+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 72

Thread: "Cadet Strike"

  1. #1
    jamiesonaelick is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    2011
    Location
    Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    63
    Gender
    Blog Entries
    3

    "Cadet Strike"

    I've heard a lot about it, I've seen the people who are trying to encourage it, but I feel its the wrong way to go.
    A lot of people have problems with the Air Cadet Program, I certainly have a few .
    But I don't think that a strike will help.
    Dialogue is important, and that's what I support.
    J

    Last edited by Lt(N) Deck; 1st December 2014 at 16:30. Reason: Link removed
    FSGT Jamieson Aelick
    734 Squadron Alliston Legion


  2. #2
    Wlodar.Alex is on a distinguished road Wlodar.Alex's Avatar
    Join Date
    2011
    Location
    Cornwall, Ontario
    Posts
    364
    Gender
    Blog Entries
    4
    It has sparked quite the discussion on some social media groups, and I'm glad to see that most people seem to be against it.

    There are so many things wrong with the idea in my opinion. A strike is a very poor way to send a message. The admins seem to believe it would work because it worked for the CF and for civilian business, ignoring the fact that those are paid workers completing tasks that earn the government/business a profit. Those workers are needed to fulfill the purpose of the business, whereas we are the purpose of our organization. If we leave, they scrap it plain and simple.

    The response I got to this was that because there are so many full-time and part-time DND workers in the cadet program, it would actually work. I quickly pointed out to them that this equates to their plan being an attempt to jeopardize other peoples' jobs and lives. I was given the age old bureaucracy argument saying there are too many people up top that are showing poor leadership.

    I finally reminded them that the single largest military movements Canada has to organize is the transport of cadets in and out of summer camps. That is no small administrative task. While the brass may be a little bit bloated, it certainly isn't as unnecessary as these people seem to believe, and certainly does not warrant wanting to damage their lives by destroying a portion of the job market (especially considering finding jobs has been a major focus since the 2008 stock crash); such is purely unethical behaviour.

    In addition to this, I made the point that many of the faults with the cadet program happen at the LHQ level where cadets do not put proper focus on their training and applying their training. This leads to poor development of seniors, meaning poor organization, lack of expertise and knowledge, etc. and creates a cycle. Shifting the blame upward to the senior officers at the RCSUs is a perfect example of this, going completely against how we're trained to identify problems, find solutions, and act on the best solution. A pyramid is built from the bottom, not the top.

    My comments were promptly deleted and I was banned from commenting further or sending them a message.

    A question to the officers: are there any policies regarding the use of social media by cadets in this fashion? I saw the CANCDTGEN posted a couple months back when 'The Truth About Cadets' page first surfaced, but it was clearly ignored/not passed on properly and now the page has become propagandized in nature. On one hand I think the admins behind this should be traced and made accountable for actions that essentially equate to insubordination (similar to the ol' Cpl. Bloggins deal, albeit in a much less extreme case), but on the other that could easily be taken as unfair censorship (of youth no less) and would fuel the fire. I'm curious what the best course of action would be considered; they certainly don't listen to reason after-all.
    Pte. (R) A.M. Wlodarczyk


  3. #3
    CW Staff Writer Thundah is on a distinguished road Thundah's Avatar
    Join Date
    2013
    Location
    Peterborough ON
    Posts
    305
    Gender
    Blog Entries
    19
    We need to enact extreme action but to both ends of the pyramid, not just one. Cadets need to take things into their own hands in a proper way (ie, be a positive leader and put their heart into improving the LHQ experience) as well.

    The page deletes for a reason, most of them are taken out for a good reason but others are removed to avoid killing the momentum.

    Honestly, from my experience, most of the deletions are ones I agree with. It seems as if a lot of people start to use poor word choice when they don't get the reply they want. It gets pretty unprofessional.... I'm talking about the people who are against the page mostly.

    The admin has a goal and will go to extremes to achieve it, and I'm with him for the most part. I would be a bit more conservative with the tactics and a bit more open with negotiation but then again, sometimes you need to hit hard. A lot of the pages they manage go a bit too over the top though, yes words need to pack a punch but too much causes that punch to subside until nobody will take you seriously.

    I'm in the middle with the strike, I feel that the planning was flawed and that with the unique circumstances, there needs to be a unique approach. I'm not participating but I'm keeping my mind open. There are a lot of negatives and problems with it that deter me.

    Edit: I know this won't be popular.
    Last edited by Thundah; 27th November 2014 at 14:41.

  4. #4
    A couple of points of consideration for you all.

    There are several Facebook pages like the one referenced above. The "Truth" one claims to be representing Cadets, however no real evidence of that has been given. The Admin or Admins of the site have chosen to remain anonymous. However at least one of the main folks widely believed to be behind the "truth" page is not a Cadet. There is a "companion" website of the same name, and all you need to do is a "WhoIs" search on that website name to see who registered the domain. It is believed by some that the same individual is associated with several other Facebook pages which feature similar messages. There may be other people involved with the pages as well.

