New 670-1 update

SFC Pedro Requena — Fri, 21 Mar 2014 11:45:35 -0400

Regulating off duty civilian attire? Clean shaved appearance on leave? Do you believe the grooming standards are focusing on a specific ethnic group/groups? What are your thoughts on the direction the Army is heading towards

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 21 at 2014 12:36 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 21 Mar 2014 12:36:22 -0400

My first thought is how are NCOs supposed to police these changes when the Soldier is in a "leave" status? The regulating of off duty civilian attire I would say that a loose precedent would be the forbidding of piercings for male Soldiers whether in uniform or out; on duty or off. Lastly, which of these changes are "punitive"?

Response by SGM Matthew Quick made Mar 22 at 2014 1:31 AM

SGM Matthew Quick — Sat, 22 Mar 2014 01:31:00 -0400

Civilian attire, shaving, grooming standards focusing on specific ethnic groups? No.

Civilian attire, shaving, grooming standards focusing on professionalism? YES!

Response by WO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 22 at 2014 11:31 AM

WO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 22 Mar 2014 11:31:31 -0400

Quick question, is the clean shaven regulation actually part of the 670-1 update? The leaked presentation said nothing of the sort, but of course there will be more changes in the actual regulation when it is released.

Response by SSG Clayton Lam made Mar 22 at 2014 8:31 PM

SSG Clayton Lam — Sat, 22 Mar 2014 20:31:18 -0400

Whatever the Army Regs are, we need to enforce them because we are NCOs and unfortunately we cannot pick and choose. I do not agree with all the regs, but this is bigger than me.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 22 at 2014 8:53 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 22 Mar 2014 20:53:40 -0400

SFC Requena,

Although many people seem upset by the new regulations, which had been talked about for over three years so there shouldn't be a surprise, this is about getting back to a professional Army. Can you please explain how you think this regulation is singling out a group? I am of Italian/German heritage and if I don't shave for a day it is very noticeable like most of the men I have served with over 15 years.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 23 at 2014 10:54 AM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 23 Mar 2014 10:54:35 -0400

I'm Puerto Rican and I do not feel targeted at all. Do I agree with shaving on the weekends or on leave no, but I'm a NCO so if I'm going to expose myself to the public, I will shave to be in compliance with 670-1. Now if I'm confine to the walls of my house I will exercise common sense.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 25 at 2014 7:27 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 25 Mar 2014 07:27:08 -0400

I don't see any "targeting" of particular racial/ethnic/gender groups in the updated reg. Face it, it is not a NEW reg, but an update to an existing one. My one concern is that whenever any standard is implemented, it must be policed. I don't care if it's a Federal law or a local ordinance. The policing will be the difficult part. My first thought was something along the lines of the possibility of Courtesy Patrols being sent to various beaches, resorts, and other common leave destinations. Is such a thing possible? Sure. Is it very practical? Probably not. Either way, we are all professionals. As has been pointed out, this thing is not a salad bar. We don't get to pick and choose what we like and do not like. It is incumbent upon us to police ourselves, our peers, and our subordinates. We even need to police our superiors. The bottom line is that the military is a voluntary-service organization. We all choose to be here. Thus, we agree to abide by the regulations, whether we like them or not.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 25 at 2014 7:44 AM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 25 Mar 2014 07:44:05 -0400

My biggest issue with the on/off post attire is somewhat silly. I understand we are soldiers 24/7, whether on or off duty. I'm a mechanic, what would happen if I was working on my truck and I get covered in grease and oil and I needed to run to the part store for something? In my opinion I'm gonna go as I am, I am not going to get showered and changed just to pick up a part and get dirty again. On the other hand, if I am going somewhere for a social event, I am going to do my best to lok presentable and professional. That being said, is this regulation saying that I can not dress in a casual professional attire now? If you look around at the social norms of today's society, most men will wear jeans, and an untucked buton shirt. Sometimes they may add a sports coat/ dress coat to look a little moe professional. The days of dressing like a jehovas witness are over. Our society today has turned to a more casual professional appearance.

We as a force are suppose to change with the times to conform to our society. It looks to me that we have too many individuals in the higher ranks who are making decisions based on their personal beliefs.

CSM Poll, you are exactly right in the fact that there is no grey line in the regualtions, howevever, I believe that those individuals writting the regulations needs to take a step back and take a look at what is going on with today's society and see what is acceptable now. They should not try to hold us back in progression just because that is how it was done back in their day.

I'm sure I could have worded this in a different direction but these are my thoughts right now. I'm sure I could go into futher discussion about the changes in the new AR 670-1, for instance, the new tattoo policy, but I won't right now.

BUT, just like most everyone has said on here. Just because I don't agree with the regulation doesn't mean I wont enforce it. It is my job as a senior NCO to enforce all standards and regulations despite my opinion. So........... that is what I will do until someone else changes it.

Response by SPC Christopher Smith made Mar 25 at 2014 9:20 AM

SPC Christopher Smith — Tue, 25 Mar 2014 09:20:23 -0400

I will not speculate on why African American women are feeling singled out, I have heard several arguments but will not speak for them. I only hope that in writing this comment I can pull in several to defend and share their feelings. The members speaking about them at this time, may not be well informed on why they are feeling singled out. Please police yourself, and refrain from targeting a group that has not yet made a statement.

