Author Topic: "Unionizing" the CF (merged)  (Read 76702 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Infanteer

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 114,725
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 14,302
  • Honey Badger FTW!
Re: Unionize Canadian Armed Forces
« Reply #25 on: February 15, 2004, 21:58:00 »
Quote
Infanteer, many general‘s and admirals have handed in their "leafs" in response to Federal decisions. Google search Admiral Landymore and the Admirals Revolt. What about Admiral Anderson our short lived CDS? What about all of the army generals in the 90s that retired to protest government decisions (MGen Vernon, etc). Why can‘t you name one of these good men who could not continue serving? Quite simply the media and people do not care about the military which is how the government continues to underfund us. Look at Cretin a couple of years ago mocking retired generals and their inability to "speak up" until they retired.
When I think of officers who "fell on their sword", think of this this.  As for Cretin‘s remarks, I think we can agree that he was a continuation of Trudeau as Military‘s Number One Enemy.

 
Quote
Infanteer, if you don‘t like the way the CF is running why don‘t you turn in your corporal stripes?
Because that would no message across.  A Lieutenant General is an important figure, politically and militarily (that is why they get little flags for their cars, I guess), whereas my two hooks denote me as another warm body to fill a trench.

 
Quote
Infanteer, a union could help right the wrongs inflicted upon our organization. It is beyond the capability of anyone in the CF and without external influences it won‘t be fixed. The Canadian army has never been prepared for conflict and if we don‘t get our act together, we never will. Leadership can‘t change a politicians or bureaucrats mind about funding, personnel levels, resourcing, etc, etc.
How would a union fix these problems?  The military has many special interest groups looking out for it; David Bercuson bleats or Jack Granatstein bleet to the national media once a month.  I just don‘t see how it could possibly succeed where others have (up until now) met with difficulty.  

I guess I could say I believe this do to distrust in the idea of unions as they exist today.  This comes from my personal experiences of dealing with unions from a managerial standpoint (ie, they cause more headaches then they fix).

Since we are on the subject of problems in the CF, I noticed at Chapters last week that Granatstein has a new book out entitled Who Killed the Canadian Military?: What Canada Must Do to Defend Itself in the 21st Century.  It is probably worth reading to get a better insight on this subject.

Infanteer Out.
"Overall it appears that much of the apparent complexity of modern war stems in practice from the self-imposed complexity of modern HQs" LCol J.P. Storr

Offline Gunner

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 6,900
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,836
  • Artillery Forum Moderator
Re: Unionize Canadian Armed Forces
« Reply #26 on: February 15, 2004, 22:22:00 »
Quote
When I think of officers who "fell on their sword", think of this this.  
How come Col Tim Collins didn‘t go out with a loud bang?  He certainly had the media stature to do it and it would have been picked up by the tabloids in a further effort to embarrass Blair.

 
Quote
 Because that would no message across. A Lieutenant General is an important figure, politically and militarily (that is why they get little flags for their cars, I guess), whereas my two hooks denote me as another warm body to fill a trench.
So you are going to sit in the mess and grip about how *^*&^ the military is and deride general officers for not quitting in a media spectacle?  Where‘s your principles man?    ;)   Unfortunately, a LGen leaving the military doesn‘t really do much to embarrass the government.  Look at MGen Cam Ross‘s reaction to the government decision to deploy to Afghanistan.

 
Quote
How would a union fix these problems? The military has many special interest groups looking out for it; David Bercuson bleats or Jack Granatstein bleet to the national media once a month. I just don‘t see how it could possibly succeed where others have (up until now) met with difficulty. I guess I could say I believe this do to distrust in the idea of unions as they exist today. This comes from my personal experiences of dealing with unions from a managerial standpoint (ie, they cause more headaches then they fix).  
I‘m not a fan of unions either but the CF is faced with a situation where no one looks out for it and political considerations take precedence over military requirements (ie, the LSVW).  