    A small handful of Cadets may be involved in terms of having signed a letter to the Chief of Reserves and Cadets. However the language in the letter is the same language that this one non-Cadet / non-Officer individual has used for some time. No evidence has been given that proves that any of the people who run the page are actually Cadets.

    So any policies or accountability questions are probably moot in this case: most evidence seems to indicate that the person calling for the strike is not a Cadet, nor an Officer, nor currently directly related to the Cadet program other than as a parent.

    There may be other people involved as well, but that helps strengthen the point: do you trust information and advice from someone who is not willing to sign their name under it? Do you want to follow a course of action led and encouraged by someone who won't identify themselves, who hides in the shadows, and who may have absolutely nothing to lose by his suggestion?

    As for "National Call In Sick To Cadets" week, the method suggested does very little to "send a message" to anyone. Cadets call in sick all the time. There are 53,000+ Cadets across Canada. Even if 530 Cadets call in sick that's only a 1% dip in attendance. Who is going to notice that?

    There are lots of reasons why Cadets may miss a parade night in the end of November. Indoor school sports are active,, school bands and drama clubs are practicing for Christmas performances. It's cold and flu season, go Google "Flu Watch Canada" and take a look at the sharp rise in reports of flu reports across the country. A couple hundred more Cadets calling in sick this week won't even register as a blip. And I highly doubt that even a couple hundred Cadets are pretending to be sick this week, judging from the responses. Many of the Officers here at CW have reported average or even above average attendance at their units this week, one even had 100% attendance. My unit of 110 Cadets paraded last night, and our attendance was about the same as it normally is. A few Cadets sick, not unusual. A few who had booked leave a week or more in advance due to conflicting school events, etc.

    Ask yourselves this: who gets affected if you miss a week of Cadets? Who misses the training? When it is time to look at attendance later in the year, for camp or staff recommendations, or for awards, etc, the Officers go into Fortress and run an attendance report. Even if you had leave, your attendance still shows you as having missed a night (absent, excused.). If your CO has to choose between two Cadets for an awesome summer course or other opportunity, if two Cadets are generally equal in many regards, but one has 90% attendance and the other has 80% attendance due to having taken leave a few more times, who gets selected? Who loses out? Certainly not the person who thought up "Call In Sick To Cadets Week."

    If you have problems or concerns about the way things are done at your unit, or about the Cadet program as a whole, does calling in sick for a week fix those? We teach Cadets to have integrity, to take responsibility, to show leadership and take initiative. Does calling in sick do any of those things? Can you call yourself a leader if you hide in the shadows?

    Yes, it may seem scary to make a complaint, but there are procedures for doing it, and Cadets have done so many times and found support and resolution for their issues. You have several options as a Cadet to help solve problems or concerns. These are outlined in the CANCDTGEN published last month (which you can find here) Yoiur chain of command is first. Your parents can approach your Navy/Army/Air Cadet League. For social issues, harassment issues, abuse issues, you can talk to a UCCMA at your unit or at the RCSU / Det. If the problem is about your CO, or your CO seems to be unwilling to listen to or solve the problem, your parents can contact your RCSU or Detachment. If you are not sure where / how / who to contact, send myself or any of the staff members here at CW a private message and we will point you in the right direction. If you are not sure of what rules, policies, CATOs apply to a situation, ask here at CW, people here are happy to help, as we have been for many years before any of those Facebook pages were ever around.

    KD
    Last edited by Lt(N) Deck; 29th November 2014 at 07:25. Reason: added link to CANCDTGEN

  5. The Following 4 Users Like This Post By Lt(N) Deck :


  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Thundah View Post

    The page deletes for a reason, most of them are taken out for a good reason but others are removed to avoid killing the momentum.

    Honestly, from my experience, most of the deletions are ones I agree with. It seems as if a lot of people start to use poor word choice when they don't get the reply they want. It gets pretty unprofessional.... I'm talking about the people who are against the page mostly.
    You are probably not aware of this, but many of the Officers who are active here on CW have tried to participate on that page as well as others, to present a different perspective. Many of us have been deleted and banned. I can assure you that it is most often not for the reasons you just listed.

    The admin has a goal and will go to extremes to achieve it,
    Do you know the admin personally? Do you know if the admin is even a Cadet? As mentioned above, if the admin is not a Cadet, is it "extreme" to encourage Cadets to call in sick one parade night? If the admin is actually a Cadet, is he calling in sick himself? Is that "extreme?"

    I would argue that if indeed the admin of the "truth " page is a Cadet, then an "extreme" action would be to be Truthful: identify himself and stand up and say "I'm not coming to Cadets tonight because I believe there are problems and I want answers! I am on strike!" Take the Absent Without Leave on his attendance record, stand up and be counted for what he believes in. That would be extreme.



    and I'm with him for the most part. I would be a bit more conservative with the tactics and a bit more open with negotiation but then again, sometimes you need to hit hard. A lot of the pages they manage go a bit too over the top though, yes words need to pack a punch but too much causes that punch to subside until nobody will take you seriously. "
    A lot of the pages insult people who disagree with them, use vulgar language, or allow other participants to insult and use vulgar language to others. These are not things we would want to see from Cadets. We try to teach Cadets to find productive ways to manage and overcome conflict. CadetWorld does the same here, see our Rules page for evidence. Those Facebook pages do not always do that, and the Admin(s) have modelled some poor examples in that regard.