Response by SFC Pedro Requena made Mar 25 at 2014 10:23 AM

SFC Pedro Requena — Tue, 25 Mar 2014 10:23:40 -0400

<p>Great Responses everyone!!!!</p><p> </p>

Response by SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 31 at 2014 10:00 PM

SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 31 Mar 2014 22:00:09 -0400

If the Off-Duty, Off post standard is indeed going to be included, how is that going to be enforced?

Are we as leaders going to spend our time trying to figure out who is Military off post and checking-up on Soldiers to see if they are shaved on weekends/holidays/leave?

I am always clean shaven and shave my head once a week, so this part doesn't bother me, but I am just wondering how exactly is this part going to be enforced?

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 31 at 2014 10:24 PM

CSM Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 31 Mar 2014 22:24:23 -0400

Interesting read. What do you think?

http://www.armytimes.com/article/20140331/NEWS07/303310051/Black-female-soldiers-say-new-grooming-reg-racially-biased-

Black female soldiers say new grooming reg is 'racially biased'

Thousands of soldiers and others have signed a White House petition calling for the president to order the Army to reconsider just-released appearance and grooming regulations they contend are 'raci...

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 1 at 2014 4:06 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 01 Apr 2014 16:06:25 -0400

God what else, they want a pt belt being worn at all times and wear your helmet in the shower. This is why soldiers leave the army and become contractors....

I do think its absurd and discriminatory to let only one group of people wear a beard in the army because of their religion. The old excuse about gas masks was always false and is apparent. So if you can let one group then Why not let all soldiers have a neatly trimmed beard?

I'm going file an EO complaint against that and make everyone do more online based training. LOL

Give me a reason why they shouldn't? and don't say professionalism because that's a crock as well.

Response by LTC Chris Norton made Apr 9 at 2014 4:00 PM

LTC Chris Norton — Wed, 09 Apr 2014 16:00:14 -0400

OK, so a few questions I have, from a "reserve guy" perspective:

Not a lot of precision around the "travel' aspect. I know a lot of us in the reserve component travel quite far for duty; I assume the guidance is now to travel in civvies or the service uniform (that's not real likely).

The second thing I see as problematic is there seems to to be zero provision for USAR/ARNG unit moves to a annual training site. Commanders will need to plan for a little extra space in that packing list now since Joe will need to pack a uniform vs. wear it enroute. I suppose the "Commander's guidance" piece will weigh in.

Response by PV2 Christopher Graham made Apr 9 at 2014 6:24 PM

PV2 Christopher Graham — Wed, 09 Apr 2014 18:24:07 -0400

Next thing you know, they'll be sending MP's to make sure VETS are clean shaven and in the proper off-duty attire.

Response by SFC William Swartz Jr made Apr 14 at 2014 8:36 AM

SFC William Swartz Jr — Mon, 14 Apr 2014 08:36:06 -0400

I think that the majority of the changes are not really new, they are just going to be enforced more than they have over the last 10-12 years or so. I do like that some things have been better defined, such as the hair styles for female Soldiers, but I do think that maybe they went a little overboard with some of the tattoo restrictions as far as possible enlisted to officer moves.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2014 1:36 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 14 Apr 2014 13:36:55 -0400

Ultimately my view on the regulation that it is the regulation even if I dont agree with the change it is the word of the law so it is what I will enforce.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2014 8:28 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 14 Apr 2014 20:28:59 -0400

I see absolutely no reference to any ethnic groups at all. I have heard the complaints but women of ALL races have worn cornrows, twists, and all of the other mentioned styles.

I may not necessarily agree in being clean shaven off duty from an anti-terrorism perspective but if that's the rules, I will abide.

Now as far as the complaints, and people demanding a revision, it is my opinion that if the leadership rescinds this new policy due to the whining it will only show weakness and give the upper hand to the soldiers. They need to stick to their guns and display that intestinal fortitude and courage that we demand of all soldiers.

They may have to reconsider the traveling in uniform part for safety reasons but the other parts I see no issue with at all.

Response by 1SG Christian Chenard made Dec 1 at 2016 1:57 PM

1SG Christian Chenard — Thu, 01 Dec 2016 13:57:45 -0500

You are still in service while on leave. You are subject to recall while on leave. That is why it is wise to keep a semblance of hair cut and proper appearance. Doesn't mean you cant' let your facial hair grow. Just be ready to shave in a jiffy ! Other than that, enjoy your leave, you earned it ! Cheers.

Response by SSG Mark Franzen made Dec 21 at 2016 8:19 PM

SSG Mark Franzen — Wed, 21 Dec 2016 20:19:34 -0500

I think that if you are on active duty and you are on Leave you are to conduct yourself as if you were in a Formation and be cleaned shaved and a presentable haircut.
SSG MARK FRANZEN USA VET

Response by SFC Tracy Scott made Aug 25 at 2018 8:09 PM

SFC Tracy Scott — Sat, 25 Aug 2018 20:09:30 -0400

Yes, maintaining a proper military appearance within the confines of the regulations should be maintained at all times unless otherwise directed permission orientation