We do have some influential friends of the military but more people can name Sven Robinson and Shiela Copps then Bercuson and Granastein.

Cheers,
Had a wonderful ~26 years in the military and still miss it.

Offline Infanteer

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 114,725
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 14,302
  • Honey Badger FTW!
Re: Unionize Canadian Armed Forces
« Reply #27 on: February 16, 2004, 16:11:00 »
Quote
We do have some influential friends of the military but more people can name Sven Robinson and Shiela Copps then Bercuson and Granastein.
Ouch...sad but true.

I think from this parlee I figure that our problems are not military or political, rather they are social (ie, not many Canadians give a flying **** about their military).

Anyone have any ideas on how to address this issue?
"Overall it appears that much of the apparent complexity of modern war stems in practice from the self-imposed complexity of modern HQs" LCol J.P. Storr

Offline NoZZle

  • Guest
  • *
  • -30
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12
Re: Unionize Canadian Armed Forces
« Reply #28 on: February 16, 2004, 19:52:00 »
Being a union guy I must add that unions do provide a degree of job security in some environments, facilitate wage increases and cost of living allowances during the bargaining process. As for unionizing the CF...I think we need to be re-born hard first(speaking in the reserve world of course).By the way nice site.

Offline Infanteer

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 114,725
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 14,302
  • Honey Badger FTW!
Re: Unionize Canadian Armed Forces
« Reply #29 on: February 17, 2004, 14:40:00 »
Quote
Being a union guy I must add that unions do provide a degree of job security in some environments
I agree with you to some extent.  I got buddies who are independant tradesmen, and the union protects them from groups that would undercut a journeymen‘s (deserved) wage.
"Overall it appears that much of the apparent complexity of modern war stems in practice from the self-imposed complexity of modern HQs" LCol J.P. Storr

Offline Bruce Monkhouse

    is thinking beach volleyball.

  • Lab Experiment #13
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 228,275
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 14,500
  • WHERE IS MY BATON?
    • http://www.canadianbands.com./home.html
Re: Unionize Canadian Armed Forces
« Reply #30 on: February 17, 2004, 15:00:00 »
This is all nice but we have strayed from the original question. However I‘m afraid I can‘t be of much help because I waffle back and forth. I‘m thinking maybe something more of an association with strict guidelines on what can and cannot be included under the umbrella. I do work in a union job and yes sometimes you do need protection from overzealous polititions. Even though I liked Mike Harris and most of the idea‘s the Tories had,{which included closing my workplace] the way they were implemented was terrible because they would‘nt listen to anything the rank and file had to say.  :flame:   However the flip side of me hates the way that no matter what some of the people do here they don‘t ever seem to have to pay the piper as in the union‘s eyes they can do no wrong.    CHEERS
IF YOU REALLY ENJOY THIS SITE AND WISH TO CONTINUE,THEN PLEASE WIGGLE UP TO THE BAR AND BUY A SUBSCRIPTION OR SOME SWAG FROM THE MILNET.CA STORE OR IF YOU WISH TO ADVERTISE PLEASE SEND MIKE SOME DETAILS.

Everybody has a game plan until they get punched in the mouth.

Offline Infanteer

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 114,725
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 14,302
  • Honey Badger FTW!
Re: Unionize Canadian Armed Forces
« Reply #31 on: February 17, 2004, 15:23:00 »
Quote
This is all nice but we have strayed from the original question.
One thing I have learned is that you can‘t fight internet thread evolution.  Just go with the flow  ;)
"Overall it appears that much of the apparent complexity of modern war stems in practice from the self-imposed complexity of modern HQs" LCol J.P. Storr

Offline Bruce Monkhouse

    is thinking beach volleyball.

