Posted on Feb 7, 2014
Double Standards for senior and junior ranks?
18.2K
80
47
7
7
0
Whats your opinion on military double standard? For example, Im a SPC(P) and if I was to fail a height/weight I would be flagged and barred, plus I'd lose my promotable status. If a SFC or MSG was to have the same scenario, would they face the same repercussions? Do you believe standards should be enforced Army wide regardless of rank?
Another example, theres a MSG I know that got a DUI after his SFAAT mission and his only being "forced retired". I would like to hear other peoples opinions on this.
Standards
Policy
Edited 12 y ago
Posted 12 y ago
Responses: 20
7
7
0
If the SFC or MSG were promotable sure they would lose their status, the difference between a SFC/MSG and you is it takes a letter to HRC requesting to remove their status unlike with E5/E4Ps it takes a simple counseling statement and unit action. As in your other scenario of the MSG being forced to retire, is that not punishment enough? Do you thinks the MSG should be busted down and then kicked out?
Each installation handles punishing all who receive a DUI differently but most CGs reserve the right to punish the soldier through a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand which can be filed in a soldiers permanent file and that serves as the punishment. Again, units do things different. Some follow that DUI up with an Administrative Reduction Board for NCOs or reduction 4187 for E4 and below.
Each soldier's infraction and the punishment given must be weighed differently because not every situation is exactly the same. There are numerous other personal and professional issues that are examined when recommending to the commander what punishment that soldier truly deserves, to include weighing in their service record.
(7)
(0)
SFC Stephen P.
Reduction in grade isn't much of an additional punishment in conjunction with the high 36 retirement plan (in effect for everyone who joined since 1980).
(4)
(0)
CSM (Join to see)
Well there's a couple of things to think about here. If they are not put out by a QMP or QSP board and choose to serve the chances of them being promoted or very slim, even more so as a senior NCO. I personally don't see the point of demotion as demoting someone doesn't change their retirement pay necessarily because that is formulated off of years of service. In my opinion the pressure of being forced to retire would be enough punishment.
(4)
(0)
SGM (Join to see)
1SG Rink has a valid point - it is harder to demote a senior NCO opposed to a junior NCO or even a Soldier. The fact of the matter is most commands see the time that NCO or senior leader has invested into the Army and they allow a forced retirement opposed to the long drawn out legal process of trying to reduce the NCO/Leader.
DUIs are a VERY sticky subject in the military. Just because you get arrested for a DUI doesn't mean that will be what you end up with after a court battle. I have seen too many DUIs get busted down to fatigued driving because the person paid $3,000 for a decent lawyer. Once it is downgraded you lose the battle through the Army to take heavy action.
(3)
(0)
SGT Kristin Wiley
If a junior enlisted and a senior NCO both got a DUI, the senior NCO should have the more harsh punishment despite how hard it is to enforce the punishment. We are not sending a good message to our troops if we allow senior leaders to get off with a slap on the wrist, but aggresively punish our juniors. A senior NCO is aware of the regulations and holds a level of responsbility that should make it completely unacceptable to be drinking and driving. It is unacceptable either way, but a senior NCO has more responsbility. How can we expect he/she to be responsbile for others when they are not accountable for themselves? At the very least punishment should be equal accross the board, but punishing juniors mores stringently is wrong.
(0)
(0)
5
5
0
I just seen a 1SG have his diamond removed and be flagged for being overweight. It happens in the senior ranks just because you do not see it doesn't mean it doesn't happen. That 1SG got off the program but he didn't get his job back; now he is retiring. He has served his country 20+ years and wanted to do more but now he has to hang it up.
(5)
(0)
1SG Michael Minton
as a Spc, there are many things that happen that you will never see or hear about. It dont take much in a senior NCOs record to force them to retire or QMB gets them. i had SFC get QMP with 17 years in for dui's over his career. he had one or two when he was a young soldier when they were exceptable, but times changed and he got one later in his career and got booted. and most !SG would be relieved if they got DUI, when is pretty much the end of their career and they will retire before QMB gets them. I dont know of anybody that gets discharged under UCMJ for a DUI, but it does end any hopes of a career, whether your a SPC or a 1SG.
