOO if we were to keep everyone in a position for a period of 24 mos - CPL and UP - most of the problems above would be pre - empted, as would the additional ones of trg standardisation and corporate memory - which is nearly non - existant.

AND- it can be done - after all - we seem to have very rigid time frames for the employment of OC's and CO's. Apply that same system to the working ranks and watch the Infantry get better and better.

Any thoughts?
No leader was ever hated for being too hard, but a great many were for attempting to appear that way.

Offline Allan Luomala

  • Banned
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • -20
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 637
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #70 on: March 10, 2005, 20:36:44 »

Quote
AND- it can be done - after all - we seem to have very rigid time frames for the employment of OC's and CO's. Apply that same system to the working ranks and watch the Infantry get better and better.

Excellent point. I clued into a sad fact of military life a few years back: the shelf life of pretty much any policy, promise, initiative seems to be two years. Hmmmm, is there a correlation here??? I remember the days when you seemed to be in a troop for 2 or 3 years, for better or for worse. I knew guys that OT'ed because they couldn't stand someone in their chain of command, and knew they were there for at least 2 years (pretty drastic move, but people like that would have OT'ed anyway). I loved knowing that you would be able to get SOP's, drills, etc down cold within a troop in that time, and only have to go over it briefly at the beginning of an ex for any newbies (officer, young drivers, etc). Now, with all the doctrinal, SOP, whatever changes, I refer to them as NSOP (NON-standard operating procedures) because there are so many changes that one couldn't possibly keep up to them, so everything becomes a power struggle (or worse yet, a fug juck).

I filled out a pers info form when I first got to the Armour School, with my employment for the last 10 years, and only had space for about 4.5 years worth of employment at the Regt. By the same token, I saw some guys whose roots are so deep into the soil here in Gagtown, that they didn't fill up half the spaces for over 10 years of employment (ie. same job for 4 or 5 years). It's feast or famine, I guess..... and I shouldnt't complain too much, as I have had the opportunity to do a bunch of different jobs, but how proficient can you get if you only do something for 4 or 5 months (Jack of all trades, master of none).

We get given days off for working courses (usually 2 days for a 4 or 5 week course), and I tell my young guys to use 'em as soon as they can, because people tend to forget about the good things you've done, and focus on the time 13 years ago when you forgot to screw the top of a gerry can on all the way.... I never did get my 2 days for a course I taught on last summer (the cheques in the mail....). I have the luxury of taking time off if I need it, but the young guys are sometimes too afraid to bring it up, for fear of looking like a whiner (though there always seems to be the guy that says "I worked 2 minutes late one day last week, can I get an afternoon off???")

One thing that was brought up that I agree with is the fact that we shouldn't compare ourselves to the civilian sector, for better or worse. For everything we ***** about that we don't get that civvies do, there are many things we do get that they don't (which people always manage to think about before they *****...). One of the things I despise is the 0800 - 1600 hrs mentality that has come to be in vogue for opposite reasons: try going into a place that never sends troops to the field (clothing stores, base orderly room, etc) and seeing that they've booked off early, so you're screwed, yet we are expected to work 0800 - 1600 pretty much every day, even if you just spent a ridiculous amount of time in the field, or overseas, or on course. If you work in an office job, fine 0800-1600hrs every day, but for field soldiers, there should be some slack cut (and at the lower, or middle "management" levels it is possible), but the corporate culture has reached to the upper levels, and you are made to feel guilty if you leave work at 1500hrs, even though you were in at 0600hrs for PT with your course. Or worked 18 hour days in the field..... you get the idea. I think the whole yin-yang aspect of the time off should be able to balance it self out naturally, without meddling from carpet commando's, and leaders are able to manage their soldiers down time without justification (reasonable being the key factor here).

Anyway, I got wound up pretty good there, so know it's time to come down....

Al


Offline Brad Sallows

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 49,290
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,415
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #71 on: March 10, 2005, 21:54:31 »
To be honest, I didn't realize the army had a problem with too much ionization in the first place...

(Thank you, Dr Hebden.)
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error.

Omnia praesidia vestra capta sunt nobis.

"It is a damned heavy blow; but whining don't help."

"Yet another in a long line of books about how libertarians are plotting to enslave you by devolving power to the individual and leaving you alone" - Warren Meyer, author of Coyote Blog

Offline c_canuk

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 13,585
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 410
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #72 on: March 11, 2005, 12:19:15 »
I think Unionization would be a bad idea, what would be an interesting experiment though would be to expand the Padre trade so that there would be more of them to filter through the system and see where problems are arising.

I find that within my own unit I get impatient with micro managers... I would love to start my day with a briefing on whats supposed to be accomplished by the end of the day, then allow me to do it, what ends up happening is I get an LT a Wo and a Sgt constantly sending me on small taskings that often conflict, and had I been given the overall plan for the day could have organized my people more efficiently, but since I'm not being told everything and I spend half my day trying to get my orders straight chasing down the three of them, not as much gets done... Then they blame us when we aren't ready to deploy on time.

Then for example, when I'm working in the CP I get a recovery request, pass it on, and the LT orders me "Ask them if they tried 4 low" and I have to look away so he can't see my exasperated expression... He doesn't seem to understand that I've trained these people, I know what they are capable of I've seen what they've done in these sit for years, I know they aren't going to tell me they are stuck and need recovery if they haven't tried every available option. He insults me and my people by assuming they are complete idiots. But I have to go over the radio and ask this question, which makes me feel like an excrement and degrades who I'm asking and anyone else that hears it.

Stuff like this happens all the time, it's just little stuff that could be corrected, but if I speak up about it I'm Criticizing my superiors, and they don't understand what they are doing to moral and retention rates, perhaps if we had a padre watching everything going on, and having the ability to interface with everyone they could become an unofficial line of communication and suggestion to help improve the working environment
"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."
-John Stewart Mill

Offline ArmyRick

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 25,610
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,951
  • What the????
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #73 on: March 11, 2005, 12:50:34 »
c_canuck, as far as the LT butting in where he shouldn't, pull aisde your SGT or WO (depending on who is more appropriate in the chain) and discuss what the LT did.

They will tell you what they think. If its valid point and your leaders are doing their job, then let the NCOs deal with it via the NCO chain command.
(you gripe to sect comd, SGT to PL WO, PL WO to CSM and if its a valid point, CSM talks to OC, who in turn counsels young LT Jimmy Bob on how the army works OR you will be told some up along the way).

As a CPL, do not engage the LT in a "professional development conversation" because that would be asking for trouble.

Hope this helps? 
I am NOT a privileged white man by virtue of being male or white. I am privileged because I am alive and exercising my right to be who I am!

Offline c_canuk

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 13,585
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 410
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #74 on: March 11, 2005, 13:14:46 »
if this was an isolated incident I'd do just that, but they've let the LT inflate their self importance a whole lot by not reigning this person in a long time ago, when the CO and DCO are not around this individual struts around like General Patton and nothing been done. This member was commissioned from the ranks a while ago, and personally I thought this member was a Gray Man during their stay in the ranks. but that's my opinion, which is worth as much as it cost you :), they must have impressed someone to get where they are, I wouldn't be in any position to know.

Bringing it up with the Senior NCOs would just make me a "non team player", plus they were standing 5 feet away when that particular incident happened. I know the sgt is a very switched on member, but recently I get the feeling that his hands are tied somewhere and I don't know whats going on behind the scenes. But it would be nice if there was someone that was not bound by internal politics and neutral to the COC that could pass information around.

All I know is that this kind of thing is killing Moral in my unit... though it could be a lot worse.
"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."
-John Stewart Mill