31
30
1
From: Army Times
If you want to go out in public on Fort Leonard Wood you better ditch the tank top, pull up your saggy drawers and shave that scruff.
Maj. Gen. Leslie Smith, the Missouri post's commanding general, issued new appearance standards in a Nov. 10 policy update.
The rules not only crack down on sloppy dress, but skimpy outfits as well: No short skirts, exposed midriffs and revealing undergarments.
The rules fall under the post's Command Policy 18, which used to be called "Wear and Appearance of Uniforms." Now it's called "Wear and Appearance of Uniforms and Civilian Attire," which really brings into focus the expansion of the policy to include not only soldiers in civilian clothes, but also spouses, kids, guests – anyone who comes on post.
"The entire concept is good order and discipline. The Army is talking about the Army profession, how we look, how we dress," Smith told Army Times in a Nov. 21 interview.
While the policy change has garnered plenty of buzz online, Smith downplayed the changes. He has been the posts' commanding general since June 2013, and said the base simply updated the regs after waiting for recent updates to AR 670-1, the Armywide regulation on appearance standards.
But Smith's policy does go further in some cases than AR 670-1. For example, the shaving rule. AR 670-1 requires soldiers to be "clean shaven" whenever they are in uniform or on duty. Fort Leonard Wood has called for soldiers to be clean-shaven, whether they are on duty or off. This is one of the few rules in the policy that do not extend to civilians on post.
"We've followed the lead on other bases and establishments," said Smith.
In recent years, bases such as Fort Irwin, California, and Fort Stewart, Georgia, have issued similar crackdowns.
Policy highlights for everyone on post at Fort Leonard Wood:
• No bare mid-drifts, shirts with cut-out armpits or sleeveless shirts, tank tops, swimsuits, or shorts/skirts/tops that "are too revealing."
• No sagging pants, pajamas or house shoes.
• No clothing depicting obscenity, slander, drug paraphernalia, or vulgarity.
More policy highlights for soldiers only:
• No headphones while wearing any Army uniform, including official PT uniforms, except for a hands-free device while driving. Soldiers can wear headphones, however, while walking or running on sidewalks, troop trails, running tracks or inside the gym in civilian clothing.
• Though not new, a draft poster depicting the changes reinforces that PT uniforms cannot be worn outside of unit personal training, transit to PT, and a few select locations such as the daycare center.
Officers bear responsibility for passing down the changes to soldiers under their command, and soldiers for informing families and guests, base spokeswoman Shatara Seymour said. Access control officers at the post's gates will have authority to prevent entrance to those not in compliance, and management of various facilities will also wield authority to ask people to leave.
Smith said certain facilities such as the PX and commissary could ask inappropriately dressed civilians or soldiers to leave, but said the gate guards would focus more on military personnel rather than denying non-compliant civilians access.
He said they will be looking hard at the off-duty shaving requirement, leaving open the possibility that there could be an adjustment to that rule.
As for enforcement, he said, "self-policing is the goal." The policy states, as it did before the changes, that soldiers all "have the general military authority to make corrections on service members improperly wearing the uniform, regardless of the rank or duty" of the non-compliant soldier.
After a draft of a poster spelling out Smith's policy leaked online, soldiers and vets responded with mixed reviews via social media.
"As a former NCO I agree with this 100%. When I was in this was not an issue, we looked squared away 24/7. It's sad that today soldiers have to be told how to look both on and off duty," Jack Hutchinson said via Facebook.
Others reserved their blunt remarks for civilian appearance.
"It's Leonard Wood which means it is constantly full of disgusting civilian family members watching their spawn graduate Basic Training. Good luck to the post CSM on actually enforcing this," said John Atkinson.
But comments also included pushback against rules viewed by some as superfluous.
"God forbid soldiers utilize music devices while improving their physical fitness," Scott Welch said.
"I am a retired NCO, and I think the shaving point is total BS," said Steve Buero. "I NEVER shaved on weekends or on leave. That is my time and if I was on duty in civilian clothes I shaved, but you call me in for some BS on my leave you got what you got."
Some complained that family members and friends visiting the base not employed by the Army should not be subjected to Army rules. But others say coming on the post comes with tacit agreement to abide by rules designed to promote the atmosphere desired by leadership.
"Hate to be the spoiler. But soldiers are and have always been responsible for the actions of the family members. It is the soldier's responsibility to ensure family members know what they can and cannot do," John DeSmith said.
http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/2014/11/21/leonard-wood-dress-code/70017120/
If you want to go out in public on Fort Leonard Wood you better ditch the tank top, pull up your saggy drawers and shave that scruff.
Maj. Gen. Leslie Smith, the Missouri post's commanding general, issued new appearance standards in a Nov. 10 policy update.
The rules not only crack down on sloppy dress, but skimpy outfits as well: No short skirts, exposed midriffs and revealing undergarments.
The rules fall under the post's Command Policy 18, which used to be called "Wear and Appearance of Uniforms." Now it's called "Wear and Appearance of Uniforms and Civilian Attire," which really brings into focus the expansion of the policy to include not only soldiers in civilian clothes, but also spouses, kids, guests – anyone who comes on post.
"The entire concept is good order and discipline. The Army is talking about the Army profession, how we look, how we dress," Smith told Army Times in a Nov. 21 interview.
While the policy change has garnered plenty of buzz online, Smith downplayed the changes. He has been the posts' commanding general since June 2013, and said the base simply updated the regs after waiting for recent updates to AR 670-1, the Armywide regulation on appearance standards.
