New CF Fitness Policies Coming

[WogCpl]

As i said before, i am not holding my breath on the "new" policy being effective. Why create a new policy anyway, why not just enforce the old one. I think Haggis posted it a few months back, i'll try to dig it up later. For those of us who joined 15 or more years ago, the division in fitness is easy to see, especially in the CSS trades. I was always taught "your a soldier first" and i always took it seriously. I do not profess to be an infanteer but i know i can fight at a basic soldier level, and i won't burn out after the first 10 minutes. I think that most of the folks who got in when i did are probably the same, the army is our profession. As for some of the newer troops,(not aimed at all of you) they seem to be too "thin skinned" and concerned with "what's in it for me?"
I was in borden on a course a few months back and i was kind of shocked at the general feel around the shacks. I serously felt like i was in gang teritory, a bunch of punks with their hats on sideways standing around their brand new frenched out honda civics looking like gangstas'. I wish i could have bought a car when i was on my threes, but i could barely aford my bicycle ! What is it with troops today? I know that discipline is lacking, do we pay them too much? Am i just getting old. Anyway I guess my point is that it is going to take a lot more than a small change in our fitness policy to change the way people think about their chosen profession, and how they view "the Service" as a whole.

Yup, i am getting old

 

[Zell_Dietrich]

I think we’re all in agreement here.  The armed forces needs to be effective.  That means physical ability, training, and experience.  I guess this is just a case of facing south saying left, facing north saying right.  When I have been on Canadian bases, only a dozen times or so, I have seen basically fit people, a few exceptions for the more ‘senior’ staff, but all in all solid.  Therefore I perceived the posts above to be more along the aesthetic lines than operational.  Also, I think we have a slightly different perception on the size of the “pool of talent”; it isn’t limitless and a better person isn’t just ready to go all the time. Also,  I have questions about the state moral would be in if a career and a pension could be thrown out the window because of screwing up one fitness test. Obviously I’m talking in extremes, the current system – from what I understand, has warnings in place and the like. 

So what I’m hearing is:

Standards: Good, we need them. (The Min is very reasonable)
More incentives to improve: Good idea
Young kids with strangely placed hats:  Bad
Enforcing the regulation instead of making another regulation to replace the “bendy” regulation: better idea

:

 

[WogCpl]

Zell, your absolutely right, but what you don't see is how bad ti has become. I have worked in infantry and CSS battalions and i can honestly say that the fitness situation is much worse in the CSS trades. I really do not care how someone looks, it's the fact that a group of 35 year old men and women(the ones that CHOOSE to do pt) can go out for a run with their troops and lose 70% of them along the way, fat and skinny. If our army was fitter the long lineups at physio on base would probably dwindle, and medical pensions would be decresed because fitter troops get hurt less.etc etc....
If you want to see how unfit we are go to a base physio clinic

 

[WogCpl]

A quote from Haggis Sept 1st 2005 CFAO 50-1 (the old policy)

"REQUIREMENT AND RESPONSIBILITY
4. It is a mandatory military requirement that members participate in the Canadian Forces Exercise Prescription (CF EXPRES) Program. The physical fitness training prescribed under this Program shall be conducted during normal working hours when circumstances permit. When this is not feasible, the member must maintain training outside normal working hours, in accordance with the member's CF EXPRES Program prescription. The times and places of physical fitness training outside normal working hours will be determined mutually by the member and the EXPRES evaluator. To the extent practicable, these times and places shall be annotated on form DND 279 -- CF EXPRES and approved by the commanding officer (CO). This physical training shall be considered as fulfilling the military requirement for participation in the CF EXPRES Program even when conducted outside normal working hours.

5. Leadership is fundamental to program success and therefore the primary responsibility rests with the chain of command (including civilian supervisors and managers) to ensure that all members actively participate in regular exercise programs.

6. To meet their specific requirements, commanders of commands may amplify this order by publishing command physical fitness policies and instructions consistent with this order. In addition, due to the varying nature of employment of Reservists on Continuous or Periodic Reserve Service (Class A or B) for less than 181 days, commanders of commands are delegated authority to determine the level of fitness required for these members of the Reserve Force.