    Edit: I know this won't be popular.
    You are allowed to have unpopular opinions! You've stated them respectfully and intelligently. As long as everyone treats everyone fairly, and disagrees with ideas without attacking people, it's ok to disagree.

    KD
    Last edited by Lt(N) Deck; 29th November 2014 at 19:49.
    Kevin C. Deck cd1
    Lt(N)
    RCSCC GRILSE canada bc
    Past CO - RCSCC MEDICINE HAT, RCSCC BICKNELL, RCSCC GRILSE

  7. The Following 2 Users Like This Post By Lt(N) Deck :


  8. #6
    CW Staff Writer Thundah is on a distinguished road Thundah's Avatar
    Join Date
    2013
    Location
    Peterborough ON
    Posts
    305
    Gender
    Blog Entries
    19
    I'm aware of it all, I have had lengthy chats with K (I'm definate that he's the sole admin...). And I know the strike won't really cause much which is why I'm not totally supporting it. I also know about the other pages and the vulgarities. That's what I mean by extremes, he's being very dirty. I support his cause but I have my negative words in regards to his actions. I support only that one page because it's civil enough to like and I like the debate. He doesn't sign his name anywhere because as soon as people realize it's him, it won't be taken seriously. because he's such a hot head in a way.

    About officers posting, quite a few of them deserved to be deleted for the word choice, but you are right and I have confronted the page about it

    I have to go but PM me if you want to discuss more.

    Thanks for the words.
    L. Korolenchuk
    Flight Sergeant (Ret'd)

    aircsmlsm | canada

  9. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Thundah View Post
    I'm aware of it all, I have had lengthy chats with K (I'm definate that he's the sole admin...).
    So you understand at least that he is encouraging an action that he is not going to be participating in, thus will have no consequences from it. He won't be missing training, or lowering his attendance average. He won't be the one who misses out on an opportunity because his attendance is slightly lower than another Cadet's.

    There are better ways to get answers to questions, or help with concerns or problems.

    KD
    Kevin C. Deck cd1
    Lt(N)
    RCSCC GRILSE canada bc
    Past CO - RCSCC MEDICINE HAT, RCSCC BICKNELL, RCSCC GRILSE

  10. The Following User Likes This Post By Lt(N) Deck :


  11. #8
    It's nice to finally see someone on that side of the fence at least being both logical and reasonable. Well done, Thundah. I don't agree with what's being presented by all of these connected Facebook pages, but you absolutely have the right to do so and I applaud you for standing by your own convictions. Everything in life comes down to choice, and it at least appears you are making yours, and not letting someone else make it for you.

    Bravo Zulu.

    JB
    Run until you can't. Then run some more

  12. The Following User Likes This Post By Juice :


  13. #9
    CW Staff Writer Thundah is on a distinguished road Thundah's Avatar
    Join Date
    2013
    Location
    Peterborough ON
    Posts
    305
    Gender
    Blog Entries
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Lt(N) Deck View Post
    So you understand at least that he is encouraging an action that he is not going to be participating in, thus will have no consequences from it. He won't be missing training, or lowering his attendance average. He won't be the one who misses out on an opportunity because his attendance is slightly lower than another Cadet's.

    There are better ways to get answers to questions, or help with concerns or problems.

    KD
    The problem is that conventional methods haven't really worked very effectively. People aren't really being heard.

    But.... It's known that when people don't truly know what's happening behind closed doors, people assume the worst.

    And the worst is usually much more believable. Which is why the page has followers. Which is why we have anti-government protests. And etc. I like to make comparisons.

    But see, I believe the worst is true but I also believe there are many good people being labelled bad due to the action (or lack of action) of others. We need to all band together, officers, cadets, volunteers and make sure our voices are heard and considered. We as a collective can shape the program we work so hard to keep running. Lt(N) Deck, the quoted post couldn't describe my issues with a strike better.

    People flock to the page because it makes them feel like they are making a difference, because it's exposing the secrecy. Well, I think that there should be more transparency in regards to decisions that affect cadets, this would lead to less speculation and potentially more input and confidence in the program.

    I was thinking of implementing a type of "student trustee" system but with mature cadets nominated from each region. (Probably already exists). With social media, we can reach more cadets and perhaps we can use this to our advantage. I'm just rambling on.

    @Juice
    Wow thanks, I always felt that my posts were illogical....
    L. Korolenchuk
    Flight Sergeant (Ret'd)

    aircsmlsm | canada

  14. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Thundah View Post
    The problem is that conventional methods haven't really worked very effectively. People aren't really being heard.

    But.... It's known that when people don't truly know what's happening behind closed doors, people assume the worst.

    And the worst is usually much more believable. Which is why the page has followers. Which is why we have anti-government protests. And etc. I like to make comparisons.