But Smith's policy does go further in some cases than AR 670-1. For example, the shaving rule. AR 670-1 requires soldiers to be "clean shaven" whenever they are in uniform or on duty. Fort Leonard Wood has called for soldiers to be clean-shaven, whether they are on duty or off. This is one of the few rules in the policy that do not extend to civilians on post.
"We've followed the lead on other bases and establishments," said Smith.
In recent years, bases such as Fort Irwin, California, and Fort Stewart, Georgia, have issued similar crackdowns.
Policy highlights for everyone on post at Fort Leonard Wood:
• No bare mid-drifts, shirts with cut-out armpits or sleeveless shirts, tank tops, swimsuits, or shorts/skirts/tops that "are too revealing."
• No sagging pants, pajamas or house shoes.
• No clothing depicting obscenity, slander, drug paraphernalia, or vulgarity.
More policy highlights for soldiers only:
• No headphones while wearing any Army uniform, including official PT uniforms, except for a hands-free device while driving. Soldiers can wear headphones, however, while walking or running on sidewalks, troop trails, running tracks or inside the gym in civilian clothing.
• Though not new, a draft poster depicting the changes reinforces that PT uniforms cannot be worn outside of unit personal training, transit to PT, and a few select locations such as the daycare center.
Officers bear responsibility for passing down the changes to soldiers under their command, and soldiers for informing families and guests, base spokeswoman Shatara Seymour said. Access control officers at the post's gates will have authority to prevent entrance to those not in compliance, and management of various facilities will also wield authority to ask people to leave.
Smith said certain facilities such as the PX and commissary could ask inappropriately dressed civilians or soldiers to leave, but said the gate guards would focus more on military personnel rather than denying non-compliant civilians access.
He said they will be looking hard at the off-duty shaving requirement, leaving open the possibility that there could be an adjustment to that rule.
As for enforcement, he said, "self-policing is the goal." The policy states, as it did before the changes, that soldiers all "have the general military authority to make corrections on service members improperly wearing the uniform, regardless of the rank or duty" of the non-compliant soldier.
After a draft of a poster spelling out Smith's policy leaked online, soldiers and vets responded with mixed reviews via social media.
"As a former NCO I agree with this 100%. When I was in this was not an issue, we looked squared away 24/7. It's sad that today soldiers have to be told how to look both on and off duty," Jack Hutchinson said via Facebook.
Others reserved their blunt remarks for civilian appearance.
"It's Leonard Wood which means it is constantly full of disgusting civilian family members watching their spawn graduate Basic Training. Good luck to the post CSM on actually enforcing this," said John Atkinson.
But comments also included pushback against rules viewed by some as superfluous.
"God forbid soldiers utilize music devices while improving their physical fitness," Scott Welch said.
"I am a retired NCO, and I think the shaving point is total BS," said Steve Buero. "I NEVER shaved on weekends or on leave. That is my time and if I was on duty in civilian clothes I shaved, but you call me in for some BS on my leave you got what you got."
Some complained that family members and friends visiting the base not employed by the Army should not be subjected to Army rules. But others say coming on the post comes with tacit agreement to abide by rules designed to promote the atmosphere desired by leadership.
"Hate to be the spoiler. But soldiers are and have always been responsible for the actions of the family members. It is the soldier's responsibility to ensure family members know what they can and cannot do," John DeSmith said.
http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/2014/11/21/leonard-wood-dress-code/70017120/
Army
Fort Leonard Wood
Army Regulations
Posted 11 y ago
Responses: 112
60
60
0
I'm down with any rule that eliminates those dreadful pants that sags off the individuals a$$!
(60)
(0)
SFC David Pope, MBA
If you look closely, the Capt is Polynesian. Do not let his size fool you, because he is very capable of his job. Having been stationed in Hawaii I learned that there is different regulations that apply to certain groups. I had two leaders that were Samoan with a similar build. They scored 300 on their PT tests, and would run circles around most others in my unit.
(0)
(0)
SGT Ty Henderson
SFC David Pope, MBA - I had a squad leader that was a native Samoan. I don't know how well he met the height and weight standards but he was well known for his incredible strength. In a fight, I'd take him over a fast runner any day.
(1)
(0)
SFC Harry (Billy) Tison
SGT Ty Henderson - We had a sergeant who was able to lift a 4 deuce mortar by himself. He was also over the so-called weight standards for his age and height. They gave him such a fit about it, that he didn't reenlist after a couple of contracts. I would take him also in a fight over some pencil thin runner
(0)
(0)
SSG George Holtje
Are the kids still doing that?
Make them aware that's a prison symbol for flagging down a new boyfriend.
Make them aware that's a prison symbol for flagging down a new boyfriend.
(1)
(0)
36
36
0
Thank God I am divorced. My ex would get me in so much trouble with her actions. We sure have come full circle. When I was a grunt stationed at NTC, the FRG (Family Support Group back then) held car washes in short shorts, tank tops, and bikinis.......from the COL's wife on down. Back then I was considered "hooah" for having a tattoo of a Bradley and was told to dismount my top whenever the COL had a VIP come visit. We used to settle grudges with the tankers in the boxing ring and after we beat each other stupid we had our noses set , shook hands, and went right back into the desert for the next rotation as compadres. These days........whew. As far as saggy pants goes....it is about time. Hip gangster wanna-bees, pull up your pants!
