Posted on Jan 14, 2015
On the spot corrections in public; when is it appropriate?
477K
2.24K
1.05K
167
167
0
This weekend me and my GF decided to get out and go to the movies not near any military base once so ever (maybe a Reserve or NG training facility could be near by). So I'm glancing around notice a uniform on a young lady and her hair down with a PT cap on inside of the mall. I didn't loose my mind at first because it could be anyone just wearing the uniform these days. As I get closer to her I notice she has on SPC rank. I told my GF that I have to say something to her and of course she didn't understand. When I approached the SPC and her civilian male acquaintance, I asked her was she in the Army and she quickly replied "yes". So I asked her did she know she was in complete violation of Army Regs she says "yes". The female rolled her eyes at me and I could tell she was going to have
a attitude with me so I quickly removed myself from the situation. So at what point do we as leaders make a on the spot correction in public or remove ourselves from the situation? I felt at the time as a NCO I should have done more to make her fix herself, but on the other hand I didn't want to make a scene at the mall and in public. SPC Ware I definitely will remember you forever.
a attitude with me so I quickly removed myself from the situation. So at what point do we as leaders make a on the spot correction in public or remove ourselves from the situation? I felt at the time as a NCO I should have done more to make her fix herself, but on the other hand I didn't want to make a scene at the mall and in public. SPC Ware I definitely will remember you forever.
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 709
I'm not convinced she's wrong. (Except for her word on the matter)
She's not on duty, therefore she's allowed faddish hairstyles.
She's wearing part (not all) of her pt uniform... Specifically the fleece cap is called out as authorized for civilian wear.
The only remote violation interpretation I can find is that her hair should not alter the wear of headgear, but again, it's being worn in civilian style.
Anyone care to actually discuss this?
She's not on duty, therefore she's allowed faddish hairstyles.
She's wearing part (not all) of her pt uniform... Specifically the fleece cap is called out as authorized for civilian wear.
The only remote violation interpretation I can find is that her hair should not alter the wear of headgear, but again, it's being worn in civilian style.
Anyone care to actually discuss this?
(0)
(0)
SPC (Join to see)
This is simple. no headgear inside. Period. While in the Army Combat Uniform you are not aloud to have your hair down. Also you are never aloud to ware headphones or any other type of thing unless you are driving of course
(1)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
Thanks for the response Robinson. I'm going to retract my statement. My excuse is m phone screen sucks and I missed key details like "uniform being worn". Thanks for getting back to me.
(0)
(0)
I'd love to see any junior Marine roll their eyes at an NCO and live to tell about it. Public or not
(0)
(0)
Public orientation should be of reservation. Sometimes in our daily lives we get busy, letting our guard down, or forgetting who we really are in the public's eye. Each generation of SM's will have their own challenges.
I remember in the 70s, my neighborhood's public orientation toward SMs, vis-a-vis, was quite different than in other parts of the US. I grew up and was raised in the East Bay, Northern California. People did their own thing and wore what ever suits them, even SMs. Why? Long hair was in and one could spot a GI a mile away...Additionally, that demographic area was and will always be predominate working class, violent, and culturally diverse.
Fast forward to this situation...the person of interest may have a good reason why she is wearing and sporting this attire. If you are really interested, make your introduction face to face and use tact and respect, and if she is responsive...listen to her story...or watch her body language...she could be carrying a concealed weapon. Hands...watch the hands.
Remember, in public, you are in her space and she is protected by civil law if you get it wrong, you can be arrested for stalking, sexual harassment and possible charges of groping her can be added to the legal exchange. Law suits and litigations are very real and career changers. My advice, if you are not in a position of public authority, be cautious of your behavior. Not everyone in public will side with your actions in word and/or deed.
I remember in the 70s, my neighborhood's public orientation toward SMs, vis-a-vis, was quite different than in other parts of the US. I grew up and was raised in the East Bay, Northern California. People did their own thing and wore what ever suits them, even SMs. Why? Long hair was in and one could spot a GI a mile away...Additionally, that demographic area was and will always be predominate working class, violent, and culturally diverse.
Fast forward to this situation...the person of interest may have a good reason why she is wearing and sporting this attire. If you are really interested, make your introduction face to face and use tact and respect, and if she is responsive...listen to her story...or watch her body language...she could be carrying a concealed weapon. Hands...watch the hands.
Remember, in public, you are in her space and she is protected by civil law if you get it wrong, you can be arrested for stalking, sexual harassment and possible charges of groping her can be added to the legal exchange. Law suits and litigations are very real and career changers. My advice, if you are not in a position of public authority, be cautious of your behavior. Not everyone in public will side with your actions in word and/or deed.
(0)
(0)
I once saw an Army Sargent pumping gas in his BDUs without a hat a year or two after 9/11 and I asked were is cover was. He started to move in on me like I just had picked a fight. It just goes to show you that there are former military around all over the place.
(0)
(0)
You definitely make the correction because she in violation of AR 670-1 and she is going to the movies in a duty uniform. The appropriate thing is to pull her aside let here know she is violation and if she get an attitude at least get her name and unit or here picture. The go through the chain of command to ensure she gets punished under UCMJ. This is the lack of military discipline that NCO's are being blamed for.
(0)
(0)
Should probably find out her name and rank and unit and correct her and inform her chain of command. Especially if she refused to correct the situation
(0)
(0)
I think on the spot corrections would be great. I recently returned from war-x where I helped trained NG and reserves. While I was training them my SSGT and I tried to correct a Soldier that had their PC on inside a building and the soldier completely blew both of us off. We spent 3 weeks training them and by the 3rd day, we were ready to come back home.
(0)
(0)
SPC (Join to see)
I am not being rude, but the correct abbreviation for that rank is SSG. It took me a couple of years to get it right. lol
(0)
(0)
Right then and there I wouldn't make a scene but I would walk up behind her and talk like we have a normal convo
(0)
(0)
We assume she is in the military because she is wearing part of a uniform and said she was. She may have been, and is now trying to scam some discounted movie tickets. She may be a problem at her unit if she is in the military. Demand an ID and unit, in a calm manner. If she is in the military its a problem her unit can deal with long term. She may not be able to fix this problem on the spot. If she is not in the military, she won't be scamming tickets today. If your going to intervene, be prepared to follow through. Otherwise just enjoy your night off that was your plan when you wanted to get away from the base.
(0)
(0)
If she were truly a SPC...she shouldn't need to be corrected! She should have known...therefor a quiet, but firm counseling session on the spot. If she disobeyed a direct order from you...an NCO...I would have reminded her about a couple of UCMJ items called Article 91 & 92!
(0)
(0)
Read This Next