    But see, I believe the worst is true but I also believe there are many good people being labelled bad due to the action (or lack of action) of others. We need to all band together, officers, cadets, volunteers and make sure our voices are heard and considered. We as a collective can shape the program we work so hard to keep running. Lt(N) Deck, the quoted post couldn't describe my issues with a strike better.

    People flock to the page because it makes them feel like they are making a difference, because it's exposing the secrecy. Well, I think that there should be more transparency in regards to decisions that affect cadets, this would lead to less speculation and potentially more input and confidence in the program.

    I was thinking of implementing a type of "student trustee" system but with mature cadets nominated from each region. (Probably already exists). With social media, we can reach more cadets and perhaps we can use this to our advantage. I'm just rambling on.

    @Juice
    Wow thanks, I always felt that my posts were illogical....
    Can I ask how you know people aren't being heard? You read those pages and assume that they are at the head of a vast groundswell of support. Has anyone actually self-identified as taking part in the strike? Has any unit reported any unusual bouts of absenteeism? Not that I'm aware of.

    You read what they write and assume what they are saying is true or, at least, in proper context. One of the admin's posts included a warning that cadets is in danger of being shut down - do you believe this is a true statement or a way of inflaming cadets to become angry and rally to his side?

    Do you believe that anyone who so blatantly tries to manipulate cadets with falsehoods and half truths actually has your best interests at heart?

    In your own words, please explain what is this "crisis" is all about?

  15. The Following User Likes This Post By J-P Johnson :


  16. #11
    CW Staff Writer Thundah is on a distinguished road Thundah's Avatar
    Join Date
    2013
    Location
    Peterborough ON
    Posts
    305
    Gender
    Blog Entries
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by J-P Johnson View Post
    Can I ask how you know people aren't being heard? You read those pages and assume that they are at the head of a vast groundswell of support. Has anyone actually self-identified as taking part in the strike? Has any unit reported any unusual bouts of absenteeism? Not that I'm aware of.

    You read what they write and assume what they are saying is true or, at least, in proper context. One of the admin's posts included a warning that cadets is in danger of being shut down - do you believe this is a true statement or a way of inflaming cadets to become angry and rally to his side?

    Do you believe that anyone who so blatantly tries to manipulate cadets with falsehoods and half truths actually has your best interests at heart?

    In your own words, please explain what is this "crisis" is all about?
    Question 1:

    Well, it seems as if it's the case. I know its not completely true but it seems as if decisions are being made to make things more convenient financially. Just how it seems, I've read information from other sources. Of course, quite a few cadets probably feel that way because of issues within LHQ where word never actually travels up the chain of command, or they just have never actually tried to. A lot of cadets keep wishing for more "hardcore" elements to be reintroduced into the program, or for money to be spent in a different fashion. I tend to trust the concerns posted in the comments rather than the case studies posted. I think the main issue is that we don't seem to get confirmation that our opinions are being heard. About the strike, yes some cadets have actually persuaded quite a few members of their units to call in sick, and some have announced that they have done it. But the vast majority didn't. I did some profile stalking.

    Question 2:

    It's exaggerated, obviously it's an attempt to rally people to support his cause. An often used technique, to over-catastrophize the possible negative outcome of not acting.

    Question 3:

    I haven't seen many half-truths and false-hoods (okay, I have seen some but I focus on the more believable ones) although it's getting more apparent. He doesn't have our best interests at heart but I'm going to take the benefit of the doubt and say that his interests are intended to be beneficial.

    Maybe he is ruling us up with falsities, but the replies and stories commented by the cadets suggest that some are actually somewhat true. I don't agree with cadets posting the dirty laundry in an open forum as such but then again, what people do in their free time is not my business.

    Question 4: I don't see it as a crisis, but to define it, it's the case of cadets wanting things that aren't in the program for various reasons. Its apparent that the safety rules and various precautions are more stringent than in the past, leading to people wishing it was less so. This is further perpetuated by stories from parents (who are former cadets) complaining that cadets has gone too soft. I can attest to that as one of my CI's made a complaint just the same back in 2012. Cadets seem to want more freedom to influence the major decisions in regards to the program.

    I'm tired so the above may make no sense, not actually answer the question etc.
    L. Korolenchuk
    Flight Sergeant (Ret'd)

    aircsmlsm | canada

  17. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Thundah View Post
    The problem is that conventional methods haven't really worked very effectively. People aren't really being heard.

    Capt Johnson makes some great comments above, but I want to add to this. Conventional methods haven't worked to do what, exactly?

    What is the motivation behind these pages? What is their basic message? I've seen the various topics and tangents and read the manifesto of questions. Some of the questions are good...and can be answered easily by reading existing policies, or asking your own CO, or even just searching here on CW. Some of the questions are just attacks, with no real goal then to denigrate the leadership and the CIC. Some are just unanswerable because they are vague or so wide ranging. But what is the end goal, that "conventional methods" supposedly hasn't been able to address?