7. COs are responsible for programs conducted in accordance with CF policy and command direction. Physical education and recreation (PE&R) staffs are responsible to their COs for planning, organizing, conducting, instructing, and evaluating CF physical training programs. Where necessary, members of other military occupations who are appropriately qualified Unit/Ship Physical Training Assistants may evaluate and train personnel under this order."

and....

"3. Career Administrative Policy -- General. If failure is determined to be a performance deficiency, then CFAOs: 26-17, Recorded Warning and Counselling and Probation -- Non-Commissioned Members, 26-21, Career Shortcomings -- Officers -- with notification to NDHQ may apply. If it is a medical problem then 34-26, Career Medical Review Board, may apply. If Service requirements have precluded adequate remedial training, then the above CFAOs may be inappropriate and alternative corrective measures may be required. In all cases the CO has requisite authority to remedy the situation."[/b]

 

[Zell_Dietrich]

FatwogCpl :

That is an ironic name for a person who is advocating physical fitness. 
(Sorry if I see irony I’ll go for it)

I guess I’ve only seen the more active soldiers when on base.  (Which is possible I’ve only been on a base maybe a dozen times in my life, usually for a Judo or Kung fu tournament, or to quickly grab my friend’s stuff on way to Montreal)

As an outsider looking in, I’m seeing an operationally capable force. I know from personal experience, problems barley visible from the outside are huge once you’re in.

 

[armyvern]

Zell, your absolutely right, but what you don't see is how bad has it become. I have worked in infantry and CSS battalions and i can honestly say that the fitness situation is much worse in the CSS trades. I really do not care how someone looks, it's the fact that a group of 35 year old men and women(the ones that CHOOSE to do pt) can go out for a run with their troops and lose 70% of them along the way, fat and skinny. If our army was fitter the long lineups at physio on base would probably dwindle, and medical pensions would be decresed because fitter troops get hurt less.etc etc....
If you want to see how unfit we are go to a base physio clinic

OK, I agree with you on this. It has become bad and it IS worse in the CSS trades, but have any of you considered reasons for this? Yes I AM a soldier first....but I must still do my trade-related job. Some CSS trades don't have the opportunity for mandatory PT on a daily basis as most hard Army trades do. PT is mandatory here 3 days per week...but if I have a course coming through for a kitting or are deploying someone...that takes priority over PT. Yes, it is our jobs to maintain our fitness on our own time if required (and if able to do so barring a P/TCat). Sadly, the own-time caveat only leads to some support personnel (other bases or serving with non-Army enviorments) being given ZERO time during working hours to do PT as in some places the work-comes-first attitude prevails ALL the time as the Leadership can always quote the "according to the regulations it is your personal responsibility." This is indeed a leadership failure.
About the PCat/T Cat side of the house...
I am aware of many pers on the CSS side of the house who can pass the CF Expres test and are therefore fully comply with the minimum fitness requirements. However, a whole bunch of them (and more than a few in Land DEU) are precluded from carrying rucks or running becasue of permanent medical categories. What to do about this situation?
But before we relegate it to a "majority are CSS trades" observation I would also like to point out that most of these personnel that I have met within my CSS trade, have been re-mustered over to that CSS trade as a direct result of their category making them unfit for futher service in the "hard Army" trades, but as they can still do the express test....they move them over to our trades.
I would dearly love to see a study done to see what percentage of the "non-deployable/'fat'/can't do a 13km march/carry a ruck/need to go to physio" CSS trade personnel are actually re-musters to CSS trades because of these very reasons. It's high. Of my own personnel in this situation...the rate is...100%.

So looks can be deceiving and I urge you to consider this. That all being said, is booting a guy whose service to the country has caused his injuries as a first line field soldier and made him unfit for further service within his old MOC the proper way to go? Or do we roll him into a CSS posn when he can still meet the minimum (that is the Expres Test) fitness requirements of the CF? I'd argue that his experience and leadership capabilities must also play a role. Let's face it....in trades like mine...whether we like it or not, there are desk jobs that these personnel can still do, thereby freeing up the rest of us who are medically fit to deploy, go to the field etc. My .02 cents worth.

 

[SHELLDRAKE!!]