  • Lab Experiment #13
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 228,275
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 14,500
  • WHERE IS MY BATON?
    • http://www.canadianbands.com./home.html
Re: Unionize Canadian Armed Forces
« Reply #32 on: February 17, 2004, 15:26:00 »
TOUCHE!!!
IF YOU REALLY ENJOY THIS SITE AND WISH TO CONTINUE,THEN PLEASE WIGGLE UP TO THE BAR AND BUY A SUBSCRIPTION OR SOME SWAG FROM THE MILNET.CA STORE OR IF YOU WISH TO ADVERTISE PLEASE SEND MIKE SOME DETAILS.

Everybody has a game plan until they get punched in the mouth.

Offline NewCenturion

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 0
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 351
Unionize the Army?
« Reply #33 on: March 08, 2005, 11:27:41 »
The crux of the article is women in combat...I think that this has been done to death..however in the sceond part of the article I found it interesting that 30% of NCMs are in support of a professional association or union. The RCMP has an association for its members however it doesn't really have any power. 


Women still not accepted in combat, reports find
Last Updated Tue, 08 Mar 2005 09:32:01 EST
CBC News
MONTREAL - Women are still not accepted in combat roles by many of their male colleagues in Canada's ground forces, according to internal army reports.

The two studies, obtained by the CBC's French-language network Radio-Canada, looked at the attitudes of rank-and-file soldiers on such issues as gays and lesbians, ethnic minorities and commanding officers.

They found that soldiers in Quebec least welcomed women in combat positions.

Michel Drapeau, a retired Armed Forces colonel and military commentator, said the army has to try harder to integrate women in combat units.

"At the moment, there is a wide difference between what is being said and what is being done, and the polls tells us that soldiers, the dialogue they are having, is not quite the one that their leaders are [having]."

But an army recruiter said it will take time for women to fit into what have been traditional male positions.

Lieut. Nancy Baril, an Armed Forces recruiter at CFB Valcartier in Quebec, said attitudes are changing as more women go into jobs traditionally held by men.

"They know if they come in the military, even if it's a guy or a girl, they're going to do the same job, they're going to get paid the same."

About 17 per cent of the army's personnel are women. The army hopes to have that up to 28 per cent in two decades.

Many troops, especially in Quebec, also are unenthused about having gays and lesbians in the army, the studies suggest.

Some in lower ranks want union

The reports also suggest the lower ranks have lost confidence in officers.

As well, researchers found that 30 per cent of the lower ranks would support the creation of a professional order or union.

Drapeau said the finding indicates that the army has a serious problem.

"It shows a breakdown in esprit de corps, in leadership, two absolute essential qualities of the modern armed forces."




"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 GerryCan

  • Member
  • ****
  • -60
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 203
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #34 on: March 08, 2005, 11:43:13 »
Quote
As well, researchers found that 30 per cent of the lower ranks would support the creation of a professional order or union.

Drapeau said the finding indicates that the army has a serious problem.

"It shows a breakdown in esprit de corps, in leadership, two absolute essential qualities of the modern armed forces."



I'm very interested to know exactly what kind of union this 30% is supposedly supporting. My only experience with a union was 3 years under C.A.W. also referred to as 'Cry and Whine'

During those few years I noticed that a union is good for 2 things:

1. Getting lazy people out of work they don't want to do through a series of loopholes;

2. Creating a permanent barrier between higher authorities  and common labourers in the work place.

So if its Esprit de Corps we're losing out on, I'm not sure that a union would be the best means of regenerating such a thing.
Also with leadership along the same lines, a Union Rep isn't going to help in any way shape or form for a fall out in leadership. Only leadership can rectify that problem.

Can you imagine a Snr NCO telling a Pte to do something and hearing "I'd like to speak with my union rep."

Again, I'd like to see what type of union would be implemented, as there are quite a few armies out there that are unionized. I'm also interested to know how effective these unionized armies are now with it in place.