(36)
(0)
1LT William Clardy
1SG Michael Blount, could I become a Drill Sergeant? Every so often I regret that TRADOC processed my ROTC scholarship application so much faster than my application to earn earn a "This We Defend" badge. I'd even be willing to redo all my paperwork for DS training....
(3)
(0)
PV2 Abbott Shaull
Um 1stLt William Clardy, Soviet Artillery does follow the line units, it doesn't hang back to fire at request. In the Soviet model, the Artillery units assigned to the Regiments were split up down to Battalion and were Direct-fire Support. While the Artillery Regiment(s) of the Division were the ones who fired while the Division was moving forward. In the Soviet Army, there is really no such thing as calling in artillery or air support, you simply relay up the chain of command what you see, and hopefully someone up the chain feels your target is worthy to be targeted. Otherwise, you deal with it the best you can, with your DS artillery and mortars.
(1)
(0)
SGT Anthony Bussing
in 1990 I went to NTC from 29 Palms...went back in 91 or 92...then again in 2003 with my guard unit...the first time we were with the opfor...the second we went as blue...the third time we (my medical unit) never left the "FOB"...I love the desert...miss it alot
(0)
(0)
1LT William Clardy
Ummm, PV2 Abbott Shaull, that was exactly my point about Red Army artillery doctrine.
Prior to my brash input, the 2S1 vismods followed U.S. Army indirect-fire practice -- baking in a stationary firing position out of line of sight from the battle. Once my platoon sergeant understood that I wasn't blowing smoke about Soviet fire-support doctrine, we began routinely rolling close behind the lead attack elements. Every so often, our chain of command would come back from the AAR "complaining" about having to explain why the motorized infantry was following the artillery in an ad hoc flanking maneuver. Way more fun than sitting in the sun calling "Shot, over" on the radio...
Prior to my brash input, the 2S1 vismods followed U.S. Army indirect-fire practice -- baking in a stationary firing position out of line of sight from the battle. Once my platoon sergeant understood that I wasn't blowing smoke about Soviet fire-support doctrine, we began routinely rolling close behind the lead attack elements. Every so often, our chain of command would come back from the AAR "complaining" about having to explain why the motorized infantry was following the artillery in an ad hoc flanking maneuver. Way more fun than sitting in the sun calling "Shot, over" on the radio...
(0)
(0)
25
25
0
Everything is spot on except for the requirement to be clean-shaven everyday even out of uniform. In essence, you are mandating Soldiers shave everyday as most men can't go a day without shaving before the shadow comes. So, now it's an arbitrary standard vs medical readiness. Shaving everyday for 20 years will rip your face apart. It can lead to serious skin disorders in some men. Your face needs time to rest from a blade hacking at it for five days straight. Just like doing nothing but strength conditioning for PRT everyday for 20 years--it's not safe! All this new rule is going to do is cause servicemembers to start getting no-shaving profiles. Then, not only will they be authorized to not shave off duty, they'll be scruffy on duty as well which is really the only place it should matter!
(25)
(0)
SGM (Join to see)
CSM Benjamin Lemon, I agree, SGM, it's also unrealistic to enforce as I stated in my post, plus it strikes me as a control issue as well. We must allow our Soldiers some release and this is one thing that should be left alone. I don't expect someone on Leave in HI, Cancun, Myrtle Beach, or anywhere within the post proper to shave when off duty.
(0)
(0)
CSM (Join to see)
I shaved generally every day of my 30 years of service. I've always considered it the rule that if you're on post you are shaven. If you're at home tucked away in your garage then who really cares - just be shaven when you come back on post.
(0)
(0)
13
13
0
SSG Gordon Hill
I agree no wants to see somebody elses ass crack or underwear or whatever there wearing at the time, you have to wonder what there mother would do if she saw them around around like that.
(0)
(0)
13
13
0
I hope that the Army is culturally contextual here. Imagine telling Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Marines in Hawaii that they can't be in tank tops or flip flops.
No iPod while in APFT? Stupid. I get not wearing them while running outside in non-designated tracks, but while on a treadmill? I run 10 miles at a time. I could do it without music, but I see no reason why not. And the excuse of uniformity is tired. If we cared so much for uniformity, we wouldn't give badges and tabs away.
No iPod while in APFT? Stupid. I get not wearing them while running outside in non-designated tracks, but while on a treadmill? I run 10 miles at a time. I could do it without music, but I see no reason why not. And the excuse of uniformity is tired. If we cared so much for uniformity, we wouldn't give badges and tabs away.
(13)
(0)
PV2 Abbott Shaull
CPT Michael Krogh, it called discipline, Sir. If you out of uniform and are one doing PT and working out on your time, then by all means listen to music. Again we signed up for the military because we wanted to join, and we sign our rights away. At the same time, any rights our dependent currently or in the future were signed away too. Like it or not, we made that choice. We can't ignore rules because we don't like them. Once discipline breaks down to point, then we get things going out of control. It ever going struggle of giving a inch and troops taking a mile. Every so often the higher ups in the food chain have to snap it a little to make it tighter, is it right, no. The standard should of been in forced to begin with, not overlooked in a time of need. That not entirely right either, but now they are enforcing it, quit whining about little shit, you suppose to set the tone for the discipline, not to be instigator for not being carried out.
(0)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
PV2 Abbott Shaull Thank you for you last sentence. I had no idea what my job was.
