cdt integrity check

Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by delwalker, Nov 24, 2013.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. CDT rolled into Collingwood not 2 months ago and caught a trainee out with cannabis in hissystem and he got let off because he said it was "out of character". Anyone else think this defeats the purpose of "zero tolerance" and think this shows the cdt as a bit spineless.
     
  2. Because HE said it was out of character? No. Because his chain of command said it was out of character. Whether or not that is acceptable is a different matter.

    CDT bloke/wench: You've been on the pakiblack then?

    Trainee: *finishes Kit-Kat* Yeah dude, but it was like out of character, y'nah what I mean innit?

    CDT bloke/wench: OK then - you're 'let off'.

    Edit: If there is any spinelessness (?) it wouldn't come from the CDT would it? All they do is *ahem* take the piss. It's the adminstrative/disciplinary system that deals with the drug hypocrisy and double standards within the armed forces.
     
    Last edited: Nov 24, 2013
  3. Still. I just don't see how they can preach "zero tolerance" when all it takes a good word from your DO.
     
  4. You didn't say his DO - you said it was him that claimed out of character.

    From my recollection it is generally 'zero tolerance', but perhaps some mature thinking has now prevailed bearing in mind the serious alcohol abuse in the Navy. I often wonder what a Commander I used to work for, who was permanently pissed, would think of 'zero tolerance' to drugs which affected the ability to speak coherently amongst other things.
     
  5. All I'm saying is the story goes, from as far as I know/heard, was that it was the lad who said he was out of character. What I'm saying now is that even if it was the chain of command it's still not zero tolerance. I'm with you on the common sense bit but if the cdt are going to keep using the "zero tolerance" line then they'd better uphold it.
     
  6. Ninja_Stoker

    Ninja_Stoker War Hero Moderator

    Do you have any evidence beyond hearsay to back up your claim?

    If 100% true, then it's a bit pointless having CDT if discharge is an option rather than mandatory as it is no longer a deterrent and sends a clear message to those wishing to join.

    If an unfounded rumour, then suggesting a positive CDT doesn't result in an automatic discharge has the ironic effect of encouraging recreational drugs users who desist due to the consequences, to re-commence their habit.

    Rather worryingly, the RN Drugs policy appears to suggest, a positive CDT isn't always an automatic dismissal. This in itself leaves room for potential joiners to think there are certain circumstances where it is accepted:

    http://c69011.r11.cf3.rackcdn.com/29bd98646fca41a890a772a59df08d1a-0x0.pdf

    The only words that an habitual drugs user will read and remember from the above extract are "Very few exceptions". It may also interest viewers to know that we no longer ask drugs-related questions at interview.
     
  7. I heard from the Number 1 Laundry man whilst in the Naafi queue it was out of character
     
    • Like Like x 3
  8. I am going to say this is a gash dit. Myself being at C'wood, CDT haven't visited us since April/May. And no body tested positive. But never let the truth get in the way of a true dit.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  9. Hopefully now its been posted on here it will be sorted for you, wahhh
     
  10. I've been told in a few briefings that really only the most junior ratings stand a chance of being retained. If you're LH upwards you are in a leadership position and will not be retained but the bottom end junior dudes might get a second chance but will almost certainly be on an enhanced testing regime. So it's not zero tolerance for ABs but it us for everyone else.


    Posted from the Navy Net mobile app (Android / iOS)
     
  11. Which is it?
     
  12. Ninja_Stoker

    Ninja_Stoker War Hero Moderator

    Are you sure that's the case? The reason I ask is that as sure as eggs are eggs, if that's the case then we no longer have an effective deterrent as any joiner need not worry about recreational drugs use. It's also contrary to what we are directed to brief joiners - effectively: "You will be tested in training & you will be discharged if tested positive".

    I'd be more than a little hacked-off if we were being directed to tell porkies.
     
  13. All I can say Ninj is that I have sat in briefings and been told that "while it's a zero tolerance policy there are sometimes circumstances where someone can fail a test and not be kicked out. If, however, you are a LH or above there is no chance". I think cases where people are kept are very few and far between but not non-existent so it can't be zero tolerance can it. I think the booties had a few cases retained and they come under our regime. There are definitely people who've not been kicked out but I think it's about a 99%+ discharge rate.


    Posted from the Navy Net mobile app (Android / iOS)
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. exJenny

    exJenny War Hero Moderator Book Reviewer

    I knew a lad, though he was knocking 40 so not so much a lad, who got caught and discharged after 18 years service. It is thought he got grassed up, pun intended, and busted after saying to his "mate" he'd just claim he was spiked if he ever got caught. Apparently, so I heard later, he would have had to have been spiked every night for the previous 6 months at least.


    Just the thoughts of a blonde ex wren
     
  15. Ninja_Stoker

    Ninja_Stoker War Hero Moderator

    I'm certain Royals get kicked-out on a positive CDT whilst in training as I've had guys try to rejoin years later and told to foxtrot oscar as it's gross misconduct & nothing to do with the rehabilitation of offenders act.

    If someone comes back off weekenders & reports they had their "drink spiked" (this is the most common feeble excuse on a positive CDT - as we all know), then there's a grey area if a CDT coincides with this soon after being declared, but only if it's declared upfront, before the CDT is even announced. Obviously this can only happen once & is not a retrospective excuse.

    I do know years back, the Army toyed with the concept of a "three strikes & out" CDT and possibly this is where people may think a recruit has a "Get Out of Jail Free Card" whilst in training, but unless things have radically changed, I know of no-one that escaped discharge from a positive CDT although I've heard heaps of rumours to the contrary.
     
  16. Have to say I've never been briefed on CDT being anything other than zero tolerance. They also seem very active at the moment. 3 visits to Culdrose since summer leave.
     
  17. From a FOI request response found by googling RNCDT:

    2009 positive tests 34 Discharged 30
    2010 positive tests 44 Discharged 42
    2011 positive tests 31 Discharged 31

    So not zero tolerance by any means. See for yourself at: posting link didn't work. Google Royal Navy Compulsory Drug Testing. It's the 3rd result.
     
    Last edited: Nov 24, 2013
  18. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...1212_16112011123047011_AF_DrugTests_Final.pdf
     
  19. Seen, cheers.
     
  20. interesting numbers there:

    RN 94% Discharge
    Army 98%
    RAF 79%
    (Numbers rounded down to nearest full %)

    Throw in that the RAF figure went up 3 years on the trot
     
    • Like Like x 1

Share This Page