*Insert Dramatic Quote Here*

Offline NewCenturion

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 0
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 351
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #35 on: March 08, 2005, 12:26:22 »
 My only experience with a military union in action was with the Dutch. During the height of the war in Bosnia we actually had Dutch soldiers refuse to go on missions that they thought were too dangerous, these were soldiers attached to a Canadian unit, and depite our protests there wasn't a thing we could do about it.
"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 CheersShag

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 75
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,354
  • My mom says I'm cool
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #36 on: March 08, 2005, 12:39:41 »
I was once told by my boss at my office, when I jokingly said "Wait until we get unionized then you'll see lazy."
He responded by saying "If management does such a piss poor job that you actually feel the need to unionize then I'll know I've done something really wrong." I'd like to point out that I call my boss Joe, he wears a ball cap to work and his office is the same size as mine, we're at a level of management employee interaction where he rarely ever needs to pull out the "boss" card.

In the developed world where we have minimum wages, courts, human rights watches etc. I can only see a union wedging in between management and labour and really just exacerbating the fading (yet still present) notions of upper and lower classes, which unions are somehow a result of I believe.

In an organisation such as the military where thousands of peoples (millions even) lives depend on the professional and close interaction between "management" and "labour" (define those as you wish, on a small level or the big picture) I could only see a union as a negative force...do we really want to breed any (More) contempt between lower and upper ranks? Our NCOs and Officers?

Back to my orginal point, sorry, if there is a strong sentiment that a union is neccessary perhaps the "management" might wish to consider why someone would feel that way rather then how to avoid it, or even accomodate it.
I lost myself there a bit, there shouldn't need to be a union.

That story about the Dutch is just absurd too, it just shows that a union cannot function in a military, maybe because there is a degree of danger to every job and there has to be some kind of "override" button when it comes to what one individual is afraid of.

Bit altruistic? Was that a bit much? I'm just throwing thoughts out at this point

Offline NiTz

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 100
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 427
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #37 on: March 08, 2005, 12:56:03 »
I don't want to start a flamewar here, but I saw this reportage on tv last night and actually they said that the canadians in the west least welcomed women, gay and lesbians in the ranks, and that Quebec has the most open-minded soldiers... Maybe I misunderstood or something but i'll check this info again, as it makes more common sense to me that what Jumper said was right, as we, in Quebec, are a bunch of always-whining and union-wanting people. Don't misunderstand me here, not ALL quebecers are like that, but there's lots of them.  Anyways, feel free to correct me!

By the way, IMHO it would be stupid to unionize the army. I'm part of a union actually in my civi job and it SUCKS. Really! If they unionize the army, they'll encourage lazyness, overpaying, and imagine the poor officers having to deal with soldiers complaining : "it's too dangerous for me, I refuse to do it!" or "hey, I won't finish my work, it's 4:00pm!" . We'll lose all about what the army is all about and besides, work conditions are similar and even better in many cases than in unionized places. Rare are the places where someone with a 3rd grade in secondary school gets paid 30000$ a year the first year with all dental and medical plus the month of vacations. Look at what union does : in my region, everybody working in plants are about to lose their job as the directors of the plants now move outside of Canada because they're tired to pay stupid asses 34$ an hour for sitting on their *** and break material and don't do anything except whining and complaining because "it's too dangerous to work". In a union, they're always abuse and that's what's killing the whole thing. They're even closing the Wal-Mart in my city because of this stupid union. We lose 200 jobs AGAIN.. Really, people should stop thinking that unions are always good, in fact, they're not. Just my 2 cents



Cheers!
« Last Edit: March 08, 2005, 13:07:12 by NiTz »

Offline RangerBoy

  • Member
  • ****
  • 1,342
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 109
  • I
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #38 on: March 08, 2005, 13:19:28 »
Am I the only one who finds the idea of a "target" of 28% women in the army in two decades a little silly? If the gals can do the job, and I've met many fine female soldiers in the CF Reg Force and Reserves, then fine, but setting a quota like that will only cause problems IMHO. It will invariably mean watering down the requirements, which will be a slap in the face to the women who did manage to meet the cbt arms standards.
Also, doesn't CBC have any other "military experts" on call besides the unfortunately ubiquitous Col. (ret'd) Drapeau? Yeah, I know: rhetorical question ...  :-\
"Canadians are good fighters, but their politicians are weak."
Mullah Dadullah Akhund (late)