Sarcasm aside, I never said that I wasn't enforcing the rules and regulations. I just have a disagreement with the nitpicky and tickytack focus on minutia. So, were I on Fort Leonard Wood, I would not have an iPod in while running in IPFUs. However, I imagine that, in theater, this rule wouldn't be enforced. Many Soldiers deployed can only bring IPFUs, and many of those who want to do PT on their own time, like running and working out while listening to an iPod. This is the sort of micromanaging leadership that would (I believe mistakenly) say that you wouldn't be able to PT in theater in anything other than an IPFUs , but wouldn't let you do so while listening to music. (or, in my case, podcasts.)
BTW, I agree that discipline is essential to good military order; however, I don't think that giving Soldiers a modicum of individuality and freedom leads to a breakdown of discipline.
Sarcasm aside, I never said that I wasn't enforcing the rules and regulations. I just have a disagreement with the nitpicky and tickytack focus on minutia. So, were I on Fort Leonard Wood, I would not have an iPod in while running in IPFUs. However, I imagine that, in theater, this rule wouldn't be enforced. Many Soldiers deployed can only bring IPFUs, and many of those who want to do PT on their own time, like running and working out while listening to an iPod. This is the sort of micromanaging leadership that would (I believe mistakenly) say that you wouldn't be able to PT in theater in anything other than an IPFUs , but wouldn't let you do so while listening to music. (or, in my case, podcasts.)
BTW, I agree that discipline is essential to good military order; however, I don't think that giving Soldiers a modicum of individuality and freedom leads to a breakdown of discipline.
(3)
(0)
PV2 Abbott Shaull
Didn't mean for that last line to come off that harshly. Sarcasm comes off a second nature to me.
Yes I have always agreed it can, and at times as it naturally does goes from one extreme to another. That what naturally happen with organization as big as the military. No in general I would agree some of it is quite trivial, with military catching up with reality of what kids grow up with now. When I was in, everyone had walk-man and camera, but never really showed it anyone outside of you Team. Why because the Army hadn't caught up with what civilians had grown up with. Personally I know what you are saying about going out for run to listen to music, when I was still able to run, I would have carry walk-man or older generation mp3-player, nothing like they have now. Now the troops can have it all in their cell phone/smart phone. There is time and place for everything.
As for the shaving standards, shrug. I am with you, never did if I had didn't have to make formation, but late Sunday or Monday morning before PT formation I would so not to get the stink eye from Top and others.
As for the telling others what they can and can't wear on base, that has always been an unwritten contract with everyone. Nothing really new here, like I said in other places there was time, when troops had to wear uniforms all the time, and almost all families lived off based, I think anyone wants to see a return of those standards.
As for when you downrange with limited space to pack, well gosh darn it, I think you took care of the problem with answering it with some common sense. Now to filter that down through the ranks.
No Soldiers need their individuality and freedoms too, that much I do agree with. There is a balancing act though. We can't sit here pick and choose what orders and regulation we want to enforce and the ones we don't. When we do that, it leads to confusions and frustration in the ranks that we have now, because for such a long time they had been relaxed. It always tougher turn the clock backward than it is to move forward. There are some clothing choices out that I see young girls wearing today, with my 13 years old daughter, that I know when she gets there that I will not be too happy with, may cause some heated discussion between me, her, and the wife. But that not here or there. It all about taking responsibility, and with it respecting the fact that they may not want to see you with next to nothing on, or walking around the PX in BJs. Not saying that saying they making a choice for your attire is correct, never will believe in Political Correctness. Do I understand their position, just a little bit, it was the environment they grew up in where everyone and everything was covered, remember bikini was shocking when it came out, it covered lot more than they do today. Just take it with grain of salt, and use common sense when and where is need. These regulation were only relaxed because they weren't mission critical, and only being tighten now, because their is no mission to do. Same thing happen back in 1989 and 1992, and before then in 1973-1974 and 1946.
Yes I have always agreed it can, and at times as it naturally does goes from one extreme to another. That what naturally happen with organization as big as the military. No in general I would agree some of it is quite trivial, with military catching up with reality of what kids grow up with now. When I was in, everyone had walk-man and camera, but never really showed it anyone outside of you Team. Why because the Army hadn't caught up with what civilians had grown up with. Personally I know what you are saying about going out for run to listen to music, when I was still able to run, I would have carry walk-man or older generation mp3-player, nothing like they have now. Now the troops can have it all in their cell phone/smart phone. There is time and place for everything.
As for the shaving standards, shrug. I am with you, never did if I had didn't have to make formation, but late Sunday or Monday morning before PT formation I would so not to get the stink eye from Top and others.
As for the telling others what they can and can't wear on base, that has always been an unwritten contract with everyone. Nothing really new here, like I said in other places there was time, when troops had to wear uniforms all the time, and almost all families lived off based, I think anyone wants to see a return of those standards.
As for when you downrange with limited space to pack, well gosh darn it, I think you took care of the problem with answering it with some common sense. Now to filter that down through the ranks.
No Soldiers need their individuality and freedoms too, that much I do agree with. There is a balancing act though. We can't sit here pick and choose what orders and regulation we want to enforce and the ones we don't. When we do that, it leads to confusions and frustration in the ranks that we have now, because for such a long time they had been relaxed. It always tougher turn the clock backward than it is to move forward. There are some clothing choices out that I see young girls wearing today, with my 13 years old daughter, that I know when she gets there that I will not be too happy with, may cause some heated discussion between me, her, and the wife. But that not here or there. It all about taking responsibility, and with it respecting the fact that they may not want to see you with next to nothing on, or walking around the PX in BJs. Not saying that saying they making a choice for your attire is correct, never will believe in Political Correctness. Do I understand their position, just a little bit, it was the environment they grew up in where everyone and everything was covered, remember bikini was shocking when it came out, it covered lot more than they do today. Just take it with grain of salt, and use common sense when and where is need. These regulation were only relaxed because they weren't mission critical, and only being tighten now, because their is no mission to do. Same thing happen back in 1989 and 1992, and before then in 1973-1974 and 1946.