    People flock to the page because it makes them feel like they are making a difference, because it's exposing the secrecy.
    What secrecy, exactly?

    KD
    Kevin C. Deck cd1
    Lt(N)
    RCSCC GRILSE canada bc
    Past CO - RCSCC MEDICINE HAT, RCSCC BICKNELL, RCSCC GRILSE

  18. #13
    CW Staff Writer Thundah is on a distinguished road Thundah's Avatar
    Join Date
    2013
    Location
    Peterborough ON
    Posts
    305
    Gender
    Blog Entries
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Lt(N) Deck View Post
    Capt Johnson makes some great comments above, but I want to add to this. Conventional methods haven't worked to do what, exactly?

    What is the motivation behind these pages? What is their basic message? I've seen the various topics and tangents and read the manifesto of questions. Some of the questions are good...and can be answered easily by reading existing policies, or asking your own CO, or even just searching here on CW. Some of the questions are just attacks, with no real goal then to denigrate the leadership and the CIC. Some are just unanswerable because they are vague or so wide ranging. But what is the end goal, that "conventional methods" supposedly hasn't been able to address?



    What secrecy, exactly?

    KD
    1: well, in our perception, complaints seem to be pushed aside. Whether it's true ignorance of the complaint of the amount of time it takes to process the complaint is ambiguous.

    2. Well, the motivation is to enact change in the cadet program by finding as much proof of the lack of capability of the program's leadership as possible. He believes that the main problem is that lack of capability, and in order to enact the change that he and those who agree want, shaming the leadership and exaggerating their flaws is the way to do it. Of course there's other methods but that's what I was told in conversation. Not even kidding.

    Basically it's a case of using fire to fight what is percieved to be fire.

    A lot of people feel that their complaints aren't being heard and put into action. Note feel. Also it doesn't seek apparent that they are. That's the what.

    4: theoretical secrecy. They feel that they are getting insider info and it empowers them. If it's accurate of not, I don't know but some of it is backed up by news articles (to an extent) and general observations and comparisons. A lot of the claims are understandable explanations to current changes in the program that they don't seem to like.
    L. Korolenchuk
    Flight Sergeant (Ret'd)

    aircsmlsm | canada

  19. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Thundah View Post
    1: well, in our perception, complaints seem to be pushed aside. Whether it's true ignorance of the complaint of the amount of time it takes to process the complaint is ambiguous.

    So, let's dive into this comment. What sort of complaints have been pushed aside by whom? Were the complaints made properly via the chain of command in your unit? Were they followed up on properly as outlined in CANCDTGEN 004/14?

    It's easy to say that "complaints are pushed aside." What has to be remembered is that the CCO has 53,000+ Cadets, approx 5000 Officers, and hundreds of Civilian Volunteers.

    Valid complaints of abuse, harrassement, disregard for safety, disregard for orders, etc: those should get heard and reacted to at the approproate level (Cadet unit, Summer Trg Centre, RSCU / Det, etc.) No question. There are published procedures for doing that (see the CANCDTGEN above.)

    But let's talk about other complaints, the ones about why Cadets does this or does not do that, why certain policies are in place, or regulations, etc.

    I want to phrase this carefully so it is not misinterpreted: when it comes to complaints, everyone has at least one. Does every person's complaint need to get heard at the very top of the organization? That would be impossible to facilitate. So we have a structure in place, where complaints, concerns, issues, questions, ideas, suggestions for improvements, etc, get heard first at the appropriate level. A problem within your unit should be solved within your unit. If it cannot be, the next step does not have to be "get on social media and tell the world." The next step should be to either take the complaint to the local Navy League, Army Cadet League or Air Cadet League sponsoring branch / committee to see if they can assist, or direct it to your RCSU or Detachment, as they are the next step up the chain of command. CANCDTGEN 004/14 contains a link to Contact Info for the RCSUs.


    The next question is: does every complaint mean that the CCO needs to instantly react and change something? If a first year Cadet thinks that drill is boring, should he complain loudly on social media, and send a letter to the top echelons of the CCO and demand to know why we do drill, and why we cannot replace drill with something else?

    The answer to that question can be found by asking the chain of command. Why we do drill can be answered by looking in the QSP/ IG, the rationale for it is laid out.

    I am not trying to minimize valid complaints about serious problems, things like harrassement, abuse, misuse of authority, disreagard for safety, etc, as I mentioned above. I am aware that someone may want to cherry-pick my comments here and misconstrue them elsewhere. My point is that many general complaints about why things are a certain way can be answered at the local level, by asking an Officer, and getting good information from them.

    When I read the list of questions that are published on the "truth" page, one of the first things that struck me was that much of that information can be found by asking your CO, reviewing CATOs and other orders, or asking here on CW. Here is an example of a couple of questions which can be easily answered:

    11. Can the air rifle be replaced with a proper Canadian Forces issue combat rifle? If not, please indicate the reason(s) why.

    12. Can we participate in live-fire and other combat-readiness training exercises with Regs and/or Reserves to provide cadets with a better appreciation for and understanding of the CF? If not, please indicate the reason(s) why.

