DA 638's should have no administrative data on them. Take rank out of the awards process.

SSG Robert Burns — Mon, 04 Nov 2013 17:17:39 -0500

Too often you hear of individuals awards being downgraded/upgraded/or not even approved because of what rank the person is, who recommended it, or simply who they are.  Awards should be approved based solely on what is written in the bullets or the narrative for that individual.  If I have a SPC who did the exact same thing as a SFC and submit them both for a BSM how does one get an ARCOM and the other a BSM?  I'll tell you what was told me, because of their rank.  I would argue if you are going to bring rank into it then that SPC deserves it more because he obviously did something that was considered above and beyond for a SFC.<div>The awards form should be 2 forms; the recommendation with justification and an administrative form for S-1.  Once approved/disapproved it comes back to S-1 and matched up with the reference number on the admin form for action.  S-1 can check for flags, etc.</div><div>The decision should have nothing to do with anything other than those bullets.</div>

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 4 at 2013 5:19 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 04 Nov 2013 17:19:49 -0500

I agree. During my last rotation as an advisor, my team medic was working far above his pay-grade, and accomplishing incredible things with his Afghan counterpart (a LTC). In the end, his BSM was downgraded based on his rank.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 4 at 2013 5:28 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 04 Nov 2013 17:28:55 -0500

I wholeheartedly agree. Not only have I heard about this but I've seen it firsthand. Why downgrade someone's award???? Because those senior "leaders" did not feel that the individual was deserving of our because they fell short of saving someone's life. A Soldier (or any servicemember for that matter) should NEVER have to worry about thinking if the work they did was good enough to warrant an award.

Being a leader myself I've come to believe that in some units it is much harder to get an award than in others. This being particularly true with the comparison of TDA and TOE units. Take the politics out of everything and let's reward those who honestly deserve them. Watch how quickly morale will rise.

Response by SPC Corbin Doades made Nov 4 at 2013 5:59 PM

SPC Corbin Doades — Mon, 04 Nov 2013 17:59:19 -0500

I was put up for an award for saving my MRAP from rolling over after I hit a pothole that we thought was a rough spot in the road. Had it been any other driver the results may have been different. I never saw the award and I became upset when other drivers got awards for minor things. I was considered the the sh!t bag of the unit and was not very well liked. I suppose that was the main reason for not receiving any sort of recognition. I am glad that I was awarded the Combat Spurs from the Cav Unit we fell under.

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 4 at 2013 6:05 PM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 04 Nov 2013 18:05:52 -0500

I've never heard this approach to solving this particular problem. I think it's a great idea. I ran into an issue years ago where I recommended a SGT for a PCS award. She was a pain in the butt, but she worked very hard and was frequently selected for particularly difficult/arduous tasks (she was very detail oriented too). The award was initially kicked back because "That's the same award we just gave to the SFC who was the HQ Platoon Sergeant, and the training room NCOIC. How can you possibly justify that your Soldier deserves the same award." I returned it with the same bullets and told the commander to downgrade it if wasn't warranted. The 1SG then started nit-picking every little detail on the award, each time kicking it back for something new and unrelated to previous submissions. One day I was told the award was good to go. Two or three weeks later my Soldier was awarded a lesser award as the PCS award. When I asked her about it, she showed me the 638. My acting Patoon Sergeant took my award, removed my name, downgraded the award, and resubmitted it. No bullets were changed, and it was approved with praise from each of the Commanders in their comment sections. Never in my life have I lost my military bearing to such a degree so quickly. Calmer heads prevailed and I made it out of my boss's office with my rank, but I'll never forget the BS argument which cost a Soldier the award they had earned. By the way, the recommendation was an ARCOM, not an MSM as some of you may have assumed while reading this.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 11 at 2013 2:10 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 11 Nov 2013 14:10:59 -0500

SSG Burns,

I will agree with you that awards should be approved based solely on what is written in the bullets or the narrative for that individual but I think more than rank need to be taken out. I believe block that deals with previous awards need to be taken out as well. The reason for that is some commander look at the previous award a Soldier received and base their recommendation off of that. For example when I PCS from my old duty station as a commander to my current duty station I was put in for a MSM and at the time I had 2 AAM no ARCOMs my award was downgraded to an ARCOM.

Response by COL Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 19 at 2014 10:36 PM

COL Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 19 Aug 2014 22:36:56 -0400

SSG Burns...totally agree with you! If a SPC does the exact same thing a SFC does, they should get the same award. Now...the chances of that happening are slim. It has to do with level of responsibility too. If a private is excellent at his job (top 1% performer) and a MSG is excellent at his job...which one has more impact? Which one has more responsibility? A LT and a LTC. The LT fights 4 vehicles and 25 soldiers and owns a small piece of terrain. The LTC is responsible for 600 people, 150 vehicles, and a battle space the size of Maryland. There's a difference there. Both may be excellent at their jobs, but one has a more significant impact on the army and the mission. We do have a gap though. PCS moves are a problem at the rank of SFC-1SG and CPT's. The MSM covers a broad range of ranks in the level of responsibility it represents. It's too wide in my opinion

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 20 at 2014 9:51 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 20 Aug 2014 09:51:28 -0400

"If I have a SPC who did the exact same thing as a SFC and submit them both for a BSM how does one get an ARCOM and the other a BSM?"