Some CSS trades don't have the opportunity for mandatory PT on a daily basis as most hard Army trades do.

Inevitably though it boils down to personal motivation. My job is 12 hour shift work that alternates dayshift and nightshift. Although I can't get a straight answer out of my career manager as to when I can get back to a Regiment, and there is no directed PT for me, I make the time to atleast get 45 minutes of PT a day 4 days a week.

If motivation to stay fit doesn't come from a future need to be fit, one should rethink their choice of joining since PT on basic training wasn't designed to get you in shape just once.

My buck twenty.

 

[armyvern]

And I agree with your statement. This is a leadership failure as well though. I'm a former shiftworker as well (us Sup Techs do that while posted to Air Force bases). But, if the status quo is to allow ZERO time for PT to personnel in certain places...you must at some point in time require the "Leadership" to be held accountable for that, not just the individual.

By the leadership allowing ZERO time for PT, and simply quoting as their reasoning "it's a personal motivation/requirement/responsibility" , there will be no change. Their needs to be a change in the Leaderships mindset...they need to MAKE IT their responsibility to ensure the personnel are fit.

After all, why back-fill all those empty posns (that costs money!!) in the trades? You can simply work your personnel to the bone on that 'work-requirement and unpaid over-time/operational reasons' thing and then say "it's a personal responsibility" to keep fit on top of all that which doesn't cost them any money. That's a cop-out as far as I'm concerned. Perhaps we will see improvement in the personal fitness levels when the CF is at the full strength that it should be for our current op tempo and, once again, like back in the days, when we actually had enough personnel to do our jobs, do PT and do the Ops.

Let's face the facts...the military needs to be fit. The Leadership should make it their personal responsibility to ensure that soldier's are fit. If that means hiring the extra 15 personnel required at whatever Unit permanently that would allow us the time and opportunity to get both our jobs, taskings AND PT done....so be it. If a trade/Unit does NOT have time to get out and do PT because the work-load is too heavy, then I suggest it is the CFs responsibility to get them the personnel resources they require.

So what are your thoughts on those personnel I mentionned earlier who can and do meet the CF Express standard, but can't carry a ruck/deploy etc? Some don't look very fit but they do technically meet the standard. Should they have to go to the gym on their own time to get those washboard abs to look fit...even if they're meeting the current CF minimum standard? I think it comes down to what the CF minimum standard actually is (definately not saying that I agree with what the minimum standard is  )...and leadership.

 

[WogCpl]

Well, if you look at the CFAO it is a leadership failure, no doubt. If a CO's people are not fit then it is his fault if they were not given time to maintain proper fitness as far as i am concerned any CO that hides behind the "personal responsibility" idea is not taking ownership of the problem. You and I are on the same page AV, but first off i think the BFT is useless. the express tests both aerobic and anaerobic fitness, to a degree, where as the BFT proves that if you are really big then 52 pounds is not as much of a difference than if you are really small. I am speaking to holding people accountable when they do fail, which is not being done. On another note if we filled all of the base positions with "non deployable" people then the deployable ones are gone more often, and while we all like to go on tour sometimes enough is enough, ask anyone from 1CER during the 90's.
As far as my "handle" irony is the reason i chose it 

 

[ZipperHead]

I wish we lived in a black and white world, but we don't. Because we live in the "grey zone", we re-muster 'broken' soldiers to CSS trades. And then expect them to be as fit as an infantry soldier. But because they are on some form of Category, or a chit, they are exempt the rigorous training they require to get in shape. So they get out of shape. So then we tell them to get in shape. Refer to chit. And around and around it goes......

Here's something that I've been thinking about lately, so I'll throw it out to the masses: when a person goes on chit, category, etc, is it acceptable for them to get fat/out of shape??? If a person can't, say, run, shouldn't they swim, or bike???? If they can't swim, they can learn. If they can't bike, shouldn't they walk??? I think I know the answer to this one, but it is rather tiresome to hear: "I'm on a chit/category/whatever, so I can't run/walk/swim/bike/life weights......". How about a chit that says: "Member must maintain a healthy weight, via keeping energy ouput equal to/greater than energy input". Let's see how much people would obey THAT chit/category: "It's against my human rights!!!!!" "They can't tell me to do that!!!!!!". But when the chit says "PT at own pace/design/duration", they can do 10 mins of light pedalling on the bike and feel that is plenty enough, and "Hey, that's what the chit says. Can't go against that!!!!".

