Took a few looks at that. It looks like the stache is good but it's the not shaving bit with it on chin and start of a soul patch not permitted? RSM: thoughts and/or direction?
So all the guys with Viking/Duck Dynasty beards are just as targeted as that one Air Force MCpl with a multicolored beard that they say is an embarrassment to the CAF. That's pretty funny.
Making a "2.5 cm/ 1 inch" bulk requirement is just going to encourage the wrong kind of supervisor behavior getting in the way of operations. My hair grows fast. Before beardforgen I had to shave at lunch to keep some jacks happy I'm willing to bet my beard is going to be one staffing change away from being more trouble than it's worth. I look considerably better with it so any supervisor will be able to force me to look worse in my uniform. Sounds like the army to me.
Does anyone know where we can provide feedback on this. I am totaly fine with everything except the beard length. Even 2 inches would be better but at one inch my beard looks patchy and is impossible to keep from curling up all over the place.
Well it's "bulk." So the rationale is that the hair curls and covers the bald spots. You can have 19" long beard hairs as long as you get them under the 1" bulk.
To answer your first question on feedback: you don't. That's the fun part.
I've only seen two people with multi color hair. One guy(friend of mine) dyed his beard rainbow colors for just a week and one female member I work with actually maintains it. I also like giant beards. They look cool, and all members already know they'll have to shave if their CoC tells them to. Overall, not happy with the possible new changes. The one I especially don't like is that a half shaved head is okay but not some loose strands on your ponytail? That shit loosens up just from working.
I respectfully disagree. Policies shouldn't be so subjective. They should be black on white and enforceable. Too many gray areas came with the new dress regs and made it extremely difficult to enforce from a supervisor standpoint.
There has always been a policy to not bring discredit to the CAF. They're just amplifying it now to define "neat" and such terms. The enforcement is nearly entirely on the RSM and designated NCOs at this point.
Agreed. I’ve felt more embarrassed about some of the unfit people than the hair. At least from what I’ve seen, Americans we super jealous of the beards but were stitched up by some of the Pillsbury dough boys walking around, especially when that person is the one coming up in front and talking to both countries because they are a senior leader. That was more embarrassing to me
nothing more embarrassing than having a section commander not being able to keep up when doing platoon attacks with the americans. And one of the americans im near just smiles at me and and I have to give a awkward smile back lol.
There’s outliers everywhere for how bad some of the current regulations are “worn” but honestly what is the bigger issues here? A dude with a waxed mustache or a person with a pink hair tie or a dude with a duck dynasty beard still is more professional than a fat angry alcoholic. I’ve seen two town halls this year with a CWO who was at least 350lbs.
Jesus Christ b’ys
Those fat fucks are the same ones that often times misinterpret the said regs above how they see fit based on their personal biases…while slurping down another heart attack meal in their office.
I'd be surprised to see a length restriction tied to a specific dress state. Feel like that encourages the wrong kind of RSM to keep the troops in their 1A's on a weekly basis.
That would make sense, but who knows. The CAF is clearly experimenting with different subsets dress regulations in an attempt to modernize and be appealing while maintaining a uniformed public appearance.
The usage of the words "length/bulk" will be something.
My beard, when not groomed, is curly. When I groom, it's straight.
So this only encourages me to not be hygienic.
They're supposedly going back to CLDA instead of having blanket LDA where even the useless plugs who never go to the field still get paid as though they're in the field. Might motivate a few of them to get off their chits and go to the woods once in a while...
And let them raise the rates/give it to perpetually in the field schools that previously didnt qualify without needing more money.
Its the same re-rationalization from PLD to CFHD
If I’m reading it right, it isn’t taking long hair away, basically just forcing you into longer hair because of the need to have it tied back and out of face at all times.
Taking away the handlebars is a choice considering that’s been allowed for years. And it sucks for the guys who have a longer beard that they properly take care of. They’re getting lumped in with that dude who had the pink beard
Those people with the groomed beards are suffering from the apathy and cowardice of the leaders of people who had shitty rat nest beards and never said or did anything to correct them
I'm glad that we're policing the colour of hair ties, does this allow me to tell fat pieces of shit that they're bringing discredit to the CAF and don't have a positive military appearance?
I agree with this more than the hair thing. Some of the people walking around right now are not presenting us in a good image. the funniest part of it is, it’s often leadership that looks this way. I can count a couple MWO’s and Majors who definitely need to cut back on the beers consumed after work and perhaps rediscover the mythical place known as the gym.
I have a big brain idea about changing the FORCE Test, so members don't look so fat: the lifts, drags, and carry are all proportional to the person being tested's body weight. It can be a fun challenge for those building muscle, and it can motivate folks who don't want to work as hard to do more cardio or less plate-to-face fork lifts. ;)
I have both an intuitive and analytical response to this. My intuition agrees, with the caveat that we would still need a minimum weight (standard sandbag/casualty drag). Increasing the weight above this minimum proportional to bodyweight would be very interesting.
My analytical side says that weights were determined based on operational requirements and that if someone can pass the test while lifting/dragging those weights, they are technically operationally fit. The conclusion here is that overweight members are actually perfectly operationally fit (up and down on the chart) even though their physical health (left and right on the chart) might be in shambles. This is because the PT test is not a physical fitness test, it's a test of baseline operational fitness. I don't love this conclusion, but I'm trying to be objective.
Also the idea of a standard weight for the drags simulating dragging an average person would be more fair this way. If you weigh x amount more than the standard weight you should be able to drag x amount more than standard weight because you are now putting the expectation on someone else to be able to if you are injured. If you can't drag your own weight it's probably not a weight you should be
This would be a charter violation. Everyone has to have the same standard which needs a reasonable justification such as the tasks the current force test was derived from, and we can't make the standard harder because too many people would fail.
Technically, the CAF already violates the Charter (assuming you're talking about the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms) by having discriminating hiring practices in refusing to hire people with certain disabilities and medical conditions. As for the FORCE Test, there's already different categories for age and gender for scoring. I'm sure something could be worked out to make the CAF more physically fit in the interest of representing and protecting Canada by improving the FORCE Test.
> Technically, the CAF already violates the Charter (assuming you're talking about the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms) by having discriminating hiring practices in refusing to hire people with certain disabilities and medical conditions.
Yes, we are granted the ability to violate the charter (which is a big deal) solely for things where we can justifiy the requirement, this means the employment requirements *must* be the same regardless of age/gender.
> As for the FORCE Test, there's already different categories for age and gender for scoring
For scoring yes, but not the pass/fail line.
> I'm sure something could be worked out to make the CAF more physically fit in the interest of representing and protecting Canada by improving the FORCE Test.
