Posted on Apr 12, 2014
Corrective training vs negative counseling statement
87K
45
39
0
0
0
Obviously some situations are clear. But for those ones that are not. Which is more effective, productive and best for the soldier?
Discipline
Counseling
Corrective Training
UCMJ
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 14
15
15
0
My answer goes contrary to the current school of thought: smoke session if you want them to learn, negative counseling when you're preparing for UCMJ.
I know that goes against everything the Army says is correct, however policies don't determine what makes great Soldiers, experience and Leaders do. In my short experience, my leaders smoked me until I learned. I still remember doing handstand pushups against the wall and my NCO saying, "there are smart Rangers, and strong Rangers; which one are you?" Paperwork was that ultimate big gun that your leader broke out when it was time to stand before the 1SG.
Taking away the threat of a little sweat leaves that team leader with little in the way of elevating the ROE without going straight to UCMJ.
I know that goes against everything the Army says is correct, however policies don't determine what makes great Soldiers, experience and Leaders do. In my short experience, my leaders smoked me until I learned. I still remember doing handstand pushups against the wall and my NCO saying, "there are smart Rangers, and strong Rangers; which one are you?" Paperwork was that ultimate big gun that your leader broke out when it was time to stand before the 1SG.
Taking away the threat of a little sweat leaves that team leader with little in the way of elevating the ROE without going straight to UCMJ.
(15)
(0)
4
4
0
Well you have to know what would get better results. Know your Soldiers and learn how to get the most out of them. If a good smoke session works do it but some need that negative counseling in writing with a plan of action to get their attention. As leaders we should know what gets the attention of our Soldiers to help develope them.
(4)
(0)
3
3
0
SSG(P) (Join to see)
MSG Quick,
Smoking a Soldier for a perceived infraction is synonymous with punishment. If the Soldier repeats the same offense later, and the paperwork trail leads to NJP under UCMJ, then the Soldier can claim that he/she has already been [illegally] punished for the offense. There is a fine line that many cross unknowingly in terms of "punishment" and "corrective action." The term "corrective action" (when imposed by a leader) should be focused on correcting a deficiency. The only time that "corrective action" should involve physical training or PRT is when the deficiency is a failing APFT score. (See additional post)
(0)
(0)
SGM Matthew Quick
SSG Ruth,
Are you saying a corrective action-type event equates to 'punishment'?
Example: A Soldier is late for formation and has to show up 30 minutes early for the next three formations. If the Soldier is late again and the NCO recommends Article 15, the Soldier can successfully claim 'time served'?
I would recommend you seek a legal NCOs perspective on this situation.
Example: A Soldier is late for formation and has to show up 30 minutes early for the next three formations. If the Soldier is late again and the NCO recommends Article 15, the Soldier can successfully claim 'time served'?
I would recommend you seek a legal NCOs perspective on this situation.
(2)
(0)
CMDCM Gene Treants
Corrective action, if done properly is NOT punishment. It is teaching a Sailor of soldier the proper way to do things. If a Sailor cannot maintain his Uniform properly and you take away his Civilian Clothing Privileges, that IS Punishment. However, inspecting his entire Seabag and making sure that his locker is stowed properly daily is Corrective Action and is not punishment, especially if discrepancies are found.<div><br></div><div>After Mast (Article 15) we have sometimes removed Civilian Clothing privileges if a Sailor's uniforms and or lack of ability to care for his uniforms is a part of his problems. Yes THAT is punishment!</div>
(1)
(0)
SFC Robert Walton
SGM Matthew Quick - SSG(P) (Join to see) I see both sides here and the best way to solve it is the corrective action should justify the failure except in a situation like late for formation that is what I call think correction. Push ups behind formation is think correction I can use that and also set the individual down for counseling if this is recurring issue. I like the push-ups then see me after formation so i can do a verbal the first time, second time is push-ups and meet me in the orderly room every morning at this time 15 min. early until further notice and put it on paper. Provide a copy for the SM.
Third time Written counseling and forward all to the 1SGT. for non-judicial. JMTC
Third time Written counseling and forward all to the 1SGT. for non-judicial. JMTC
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
Each incident and each individual is different...small infractions and Soldiers may respond to a simple "smoking" while a larger or repeated infraction and different Soldier may respond better to a counseling session with a recorded 4856. You as a leader SHOULD know when one is more appropriate or better suited than the other and also what your Soldiers respond better to.
