Should an officer be allowed to continue to serve on Active Duty after being relieved from command?

2017-04-09T20:20:22-04:00

Some officers are meant to command and lead, and others probably should never be allowed the opportunity. I'm a witness to the case of an ousted ex-commander now working as a staff-O "leading" a highly technical department - his lack of technical competence and inability to mentor and lead others is obvious. Should such an officer be "encouraged" to separate or retire early to make room?

Response by SSgt Jim Gilmore made Apr 9 at 2017 8:33 PM

2017-04-09T20:33:37-04:00

Unless there is a valid reason for him NOT to continue to serve he should be allowed to remain. Because an individual is relieved of command means there is no confidence in his ability to command...not to serve.

Response by SSG Dale London made Apr 9 at 2017 8:39 PM

2017-04-09T20:39:57-04:00

Unless he or she was found guilty by court martial, is unfit to serve by reason of incompatibility with military service, is grossly incompetent or is unfit to serve for medical reasons I don't see why he or she could not serve in a staff position. There are many positions that require a commission but that do not involve actual "command" of troops. Really good leaders are hard enough to find and grow without sidelining them into administrative roles that only require a modicum of management expertise. They can't all be Patton or Schwarzkopf.

Response by SGM Mikel Dawson made Apr 9 at 2017 8:46 PM

2017-04-09T20:46:02-04:00

Not everyone is a leader. The Army's big mistake, both NCOs and Officers. There are plenty of places many of they can serve and do very well, just not in command or leadership.

Response by LTJG Richard Bruce made Apr 9 at 2017 9:26 PM

2017-04-09T21:26:14-04:00

An O-4 has "tenure" for lack of a better word. Short of legal proceedings, an O-4 is allowed to continue on active duty until they reach 20 years. Officers who have lost command or had other similar problems are usually passed over. Second pass over forces one out, making room for juniors to move up.
Not all passed-over officers have done anything wrong. Most are forces out due to lack of billets in higher ranks. The pyramid gets smaller. Someone has got to go.

Response by MSgt Steven Holt, NRP, CCEMT-P made Apr 9 at 2017 9:31 PM

2017-04-09T21:31:49-04:00

I think the biggest (well, one of the biggest anyway) mistakes Big DoD makes is assuming EVERYONE is born to be a leader and should strive to be the next Chief of Staff or Sergeant Major of the Army depending on whether you are Officer or Enlisted. Sadly, not everyone has the ability for that role. It doesn't mean they can't be useful in some other capacity. Not ever NCO can be a Platoon Sgt just as every LTC can't be a unit commander. Maybe the "UP or Out" mentality that drive everyone to leadership roles isn't such a great plan as originally envisioned.

Response by LTC John Mohor made Apr 9 at 2017 9:34 PM

2017-04-09T21:34:39-04:00

MAJ Frank Polzin it really depends on how the relief was made. Some Officers don't get all the counseling and paperwork together the way it should be in order to get the potentially substandard officer out of the service. A lack of technical competence may or may not be indicative of said officers abilities without further details but I'm not gonna try to go down that route. I'm aware of some interesting cases and some instances where officers survived what other never would. In the ideal world that Officer that you mentioned should be strongly urged if not forced to leave and start another line of work.

Response by LTC Jason Mackay made Apr 9 at 2017 11:50 PM

2017-04-09T23:50:03-04:00

Once that OER hits, it should work itself out in the next promotion board. What the real question is, what were they relieved for? If it was lack of integrity, criminal conduct, ethical misconduct, abuse of subordinates etc then the appropriate action should follow. Depending on circumstances they may get a show cause OER that will force them out. By ousted, I assume relieved. If they were changed early as an expedient, that is s way different. The blah OER will hit but take longer.

If it was because they rose to their level of incompetence; vice illegal, unethical, immoral; then there is a tough senior rater conversation that needs to happen to talk potential. The senior rater is in the best position to have this discussion. Command is almost exclusively one and done at each level. If we are talking an O3 relieved as a company commander, they are unlikely to get another shot under that same Brigade leadership. If they are O5/O6 then das ist alles. I can't imagine a relief for cause that wouldn't result in follow on action. Perhaps the other shoe hasn't dropped yet and he requires temporary warehousing commensurate with his rank.

People will hang on for a variety of reasons. Understanding their inner motivation may shed light on their persistence. The "one more year" to go with 22 or 24; they hang around until they chase them out because the gig is good $; lingering until the leadership rotates, hoping for another shot; waiting on one more board (counter productive in this case); or refusing to retire due to impending divorce have been reasons people cite for hanging on when they are clearly done.

Response by CAPT Kevin B. made Apr 10 at 2017 12:18 AM

2017-04-10T00:18:30-04:00

Unfortunately I've been around my fair share. I had the displeasure of having to "mentor" an ex Trident SSBN skipper that was relieved for "loss of confidence". That's code speak for a major character flaw that somehow made it through all the hurdles to Command. It's usually a massive ego such that they're OK with themselves doing bribery, womanizing, bypass safety protocols and come up under a research ship with a bunch of kids on board.... Oh, the list goes on. I had to work the Ehime Maru recovery out in Hawaii. Not a good period in my life. Every one of these cases I was around in the Seattle area were immediately transferred to TPU pending completion of their exit process. And every time, I wondered how on earth they made it to the point they did. So this ex Nuke was drafting a resume to job hunt on the outside. Regarding his last job it ran along the line of "CO of a nuclear missile submarine. Able to destroy cities." He just couldn't connect the dots on how poorly he was depicting himself and what he thought was important. There was always this toxic nature to this group. My experience is relief for cause means separation soonest is best for the good of the service.

Saw a comment about staying 20. DOPMA doesn't allow that say for an O-4 FOS to O-5 unless a Continuation Board OKs it. Won't happen in these cases. BTW all officers serve at the pleasure of the President. You don't have to encourage anything. You can just put them out. There's a process for that. Retaining someone usually means there's more to the story outside the individual. Saw that too, along with the Gag Order that came with it.

Response by SGT Tony Clifford made Apr 10 at 2017 12:50 AM

2017-04-10T00:50:20-04:00

Sir, I see 2 problems here.

First is that not everyone is capable of leadership. Some people don't have the ability, desire, or even the presence required to lead. As an officer or non-commissioned officer, that should be the end of your career. Your position could be filled by someone more capable.

The second problem is that as a leader you should be allowed to find a position that you would like to be you end point. I have known many NCOs that never wanted to progress beyond squadleader or PSG for reasons ranging from a distain for working in an S Shop or never wanting to give up their platoon. There should be an option for an excellent leader to decide that this is the final point of career progression. However refusing an assignment is the end of your service, even if you don't feel comfortable performing at the next position higher up.

These 2 problems make it so the military is stuck with leadership that is either incompetent or unmotivated.

Response by Capt Seid Waddell made Apr 10 at 2017 2:11 AM

2017-04-10T02:11:59-04:00

I served under a fine officer that had earlier been relieved of duty as Base Commander because of an error in judgment by his predecessor - while he was still in transit to his new duty station.

Two air crews were lost due to being scrambled into the teeth of a severe storm on the standing orders of the commander that had just been relieved of his command for the same reason. The previous commander valued his response time record over the lives of his pilots and he would not allow exceptions for severe weather - even in training situations.

Someone had to pay for such a mishap - so my commander was relieved of a command that he hadn't yet assumed. Unthinking stupidity can affect any rank - even those that make such rulings.

This officer was one of the finest commanders I ever served under, and he continued to serve with distinction until his retirement.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 10 at 2017 2:52 AM

2017-04-10T02:52:55-04:00

Things like this on the Enlisted side make me say bring back the Specialists, not sure how that could work for Officers. From this though Sir, the Officer was relieved of Command and was then placed in a technical department that they don't know anything about so therefor can't ever truly lead.

To me that sounds like an upstairs failure placing someone in a spot where they're going to fail. I also don't know how any of that is decided either. Though I see it as say myself being a Paralegal is suddenly told to fix a Humvee. I'm not going to get much done, set up for failure not knowing the field.

So in this case I would say evaluate the Officer, place them in a field they do understand and go from there. If that is not possible then the only option I can see is encourage the Officer to retire or train them in another field.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 10 at 2017 8:30 AM

2017-04-10T08:30:58-04:00

I have seen commanders relieved when they had well and truly earned it, and I have seen them relieved due to the ubiquitous "loss of faith in their ability to lead", usually because of some foul up committed by subordinates. This is the genesis of the damaging zero-tolerance policies that rob leaders of the opportunity to exercise judgment - exactly what I'd argue they are there for in the first place.
To answer the question, their career is likely over - or at least headed towards a dead end when the next board happens. That doesn't mean they are useless, but too often they are slid into a staff position to mark time.
It can definitely be handled better.