(1)
(0)
SSG Ronald Rollins
CPL Michael Strickler I have to say I agree. I have talked aboout this with many I know still on active duty. If they start making to many rules it is like they are trying to control you and everything you do. I can see why people especially the younger folks want to rebel. But as I look back now, there were rules and regulations that I did not like and some I out right disregarded. It was not right but I did what I wanted. So I can see where some of these people say the heck with it. Rules are not always good or smart. Some I think were designed and made to get people into trouble just to keep someone busy. And most are made my old senior NCOs who have nothing better to do or young new officers who think their way is better and they know better. This was told to me by a retired CSM. Dont know if it is true or not but seems reasonable!!
(0)
(0)
10
10
0
It's unfortunate that individual responsibility, values, discipline and accountability have fallen to a level in which commanders have had to go this route on any installation to ensure Soldiers, family members and civilians visiting or conducting business both on and off duty maintain a common decent appearence in public.
If you want wear your sagging pants with your ass hanging out...don't do it on post. If your wife, girlfriend, daughter wants to wear a shirt that's cut to show her waist, stomach and ass....don't do it on post. If you wish to not shave over the weekend...thats fine too....just don't plan on visiting the post for personal needs, PX, commissary, etc. You can use Kroger, Walmart, the Mall....and then fit in and look like those whom we often point out to our wife/husband and saying...."I can't believe someone would wear that out in public.
I don't necessarily agree with all included in some of these installationos policies, but definitely see the need for the stricter standards. The next step is for those in a position to make the "on the spot" corrections to do so. This will be the test that will determine the effectiveness of the policy. I've seen many NCO and Officers turn their head in order to NOT make appropriate corrective actions to Soldiers in uniform.....so unfortunately I do not expect to see them do so when they see someone in inappropriate civilian attire, etc when not on duty.
How many of us have een Soldiers, NCOs, and Officers take off running at the first sound of Retreat to get indoors so they do not have to pay the proper respect for the 1 minute it takes to bring down the Flag or just sit in their car pretending to not hear the music or see that others are doing the right thing. I've called out Soldiers and NCOs more on this then I have seen those in uniform also seeing them have done. I recall the days of when someone was caught doing this...you would see them standing at the Flag Pole every morning and evening for 30 days doing the right thing at the right time and paying the proper respect they should have done all along, as second nature and instinct.
Bring back the discipline; remove the stigma of .....when a male makes such a correction on a female and then she claims, sexual harrassment, then he becomes the object the chain of command is focusing on.....and not the culprit who was wrong to start with.
Fort Stewart ( and every Army installation I've been on) has the policy when Reveille and Retreat/End of the day music is played, if you're driving, you stop and get out of your vehicle and render proper respect. But it's not enforced. If it was, then eventually those of us who do what's right, would not see cars pulling around us while observing the installation policy. If MPs were stopping these clowns and then commanders restrict their post driving privileges for 30 days....it would come to an end. But enforcement is inconveinent....humm ....inconveinent for the MPs, inconveinent for commanders...so why keep the policy.
There is a bigger picture in which these off-duty rules encompass only a small piece of. It all goes back to discipline, leadership, tying personal and professional values together, and accountablility. Until the Army Leadership tackles these "institutional" issues and brings them back to where they once were....we're continue to see commanders trying to cure symptoms instead of the disease.
Sure some of the policies, rules that have been institutionalized in the military may seem absurd and not make sense to many. However, we are the military, in the military and traditions and values are a big part of this heritage (strange words to many young Soldiers, NCO, Officers) today...because they are inconveinent to their personal values.
So for those who do not wish to comply, feel they are stupid rules, and perfer to be an individual and fully be a part of the military tradition, values, heritage, (including policies they don't fully agree with)....then it's time to get the hell out and go back home so you can do whatever you wish, when you wish to do it and how you want to do it. Otherwise...get on board, be part of the solution and help get rid of some of these senseless problems.
If you want wear your sagging pants with your ass hanging out...don't do it on post. If your wife, girlfriend, daughter wants to wear a shirt that's cut to show her waist, stomach and ass....don't do it on post. If you wish to not shave over the weekend...thats fine too....just don't plan on visiting the post for personal needs, PX, commissary, etc. You can use Kroger, Walmart, the Mall....and then fit in and look like those whom we often point out to our wife/husband and saying...."I can't believe someone would wear that out in public.
I don't necessarily agree with all included in some of these installationos policies, but definitely see the need for the stricter standards. The next step is for those in a position to make the "on the spot" corrections to do so. This will be the test that will determine the effectiveness of the policy. I've seen many NCO and Officers turn their head in order to NOT make appropriate corrective actions to Soldiers in uniform.....so unfortunately I do not expect to see them do so when they see someone in inappropriate civilian attire, etc when not on duty.