(2)
(0)
SSG Selwyn Bodley
I think a leader that is worth his salt will know. I've been out for a couple of of moons, but what I'm hearing is that NCO's are being pushed in the direction of counseling and away from smoke sessions. Which concerns me.
(1)
(0)
SFC William Swartz Jr
Yes, unfortunately with the climate of the Army over the last oh ten years or so, it has been viewed more as hazing or poor leadership by smoking the "evil" out of a transgressor....so, the NCOs have been forced, more or less, to put to paper as opposed to conducting a smoking session.
(1)
(0)
SSG Selwyn Bodley
I certainly can see the danger of a poor NCO abusing a soldier... Just kinda feel they're throwing the baby out with the bath water.
(1)
(0)
SSG Daniel Deiler
I really disagree with what some people's definition or idea of "hazing." AR 600-20 is clear about it.
(2) When authorized by the chain of command and not unnecessarily cruel, abusive, oppressive, or harmful, the
following activities do not constitute hazing:
(a) The physical and mental hardships associated with operations or operational training.
(b) Administrative corrective measures, including verbal reprimands and a reasonable number of repetitions of
authorized physical exercises.
(c) Extra military instruction or training.
(d) Physical training (PT) or remedial PT.
(e) Other similar activities.
But now we run into the problem of what "a reasonable number of repetitions of authorized physical exercises" is. I would say that so long as a Soldier can still perform normal daily activities safely without their body failing them that is reasonable. So long as a Soldier does not become dehydrated. A leader should be aware of any physical limitations and their health history that may be a pre-cursor to the onset of something like a asthma attack or seirzures...We do muscle failure PT right? So how is that not "hazing" but doing it outside of the hours a Commander designates as PT time all of a sudden it is?
(2) When authorized by the chain of command and not unnecessarily cruel, abusive, oppressive, or harmful, the
following activities do not constitute hazing:
(a) The physical and mental hardships associated with operations or operational training.
(b) Administrative corrective measures, including verbal reprimands and a reasonable number of repetitions of
authorized physical exercises.
(c) Extra military instruction or training.
(d) Physical training (PT) or remedial PT.
(e) Other similar activities.
But now we run into the problem of what "a reasonable number of repetitions of authorized physical exercises" is. I would say that so long as a Soldier can still perform normal daily activities safely without their body failing them that is reasonable. So long as a Soldier does not become dehydrated. A leader should be aware of any physical limitations and their health history that may be a pre-cursor to the onset of something like a asthma attack or seirzures...We do muscle failure PT right? So how is that not "hazing" but doing it outside of the hours a Commander designates as PT time all of a sudden it is?
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
Being "very old school" myself I am going to quote a very influential General I once protected.
Praise in public, but counsel in private.
That being said I am wholeheartedly against physical corrective training and would quickly deal with my NCOs if I saw it done. I see it as an abuse and misuse of power.
Making a soldier do push-up, flutter kicks, burpees, etc... Does absolutely nothing to correct the infraction. If the soldier was a PT failure I might make them do more of the failed event than other soldiers but that was it.
I strongly believe in paperwork. If a soldier is subpar they need to know that and you need to annotate that. If an NCO is subpar, likewise.
The reason we have so many piss poor leaders in the Army today is because someone was either afraid or too lazy to do the paperwork. That same mentality of "I don't want to hurt their career". BS! You didn't do a thing, they did, or failed to.
A good soldier never has to stand on the carpet.
Anyone who actually knows the regs should know that the boards will never see a counseling statement but they will see GOMAR's and such as it should be.
I agree that people grow, change and improve but that does not negate the fact that said NCO sexually assaulted someone or got a DUI at some point.
Praise in public, but counsel in private.
That being said I am wholeheartedly against physical corrective training and would quickly deal with my NCOs if I saw it done. I see it as an abuse and misuse of power.
Making a soldier do push-up, flutter kicks, burpees, etc... Does absolutely nothing to correct the infraction. If the soldier was a PT failure I might make them do more of the failed event than other soldiers but that was it.
