Can a Commander retroactively flag an SM with an unsigned PT card and never having been counseled?

2020-03-03T08:39:37-05:00

I have a soldier in my Battalion who failed a PT test August 27, 2019. The SM was never counseled and the PT card was never signed by the grader for the test. All this being said, the commander is just now looking into retroactively flagging the SM. Can they flag the SM with an unsigned PT card, and never having counseled them?

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 3 at 2020 8:46 AM

2020-03-03T08:46:52-05:00

I was once flagged for PT failure despite the fact that I had knee surgery the week before the PT test and was on profile and they never even told me I was flagged. I simply didn't make the promotion list and they kept giving me the run around when I asked why. I only found out about it a couple of years later when I got commissioned and had free access to my 201 file and saw the paperwork where I had been flagged. illegal as hell but they did it anyway. In this case they could retroactively counsel the SM for failing the test but since the card wasn't signed it would be hard to make the flag stick if the SM wanted to challenge it.

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 3 at 2020 8:51 AM

2020-03-03T08:51:38-05:00

There is no statute of limitations on a flag, yes they can still do it.
They can go back to the OIC of that test and get the 705 signed.
It is an administrative flag, so the flag can be imposed prior to the counseling session.
The counseling still has to happen, but neither the delay in flagging or delay in counseling is grounds to have the flag dismissed.
It has also been six months, the Soldier is already due another APFT, passing it prior to the flag action would be the best course of action here.

Response by CSM Danny S. made Mar 3 at 2020 9:17 AM

2020-03-03T09:17:18-05:00

Short answer is yes they can flag them. To initiate the flag using a DA 268 doesn't require you submit any of the documentation with it. The unit is suppose to maintain the supporting docs for length of the flag. However if you fail a record APFT you should expect to be flagged.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 3 at 2020 9:39 AM

2020-03-03T09:39:38-05:00

As said a few times in here. yes a flag can be initiated. It just amazes me to no end. Once the mention of flag comes about, thats when the Soldiers are worried about failing a PT Test. How about doing the bare minimum needed to just Pass the PT test? then there is no worry about a flag. Then all of a sudden the SM wants to dig into regs anf find out what their options are. The Army is easy. Be in the right place, in the right uniform, PASS a PT test whenever directed, and qualify with your weapon. Easiest job i ever had!!!!!!!!!!

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 3 at 2020 9:53 AM

2020-03-03T09:53:20-05:00

If the Soldier failed and it was a record APFT, then they get flagged. No amount of barracks layering will change that

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 3 at 2020 11:10 AM

2020-03-03T11:10:41-05:00

Can they flag? Yes. Will it hold up if the SM goes to JAG over it? Most likely not since 6 months have passed and the PT card was not signed. Did the card even say for record or for diagnostic on it? Lots of wiggle room on this one for the SM, but I can understand the CO wanting to get it done because you now have a soldier who doesn’t have a valid PT test on the books and is now on a profile and won’t be able to take one.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 3 at 2020 11:39 AM

2020-03-03T11:39:12-05:00

Bottom line: SM is wrong for failing APFT. CoC is wrong for not adhering to the phases, principles, components and types of training outlined in FM 7–22 as required by AR 350-1. Is this really a road the Commander wants to go down? From where I'm sitting it looks like the possible negatives he could face are greater than what the SM could face for PT failure, should this SM want to push the issue.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 3 at 2020 11:55 AM

2020-03-03T11:55:07-05:00

Just pass your PT Test, it’s not the hard to make the bare minimum standard.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 3 at 2020 12:09 PM

2020-03-03T12:09:48-05:00

Well, I presume the last RECORD APFT on file is 8+ months old, so I suppose the SM could be ordered to take a RECORD APFT at any given time from this moment forward. So the flag could be initiated right here and right now without any retroactive drama. What would be the benefit of a retroactive action in this case? Take away a promotion? Create a paper chain of the command's inaction from prior? Bring to question the complexities of an inconsequential negative action and raise the visibility of the command's potentially hostile motivation?

I don't know if this is AC or RC, but as a RC Commander I prided my staff's ability to execute flags and chapter packets that STUCK. That said, it still took the CG's approval of anyone I pushed upwards to kick out.

Where I'm going is I had a soldier that didn't pass the APFT for FOUR YEARS. The CG wasn't kicking anyone out for APFT (you had to pop hot for drugs or get convicted of a crime to get kicked out). So I can see the motivation being low for "flagging" SM's. There are multiple ways to the same end though. That SM's ETS date was coming, and he wanted to re-enlist. Well, not with a properly executed flag. Not even a CG's inaction was going to save him. He needed MY waiver to re-enlist. NOPE I wouldn't give it. He had TWO WEEKS before ETS to provide a RECORD PASS APFT.

He hadn't passed in FOUR YEARS, and sure as hell wasn't going to pass in TWO WEEKS.

Well, I was wrong!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! He PASSED!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Flag removed, my signature wasn't part of the re-enlistment process (since he wasn't flagged). I assure you no one did this SM any scoring "favors". Sr. Company leadership wanted him gone, and I thought I had an ACE up my sleeve.

