Posted on Apr 4, 2020
How should I pursue going to the promotion board when my squad leader doesn’t want to send me?
12.1K
37
13
4
4
0
I’m an E-4 that switch from National Guard to active duty. I’m already on my primary zone to attend the promotion board but my squad leader doesn’t want to send me and gives me a generic counseling to sign every month on why he doesn’t want to send me. I asked him why he won’t send me and he said that I spend too much time with the other Spc’s and Pvt’s. The reason for that is that I’m very approachable and most of them come to me for answers or clarification because the NCO’s at my platoon will make fun of them or tell them the (you already should know this). I really want to get my P status but I feel like he’s holding me and they keep sending the Spc’s that always hang out with them or you could say they’re the favorites. I tough that the 2018 directive said it’s now mandatory to attend the promotion board once eligible and it’s not on command nominations? Any insight on how I can address this is appreciated.
Promotion Board
Promotions
Promotable
Promotion Points
31B: Military Police
Posted 4 y ago
Responses: 9
13
13
0
Have you tried talking to your Platoon Sergeant, or 1SG, or CO before running to a social media site? This problem can only be solved in house.
(13)
(0)
7
7
0
First of all, I surmise from how you've couched your question that your immediate supervisor have not approached you. Whether true or not, you should seek out a one to one with them. Prior to your meeting you need to assemble some factually accurate information about your preparation for a desired promotion. It should spell out specifically what career-related courses/schools you have completed. Correspondence courses, civilian education and you have a loose explanation of why you know and feel you fully ready to tackle the next level of leadership. Hope that helps you some.
(7)
(0)
6
6
0
SPC (Join to see) So he has counseled you, what was the plan of action on the 4856? What were you to do to improve and what was his support of those actions? Pick a month, and write on your 4856 that your goal is to attend that board and need his direct assistance getting there. If you can do this, respectfully put it back on him. He is supposed to be getting you ready to advance everyday anyway, regardless of boards.
Last time I checked, SPCs are supposed to associate with other SPCs and enlisted soldiers, as associating with SGTs and above was fraternization.
Have you tried going to the SOM board to get board practice? This would demonstrate your aptitude out side the Team/Squad level. If you face plant, it's on you.
Get your uniform ready and keep it ready. Study and prepare now. If you keep putting this on the front burner, he'll eventually relent and send you but may be on short notice. Now is not the time to bolo PT, weapons, or ABCP. It'll end with a "see I told you".
If there is a high visibility detail that comes up, volunteer to lead it. Especially if it's for the 1SG or PSG. As long as it ends well, they'll be asking why you don't board.
If they bring you in to bar you, that is the perfect time to lay out this issue and tell them you are ready right now.
Last time I checked, SPCs are supposed to associate with other SPCs and enlisted soldiers, as associating with SGTs and above was fraternization.
Have you tried going to the SOM board to get board practice? This would demonstrate your aptitude out side the Team/Squad level. If you face plant, it's on you.
Get your uniform ready and keep it ready. Study and prepare now. If you keep putting this on the front burner, he'll eventually relent and send you but may be on short notice. Now is not the time to bolo PT, weapons, or ABCP. It'll end with a "see I told you".
If there is a high visibility detail that comes up, volunteer to lead it. Especially if it's for the 1SG or PSG. As long as it ends well, they'll be asking why you don't board.
If they bring you in to bar you, that is the perfect time to lay out this issue and tell them you are ready right now.
(6)
(0)
SFC David Dean
Sir with all due respect; fraternization applies with respect to officers and enlisted members under the UCMJ. I understand what you are attempting to convey to this person with respect to whom he should spend time in an off-duty or relationship. However; I would propose that any solider regardless of enlisted rank should seek to emulate leaders who model leadership traits and characteristics that represent the manner in which soldiers should act. In a like manner, they should seek interactions from their officer leaders that inculcate and validate the same leadership traits that are sought to be present in all soldiers; regardless of rank. Unless the military has detoured from what it has always sought to be, this is what is expected from the highest level leaders from subordinates and future leaders.
(0)
(0)
LTC Jason Mackay
SFC David Dean - I didn't pull this,out of thin air.