Response by SGM Erik Marquez made Apr 10 at 2017 9:16 AM

2017-04-10T09:16:03-04:00

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member Sir, the answer to your QUESTION.. Is possible...
The answer to your question AND personal observation for that specific SM is NO.

Response by Cpl Justin Goolsby made Apr 10 at 2017 9:58 AM

2017-04-10T09:58:06-04:00

If he has been relieved of command, I'm surprised he would be put in charge of anyone else afterwards. But yes. He should be allowed to continue to serve on active duty... if we have a use for him. That caveat is pretty important. Based on your description, it sounds like he was shuffled off into another department as a second chance, but one he has no experience in. I understand the need to fill an open slot with any warm body, but it's a detriment to everyone if we are just shuffling people around. In my opinion, he should have been sent to wherever his particular expertise was. If he's a supply guy, send him to supply. If he's personnel, send him there, etc etc. Either that, or send him to work for someone who outranks him. He might not be a good leader, but he might be great at executing orders which could have helped him rise in the ranks.

If none of those are an option, then yes I think he should be moved somewhere of little value so that he has the time to get his affairs in order to quietly take his walking papers. Regardless of the rank, each member of the Armed Forces is an investment and I'm not so quick to throw away an investment when I can still get some use out of them.

Response by SSgt Dan Montague made Apr 10 at 2017 10:08 AM

2017-04-10T10:08:28-04:00

Officers are human too. They take command at an early age. Im sure young CO's will make mistakes. I have seen my fare share of officers relieved. I believe if it is a major violation of the UCMJ, then yes.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 10 at 2017 10:32 AM

2017-04-10T10:32:12-04:00

I think it depends on what happened. If they were relieved just because they were seen as unfit not any negative action then yes let them serve. If for instance their leadership was something like intimidation on the unit then I don't think they should still be able to serve.

Response by PO2 Robert Aitchison made Apr 10 at 2017 11:50 AM

2017-04-10T11:50:11-04:00

Can the officer be effective in any appropriate assignment? If so then put them there.

Don't have any direct insight into officer billeting but I could see a situation where an officer could be a highly effective bureaucrat (it's a bit of a dirty word but it's still an important role to fill) but not have the ability to actually lead people.

Response by LTC Stephen B. made Apr 10 at 2017 12:48 PM

2017-04-10T12:48:54-04:00

Being relieved of Command is an authoritarian act devoid of due process. Commanders are given the authority to relieve subordinate commanders for any reason. Being forcibly discharged from the Service REQUIRES due process and a formal determination of the character of service.

So my answer is no, simply being relieved of command should not, in and of itself, prevent an officer from "being allowed" to serve.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 10 at 2017 6:11 PM

2017-04-10T18:11:40-04:00

I have always been curious as to how "toxic leadership" is handled long after the headlines have faded away from the headlines of the Army Times and the news media. Aside from my own personal experiences under the yoke of certain individuals who had no business (in my humble opinion) leading a bake sale, I have reviewed a few doctoral dissertations (all qualitative studies...it was for a class, I swear!) on the topic of toxic leadership from the perspectives of military families and service members.

Although my dissertation will not be in a management concentration, I have brought up with some of my classmates at symposium about the viability of toxic leadership as a topic for a doctoral-level study in management. I could see the applicability of such a study within the DoD, let alone in private industry.

You all have been providing some very diverse and interesting viewpoints and perspectives on this issue. Thanks to all of you for contributing to what appears to be a very lively and interesting discussion so far! :-)

Response by LtCol Robert Quinter made Apr 11 at 2017 8:41 AM

2017-04-11T08:41:39-04:00

The key words in your write-up are "his lack of technical competence and inability to mentor and lead others is obvious". Serving as an officer demands more than technical proficiency. If I want technical proficiency I'll turn to the individuals who demonstrate their qualifications every day, often a SNCO or another enlisted person who has taken the effort to know his field. An officer must be capable of providing direction to his people and creating an environment where his people can work to the betterment of his section, unit and nation. Very few CEOs of major corporations can perform the tasks necessary at lower levels of responsibility. An executive's responsibility is to monitor the well being of his company, be it civilian or military and provide the opportunity for the real experts to do their work. The officer in question should be concentrating on his future outside the military.

Response by Lt Col Jim Coe made Apr 11 at 2017 11:22 AM

2017-04-11T11:22:06-04:00

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member going on what you provided:

You're right, some people do well in command and some don't. Some of those who don't do well are so bad that the need to be removed to prevent the unit becoming ineffective. If the officer was removed for a criminal offense (substance abuse, sexual harassment, misappropriation of government funds for example) then he or she should be prosecuted under the UCMJ. Sometimes otherwise honorable service members are offered the opportunity to retire or separate in lieu of prosecution. Automatic forced separation for doing a job poorly, even a job as important an unit command, may not be in the best interests of the Service.

Based on the information you've provided, it looks like the officer has been relieved and shifted to a staff officer position. This may be a holding pattern while senior leaders decide what to do with the officer or it may be an opportunity for an otherwise excellent officer to rehabilitate. His department leadership is a natural consequence of his staff job and rank. His lack of technical competence may not matter much if his subordinates are good at their jobs and he's willing to listen to their inputs. Same with an inability to mentor subordinates. My experience on staffs indicates that most officers and NCOs on staff duty are capable of managing their own careers. The one place where this officer might hurt his subordinates is the reporting process. If he doesn't write OERs and NOCERs well and honestly with accompanying counseling, then his subordinates could be hurt. Hopefully the Chief of Staff will look out for this problem and relieve him of his supervisory responsibilities if necessary.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 11 at 2017 1:22 PM

2017-04-11T13:22:29-04:00

I have seen 2 cases where officers relieved of command that were forced to leave the Army within 24 Hours or face courts martial for their actions

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 15 at 2017 11:20 AM

2017-04-15T11:20:38-04:00

Up Straight, I disagree. I myself had no business being NCOIC. I should have been left supervising a floor or a work crew, but not an NCOIC.

Response by SSG Chris B. made Apr 15 at 2017 11:23 AM

2017-04-15T11:23:03-04:00

Any officer or NCO relieved for cause should be smoothly transitioned from service at the earliest opportunity, with an appeals process.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 15 at 2017 11:32 AM

2017-04-15T11:32:43-04:00

Why were they relived? Was it because one of their Soldiers did something stupid, because that happens too much.

Response by COL Jon Thompson made Apr 15 at 2017 12:18 PM

2017-04-15T12:18:16-04:00

This is not a black or white question. If someone failed as a commander, that does not make them necessarily a bad officer, it just may mean they were not cut out for leadership at that level. Since a small percentage of field grade officers get to command, a majority of them can serve on active duty without assuming the inherent responsibilities and risks of command. So why should the Army penalize someone who held more responsibility as a commander? Now in your case, it might be different. There are incompetent officers who should be separated from the service. I worked with one captain who everything he touched was worse off when he was done. In my opinion, he should have been separated early but that was not my call. Realistically, we know that if someone is relieved from command, their career is essentially over. It is just a matter of time before they are out or retired. But all Soldiers are owed due process and you cannot kick someone out of the Army right after they are relieved. There are processes that need to take place.

Response by SSG Darrell Peters made Apr 15 at 2017 12:58 PM

2017-04-15T12:58:13-04:00

Here is the thing. My refection's of when I retired from the Army. I did serve with some good Officers however I also served with some officers that were more concerned with their statistics than they were with the welfare of their soldiers. In other words they were looking at the Monitor more than they were the Patient. With all the new bells and whistles in the computer world it has not gotten any better.
I saw a lot of problems that could have been solved with common horse sense. Yet the Officers didn't have the common sense of a horse but rather that of a Jack A$$. When Officers are more concerned about Metrics, and having NCO and Officers write things that no one will ever read then they will be a waste of time and manpower.
Early in my career I was lucky to have good Officers when I went on Active Duty but when you get transferred and find yourself in another unit you never know what you are going to get it's like spinning a roulette wheel.
One solution I found in dealing with incompetent Officers who were in Command was explain to the Article 138 of the UCMJ. which is the least article ever employed but the most powerful among them.
"Article 138 of the UCMJ, "any member of the armed forces who believes himself (or herself) wronged by his (or her) commanding officer" may request redress. If such redress is refused, a complaint may be made and a superior officer must "examine into the complaint."
It has been my opinion that all other avenues of solving a problem should be explored before employing article 138.

Response by CPT Robert Boshears made Apr 15 at 2017 4:31 PM

2017-04-15T16:31:20-04:00

I was the second company commander to be relieved for disobeying the same illegal order. This order was witnessed by the IG, who walked away. It went to a lower level Federal court, who held that the order was given through personal animus... the LTC didn't like an E-6 for personal reasons. I found a bar napkin in my dress green coat, that told me how to set up the man and get rid of him. This was written at a bar, witnessed by a Brigadier General, the Full Colonel, three Light Colonels and one Major. The Pentagon asked for the original napkin. My adverse OER was reversed, but by then my career was over. Two Captains had the moral and ethical courage to stand up to this group of officers. This was my third command and had just came from the 7th ID. I was selected for early promotion, but rank has its priviliges. I don't regret one thing.

