the standard (only one authorized to be bought from now on) is going to be the mesh PFD.

Your post raises the question of "ethical fitness" (see the LAMS thead). The district stores are now selling PFDs which they know will be obsoleted on 01 June 2009. The AuxKB is not the place where most members would expect to go and find news about PFDs and we all know the Rusty Chain will never get this info to most members.

So do the District Stores have an ethical obligation to promiently post a notice of the "not to wear" date on the PFDs or is it caveat emptor so far as the membership is concerned.

Before you answer, bear in mind the Core Values of the CG.

quote:

Honor
Integrity is our standard. We demonstrate uncompromising ethical conduct and moral behavior in all of our personal actions. We are loyal and accountable to the public trust.

Would not disclosing the 'not to wear date' be a lack of integrity?

quote:

Respect
We value our diverse work force. We treat each other with fairness, dignity, and compassion.

Is not disclosing the 'not to wear date' fair to the membership, who probably will not be informed of the change in a timely manner?

Or does the financial need of the Aux and its Mad Dash For Cash trump the Core Values? Is it better to stick the membership with obsolete or soon-to-be obsolete PFDs just so the District Stores and Nat Aux don't have to write off obsolete inventory?

This message has been edited. Last edited by: FL51D7,

When I look at the AuxKB notice, I see the following fragment at the beginning. My question is: How do I interpret the qualification this applies to cutter - based boat operations? Is that a normal catch all for any boat operations or a specific type of boat? If for a specific type of boat that most of us don't ever see, then why would we be affected? Just trying to understand what I am reading. Thanks for listening.

A. RESCUE AND SURVIVAL SYSTEMS MANUAL, COMDTINST M10470.10(SERIES) B. COMDT COGARD WASHINGTON DC 061317Z SEP 07 1. PURPOSE. THE PURPOSE OF THIS MESSAGE IS TO ANNOUNCE THE CHANGE TO THE MINIMUM FLOTATION REQUIREMENTS FOR SHORE AND CUTTER - BASED BOAT OPERATIONS.

So if this is for Defender and "Notch" boats we're getting all worked up for nothing?

Just like the innappropriate swat team uniform, this edict will also apply to the auxiliary thanks to our "leaders' who have no clue how this will negatively effect the grunts who are actually out on the water.

No, I think the quote means, "for all shore based AND cutter based" boat operations. That's the policy for the CG, but the Aux says they will now adopt the policy. Our patrols would count as shore based I guess.

I'm going to get way ahead of the curve and ask:
Can we Land Mobile operators have advertising on our helmets and fire-suits like the guys in NASCAR?

A rare burst of sanity has hit the CG and Aux. Of course, the following had nothing to do with what was posted here.

The original AuxKB entry is blank.

There is now this AuxKB entry on the subject:

quote:

"Auxiliary surface facilities which can exceed 35mph shall be required to comply with the new Minimum Floatation Requirement by June 1, 2009.

All surface facilities that do not have the capability to exceed 35mph may continue to wear currently approved PFD's including the float coat.

All of our pierside/shore based programs will be unaffected and may continue to wear the PFD's they have now including the float coat.

PWC's will continue with what they have been approved to use with no changes. None of the CG 50mph Dynamic tested PFD's listed in the message are for use with PWC's."

Now if only they can do something about the robo-cop ODUs that are despised by both the auxies and the ADs.

quote:

Originally posted by Ancora:
Now if only they can do something about the robo-cop ODUs that are despised by both the auxies and the ADs.

I don't think anyone but you despises them because of the color -- I dislike only the velcro on the pockets and the lack of a lighter-weight shirt.

It isn't the color I hate ,it is the gestapo like appearance of the of the whole ensemble.
I feel really uncomfortable playing coastie and looking like a member of a senior citizen swat team.

Ancora,

I've never had anyone run away from me at the boat ramp b/c I was wearing a set of ODU's...

Personally, I didn't really like the window washer outfit. The ODU is simply a pair of cargo pants, a pair of comfortable boots, and a tuck in shirt with two pockets on the chest. Where you get "Gestapo" from that uniform is beyond me.

Its the black boots that drive him crazy...

quote:

Its the black boots that drive him crazy...

It is also the bloused pants. I would have to agree with him on both. There are very few Auxies who do anything that require combat boots. Boat shoes with the ODU are much more boater and boat friendly.

Then the blousing is just over the top. Many Coasties don't like it either. The CG did fine for many years without blousing. Now they all look like they are too poor to buy uniform pants that fit correctly - which is what the bloused look looks like.

Personally I found the unbloused ODU pants with boat shoes much more comfortable then the old WBs. I never bloused the ODUs since I didn't own a pair of combat boots and didn't have any intention of ever buying such a useless article of clothing.

I guess I'm just as used to wearing them like that just as you guys are not used to wearing them like that.

ODU's with boat shoes... ugh...

I saw one Auxie show up to an event wearing the operations polo shirt, unbloused ODU pants, and a pair of dress shoes. It made me cringe...

We are not allowed at Sector without the clodhopper boots so we cannot use the galley while on patrol. This means we must feed our crew of five underway thus adding another obstacle for doing patrols. Our Sector commander does not allow the hot weather uniform in our AOR thus adding yet another negative for doing patrols. We are down to doing just enough hours to keep our quals.

Don't fret about the PFD situation quite yet. In 20 years of ops I can't tell you how many times a policy has been announced and then amended because of the backlash. Use the COL to let our elected folks know the potential problems with this. Now,as to ODU's! I like them much better than the old uniforms. I always thought we looked like mechanics in the old working blues. Footwear. Depending on where you are at a lot of folks need the boots. I'll agree that the oxfords, while authorized, would look BAD with ODU's.

Boating shoes do not leave ugly black, hard to remove, scuff marks all over my white hull. We do not allow boots on our boat for just that reason.

Ancora... the guy was wearing a pair of Bates Lite Corfams... not boating shoes.

The rest of us (Auxies) were trying to decide whether or not to laugh or go hide in shame.

Anything would be better than the gestapo boots.

quote:

We are not allowed at Sector without the clodhopper boots so we cannot use the galley while on patrol. This means we must feed our crew of five underway thus adding another obstacle for doing patrols. Our Sector commander does not allow the hot weather uniform in our AOR thus adding yet another negative for doing patrols. We are down to doing just enough hours to keep our quals.

What happened to your working blue uniform which is still allowed, and with boat shoes?

In my opinion, a number of you are too sensitive about how you look. This is not a fashion parade; we are in the AUX to help the CG. I believe in being comfortable while discharging my duty. That translates into working blue with boat shoes when on patrol and ODU with boots when I'm the station watchstander.

On a practical note: I find the boots slow down my reaction time when driving.