AR 670-1 Why do Soldiers have to be at the mercy of interpretation?

2014-08-22T16:52:31-04:00

When the most recent version of AR 670-1 was released I specifically looked for something specifically. I wanted to see what it had to say about males shaving off duty. I'm not a fan of having to shave on the weekends or while on leave, but if the Army says I have to than I will execute. So I was pleased when I seen what the reg had to say.

I just copied and pasted from the AR 670-1.

"Facial hair. Males will keep their face clean-shaven when in uniform, or in civilian clothes on duty."

Seems pretty straight forward to me. But no more than 5 hours after I looked up this information, the BN CSM addressed the formation during the weekend safety brief. He asked if everybody had the chance to review the reg. Then he said, "So are we allowed to walk around on the weekend with hair all over our face.
To my surprise there was an overwhelming " No Seargent Major". Then he proceeds to say " that's right and if I see you on the weekend, I'm gonna ask if you're doing alright then light you up for walking around with hair on your face".

I was puzzled. Since then I have heard the same thing from multiple NCO's from in NCOPD and other forums. I have brought up that it does not say you have to shave off duty. But I get shut down every time. I get " we are always on duty" and old faithfull "you can add to but can't take away".

How do you interpet this information? And where do we draw the line with forcing people to do things because it's what you like, not what the Army says? I support Army regulation because it's my chosen profession. But I'm not about looking a certain way off duty because that's how an individual who out ranks me chooses look.

This is epidemic in more than just this instance and I'm just wondering why it happens.

Help me out Rallypoint, if their is a Army wide directive that I'm unaware of educate me.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 22 at 2014 4:56 PM

2014-08-22T16:56:19-04:00

Im confused by this post. What you have copied says no hair. The CSM said no hair. Everyone agreed, no hair. Am I missing something?

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 23 at 2014 2:19 AM

2014-08-23T02:19:56-04:00

From what i read before there was supposed to be a regulation stating soldiers must stay clean shaved out of uniform and during leave and etc. They cant really enforce that especially for reserves and National Guard. I know it clearly states while on duty which means while not on duty you are not required to shave. I would love to see how they would try to enforce being shaved during leave

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 27 at 2014 12:39 PM

2014-08-27T12:39:04-04:00

This seems to be something that gets confused(along with the supposed mandatory sew on name tapes) regularly. What you posted from AR 670-1 is correct and anyone can look it up for themselves[AR 670-1 para 3-2a(2)(b)]. I believe the confusion lies with the fact that soldiers are seldomly on duty while wearing civilian clothes and this gets confused with ANY TIME civilian clothing is worn(i.e. off duty). Some on duty occassions where civilian clothes would be worn are a unit picnic or family day, traveling TDY(other than for TCS), and, of course, if the unit Commander were to dictate civilian clothing as the uniform of the day(like the unit picnic example). Also, there are many positions, locales, and engagements for soldiers that render wearing a military uniform while on duty impractical, and the commander will adjust as he/she sees fit. Some of these may be CID agents or members of an embassy staff.
Generally speaking, weekends are informal pass periods(2 day pass) meaning you are off duty. Of course, while on leave you are also off duty.

All of that being said, a unit commander(and only a commander) can dictate tightening the regulation, although I'm not sure why with a trivial matter such as this. If so, it should be posted with other BN or BDE policy letters.

One can get into the "what ifs" regarding professional appearance, but strictly speaking, the regulation spells it out pretty clearly.

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 9 at 2014 1:57 PM

2014-10-09T13:57:38-04:00

The verbiage states "While on Duty". Unless there is some sort of post/unit policy that "adds to" the reg, it should only apply to your duty days.

Sounds like the CSM read to much into the regulation. Civilian clothes can be worn during the duty day (depending on the event) and even more so now if on official travel.

Response by MSG Greg Kelly made Oct 10 at 2014 2:12 PM

2014-10-10T14:12:47-04:00

This is one of my biggest pet peeves and 9 times out of 10 the people guilty are senior NCOs and Officers when I hear someone say "the regulation is interpreted this way" I want to go on a killing spree Army Regulations are not open to interpretation that is why they are called regulations. If there is a question about the regulation and why it is written a certain way there are references that can be used to clarify it. This comes down to we as humans are to lazy or are not taught the proper way regulations work by our leadership. Here is a simple example, Service Obligations are covered by AR 135-91 but depending on issues such as if someone is male/female, Officer/Enlisted even if someone is pregnant and not performing well or if they are National Guard/Reserve Here are just a couple of ARs that explain or clarify any questions. AR 135-178. AR 135-175, AR 140-10 NGR 600-200 and NGR 614-1 there is not one regulation that is open to Interpretation and when you hear someone quote a regulation I would bet a dollar to donut they have not seen it and are regurgitating something they have been told. Every soldier should be familiar with the primary Regulations for their MOS and you owe it to yourself when someone tells you, no that's against Regs to go research it and educate yourself.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 11 at 2014 12:11 AM

2014-10-11T00:11:52-04:00

I think that some confusion comes from that commanders are allowed to add to regulation, but not take away from it. I have seen units that add in little extras that their pet-peeves so to say. Is this the right thing to do, not really but it happens. To me the regulations are black and white for the most part, but as I stated above some commanders like to add things in that they like. AR670-1 takes some research on you're part, and good example of that is when it comes to boots. The regulation tells you what is authorized to wear, but it may take some research on you're end to make sure you are within regulation.

Response by SGT Josheua Cooke made Oct 16 at 2015 2:06 AM

2015-10-16T02:06:57-04:00

Command can add to 670-1 but not take away. Think of 670-1 as the most lax the Army as a whole will allow one to exercise and express themselves. The Army is synonymous with societal norms and your chain of command is like your mom and dad. You will abide by what mom and dad say, despite societal norms allowing for less stringent standards.