(0)
(0)
SPC Corie Davis
I agree with 1SG Minton, I didn't know half the stuff was going on till I worked as the clerk in our company. Sometimes its better to just go about your day and keep doing whats right and not worry about the higher ranks then you. Have trust in your command they will do whats right no matter the rank if they are a good command.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
SSG(P) (Join to see)
SSG,
Thats kind of my point, by your statement, we're saying that a senior leader can get away with doing wrong. Simply because they have 19+ years in. I understand that the Army has spent more money and time training them then they have on me. But standards are standards. And its up to NCO to enforce those standards.
(1)
(0)
SGT(P) (Join to see)
SPC I was and still do bring situations like that to light, my old NCO said a few things to me. First being just like SSG Turkezer said " do what your rank can handle" then " RHIP " AND lastly just take pride in upholding the standards and affecting change within your bubble. I don't if you have Soldiers already or not but when you do those troops are your Army. Ensure all the standards are upheld and there are no double standards. That will be throughout your career. That's almost all you can do.
(1)
(0)
SSG(P) (Join to see)
Great point SGT. I always try to make sure the soldiers that with me are within standards.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
I bet you a shiny nickle I could pull up a roster of at least 100 SFCs and MSGs with K or J flags.
If a SPC had 20 qualifying years of service, I suspect he would be forced to retire as well. We just don't see a whole lot of SPCs with 20 years TIS.
If a SPC had 20 qualifying years of service, I suspect he would be forced to retire as well. We just don't see a whole lot of SPCs with 20 years TIS.
(3)
(0)
SFC Stephen P.
RCP only applies to active duty. The 20 year SPC is actually quite feasible.
Qualification, or near qualification for retirement does create a bit of a protected status for service members. We in fact have a special rule to extend someone with over 18 years to meet retirement eligibility if they are completely ineligible to reenlist.
I'm not trying to say double standards don't exist; just that they are not consistent or uniform across the service.
Qualification, or near qualification for retirement does create a bit of a protected status for service members. We in fact have a special rule to extend someone with over 18 years to meet retirement eligibility if they are completely ineligible to reenlist.
I'm not trying to say double standards don't exist; just that they are not consistent or uniform across the service.
(2)
(0)
SFC Stephen P.
RA tends not to see outside of RA; this ignorance is quite common and understandable.
RCP will certainly change, but needn't end a career.
Theoretically, we could have a SPC on active duty in the RA with 20 years qualifying for non-regular retirement but less than 4 years AFS.
RCP will certainly change, but needn't end a career.
Theoretically, we could have a SPC on active duty in the RA with 20 years qualifying for non-regular retirement but less than 4 years AFS.
(1)
(0)
SGM (Join to see)
Just because the lowest level doesn't see action doesn't mean there isn't any action. I have had to make the hard decision to give many NCOs (SSG and above) a 4/4 NCOER knowing as soon as I did it I was ending their military career regardless of the time they have in. The biggest action you will see at the higher levels are poor NCOER ratings and the NCO getting flagged. Both of those actions are invisible to the lower levels unless the NCO brings it to the discussion table.
I can tell you senior NCOs are held accountable more than you think. The sad fact is 18+ years of TIS usually means a force retirement.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
SPC (P) Hildago,
I am familiar with the senario which you're speaking of; I have seen many senior enlisted/officers who are OBVIOUSLY overweight and to the point where their appearance should have demanded attention from the commander. With that being said, there is also the "sanctuary rule" some have mentioned here, and also the service members record and years of service.