AR600-20
4–14. Relationships between Soldiers of different grade
a. The term "officer" used in this paragraph includes both commissioned and WOs unless otherwise stated. The term “noncommissioned officer” refers to a Soldier in the grade of corporal to command sergeant major/sergeant major. The term “junior enlisted Soldier” refers to a Soldier in the grade of private to specialist. The provisions of this paragraph apply to both relationships between Soldiers in the Active and Reserve Components and between Soldiers and personnel of other military Services. This policy is effective immediately, except where noted below, and applies to opposite-gender relationships and same-gender relationships.
b. Soldiers of different grades must be cognizant that their interactions do not create an actual or clearly predictable perception of undue familiarity between an officer and an enlisted Soldier, or between an NCO and a junior-enlisted Soldier. Examples of familiarity between Soldiers that may become “undue” can include repeated visits to bars, nightclubs, eating establishments, or homes between an officer and an enlisted Soldier, or an NCO and a junior-enlisted Soldier, except for social gatherings, that involve an entire unit, office, or work section. All relationships between Soldiers of different grade are prohibited if they—
(1) Compromise, or appear to compromise, the integrity of supervisory authority or the chain of command. (2) Cause actual or perceived partiality or unfairness.
(3) Involve, or appear to involve, the improper use of grade or position for personal gain.
(4) Are, or are perceived to be, exploitative or coercive in nature.
(5) Create an actual or clearly predictable adverse impact on discipline, authority, morale, or the ability of the command to accomplish its mission.
AR600-20
4–14. Relationships between Soldiers of different grade
a. The term "officer" used in this paragraph includes both commissioned and WOs unless otherwise stated. The term “noncommissioned officer” refers to a Soldier in the grade of corporal to command sergeant major/sergeant major. The term “junior enlisted Soldier” refers to a Soldier in the grade of private to specialist. The provisions of this paragraph apply to both relationships between Soldiers in the Active and Reserve Components and between Soldiers and personnel of other military Services. This policy is effective immediately, except where noted below, and applies to opposite-gender relationships and same-gender relationships.
b. Soldiers of different grades must be cognizant that their interactions do not create an actual or clearly predictable perception of undue familiarity between an officer and an enlisted Soldier, or between an NCO and a junior-enlisted Soldier. Examples of familiarity between Soldiers that may become “undue” can include repeated visits to bars, nightclubs, eating establishments, or homes between an officer and an enlisted Soldier, or an NCO and a junior-enlisted Soldier, except for social gatherings, that involve an entire unit, office, or work section. All relationships between Soldiers of different grade are prohibited if they—
(1) Compromise, or appear to compromise, the integrity of supervisory authority or the chain of command. (2) Cause actual or perceived partiality or unfairness.
(3) Involve, or appear to involve, the improper use of grade or position for personal gain.
(4) Are, or are perceived to be, exploitative or coercive in nature.
(5) Create an actual or clearly predictable adverse impact on discipline, authority, morale, or the ability of the command to accomplish its mission.
(0)
(0)
SFC David Dean
Sir, with all due respect to what you are defining here; I have read and re-read this soldier's posting. I do not find the issue of fraternization to be what is present. In essence he was eluding to the manner in which he was seeking to gain valuable insights and knowledge one can only gain through the experiences of asking those who are senior and/or via their sharing of such knowledge. That does in no way become the aforementioned fraternization. Regardless of the stated "new" definition of policy, the primacy of what the military had and continues to seek with respect to the fraternization between ranks has not significantly changed. It was designed in the past as well as currently to be a proverbial "wall" between unsavory and/or unwanted relationships to develop that in turn can negatively impact the organization's ability to function. Properly employed it enhances the leadership model that the military necessarily must have in place to effectively ensure orders to subordinates are executed in a timely manner.
In this soldier's situation he was seeking direct guidance and input from his leaders such that he could become an effective and quality leader in the military. Too often some people seek to dissect to the smallest scintilla the question or motivation instead of taking at face value the subject of the query. In this circumstance I am convinced that some have taken this approach instead of merely providing the soldier a path or an answer. We need not examine every possible perspective of a question and in essence we often do a disservice to subordinates when following such a course of action.
In this soldier's situation he was seeking direct guidance and input from his leaders such that he could become an effective and quality leader in the military. Too often some people seek to dissect to the smallest scintilla the question or motivation instead of taking at face value the subject of the query. In this circumstance I am convinced that some have taken this approach instead of merely providing the soldier a path or an answer. We need not examine every possible perspective of a question and in essence we often do a disservice to subordinates when following such a course of action.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google