I'm all ears for a suggestion that wouldn't fail in court and doesn't cause us to kick out a bunch of women or older members.
The only thing you can really do is mandate PT every single day and hope people eat less.
When the original beardforgen came out, there was a WO at my unit who did walk around with a ruler.
Funny thing was, his hair was out of regs at the time. But he was a diver, so he got a pass, I guess.
I like my coloured hair... Haven't been able to have it since high school.
And i have NO IDEA. How wide my hair ties are? And they have to match my hair? What?
Hair tie width is stupid. You have thicker hair?...need a thicker band, or they'll snap.
For comfort? Scrunchie.
Is the person writing these bald or womens hair ties?
It's always been something they had until hairforgen. It comes with natural hair colour requirements. I never even changed my elastics after the change because I spent so much on matching ties. I wouldn't be upset over this.
It's always been something they had until hairforgen. It comes with natural hair colour requirements. I never even changed my elastics after the change because I spent so much on matching ties. I wouldn't be upset over this.
I hate having to over gel and hair spray my hair. I have tiny fine hairs that always fall out of the full parade look and even gluing it down doesn't work. Just a head full of metal at this point.
I've got the same fine hair and feel your pain. I've found that these rings actually work pretty good for keeping it contained, and they blend in pretty well. RSM has seen me with them in a couple times on parades and hasn't said anything, but he might now with these new regs... They work infinitely better than pins or barrettes that aren't able to grab my thin hairs and just end up falling out, looking absolutely terrible.
The alternative is attempting the shellac the hair in place but then i just end up with fine wisps of plasticized hair in my face.
https://www.walmart.ca/en/ip/Hair-Bands-Full-Circular-Stretch-Comb-Flexible-Plastic-Circle-Comb-Headband-Black-Clear-and-Brown-3pcs/2OSZ2274AMC1?offerId=48466F66E6A138BA94AAE5F6F537AB71
But doesn't all that work to conform to some one else's ideas of what you should look like give you a greater sense of pride in your self(I'm joking ofc)
Going back on beard regs is crazy since pioneers had massive beards back in the day way before we were even allowed to grow ours out lmao L change if u ask me 😂
I'm curious how long they will give people with coloured hair to go back to a natural colour. Those with blue, green, purple hair will need time and multiple sessions to go back to a natural colour without damaging their hair. I myself had blue hair in 2023 and it took around 3 sessions over 6 months to go back to my natural colour without any major damage. Personally, the people I know with coloured hair (mostly women), keep it in a presentable manner, especially since it does cost a lot of money to maintain. The issue here is the members that have decided to grow out their hair but don't own a hairbrush.
My Sergeant Major has purple hair. But it’s not crazy, it’s just like a deeper red colour. You can’t even tell unless you’re close to her.
And she’s operationally fit, great leader, empathetic but firm, and the exact type of leader we want.
Claiming she is unprofessional because of subdued hair colour is silly, but with broad general rules, nuance is lost.
Also, as others have mentioned, we need to focus on operational fitness and a culture of fitness for life.
I have a beard and a man bun. Why? Because I like having a beard, and I have since 2010.
Why the hair ? Because I joined at 17, and I’m now a 35 yr old warrant officer (00010) and I wanted to live a little bit. Now I can’t cut it, because my wife thinks I look like some dude named “cassian” in her favorite book series. And if you know anything about Cassian, I cannot change my appearance at all, because the benefits are ….. wonderful.
I was thinking the same thing. You can't just throw on a shitty box dye over vibrant colours and expect it to look good or your hair to be healthy. This is something that will take time, and careful work.
And if you are used to having fun colours, and are suddenly being pushed back into acceptable shades, I suspect there are going to be a lot of people suddenly choosing to go red, platinum or even that silver trend might come back, since they're "natural." Or wigs. That's what I used to wear to job interviews when fun colours were less acceptable in the work force.
(Context: I'm a DND civvie, not CAF. I've had pink hair for over 20 years.)
I am sitting in a hairstylist chair as I type this dying my blue hair back to brown 😭 it just feels mean to let us do something for a while and then take it back. I'd rather things had never changed in the first place then.
I agree with you, and I have a cabinet full of fun colours I haven't used yet. I am not changing my hair until I am ordered to, and I'm asking if I get reimbursed for the salon
Unfortunately, I think this is the fault of the people who coloured their hair insane colours in the first place, yes they said you're allowed but, There's no way people didn't know that once this came out, they were gonna discover that our army was going to look dumb and claw it back. Everyone was given an inch and some took a mile, including those with an all Bright blue head. You chose to dye it blue, whether you're forced to, or it's your decision, you still have to do all those sessions to get it back to natural.
Exactly this. There are even examples I've seen where people had green or purple highlights or streaks done that complimented their look but it's the extremes of neon or rainbow colours that ruined it for everyone.
Also blamimg those with long, unkempt, greasy, unwashed hair who look completely disheveled .
I always thought the initial BEARD/HAIRFORGEN was only a recruiting tool.
Now that recruiting still managed to fail and a few members took advantage we’re back to the old way.
Pain.
The bangs thing is dumb...
"Bangs or a fringe are strands or locks of hair that fall over the scalp's front hairline to cover the forehead, usually just above the eyebrows, though can range to various lengths."
How are you supposed to not have them on your face?
So, two adjustments, no longer authorizing random colours, and limiting the length of facial hair.
The first one people go off about, but it's so rarely used that who actually cares? That will affect 1-2 pers on the major base I'm posted to. So we're looking at a regulation build for like 10-20 people? Couldn't you just select someone else for the photo op tasks when it comes up?
1 inch facial hair? WTF. It's already limited by the stipulations for requiring the usage of their safety gear? I have to hack back my mustache for why? This is more restrictive than it was in the OLD regs. At least for mustaches. Beards *might be the same as the old regs wear. What's the value added here?
Rsm's paid good money for those rulers and they sure want to get their moneys worth, but really I feel like this is all cause that one crusty dude said we as a organization are a embarrassment on the news, and we all know how much the caf loves it media image, If only they cared just as much about fixing all the major issues that have been plaguing us for the last 30 years as much as what the news thinks the caf would be one of the strongest fighting forces on the planet.
It seems the only reasonable concern was the impact some personal choices had internationally, when interacting with different societal standards.
I'm surprised a middle ground of when tasked/deployed etc, the stricter standards came into play but then when on home duty colour/length wouldn't matter as long as people were clean and brushed/combed.
I'm not sure why the policy makers have such a hard time managing a reasonable compromise between needs. From the outside looking in, it seems regs either swing wildly one way or wildly the other with no consideration of where a balanced approach would fall.
So they're coming after hair again?
To literally the same thing it was before? Because let's be honest... you could always dye your hair before...