Offline putz

  • Member
  • ****
  • 2,125
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 148
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #39 on: March 08, 2005, 13:26:00 »
Before this gets too off topic I believe that this is covered in another thread:
http://forums.army.ca/forums/index.php/topic,27970.from1110302627/topicseen.html#new

Am I the only one who finds the idea of a "target" of 28% women in the army in two decades a little silly? If the gals can do the job, and I've met many fine female soldiers in the CF Reg Force and Reserves, then fine, but setting a quota like that will only cause problems IMHO. It will invariably mean watering down the requirements, which will be a slap in the face to the women who did manage to meet the cbt arms standards.
Also, doesn't CBC have any other "military experts" on call besides the unfortunately ubiquitous Col. (ret'd) Drapeau? Yeah, I know: rhetorical question ... :-\

Also its Vice Versa:
I don't want to start a flamewar here, but I saw this reportage on tv last night and actually they said that the canadians in the west least welcomed women, gay and lesbians in the ranks, and that Quebec has the most open-minded soldiers...



Offline P-Free(Banned)

  • Banned
  • Full Member
  • *
  • -210
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 259
  • I AM A RUBBER DUCK. QUACK
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #40 on: March 08, 2005, 17:07:53 »
Unionizing the army would be ridiculous. For a union to work, it has to have bargaining power and for an organization like the military to give that much power to the individual would be disastrous.

Offline mo-litia

  • Banned
  • Full Member
  • *
  • -135
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 279
    • The Loyal Edmonton Regiment Homepage
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #41 on: March 08, 2005, 18:44:36 »
By the way, IMHO it would be stupid to unionize the army. I'm part of a union actually in my civi job and it SUCKS. Really! If they unionize the army, they'll encourage lazyness, overpaying, and imagine the poor officers having to deal with soldiers complaining : "it's too dangerous for me, I refuse to do it!" or "hey, I won't finish my work, it's 4:00pm!"

Have you been to a headquarters Bldg lately? ;D

I am a strong supporter of unions-for the reasons they were initially created.  However, I agree with some posts that many unions have regressed into a sheltering system for laziness and incompetency among workers.  As for the idea of a unionized military, IMO it is a incredibly bad idea.

Not sure if this is true, but I heard that in the Dutch military if a troop refuses to cut his hair in accordance with regulations he simply pays a small monthly 'fine' and keeps his hippie dreadlocks.   ::)
"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 NiTz

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 100
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 427
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #42 on: March 08, 2005, 19:19:22 »
Very good post Mol-litia. It's exactly my point of view.. maybe the union in my workplace gives me a bad idea of all the unions? Anyways, the thing about the dutch army is ridiculous.. it's very bad for the look of the army, and it doesn't look professional at all.



Cheers!

Offline Acorn

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 770
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 852
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #43 on: March 08, 2005, 19:25:19 »
I think it'd be prudent for people to post what they know is fact about the Dutch Army, rather than "I heard that..." type stuff.

Acorn
(I haven't seen a long-haired Dutch soldier since they got rid of conscripts)
"Liberal societies cannot be defended by herbivores. We need carnivores to save us." - Michael Ignatieff, The Lesser Evil

Offline Love793

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 123
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 481
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #44 on: March 08, 2005, 21:55:21 »
Great, and I have enough trouble getting guys to actually work as it is. ;D
The role of Cavalry is to add dash and colour, to a otherwise drab event called war.

Offline Cloud Cover

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 12,730
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,176
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #45 on: March 08, 2005, 22:08:13 »
I don't think the enemy is going to respect your union rights -"solidarity forever" is not a universal maxim. Also, unionization inevitably leads to more contracting out and more micro management, which fuels more unrest in the workplace.

The formation of a professional organization with it's own distinct ethos and creed for duly qualified personnel with the skill, expertise and wherewithall is something I have long advocated.

