How many Army Values violations does it take to justify a "No" block on your evaluation?

2014-05-08T09:57:53-04:00

Before the easy hard core answer of "JUST ONE!" think about it for a minute.
Think about all of the discussions we have had on here.
Saluting, hands in pockets, colors of socks, buttons buttoned, head gear at home, SHARP, thieves, late for work, 670-1 violations, vehicle inspections, inappropriate photos, etc.
EVERYTHING that we do wrong no matter how minor is a violation of some Army Value. For example putting your hands in your pockets would be an integrity issue. Getting a speeding ticket, integrity issues. Integrity is doing what's right legally and morally. I am positive that everyone who got a speeding ticket didn't get a NO block.
So what is the standard? Is it the severity of the violations? The volume of the violations? Who decides what is severe and what is not? Who decides how many times is too many? Do small violations give hint to a larger character flaw?
Have you ever tried to NO block someone and got severe push back from the NCO Support channel? Isn't it up to the rater?
At this day and age a NO block is your ticket out of the military. Can this be abused and taken advantage of by leaders?

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made May 8 at 2014 10:08 AM

2014-05-08T10:08:49-04:00

Clearly each situation will have to be examined. A cookie cutter approach to this is wildly unrealistic.

Response by 1SG Mike Case made May 8 at 2014 10:12 AM

2014-05-08T10:12:11-04:00

I don't believe there is a set answer for that. I don't think one speeding would earn you a "no" for integrity. I don't think me telling you to take your hands out of your pockets will earn you a "no" in integrity. I think cheating on an APFT (taking a shortcut on a run and getting caught) will earn you a "no" on more than one. I think as the rater you must take each situation on merit alone and see how it fits.

Response by CPT Aaron Kletzing made May 8 at 2014 10:32 AM

2014-05-08T10:32:09-04:00

To me, this depends on the infraction and the pay grade of the individual at fault. If it is a junior SM, then perhaps corrective counseling/training is most appropriate for more minor infractions like colors of socks. But there are infractions that are so horrible and unspeakable that, regardless of pay grade, I think merit a career ending eval.

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made May 8 at 2014 11:37 AM

2014-05-08T11:37:24-04:00

I agree that there should be no tolerance to any Army Values violation, but I lean more on the severity of the issue. Think about it, the Army will be desolated if we identify every violation as a NO on a Soldiers evaluation's Army Values section. Specially now with this downsizing rampage that is going on. Thats why we have developmental counselings. Every case needs examination and the mayority of time there is a corrective action for minor violation such as those you mentioned, except SHARP and thieves. Those are absolutley NO GO for a second chance.

Response by SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made May 8 at 2014 11:47 AM

2014-05-08T11:47:35-04:00

Thieves? There's only one thief in the Army. Everyone else is just trying to get their stuff back.

Response by CPT Daniel Walk, M.B.A. made May 8 at 2014 11:53 AM

2014-05-08T11:53:05-04:00

This question is useless. There are requirements for no blocks on the evaluation. A no block means there has been a violation, an attempt to remediate, and a failure to remediate.

The more you seek to attempt to advocate for objective standards for such concerns the faster you find yourself at the wrong end.

Response by SSG Genaro Negrete made May 8 at 2014 12:02 PM

2014-05-08T12:02:26-04:00

I suppose the bullets would have to be very "meaty" to support those NO blocks. Any leader will HAVE to examine the incident and the soldier as a whole. There are incidents that are hands down a failure of Army values. Everything else has to be a judgement call. A pattern of issues leaves less to be interpreted by the CSM and any third party other reviewers. Although I must admit I get a kick about hearing stories of how an NCO earned a NO in any of those blocks.

Response by SSG Robert Burns made May 8 at 2014 12:09 PM

2014-05-08T12:09:10-04:00

I guess a good question is could you stop a Rater from giving you a NO block for something ridiculous? If no one could pressure them to change it, would you just have to eat it and end up appealing the NCOER?

