Posted on Apr 1, 2024
Is it an EO complaint if your NCO is making you do extra duties, for example, covering down for shifts so that the rest can do mandatory PT?
3.77K
29
10
3
3
0
I need help, I have a Soldier, with a permanent profile, who came up to me and asked, " Is it an EO complaint if your NCO is making you do extra duties, for example: covering down for shifts so that the rest can do mandatory PT? I have looked in AR 690-12( EEO) and 600-20 ( Army Command Policy) I don't want to steer my Joe in the wrong direction or talk from my 4th point of contact.
Posted in these groups: 
Equal Opportunity (EO)
Equal Opportunity (EO)
Posted 8 mo ago
Responses: 7
No.
Is it 'unfair'? Absolutely. Is it something that might adversely affect morale? Sure thing. Does it feel like he's being singled out because they are on a profile and can't do mandatory PT (that's an assumption on my part)? If so, then yes - and he may actually be in a situation where that's accurate.
But aside from griping, is there ANY indication that he's being singled out because of his race, color, sex (to include gender identity), national origin, religion, or sexual orientation? If there is, then 'Joe' might have valid grounds for an EO complaint. Did 'Joe' say that's why he feels the NCO is having him do the extra shifts?
It's not an EO complaint if PFC Snuffy is told to work another shift and cover down on PFC Badluck's duties because he is laid up in the hospital. It's not even an EO complaint if PFC Snuffy is the one that is told to take his mask off to confirm that the chemical agent really is gone as well.
Both instances fall into the category of military necessity. It may appear that they are being singled out to the Soldier that has to be the one to cover down on the shifts or take the mask off, but unless there is something that points at the reason Snuffy was chosen was for the EO categories listed above (and not simply because Snuff happens to be in one of those categories), it's not an EO complaint.
Without knowing the limits on why your 'Joe' can't be involved with the rest of the unit doing PT, it's really impossible to comment further. For example, does your Soldier have a walking dead profile and can't approach within 50 feet of a PT formation before collapsing on the ground? If not, then there would be a strong argument for there being a DA-6 rotation of individuals that covered down on shift while the rest went to do PT.
It's also possible that it could run afoul of being in the ballpark of harassment if there is no valid military purpose tied to it (e.g., no requirement for anyone to be on shift), which would be a legitimate reason to speak to his Commander about the unfair treatment.
Again, both are hypotheticals, but the EO route is out.
If this seems a bit harsh towards 'Joe', it's because in my experience the majority of situations where a lower enlisted Soldier approaches someone about "is this possibly an EO complaint" when there is no hint of it being one, they are usually trying to get out of something they just don't like doing and are looking for a "club".
Again, is it unfair, something that could adversely affect morale, something that there could be a better way of accomplishing, etc.? Yes. But not EO unless there IS something that points to it being discriminatory and done because of his race, color, sex, national origin, religion, gender identity or sexual orientation.
Is it 'unfair'? Absolutely. Is it something that might adversely affect morale? Sure thing. Does it feel like he's being singled out because they are on a profile and can't do mandatory PT (that's an assumption on my part)? If so, then yes - and he may actually be in a situation where that's accurate.
But aside from griping, is there ANY indication that he's being singled out because of his race, color, sex (to include gender identity), national origin, religion, or sexual orientation? If there is, then 'Joe' might have valid grounds for an EO complaint. Did 'Joe' say that's why he feels the NCO is having him do the extra shifts?
It's not an EO complaint if PFC Snuffy is told to work another shift and cover down on PFC Badluck's duties because he is laid up in the hospital. It's not even an EO complaint if PFC Snuffy is the one that is told to take his mask off to confirm that the chemical agent really is gone as well.
Both instances fall into the category of military necessity. It may appear that they are being singled out to the Soldier that has to be the one to cover down on the shifts or take the mask off, but unless there is something that points at the reason Snuffy was chosen was for the EO categories listed above (and not simply because Snuff happens to be in one of those categories), it's not an EO complaint.
Without knowing the limits on why your 'Joe' can't be involved with the rest of the unit doing PT, it's really impossible to comment further. For example, does your Soldier have a walking dead profile and can't approach within 50 feet of a PT formation before collapsing on the ground? If not, then there would be a strong argument for there being a DA-6 rotation of individuals that covered down on shift while the rest went to do PT.
It's also possible that it could run afoul of being in the ballpark of harassment if there is no valid military purpose tied to it (e.g., no requirement for anyone to be on shift), which would be a legitimate reason to speak to his Commander about the unfair treatment.
Again, both are hypotheticals, but the EO route is out.
If this seems a bit harsh towards 'Joe', it's because in my experience the majority of situations where a lower enlisted Soldier approaches someone about "is this possibly an EO complaint" when there is no hint of it being one, they are usually trying to get out of something they just don't like doing and are looking for a "club".
Again, is it unfair, something that could adversely affect morale, something that there could be a better way of accomplishing, etc.? Yes. But not EO unless there IS something that points to it being discriminatory and done because of his race, color, sex, national origin, religion, gender identity or sexual orientation.
(7)
(0)
CSM William Everroad
SGT (Join to see), I cannot improve on what COL Randall C. laid out for you, but I will add this is a good teaching moment to reinforce the principles of EO program and policy.
Assuming that the Soldier asked the question in earnest because they genuinely did not know what was going on and that there is most definitely not an EO issue at play:
You can let the Soldier know the situation, that they are on profile and cannot perform mandatory PT that has been directed by the Commander for all able bodied Soldiers but the shift must still be covered. It is convenient that there is a profile Soldier (assuming there are no others) so that the 1SG does not have to do a DA6 and rotate people in and out to meet the Commander's objective.
Yes it sucks, but you can let them know what comprises an EO complaint and help them recover so it is not their problem any more.
Or, you could advocate for your Soldier to perform PT with the rest of the company within the limits of the profile and encourage a rotating duty roster so everyone has a change to be a part of the training excercise.
Assuming that the Soldier asked the question in earnest because they genuinely did not know what was going on and that there is most definitely not an EO issue at play:
You can let the Soldier know the situation, that they are on profile and cannot perform mandatory PT that has been directed by the Commander for all able bodied Soldiers but the shift must still be covered. It is convenient that there is a profile Soldier (assuming there are no others) so that the 1SG does not have to do a DA6 and rotate people in and out to meet the Commander's objective.
Yes it sucks, but you can let them know what comprises an EO complaint and help them recover so it is not their problem any more.
Or, you could advocate for your Soldier to perform PT with the rest of the company within the limits of the profile and encourage a rotating duty roster so everyone has a change to be a part of the training excercise.
(3)
(0)
Suspended Profile
As recommended by others here, seek guidance from the Equal Opportunity Advisor within your unit or any available EO representative within your chain of command to assess this situation objectively.
My first instincts is to say no. But, for clarification:
1) Without divulging/violating HIPAA, what activity or activities can your Soldier not do that is excluding them from conducting mandatory PRT with the rest of the company?
2) What shifts are needing to be covered while the rest of the Company is doing mandatory PRT?
Regardless of my instinct, whomever the EOA/EOL for your unit needs to be consulted to ensure if this is their lane or not.
1) Without divulging/violating HIPAA, what activity or activities can your Soldier not do that is excluding them from conducting mandatory PRT with the rest of the company?
2) What shifts are needing to be covered while the rest of the Company is doing mandatory PRT?
Regardless of my instinct, whomever the EOA/EOL for your unit needs to be consulted to ensure if this is their lane or not.
(4)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google