btrudy
Full Member
- Reaction score
- 465
- Points
- 810
I don't want to pass a negative judgement on the position. I'm dismayed that people thing we aren't representing them well enough.
I can understand being dismayed at this; sure the Chiefs have supposed to be doing this job.
But, well... can anyone who by definition is a very very long ways away from being a junior ranks member be actually trusted to adequately represent the interests of said junior personnel? I mean, hell, can they be trusted to even properly understand the interests of the average junior ranks member?
Representation should be best done by members of the group being represented. People who are, or at least have very recently, lived the experiences of the folks they're trying to represent. People who have a good idea of what it actually means to be doing the job; now, not what it was like 15 years ago.
There's a reason that unions are represented by people who are selected by the bargaining group, and not being represented by someone in middle management hand-picked by the CEO.
This of course also shouldn't be applied just to rank. It's also farcical to have the CDS tweeting out something saying "Conversations on diversity, inclusion, and culture change are not incompatible with our thirst for operational excellence. I count on my senior leaders to champion culture change. Diversity makes us stronger, inclusion improves our institution. We are #StrongerTogether", when it's accompanied by a picture of the most homogeneous group of old white men you've ever seen in your life.
![CHIEF-OF-DEFENCE-DIVERSITY-MEETING-FRAIMAN-FEB11-766x575[1].jpg CHIEF-OF-DEFENCE-DIVERSITY-MEETING-FRAIMAN-FEB11-766x575[1].jpg](https://army.ca/forums/data/attachments/13/13059-683f54d9861070dbe95472ce06af3859.jpg?hash=aD9U2YYQcN)