Canada 150th Anniversary of Confederation Medal

[Monsoon]

And for the record, you turned this into a "us vs. them" pal. I merely pointed out someone who had 7 medals without one deployment without one deployment for which a medal was authorized.

FTFY

 

[daftandbarmy]

It might be more egalitarian to award a medal for going 'days without access to a shower'.

But then that would mean box loads would automatically be handed out to Phase III Infantry Officers....

 

[Furniture]

Not days, only 8 hours out of 24 at sea or anchor counts. They also realized not enough bling went around on the first go for SSI issues, so they halved the requirements for them a year or so ago to make sure there was enough bling to go around.

You might have stumbled on the reason why the RCN wanted SSI. Bling to show deployments that aren't going to named Ops. They disregarded the fact that we don't normally award people medals for doing things like RIMPAC.

If you're going to say mean things about the Navy get the story straight. The first level of the SSI was reduced from 365 days to 180 days, all other level remain at full year increments. To put this in perspective, I have been sailing for 4 years on the left coast with two 8 1/2 month deployments as well as several sets of WUPS, MIDPAC/SOCAL Oiler, and trials. I am still 100 days short of two years for my Bronze SSI with all that time away.

To the point of the thread, if someone deserves recognition for their hard work we should be awarding one of the merit awards that already exist. Handing out jubilee/anniversary medals as a reward for a good job is a lazy way to recognize our people.

 

[Stoker]

I can't imagine another service member who would disparage another for the medals they wear either if they are operational or non operational. That naval officer in the picture probably had a rewarding and interesting career, who cares what medals he is wearing or not wearing.

I consider my career pretty rewarding with a CD1 and OSM and that's with 2100 sea days and many more not counted. If the government decides to issue said medal then don't wear the thing and not disparage the ones that do.

 

[slayer/raptor]

I suppose I should comment on the actual topic of this thread. I disagree with the fact that we are not getting a 150th medal. I think commemorative medals have their place. The Diamond Jubilee medal was not bad, it was just poorly executed by Canada. I say Canada because I feel the Brits got it right where they gave it to ALL members of the armed forces that had at least 5 years in.

 

[jollyjacktar]

Not days, only 8 hours out of 24 at sea or anchor counts. They also realized not enough bling went around on the first go for SSI issues, so they halved the requirements for them a year or so ago to make sure there was enough bling to go around.

You might have stumbled on the reason why the RCN wanted SSI. Bling to show deployments that aren't going to named Ops. They disregarded the fact that we don't normally award people medals for doing things like RIMPAC.

Not all of us.  I despise the SSI and wish I didn't have to wear one.  It's nothing but a dick measuring device for many, for starters.

 

[Stoker]

Not all of us.  I despise the SSI and wish I didn't have one to wear.  It's nothing but a dick measuring device for many, for starters.

Hey I respect your opinion on the SSI, but there is a lot of us see it as a tangible measure of the time spent away from home. I admit I used it for bragging rights but more in good natured razing than anything. Certainly no worse that many who bragg about how tours they did and people who haven't are less in their minds.

 

[jollyjacktar]

Hey I respect your opinion on the SSI, but there is a lot of us see it as a tangible measure of the time spent away from home. I admit I used it for bragging rights but more in good natured razing than anything. Certainly no worse that many who bragg about how tours they did and people who haven't are less in their minds.

And I respect your opinion as well, I just don't share it. 

 

[Halifax Tar]

Hey I respect your opinion on the SSI, but there is a lot of us see it as a tangible measure of the time spent away from home. I admit I used it for bragging rights but more in good natured razing than anything. Certainly no worse that many who bragg about how tours they did and people who haven't are less in their minds.

If only it actually measured what you pretend that it does. 

You aren't actually comparing the SSI to an operationally earned decoration are you ? 

Back on topic.  As for the 150 medal I stand in the everyone or no one corner. 

 

[jollyjacktar]

Just 410 days on two tours, one of them on a combat mission, in 8 years. Oh and all my countless days in the field being in the combat arms... I'm sorry the army doesn't give out badges for days out in the field.

