Is the Active Component of the military becoming a less forgiving place?

Less forgiving? I don't think so. Depends on the situation. You obviously have an opinion but did not state it. So let me delve into the subtext beyond the broad intro. The Army is moving to a peacetime training mission. The same one that created an Army capable of adapting and kicking the hell out of two or more insurgencies simultaneously while maintaining multiple other requirements throughout the globe. That kind of training requires discipline and rigor that has been lost in the ARFORGEN - fill you up when you need to be - Army where resources and time were unconstrained. We flew loose and low, buying everything off of the shelf to create equipment solutions to training problems. Now we have to create training solutions to training problems. That requires us to knuckle up and be honest with ourselves. Are we ready? Tonight? The draw down (not self imposed) during this period also places a requirement to identify our best for retention. Not everyone gets to stay because they just squeak by. Waiting for a "better deal" on your reenlistment may mean that it closes and you never get to reenlist at all. We now have to maintain an Army without the benefit of billions of dollars and unconstrained resources. In order to do this, we have to transition...wisely...with the right people and the right training. Less forgiving? No. Better manned and better trained. That means average is now below average.

The military operates much in the same way as the rest of society. As missions and resources change, the requirements for the workforce changes with them. There has to be some system in pace for ramping up or downsizing, as the situation dictates. While some may see this as unfair, it is just a fact of life.

Typically, the method used to downsize is based on a review of personnel records to determine who best meets the standards and requirements of the organization. That may be based on qualifications and experience, disciplinary matters, and a whole multitude of other things. Once that criteria has been set, people are identified for retention and for discharge.

Is it fair or just to select an E-7 for discharge who had a DUI in his record from 10 years ago and that is the only derogatory thing in his record? That's very hard to answer, however, if, compared to everyone else he is being evaluated against, he is the only one that has a black mark in his record, that is what happens. Remember, the boards that make the selections deal with records, not people. They don't know SFC X from SFC Y. They don't know that SFC X with the DUI is overall a much better NCO than SFC Y without the DUI. That is particularly true when the NCOERs and OERs are so inflated as to make it difficult to use them to differentiate people, although changes over the past few years have made that situation better.

I have been in situations as a commander where I would have traded several NCOs for one who had been selected for discharge. Again, that goes back to the fact that I was dealing with real people and not just records.

I guess a solution could be that, if the Army needed to downsize by X number of NCOs and officers, they could allocate that number out to the field and allow local commanders to select who stays and who goes. For example, as a brigade commander, if I had 100 E-6 and had an allocation of 2 to discharge, I get to pick the 2. Would that make it fair? It would put the personal knowledge about the individual into it (if not a thorough knowledge of the individual's history). Or, maybe a combination of the two, where a commander is told to choose between several in his/her command (selected by a board) for discharge. I don't think that would ever happen, nor do I really think it should.

No system of downsizing is ever going to be completely fair or popular. The system we have is more fair, in my opinion, than a lottery system, for example, where folks are selected for discharge by simply pulling their names from a hat or letting a computer make random selections.

Downsizing sucks and, to respond to the original question, yes, because of downsizing and the necessity to cull the force, the Army is less forgiving. As someone stated, it is almost to the point of being a zero-defect situation. Not saying that is a good thing, but it is inevitable.

Isn't it right for all components to become less forgiving now that we are in the midst of a draw down?
For plenty of years we had to fight just to keep everyone in. Fail a drug test, ok. Fail multiple PT Test, ok. Get a DUI, ok. Have a domestic violence case, ok. Just show up as a warm body, ok. Etc, etc.
We need to get away from the mentality that the military owes us, or our soldiers, something because we volunteered, other than the ability to reach the end of our current commitment with faithful service from both the individual and the service and an award and handshake thanking people for their service.
In the end the problems that we have created moving forward with keeping the right people in are because we showed too much sympathy instead of empathy and the right people felt as if we were coddling those that had caused the problems. It is time to tell people the truth, point blank, and to their face.

Yes LTC (Join to see), at least I think so. There seems to be a trend of "Zero Tolerance" Military happening now where an Individual cannot make a mistake without paying for it with their career.

Now, some things I understand but not every single event destroying someone's future potential to serve.

COL (Join to see) also brings a very strong statement and I definitely agree with him. I have been informing my Soldiers not to sit and think too long or the moment to stay will pass them by. I am also Mentoring and training all who serve with me to be prepared for either path.

No.

Our perspective is one sided. We hear about acts of forgiveness typically only within our command because those are resolved at the lowest level possible. The negative results get put on militarytimes (or the branch specific version) for the whole DoD to find out about.

And thus a negatively slanted view becomes the "norm."

CPT Patrick Boling, Sir, I will not have a long detailed answer like the others but from what I believe is that the Army is moving towards a peace time mission and we have an over flow of folks. The easiest ways to get rid of some folks is not fire them and prevent them from staying in the Army for something stupid they did like a DUI, ND on the range, etc. Before the Army wanted to down sized one might bounce back from something with ease but right now that is not the case.

I just read a post where a Soldier received two Article 15’s for breaking curfew in Korea at two different times and ranks. I wrote that I hope he knows that he wasn’t punished just because he broke curfew. The reasoning goes much more in depth than a simple curfew. It’s this awareness and understanding of the purpose of conditioning and training to uphold the commands, requests, and requirements of your commanding officials that upholds the integrity of not only self, also the integrity of the purpose for the purpose of you, your unit, the unit’s mission, the overall mission, and the sovereignty and preservation of our nation and it’s citizens.
Not less forgiving, more aware of all of the moving parts and their active, interactive relational purposes for the greater good of all. There is not one facet that is not connected to another in some obtruse way. A spider web we are, and tightly woven we are a strength, a force, to be reckoned with.

Absolutely it has sir, for the enlisted side at least. I have heard from others (granted I was not there so I can't verify), that it used to be that you almost had to get an Article 15 in order to show that you had done some learning in your career. Granted, I heard that from SNCO sources (well above my pay grade), but even still, in my short 6 years in the military I have seen enough to know that the tides are moving towards a less forgiving work environment. You could even tie in the downsizing done by the military. Why would I want someone with an Article 15, when there are a half dozen or more who have no worse than a letter of admonishment throughout their career. That's how I see it, but I don't like it. I wish we did have more room to make mistakes, but I think that the military is going to continually move to become a place where mistakes are no longer tolerated.

The Army is less forgiving. It should be. Consequently, otherwise good Soldiers are put out or non retained due to not meeting standards that were previously overlooked. I don't feel they should have ever been overlooked. Standards are standards for a reason. Overlooking them in the past has created the notion that they are being unfairly enforced now. I believe in giving a second chance, but not a tenth. Many senior NCOs that are being non retained now should have probably never become Senior NCOs in the first place. I'm not a perfect NCO, nor do I claim to be. In the past I was beneficiary to a second chance. Everyone can have a bad day, or just make a bad descision. That's when it becomes important to mentor, not coddle. There is a difference. If you coddle them, they will never take responsibility for their actions, if you kick them out, they just get mad and say the Army screwed them.

I don't think active duty has become unforgiving i just think everyone is used to how things have worked during the last 10 to 15 years we have been at war in Iraq and Afghanistan. I have been talking with my peers and alot of them feel that the standards should have never changed just because we from a peace time army to war time army. but numerous standards we bent or broke due to that we were deploying every other year. My opinion is the army has gotten soft and to relaxed on standards because we were in austere conditions while deployed. I have seen way to many Soldier in all the ranks of the army who couldn't shoot, do PT or pass a Body fat test. So I'm happy to see the standards being re-enforced.