Response by PO3 Andrew Kelly made Apr 15 at 2017 11:34 PM

2017-04-15T23:34:19-04:00

Piers Anthony once said in one of his novels that military careers can be bought and sold for a clean record. I thought of this as a cynical observation by a civilian when I first read it but perhaps I was wrong.
Some years later I got to watch as my squadron went to great effort to deal with what, by all rights, should have been a class A incident by robbing parts from every bird in the squadron to assure that the actual cost of a mishap would not spoil the squadron's safety record. And to make it worse we watched them convince the Lt. CMDR responsible (who everybody was amazed was ever rated carrier qualified in the first place) to request a transfer to a C-130 squadron so they would not have to explain why every flight crew in the squadron now refused to fly with him.
My point is that the service will often go to great lengths to avoid having to officially admit that they made a mistake in commissioning an individual or rating them as qualified in a position to which they have assigned him.

Response by PO3 Andrew Kelly made Apr 16 at 2017 12:16 AM

2017-04-16T00:16:53-04:00

It really depends on the circumstances I think. I have known a number of individuals both military and civilian who had all the leadership potential of a potato but were highly skilled within their specialty. Reassigning a failed CO to a position in line with his skills makes sense but placing him in a position just to avoid having to force him out of the service does not and can only cause damage to the people of whom he is assigned to oversee.
Early in my career I was assigned to an I level facility and our division was temporarily without an officer. The prior OIC had set up the shop to maximize the productivity and morale of the personnel. This had the effect to have given our division the highest turnaround efficiency in the department as well as the lowest disciplinary records. About a month into my assignment we acquired our new OIC, an LDO ensign. His first act was to scrap the setup of his predecessor and declare that no liberty requests would be approved for at least a month while he evaluated his new command. Morale went into the wastebin and productivity followed close after. Between orders that served no purpose and a practice of favoring one set of technicians over the other half of his command he just about had the division in outright rebellion. To be truthful it was the discipline and professionalism of the NCOs that kept the division together despite his efforts. Eventually the situation drew the attention of the department master chief due to noticing that several personnel had not been advanced in due time while others who had legitimate reasons for being held back were advanced. In due course he took the situation to the attention of the Department Head and things moved rather quickly after that. I transferred out before this drama reached its conclusion but one fo my shipmates wrote me some months later to let me know that the Officer was once again a CPO and someone else's problem.

Response by LTC John Shaw made Apr 16 at 2017 5:09 PM

2017-04-16T17:09:57-04:00

Yes the officer should be allowed to serve unless relief was based on lack of integrity/duty/critical core value.
If the relief from Command was based on the lack of a core value of the Army then the soldier/Commission or Non-commissioned will not likely serve past the next promotion or Command board.
If based on something else and the needs of the Army is such that he or she may be valuable and continue to serve.
In the Signal Corps many of the Officers are most valuable in non-Command roles.
Technical skills in many cases are more valuable in the industry, leading to year group losses and the Army can't keep MOS 24, 25, 26, 53 officers in the service long enough. With Cyber being folded into the branch this trend will get even more challenging.
The mix of leadership and technical competence is one of the reasons why many companies seek out military leaders of all levels.

Response by MSG Chris Clanton made Apr 16 at 2017 5:16 PM

2017-04-16T17:16:02-04:00

Some officers make great commanders. Some great staff officers. Some do both. Some neither. I had a platoon leader who got fired (I think a little early but...) and ended up selling coffee cups at battalion. He got a second chance when we got a new BC. He ended up being one of the best Plt Ldrs I ever had, made major and ltc below the zone (commanded a ranger battalion) and retired a colonel. I worked with another at division that was a damn good staff officer. He got his command and... someone liked him because I was sent down there to be his 1SG. He retired a ltc. NCO's make the officer corp.

Response by CPT Patrick Jordan made Apr 13 at 2018 5:52 PM

2018-04-13T17:52:54-04:00

The officer in the picture has a striking resemblance to MG Tom Seamands. The finest leader I ever served with.

Response by COL Rich McKinney made Apr 13 at 2018 6:27 PM

2018-04-13T18:27:14-04:00

Check the book "The Generals" by Tom Ricks. The entire book analyses the concept of relief of command from WWII to today.

Response by Sgt John Henderson made Apr 13 at 2018 9:05 PM

2018-04-13T21:05:34-04:00

This is why the Air Force needs Warrant Officers and the Army needs the specialist ranks as high as is practical. Everyone needs the opportunity for advancement but not all for leadership.

Response by SPC Rick LaBonte made Apr 13 at 2018 9:14 PM

2018-04-13T21:14:25-04:00

I was in 3rd AD, we were deactivating soon after returning from Desert Storm so we were turning in vehicles out there for reassignment. We were ordered to powerwash the exterior but one CO of a tank company ordered his men to powerwash the engines-130 degree water vs 2000 degree aluminum-you can guess what happened, a company of M1 Abrams with shattered engines. Rank advancement doesn’t necessarily represent common sense! How he made captain bars in Armored Cav and didn’t think hot turbine engines would be hurt by luke warm water is beyond me!

Response by CPL Shadrack George made Apr 14 at 2018 8:59 AM

2018-04-14T08:59:39-04:00

As a junior soldier I have been through numerous commands, and some of my peers made better NCOs than the ones appointed over us, the promotion system has many flaws, your promotion to a new rank should be based off of the knowledge of your job and taking care of you soldiers and experience, rather than if you can click through a power point and attend college. It is great that we push soldiers to go to college but going to college doesn't qualify you to be a leader taking a bus driver or a cpr class doesn't make you a leader. Half of the NCOs in my section are fragile and break under pressure and snap at junior soldier, and this is only working in a civilian hospital, what would happen when bullets start to fly and everyone in your squad looks to you for guidance.

Response by SGM Bill Frazer made Apr 14 at 2018 10:24 AM

2018-04-14T10:24:37-04:00

Maybe they have him marking time until the figure exactly how to can him, or where in Alaska to send him?

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2018 11:12 AM

2018-04-14T11:12:30-04:00

Yes

Response by CPT Don Kemp made Apr 14 at 2018 9:18 PM

2018-04-14T21:18:42-04:00

I had a good friend “relieved” as a 1LT because of a stupid action by troops under his command. He went on to serve 30 years and retired as a fire-breathing 0-6 Colonel. Had the military taken the “no errors” stance in WW II, Patton would never have led III Army.

Response by PV2 Mark Zehner made Apr 15 at 2018 7:36 AM

2018-04-15T07:36:25-04:00

Response by LTC Jeff Shearer made Apr 15 at 2018 8:12 AM

2018-04-15T08:12:22-04:00

Frank I am sure that there are reasons which could make a difference HOWEVER, if you were received of command, no. The truth is some O's are better than others. I was very lucky in that none of Officers I have ever worked for, with or worked for me were ever bad officers. I, SF always expected a lot from its O's and NCO's but if you are a problem for SF do you need to go and be a problem for armor?

Frank as I said I am sure details could sway my opinion but that is just kind of how I feel.

Response by SMSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 15 at 2018 11:41 AM

2018-04-15T11:41:24-04:00

Leadership is a phenomenal attribute which can not be appointed or achieved through education. I personally know great leaders who were reprimanded for doing what was right for their people and mission, because leadership above them was terrible. Real leadership, in my opinion is: don't read a book and tell somone how to accomplish a task.... show them through your own expertise and experieve!! Stand up fot your people, take the hit, if it is the right thing. Be humble and realize how important one word or action may be to a young subordinate. Treat everyone with respect. And, if necessary, be willing to give everything you have, stay calm, make decisions with confidence and lead!!!

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 15 at 2018 1:06 PM

2018-04-15T13:06:13-04:00

We need the technical ranks back. A lot E4s don't want the leadership responsibility but are great team members and very technical. Is combat support MOSs this is just fine ie Signal. Many signaliers are techies but clare not good leaders yet we force them to NCO ranks where they fail. As for Officers, well, ya kinda have to lead and sadly many couldn't lead a horse to water.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 15 at 2018 1:39 PM

2018-04-15T13:39:36-04:00

The service should Bring or add the SP 5,6,7,8,9 for NCOs or officers who can’t lead. They can perform better in their expertises. Why have to assign them the leadership positions?

Response by Cpl Bryon Larson made Apr 15 at 2018 1:53 PM

2018-04-15T13:53:35-04:00

Here is my take as a Marine for what it is worth. All Officer, SNCO, and NCO our in a leadership roll if it’s over a section to Regiment. If they can not not make sound judgement time and again for the mission and there people then they need to get the boot. Men’s and women’s lives our in there hands and there action effect these lives. One last thing is that not all in the military can lead and with rank comes much responsibility.