    The answer to that can be found in CATO 11-33: AFFILIATED UNIT SUPPORT AND
    CANADIAN FORCES TRAINING

    https://portal-portail.cadets.gc.ca/...20FC/11-33.pdf


    2. One of the three aims of the Cadet
    Movement is to stimulate the interest of cadets in
    sea, land, and air activities of the CF. This is the
    intention of cadet participation in CF unit
    activities, including the participation in exercises
    and the firing of weapons.

    3. The goal of participation in such activities
    is not and shall not be to train cadets to any predetermined
    standard.

    6. Cadets may participate in training or
    activities of the affiliated unit as deemed
    appropriate by the cadet unit CO and the
    affiliated unit commander once approved by the
    Region Cadet Officer (RCO).

    7. The RCO will not authorize training which
    poses a risk of injury to cadets. Where possible,
    the RCO shall use his authority to ensure that
    minimum safety standards are established
    instead of withholding permission to participate
    in affiliated unit training, as it is an important
    means of stimulating interest in the CF.

    8. Under the current federal gun legislation,
    cadets, not being members of the Canadian
    Forces, are prohibited the use of restricted
    weapons even when supervised by members of
    the CF.

    Certain CF Combat weapons are considered Restricted by law.

    One could also read CATO 14-41 - AUTHORIZED RIFLE TRAINING for more info. With regard to specifically the C7/C8 rifle, CATO 14-41, Annex A can answer that question:


    1. This annex governs the use of C7/8 service
    rifles within the CCO.

    2. Only familiarization firing may be
    authorized on the C7/8. B-GL-385-001/PT-001
    “The Rifle 5.56mm C7 and Carbine 5.56mm C8”
    Chapter 5, Annex A, Appendices 1, 3 and 4
    should be used for guidance.

    3. C7/8 firing, other than that authorized and
    approved for CSTC training, will be conducted
    only with the approval of the RCSU CO.

    4. C7/8 use for drill purposes is not
    authorized.

    5. The bayonet is not authorized for use
    during C7/8 training.


    With 5 minutes of reading the appropriate CATO, the answers to two of those questions are found. So if the complaint is "we want to shoot machine guns", the answer is: Federal Law says that you can't shoot certain ones. No letters to a Rear-Admiral were necessary to get that question answered. Any Cadet unit CO should be able to point you to the answer which is publically available online.

    So circling back to my point: we can see on this case that yes, Cadets can participate in some activities with Reg F or P Res units, so long as the Regional Cadet Officer is satisfied that it is reasonably safe, and they will not be shooting any restricted firearms as per federal law.

    Cadets may not like that answer, and complain. But will complaining to your CO change that? Will complaining to the Chief of Reserves and Cadets change that? It is a Federal law, in order to change it you need to get a majority of Members of Parliament to vote to ammend the appropriate legislation.

    That is just one example, but the point is this: just because someone has a complaint does not mean that the entire CCO can or should change because of it. Some complaints, when registered properly via the chain of command, can bring about changes. We did not have CHAP or PSRY back when I was a Cadet. The CCO changed in reaction to problems. But for complaints like "I want to go out and shoot machine guns with the army" the answer boils down to "We can't do that in Cadets due to federal law. When you are old enough to join the P Res or Reg F, you can go do that."

    As always, if Cadets have complaints, questions, concerns or problems that they do not know where or how to find the answers to, the experienced and knowledgeable members of CadetWorld are happy to help, as we have been for over 15 years.

    KD
    Last edited by Lt(N) Deck; 29th November 2014 at 10:16. Reason: corrections
    Kevin C. Deck cd1
    Lt(N)
    RCSCC GRILSE canada bc
    Past CO - RCSCC MEDICINE HAT, RCSCC BICKNELL, RCSCC GRILSE

  20. The Following 4 Users Like This Post By Lt(N) Deck :


  21. #15
    I will quickly address your other points. Thanks again for making them!


    Quote Originally Posted by Thundah View Post

    2. Well, the motivation is to enact change in the cadet program by finding as much proof of the lack of capability of the program's leadership as possible. He believes that the main problem is that lack of capability, and in order to enact the change that he and those who agree want, shaming the leadership and exaggerating their flaws is the way to do it. Of course there's other methods but that's what I was told in conversation. Not even kidding.


    The problem with this approach is that it assumes that the person making the complaint or protest has all the right answers. Essentially the approach is: there is a problem, I think it should be solved like this, and if you won't solve it in exactly the manner I suggest you must be incapable of solving the problem, therefore I should call you names and make insulting photoshops of you, and "anonymously" publish information which is available to anyone who submits an Access To Information request.

    It's hard to take that approach seriously. The person or persons making complaints do not always have all the correct information, nor are their suggestions always practical given other considerations like need and budget. Complaints about CIC members not having to meet the same fitness standards as Reg Force members have been around long before these Facebook pages popped up. The answers are simple, yet solutions are complex. Reg Force and P Res members are given access to fitness facilities and trainers. If CIC Members are required to meet the same standards, are we to be given the same access to facilities? Can you put fitness facilities into every Cadet unit? No. So should we give CIC members an allowance to join a local fitness club and engage personal trainers? Great idea, I'd take it instead of paying out of my own pocket to go to the gym. Where is the money going to come from? Take it out of Cadet Summer Training, perhaps?