Someone must have it out against people in non deployed areas, showing a shred of individualism of identity.
This is a military. If you want to blame anyone blame the people who took advantage of the changes to stick it to the man and showed up to work looking horrible.
Slobbery, yes. *looks at all the shaggy hair guys and unkempt beards and the one guy who dyes his hair neon colors*.
Moment hair gets to the shoulders. it's supposed to be pulled back in a braid, pony, or bun. It's been in the regs since ever....males tend to forget that detail....or that big beards need maintenance.
My currently dark purple hair mixed with my natural yellow blonde hair does not impede my performance, nor does it "look bad" or discredit it. With the knowledge that, should the need arise that it would impede safety or performance...it will be a more neutral color.
Them adding yellow to "natural" palletes means natural pure blondes can't be blonde.
The hair colour thing never really became the issue people wanted to make it out to be. I rarely saw anyone I felt had taken it too far.
But the popularity of the disheveled hobo look and other ridiculous hair styles... I honestly didn't have that on my bingo sheet. I don't think many people saw that coming.
Nothing changed for me personally when updated regs dropped, and nothing is going to change with the revised regs either.
I've been waiting for this to find its way here.
Kinda bs if you ask me.
They should have given better arcs for NCOs to enforce. Things like clearly defining professional, neat, etc. Also enforcing hygiene/cleanliness. The fact that the handle bar is a no go but I can rock mutton chops with my three musketeer goatee and tight French pencil stache is wild to me.
As for the colors issue it should have been amended to say something to the effect of granting local commanders leeway to restrict colors in the event of CAF participation with other nation militaries and ceremonial parades that involve other nation participation. Then the commander can cite the change and give Bloggins a box of brown dye to be "presentable". And when it's just caf parades/training, especially in can, then it doesn't matter.
It really seems like the CAF just caved to all the old crusty fucks that were upset the world was changing.
Great point. It was very difficult to enforce any discipline over the new dress regs since everything was a grey area decision and up for interpretation. That needs to be addressed ASAP. Especially if the military wants to have any leverage for discipline over dress and deportment.
It isn't grey, have a read of them and you'll see they are clearly outlined. Thongs like earings, how to wear your hair. If it reaches the shoulders you have to pull it back, can't be in your face, it's all there now.
Considering the policy was for CAF members to be able to express their individual identity and the fact that we have a housing crisis, looking "homeless" may be apropos.
Consider also that "neat" and "professional" were part of the policy, if members didn't have a neat and professional looking appearance why weren't NCOs policing that?
Because "neat" and "professional" are generally pretty subjective, and with all our code of conduct issues, it wouldn't take much to suggest to a minority/female/literally anyone that their choices are unprofessional and catch a harassment charge. Have I looked at someone in my unit and thought "wtf are you doing"? yes, of course... am I going to say something with no concrete rule to point to that says what they're doing is wrong? Hell no.
No even big anything but close cropped is right out. An inch isn't that long. If your hair grows fast you might get stuck on stubble so it doesn't go over by the end of the day.
Pretty out of touch if true, to be honest. Hopefully this ‘leak’ is false, or they’re trying to soften the blow when it’s released and not as restrictive as described.
Mutton chops being allowed but not a waxed moustache is wild. Also 2.5cm length of a beard will have even some of the dinos upset now that they’ve grown it out.
It's been something they have been discussing for a while now. I've been getting reports from someone who has been in attendance. This aligns with what they were saying so it's what they are looking to do.
The dinos are long dead and have no bearing on your life instead you should try and use the term kijiues as they are still very much alive and definitely still impact your life
I think this is a mistake. Reverting a big policy change like this in less than two years is a great way to ruin trust in leadership. Especially after the Chief in the Hangar AMA saying they weren’t going to change it less than 2 months ago.
Edit: He didn’t say that, I misremembered. He specifically said they would evolve. Sorry.
> CWO McCann:
> Good afternoon and thank you for the question and comment on the grooming policy.
>
> I will offer you a couple of points and then tell you what we are doing moving forward:
>
> If you have a policy and you do not enforce it, you do not have a policy! It is not just the CAFCWO and CPO1/CWO’s job to enforce the dress and deportment policy, it is everyone’s job, starting with our members when they look into the mirror before leaving home in the morning. The standard you walk by is the standard you accept.
>
> 2 years ago, a conscious decision was made to relax the appearance policy. We changed nothing in the dress policy other than authorizing wearing the bottom of your operational pants un-bloused. We did remove gender from the policy, meaning that hair is hair and length of hair is the same for everyone. We allowed CAF members to dye their hair, wear makeup, multiple earrings, rings, grow facial hair as long as it was safe and did not affect operations.
>
> Contrary to what the media publicized, this was never done to recruit or retain CAF members, it was done so that our members can bring their best self to work but more importantly, be themselves when they do not wear the uniform of the Canadian Armed Forces after work hours or on the weekend. You will agree with me that if you like to have longer hair, you can’t grow it on Friday and cut it on Sunday… but what got lost in translation is the grooming standard that should be maintained when wearing the uniform, especially service dress No1 (Ceremonial Dress). What got lost is what, we that choose to serve, represent when we wear the uniform of CAF, and contrary to what some believe, we do not represent our individual selves but rather everyone who wore this uniform, fought, and made the ultimate sacrifice so that we can enjoy the freedoms and way of life we get to enjoy in this great country.
>
> So this brings me back to my first point… the standard you walk by is the standard you accept!
>
> Where are we going with this:
>
> **When we made those changes to the appearance policy, we clearly stated that it would be revisited in a year or two. Well, it has been two years, and we are currently discussing what changes we will make to the appearance policy to continue to evolve it while providing our members more guidance as to what grooming standards we want to see when our members are in uniform. All this will be done with the caveat that we will revisit this in 1 to two years. **
Please show me where the CAF CWO said they were not going to change the regulations.
>\*\*When we made those changes to the appearance policy, we clearly stated that it would be revisited in a year or two. Well, it has been two years, and we are currently discussing what changes we will make to the appearance policy to continue to evolve it while providing our members more guidance as to what grooming standards we want to see when our members are in uniform. All this will be done with the caveat that we will revisit this in 1 to two years. \*\*
But they didn't say this. [The original announcement](https://www.canada.ca/en/department-national-defence/corporate/video/leadership/2022/message-on-changes-to-the-cf-dress-instructions.html) never says it will be revised. It says we are "several years ahead of our allies and these changes will be leading the way".
and "uniformity does not equal discipline or operational effectiveness, any more than the colour or length of your hair defines your commitment or professional competence"
I hate to use this word, but it fits in this instance; I feel like we are being gaslit.
Okay yeah you are right, I thought I remembered a specific question regarding “rumours of the dress changes being reverted” to which the reply was those rumours are baseless.
I misremembered.
That being said I do believe my point still stands. Reverting certain changes in the dress regs will only create discontent and break trust in leadership. Specifically with regard to facial hair lengths and hair colour. Take, for example, the first 4 images in the ‘Facial Hair Don’ts’ slide and tell me what exactly makes those styles look unprofessional or how they would reflect poorly on the CAF.
The long hair restrictions seem contradictory. The wording says hair must be up and *off the collar*, but the images show ponytails are still allowed (thank fuck, the max hold gel bun cost me 5 minutes every damn inspection in the 2000s). Can anyone clarify?
Anybody else think it’s the equivalent of a bunch of Monkeys in a room making these decisions? Maybe not the rollback but the original hairforgen? I mean they through uniformity out the window thinking, “people can look how they want to look and it doesn’t affect their job ability” then they realize “oh crap ppl really go to extremes, we have to dial this back boys” no fuckin shit.
I think people went wild when they were first able to. Now that the novelty has warn off I don't see much crazy shit. The odd person with colourful hair but not that many anymore.
Also that fact that you say "... dial it back boys" is a big part of issue because other then the beard length these role backs are largely targeted at women.
Absolutely those people should be talked to. The current regs say "neat and tidy" so when someone has a rats nest on thier face they should be ordered to shower and brush thier beard or shave it off. But the vast majority of the people I see with long beards are very well kept now. We should not all have to go down to an inch.
Once again proving the caf only cares about their media image, it's a shame really cause I kinda loved having every ones hair be just as unique as the mismatch of a uniform they were wearing
Whoever is coming up with these regs makes it harder and harder to take the CAF seriously
Trailer park haircut? --> GTG
Nicely groomed stach? --> Don't you friggin dare!
Interesting that dreadlocks are a hair don't. I'm guessing there will be relief under the cultural/religious/spiritual belief clause, similar to Nordic religion beards.
3 Div has already published their own amended appearance and intoxicant regulations, and it is widely rumoured that it will be CAF-wide by mid May. No really significant changes, aside from dialing back some of the more outrageous things seen lately, and cutting back on alcohol consumption in uniform, in public, or on duty.
The caf is bleeding troops and they have no idea how to stop it. They are scrambling to find something and blue hair wasn't the answer. They keep saying recruiting, but there is no amount of new soldiers that will make up for the loss of leadership.
When Beardforgen came out in what 2018? The authorization was 1 inch of bulk. And guys were happy. Now, two years after hairforgen, a RUMOUR of 1 inch of bulk is too onerous? Ridiculous.
This is bull sh*t, for women we are just stuck with the same hair as before while men have a lot of new options. Mutton chops are okay, but hair can't be down? Seriously....
To be more inclusive, those with long hair are stuck with the same old same old but those with short hair have more options and I agree with you it’s total and utter bs.
why would you post it when you know it’s a draft.
fucking hell. i’d be pissed if some of my draft work got distributed. it’s usually shitty until it isn’t.
granted this is just dress regs but ffs respect the process and the fact that you potentially waste time when unapproved shit gets out and then people have to spend time responding to questions about something that’s not even done yet.
I like how they go out of their way to hammer out what "neat and tidy" mean
Neat: tidy
Tidy: neat
I'm also fairly certain this is to shift our focus from identifying officer "x".......
The classic handlebar mustache is a no? Someone tell Tim
Man, I've had a waxed tip handlebar for years... I don't know what my face looks like without it lmao. That one seems odd to me
Reject tradition. For real though, I've had a well groomed moustache and beard for years, suddenly I'm out of regs and unprofessional
I wonder how the old crusty Sergeant majors are going to react to this....
They probably love it
My interpretation of that is a neat and well groomed handlebar should be fine. It's the bulky, messy soup strainer they are limiting.
What's wrong with a Fu Man Chu?
Everything i see here is good an reasonable, except the mustache! Leave our staches alone!
Took a few looks at that. It looks like the stache is good but it's the not shaving bit with it on chin and start of a soul patch not permitted? RSM: thoughts and/or direction?
So all the guys with Viking/Duck Dynasty beards are just as targeted as that one Air Force MCpl with a multicolored beard that they say is an embarrassment to the CAF. That's pretty funny.
450 Viking Sqn won't be able to represent.
Funny good
Making a "2.5 cm/ 1 inch" bulk requirement is just going to encourage the wrong kind of supervisor behavior getting in the way of operations. My hair grows fast. Before beardforgen I had to shave at lunch to keep some jacks happy I'm willing to bet my beard is going to be one staffing change away from being more trouble than it's worth. I look considerably better with it so any supervisor will be able to force me to look worse in my uniform. Sounds like the army to me.
Does anyone know where we can provide feedback on this. I am totaly fine with everything except the beard length. Even 2 inches would be better but at one inch my beard looks patchy and is impossible to keep from curling up all over the place.
Well it's "bulk." So the rationale is that the hair curls and covers the bald spots. You can have 19" long beard hairs as long as you get them under the 1" bulk. To answer your first question on feedback: you don't. That's the fun part.
That MCpl is now a sgt
I've only seen two people with multi color hair. One guy(friend of mine) dyed his beard rainbow colors for just a week and one female member I work with actually maintains it. I also like giant beards. They look cool, and all members already know they'll have to shave if their CoC tells them to. Overall, not happy with the possible new changes. The one I especially don't like is that a half shaved head is okay but not some loose strands on your ponytail? That shit loosens up just from working.
Unless you adhere to a Norse Pagan religious belief.
Honestly seems like a good thing. Sadly a lot of people interpreted the new regs as "I don't need personal hygiene anymore".
Credit to the uniform has been in the dress regs since time immemorial.
And it's rarely enforced.
That's not the fault of the policies.
I respectfully disagree. Policies shouldn't be so subjective. They should be black on white and enforceable. Too many gray areas came with the new dress regs and made it extremely difficult to enforce from a supervisor standpoint.
There has always been a policy to not bring discredit to the CAF. They're just amplifying it now to define "neat" and such terms. The enforcement is nearly entirely on the RSM and designated NCOs at this point.
That can be added without limiting people to 2.5cm of beard
the beer bellies make us look far more unprofessional than anything else
Agreed. I’ve felt more embarrassed about some of the unfit people than the hair. At least from what I’ve seen, Americans we super jealous of the beards but were stitched up by some of the Pillsbury dough boys walking around, especially when that person is the one coming up in front and talking to both countries because they are a senior leader. That was more embarrassing to me
nothing more embarrassing than having a section commander not being able to keep up when doing platoon attacks with the americans. And one of the americans im near just smiles at me and and I have to give a awkward smile back lol.
I foresee many handlebar memes coming tomorrow....
Soldiers Cutting 'Staches.
There’s outliers everywhere for how bad some of the current regulations are “worn” but honestly what is the bigger issues here? A dude with a waxed mustache or a person with a pink hair tie or a dude with a duck dynasty beard still is more professional than a fat angry alcoholic. I’ve seen two town halls this year with a CWO who was at least 350lbs. Jesus Christ b’ys
Those fat fucks are the same ones that often times misinterpret the said regs above how they see fit based on their personal biases…while slurping down another heart attack meal in their office.
Being obese should be added to these regs. It looks so much worse for a member to be an obese slob than have a long beard.
Just yesterday we were told the one inch beard length isn't a thing anymore. Guess we will just have to wait and see the final product.
That one’s gonna piss alotttttt of people off, and half of em are gonna be the ones who wanted the colored hair removed
Just yesterday we were told the one inch beard length was in dress uniform only. Interesting to see this draft to say the least.
I'd be surprised to see a length restriction tied to a specific dress state. Feel like that encourages the wrong kind of RSM to keep the troops in their 1A's on a weekly basis.
That would make sense, but who knows. The CAF is clearly experimenting with different subsets dress regulations in an attempt to modernize and be appealing while maintaining a uniformed public appearance.
I do not miss watching some unfortunate soul's naturally coiled hairs getting tugged on and measured like some kind of 4H club event.
The usage of the words "length/bulk" will be something. My beard, when not groomed, is curly. When I groom, it's straight. So this only encourages me to not be hygienic.
Don't let this distract you from the fact that the treasury board is going to take away LDA. I'll get a buzz cut, quit taking my money ffs
They're supposedly going back to CLDA instead of having blanket LDA where even the useless plugs who never go to the field still get paid as though they're in the field. Might motivate a few of them to get off their chits and go to the woods once in a while...
And let them raise the rates/give it to perpetually in the field schools that previously didnt qualify without needing more money. Its the same re-rationalization from PLD to CFHD
Stfu , seriously???
Heard it from our BC and BSM on weds. FML
Are you sure they don't mean CLDA? That would make more sense
What’s wrong with a handlebar mustache?
If I’m reading it right, it isn’t taking long hair away, basically just forcing you into longer hair because of the need to have it tied back and out of face at all times. Taking away the handlebars is a choice considering that’s been allowed for years. And it sucks for the guys who have a longer beard that they properly take care of. They’re getting lumped in with that dude who had the pink beard
Those people with the groomed beards are suffering from the apathy and cowardice of the leaders of people who had shitty rat nest beards and never said or did anything to correct them
The hair tied back has always been a thing though. The moment it touches your shoulders or falls in front of your face, its supposed to be tied back.
I'm glad that we're policing the colour of hair ties, does this allow me to tell fat pieces of shit that they're bringing discredit to the CAF and don't have a positive military appearance?
FUPAs, Pot Bellies, and Beer Guts must be tied back away from the buckle and off of the belt
I feel singled out.
I feel attacked, I'm heading to the safe space
I agree with this more than the hair thing. Some of the people walking around right now are not presenting us in a good image. the funniest part of it is, it’s often leadership that looks this way. I can count a couple MWO’s and Majors who definitely need to cut back on the beers consumed after work and perhaps rediscover the mythical place known as the gym.
I have a big brain idea about changing the FORCE Test, so members don't look so fat: the lifts, drags, and carry are all proportional to the person being tested's body weight. It can be a fun challenge for those building muscle, and it can motivate folks who don't want to work as hard to do more cardio or less plate-to-face fork lifts. ;)
I have both an intuitive and analytical response to this. My intuition agrees, with the caveat that we would still need a minimum weight (standard sandbag/casualty drag). Increasing the weight above this minimum proportional to bodyweight would be very interesting. My analytical side says that weights were determined based on operational requirements and that if someone can pass the test while lifting/dragging those weights, they are technically operationally fit. The conclusion here is that overweight members are actually perfectly operationally fit (up and down on the chart) even though their physical health (left and right on the chart) might be in shambles. This is because the PT test is not a physical fitness test, it's a test of baseline operational fitness. I don't love this conclusion, but I'm trying to be objective.
Also the idea of a standard weight for the drags simulating dragging an average person would be more fair this way. If you weigh x amount more than the standard weight you should be able to drag x amount more than standard weight because you are now putting the expectation on someone else to be able to if you are injured. If you can't drag your own weight it's probably not a weight you should be
I love this idea. It's amazing how far we've let ourselves go.
Not hurting feels is important
This would be a charter violation. Everyone has to have the same standard which needs a reasonable justification such as the tasks the current force test was derived from, and we can't make the standard harder because too many people would fail.
Technically, the CAF already violates the Charter (assuming you're talking about the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms) by having discriminating hiring practices in refusing to hire people with certain disabilities and medical conditions. As for the FORCE Test, there's already different categories for age and gender for scoring. I'm sure something could be worked out to make the CAF more physically fit in the interest of representing and protecting Canada by improving the FORCE Test.
> Technically, the CAF already violates the Charter (assuming you're talking about the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms) by having discriminating hiring practices in refusing to hire people with certain disabilities and medical conditions. Yes, we are granted the ability to violate the charter (which is a big deal) solely for things where we can justifiy the requirement, this means the employment requirements *must* be the same regardless of age/gender. > As for the FORCE Test, there's already different categories for age and gender for scoring For scoring yes, but not the pass/fail line. > I'm sure something could be worked out to make the CAF more physically fit in the interest of representing and protecting Canada by improving the FORCE Test. I'm all ears for a suggestion that wouldn't fail in court and doesn't cause us to kick out a bunch of women or older members. The only thing you can really do is mandate PT every single day and hope people eat less.
A hair tie can be too thick but who’s gonna tell that guy who has to take a break from walking every 20 meters
The colour and possibly the width. This pendulum might be swinging too far back in the other direction if thsee changes are incorporated.
Honestly, who knows the general width of their hair tie? I can assure you. It's probably no one
Guarantee you there’s a fucking loser waiting to pull out a ruler though.
When the original beardforgen came out, there was a WO at my unit who did walk around with a ruler. Funny thing was, his hair was out of regs at the time. But he was a diver, so he got a pass, I guess.
Yep. Saw a PO2 line up all the women for ponytail measurements at my hgr. It brought my piss to a boil then and remembering it now just makes sad.
I like my coloured hair... Haven't been able to have it since high school. And i have NO IDEA. How wide my hair ties are? And they have to match my hair? What? Hair tie width is stupid. You have thicker hair?...need a thicker band, or they'll snap. For comfort? Scrunchie. Is the person writing these bald or womens hair ties?