I think one of the sticking points for junior soldiers is to continually see those who are clearly not within the guidelines but still make rank and suffer no reprisals. I also think the adage: "Different spanks for different ranks" applies more to NCO's vs. Officers than among the enlisted ranks themselves.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
there is no double standard, AR 600-9 spells out in black and white what MUST happen. It may not be advertised to the unit, but that dont mean actions havent been taken.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
forced to retire is ending his career, same as a SPC with a bar to re-enlist, your career is over. he's just fortunate enough to have over 20 years in to have the option to retire or take a chance on being QMP'd. Nobody i single dui under the UCMJ, but they will end your career ambitions. so that pretty much forces him to retire since he has already met that qualification and the UCMJ does not present it. And i dont know where you were at, but senior ncos do get flagged if they are over weight or fails APFT, however, flags are local and removed once standards are met.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
SPC Hidalgo,
While I DEFINITELY understand where you're coming from and know exactly who you're talking about, I will say this. Double standards exist, and will continue to exist.
Whether that reason is legitimate or not doesn't matter, because all decisions are made by the Commander on a case by case basis.
Based solely off "importance", when a SPC gets a DUI, he gets the hammer and out he goes...why? Because typically, the SPC KNOWS better. The SPC gets safety brief EVERY.SINGLE.WEEKEND. The Commander is 9 out of 10 focusing and speaking to that SPC or E-4 and below. When was the last time you hear your Commander say "Hey SFC, hey MSG, hey 1SG, don't do dumb sh*t, wrap it up, don't drink and drive"..it doesn't happen. Because that Senior NCO has more or less proven that he doesn't need to be "briefed" on what not to do on the weekend. So when that Senior DOES mess up, they're given a "Hey SFC/MSG/1SG, ya messed up. You knew better, you were supposed to set the example, but you failed. Love ya like a play cousin, but its time to go" Which, if you think about it, more than likely will come with a GOMAR, and that big DUI stamp on his/her DD214..so it actually hurts them more when they go looking for work. Think about..1SG with 18 years TIS with nothing to show for it once that DUI is on his DD214.
Also, the reason you will never see a senior get the same punishment as a Joe, is because the senior and the non senior ARE different. They don't want the Joe to lose respect for SFC XYZ just because he messed up..Look at it this way, if you and I are extra duty, and Im a SGT who got ED for the same reason you did. You would subconsciously disrespect me because in your (or Joes) mind, we are equal now..
(2)
(0)
SSG(P) (Join to see)
SGT,
In your statement you wrote that the: "Senior NCO has more or less proven that he doesn't need to be "briefed" on what not to do on the weekend." And I agree with that, he/she has proven they are responsible soldiers throughout the years. But SGT, all it takes is ONE uh-oh, and you're done. As NCO's shouldn't we enforce the standard regardless of rank and/or TIS. The Army has a zero tolerance for DUI's and drugs.
But nevertheless, I appreciate everyones feedback, and wide leadership views on this topic.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
Of course everybody believes there should be no double standards in regards to rank. Anybody who thinks otherwise should reread the Army Values. Having said that, will it ever change in the Army, society, or pretty much anywhere? Doubt it.
(2)
(0)
CSM (Join to see)
I would say it's situational dependent, first time ever being late no problem. Figure it out, buy more alarm clocks, batteries, etc but next time it's going on paper and some form of corrective training is going to happen. Third time is UCMJ action!
(8)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
Yea, I don't think too many people would have the same opinion on this. Good to see everyone's POV
(1)
(0)
1SG Michael Minton
If someone id late the first time, i usually had a verbal conversation about not making it a habit etc. because it does happen to everyone once in awhile. but if it happens again fairly soon, then they get WRITTEN counseling to make them realise it is not going to keep happening with out results, plus as we all know, you have to have it all documented that you game them plenty of chances to correct it, in case you wanted to take it to UCMJ actions. and possibly building a file for chanpter if the UCMJ does not fix it. but if the counseling do work, before i go to UCMJ, i will move them into the barracks, no matter if they have family or not, with a hourly sign in until 10 at night and start back at 5 in the morning. if you mess that up, UCMJ is next and putting more ammo in your records for chapter. Usually by the time i give up on them is they will have about 7=8 counselings, failed corrective training/ctions, 2 Article 15s. thats enough for me to chapter you and have all the supporting documents. thats more then enough chances.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
I think that those at the highr ranks and positions should be held to the standards no matter what.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google