    Again, those discussions have been had, even here on CW, long before these Facebook pages ever popped up. Just because CIC Members have not been required to meet the same fitness standard as Reg Force members does not mean that CCO Leadership is incapable of finding a solution. They just may not have been given the money, tools or authority to solve it.



    A lot of people feel that their complaints aren't being heard and put into action. Note feel. Also it doesn't seek apparent that they are. That's the what.
    I understand that. But at some point Cadets also need to realize that certain complaints are not going to get actioned. When Cadets complain that they can't play airsoft or war games, and they complain about it, that is not necessarily going to change. At some point the answer is "we don't do that." I know that some people are fond of comparing Cadets to Boy Scouts and Girl Guides. I have a daughter in Girl Guides. They don't shoot machine guns or play airsoft on camping weekends. If she wanted to do that, should she complain? Sure, if she wants to. But should Girl Guides change their rules, nationally, because she complains? What if 6 Girl Guides sign a letter and send it to the national office? What if 100 Girl Guides called in sick one week to protest not being able to shoot machine guns or play airsoft in Girl Guides? What if they posted videos on Youtube complaining about the lack of machine guns in Girl Guides? Should Girl Guides Canada change their policies? Are those Girl Guides being heard? Are their complaints being ignored? Or at some point do the kids have to accept what their local Girl Guide leaders told them: that they are not allowed to do that.

    The Canadian Cadet Organization is not Boy Scouts. It is not Girl Guides. It is not Hockey Canada. It is not FIFA. It is not Major League Baseball. It is not the Canadian Armed Forces Regular Forces or Primary Reserve. It is not the United States Marines. It is not the Navy Seals. It is not the UK Cadet Forces. It is not the U.S. Naval Sea Cadets. If someone complains that Cadets should be more like any of those organizations or entities, is the CCO obligated to change to be more like that Organization?

    4: theoretical secrecy. They feel that they are getting insider info and it empowers them. If it's accurate of not, I don't know but some of it is backed up by news articles (to an extent) and general observations and comparisons.
    I'm not sure what you are referring to by theoretical secrecy. Can you be more specific? What info are Cadets not getting that they feel they need to have access to?

    KD
    Last edited by Lt(N) Deck; 29th November 2014 at 10:21.
    Kevin C. Deck cd1
    Lt(N)
    RCSCC GRILSE canada bc
    Past CO - RCSCC MEDICINE HAT, RCSCC BICKNELL, RCSCC GRILSE

  22. The Following User Likes This Post By Lt(N) Deck :


  23. #16
    CW Staff Writer Thundah is on a distinguished road Thundah's Avatar
    Join Date
    2013
    Location
    Peterborough ON
    Posts
    305
    Gender
    Blog Entries
    19
    Thanks for the great info Lt(N)!

    theoretical secrecy, cadets think that the program is keeping its actions secret from them so the things posted by the page seem....I really can't find the word. Example, I didn't know that CANCDTGEN's were actually released to the public until this morning. I think the cadets don't realize that they can find this information on their own. I'm having issues wording it right, I hope you can find my point :/

    Ill post a more comprehensive post once I can get my thoughts together, but I hear you and I'm glad we can have a civil conversation as its giving me things to think about in regards to my stance. The one thing I don't agree with completely is your point on comparisons, I'll explain later.
    L. Korolenchuk
    Flight Sergeant (Ret'd)

    aircsmlsm | canada

  24. #17
    x_paden_x is on a distinguished road x_paden_x's Avatar
    Join Date
    2014
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    88
    Gender
    Blog Entries
    3
    I don't know if this point has been made or not. But just for the sake of It i'd like to bring it up, Feel free to correct me if i'm wrong... I feel like this is a point that people point out with "Treason", But sometimes neglect.



    I'm for Changing the Program and making it more "Military" Oriented like all the Other cadet programs around the world; Not even just Correcting the Military part, Just fixing it as a whole: Because right now, The program's always compared to the scouts/Guides programs, And many of the points made comparing Cadets to those, are correct.

    The program needs to be Reformed. Cadets Nationwide are Demanding it, But this isn't the way to do it.


    Anyways.

    Technically... A Royal Canadian Cadet, Regardless of Element, Cannot commit treason, Due to the fact that we are not Military, And we aren't completely governed/Bound by Military rule.

    We are Taught the Value of the Canadian Forces motives, and Train in Military like Environments (Occasionally), And are given a Condensed, Easier form of Military training... But we are not Military.

    Referring to the "http://cadets.ca/en/about/cadets-faq.page" It states:

    Q: Are Cadets expected to join the Canadian Armed Forces?
    A: Cadets are not members of the Canadian Armed Forces, nor are they expected to join the military. While they are introduced to Sea, Army and/or Air activities of the Canadian Armed Forces and certain traditions, they are also introduced to many other respectable career choices that are available to them.