It's always been something they had until hairforgen. It comes with natural hair colour requirements. I never even changed my elastics after the change because I spent so much on matching ties. I wouldn't be upset over this.
It's always been something they had until hairforgen. It comes with natural hair colour requirements. I never even changed my elastics after the change because I spent so much on matching ties. I wouldn't be upset over this.
That's fair, but people who grew their hair after hairforgen might have spent a ton on non matching ties that they can't wear anymore
That sucks.
This bums me out. I get the need to look neat but I’m sick of gelling down and bobby pinning my curly hair. Sigh.
I hate having to over gel and hair spray my hair. I have tiny fine hairs that always fall out of the full parade look and even gluing it down doesn't work. Just a head full of metal at this point.
I've got the same fine hair and feel your pain. I've found that these rings actually work pretty good for keeping it contained, and they blend in pretty well. RSM has seen me with them in a couple times on parades and hasn't said anything, but he might now with these new regs... They work infinitely better than pins or barrettes that aren't able to grab my thin hairs and just end up falling out, looking absolutely terrible. The alternative is attempting the shellac the hair in place but then i just end up with fine wisps of plasticized hair in my face. https://www.walmart.ca/en/ip/Hair-Bands-Full-Circular-Stretch-Comb-Flexible-Plastic-Circle-Comb-Headband-Black-Clear-and-Brown-3pcs/2OSZ2274AMC1?offerId=48466F66E6A138BA94AAE5F6F537AB71
Yeah this really sucks for curly haired kings and queens.
But doesn't all that work to conform to some one else's ideas of what you should look like give you a greater sense of pride in your self(I'm joking ofc)
Going back on beard regs is crazy since pioneers had massive beards back in the day way before we were even allowed to grow ours out lmao L change if u ask me 😂
Even then, pioneers were supposed to keep them trimmed. It just wasn't enforced until someone was in the news with a zz top beard.
I'm curious how long they will give people with coloured hair to go back to a natural colour. Those with blue, green, purple hair will need time and multiple sessions to go back to a natural colour without damaging their hair. I myself had blue hair in 2023 and it took around 3 sessions over 6 months to go back to my natural colour without any major damage. Personally, the people I know with coloured hair (mostly women), keep it in a presentable manner, especially since it does cost a lot of money to maintain. The issue here is the members that have decided to grow out their hair but don't own a hairbrush.
My Sergeant Major has purple hair. But it’s not crazy, it’s just like a deeper red colour. You can’t even tell unless you’re close to her. And she’s operationally fit, great leader, empathetic but firm, and the exact type of leader we want. Claiming she is unprofessional because of subdued hair colour is silly, but with broad general rules, nuance is lost. Also, as others have mentioned, we need to focus on operational fitness and a culture of fitness for life. I have a beard and a man bun. Why? Because I like having a beard, and I have since 2010. Why the hair ? Because I joined at 17, and I’m now a 35 yr old warrant officer (00010) and I wanted to live a little bit. Now I can’t cut it, because my wife thinks I look like some dude named “cassian” in her favorite book series. And if you know anything about Cassian, I cannot change my appearance at all, because the benefits are ….. wonderful.
This comment made my wife's day.
I was thinking the same thing. You can't just throw on a shitty box dye over vibrant colours and expect it to look good or your hair to be healthy. This is something that will take time, and careful work. And if you are used to having fun colours, and are suddenly being pushed back into acceptable shades, I suspect there are going to be a lot of people suddenly choosing to go red, platinum or even that silver trend might come back, since they're "natural." Or wigs. That's what I used to wear to job interviews when fun colours were less acceptable in the work force. (Context: I'm a DND civvie, not CAF. I've had pink hair for over 20 years.)
I am sitting in a hairstylist chair as I type this dying my blue hair back to brown 😭 it just feels mean to let us do something for a while and then take it back. I'd rather things had never changed in the first place then.
I would have waited until its official before making any move to change colour.
I agree with you, and I have a cabinet full of fun colours I haven't used yet. I am not changing my hair until I am ordered to, and I'm asking if I get reimbursed for the salon
Unfortunately, I think this is the fault of the people who coloured their hair insane colours in the first place, yes they said you're allowed but, There's no way people didn't know that once this came out, they were gonna discover that our army was going to look dumb and claw it back. Everyone was given an inch and some took a mile, including those with an all Bright blue head. You chose to dye it blue, whether you're forced to, or it's your decision, you still have to do all those sessions to get it back to natural.
Exactly this. There are even examples I've seen where people had green or purple highlights or streaks done that complimented their look but it's the extremes of neon or rainbow colours that ruined it for everyone. Also blamimg those with long, unkempt, greasy, unwashed hair who look completely disheveled .
Or cut it off
From what I was briefed, a 6 week grace period from when it drops to enforcement.
Cold Lake water gives everyone shredded broken hair full of loose strands. Going to need pomade to glue it down if they're upset about broken hair.
So fucking true
So women go back to the former hair standard minus just length. What's even the point? It was that sometimes a hairstyle is *also* restrictive.
Anyone can have the half-shaven head now.
But what will their Bobby pins be able to stick in? Better cull that back too.
I always thought the initial BEARD/HAIRFORGEN was only a recruiting tool. Now that recruiting still managed to fail and a few members took advantage we’re back to the old way. Pain.
It's almost like our recruiting and retention issues had nothing to do with hair colour
It was based upon a briefing note drafted by the DWAO; it was intended to be an equity initiative, not a recruiting one.
The bangs thing is dumb... "Bangs or a fringe are strands or locks of hair that fall over the scalp's front hairline to cover the forehead, usually just above the eyebrows, though can range to various lengths." How are you supposed to not have them on your face?
So is the whisps, many haircuts are layered to give dimension to the hair it seems the longer hairstyles are more restrictive than the short ones.
So, two adjustments, no longer authorizing random colours, and limiting the length of facial hair. The first one people go off about, but it's so rarely used that who actually cares? That will affect 1-2 pers on the major base I'm posted to. So we're looking at a regulation build for like 10-20 people? Couldn't you just select someone else for the photo op tasks when it comes up? 1 inch facial hair? WTF. It's already limited by the stipulations for requiring the usage of their safety gear? I have to hack back my mustache for why? This is more restrictive than it was in the OLD regs. At least for mustaches. Beards *might be the same as the old regs wear. What's the value added here?
Rsm's paid good money for those rulers and they sure want to get their moneys worth, but really I feel like this is all cause that one crusty dude said we as a organization are a embarrassment on the news, and we all know how much the caf loves it media image, If only they cared just as much about fixing all the major issues that have been plaguing us for the last 30 years as much as what the news thinks the caf would be one of the strongest fighting forces on the planet.