I think that the fit and good-to-go soldiers should NOT be forced to do all the deployments, tasks, field training, etc etc. That mentality is what drives out the good soldiers, and allows the weak to stay in ("Cpl "Too Fit" Bloggins will do all my work, I get to sit around, collect the same pay and benefits..... excellent!!!!"). Seen it, lived it, hate it.

If a person can't do the job of an average person in their trade, good bye, see ya later. That's heartless and cruel. So's life. And war. Go to the Marines (who happen to be fighting a war right now) and see if that looks vaguely familiar to their policy. How many desk jobs are their available in every trade (or the equivalent)??? Who get's the desk jobs once they are all taken: "Hey, I'm a good 20lbs fatter than you, I deserve it!!!!" "No, I deserve it because I did far worse than you on the EXPRES test" "No, my medical file is at LEAST as thick as the New York phone book, I deserve it". And so it goes......

We are not a job placement agency. Once your best-before-date has expired, yes, you are gone. Unless of course they can find something meaningful and useful for you to do. And then the cycle (as above) begins anew. Again, a grey world is what we live in.

As for PT time: it IS a leadership failing if time isn't made available during the work week (a normal week). It is also a personal failing if that time isn't utilized. And if you have to go into "personal" time (lunch, before work, after work), you don't get a medal or an "Outstanding" on your PER: you get a paycheck every 2 weeks. I hear excuses, not reasons, for why people don't do PT. A lot of them emanated from my very lips. Then I got sick of being a lazy bastard and FORCED myself into a routine. Would I rather sit on my ass?!?!?!? Hell yeah!!! But I feel much better, physically, emotionally, pride-wise, etc for knowing that I am bettering myself. And I ran in the field (I was the moron running with a rucksack in the training area the last 2 summers/winters, at night, in the snow/slush, the heat..... you'd be amazed at how many people offered me a lift.... as though a guy in PT gear wearing a rucksack is broken down..... I guess the thought of doing PT in the field never crossed their mind).

I guess we can wait and see how the "new improved" standards (or enforcement of existing standards) works out, but it won't be pretty. Once people are used to the easy way, trying to make it harder, will be, well, harder. And that sounds like a lot of work. I'm sure the Ombudsman and the Humans Rights people will be working overtime with all the complaints they will receive. Again, the fit will get fitter, and the fat will get fatter...... (I'll stop using that line once I stop seeing grotesquely fat people in uniform.... that won't happen any time soon, I'm sure).

Al

 

[SHELLDRAKE!!]

I think the sorepoint of "looks overweight" is just our combined desire to have a lean mean fighting machine for an Armed Forces. I think we all have seen that grossly overweight soldier on the evening news clip and were ashamed. Its my belief though that provided a decent PT program is immplemented that has a basis of fitness that applies to all, then you can develop PT standards specific to trades.

A clerk for instance, should not need to be able to offload a truck of 155mm bullets, but every artilleryman should. Its my understanding that the yearly PT test is designed to ensure no one drops below a minimal level of fitness, and each trade should ensure that not only is this level maintained but improved upon when/where the situation avails itself.

In any case at any rank level, if the minimal PT test is not met, the soldier/sailor/airman should immediately be prescribed an extra PT program and the test repeated. A second failure should constitute a review of the CF members employability.

Yes I agree 100% the changes need to start at the highest level, after all this concept of do as I say and not as I do, doesn't work when it comes to fitness.

 

[Armymedic]

I wish we lived in a black and white world, but we don't. Because we live in the "grey zone",

I wish we did Al, cause it would make our lives as CF Sgts much easier.

How about a chit that says: "Member must maintain a healthy weight, via keeping energy output equal to/greater than energy input". Let's see how much people would obey THAT chit/category

I will try it once I am back from my 6A course in Jan...I'll let you know how it goes over.