And for the record, you turned this into a "us vs. them" pal. I merely pointed out someone who had 7 medals without one deployment.

I have green time behind me as well as my blue time, so can speak with some knowledge on the subject.  Something to keep in mind about the time away that many of the sailors here endured is that it makes your time in the field pale by comparison as a rule.  While not so much the rule now, it was common for them to be away at sea for 200 plus days a year, every year.  My field tempo and the rest of the Brigade for that matter didn't come close to meeting the same pace as set by the navy.  You're outclassed, I'm afraid, even with today's less frequent sailing schedules. 

 

[ModlrMike]

Part of the problem is clearly the nonsense system we have regarding commemorative medals. If they're commemorative, why are we attaching merit to them?

It really should be an everyone or no one situation.

I know the "buttons and bows" police will have me for this, but even if the CF were on the hook for 100,000 medals. At $25-$40 to produce we're talking a pittance in the grand scheme of things.

 

[Blackadder1916]

. . .  but even if the CF were on the hook for 100,000 medals. At $25-$40 to produce we're talking a pittance in the grand scheme of things.

Even though the CF may be the prime wearer of buttons and bows in Canada (and may be the originator of many of our medals) a "Buck and a Half Medal", being a nation wide commemorative award (like all the other of its ilk) would have originated and been funded through the Heritage Minister.  It was the same in the UK with the Jubilee medals.  As well, not only were the medals (the Gold and Diamond variety at least) widely distributed within the armed forces, the same criteria was applied to any government employee who could conceivably be considered in a uniformed service.  So you would possibly have to include all police, fire services, EMS, Coast Guard, corrections, et al within the calculation on top of the civvies well liked by MPs.  Even then, there will be groups that feel excluded, much like some in the UK who felt excluded from "the integrity and exclusiveness of the medal" - however 450,000 is not that exclusive.

 

[dapaterson]

Regardless of the decision - Canada 150 or not, all or some, the CAF will somehow survive and pull through.

Much ado about not much of anything.

 

[mariomike]

Much ado about not much of anything.

Three pages, and counting, of ado!

 

[rmc_wannabe]

At the rate they're going with getting medals set up for named Operations,(*cough* Reassurance and Unifier *cough*) I can assume it would most likely end up being a 152 or 153 medal when it starts making its way onto the chests of the "deserving." :

Unless they expedite commemoration medals over all others ;D

 

[medicineman]

Three pages, and counting, of ado!

I was about to comment that I can't believe we're still talking about this...

op:

MM

 

[Lightguns]

Part of the problem is clearly the nonsense system we have regarding commemorative medals. If they're commemorative, why are we attaching merit to them?

Because unlike '67, they are not making enough for all uniformed troops which is really how official commemoratives have been distributed prior to 1992.  Thus in order for the receivers not to look like the unit suck units they attach conditions. 

 

[Old Sweat]

Because unlike '67, they are not making enough for all uniformed troops which is really how official commemoratives have been distributed prior to 1992.  Thus in order for the receivers not to look like the unit suck units they attach conditions.

The centennial medal was not on general distribution. In fact it was awarded on a very limited basis; in A Battery 1 RCHA only one or two members received it, out of an establishment of over 150 all ranks.

 

[Lightguns]

The centennial medal was not on general distribution. In fact it was awarded on a very limited basis; in A Battery 1 RCHA only one or two members received it, out of an establishment of over 150 all ranks.

Really?  Interesting all my ex brothers in law (3) have it.  They were Ptes in RHC at the time, two at Altershot and one at Gagetown.  One of my current brothers in law has it, he would have been a MP Pte at Halifax or Debert at the time.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Neither was the Queen's silver Jubilee medal in 1977: Limited distribution also. So I don't understand the reference to 1992, Lightguns.

Personally, I agree that for commemorative medals, it should be general distribution to anyone who serves in the "commemorated event" year and has completed his/her basic. It's not like we have so many medals and ribbons in the CAF that we have to worry about running out of space on our dress uniforms ... unlike some other countries that shall remain nameless.  :-X