Response by PO1 Lee Conway made Apr 15 at 2018 3:23 PM

2018-04-15T15:23:26-04:00

There is a huge difference between officers and leaders.

Response by COL Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 15 at 2018 3:34 PM

2018-04-15T15:34:33-04:00

Sure you can encourage them to leave. But really, you need to know why the person was relived. Was it b aide someone, an LT, in the command did something stupid and they had to punish a responsible official. Or was of just overall failures of the unit. Maybe a toxic environment. Just because an officer has a bad command doesn’t mean they have no worth to the organization as a whole. If an NCO gets a company article 15 should he/she be kicked out of the Army? Clearly can’t follow rules so how could they be expected to train the standards to jr enlisted if he/she can’t follow them?

Response by TSgt Steve Wheeler made Apr 15 at 2018 4:04 PM

2018-04-15T16:04:54-04:00

Wow, most of the time quality decisions are made in the military. But, about 25% of the time morons that possess zero common sense effect careers with lasting negative consequences.

Response by SFC Rob Geer made Apr 15 at 2018 6:36 PM

2018-04-15T18:36:19-04:00

Hell No!!

Response by 1SG Bob Kinser made Apr 15 at 2018 6:36 PM

2018-04-15T18:36:44-04:00

Not all officers are commanders and all NCO’s shouldn’t be PSG’s, 1Sg’s, or CSM’s. Keep the best of both and reward them.

Response by SSgt Boyd Herrst made Apr 15 at 2018 11:47 PM

2018-04-15T23:47:03-04:00

Setting someone In a position where they are over their head could be a sure recipe for disaster. .

I served as a SSGT (AF) and had just returned to duty from a Temporary disability Retirement List after 2-1/2 year on the list. Quite a bit had changed while I was gone.. There were just certain things a supervisor couldn’t do in regards to what he could tell Airmen to do. I was going by what these Airmen were expected to do by their skill level description.. On one of the shifts I had a
SrAmn being shift Ldr. For that while his regular Ldr. was on his off-day. His 1st cook(the position he usually done was an A1C(E-3)... fortunate for us they were both very competent and comfortable in their position.. the lunch went well w/o
any probs.. aside from getting replacement pans in the slot fat enough.
I’d rather they be more careful than fast and avoid spillage of sauces or product..
then time has to be taken for clean-up..
We changed a lot of pans because I didn’t allow pans to be overloaded with product..
or using deeper pans just to save time.. we had good looking product ... We made a few changes so the product would look as good when we were almost to the end
As when the pan was first placed on the line.. I didn’t like hiding product like breaded meats under sauce.. a little is fine .but burying it will make a soggy product..
So sauce was added if the Airman* requested.. we could also put in a side dish.. I have put sauces on dish around the product, under it.. One Airman asked if he could sample the sauce.. I gave him a little in a side dish .. he was fine with it it and told us to proceed putting on the product.. Some people get inpatient having to wait.. for others.. sometimes
Things seem to get out of line.. a few Airmen later but down thd line, a Airman asked if he could sample the Pie.. Sure..
picked up the dish and put in his fork .. decided he didn’t like it and took a piece of cake instead.. we’ll I couldn’t serve that pie but seen he took the cake .. I want them be happy with their selection.. maybe the rest of his day will be productive.. hope so!.. don’t need grumpy Airmen because their lunch was so-so.. rather complaint come from something other than about the food we serve .. Anyway the day went great.. when the Facility NCOIC came in later after we were finished and had gotten all our cook log done.. and requisition in for next day’s dinner.. The NCOIC asked why didn’t I call the SSGT from the evening shift to come in.. I replied ; “Why, there was myself I had a competent SrAmn and A1C and 3 other AMN on shift”... I worked with them as close as I needed to and could assist as needed.. I did at times..
We had the sit-rep in hand.. I worked with these Amn when it was my shift..
before I became a Assistant Dining Facility
NCOIC.. I cross-trained them to be able to be 1st Cooks, shift-leaders, Fill the Cook log, make requisitions, returns.. disposition of left overs.. how not to overcook(cook too much). There are items like liver that are not that popular..
one we had liver and s’thing else not too popular either .. we were supposed to have liver and breaded hamburger patties (chicken fried steak) and thete was a tomato sauce for the liver. That wasn’t gonna fly.. I had them flour,eggwash and bread the liver.. We had both grills going..
I got out bacon and we did that and served with the liver. And tomato sauce
(Pico d’ Gallo) over the burgers.. both went well We served more liver than planned (3.5 cases). Spanish burgers went well.. I had mild and medium sauces.. As for the breading ; we ground wheat, white and rye bread and toasted in roasters with a light amount of oil. Everything was to perfection.. I thought of adding ground almonds but figured that was pushing it ; Liver Amondine.. seriously? Dinner went well that day..
“Watta ya mean ya used 3-1/2 cases of liver, we barely use 2! What the heck !
Why does he complain.. liver was .36 a serving (in the box frozen). Burger patties
.39 a quarter lb patty. (That was in ‘82,
‘83)... it might have been a tad more..
We cooked n served bake ham with cherry sauce.. I signed out a case of Pie cherries(we used 4, returned 2.. and out of the cherry sauce left we had about 1-1/2 cups.. why didn’t you use maraschino cherries? They were actually $1.80 a can more than. The pie cherries in natural juice (#10 can). Early The next day one of the civilians the Dining Facility NCOIC knew came and wanted the empty gallon jars (plastic) supposed to be left for him..
Sorry jack, no jars ! Did ya throw them out? No, they used pie cherries out of a
#10 can.. he left heavy-hearted ...
I can say after that dinner I had very happy Airmen.. many just took the cherries in a side dish and ate them that way. We did put a few. In the serving pan
Just for appearance sake.. I let the Airmen do how they were trained and guided as needed.. if they got ideas .. I want to hear them.. if good we’ll try them
after we cost out the product and see if we can do it. I train them to be able to do that.. go through the catalog and find the list prices , in what volume. (How many per case.. divide cost of case by how many in it..). What other items needed?
Breading, eggs, milk.. spices..? Is their a sauce, gravy ? ; made with a roux (roo)
Cornstarch n warred added to juice of meat.. best sauce with cornstarch is a
Cornstarch-flour and make up a juice with
Beef or chicken base, will not need much.. add corn-starch flour mix so it’s a smooth slurry.. then when juice is bubbling have s’body add slurry easy and another stir it in.. it has to cook enough so starch-flour taste is gone.. add slurry as needed, not too much at once.. you may not need all of it.. having chicken and beef on same line and not enough room for two gravies?
When making roux.. add in chicken and beef base And mix in stock .. gravy will work good for both.. ..
Top guy ask me why I teach the Airmen to fill out Sr. Cook requisition form and cook sheet/log when they’re only Airmen?
Because it sharpens their skill.. what if they get thrown into. Sitrep and there’s only them, some other Airmen ? Why have them running all over like headless
Chickens looking for help.. teach them self reliance in what they may have to do in an emergency some day. When I was first in the Reserves as an A1C I learned every form I could relates to being a cook, cook supervisor.. I learned the ration strength Report .. I learned the Commissary requisition form ..
learned the cash in/out form
All what was related to setting up the mess check.. (per diem charges and who pays them.. ). If a mess check asks, I can tell them... who’s authorized to do a Dining critique paper(all Airmen on Meal card and separate rations, drawing per diem.. officers required to use din’g Hall, Alert facility as an evaluating officer will fill
A critique. Mandatory. We had a locked box the sheets went into.. voided sheets (mistakes)had to be saved to account for them.. then they could be destroyed....
it didn’t hurt for the average Airman to be on top of what paperwork his career field does.. I had a MSGT wanted creams for coffee, sugars, stirrers and packs of cookies.. I made a triple of a AF 139-Tally in/out sheet and was going to have the MSGT sign for the stuff.. he said he forgot the authorization # for his duty section.
He left and didn’t come back, so I set it aside to wait for his return ... I passed on to the Amn relieving me about the AF 129
and he asked since when? I said in the AF Food Service guide.. page—- chapter—.
What kind of poppycock is that? Ok, look it up ! It’s there ! One day I turned in 8 -12 copies of AF 129s costed out for
Cups, creamers, stirrers.. napkins..
the Lt about s**t herself.. I added a note showing authorization to ask for reparations from sections for requisitions
In AF FSM —- and added i’m Sure s’where there’s a Base Reg saying the same(reference AF FSM—). Well the Lt. Had the CMSGT who had the clerk go find it in the back room of the office.. they did and dusted it off and found the related
Regulation.. she sent a friendly note thst
Our section would require reparations from sections coming to us for coffee supplies.. if they didn’t want to they could. Requisition from supply.. and it would of course take longer.. And we also had limited so they may not get all they ask for.. I had more sections leaving Us alone and going to supply.. They set up times and days for sections to get their stuff !