I strongly believe in paperwork. If a soldier is subpar they need to know that and you need to annotate that. If an NCO is subpar, likewise.
The reason we have so many piss poor leaders in the Army today is because someone was either afraid or too lazy to do the paperwork. That same mentality of "I don't want to hurt their career". BS! You didn't do a thing, they did, or failed to.
A good soldier never has to stand on the carpet.
Anyone who actually knows the regs should know that the boards will never see a counseling statement but they will see GOMAR's and such as it should be.
I agree that people grow, change and improve but that does not negate the fact that said NCO sexually assaulted someone or got a DUI at some point.
(1)
(0)
SFC Gary Fox
SFC Grudzinski, I beg your pardon, but you're not old school. I on the other hand am having gone to BCT in 1974. Back in those days, the whole platoon could be smoked for one guy not making his bunk properly or for some other infraction. The whole idea of smoking the entire platoon was to enforce the importance of team work and checking each other out. Another reason for it was to instill peer pressure. We had 41 guys in the platoon. If one kept screwing up on a regular basis, he had 40 on his ass to straighten him out. It worked.
At AIT (MP school at Ft. Gordon) it was different. There a Soldier was smoked as an individual; however, I only remember one ever being smoked and it was because he showed up to morning formation late and hung over. In those days, you were permitted to go off post after final formation and on weekends, as long as you were on time for formation and prepared. Prepared meant you had enough sleep and weren't hung over. Soldiers were treated like adults back then, were allowed to consume and purchase alcohol on post even if you were only 17 (the state drinking law was 18). We could also wear civilian clothing after final formation.
I had a total of 25 years of service. Not all Soldiers are going to respond to a smoking. Those Soldiers don't normally respond to written counseling either as they have attitudes. I'd smoke a Soldier and if he continued to commit the same infraction or any other, I would then begin the paper trail in case it eventually came to the need for punitive action or even to begin chaptering him out.
At AIT (MP school at Ft. Gordon) it was different. There a Soldier was smoked as an individual; however, I only remember one ever being smoked and it was because he showed up to morning formation late and hung over. In those days, you were permitted to go off post after final formation and on weekends, as long as you were on time for formation and prepared. Prepared meant you had enough sleep and weren't hung over. Soldiers were treated like adults back then, were allowed to consume and purchase alcohol on post even if you were only 17 (the state drinking law was 18). We could also wear civilian clothing after final formation.
I had a total of 25 years of service. Not all Soldiers are going to respond to a smoking. Those Soldiers don't normally respond to written counseling either as they have attitudes. I'd smoke a Soldier and if he continued to commit the same infraction or any other, I would then begin the paper trail in case it eventually came to the need for punitive action or even to begin chaptering him out.
(0)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
Ok, geez lets not pull em out and compare. The analogy was related to my methods compared to those of today's Army. I too had people get smoked, I too remember blanket parties and idiotic things of that nature but that still doesn't justify it. An effective leader can instill discipline without having to resort to physical embarrassment which is what it equates to.
Discipline is doing what is expected even when no one is looking.
Discipline is doing what is expected even when no one is looking.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
The answer will always depend on the individual. The "abuse" reasoning only really applies when a Soldier is repetitively smoked for no legal reason. Often I find that a smoke session is only effective for attitude adjustments. For legal infractions concerning breach of regulation or policy, I counsel on the spot. Why? An attitude or "I don't care mindset" or lack of attention to detail can always be bent into a Article 134 Counseling, but is it necessary? I say that counseling in these cases is only necessary when their is a repetitive trend and the individual does not respond to retraining. Because what really is the purpose of a 4856? To provide a written record of a dialogue between Leader and Subordinate. Why keep a record unless their is a reason to use it in the future. We as leaders use 4856's not simply for event oriented counseling, but professional growth.
To wrap it up, I find it personally disturbing when Leaders think that a few pushups are abusive. I find it problematic that we are so quick to write a narrative about how we feel about a Soldiers conduct and leaving it in their file until they PCS rather than providing them a significant emotional event to change their direction with. No, smoke session after smoke session is not the answer for mentoring Soldiers, but I see it as giving the Soldier a chance to correct themselves prior to becoming subject to administrative action s.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
"Smoke sessions" are not effective (having been smoked many times in my career) and can lead to being court martialed for abuse (I have testified in such matters). If the "punishment does not meet the crime," then why do it? Smoking your Soldiers is naive. As a leader, you should be capable of developing a plan of action that will garner the results you desire while developing the Soldier simultaneously. Dont be scared of a little paperwork.