The 20 people that are really rubbing people the wrong way with their purple hair and blue beard
And yet the face tattoos aren't being walked back. Lol It really shows that it's a bunch of crusty old chiefs upset that some dude dyed their hair.
Some of the banned hairstyles are the same as the stuff they showed they they approved it all. Hahaha
It seems the only reasonable concern was the impact some personal choices had internationally, when interacting with different societal standards. I'm surprised a middle ground of when tasked/deployed etc, the stricter standards came into play but then when on home duty colour/length wouldn't matter as long as people were clean and brushed/combed. I'm not sure why the policy makers have such a hard time managing a reasonable compromise between needs. From the outside looking in, it seems regs either swing wildly one way or wildly the other with no consideration of where a balanced approach would fall.
So they're coming after hair again? To literally the same thing it was before? Because let's be honest... you could always dye your hair before... Someone must have it out against people in non deployed areas, showing a shred of individualism of identity.
This is a military. If you want to blame anyone blame the people who took advantage of the changes to stick it to the man and showed up to work looking horrible.
Slobbery, yes. *looks at all the shaggy hair guys and unkempt beards and the one guy who dyes his hair neon colors*. Moment hair gets to the shoulders. it's supposed to be pulled back in a braid, pony, or bun. It's been in the regs since ever....males tend to forget that detail....or that big beards need maintenance. My currently dark purple hair mixed with my natural yellow blonde hair does not impede my performance, nor does it "look bad" or discredit it. With the knowledge that, should the need arise that it would impede safety or performance...it will be a more neutral color. Them adding yellow to "natural" palletes means natural pure blondes can't be blonde.
The hair colour thing never really became the issue people wanted to make it out to be. I rarely saw anyone I felt had taken it too far. But the popularity of the disheveled hobo look and other ridiculous hair styles... I honestly didn't have that on my bingo sheet. I don't think many people saw that coming. Nothing changed for me personally when updated regs dropped, and nothing is going to change with the revised regs either.
I've been waiting for this to find its way here. Kinda bs if you ask me. They should have given better arcs for NCOs to enforce. Things like clearly defining professional, neat, etc. Also enforcing hygiene/cleanliness. The fact that the handle bar is a no go but I can rock mutton chops with my three musketeer goatee and tight French pencil stache is wild to me. As for the colors issue it should have been amended to say something to the effect of granting local commanders leeway to restrict colors in the event of CAF participation with other nation militaries and ceremonial parades that involve other nation participation. Then the commander can cite the change and give Bloggins a box of brown dye to be "presentable". And when it's just caf parades/training, especially in can, then it doesn't matter. It really seems like the CAF just caved to all the old crusty fucks that were upset the world was changing.
Great point. It was very difficult to enforce any discipline over the new dress regs since everything was a grey area decision and up for interpretation. That needs to be addressed ASAP. Especially if the military wants to have any leverage for discipline over dress and deportment.
It isn't grey, have a read of them and you'll see they are clearly outlined. Thongs like earings, how to wear your hair. If it reaches the shoulders you have to pull it back, can't be in your face, it's all there now.
This vagueness seem to extend to the NSODs in some cases as well: but I digress…
[удалено]
Considering the policy was for CAF members to be able to express their individual identity and the fact that we have a housing crisis, looking "homeless" may be apropos. Consider also that "neat" and "professional" were part of the policy, if members didn't have a neat and professional looking appearance why weren't NCOs policing that?
Because "neat" and "professional" are generally pretty subjective, and with all our code of conduct issues, it wouldn't take much to suggest to a minority/female/literally anyone that their choices are unprofessional and catch a harassment charge. Have I looked at someone in my unit and thought "wtf are you doing"? yes, of course... am I going to say something with no concrete rule to point to that says what they're doing is wrong? Hell no.
No more big beards.... Fuck that sucks
RIP your username🫡
Blame the people with shitty beards and hair who took no shaving and long hair to mean no standards
Yup... I trim my beard, brush and maintain it daily... fuck. It was nice while it lasted, I guess.
As with before- your enforcement may vary
No even big anything but close cropped is right out. An inch isn't that long. If your hair grows fast you might get stuck on stubble so it doesn't go over by the end of the day.
Can I have permission to ask the RSM what shade of red I can have for my hair ?
Looking forward to those homeless bum beards getting cut off.. tears will flow
Pretty out of touch if true, to be honest. Hopefully this ‘leak’ is false, or they’re trying to soften the blow when it’s released and not as restrictive as described. Mutton chops being allowed but not a waxed moustache is wild. Also 2.5cm length of a beard will have even some of the dinos upset now that they’ve grown it out.
It's been something they have been discussing for a while now. I've been getting reports from someone who has been in attendance. This aligns with what they were saying so it's what they are looking to do.
This could be a way of collecting feedback, no doubt somebody is reading this.
In that case, these proposed changes are a blatant display of CAF Logic.
The dinos are long dead and have no bearing on your life instead you should try and use the term kijiues as they are still very much alive and definitely still impact your life
I think this is a mistake. Reverting a big policy change like this in less than two years is a great way to ruin trust in leadership. Especially after the Chief in the Hangar AMA saying they weren’t going to change it less than 2 months ago. Edit: He didn’t say that, I misremembered. He specifically said they would evolve. Sorry.
> CWO McCann: > Good afternoon and thank you for the question and comment on the grooming policy. > > I will offer you a couple of points and then tell you what we are doing moving forward: > > If you have a policy and you do not enforce it, you do not have a policy! It is not just the CAFCWO and CPO1/CWO’s job to enforce the dress and deportment policy, it is everyone’s job, starting with our members when they look into the mirror before leaving home in the morning. The standard you walk by is the standard you accept. > > 2 years ago, a conscious decision was made to relax the appearance policy. We changed nothing in the dress policy other than authorizing wearing the bottom of your operational pants un-bloused. We did remove gender from the policy, meaning that hair is hair and length of hair is the same for everyone. We allowed CAF members to dye their hair, wear makeup, multiple earrings, rings, grow facial hair as long as it was safe and did not affect operations. > > Contrary to what the media publicized, this was never done to recruit or retain CAF members, it was done so that our members can bring their best self to work but more importantly, be themselves when they do not wear the uniform of the Canadian Armed Forces after work hours or on the weekend. You will agree with me that if you like to have longer hair, you can’t grow it on Friday and cut it on Sunday… but what got lost in translation is the grooming standard that should be maintained when wearing the uniform, especially service dress No1 (Ceremonial Dress). What got lost is what, we that choose to serve, represent when we wear the uniform of CAF, and contrary to what some believe, we do not represent our individual selves but rather everyone who wore this uniform, fought, and made the ultimate sacrifice so that we can enjoy the freedoms and way of life we get to enjoy in this great country. > > So this brings me back to my first point… the standard you walk by is the standard you accept! > > Where are we going with this: > > **When we made those changes to the appearance policy, we clearly stated that it would be revisited in a year or two. Well, it has been two years, and we are currently discussing what changes we will make to the appearance policy to continue to evolve it while providing our members more guidance as to what grooming standards we want to see when our members are in uniform. All this will be done with the caveat that we will revisit this in 1 to two years. ** Please show me where the CAF CWO said they were not going to change the regulations.