Response by MSgt Tommy Anderson made Apr 16 at 2018 5:38 AM

2018-04-16T05:38:28-04:00

It depends on the situation. I was given the option to stay in the service at my old rank of Staff Sergeant after being RIF'd 2 years after OCS. Jimmy Carters budget cuts did a lot of guys in. My SFC had been a LTC and they let him complete his 20 after the RIF.

Response by SPC Jeffrey Stone made Apr 16 at 2018 7:10 AM

2018-04-16T07:10:47-04:00

Peter principle

Response by SSgt Elihu Lowery made Apr 16 at 2018 9:25 AM

2018-04-16T09:25:43-04:00

The military has one thing in common with its civilian counterparts. It promotes to incompetents. Meaning every leader at every level will continue to be promoted until they reach a level in which they are no longer able to perform the job as needed, instead of leaving them at the position in which they were optimal. The up or out mentally has cost the U.S. military of all branches some of the best most competent leaders and technical experts it has ever had and filled the ranks with people promoted too fast only barely able to keep up with their duties before being forced to promote again for more duties or leave. Its a disgrace we treat our people this way. Keeping them always balancing on the edge of disaster just a few steps from collapsing. This compounded by the fact that in today's service one misstep, one bad decision can cost one their career as well as the career of everyone around them.
Take the Navy for example; an error in judgment of the Officer in Charge of a ship at night impacts another vassal. That Officer is done, so is the enlisted helmsman that followed the order, as is the XO and Captain of the ship who were asleep at the time. Everyone's career ends because someone was promoted before they could handle the extra duties, and I don't think this problem is limited only to the Navy.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 16 at 2018 10:50 AM

2018-04-16T10:50:10-04:00

Let em continue to serve in lesser support capacity, never more to lead.

Response by MSG John Hundahl made Apr 16 at 2018 11:18 AM

2018-04-16T11:18:10-04:00

During the war in Vietnam and today, getting officers into command positions was a critical goal. As a result, many LTC' s were commanding infantry battalions and they had not been in any infantry positions in years. Many 11B' paid a huge penalty for that policy. After the battle at LZ X Ray, the 1st Cav left the battle site under a different commander and was almost destroyed due to lack of infantry leadership skills.

Response by SFC Killo Serafin made Apr 16 at 2018 12:03 PM

2018-04-16T12:03:06-04:00

I had a BN commander who though he was another GP by wearing those riding baggie pants with the tall riding boots. if we all have to follow a dress code ! so should our officers.

Response by SFC Don Lawrence made Apr 16 at 2018 12:21 PM

2018-04-16T12:21:16-04:00

If unfit for any job suitable for the rank held a oerson should be reduced or removed. Regardless of rank.

Response by MAJ William Roberts made Apr 16 at 2018 1:39 PM

2018-04-16T13:39:55-04:00

This like most of these posts is situationally dependent. There arw some good officers who are reliieced for circumstances beyond their control and there are some who are great staff officers but should really never take command. Very rarely you will find those who probably should not have been commissioned but the screaning process is very extreme and getting promoted is not automatic so they have impressed someone or they wouldnt have made it to CPT in the first place. So in short No someone shouldn't be asked to resign their commission or retire just because they were relieved of command. It may be just the kick in the tail they need to become the next General Odierno.

Response by CPO Noel Cotton made Apr 16 at 2018 2:02 PM

2018-04-16T14:02:20-04:00

Retire

Response by SFC John Fontenot made Apr 16 at 2018 4:29 PM

2018-04-16T16:29:51-04:00

Ok spent my career in Aviation. We had commissioned officers who could not lead you to a bar in Vegas. But he was a helluva pilot. I think he would have made a great CWO. Army lost a good man.

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 16 at 2018 4:35 PM

2018-04-16T16:35:24-04:00

The fix is Specialist ranks for enlisted, Warrant Officers, Limited Duty Officers like the Navy has. Leading is a skill set all do not have just as technical expertise is another skill set. Some have both, but not often.

Response by MSgt Rob Weston made Apr 16 at 2018 11:59 PM

2018-04-16T23:59:08-04:00

Reminds me of the saying ‘All leaders can manage, but not all managers can lead’... This is one of many reasons that the branches need to implement Specialists ranks in the Enlisted Catagory (Spec-4 thru Spec-9) NCO ranks are awarded to those who show leadership traits for and are ready for those respective ranks.

As for the O-Side, I have some ideas such investing more in the WO Corps (including bringing it back to the USAF) making Os who are not ready for Leaderdhip positions yet have the skill necessary for their field an offer of going Warrant (WO1-3) or seperation. Another possibility could be implement a Technician rank system for the officer side O-1 thru O-5 (Tech-1 thru Tech-5) with only command/leadership ranks awarded for those ready for the positions. but, I can also see how an implementation as this could hurt egos or make some Os feel like they have been demoted or downgraded. But, it’s an idea.

Response by SFC Monty Wilson made Apr 17 at 2018 8:09 AM

2018-04-17T08:09:00-04:00

We need to go back to the Specialists ranks. Great leaders are born the rest need to be technicians plain and simple. As someone who held the rank of Spec 5, I can tell you that if you’re destined to be an NCO, be all you can possibly be. If you’re comfortable doing a job not leading soldiers, excel in your field and remain a specialist, up to and including Spec 7.

Response by SFC J.c. Bailey made Apr 17 at 2018 8:32 AM

2018-04-17T08:32:16-04:00

Who has determined that he lacks Leadership ability? You , and if so are you his subordinate and just don't like his Leadership style.

Response by SPC David Willis made Apr 17 at 2018 9:11 AM

2018-04-17T09:11:11-04:00

So long as enlisted men are expected to move up or move out officers should be held to the same standard. However I don't think that's the best thing for the Army. Plenty of officers are great at the Platoon level, but struggle with added responsibility same with junior enlisted/junior NCOs. The Army would benefit greatly with 5 year team leaders who are good with their position and just want to lead a few men.

Response by SFC William Lucas made Apr 17 at 2018 10:34 AM

2018-04-17T10:34:00-04:00

Should resign or be forced into a glorified paper pusher position. No command and no promotions whatsoever.

Response by SPC Keith Starr made Apr 17 at 2018 10:42 AM

2018-04-17T10:42:00-04:00

As Lauren listed I've seen people who are outstanding in their technical field who knew how to get things done who knew how to keep equipment running who knew what techniques to get a job done but they were lousy leaders they were lousy at being ncos they were lousy at being officers what the military needs to do is split it to technical skills and Leadership skills they also need to keep those people and retain them so they can train the next generation of operators or next generation of leaders I say bring back spec 5 and 6 and it after spec six they go warrant officer if you can lead you become an NCO or you get selected for officer candidacy School if you have technical skill you stay on the technical side as a warrant officer or a specialist

Response by SFC Kenneth Kreps made Apr 17 at 2018 11:08 AM

2018-04-17T11:08:44-04:00

Negative, a real leader would put him in a position in which he shows competence. Then train and mentor him. Getting rid of home is easy, being a leader is not!
Ken SFC , USA Retired.

Response by CPT Lawrence Cable made Apr 17 at 2018 11:20 AM

2018-04-17T11:20:42-04:00

I think it would depend on the reason why he was relieved. I've had three commanders relieved for cause. My first Company Commander as a new LT was literally one of the smartest men I have every meet, did advanced math problems for fun, but couldn't lead a horse to water. I don't know what happened to him after, but it would have been a shame for the Army to lose someone that smart just because he sucked as a company commander. (The other two got what they had coming to them).

Response by LTC Russ Smith made Apr 17 at 2018 11:31 AM

2018-04-17T11:31:53-04:00

You have to look at these reliefs on a case by case basis. If a commander is relieved for criminal behavior they need to be discharged. Even as a staff officer your still a leader.....

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 17 at 2018 11:33 AM

2018-04-17T11:33:22-04:00

I think it depends greatly on the circumstances. We accept that commanders are responsible...regardless of most circumstances, but in truth, there are many factors leading to failure, and not all constitute a lack of commitment, ethics or value to the service. On the other hand, some failures are due to intrinsic flaws of competency or character...some of which make one no longer compatible with service.

What I do disagree with, vehemently, is any "double standard" owing to seniority. If a new O-1 (let alone an enlisted person) makes a mistake, and is cashiered...while a senior officer is allowed to "get away" with measurably worse actions...that sends a message that we "weigh" these standards differently according to one's closeness to retirement.

In general, if someone can be redeemed...I say we do it.