I think that the fit and good-to-go soldiers should NOT be forced to do all the deployments, tasks, field training, etc etc. That mentality is what drives out the good soldiers, and allows the weak to stay in ("Cpl "Too Fit" Bloggins will do all my work, I get to sit around, collect the same pay and benefits..... excellent!!!!"). Seen it, lived it, hate it.

Hate it as well, as I tended to be that medic stuck out in the fd. Now I get those sick, lame and/or lazy to stay back in the UMS for extra hours while I am in the fd so they can catch up on all the paper work and things that always need to be done...nobody gets a free ride anymore.

 

[armyvern]

But when the chit says "PT at own pace/design/duration", they can do 10 mins of light pedalling on the bike and feel that is plenty enough, and "Hey, that's what the chit says

BINGO!!
Alan, I do like your suggested wording for the chit. But, you are correct...it would probably never fly.

And the grey zone would continue should the 'broken' soldiers be put out of the military (properly pensioned if required). 5000 new troops for the Army, but nada one for the CSS trades. So if this was to occur, some of us would have even less time for PT because the 'broken' guys wouldn't be around to assist with desk workload etc. It's one big in-effecient circle.

Check my profile...I've been away lots too. At this point in time though my pers tempo still doesn't bother me. Someone's got to go. Will it last?? Who knows. It may just take one simple, as yet unseen, circumstance to make me finally say...enough already...I'm done with this whole outfit. I realize this, as I've seen many far-better and deserving Sup Techs than myself hit this wall and pull the pin very quickly.

Sad thing really...especially during times when what we are really trying to achieve is an increase in a combat capable, operationally deployable, fully fit Canadian Forces.

 

[ZipperHead]

A clerk for instance, should not need to be able to offload a truck of 155mm bullets, but every artilleryman should. Its my understanding that the yearly PT test is designed to ensure no one drops below a minimal level of fitness, and each trade should ensure that not only is this level maintained but improved upon when/where the situation avails itself.

In this case, I disagree. I know you are using an example near and dear to your world, but why SHOULDN'T a clerk be able to offload a truck of 155mm rounds? Just because they are a clerk? What should they be capable of offloading? A ream (500 sheets) of paper? I think one of the biggest problems we have have is that we default to the lowest common denominator, not the average. As well, we still patronize females, by ASSUMING that they aren't capable of physical effort, and then some (not all, by any means) play up to the "widdle ol' gurl" routine, and let the suckers (read as: men) do their work for them. And by allowing trades to set their own standard, I would guess that many would lowball the requirements to ensure that they keep their "special" (read as: out of shape/weak) people employed. But then we get the "us vs them" mentality of: "Well, why do WE have to be able to lift/carry/push/run more than THEM?!?!". So the patriarchal system brings in the lowest common denominator standards (EXPRES, 13km with pathetically low weight) to protect people. I think true protection would be ensuring that ALL soldiers are capable of warfighting, by ensuring that they are fit-to-fight, so that they can withstand the rigours.

Hate it as well, as I tended to be that medic stuck out in the fd. Now I get those sick, lame and/or lazy to stay back in the UMS for extra hours while I am in the fd so they can catch up on all the paper work and things that always need to be done...nobody gets a free ride anymore.

What you are doing there Ash, is being creative. The easy way out would be to let them slide, but making them work "extra" (even though it is in reality probably less than what field soldiers would have clocked in over the duration of an average exercise) makes people re-think the wisdom of being a rear party commando. In the Strathcona's a few years back, the RSM instituted a policy of making everybody on rear party (well, almost everybody... apparently there were some with work day hour restrictions (max 8 hrs a day, 5 days per week).... now THERE'S a sweet chit) work weekends when the Regt was in the field. Didn't that just go over well with all the perenial rear party commandos. One of them even had the gall to say: "I may as well be in the field!!!!". Well, d'uhhhh!!!! That's the point of that policy. I think that if someone has a chit that excuses them from deploying/field trg, they should have to do ALL base duties, so that field soldier's shouldn't have to. Or at least to make people think twice about whining their way out of the field.

Sad thing really...especially during times when what we are really trying to achieve is an increase in a combat capable, operationally deployable, fully fit Canadian Forces.