Response by SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made May 8 at 2014 12:42 PM

2014-05-08T12:42:43-04:00

I would say that it should depend on the severity of the violation. The raters should have a working knowledge of the Soldiers character, professionalism and conduct and be able to determine if the issue is an isolated occurrence that can be mediated through counseling or a severe violation that warrants a "NO" according to the criteria on the Evaluation

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 8 at 2014 1:05 PM

2014-05-08T13:05:10-04:00

There is no simple one answer fits all for this question. It is dependent on the situation, do we throw the book (or no block it this instance) at someone for a simple mistake. I say it depends of the severity of the violation, and then there are still variables that need to be taken it to account.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 8 at 2014 6:37 PM

2014-05-08T18:37:52-04:00

It degrades our military letting troops get away with any violations. At the very least light them up for the small crap but the big stuff has no business in the military.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 20 at 2014 8:57 PM

2014-09-20T20:57:45-04:00

Do cadets get OERs? How will this effect his evaluation? >.>

http://espn.go.com/blog/ncfnation/post/_/id/99241/watch-football-lebroning-attempts-fails

Response by SFC Jonathan Griffith made Oct 13 at 2014 9:53 AM

2014-10-13T09:53:04-04:00

I think recognition of intent and impact has importance on each instance in question.

Response by PO2 Rocky Kleeger made Oct 13 at 2014 3:55 PM

2014-10-13T15:55:54-04:00

That would depend on what sex you happen to be, and how much of a brown noser you are. And don't get pissy at me for chauvinism, we all know it happens that way...in all branches

Response by 1stSgt Eugene Harless made Dec 21 at 2015 4:59 AM

2015-12-21T04:59:22-05:00

I wasn't in the Army, but I'm taking this "No" block to mean not recommended for promotion. In my experience the rank to which you are promoting someone has a lot to do with it. Many units have policies that an NJP would mean an automatic non-rec for at least three months. Promotions to PFC and LCpl (E-2 and E-3) are practically automatic unless there was disciplinary action. Another reason to not promote would be failure to pass MOS School, pass a PFT or being on weight control.
Promotion to NCO (Cpl E-4) is a big step, as it is the first rank where a Marine will be put in a leadership billet. While you don't expect a newly minted NCO to be perfect, the person being promoted should not have any major issues, especially in integrity or judgement. As they go higher in rank the bar is raised. The one thing I with promoting individuals that was often overlooked was MOS knowledge. To me, Integrity and judgement is paramount, but if a service member in technically and tactically deficient units lose people.

Response by SFC Stephen King made Dec 21 at 2015 5:22 AM

2015-12-21T05:22:40-05:00

Great question SSG Robert Burns Given that the Army Values are the standard for all my immediate answer is one. However, not all have the same values and beliefs with this added to the problem it would require each violation to be looked at independently. That being said the evaluation systems that services use are not inherently ambitious.

Response by SSgt Boyd Herrst made Nov 13 at 2017 8:06 AM

2017-11-13T08:06:59-05:00

It doesn’t matter what branch you serve/have served in each branch handles
Their values differently... I had a friend who was off base downtown somewhere and took a rare opportunity to dash cady corner across a normally busy street. Only a few people on the street. He goes into a coffee shop and gets a beverage and is drinking it and an older person engaged him in conversation.. she starts off and asks him what ship he’s assigned
to, not thinking he tells her it’s a supply ship and they just got in.. and that’s all..
she picked up little ‘tid- bits” of more interesting items.. he made sure not to divulge security related info.. she leaves..
Next motning at ship’s morning roll call..
A Lt. mentioned that a ship’s sailor was down town and ran cady-corner across a normally busy intersection disregarding
Traffic signals.. went into a coffee shop
and got s beverage. The lady who engaged him in conversation was the Base Commander’s Mother-in-law. Well the word got to the Base Cmdr and he promised the mother-in-law he’d look into it. Officers and sailors.. when downtown you are in the public view, act accordingly, follow laws, you are not exempt.. The last thing our dear Base Cmdr needs is to get ragged by his mother in law.. and we don’t need to hear it neither. It puts ship’s officers and Senior NCOs in a bad light andthat they haven’t done their jobs directing you... We aren’t your Mommies and daddies and can’t be everywhere..
When off this ship, you represent the Navy and this ship. That is all ! Don’t Let it happen again, EVER! AM I CLEAR?.. resounding AYE-AYES.. Senior Chief, take over, and give them the assignments... and he left.. He didn’t mention security breeches which there may have been..
Not the sailor’s name.. giving the Sailor
Anonominity.. my friend and fellow sailors all got a lecture that could of been avoided.. if a certain sailor had just done
It right and crossed at the signal.. no negative remarks in their Jacket.. Definitely got off on that one.. they owed a paypack.. more ‘spit ‘n’ polish’ (that 125% Senior NCOs talk about)