Response by SSG Thomas Gallegos made Apr 17 at 2018 11:52 AM

2018-04-17T11:52:36-04:00

Great points made. I don’t believe we will ever see an end to things like this. I also am in agreement that “Big Army” pushes and thus we get many NCOs and Officers who aren’t in the mold to lead or should have leadership positions.
I absolutely disagreed at least with one CSM who thought that you should be ready to step into a SSG role, when you were going to the SGT promotion board. I under the thinking behind it but to me you need to have time in your role going into. This is why we have classes and such and hopefully mentors that will help prepare you along the well.

Response by SFC Dennis A. made Apr 17 at 2018 11:59 AM

2018-04-17T11:59:04-04:00

I think that it depends on why he/she was relieved of command. If they were relieved because the are a weak/poor leader, I'm sure there are jobs out there that they are very good at. If they were relieved for endangering their command, dishonesty, abuse or other things that are illegal, immoral or unethical they should be put out to pasture.

Response by CW4 Craig Urban made Apr 17 at 2018 11:59 AM

2018-04-17T11:59:10-04:00

Response by SGT Johnny Owens made Apr 17 at 2018 12:02 PM

2018-04-17T12:02:45-04:00

Absolutely

Response by CSM Andrew Perrault made Apr 17 at 2018 12:06 PM

2018-04-17T12:06:54-04:00

Depends on what they did to get relieved. Up and out policy has sent many a good Soldier home both enlisted and officer. Time to re-evualate......

Response by SFC John Miskowiec made Apr 17 at 2018 12:10 PM

2018-04-17T12:10:54-04:00

This is such a stupid question. If a commander is relieved for cause their career is over. No need to be removed or resign. That is their option though.

Response by Sgt Charles Hinson made Apr 17 at 2018 2:22 PM

2018-04-17T14:22:41-04:00

Nope

Response by Sgt Charles Hinson made Apr 17 at 2018 2:24 PM

2018-04-17T14:24:01-04:00

In the marines, if an NCO or a officer lacks leadership skills, they’re gone

Response by MSG Charles Grove made Apr 17 at 2018 2:41 PM

2018-04-17T14:41:19-04:00

When I was promoted to E8 it was as a 63B50 not a 63Z50. This was fine with me because I wanted to stay in the maintenance, not a 1SGT. Worked out fine for the Army and myself. l.p.

Response by CPO Ronald Caron made Apr 17 at 2018 2:46 PM

2018-04-17T14:46:56-04:00

That's exactly why the ship repair and maintenance activities are such a shitshow right now. All these retired captains and admirals who fucked the Navy up through the 90s and 2000s retire and seem to be getting jobs running things having to do with fixing ships. Worse yet, they now are ruining the civilian workforce by trying to make it the way it was in the military and making it hard to fight back when they do it. Another 10 years when all of the technically competent people with experience either retire or get sick of it and move on, you will be left with just another expensive, rule laden bureaucracy that gets nothing done, but costs billions of dollars a year.

Response by SFC Michael F. Lombardi made Apr 17 at 2018 2:47 PM

2018-04-17T14:47:09-04:00

As an example: I would rather see an E-4 mechanic stay as a professional soldier mechanic with increasing pay, stay as an E-4 if he/she is happy with that. Not every technician is leadership material. I had a friend ETS because the 1SG wanted him to go back to SGT Promotion Board. This soldier intentionally blew the board because didn’t want the responsibility. The Army lost an exceptional mechanic!

Ps: he operates a profitable garage with his wife and daughter doing the business end.

Response by PFC Delbert Gegelman made Apr 17 at 2018 3:00 PM

2018-04-17T15:00:51-04:00

If relieved from command because of incompetences. Then yes but, if allowed to stay, strip the commission from him, if the incompetence was reason for personnel failures.

Response by Maj Sean Barnes made Apr 17 at 2018 3:19 PM

2018-04-17T15:19:38-04:00

Hard call as a officer I have worked for some great commanders and some real weasels. S pattern of good technical ability and ok leadership..... ok not a big picture person. What about a terrible technical person but a good motivator.....? Or terrible all the way around.????

Response by SGT Phelan Hoover made Apr 17 at 2018 3:27 PM

2018-04-17T15:27:04-04:00

That is very true, the officer shouldn't be put in a role if they cant lead or lack those skills. A couple of things they could do strengthen Officer Canidate School (OCS) when they first come in. Even though they have a degree, I've heard that it is kind of weak. Or a mix of both Non-Commissioners courses and Officer courses, to again strengthen leadership capacity. Then finally, if they do fail or fall short instread of forcing retirement, build specialized training program for officers for "That" general realtive area that they failed at, why they failed and overhaul of what to do to fix the problem. If it still is a problem, no more leadership positions and more filling the gaps of what the Army needs until retirement or descisions to get out.

Response by CPL Joe Claridy made Apr 17 at 2018 3:43 PM

2018-04-17T15:43:05-04:00

The short answer is yes and the long answer is yes. Up or out has produced a metric ton of headaches for the military as a whole by forcing NCO's/Officers into leadership roles when they aren't suited for them. Prior to the Eisenhower Administration it was the norm for officers not suited for leadership roles to be fired and place elsewhere. Back then we policed ourselves by the general's firing other general's and officers who weren't suited for command leadership roles. Now we don't have that, instead we're left with toxic leadership.

Response by SPC Jason Hamilton made Apr 17 at 2018 3:52 PM

2018-04-17T15:52:06-04:00

My observation in the Army was that we needed to take a more British approach to service. There you can (could) retire as a corporal. Some people are great soldiers, seamen, airmen, highly competent but not leaders. The civilian world recognizes this, but the military does not. We used to have spec7 ranks and wider use of warrant officers. This would be appropriate to return to so that long time field experts can remain without the difficulty of leadership for those who are not good at it or disinclined to lead

Response by SPC Jason Hamilton made Apr 17 at 2018 3:54 PM

2018-04-17T15:54:39-04:00

As for the original question, too complex to answer. Grant, Patton, Billy Mitchell and others have been relieved of command, but turned out to be some of our finest combat officers

Response by SFC Mark Biggs made Apr 17 at 2018 4:00 PM

2018-04-17T16:00:45-04:00

It has never ceased to amaze me how many commissioned officers continually reveal their total lack of fitness to lead and command. Usually these folks are weeded out by the time they would be promoted to captain, but there are still a few field-grade officers who have squeaked through multiple bad OERs. The incompetent technical officer is an embarrassment. The incompetent commanding officer is dangerous. Both need to become civilians.

Response by PO2 Karl Lehn made Apr 17 at 2018 4:24 PM

2018-04-17T16:24:39-04:00

I've always thought up or out was counterproductive. Some people are better for example E5 rather than E6 and up. Some don't want to be LPO or LCPO or CMC

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 17 at 2018 4:38 PM

2018-04-17T16:38:57-04:00

No they shouldn't serve, once they do something to lose a command they should be kicked out. Give them the same treatment they give to lower enlisted.

Response by CMSgt Wesley Hudson made Apr 17 at 2018 4:42 PM

2018-04-17T16:42:03-04:00

Situational

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 17 at 2018 4:46 PM

2018-04-17T16:46:23-04:00

And, here I thought the discussion on this question (which I posted about a year ago) was done and over with! :) The recent attention paid to this topic by the RP community hints at the deep chords struck in fellow current and former service members with prior experiences similar to mine. Although I may not be as deeply involved in this round of discussions on this topic, I will check in and comment as time allows.
Thanks to the RP community for keeping this discussion interesting and civil!

Response by Sgt Art Ferris made Apr 17 at 2018 5:03 PM

2018-04-17T17:03:40-04:00

Find another command and a non leadership role. Sometimes you rise to the level of your incompetence, not the soldiers fault.

Response by PFC Bill Herman made Apr 17 at 2018 5:18 PM

2018-04-17T17:18:00-04:00

I was in the Corps and then worked for DOD after college. I saw often Officers who should have been flunked out early, or at least not given or keeping some of the important jobs they get, have.
But DOD seems to think all Officers and many NCOs have to be moved along and placed in such jobs they are not good at. Some ask not to be transferred, they know they are not ready or every will be, but DOD does not care. Why, one main reason is they are all "fodder" and so if they fail, so what. Then they can always be replaced with good or more fodder.
I remember one of the best Marines I ever met, he managed to stay in going for his 20, as a well Decorated Combat Vet. He said that's all he ever wanted, no NCO responsibilities, just wanted to stay at the basic PFC or no more than a Corporal level. Last I saw he was a Corporal (for about the 3rd time) and had only 2 or 3 years to go. I suspect he made it, he had that type of can do attitude.
So many get flunky promotions that do no one any good, and so some bad ones that could have been great PFCs or 1st Lts for 20 years get booted. LOL, This system is funny stupid.
People work in civilian jobs for 20, 30, 40 years without ever getting promoted and companies do great with them. They get basic raises don't want to be Foremen, leaders. in charge of anything but their basic job.
Oh well, this is the Military.