If anything, this ought to be the opposite way around (at least for non-combat awards). Any SPC who can do a job well enough that a SFC would have gotten an ARCOM would themselves deserve more than an ARCOM, if only because that's not the scope of ability and responsibility you expct from a SPC.

I have my own rank-based award story. When I was deployed as a junior CPT, I took over as a staff principal and my predecessor was a MAJ. They also chose that time to downsize, and I lost the SFC NCOIC that my predecessor enjoyed. And when I say enjoyed, I mean that he did the entire job of the shop, and the MAJ only did one 5-minute briefing of 3 PowerPoint slides every 2 weeks (I'm not kidding -- that's all he did the whole year). That MAJ walked away with an MSM for doing nothing except being a MAJ in Theater, and he put in the SFC for an AAM. When the SFC complained, I saw the MAJ dress him down and say he should be grateful for any award at all. It left me very bitter about the rank-based and buddy-buddy nature of the awards in that command. (In case anyone is wondering, I did the full job of the shop since the E-7 slot was gone, and got an ARCOM. Not complaining about what I got, but my predecessor's MSM was still undeserved and the NCO got shafted.)

Response by SGT Kristin Wiley made Aug 28 at 2014 5:11 PM

SGT Kristin Wiley — Thu, 28 Aug 2014 17:11:32 -0400

SSG Burns,
I completely agree that rank should be removed. So yesterday, my unit shared this picture with us concerning the awards process. I immediately became concerned that this guidance is going to influence the command to recommend the wrong award for the actions the individual performed.

Due to the structure of my command, some of our shops are headed by O-5/O-6 or the civilian equivalent and others are headed by O-3s. I fill an E-5 billet, but since the officer position directly over me is in a reserve position (O-3/O-4) that rotates frequently, there is not enough train-up time to make that individual efficient in their job. This is preventing the officer from obtaining good evaluations, and has forced me into taking over most of these responsibilities. My O-5 has stated multiple times that I do the work equivalent of an O-3/O-4 for our command. Despite my excellent performance above my level of responsibility, I do not foresee receiving an award higher than a JSCM by this command based on these guidelines. No, I do not feel that I am entitled to an award, but I am concerned that individuals who have done less to earn an award will receive an award or a higher award based on rank alone. Do you have any advice on how I should handle these concerns or address the stigma my unit has set forth by posting these guidelines?

Response by SFC Mark Merino made Aug 29 at 2014 1:37 AM

SFC Mark Merino — Fri, 29 Aug 2014 01:37:13 -0400

It could work, but the DA 638 is the form that gets counted to see breakdowns by Big Army. They just need to take that step later AFTER it is approved. The DA 638's are tracked by the Troop/Company and the SQDRN/BN EOR is supposed to track the entire enchilada. They are trying to do the right thing by making sure that unit is not biased in any way (Officer/NCO/Soldier, /M/F, race/ethnicity, even age. Somewhere along the line, the system broke.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 29 at 2014 2:01 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 29 Aug 2014 02:01:12 -0400

S-1 already screws things up bad enough and you're talking about using TWO forms for ONE award?? Malarkey!!

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 29 at 2014 2:10 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 29 Aug 2014 14:10:42 -0400

I don't think this would work at all. It is the culture that would need to change. In the description justifying the award you would have to state what the person was doing in the patrol or while in his position. How could you say "he led his platoon" without assuming it was the PL or "he suppressed the enemy with a SAW" without assuming it was a SPC or lower. I understand the idea behind it but it is more than that to fix the problem. It would only be a band aid to a infected wound.

Response by SFC Christopher Perry made Aug 29 at 2014 3:03 PM

SFC Christopher Perry — Fri, 29 Aug 2014 15:03:11 -0400

Unfortunately, I've had these conversations over the years. Had one very recently as a matter of fact. I was told that things were being looked at differently and things were being tightened up on awards. Basically, it was being tied to scope of responsibility. This part I have no issue with. However when scope of responsibility is tied directly to a given rank eg. BDE leadership position and above I take issue. When an NCO ends up assigned to a General Staff position the whole scope of responsibility can become a bit blurry. I will not go into a great degree of specificity on this one, however, in today's garrison kind of Army these duties can easily match up or even exceed BDE responsibility. So my question becomes, is it really scope of responsibility or is is it just another way of saying it is directly tied to rank?

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 29 at 2014 4:58 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 29 Aug 2014 16:58:38 -0400

I agree that rank should not always play a favor....but it does. If a SPC is doing a job that a SFC should be doing and does it excellently yes they deserve an award. If a SFC is doing same job excellently they deserve an award, but the trick is what is the responsibilities? A CPT that is on staff vs. a CPT who is in command of 150 plus Soldiers going out on missions, should they both receive the same award? It should be based on the actions and responsibility level in my opinion. However, some feel that you should work your way up by first earning AAM then ARCOM, etc.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 19 at 2014 5:59 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 19 Dec 2014 17:59:34 -0500

I totally agree with SSG Robert Burns. 99% of the time of all awards I have seen was based on Rank which I personally think is wrong.

Response by CW3 Kevin Storm made Oct 1 at 2017 4:44 AM

CW3 Kevin Storm — Sun, 01 Oct 2017 04:44:04 -0400

If a private can earn the MOH, every award should be open to every soldier.

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 24 at 2021 4:27 PM

CW2 Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 24 Apr 2021 16:27:28 -0400

I completely agree, just put the DODID# on the form and write "this is what happened" without all the fluff and crap. It's insane how fluffed just a simple AAM needs to be.