How many of us have een Soldiers, NCOs, and Officers take off running at the first sound of Retreat to get indoors so they do not have to pay the proper respect for the 1 minute it takes to bring down the Flag or just sit in their car pretending to not hear the music or see that others are doing the right thing. I've called out Soldiers and NCOs more on this then I have seen those in uniform also seeing them have done. I recall the days of when someone was caught doing this...you would see them standing at the Flag Pole every morning and evening for 30 days doing the right thing at the right time and paying the proper respect they should have done all along, as second nature and instinct.
Bring back the discipline; remove the stigma of .....when a male makes such a correction on a female and then she claims, sexual harrassment, then he becomes the object the chain of command is focusing on.....and not the culprit who was wrong to start with.
Fort Stewart ( and every Army installation I've been on) has the policy when Reveille and Retreat/End of the day music is played, if you're driving, you stop and get out of your vehicle and render proper respect. But it's not enforced. If it was, then eventually those of us who do what's right, would not see cars pulling around us while observing the installation policy. If MPs were stopping these clowns and then commanders restrict their post driving privileges for 30 days....it would come to an end. But enforcement is inconveinent....humm ....inconveinent for the MPs, inconveinent for commanders...so why keep the policy.
There is a bigger picture in which these off-duty rules encompass only a small piece of. It all goes back to discipline, leadership, tying personal and professional values together, and accountablility. Until the Army Leadership tackles these "institutional" issues and brings them back to where they once were....we're continue to see commanders trying to cure symptoms instead of the disease.
Sure some of the policies, rules that have been institutionalized in the military may seem absurd and not make sense to many. However, we are the military, in the military and traditions and values are a big part of this heritage (strange words to many young Soldiers, NCO, Officers) today...because they are inconveinent to their personal values.
So for those who do not wish to comply, feel they are stupid rules, and perfer to be an individual and fully be a part of the military tradition, values, heritage, (including policies they don't fully agree with)....then it's time to get the hell out and go back home so you can do whatever you wish, when you wish to do it and how you want to do it. Otherwise...get on board, be part of the solution and help get rid of some of these senseless problems.
(10)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
1SG, you are SPOT ON!
Furthermore, I would like to add that, all Soldiers, regardless of rank have general military authority. I'll take a PV1 kindly bringing to my attention that I am all jacked up any day of the week and twice on Sunday's. Sadly though, most don't have the tenacity to do it. Even more so, you'll have those that will tear into a subordinate for making that "on the spot" correction. And how can you be the one that's pissed when you yourself are the one that screwed up.
Furthermore, I would like to add that, all Soldiers, regardless of rank have general military authority. I'll take a PV1 kindly bringing to my attention that I am all jacked up any day of the week and twice on Sunday's. Sadly though, most don't have the tenacity to do it. Even more so, you'll have those that will tear into a subordinate for making that "on the spot" correction. And how can you be the one that's pissed when you yourself are the one that screwed up.
(3)
(0)
1SG (Join to see)
Absolutely Sir. I (HHB 1SG) once observed one of my young troopers approach our Bn CSM going to the his vehicle in the parking lot without his beret on and heard him say " Sergeant Major, where's your headgear?" The CSM went off on him, "I'm the Battallion Command Sergeant Major, you don't make corrections on me, I make them on you...yada yada yada." I jogged over to him and said, "Hold up, you're Fk'ed up and know it and instead of telling this troop thank you for balls for calling you out when I saw several NCOs and Officers look and keep going!" He got red in the face...but admitted he was wrong, and immediately apologized to the young Troop.
Then the next morning at PT formation he (which the Bn Cdr and CSM had planned to attend ) was running with us, I called the young trooper out front of the formation, acknowledged what he did, and that the CSM was authorizing him a 3 day pass, starting....immediately after the PT Run. Of course it me and the cdr was giving him the 3 Day Pass, not the CSM. But that put the leadership on notice...Soldiers are watching and will now call you out....hoping for a pass. Ocassionally I would do something on purpose or have the Commander do the same, just to see who would call us out....the Soldiers would do it more often then the NCOs. Then I would get in those NCO's butts for not saying something afterwards. It worked in our unit. But we could only fix the piece of the pie we owned....there is just not enough ownership be taken out there now. Soldiers is starving for leadership, accountability and discipline...they don't realize it.
Then the next morning at PT formation he (which the Bn Cdr and CSM had planned to attend ) was running with us, I called the young trooper out front of the formation, acknowledged what he did, and that the CSM was authorizing him a 3 day pass, starting....immediately after the PT Run. Of course it me and the cdr was giving him the 3 Day Pass, not the CSM. But that put the leadership on notice...Soldiers are watching and will now call you out....hoping for a pass. Ocassionally I would do something on purpose or have the Commander do the same, just to see who would call us out....the Soldiers would do it more often then the NCOs. Then I would get in those NCO's butts for not saying something afterwards. It worked in our unit. But we could only fix the piece of the pie we owned....there is just not enough ownership be taken out there now. Soldiers is starving for leadership, accountability and discipline...they don't realize it.
(3)
(0)
SSG Robert Webster
MAJ (Join to see) - I really like your attitude on this. Why - On a previous discussion here on RallyPoint, there was a CPT and a Major that tried to take me to task when I stated that I could and would make an On-the-spot Correction, if I saw them not in compliance with AR 670-1. They stated that I did not have the general military authority to correct them, when I quoted the applicable regulations, guidelines, etc. they still stated that I was incorrect and that I did not have the stated authority. It is a welcome sign that some Officer's do recognize an NCO's general military authority in these matters. Thank you.