Response by PO1 Glen Cook made Apr 17 at 2018 5:36 PM

2018-04-17T17:36:10-04:00

This is a TSA issue as well.

Response by LTC Joseph Bost made Apr 17 at 2018 5:47 PM

2018-04-17T17:47:41-04:00

Depends on what you mean by “ousted”.......if he was relieved of command, no.
But in 31 years of active Army service, ( enlisted, warrant, commissioned) followed by 14 years as an Army DoD senior civilian, I have not seen an officer relieved of command promoted. A few shunted
( parked) to positions temporarily until their fate is determined. The Army is too small to have 1 trick ponies.....officers that failed at leadership. My experience, my opinion.

Response by MSgt Christopher Soltysik made Apr 17 at 2018 6:25 PM

2018-04-17T18:25:34-04:00

Depends if the good ole boys relieved them or if they were relieved for cause.

Response by PO2 Scott Fahsbender made Apr 17 at 2018 6:34 PM

2018-04-17T18:34:00-04:00

I think it depends on the individual and why he or she was relieved. There are many cases where people may be relieved that don’t have anything to do with their ability to lead. It could have been an error caused by technical knowledge gaps, or simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Before I got to my boat, the previous captain had been relieved after a collision with a freighter while we were coming to periscope depth. There wasn’t a single member of the crew who thought it was the skipper’s fault, but it’s his responsibility, so he got relieved. I heard nothing but wonderful things about him, and he’s now an Admiral. It wouldn’t have been right to force him out of the service for that. That being said, as soon as you start to treat each scenario differently, politics now have the ability to be played. If that bad leader has a friend in the right place, it can protect that poor leader from the appropriate action being taken. It’s a tough spot.

Response by Sgt Christina Biscontin made Apr 17 at 2018 7:06 PM

2018-04-17T19:06:59-04:00

I was AF in the 80's and had a commander that was actually anti military member and pro dependent. no matter what happened the military member was always wrong. had a friend who's wife was a slush, one night she wanted another drink, her husband kept trying to get the waitress attention, and wife got mad it was taking so long and stabbed him in arm. there was 6 other people at the table, all their stories matched the husbands, but commander said obviously he did something for her to stab him. then my spouse(ex now thank god) they did not go with me to Italy, stayed in LA, I found out they were using coke so I went to legal and asked them, What is the minimum I have to send my spouse in dependent support? they said for my pay grade it was like $69.00 so next stop finance and decreased my allotment. few weeks later my commander pulls me in ask whats going on, so I explained that I found out they were on coke and I was not going to finance their drug usage. He goes off saying how 69 bucks isn't enough and then orders me to increase it. I told him, I respectfully must disobey that order since I talked to legal and this meets my legal obligation. OMG after that he was watching me with a micro scope, so bad that his own commanders offered to go after him at first I said no it's ok I'll deal with it ,, but eventually they had had enough and reassigned him to go fly propeller weather planes in Greenland(he was a jet pilot before making commander) and black marked him so he could never command a unit again. of course he quit after being in greenland for 4-5 months lol

Response by PO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 17 at 2018 7:11 PM

2018-04-17T19:11:59-04:00

This is way above my paygrade. Just give us leaders that we want to be like/follow and we trust. The reat will fall into place.

Response by CWO4 Frank Williams made Apr 17 at 2018 7:26 PM

2018-04-17T19:26:35-04:00

It would depend on the reason for relief. Misconduct yes he should be put out. If someone in his charge screwed up and he was the scapegoat he should stay. Just my humble opinion.

Response by SFC Richard Baerlocher made Apr 17 at 2018 7:34 PM

2018-04-17T19:34:00-04:00

This should be a reason to separate an officer, not to make him someone elses problem.

Response by LT Jon Anderson made Apr 17 at 2018 7:42 PM

2018-04-17T19:42:03-04:00

I wish it was that easy but yes, no one should just be passed along. I witnessed it all to often.

Response by SFC Carl Phillips made Apr 17 at 2018 7:53 PM

2018-04-17T19:53:09-04:00

Bring back the old specialist rank structure!!!!

Response by SPC Paul Robinson made Apr 17 at 2018 7:56 PM

2018-04-17T19:56:20-04:00

Retraining might be in order if the officer has some level of competency

Response by SSG Cliff Karolak made Apr 17 at 2018 8:25 PM

2018-04-17T20:25:21-04:00

If you where around for some time like 21 years you experienced. Bad leaders. When I was totally frustrated. I'd say sir lead follow or get the hell out of the way.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 17 at 2018 8:55 PM

2018-04-17T20:55:54-04:00

I think that if you as commissioned officer or senior enlisted service member get relieved of command/duties you should be encouraged sometimes even forced to retire. If you get relieved of command/duties is pretty much like being fired or am I wrong ?

Response by 1SG Ralph Hazlett made Apr 17 at 2018 9:33 PM

2018-04-17T21:33:38-04:00

Separate !!

Response by SGT Grant Rushton made Apr 17 at 2018 9:57 PM

2018-04-17T21:57:05-04:00

Absolutely. Now as for Enlisted they need to bring back specialists ranks.

Response by SSgt Charles Parks made Apr 17 at 2018 11:31 PM

2018-04-17T23:31:28-04:00

Response by 1SG Robert Vanhoose made Apr 17 at 2018 11:59 PM

2018-04-17T23:59:03-04:00

We have an over abundance of officers that’s really not needed. To much excess everywhere. Time to go back to the SPC 4,5,6,7,8 and 9 and definitely cut back on officers as well. So many have commanded and done a crappy job but leave with the best OER in the world. To much buddy system going on in the officer world.

Response by 1SG Andrew Biggerstaff made Apr 18 at 2018 12:00 AM

2018-04-18T00:00:44-04:00

As was said by my peers, not everyone is cut out for leadership. I have met quite a few people who were not very good leaders but were excellent instructors and matter experts in their field . As far as should an officer be allowed to remain on AD, that all depends the circumstances and should be judged on a case by case basis.

Response by PFC Aaron Cox made Apr 18 at 2018 1:51 AM

2018-04-18T01:51:48-04:00

Yes

Response by PO1 William Ewing made Apr 18 at 2018 3:44 AM

2018-04-18T03:44:39-04:00

Well, some of those officers are not yet eligible to retire, and get such positions so they can get to retirement. Partly, that's not fucking over people like happened to McCabe (not intending to discuss the validity of that firing, just an example). But it also means bad PR fades before they go. After that astronaut drove from Texas to Florida in a diaper and committed assault, NASA sent her back to the navy, where she flew a desk until retirement. By the time she got out, the press no longer cared about her story. Had the navy said "bye, don't bother to write", she'd have had no pension, and might have cashed in with a tell-all memoir trashing NASA and the navy.
Is it worthwhile to keep a lid on bad PR to keep them around? I say no, but I never had stars on my collar. I'd rather ask congress to authorize a special pension rule: if the officer is being court-martialed for an incident that gets them cashiered, the board can recommend early vesting, subject to the secretary's approval. An 18 year officer could then get a 45% pension, instead of being kept until they hit 20, still subject to the paygrade being determined based on the last paygrade they served honorably in (as in the general who had an affair in Italy, and got a colonel's pension).
If it's a case of the Peter Principle, I would support moving them to a new job and keeping them around. They can still contribute.
As for toxic leadership, I saw a lot of it, and have long wanted to see the investigative services go undercover at commands to look into it. For example, a ship gets a reputation on the waterfront, and soon, a new E-5 checks aboard. He may be a chief, senior chief, or even junior officer, but his paperwork from BUPERS show him to be the 2nd class the ship needed. After a couple of months, he can tell NCIS if the complaints about the ship are valid or not, and who is to blame. This would go a long way towards fixing tje hundred hour work weeks that contributed to the Fitzgerald and McCain collisions.
I think that toxic leadership is one issue, that really needs to be addressed, and that up or out is another. Line officers should have up or out, with the possibility of getting off that road into a staff or other support track where there's no pressure to advance, merely to continue performing. If you want to make admiral, or have a command, you have to accept up or out. If you just love your job, and don't care so much about making rank and being the big kahuna, you can escape it and keep doing your job.
Of course, I will probably never be in a position to implement this, just as I will not be able to make the services adopt tje 360 fitrep program they bandied about briefly.

Response by CPT Tim Iund made Apr 18 at 2018 4:54 AM

2018-04-18T04:54:20-04:00

My Army service is long in the past, but can tell you candidly in hindsight that I was a mediocre leader but was a very competent staff officer and worked hard at it.

