I would be really interested to know who told the person in question to remove the photo.
2 Likes
iām interested - iām a famous gossip, and i love a good witchunt - but i donāt think its important.
the point, for me, is that there are people in the ACO who were more interested in what the cadet was wearing than the astonishing fact that 3 cadets from the same Sqn had been in a glider more than once in the last decade.
the achievement of that Sqn to get that amount of gliding is, from out here in the wilds where iām more likely to get permission to build a Trebuchet and use it to throw cadets over the walls of Harlech Castle than i am to get that number of gliding slots, so astonishing that i probably wouldnāt have noticed if the cadets concerned were dressed as Ben and Holly.
there is a way of couching āadviceā, iām afraid its not something iāve seen used much in the ACOā¦
3 Likes
His Wing Warrant Officer.
Who I believe was met with a barrage of shouting and abuse in return from said CFAV. Make of that what you will but I donāt believe there is a place in the organisation for a member of staff who canāt sensibly discuss something with another CFAV without resorting to abusing the person down the phone no matter how much they do or donāt like it.
Depends on how the WWO approached the CFAV. Having met quite a few throbbers in my time in the ACO, maybe the WWO deserved to be spoken to forcefully, maybe not. However, I doubt weāll ever know the exact text and tone that was used in that conversation.
4 Likes
If wearing a jumper over CS95 is mixed dress and not in the regs, how do you stand with cadets wearing hi-viz waistcoats over CS95?
3 Likes
Naughty
High-Vis is covered in para 0127.
Mixing different types of uniform is covered at 0110c. The wearing of civilian clothes to cover unifrom for security purposes is permitted by JSPs, routine orders and common sense but the uniform shoud be properly covered and you obviously donāt wear headdress 
We lift our regs straight from the RAF and make small adjustments as necessary. This is insufficient to properly accommodate the practicalities and realities of a uniformed youth organisation but it is what it is until people further up the chain amend it.
Which is why weāre not saying that the picture should be pulled because it lacks boots in which you can see your face and creases on which you can shave. Expecting cadets to be correctly dressed insofar as there is only one form of uniform per cadet is hardly Trooping the Colour standard.
It doesnāt matter what you look like as long as you are warm and dryā¦
Iāve removed a post here asking us to criticise other photos for uniform discrepancies.
We donāt like those as the āoffenderā generally isnāt around to defend themselves and also thatās not the purpose of this thread.
1 Like
For the rest of the day outside of when the photo was being taken, yes.
Because god forbid that photos should actually show reality.
Or, indeed, to show things that just donāt matter?
I simply donāt care about the fact that the, doubtless massively chuffed cadet who was also wearing a grin about half a mile wide, wore a blue jumper over his DPMās to show off his wings. It matters to me far less than what brand of toilet roll the woman who lives 2 miles down the road uses - I simply donāt care.
My ex-wife doesnāt get a say in what I wear, or where I go, or who Iām friends with - thatās the down side (for her) of divorcing me. Perhaps the crabs and their fellow travelers ought to consider that the same principle applies to the ACOā¦
4 Likes
For those of you wondering about the removed picture from yesterday.
I posted a Facebook picture of the south west regions wing warrant officers. It featured an incorrectly dressed WWO. It also featured, I believe, the same WWO who demanded the social media post of the incorrectly dressed cadet be taken down. Heās not happy with incorrectly dressed cadets, but incorrectly dressed WWOās is fine it would seem.
I was trying to make a point the organisation could learn from. Check your own historical social media posts before laying into other peoples.
And finally, a question to the admin. The picture of the poor cadet in question is still available via post 35 on this thread, yet the picture of the incorrectly dressed WWO you removed within hours. Why?
1 Like
Simple. You arenāt targeting the cadet with abuse, yet you are to the WWO and some have to the CFAV that posted it.
WWOās, and RWOās, ought to be big and ugly enough to cope with a bit of stick about their public use of double standards - or indeed not having the faintest grasp of the the job.
If not, theyāre in the wrong job, and they should get the brews in before opening the tuck shop.
Milk, two sugars.
3 Likes
Iām not āabusingā anyone. Iām simply pointing out that there are staff out there who are not happy with pictures of incorrectly dressed cadets, yet arenāt bothered about pictures of incorrectly dressed staff. As Angus points out, itās double standards. Not the best message to be presenting to potential recruits!
1 Like
I doubt potential recruits would care.
I doubt existing cadets would be that bothered.
I doubt that the majority of the staff would be bothered about being on message on uniform either.
1 Like
So that brings us quite neatly back to the start of the thread.
Why get so upset about a cadet incorrectly dressed, when no one cares?
2 Likes
Some people, obviously, do care.