(1)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
SSG Robert Webster - That CPT and Major get the Campbell's Golden Ladle award for being a couple of noodles in a soup sandwich.
(1)
(0)
10
10
0
Truth be known, there's a few of us CSMs that don't like to shave in the weekends... However, once I step off my property, and especially if I'm on post, I'll be properly shaven. The rest of the rules are simple dress policies that brings people to a standard that is acceptable. Can't hurt to look a bit respectable and be safe at the same time (earphones). Just remember, summers always coming, so get in the gym, exercise during PT, and have a great time at the lake or off post somewhere where you can show off the work you've done to your body (but use suntan lotion (higher than 30)).
(10)
(0)
SSG Robert Webster
CSM (Join to see) - Shouldn't that piece of equipment behind you be painted OD, Sand, Coyote Brown, or some other appropriate military paint scheme? ;-)
(1)
(0)
CSM (Join to see)
SSG Robert Webster - Ironically enough, the photo was from a dedication I was at for a new VA Clinic in Marina, California... The equipment in civilian and they are doing a super job getting the place up and running. :-)
(1)
(0)
SSG Robert Webster
CSM (Join to see) - Then I am not surprised that you were there. One jump with a Dragon Missile Jump Pack is enough to hurt anybody. At least you weren't one of the Airborne Board test dummies when the DMJP was being tested. Who were you with in 1989/90? I was with the 1/325th AIR.
(0)
(0)
CSM (Join to see)
SSG Robert Webster - I was there the same timeframe in the 82nd; 313th MI BN... Actually, after becoming a Jump Master, I think most the accidents were actually from routing the lanyard improperly. As a result it knots up and prevents the DMJP from deploying down and away from the jumper...
(1)
(0)
10
10
0
"Good morning sir, welcome to FT. Leonard Wood. Please pull your vehicle over in the left lane, exit your vehicle, and assemble with others. At that time one of my civilian rent-a-cop buddies will conduct an in-ranks inspection before granting you access to the base"
(10)
(0)
CW2 (Join to see)
Although I haven't been there. I can only guess the reaction when it all goes down.
(1)
(0)
SGT William Howell
You have to remember there are a kazillion MPs on the post and you know they love the 670-1. I was an MP and we were always told that we set the standard.
(0)
(0)
9
9
0
ACCORDING TO THE NEW AR 670-1 (15 SEPTEMBER 2014) ITS THE REGULATION.
3–9. Civilian clothing
a. Civilian clothing is authorized for wear when off duty, unless the wear is prohibited by the senior commander.
Commanders down to unit level may restrict the wear of civilian clothes by those Soldiers who have had their pass privileges revoked. Within the confines of a military base or a DoD installation, civilian clothing will be worn subject to local regulations.
b. When on duty in civilian clothes or off duty and outside of their personal dwelling, Army personnel will present a professional image that does not detract from the profession, unless specifically exempted by the commander for specific mission requirements.
c. Soldiers are associated and identified with the Army in and out of uniform, and when on or off duty. Therefore, when civilian clothing is worn, Soldiers will ensure that their dress and personal appearance are commensurate with the high standards traditionally associated with Army service. Commanders are charged with determining and publishing the local civilian clothing policy. When on a military installation, civilian headgear will be removed indoors in accordance with established norms.
d. When civilian clothing has been authorized by competent authority for wear in a duty status in lieu of a uniform, the civilian clothing will be of the same comparable degree of formality as the uniform prescribed for such duty. Standards of dress and appearance will be conservative and meet the same high standards established for personnel in uniform.
e. The wear of clothing articles not specifically designed to be normally worn as headgear (for example, bandannas, do rags) are prohibited while on duty.
f. No part of a prescribed uniform, except those items not exclusively military in character, may be worn with civilian clothing.
g. Uniform items authorized for wear with civilian clothing by males are restricted to the gold cuff links, studs, tie bar, mourning band, footwear, socks, gloves, undergarments, black bow-tie, wool scarf, all-weather coat, fleece caps, and physical training uniforms.
h. Uniform items authorized for wear with civilian clothing by females are restricted to the white shirt without insignia of grade, undergarments, footwear, gloves, handbag, clutch purse, wool scarf, all-weather coat, fleece caps, and physical training uniforms.
i. Uniform items that have been declared obsolete may be worn with civilian clothing, provided such items contain no distinctive insignia or buttons.
3–9. Civilian clothing
a. Civilian clothing is authorized for wear when off duty, unless the wear is prohibited by the senior commander.
Commanders down to unit level may restrict the wear of civilian clothes by those Soldiers who have had their pass privileges revoked. Within the confines of a military base or a DoD installation, civilian clothing will be worn subject to local regulations.
b. When on duty in civilian clothes or off duty and outside of their personal dwelling, Army personnel will present a professional image that does not detract from the profession, unless specifically exempted by the commander for specific mission requirements.
c. Soldiers are associated and identified with the Army in and out of uniform, and when on or off duty. Therefore, when civilian clothing is worn, Soldiers will ensure that their dress and personal appearance are commensurate with the high standards traditionally associated with Army service. Commanders are charged with determining and publishing the local civilian clothing policy. When on a military installation, civilian headgear will be removed indoors in accordance with established norms.
d. When civilian clothing has been authorized by competent authority for wear in a duty status in lieu of a uniform, the civilian clothing will be of the same comparable degree of formality as the uniform prescribed for such duty. Standards of dress and appearance will be conservative and meet the same high standards established for personnel in uniform.