    So...

    Does that not mean that, we can't technically commit treason, As we are not Military?

    It again, Still is treason-- But Cadets canada can't really punish or do anything about it-- Because it's a youth organization, Not the Military.

    It's got a few Aspects scattered here and there... But it's not.

    Again, Correct me if I'm wrong so that I may be right.
    "Sometimes, you just gotta take all the mayo packets you find from the mess hall..." -A cadet I overheard on course, who at the time, was in fact putting mayo packets into his pocket.

  25. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by x_paden_x View Post
    I don't know if this point has been made or not. But just for the sake of It i'd like to bring it up, Feel free to correct me if i'm wrong... I feel like this is a point that people point out with "Treason", But sometimes neglect.



    I'm for Changing the Program and making it more "Military" Oriented like all the Other cadet programs around the world; Not even just Correcting the Military part, Just fixing it as a whole: Because right now, The program's always compared to the scouts/Guides programs, And many of the points made comparing Cadets to those, are correct.

    The program needs to be Reformed. Cadets Nationwide are Demanding it, But this isn't the way to do it.


    Anyways.

    Technically... A Royal Canadian Cadet, Regardless of Element, Cannot commit treason, Due to the fact that we are not Military, And we aren't completely governed/Bound by Military rule.

    We are Taught the Value of the Canadian Forces motives, and Train in Military like Environments (Occasionally), And are given a Condensed, Easier form of Military training... But we are not Military.

    Referring to the "http://cadets.ca/en/about/cadets-faq.page" It states:

    Q: Are Cadets expected to join the Canadian Armed Forces?
    A: Cadets are not members of the Canadian Armed Forces, nor are they expected to join the military. While they are introduced to Sea, Army and/or Air activities of the Canadian Armed Forces and certain traditions, they are also introduced to many other respectable career choices that are available to them.


    So...

    Does that not mean that, we can't technically commit treason, As we are not Military?

    It again, Still is treason-- But Cadets canada can't really punish or do anything about it-- Because it's a youth organization, Not the Military.

    It's got a few Aspects scattered here and there... But it's not.

    Again, Correct me if I'm wrong so that I may be right.
    I think the word you want is mutiny, not treason. A civilian can commit treason punishable under the Criminal Code. The "strike" idea would be inciting a mutiny but for the fact that the definition of inciting a mutiny would exclude most civilians.
    Captain J. Gleiberman cd1
    Everytime I think I am out, they keep pulling me back in.
    Grand Poobah of the SAW
    Was mich nicht umbringt, macht mich stärker.

  26. #19
    I know that people have use the word "treason" in connection with this issue, but that's not really the right word. Treason is the use of violence to try to overthrow the government, or sharing information with a foreign government that might be used to the detriment of Canada. High treason is the use of violence against the Queen or participation in a war against Canada.

    If you'd like the exact language from the Criminal Code of Canada, it's here: http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/a...t=treason#s-46.

    Mutiny might be the word people are looking for. Mutiny is a military offence (that is, an offence under the National Defence Act rather than the Criminal Code of Canada). It consists of an agreement between two or more people to resist lawful authority. If Canadian Forces members were to go on strike (or try to organize a strike), I think that's what they would be charged with. (Here's the relevant part of the National Defence Act, if anyone's interested: http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/a...age-1.html#h-2.)

    It's correct that cadets are not Canadian Forces members so cannot be charged for being involved in a strike. However, I have to say that it's ironic to read about people who want the cadet programme to be more military but want to use this most un-military of actions to make it so.

  27. The Following 7 Users Like This Post By N. McKay :


  28. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by Thundah View Post

    theoretical secrecy, cadets think that the program is keeping its actions secret from them so the things posted by the page seem....I really can't find the word. Example, I didn't know that CANCDTGEN's were actually released to the public until this morning. I think the cadets don't realize that they can find this information on their own. I'm having issues wording it right, I hope you can find my point :/
    Yup! Things do look slow and seem secretive. I agree fully with you, but that is just the surface.

    When a house is built from the ground up, there is a period during construction where nothing appears to happen. Everything goes so quickly then BAM.........nothing.

    That slow time is when the tradesmen go to work, putting in the electrical, plumbing, gas fitting, IT, etc. These are the finer details in a home, that well, we never see. The work takes a great deal of time, accuracy and supervision. Moving an electrical socket 16" at this stage is simple, but when the drywall goes up, a small move will cost a fortune and take triple the time and labour.

    In the CCO case, things are much slower because we are renovating. Imagine that we are painting your bedroom but we cannot move any furniture out and you must still study and sleep there. Rather than the job taking an afternoon, the job will now take a day or two. If the CCO were able to shut down for an entire year or two, the changes would be able to appear to happen overnight.......................but we can't do that. Instead, the CCO continues to deliver a program, while making what are hopefully, seamless changes.

  29. The Following 6 Users Like This Post By Rhino Rob :


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts