Posted on Nov 6, 2013
PCS, Impact, Deployment, and other awards: Should they be determined by rank?
54.9K
397
249
18
18
0
Should a commander be able to say that they will only give a Bronze Star Medal to SSGs and above? Is this how awards are determined IAW AR 600-8-22? What if a SGT or below has met the criteria to earn a more prestigious award? Why does BDE or higher say that they are only alloted a certain number of awards for deployment or PCS or for an impact award? If your repsonse is "Tradition" or "That's the way it always has been," does that make it right?
Deployment
Awards
PCS
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 129
0
0
0
I can say a lot about this but I am going to keep it short. Of course not!
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
SGT,
I think this is something that any SM that's served more than a day in the Army has experienced. Even though this reason is not stated for why an award is down graded we all know it is. Even when well deserved, it'll still get down graded because of rank.
My answer is NO!
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
NO, I don't think all awards should be based off of rank. I honestly believe it should be for the job you have done while you're in a particular unit and time period. I have personally noticed first hand a senior SFC and another SSG get awarded the Bronze Star. They were both extremely overweight, flagged, couldn't pass a APFT to safe their life and only did what was told of them as a Convoy Commander in Iraq from 07-08. I personally logged in more than 4oo,ooo miles as a Convoy Commander, multiple SAF engagements, countless IEDs and IDF barrages to count for. I told my Commander that I didn't want the award I was going to be given because it was like a kick in the groin to me, for all of my Soldiers that were with me and for everything that I've done.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
This is one of the thing that is happening in my unit right now. We are coming to the end of the deployment and all the awards have been submited. Now they are coming back down graded. It seem that they are not even interest in what the soldier has done just the rank on there chest. There are sodiers filling positions above there grade, and that makes no difference. I hate the system because I live by the NCO creed. "I will be fair and impartial when recommending rewards and punishments".
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Unlike European Armies, the US Military isn't supposed to designate Awards for Merit based upon Rank. That said, the DoD [I pronounce as Dud] allocates a finite number of each award. Commanders must make a decision [right or wrong] as too who will receive these awards. Unfortunately, there is a Demographic Quota that Commanders must adhere too when issuing Awards and Promotions.
I have both witnessed and experienced this type of event when I was in the Army,
1981-96
(0)
(0)
CSM Mike Maynard
Mr Frank, could you provide the source of your comments - DoDIs?
Now, I agree that we do track demographics on awards, but I am not aware of any Demographic Quota's at all - in fact, that would make awards the antithesis of merit based. Additionally, I'm also not aware of any Command being authorized to present only so many awards.
It would be interesting to see the documentation that backs up these statements as it would answer a lot of questions of how sometimes it does appear that there are rank based criteria or quotas for awards.
(0)
(0)
SGT Gary Frank
Since I haven't been in the Military for 20 years I don't have any documentation, however that does not mean that there are soldiers out there who have been given a promotion or award over someone that was more deserving to maintain the appearance of "Equality".
This obviously is not a written rule, even the DoD isn't that stupid, however every Officer knows that even a false E/O charge can ruin his/her career. It's just makes life easier to divvy out awards across the demographic board. Everyone in the Military is supposed to be equal therefore why is anyone tracking demographics in the first place? If it walks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, chances are very good that it is a duck
With all due respect CSM, you response is not surprising. Of course Command doesn't show favoritism based upon Sex or Race, just like there is not such thing a waste in the military.
This obviously is not a written rule, even the DoD isn't that stupid, however every Officer knows that even a false E/O charge can ruin his/her career. It's just makes life easier to divvy out awards across the demographic board. Everyone in the Military is supposed to be equal therefore why is anyone tracking demographics in the first place? If it walks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, chances are very good that it is a duck
(0)
(0)
CSM Mike Maynard
Mr Frank - I was addressing your specific statement on why maybe awards aren't fairly distributed, not whether awards are fairly distributed.
In your statement you said "DoD allocates" and "Demographic Quota that Cdr's must adhere to".
Those statements sure sound like facts/policies/directives/regulations. I was just asking for the source for my own edification.
(0)
(0)
SGT Gary Frank
Today's military leadership is fully committed to equal opportunity.
(54)
This commitment has produced considerable progress, although more
remains to be done, particularly for women. Historically, ...
