Posted on Dec 22, 2019
Is it the right thing to do to follow every single regulation and admin process?
5.52K
48
28
6
6
0
I feel like too often shortcuts are taken to "execute the mission," and as a result, people are reprimanded, smoked, or counseled for disobeying a direct order from a superior ranking. For example Pvt Snuffy (feel sorry for whoever he is, being made an example out of in the worst situations, ha ha ha) is given his military driver's license and told to drive an LMTV in a convoy. He is not licensed on the vehicle, but "it's ok because there's an NCO as his TC." Another example is when Pvt Snuffy is performing a thorough PMCS (testing the attachments for the IHMEE, unreeling the winch for the Dozer, etc) and is told by his SL to stop what he's doing and just get the 5988 verified because everyone is waiting on him to go to lunch.
What should (s)he do in situations like these? My second example might not be as good as the first, but hopefully you get the point.
What should (s)he do in situations like these? My second example might not be as good as the first, but hopefully you get the point.
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 19
Private snuffy should have raised the point that he is not licensed to drive that LMTV, regardless of their being an NCO TC. Unless they are using that as his test drive for licensing him on it or it is part of a drivers training session. This puts not only the driver but the NCO and command at risk. Plus the lives of those in and around that LMTV
(8)
(0)
SPC (Join to see)
Let's say your conditions don't apply and he does bring it up, yet his CoC tells Snuffy to drive it anyway or he will receive a counseling for disobeying a direct order? Personally, I would've taken the counseling and explained in the "Comments" section that I wasn't licensed on it.
How much of that "behavior" [being a stickler to the rules when '...some can be bent' ] until Snuffy is regarded as being a smartass?
How much of that "behavior" [being a stickler to the rules when '...some can be bent' ] until Snuffy is regarded as being a smartass?
(0)
(0)
CPT Lawrence Cable
SPC (Join to see) - I would point out that in case of an accident, that NCO won't be held responsible, PVT. Snuff will. You solution would be correct, take the counseling and explain why in the comments.
Of course, if he has an accident, his entire chain of command it going to be in Deep Poo also.
Of course, if he has an accident, his entire chain of command it going to be in Deep Poo also.
(2)
(0)
You can ignore regs and policy when you feel like the circumstances (and your rank) can support assuming the risk.
(7)
(0)
SSG Terry Cummings
ADR I dont think that complete statement should be made for reading for all Ranks.
(1)
(0)
First situation, it is not Pvt Snuffy's fault as he was ordered to drive the vehicle. It falls to the NCO or officer that gave the order as they not only outrank him but gave a reason that might seem valid to the PvT. At most said Pvt should get counseled.
With the second it falls to the same thing. It was an order by NCO or Officer.
With the second it falls to the same thing. It was an order by NCO or Officer.
(4)
(0)
All rega and policies have sound reasoning behind them, and years caring them out. You have the right to refuse illegal immoral orders by law. If anybody tells you to do something wrong, and you do it, then both of you are wrong! What you should do is quietly and personally tell just the person in charge that you CAN'T do it, and if forced will they write the order out and give it to you.
(2)
(0)
Learn how to read regulations and other directive documents. There’s a difference between “shall” and “should “ or “must” and “may”. Early in his career, PVT Snuffy should focus on learning and doing the essentials. The shalls. After he gets more training and experience he can learn the difference between what must be done exactly as directed and what can be handled with some flexibility. In your first example Snuffy should ask to not be required to operate a vehicle he isn’t qualified to handle.
In the second case he might have asked for help in completing the required checks while bypassing the nice to do ones.
Here's an example: A C-130 flight engineer normally pre-flights the aircraft including climbing on to of the aircraft and walking out on the wings and up a down the fuselage to check access panels for security and other things. In the winter in Alaska this can be a very dangerous undertaking if the top of the aircraft is slick because of deicing. Usually the Engineer will ask the Pilot if it's okay to skip the top-of-aircraft inspection if the aircraft has been deiced. I always told him "yes." I was willing to accept the risk of minor damage to the aircraft from a lose fastener or panel, but not willing to risk the Engineer's body or life to go on top the aircraft under those conditions.
In the second case he might have asked for help in completing the required checks while bypassing the nice to do ones.
Here's an example: A C-130 flight engineer normally pre-flights the aircraft including climbing on to of the aircraft and walking out on the wings and up a down the fuselage to check access panels for security and other things. In the winter in Alaska this can be a very dangerous undertaking if the top of the aircraft is slick because of deicing. Usually the Engineer will ask the Pilot if it's okay to skip the top-of-aircraft inspection if the aircraft has been deiced. I always told him "yes." I was willing to accept the risk of minor damage to the aircraft from a lose fastener or panel, but not willing to risk the Engineer's body or life to go on top the aircraft under those conditions.
(2)
(0)
Taking a short cut to get everyone to lunch sooner isn't the right answer. As a 2LT, my Company XO called me unexpectedly one afternoon at 1500 and told me that he and his senior supply NCOIC would be conducting an inventory of my property that same afternoon. This was in the winter in Germany (late November) and I was then on crutches with a broken foot. I agreed to start the inventory, but when darkness fell, I insisted we stop, because three of us could not see everything at the same time in several truck-mounted huts. The XO got pissed and ordered me to continue the inventory so he could return home that night. I refused, and the senior supply NCO agreed with me, thankfully. So we resumed the inventory the next day and it ended in a good result.