I couldn't agree more. The malingering and idleness within the CF is like a disease that needs to be removed, so that it doesn't infect the new soldiers coming in. It already effects those that always say "Can do!!!!". And nobody seems to give a shit that the one's that are tired of the lamers are getting out. There are no exit poll's/surveys for them (that I'm aware of, anyway). Or how many people DON'T join because they see the sad state that the military has become. I know of a LOT of good guys who got out because of the crap that they see (not the field, work, or tours): the crap that puts on a uniform and does their minimal workload (or less) and still gets paid. When a young keen guy/girl wants to be proud, serve their country, seek a job that promises adventure, and then sees some of the sacks that are in uniform in the media, in the mall, etc, that doesn't do much for them trying to "be all they can be", and they look elsewhere. However, the sack that hasn't put on a uniform yet looks and says: "Paydirt!!! Sign me up for that!!" And here we are......

Al

Editted for spelling.

 

[SHELLDRAKE!!]

My "clerk" comment was in no way a jab at women, but rather I was making the point that with the difference in trades in the CF, a person whos job in garrison as well as wartime, does not require running the 7 minute mile, should be fit as a soldier but not need to be fit as the "ironman" soldier.

Why should we need to focus on how many bench presses every soldier can do if their trade doesn't require huge pec's? Like I said, set the minimum PT level to a healthy, reasonable level, ensure everyone meets that level and for those that feel they need to go for a run with their ruck, fill your boots.

 

[ZipperHead]

I had two, count 'em, two (lengthy) responses all ready to be posted, when BOOOOM!!! Firefox crapped out on me twice (I 'upgraded' last week, and it has been nothing but misery all week). Or maybe it's all the fat computer hackers are onto me with all the dissing of their tubby brethren. Must wear tin-foil hat to stop my thoughts from escaping before I hit "Post" button......

Anyway, the gist of my response was that I didn't think that you were consciously slagging women, but since there are a lot of female clerks, it might seem that way. And whether clerk or artillery, there needs to be a higher (than the existing) level of fitness for ALL. Because we are defaulting to the lowest common denominator, it effects all trades. Because the infantry can't select who they get for a clerk, or the artillery who they get for a sup tech, they WILL be effected when push comes to shove, because it will be the clerk in the trench (when needed to guard the base camp), or the supp tech unloading the ammo from the truck (when the fork life packs it in). Trying to raise the standards at that point is a little late.

"Healthy and reasonable" is very open to twisting and turning into whatever people want. One could argue that everyone who passes the existing standard is healthy, so in fact it is reasonable. I think we all know that it is otherwise. We should look to the standards that the USMC has, and use them. They have the best policy: Every marine is a rifleman. And as we are such a small military, we would be wise to latch onto that little pearl of wisdom, and make it so that every soldier is able, physically and skillwise, to perform the role of a rifleman.

Al

 

[SHELLDRAKE!!]

Agreed, the current PT standard is too low and sadly there are still members (all ranks) failing to achieve even that weak standard. Bring up the level, ensure all members meet it, but keep in mind not every member needs to be able to pass JTF tryouts.

 

[Spr.Earl]

Agreed, the current PT standard is too low and sadly there are still members (all ranks) failing to achieve even that weak standard. Bring up the level, ensure all members meet it, but keep in mind not every member needs to be able to pass JTF tryouts.

Re your JTF tryouts;it's every memebers duty to stay fit even when on leave.
Every one can do it.

 

[Proud Canadian]

C.  A NEW DAOD ON PHYSICAL FITNESS WILL EMPHASIZE REQUIREMENT FOR
ALL CF MEMBERS TO PARTICIPATE IN A PHYSICAL FITNESS PROGRAM
SANCTIONED BY THE CF

What about the members that already have a fitness routine? I run 1/2 hour every weekday morning before breakfast. Combine my breaks and lunch and go to the gym or for a bike ride everyday for a min of 1 hour and then as soon as I get home I run another 1/2 hour. Then 3 times a week in the evenings martial arts.

I would hell bent on changing my fitness routine.

IMO our express standards are too low especially the 35 - 40 age category.

 

[Infanteer]

Interestingly enough - this made CBC news:

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2006/01/04/forces060104.html