e. The wear of clothing articles not specifically designed to be normally worn as headgear (for example, bandannas, do rags) are prohibited while on duty.
f. No part of a prescribed uniform, except those items not exclusively military in character, may be worn with civilian clothing.
g. Uniform items authorized for wear with civilian clothing by males are restricted to the gold cuff links, studs, tie bar, mourning band, footwear, socks, gloves, undergarments, black bow-tie, wool scarf, all-weather coat, fleece caps, and physical training uniforms.
h. Uniform items authorized for wear with civilian clothing by females are restricted to the white shirt without insignia of grade, undergarments, footwear, gloves, handbag, clutch purse, wool scarf, all-weather coat, fleece caps, and physical training uniforms.
i. Uniform items that have been declared obsolete may be worn with civilian clothing, provided such items contain no distinctive insignia or buttons.
(9)
(0)
SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL
Thanks and your right the right to defend America comes with rules and regs in the Military.
(2)
(0)
PO1 Autumn Sandeen
When i was an active duty service member, I knew that I signed up to an organization that had rules and regulations that I'd be required to follow. This isn't true for the civilians in civilian clothing part of this policy.
What we have here is "Commanding Officer Dad," and "DA" feels it's okay to tell visitors to his "home" what they can and can't wear.
Except, "Dad" is an agent of the federal government, and he's acting in a way that doesn't seem to acknowledge that the government isn't supposed to censor the free expression of it's citizens.
If he were Dad, it's his house, his rules. But as an agent of the federal government, he's not living up to the spirit of the Constitution he swore support and defend.
The First Amendment means something. When it comes to civilians, "Commanding Officer Dad" appears to have forgotten this.
What we have here is "Commanding Officer Dad," and "DA" feels it's okay to tell visitors to his "home" what they can and can't wear.
Except, "Dad" is an agent of the federal government, and he's acting in a way that doesn't seem to acknowledge that the government isn't supposed to censor the free expression of it's citizens.
If he were Dad, it's his house, his rules. But as an agent of the federal government, he's not living up to the spirit of the Constitution he swore support and defend.
The First Amendment means something. When it comes to civilians, "Commanding Officer Dad" appears to have forgotten this.
(3)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
I must disagree with you PO1Autumn Sandeen, a military installation is not a college campus it is federal property that is governed by the commanding officer. We are not a civilian corporation we are a profession of arms that requires a more stringent set of rules.
When I walked into the recruiting station and volunteered to join my respective branch I was telling them that I was willing to relinquish my previous identity and traits and take in those of a professional military leader. That meant that I was willing to abide by policies and regulations already in place, not try to change them or implement my own.
To serve this nation is a privilege not a right.
When I walked into the recruiting station and volunteered to join my respective branch I was telling them that I was willing to relinquish my previous identity and traits and take in those of a professional military leader. That meant that I was willing to abide by policies and regulations already in place, not try to change them or implement my own.
To serve this nation is a privilege not a right.
(5)
(0)
8
8
0
"No...sleeveless shirts, tank tops"
Ok grandpa Army! What is unprofessional about a tank top on a summer day?
ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.
*12 months to my ETS :)
Ok grandpa Army! What is unprofessional about a tank top on a summer day?
ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.
*12 months to my ETS :)
(8)
(0)
SSG V. Michelle Woods
Im sorry! Lol I had big plans to be a CSM and I was on my way! But then they decided to deploy me...again...and I need a break :-/
Plus Ive just accepted Im not good at being assertive and the Army is no place for someone who isn't assertive :)
Think I'll go be a llama farmer...that sounds peaceful enough lol.
Plus Ive just accepted Im not good at being assertive and the Army is no place for someone who isn't assertive :)
Think I'll go be a llama farmer...that sounds peaceful enough lol.
(2)
(0)
1LT William Clardy
SSG V. Michelle Woods, don't you dare go ETSing on us without permission! Do you know how hard it is to find a PAO who is honest *and* informative?
Seriously, I can understand the needing a break. I'm not exaggerating when I say that getting an ROTC scholarship was my Plan B for escaping Fort Irwin, and I recently came across a letter I wrote to my parents while I was in Korea and had not a single nice thing to say about the Army -- about 14 months before I re-upped for 6 more years. You show all the signs for having Army in your blood (a passion for what you do, frustration about things that don't seem right, to name a couple), so over the next 12 months you should think through a long-term plan to scratch that itch when it comes back.
Seriously, I can understand the needing a break. I'm not exaggerating when I say that getting an ROTC scholarship was my Plan B for escaping Fort Irwin, and I recently came across a letter I wrote to my parents while I was in Korea and had not a single nice thing to say about the Army -- about 14 months before I re-upped for 6 more years. You show all the signs for having Army in your blood (a passion for what you do, frustration about things that don't seem right, to name a couple), so over the next 12 months you should think through a long-term plan to scratch that itch when it comes back.
(4)
(0)
1LT William Clardy
SSG V. Michelle Woods and SGT (Join to see), I think that the simplest and most aesthetically correct solution for tank tops is that they should only be worn over a bra or swim suit.
(4)
(0)
SSG V. Michelle Woods
1LT William Clardy please dont use logic and sense with me!
Ugh, lol dangit...your wise words are surely heard, which just confuses me on my decision.
Damn damn damn lol!
Ugh, lol dangit...your wise words are surely heard, which just confuses me on my decision.
Damn damn damn lol!
(3)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google