CSM
I remember watching a interview where General Powell said that He had benefited from Affirmative Action and that he supports this policy in the Military.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/hey_wait_a_minute/1997/12/quotas_and_colin_powell.html
I want to be perfectly clear that I do not support unjust discrimination based upon race or gender. If a Soldier demonstrates exemplary conduct He/She deserves to be rewarded. The "Good Ol' Boy" syndrome is in the past. We are not living in 1948 when the Army first introduced integration, nor is it the 1960's when minorities had to fight for their Civil Rights. A soldier should be judged solely upon his/her merit irrespective of their race or sex, Affirmative Action is telling NCO's and Commanders that they had better incorporate it. That said, when Race or Gender is put into consideration when awards and promotions are issued, is that not another form of discrimination?
I want to be perfectly clear that I do not support unjust discrimination based upon race or gender. If a Soldier demonstrates exemplary conduct He/She deserves to be rewarded. The "Good Ol' Boy" syndrome is in the past. We are not living in 1948 when the Army first introduced integration, nor is it the 1960's when minorities had to fight for their Civil Rights. A soldier should be judged solely upon his/her merit irrespective of their race or sex, Affirmative Action is telling NCO's and Commanders that they had better incorporate it. That said, when Race or Gender is put into consideration when awards and promotions are issued, is that not another form of discrimination?
Affirmative Action which was designed to provide Equal Opportunity and discourage unjust discrimination, is now a policy that promotes favoritism based upon race and gender.
Is there a set quota that must be met? You know that better than I, but I'll ask you this. When it comes to Awards and Promotions, have you ever favored one soldier over the other in the name of "Equal Opportunity"?
I know that this is a loaded question because you really cannot say yes. That would be admitting that there is favoritism in the military and E/O is a bad joke.
Today's military leadership is fully committed to equal opportunity.
(54)
This commitment has produced considerable progress, although more
remains to be done, particularly for women. Historically, ...
"The issue, Mr. President, is not affirmative action but racial preferences," declared Abigail Thernstrom to President Clinton at his "Town Hall" discussion on race in Akron, Ohio, Dec. 3. Clinton ret...
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
It should not be based on rank at all. Most of us have first hand experience of this time and time again. I hope this will change in the future and the ones who deserve the higher award gets it and for the ones who just doing the minimum to get by should get what they deserve that AAm or COA that the PV2s, SPCs and SGTs are getting after doing all the hard work and going above their duties and doing extra.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
We already discussed most of what you have mentioned in another thread about rank being used to discriminate when it comes to awards, it is a good thread. You should check it out, many good responses and informative opinions and some factual data as well.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Short answer: it seems that way because it is that way.
(0)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
I wonder how well it would be received if the rank was not included on the 638. The only thing that would be seen is the impacts/achievements/contributions. Same method as the senior NCO selection boards. Certain demographic and discriminator information blocks are blacked out to prevent bias in the approval/ selection process.As for the 1sg and CSM reviewing the 638, I agree that it should only be limited to corrections due to grammar and syntax, maybe a suggestion on synonym usage or rewording for content, but never to "approve" the validity of an award or it's merit. Even if it goes up and gets returned downgraded, that 638 will show that their leader recognized their efforts. I know I have gotten recommended for an award that was downgraded but I saw that my company leadership thought a lot of me, while the batallion leadership downgraded it becuase they did not know me. It didn't bother me... The people that knew me thought enough of my effort to recommend the award and that was more than enough for me.
The awards system is broken, no doubt. But as mentioned already, those who benefit from it's current usage are the same ones who have the power to change it, and they likely won't. Like many things, senior leadership will recognize a problem or even pat a junior leader on the back for bringing a problem to light, and then do nothing about it as they don't want to jeopardize their own good standing. Things will not change until the people who despise change are retired or separated.
The awards system is broken, no doubt. But as mentioned already, those who benefit from it's current usage are the same ones who have the power to change it, and they likely won't. Like many things, senior leadership will recognize a problem or even pat a junior leader on the back for bringing a problem to light, and then do nothing about it as they don't want to jeopardize their own good standing. Things will not change until the people who despise change are retired or separated.
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
I think this is a good thread for those we are trying to get to join can see the substance of some things we discuss between us as current and former military, soft spoken as well as informational and mentoring types of postings.
We also have fun at times while remaining professional.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google