My point is that pushing on people to shortcut SOP to make things more convenient for others is not the right thing to do. If PVT Snuffy had gotten into an accident while driving a vehicle he wasn't licensed to drive after illegally ordered to do so, his boss would have been in deep poo-doo as well.
My point is that pushing on people to shortcut SOP to make things more convenient for others is not the right thing to do. If PVT Snuffy had gotten into an accident while driving a vehicle he wasn't licensed to drive after illegally ordered to do so, his boss would have been in deep poo-doo as well.
(1)
(0)
I have to drop a second comment more specific to your circumstances. Guidance regarding a proper PMCS so as to get off to lunch(AKA paperwork time for NCOs and nap time for Joe) falls on your first line supes and E-4 mafia. There is never enough time but there are ways to strategize getting the job done. Anyone stating ‘I always got it done in 45 minutes’ took shortcuts and got lucky.
As for example 1. There is supposed to be a learners permit that gives soldiers that authorization to drive provided they are rolling with a licensed VC
As for example 1. There is supposed to be a learners permit that gives soldiers that authorization to drive provided they are rolling with a licensed VC
(1)
(0)
I would like to share a few quotes that contributed to this ethical dilemma.
‘We don’t pick and choose what standards we follow!’
‘If we stopped to enforce every standard, nothing will get done’
‘How come we don’t pick and choose our standards until it’s a standard that is for the soldiers’
‘Why do you compromise integrity and moral courage about someone who might affect your NCOER’
‘I risk 4 article 15s a day just to get my job done’
‘I read AR670-1 and your unauthorized lacing of your boots is just as much an issue’
‘The CSM had white spandex under his PT shorts’
‘Spit and starch just so we can go to the motorpool?’
‘Access to Endust is far more dangerous than tobacco’
If it’s stupid but it works means its not stupid also means a simple explanation when time permits also works. Soldiers understand if you don’t have time to explain currently. But because I said so doesn’t develope a good mentoring relationship.
Regs like AR 670-1 exist for a reason. Unauthorized gloves can potentially cause frostbite. A lack of understanding why the regs exist leads to NCOs picking their standards in the future.
1700 release exists for the same reasons as wearing authorized socks or following the exercises outlined in 21-20.(or whatever you kids are calling it now)
‘We don’t pick and choose what standards we follow!’
‘If we stopped to enforce every standard, nothing will get done’
‘How come we don’t pick and choose our standards until it’s a standard that is for the soldiers’
‘Why do you compromise integrity and moral courage about someone who might affect your NCOER’
‘I risk 4 article 15s a day just to get my job done’
‘I read AR670-1 and your unauthorized lacing of your boots is just as much an issue’
‘The CSM had white spandex under his PT shorts’
‘Spit and starch just so we can go to the motorpool?’
‘Access to Endust is far more dangerous than tobacco’
If it’s stupid but it works means its not stupid also means a simple explanation when time permits also works. Soldiers understand if you don’t have time to explain currently. But because I said so doesn’t develope a good mentoring relationship.
Regs like AR 670-1 exist for a reason. Unauthorized gloves can potentially cause frostbite. A lack of understanding why the regs exist leads to NCOs picking their standards in the future.
1700 release exists for the same reasons as wearing authorized socks or following the exercises outlined in 21-20.(or whatever you kids are calling it now)
(1)
(0)
The Soldier should do the right thing.
Sometimes a higher ranking person will use their authority to bypass such things, assuming risk in order to accomplish the mission. Pvt Snuffy lacks such authority, so he should do the right thing AND follow orders if a competent authority says so.
Driving an unlicensed vehicle is a commander's call. He/she assumes the (ample) risk.
Hurrying through PMCS to go to chow is UNSAT; the right answer is for some help to show up and get it done to standard.
Sometimes a higher ranking person will use their authority to bypass such things, assuming risk in order to accomplish the mission. Pvt Snuffy lacks such authority, so he should do the right thing AND follow orders if a competent authority says so.
Driving an unlicensed vehicle is a commander's call. He/she assumes the (ample) risk.
Hurrying through PMCS to go to chow is UNSAT; the right answer is for some help to show up and get it done to standard.
(1)
(0)
Sooo... to take your example into the real world.
1990 Dessert Shield. There I was a SPC out in the sandbox. At the time my unit was still using the old trucks, I forget the designation now, with the newer HMMV. The order from command was simple. Everyone that was not on duty that could drive was to drive a truck in convoy to the replacement depot and turn it in and pick up a HMMV. I was rated on the truck, but not the HMMV. These orders came from not just the NCOes but the XO, the 1SG and Company Commander.
Luckily nothing more serious than a bit too much speed and a rough landing but still.
1990 Dessert Shield. There I was a SPC out in the sandbox. At the time my unit was still using the old trucks, I forget the designation now, with the newer HMMV. The order from command was simple. Everyone that was not on duty that could drive was to drive a truck in convoy to the replacement depot and turn it in and pick up a HMMV. I was rated on the truck, but not the HMMV. These orders came from not just the NCOes but the XO, the 1SG and Company Commander.
Luckily nothing more serious than a bit too much speed and a rough landing but still.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next