• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

C.O.D.E (Conversation on Defence Ethics)

dapaterson

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
7,220
Points
1,090
Chris Coates had his misconduct ignored, whether because it was identical to Jon Vance's or because his sister-in-law was the DM. He should have had a public execution, not a "oops we got caught" resignation.

Instead of putting bullets into the heads (figuratively) of GOFOs, we are doing bullshit training sessions to mask that kind of misconduct.

Until we hold the most senior to account, telling the most junior to do a training session is part of the ongoing abdication of responsibility of the GOFOs.

(And let's not talk about the RCN and its passing of faults of Admirals credibly accused of sexual assault.)
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,218
Points
1,010
Cracking down on the little sh!t is what you do after cracking down on the big sh!t, in order to keep the big sh!t from resurfacing. Not the other way around.
 

Furniture

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,165
Points
1,110
Maybe people in the CAF are smart enough to follow the rules that aren't stupid? I don't think hands in your pockets is a slippery slope to being a sex pest, but I do think if you get away with verbal sexual harassment you might go further.

Maybe we shouldn't have rules that force people to make choices between what is stupid, and what isn't? CAF members should not be choosing to follow, or not follow rules.

The broken window theory has been discounted a number of times, and it's a good example of trying to expand correlation/causation without having actual evidence. We have all the rules and tools to address the problem, but unless it's done consistently, fairly and uniformly you'll always have crazy outliers. We're part of Canadian society, so will never eliminate it until Canadian society does, but really nothing stopping us from stomping down on it when it comes up to bring our internal expectations up to what we expect of ourselves.

So the entire foundation of military discipline is just made up, and there is no connection between the ability to follow minor rules, and the likelihood of following the big ones? Then why do we even have dress regs? There are going to be a lot of angry RSMs out there if that's the case...

My point isn't that we should just focus on the small stuff, but rather that we should be looking at the small stuff as well. The things that contribute to a culture of ignoring the rules, or at least ignoring the "inconvenient" ones. Remember, not all ethical issues are sexual misconduct... We should be looking at the whole problem, not just the big flashy headline grabbing things.

Right now all these courses are just window dressing. You want real change, hold people accountable for not holding people accountable. When a few COs and RSMs get frogmarched into a CM for letting their favourite subordinate slide on some sketchy shit, maybe a lot of this greasy back alley BS will stop. I can't think of a single instance of the CoC being taken to task despite numerous examples of clear fuckery being documented in grievances and other official investigations. If people don't want to be accountable, don't take the promotion or command appointments. 🤷‍♂️

That's one thing I think the US does really well; they don't hesitate to hold senior people accountable. Sometimes they go a bit hard over, but I think that's probably better than our optimistic ostrich approach.

I agree 100%, people who allow others to get away with breaking the rules, or those who are found to be abusing their authority should be held to account.
 

rmc_wannabe

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
1,971
Points
1,310
Maybe people in the CAF are smart enough to follow the rules that aren't stupid? I don't think hands in your pockets is a slippery slope to being a sex pest, but I do think if you get away with verbal sexual harassment you might go further.

I also jaywalk on occasion, but that doesn't make me think I should ignore all driving laws.

The broken window theory has been discounted a number of times, and it's a good example of trying to expand correlation/causation without having actual evidence. We have all the rules and tools to address the problem, but unless it's done consistently, fairly and uniformly you'll always have crazy outliers. We're part of Canadian society, so will never eliminate it until Canadian society does, but really nothing stopping us from stomping down on it when it comes up to bring our internal expectations up to what we expect of ourselves.

Right now all these courses are just window dressing. You want real change, hold people accountable for not holding people accountable. When a few COs and RSMs get frogmarched into a CM for letting their favourite subordinate slide on some sketchy shit, maybe a lot of this greasy back alley BS will stop. I can't think of a single instance of the CoC being taken to task despite numerous examples of clear fuckery being documented in grievances and other official investigations. If people don't want to be accountable, don't take the promotion or command appointments. 🤷‍♂️

That's one thing I think the US does really well; they don't hesitate to hold senior people accountable. Sometimes they go a bit hard over, but I think that's probably better than our optimistic ostrich approach.
We hold on to people because we don't have many to replace them. There I said it.

Sometimes a uniform is more useful to the CAF sitting in Clothing Stores than worn by someone who doesn't uphold the ethos it represents.
 

TCM621

Sr. Member
Subscriber
Reaction score
201
Points
430
Maybe people in the CAF are smart enough to follow the rules that aren't stupid? I don't think hands in your pockets is a slippery slope to being a sex pest, but I do think if you get away with verbal sexual harassment you might go further.

I also jaywalk on occasion, but that doesn't make me think I should ignore all driving laws.

The broken window theory has been discounted a number of times, and it's a good example of trying to expand correlation/causation without having actual evidence. We have all the rules and tools to address the problem, but unless it's done consistently, fairly and uniformly you'll always have crazy outliers. We're part of Canadian society, so will never eliminate it until Canadian society does, but really nothing stopping us from stomping down on it when it comes up to bring our internal expectations up to what we expect of ourselves.

Right now all these courses are just window dressing. You want real change, hold people accountable for not holding people accountable. When a few COs and RSMs get frogmarched into a CM for letting their favourite subordinate slide on some sketchy shit, maybe a lot of this greasy back alley BS will stop. I can't think of a single instance of the CoC being taken to task despite numerous examples of clear fuckery being documented in grievances and other official investigations. If people don't want to be accountable, don't take the promotion or command appointments. 🤷‍♂️

That's one thing I think the US does really well; they don't hesitate to hold senior people accountable. Sometimes they go a bit hard over, but I think that's probably better than our optimistic ostrich approach.
I think we absolutely have to hold superstars as accountable as everyone else. However, I don't agree with your idea that the little things don't matter. If someone doesn't get a hair cut, despite knowing they need a haircut, it tells me something about their character. If a unit does a bun fight despite them being specifically verboten for years, it tells me a lot about the culture of that unit. We use boots, hairs and other things to teach those rules to privates, but when they see senior people ignoring those rules, it tells them they will be able to stop following some rules one day as well.
 

dapaterson

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
7,220
Points
1,090
Like when the Navy illegally changes designations of rank, and there are no repercussions?
 

Halifax Tar

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
2,358
Points
1,260
So I have to say I went through the course. Our group was mostly POs and above up to CDR.

The big take away was the perceived irony and the insult that was CRCN giving the speech at the start WRT the importance of ethics.

That pretty much set the room on fire. From there it was a very good 3 hour discussion spaced by scenarios every now and again.
 

Humphrey Bogart

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
4,971
Points
1,360
Chris Coates had his misconduct ignored, whether because it was identical to Jon Vance's or because his sister-in-law was the DM. He should have had a public execution, not a "oops we got caught" resignation.

Instead of putting bullets into the heads (figuratively) of GOFOs, we are doing bullshit training sessions to mask that kind of misconduct.

Until we hold the most senior to account, telling the most junior to do a training session is part of the ongoing abdication of responsibility of the GOFOs.

(And let's not talk about the RCN and its passing of faults of Admirals credibly accused of sexual assault.)
You know the emperor has no clothes when 60% of the XO names on the wardroom plaque on your Ship are under some sort of misconduct investigation.
 

Jarnhamar

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
3,699
Points
1,060
I always feel bad for CWOs when I see them going ballastic over shit to do with dress regs and other stuff that should be in JNCO wheel houses.
 
Top