(1)
(0)
SSG Daniel Deiler
I highly disagree with yo SSG Ruth. A smoke session can be extremely effective. Just because it did not work on YOU does not mean it won't work on another Soldier. Again it boils down to knowing your Soldiers. Believe me...it worked for me early on in my career. Plus I had the added bonus that I kicked ass on my PT test when it came around again.
(1)
(0)
SSG(P) (Join to see)
Just like I said, what worked with you may/may not work with others. To each their own.
(0)
(0)
SSG Daniel Deiler
Exactly. However your original comment said that they are not effective and naive. While they Gould not necessarily be the first and/or only option, to say what you did is naive and short-sighted. We should not close ourselves off to different methods of enforcing discipline.
(0)
(0)
SSG(P) (Join to see)
My current assignment has me instructing NCOs and junior officers. AR 350-1 applies to how I interact with my students, along with the maturity of being an NCO, husband, and father. I have learned that it is naive to impose my will on someone by forcing them to do physical activity at the expense of getting my point across. As a Sergeant, I was smoked and embarrassed by my SSG in front of my Soldiers (and PSG, who did nothing about it). He completely humiliated me and I lost all respect for him as a person, only respecting his rank after that. His idea of discipline was the straw that broke the camel's back, and a new Soldier took his own life because of it. Investigations ensued, a bunch of people were relieved, and 4 were court martialed. I can get anyone to learn from a mistake (including NCOs and officers) by using tact and displaying professionalism. You can form your own opinion of me, just as I will of you. We may not agree on what we think is acceptable from each other. Again, to each his own. For anyone else who reads this, I respect your opinions as yours, and will not try to change them. We are all free thinkers, entitled to freedom of thought and speech. I expect you to defend your thoughts just as I have. We are all products of our experiences, and mine are different from yours, just as yours are different from mine. I will find more constructive ways to get desired results from my Soldiers without smoking them. The only way PT will find its way into corrective training is if the deficiency is PT (even then, FM 7-22 will be my guide, not my personal opinion of what type and amount of exercises the Soldier will perform). In conclusion, I am opposed to smoking because I have seen the destruction that smoking someone does to a unit. It tears it in half, leading to prosecution and defense. I lost best friends, and we haven't spoken since because we were on different sides of the argument. Moreover, a Soldier took his life because of it.
Thank you SFC Haines for holding me accountable.
Thank you SFC Haines for holding me accountable.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
I'll give you the same answer my NCOs have always given me. (and I happen to agree with) It depends on the person and the circumstance. Some people respond to getting smoked, some don't. Although, in the current "retention climate" the army appears to be more concerned with getting rid of soldiers than shaping them into better ones. I can't say its a bad thing though, because if we are going to downsize, you might as well downsize the soup sandwiches.
(1)
(0)
SSG Selwyn Bodley
I Agee that a lot does depend on the soldier at hand. However, some of my best soldiers have started off on the wrong foot and I have seen them turn into great good soldiers and great leaders. Some if the best lessons in life come through failure. If given the chance to learn from them, with the right leadership, can produce a quality soldier . Of course this is not always the case , but from my personal experience I've seen it happen more than not. Would be interested if others have had similar experiences?
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
Both can be used or use one and then the other Counseling statements are not always negative and can be both good and bad, With that said you should know your Soldiers well enough to decide which tool works best for each Soldier and apply it accordingly. It would be my opinion that if you View counseling as always NEGITIVE you are using it wrong. I had a file on everyone of my Soldiers including a 3x5 card with information on it about family, home of record, date of rank, and so on. What I called quick information. Just because you write a counseling does not make it bad it is what you do with it that makes it bad or good. MTC Good Luck.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Always counsel but corrective training is a plan of action within that counseling. As a former legal geek you want to counsel if only to have a paper trail if the Soldier continues on the path they are on. They you show that you have attempted to correct it.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google