Funny how certain things motivate SM's

I digress..............

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 3 at 2020 2:13 PM

2020-03-03T14:13:58-05:00

Certainly, the commander can initiate the flag, have the card signed, and have the Soldier counseled. Is it the right thing to do, since the commander failed to ensure the required actions weren't followed? Maybe, but more information is needed.
Considering the added information that the Soldier is now on profile, and pregnant permits further thought. However, did the Soldier obtain a profile after she was informed of the pending flag? If so, and the profile was unrelated to the pregnancy, I suggest it is suspect. If it is solely related to the pregnacy, it doesn't make her actions any less suspect. Why?

The Soldier, knowing she failed a record APFT, failed to request another record APFT. Sure, the commander failed to ensure the completion of the administrative requirements were completed in a timely manner, but that doesn't nullify the APFT failure.

The commander, after learning of the profile and pregnancy, be trying to stop any positive personnel actions in response to the failed APFT.

I've seen many posts, and witnessed on more than a few occasions, where someone got promoted despite not having earned the promotion. Frequently, it's related to something like this scenario.

Sure, the Soldier can report it to the higher COC, or go to the IG. First, the IG may point out the commander needs to improve administrative functions related to conduct of APFT and flags, but can't direct anything. Yes, the higher CoC can direct something, but the APFT failure doesn't go away.

The Soldier failed the APFT, and the commander failed to perform administrative matters and initiate the flag in a timely manner.

IMHO, The Soldier should be flagged. She didn't correct her deficiency, and needs to own it.

Also, HR folks need not try to undermine a commander because they disagree with the commander's lawful action

Response by CSM Darieus ZaGara made Mar 3 at 2020 2:35 PM

2020-03-03T14:35:52-05:00

The idea is not to fail the APFT. End of story!

Response by SSG Brian G. made Mar 3 at 2020 7:57 PM

2020-03-03T19:57:50-05:00

Short answer is yes the SM can be flagged for failing an APFT even with no counseling and no signed APFT card and it being 6 months since the event. THAT however opens up a can of worms that the CoC might not want to even think about. Which is the SM can make a formal complaint and launch a formal IG investigation launched.

The SM was wrong for failing the APFT. The CoC was wrong for not following proper regulations.

I would be curious to know how it got to this point. Was there an audit of the units paperwork and this was discovered? Was it a case of a new training NCO taking over or simply the normal rotation of time to take the APFT?

The all around best thing here is void the APFT taken as it was so long ago, and not signed and just have the SM take a whole new APFT for record and do it by the regulations. No harm, no foul.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 3 at 2020 10:39 PM

2020-03-03T22:39:53-05:00

The DA 705 should be completely filled out as a substantiating document before the SFPA is coded. If the Soldier has not passed an APFT 8 months for Soldiers on orders and 15 for MDAY/TPU the Soldier can also be FLAGGED. AR 600-8-2 is the reg you want to read. Something's are worth fighting and some are not. Do PT!

b. “Army Physical Fitness Test failure” (Flag code J). Initiate a Flag when a Soldier fails a record APFT or when,
through the Soldier’s fault as determined by the commander, the Soldier fails to take the APFT within the time
prescribed by existing regulations, or when directed by the commanding officer (as provided for in AR 350–1). A Flag
is not required for a Soldier who has a permanent or temporary profile that precludes taking the APFT or is unable to
undergo an APFT because of conditions beyond the Soldier’s control (as determined by the commander). Soldiers with
a profile effective after the APFT will remain flagged until a record APFT is passed. A Flag is not required when the
commander determines the Soldier cannot be administered an alternate APFT because of conditions beyond the
Soldier’s control. Soldiers who become pregnant after being flagged for failing an APFT (as determined by a
physician) will remain flagged until successfully passing an APFT. Remove the Flag (code E) on date of compliance.
If, as determined by her primary care provider, the Soldier was pregnant at the time of APFT failure, the commander
will immediately remove the Flag (code Z).

2–6. Notification
The flagging authority, unit commander, or first line supervisor will counsel all Soldiers on active duty, in writing,
upon initiation of any Flag within 2 working days unless notification would compromise an ongoing investigation.
Soldiers not on active duty will be counseled regarding initiation of a Flag prior to the conclusion of the first training
period following the date the Flag was initiated. Counseling should include reason for the Flag, requirement for Flag
removal, and action prohibited by the Flag. All flagged Soldiers will be provided a copy of the DA Form 268 when the
Flag is initiated and when it is removed. Notifications for HQDA initiated flags may be delayed to protect against the
unintentional early release of a promotion board’s results.

Response by SFC Wilfredo Ramos made Apr 28 at 2020 11:18 AM

2020-04-28T11:18:17-04:00

There is no excuse for failing an APFT. If the SM has a physical condition that prevents it from completing an event, it must have a NO PT/APFT PROFILE, as simple as that.

Response by SFC Kory Schaubhut made May 16 at 2020 4:57 AM

2020-05-16T04:57:55-04:00

If the PT cards were never signed then they never failed a record PT test.