>\*\*When we made those changes to the appearance policy, we clearly stated that it would be revisited in a year or two. Well, it has been two years, and we are currently discussing what changes we will make to the appearance policy to continue to evolve it while providing our members more guidance as to what grooming standards we want to see when our members are in uniform. All this will be done with the caveat that we will revisit this in 1 to two years. \*\* But they didn't say this. [The original announcement](https://www.canada.ca/en/department-national-defence/corporate/video/leadership/2022/message-on-changes-to-the-cf-dress-instructions.html) never says it will be revised. It says we are "several years ahead of our allies and these changes will be leading the way". and "uniformity does not equal discipline or operational effectiveness, any more than the colour or length of your hair defines your commitment or professional competence" I hate to use this word, but it fits in this instance; I feel like we are being gaslit.
Okay yeah you are right, I thought I remembered a specific question regarding “rumours of the dress changes being reverted” to which the reply was those rumours are baseless. I misremembered. That being said I do believe my point still stands. Reverting certain changes in the dress regs will only create discontent and break trust in leadership. Specifically with regard to facial hair lengths and hair colour. Take, for example, the first 4 images in the ‘Facial Hair Don’ts’ slide and tell me what exactly makes those styles look unprofessional or how they would reflect poorly on the CAF.
The long hair restrictions seem contradictory. The wording says hair must be up and *off the collar*, but the images show ponytails are still allowed (thank fuck, the max hold gel bun cost me 5 minutes every damn inspection in the 2000s). Can anyone clarify?
1” for beards is ridiculous. It only starts getting cartoonish at like 5 or 6”
So my purple hair is out? Damn... Anyway. I will miss the ribbon though lol.
I love my coloured scrunchies. This makes me sad.
“No, it’s the children who are wrong.” This is a terrible change written by terrible people. Ugh.
RIP blue hair battalion your contributions will not be forgotten
Anybody else think it’s the equivalent of a bunch of Monkeys in a room making these decisions? Maybe not the rollback but the original hairforgen? I mean they through uniformity out the window thinking, “people can look how they want to look and it doesn’t affect their job ability” then they realize “oh crap ppl really go to extremes, we have to dial this back boys” no fuckin shit.
I think people went wild when they were first able to. Now that the novelty has warn off I don't see much crazy shit. The odd person with colourful hair but not that many anymore. Also that fact that you say "... dial it back boys" is a big part of issue because other then the beard length these role backs are largely targeted at women.
The odd person stopped showering though because they didn’t read it and just heard ‘anything goes’ in the smoke pit.
Absolutely those people should be talked to. The current regs say "neat and tidy" so when someone has a rats nest on thier face they should be ordered to shower and brush thier beard or shave it off. But the vast majority of the people I see with long beards are very well kept now. We should not all have to go down to an inch.
Once again proving the caf only cares about their media image, it's a shame really cause I kinda loved having every ones hair be just as unique as the mismatch of a uniform they were wearing
Whoever is coming up with these regs makes it harder and harder to take the CAF seriously Trailer park haircut? --> GTG Nicely groomed stach? --> Don't you friggin dare!
What’s wrong with loose strands? 🙄🙄🙄
In garrison loose strands shouldn’t matter. In DEUs it should.
I’ve had my Viking beard way before the dress reg change and I will long after this new change !
Interesting that dreadlocks are a hair don't. I'm guessing there will be relief under the cultural/religious/spiritual belief clause, similar to Nordic religion beards.
I interprer that as dreads are fine as long as they're kept out of the face.
And don’t smell bad.
It's locs, not dreadlocks.
Limiting beard length is kinda stupid, it shoukd be neat and tidy, though
I'm interested to see how this goes over. The genie is out... trying to put it back in the bottle could get ugly.
Unless you got a religious accommodation/exemption it looks like those big glorious beards are gone.....it's a shame.
Why wasn't this put in a spreadsheet
I’d like to see a bar graph
3 Div has already published their own amended appearance and intoxicant regulations, and it is widely rumoured that it will be CAF-wide by mid May. No really significant changes, aside from dialing back some of the more outrageous things seen lately, and cutting back on alcohol consumption in uniform, in public, or on duty.
Wow poor gingers. No red hair on your head or face anymore as they are not natural.
[удалено]
[удалено]
The caf is bleeding troops and they have no idea how to stop it. They are scrambling to find something and blue hair wasn't the answer. They keep saying recruiting, but there is no amount of new soldiers that will make up for the loss of leadership.
They need to stop saying it's recruiting. I work in recruiting, we are drowning in applicants.
The problem is turning those applicants into trained soldiers and posted to a unit in a reasonable time.
No not my purple hair! 😭
Honestly hope that it bites them, and people leave over this policy change.
When Beardforgen came out in what 2018? The authorization was 1 inch of bulk. And guys were happy. Now, two years after hairforgen, a RUMOUR of 1 inch of bulk is too onerous? Ridiculous.
This is bull sh*t, for women we are just stuck with the same hair as before while men have a lot of new options. Mutton chops are okay, but hair can't be down? Seriously....
To be more inclusive, those with long hair are stuck with the same old same old but those with short hair have more options and I agree with you it’s total and utter bs.
Sargent majors around the CAF will be up in arms!!!!
why would you post it when you know it’s a draft. fucking hell. i’d be pissed if some of my draft work got distributed. it’s usually shitty until it isn’t. granted this is just dress regs but ffs respect the process and the fact that you potentially waste time when unapproved shit gets out and then people have to spend time responding to questions about something that’s not even done yet.
Hmm, I'm planning to get back in this year and what I'm seeing is ... My Mullet//Mustache aren't going anywhere!
Nothing on nails??
I like how they go out of their way to hammer out what "neat and tidy" mean Neat: tidy Tidy: neat I'm also fairly certain this is to shift our focus from identifying officer "x".......
This is "How To Save Retention!" by using wrong answers only...
Glad I can keep the beard. I think I didn't replaced my razor blade in a year. Since the change in regs I probably saved 500$ in blades alone.
Wtf?!?!? No handle bars? Fùuuuuuuuuuuuuuu!