Posted for general interest.
From today's Times...
From today's Times...
YOUNG female recruits to the Armed Forces are not tough enough to be treated on a par with their male colleagues, a report claimed yesterday.
Too many young women were being injured in training, the independent Adult Learning Inspectorate said, and called for a rethink of the âgender-freeâ policy. The previous âgender-fairâ policy, which took account of the âweaker sexâ, was reckoned to be contrary to equal opportunities legislation.
In a report that criticised much of the culture behind Armed Forcesâ training, the inspectorate, which carried out checks on all the training establishments, said that the militaryâs interpretation was to treat everyone the same. In the case of female recruits, the gender-free approach had led to record levels of injuries.
It recommended reverting to gender-fair training. The injuries had also coincided with the fact that recruits often joined the Armed Forces âunfit, overweight or poorly nourishedâ.
In women, fractures of the tibia (shin bone) had risen over a five-year period from 12.6 per 10,000 personnel to 231.2. Stress fractures of the feet also increased significantly among female recruits.
During the gender-fair period of training, which ended in 1998, female trainees suffered 467 injuries per 10,000, compared with 118 among their male colleagues. After gender-free training was introduced, menâs injuries rose to 147, but womenâs injuries went up to 1,113 per 10,000.
After the publication of the inspectorateâs report, which was commissioned by the Ministry of Defence to examine training across the Services, Lieutenant-General Anthony Palmer, Deputy Chief of Defence Staff (personnel), said that the issue of gender-free training was being reviewed.
The report said that the problem of injuries in the Services had been âexacerbated by change from a gender-fair policy, in which women were set training goals appropriate to their physique, to a gender-free approach, prompted erroneously by a conviction that equality of opportunity demands itâ.
When gender-free training was introduced in 1998, the Government declared that it was another step in efforts to provide equality of opportunity for all. The old system, which required men to run 1.5 miles in 13min 15sec but allowed women 15min 15sec, was perceived to be no longer legally defensible on the grounds of discrimination.
General Palmer said that it was the Servicesâ responsibility to ensure proper duty of care for all trainees, including âprotecting them from injuryâ.
Military sources said that a reversal to the gender-fair approach was unlikely to affect the promotion prospects for female officers, because they required âmore brain than brawnâ. For non-commissioned officers, there might be fewer openings for jobs that needed physical strength. Seventy per cent of jobs in the Army are open currently to women.
Last week the Commons Defence Committee issued a critical report into the duty of care after four young recruits died at the Deepcut barracks.
ON REPORT: HOW ARMY TRAINING CAMPS FAILED
# Stereotyping of gender, nationality and race, inappropriate language and too lax an attitude towards harassment and bullying were âstill too widely acceptedâ. Pin-ups were still displayed
# At some training centres poor work was punished by locker-trashing. At the Royal Marinesâ establishment at Lympstone, Devon, trivial offences were punished with âtankingâ â being forced to jump into an outdoor tank of murky water
# Significantly more army personnel under 20 committed suicide than in the Royal Navy and the RAF. General Palmer said it was due to higher numbers of less well-educated recruits
# Decisions at the top about bullying and harassment were âtoo loosely connected to what happens on the groundâ
# Some barracks were âlittle better than slumsâ
# At Catterick, North Yorkshire, inspectors found unguarded weapons in recruitsâ sleeping quarters during meals and live rounds routinely discarded in undergrowth in exercise areas
# Fewer than half of instructors received training; some saw the job as no more than âbaby-sittingâ
Too many young women were being injured in training, the independent Adult Learning Inspectorate said, and called for a rethink of the âgender-freeâ policy. The previous âgender-fairâ policy, which took account of the âweaker sexâ, was reckoned to be contrary to equal opportunities legislation.
In a report that criticised much of the culture behind Armed Forcesâ training, the inspectorate, which carried out checks on all the training establishments, said that the militaryâs interpretation was to treat everyone the same. In the case of female recruits, the gender-free approach had led to record levels of injuries.
It recommended reverting to gender-fair training. The injuries had also coincided with the fact that recruits often joined the Armed Forces âunfit, overweight or poorly nourishedâ.
In women, fractures of the tibia (shin bone) had risen over a five-year period from 12.6 per 10,000 personnel to 231.2. Stress fractures of the feet also increased significantly among female recruits.
During the gender-fair period of training, which ended in 1998, female trainees suffered 467 injuries per 10,000, compared with 118 among their male colleagues. After gender-free training was introduced, menâs injuries rose to 147, but womenâs injuries went up to 1,113 per 10,000.
After the publication of the inspectorateâs report, which was commissioned by the Ministry of Defence to examine training across the Services, Lieutenant-General Anthony Palmer, Deputy Chief of Defence Staff (personnel), said that the issue of gender-free training was being reviewed.
The report said that the problem of injuries in the Services had been âexacerbated by change from a gender-fair policy, in which women were set training goals appropriate to their physique, to a gender-free approach, prompted erroneously by a conviction that equality of opportunity demands itâ.
When gender-free training was introduced in 1998, the Government declared that it was another step in efforts to provide equality of opportunity for all. The old system, which required men to run 1.5 miles in 13min 15sec but allowed women 15min 15sec, was perceived to be no longer legally defensible on the grounds of discrimination.
General Palmer said that it was the Servicesâ responsibility to ensure proper duty of care for all trainees, including âprotecting them from injuryâ.
Military sources said that a reversal to the gender-fair approach was unlikely to affect the promotion prospects for female officers, because they required âmore brain than brawnâ. For non-commissioned officers, there might be fewer openings for jobs that needed physical strength. Seventy per cent of jobs in the Army are open currently to women.
Last week the Commons Defence Committee issued a critical report into the duty of care after four young recruits died at the Deepcut barracks.
ON REPORT: HOW ARMY TRAINING CAMPS FAILED
# Stereotyping of gender, nationality and race, inappropriate language and too lax an attitude towards harassment and bullying were âstill too widely acceptedâ. Pin-ups were still displayed
# At some training centres poor work was punished by locker-trashing. At the Royal Marinesâ establishment at Lympstone, Devon, trivial offences were punished with âtankingâ â being forced to jump into an outdoor tank of murky water
# Significantly more army personnel under 20 committed suicide than in the Royal Navy and the RAF. General Palmer said it was due to higher numbers of less well-educated recruits
# Decisions at the top about bullying and harassment were âtoo loosely connected to what happens on the groundâ
# Some barracks were âlittle better than slumsâ
# At Catterick, North Yorkshire, inspectors found unguarded weapons in recruitsâ sleeping quarters during meals and live rounds routinely discarded in undergrowth in exercise areas
# Fewer than half of instructors received training; some saw the job as no more than âbaby-sittingâ
