Posted on Feb 3, 2015
Is it WRONG for leaders to spend personal time with their soldiers?
8.26K
14
14
1
1
0
Understanding that it presents complications and risks to both parties for leaders and subordinates to socialize together, where exactly in the Regs does it say you can't? Specifically, I am looking at a SGT and a PFC drinking together outside of work. No romantic relationship. Just two "buddies" drinking. Is it a black and white "NO GO" or just a strong recomendation? Need some barracks lawyers (or real lawyers) to step up and empower an LT with Army Regulations.
Army Regulations
Relationships
NCOs
Social
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 9
3
3
0
I'm sure glad I'm in the Air Force. We regularly get together outside work...2LT up to Lt Col. Occasionally, even an O-6. At a bar. With booze. Often on base, in uniform. The bar is where some of the best mentoring takes place. It's also where senior leaders can get the most unfiltered feedback from the troops in the trenches.
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
For years, and I would hope it still exists, Air Force Squadrons and Flights had "Boss and Buddy Night" is was by no means a "piss up" but more an opportunity to see your Supervisor in a more relaxed light. Of course, there was still care in the interaction, but an opportunity to see the person vs. The Rank.
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
Check the newest revision to AR 600-20, specifically para 4-14. The revision redefined relationships between junior enlisted Soldiers and NCOs.
The pertinent language is here:
b. Soldiers of different grades must be cognizant that their interactions do not create an actual or clearly predictable
perception of undue familiarity between an officer and an enlisted Soldier, or between an NCO and a junior-enlisted
Soldier. Examples of familiarity between Soldiers that may become “undue” can include repeated visits to bars,
nightclubs, eating establishments, or homes between an officer and an enlisted Soldier, or an NCO and a junior-enlisted
Soldier, except for social gatherings, that involve an entire unit, office, or work section. All relationships between
Soldiers of different grade are prohibited if they—
(1) Compromise, or appear to compromise, the integrity of supervisory authority or the chain of command.
(2) Cause actual or perceived partiality or unfairness.
(3) Involve, or appear to involve, the improper use of grade or position for personal gain.
(4) Are, or are perceived to be, exploitative or coercive in nature.
(5) Create an actual or clearly predictable adverse impact on discipline, authority, morale, or the ability of the
command to accomplish its mission.
c. Certain types of personal relationships
Remember, the key takeaway is the creation of a perception. Impact vs. Intent if you will.
When in doubt, CYA (call your attorney).
The pertinent language is here:
b. Soldiers of different grades must be cognizant that their interactions do not create an actual or clearly predictable
perception of undue familiarity between an officer and an enlisted Soldier, or between an NCO and a junior-enlisted
Soldier. Examples of familiarity between Soldiers that may become “undue” can include repeated visits to bars,
nightclubs, eating establishments, or homes between an officer and an enlisted Soldier, or an NCO and a junior-enlisted
Soldier, except for social gatherings, that involve an entire unit, office, or work section. All relationships between
Soldiers of different grade are prohibited if they—
(1) Compromise, or appear to compromise, the integrity of supervisory authority or the chain of command.
(2) Cause actual or perceived partiality or unfairness.
(3) Involve, or appear to involve, the improper use of grade or position for personal gain.
(4) Are, or are perceived to be, exploitative or coercive in nature.
(5) Create an actual or clearly predictable adverse impact on discipline, authority, morale, or the ability of the
command to accomplish its mission.
c. Certain types of personal relationships
Remember, the key takeaway is the creation of a perception. Impact vs. Intent if you will.
When in doubt, CYA (call your attorney).
(3)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google