Posted on Jan 11, 2014
Positions of "trust" according to ALARACT 147? Last time I checked the position of NCO was a position of trust.
11.8K
29
16
5
5
0
I was talking about this with some recruiters in my class today. I had to go look it up and I think it's ridiculous. As far as I'm concerned it's an OFFICIAL double standard.
For those who don't know, ALARACT 147, removes all NCO's with negative findings in their records (long specific list) from what they determine "positions of trust" to include, recruiter, drill sergeant, AIT PSG, etc.
Please explain to me the difference between a platoon sergeant in the 82nd and a PSG is AIT land? So what are you saying? I don't have to trust my PSG in the 82nd? I think the entire thing is ridiculous and a MAJOR slap in the face to the NCO Corps as a whole.
Either set the standard and enforce it on everyone; no never mind, no "either" necessary. Just set the standard and enforce it. Quit picking and choosing what jobs you think are more important.
Edited 12 y ago
Posted 12 y ago
Responses: 9
5
5
0
If we dont teach and enforce the standard in IET then do you really expect joe/jane to do the same on the gun line? I think not. A position of trust is a position of trust period.....doesnt matter if you are on a special assignment or not...all my assignments are special and include a position of trust because Im taking care of someone's child, husband, wife, mother, father.
(5)
(0)
5
5
0
I think eventually they will be moving toward phasing everyone out of the army with the negative findings, but for now its just positions dealing with the new soldiers (recruiter, drill, AIT). I am a new recruiter and am quickly realizing how much we are on our own to make decisions that can vastly effect someone else's career. However I do agree with you in the sense that they should change the wording in the message because an NCO is a position of trust.
(5)
(0)
SFC A.M. Drake
SFC McKenna,
Contact me on global I have some good knowledge to pass onto you after 12yrs of Recruiting exp
Contact me on global I have some good knowledge to pass onto you after 12yrs of Recruiting exp
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
While I agree with you 100%, I myself, being a post 9-11 Soldier am having somewhat of difficult time watching the Army change so much, so quickly. I can say I don't agree with all the changes, but I can say it must be done. Without getting off topic too much, I relate back to as this seems to be just another step in our transitioning Army. As we've done in the past and will continue to do in the future, we as leaders will adapt,adjust, and enforce. Great post, brought more knowledge to my tool kit, thanks!
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
I think the Army has to start somewhere. Since recruiters, Drill Sergeants, AIT Platoon Sergeants are dealing with new Soldiers who are learning the Army system they can get away with doing things that are questionable. Recruiters are dealing directly with civilians who know little to nothing about the Army. Some of these NCOs are taking advantage of these positions and since the the Soldiers and civilians don't understand all their rights or how to report an issue they can damage the trust we are trying to build with our new Soldiers (or they are intimidated by the perceived power these NCOs have in a training environment). I have seen good NCOs go to recruiting and lose their moral compass. It is my understanding that the CG of USAREC is the one putting extra emphasis on this, where as the Main Stream Army is not.
Again, I think we need to start somewhere (Also, this affects officers as well. If you hope to command a unit in Basic or Recruiting, then you will be screened as well. I know I was.)
(2)
(0)
SSG Robert Burns
I can understand that. But what am I supposed to do with a NCO that I get who was taken from one of these positions of trust and gets sent to me?
Do I say well the Army couldn't trust you around a bunch of privates, so let me put you in charge of a bunch of soldiers and let you lead them into war? What are his Soldiers supposed to think?
(3)
(0)
MAJ Samuel Weber
I would recommend placing him/her in positions that increase in responsibility gradually. I would also ask the NCO what was in their record that had them removed. We have a SSG in our BDE who made a mistake as a young E-5 in recruiting. It was a youthful mistake (inappropriate relationship) but he is a hard working NCO that be trusted to do the job, but he will retire as a SSG. Think of it like this, I am sure you have had Soldiers and NCOs who have made mistakes while working for you, how did you rehabilitate them?
(0)
(0)
SSG Robert Burns
That's my point. Im arguing the point that that same NCO that you said made a mistake as a recruiter of AIT PSG, etc is the same one who will do the same thing while deployed as a PSG with their troops. Putting you in a different unit doesn't change who you are. Either we trust you or we don't. It's a mistake to say we can't trust you with these troops but we can trust you with these.
If I don't trust a Soldier, I'm not putting him responsible for anyone. And if I can't trust a NCO then he shouldn't be in the Army. Im not saying that everyone who makes a mistake should be kicked out, I'm saying that if we've set a standard (which the ALARACT does) then we need to apply it across the board, not discriminate where it applies.
This message effectively makes rehabilitation irrelevant.
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
0
0
0
The reason that we have and use this system is to make sure that NCOs or Officers that may have been convicted of crimes such sexual harassment, rape, incest or any other derogatory information (there is a list) are not put into positions of Trust, or promoted to the GO ranks. It's not to weed out the "bad" ones; its to make sure that unscrupulous individuals are not put into positions of authority/trust to where they can continue with said behavior. And just to point out, POTBSCS is not a new system; it just has a different name.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Does self referring yourself to ASAP count as a violation of significant trust?.... Apparently it does! And it needs to be advertised!........about to get real!
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
I concur completely! NCO and above are all positions of trust. All should be treated as such, and lower enlisteds and other initial entrants should be groomed for such trust and responsibility.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
A position of trust is unique, in my 24+ years, it should not matter what the position is you hold as an NCO; an NCO is a NCO and is a position of trust by sphere of the rank. Everyone is not perfect on planet earth and makes mistakes and you should not be judged on your failures. It should not matter what position you hold as an NCO; a job is a job with a lot more of responsibility as you progress up the ladder. Trust matters, its the heart of true leadership within every organization and relationship!!
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google