Offline Brad Sallows

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 47,810
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,397
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #46 on: March 08, 2005, 22:22:07 »
If you lot ever decide to do the union thing, at least keep this one important fact in mind: "management" is not the officers, it is the government and people of Canada.  All of you - NCMs and officers - are in the same boat.  I think some people have a misconception that "management"="officers", but the officer corps isn't going to spring for more money to meet the demands of the union - it has no money to spring.
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."

"But injustice is a rule of the service, as you know very well; and since you have to have a good deal of undeserved abuse, you might just as well have it from your friends."  - The Ionian Mission, by Patrick O'Brian.

Offline mo-litia

  • Banned
  • Full Member
  • *
  • -135
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 279
    • The Loyal Edmonton Regiment Homepage
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #47 on: March 08, 2005, 23:45:41 »
I think it'd be prudent for people to post what they know is fact about the Dutch Army, rather than "I heard that..." type stuff.

Acorn
(I haven't seen a long-haired Dutch soldier since they got rid of conscripts)

I think admitting that the knowledge is unverified is a lot more prudent than posting it as an implied fact...

Although in light of the fact that the Dutch no longer use conscripts I can see that there are likely no more 'longhairs' in the Dutch military.   (Just unionized clowns who refuse dangerous missions by calling their union reps!)

So you HAVE seen longhaired Dutch troops? Would you care to elaborate?   Was the barracks room telegraph correct in that they only had to pay a monthly stipend to keep their curly locks or was the Sergeant blowing smoke up my ***? ;)
"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 FastEddy

  • Banned
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 7,120
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 874
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #48 on: March 09, 2005, 00:03:01 »
I don't think the enemy is going to respect your union rights -"solidarity forever" is not a universal maxim. Also, unionization inevitably leads to more contracting out and more micro management, which fuels more unrest in the workplace.

The formation of a professional organization with it's own distinct ethos and creed for duly qualified personnel with the skill, expertise and wherewithall is something I have long advocated.


It would appear that since 1968 we have, watered down, turned insideout and back, the CAF's to a point where the Good Order and Military Discipline seems to be disappearing. A Union would certainty put the icing on the cake.

Example;    CPO to Ordinary Seaman, Jones I want that Head scrubbed down.
                      Ordinary Seaman to CPO,   Sorry Chief thats not my job description.

                      Chopper Pilot to Crew,         Okay fellows lets get this show on the road.
                      Crew to Chopper Pilot,         Sorry Sir, but according to Union rules we are not required
                                                                              use or operate any equipment that may be antiquaint ed
                                                                              or pose a threat to our health or safety.

                     2/Lt. to Platoon Sgt.             Sargeant, take four and flank right of that MG Pillbox.
                     Platoon Sgt. to 2/Lt.             Sir, are you out of your f****** mind, I'm going to have
                                                                              clear this with our Shop Steward, this order could get
                                                                              us killed.

Slightly exaggerated, perhaps, but I think we all get the message.

« Last Edit: March 09, 2005, 00:06:07 by FastEddy »
Discipline By Example

Offline Infanteer

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 114,725
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 14,302
  • Honey Badger FTW!
Re: Unionize the Army?
« Reply #49 on: March 09, 2005, 03:09:01 »
Just before we start trashing the Dutch, I'd like to point out that I was on a course with Dutch soldiers while overseas and I don't find the description of "lazy union sop" very accurate.  These Dutchmen were very fit and capable soldiers - they were all from an Infantry regiment ("Princess Irene" or something) and I know one has went onto a Dutch SOC unit.  We were bugging them about their union and they told us that the whole union thing isn't taken very seriously by the "tip of the spear" types in the Dutch Army; they told me it was mainly something that was used by soldiers, mainly Rear Ech types, to sob when they felt life as a soldier was unfair (maybe akin to our Ombudsman?).
"Overall it appears that much of the apparent complexity of modern war stems in practice from the self-imposed complexity of modern HQs" LCol J.P. Storr