Response by SFC David Patterson made Apr 18 at 2018 5:39 AM

2018-04-18T05:39:49-04:00

The problem isn't "Big Army" wanting people to strive to be leaders. The problem is people in leadership positions promoting or recommending for promotion those that aren't good leaders into leadership ranks and positions. I the Army had a fix for this that should be brought back, the Technical Specialist ranks. This woild allow the Army to keep good Soldiers that may not make good leaders.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 18 at 2018 5:45 AM

2018-04-18T05:45:37-04:00

I have had some relieved, one went on the be General. For those that didn't know about it, he was a good commander. For most of us that did know, we could only scratch our head and chalk it up to "FK up move up" that seems to be recurring theme in the officer corps. I could not tell you how many times I have witnessed this and heard numerous officers comment on it. I first figured it was impatience on behalf of those that were not promoted when they thought they should be but I have seen it too often in both active and Reserve components.

Response by SFC John Chase made Apr 18 at 2018 6:40 AM

2018-04-18T06:40:15-04:00

If that officer or NCO has a record of success and makes an error in judgement on one situation then that needs to be taken into account. Too many fine people are let go and the military suffers for it. Not all are leaders and not all are followers. Sometimes leaders are advanced to a position that they will fail. Not because they are not good soldiers but because they reached their level of competence.

Response by SGT Clifford Smith made Apr 18 at 2018 6:55 AM

2018-04-18T06:55:39-04:00

Hex

Response by TSgt Johnnie Keller made Apr 18 at 2018 6:56 AM

2018-04-18T06:56:55-04:00

I have seen fine soldiers who would've been happy to be a Spec 5 or Spec 6 and do their job until retirement. Making some very qualified people take the roll of leadership doesn't always work for some folks. I have served under several Sergeants (they were not NCO's) who couldn't lead a dog to the kennel, but were darn good at their MOS. Once in Germany we were working with Canadians and I met a Corporal who had been in the Canadian Army for 18 years. He did his job well and cared nothing about becoming a sergeant. Not all MOS's/AFSC's need a butt load of sergeants, especially when there isn't any real leadership position for them.

As far as allowing someone to continue in the military after they have been relieved of duty should be case by case. Think of how many times General Patton got into trouble? I imagine that Eisenhower was glad that he didn't send Patton back to states when the Germans counter attacked in the Ardennes Forrest. Patton knew something was going to happen with the Germans and he had already started to work up plans for elements of 3rd Army to make a 90 degree turn and head north to attack the German flank. Yes, some officers should be removed if they are unfit, but it should be case by case. As my dad used to say; "don't cut off your nose just to spite your face."
FILO!

Response by LTC Brett Weeks made Apr 18 at 2018 8:53 AM

2018-04-18T08:53:50-04:00

You are assuming that the person relieved is 100% at fault. That frequently is not the case. Military commanders have discretionary authority to relieve anyone for any reason. If they don’t like someone, or they have reached their max level of competence and are poor commanders themselves, they can & will relieve someone unjustifiably. I knew a guy once who got relieved for a variety of small mistakes, because the commander was an asshole that everyone hated, and because there was zero chemistry between the two. The consensus across the division was that the guy was a good leader who got screwed. BTW, the commander was later passed over for his star. In the old days, being relieved was not the end of the world. Second chances were common because it was understood that sometimes things just don’t work out. Today, a zero defects mentality rules.

Response by SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 18 at 2018 10:00 AM

2018-04-18T10:00:34-04:00

Definitely not everyone can be a leader. There should be other positions that soldiers can stay at at the rank they're already at. They are good at their technical job so keep them at their place. There's no reason for new Joe's to take their place because they are excelling at their job. In my field we are so short on NCOs every E4 is going to the board whether they are a good leader or not. There's so many that shouldn't go to the board at all.

Response by CPT Jeff Robinette made Apr 18 at 2018 10:06 AM

2018-04-18T10:06:41-04:00

I served in the early 1980s. We had two officers in our BN Relieved for Cause; onebwas just incompetent, the other was caught in a lie .
A 3rd Officer was relieved from the Armored BN in our Bde as he did notproperly supervise the crew of his own tank when the order was given to remove some track pads from his tank. During an ARTEP his platoon was moving up a steep hill on a hardball road. His tank lost traction and slip backwards into a large Oak Tree. The Tortion bars on one side were literally ripped out of the hull of his tank.
As I recall his tank, an M-60A1, had to be sent back to the states for repair.

Of the 3 officers I described above I would only trust Armor Officer to serve on Active duty to fulfill his obligation. The other 2 were pond scrum in my opinion

Response by COL George Reed made Apr 18 at 2018 10:21 AM

2018-04-18T10:21:35-04:00

Not everyone is cut out to be a leader, but in the military everyone gets an opportunity to lead. Those who are relieved often have other talents and if history is any judge, sometimes they can come back to successfully command. There were numerous instances of that in WWII.

Response by LTC John Bush made Apr 18 at 2018 10:25 AM

2018-04-18T10:25:33-04:00

That is a very broad subject!There are skill sets required for a field command which are unique, everyone does not have them and they not essential for leading and managing and organization in garrison environment. Of course some skill sets are required in all situations and good managers can succeed though they are not particularly good leaders. So it all depends is not what you are looking for but that is the answer. We hope the fitness reporting system will get rid of the truly incompetent and a senior will recognize when an officer is ill suited for their assignment and take action.

Response by COL Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 18 at 2018 11:03 AM

2018-04-18T11:03:42-04:00

Most of the poor leaders are eliminated by the promotion board. Twice passed over and you are gone. Most of the guys I knew that were relieved were not poor leaders overall but made a big mistake they probably would not make again.

Response by SSG Jeremy Sharp made Apr 18 at 2018 11:18 AM

2018-04-18T11:18:01-04:00

I think this is a difficult question to answer without a complete file review of the officer in all assignments they have held. My reasoning is that I have observed officers that were deficient in leadership ability and the inherent requirements of a commander to motivate and develop their subordinate staff that were absolutely brilliant staff officers because of superior technical expertise and analytical ability. I think this is usually the road taken by the Army in reaching a decision on an officer's fitness to continue to serve. Case in point is an aviator that is a master of his aircraft that is not necessarily attuned to the needs of other troops. His ineffectiveness at being a good Aviation Company Commander has no bearing on his ability to pilot an Apache helicopter in a brilliant manner in combat situations.

Response by LTC James Kelly made Apr 18 at 2018 12:11 PM

2018-04-18T12:11:52-04:00

The Navy has a system where they have a command track or staff track. Works well for them maybe other branches should consider.

Response by SSG Jim McCarthy made Apr 18 at 2018 12:28 PM

2018-04-18T12:28:12-04:00

Kind of depends. I would suggest he get a new line of work.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 18 at 2018 12:32 PM

2018-04-18T12:32:26-04:00

Yes. They should be allowed to continue to serve. Just because they failed once as a commander doesn't mean they won't be great staff, training or other special jobs in the military.

This zero defect always perfect mentality is not a reality.

Response by SPC Kyle De Wolf made Apr 18 at 2018 12:48 PM

2018-04-18T12:48:41-04:00

If your allegations against him are substantiated, I would think that he should just be fired. Don’t you have a way to get rid of bad officers? Bad leadership was one of my number one problems with the military and a key reason I chose not to re-enlist.

Response by SP5 Gary Smith made Apr 18 at 2018 12:51 PM

2018-04-18T12:51:39-04:00

Isn’t that what Warrants are for? In the enlisted ranks, a sp 5 can be converted to buck sgt. if cimmand structure is required.

Or, here is a novel idea- stop having an officer class and enlisted class !!!

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 18 at 2018 1:11 PM

2018-04-18T13:11:57-04:00

It depends on what he or she was relieved for. If the individual was relieved because they could not lead Soldiers and subordinates, then they should be separated. Officers and NCOs are leaders first and it is always part of the job.

Response by CPO Greg Frazho made Apr 18 at 2018 1:30 PM

2018-04-18T13:30:30-04:00

At the risk of perpetuating a "zero-defects" culture in DoD, I'd argue that in your specific case, sir, the officer probably needs to take early retirement for the good of all, particularly himself. Everybody messes up; it's part of the growing process. I concede that and I'm certainly no exception to that stumble-and-get-back-up syndrome. That said, though, when one is screened for COMMAND (or SEA/SEL/CMDCM/CSM, et al) he or she had better have their act together and be, at the very least qualified, if not overqualified for the position. If not, particularly if they have a tendency to make unwise decisions, that person needs to be relegated to whatever staff positions are available or encouraged to seek greener pastures outside DoD. I realize I'm oversimplifying that, but there you have it.

Response by CW5 Gregory Owens made Apr 18 at 2018 2:15 PM

2018-04-18T14:15:23-04:00

Whether to be allowed to serve after being relieved of duties should depend on the severity of the officer’s conduct. Nevertheless f*^kup and moveup shouldn’t never be allowed.

Response by Sgt Santiago Ruiz made Apr 18 at 2018 2:34 PM

2018-04-18T14:34:59-04:00

Just get a desk job some where else to get his time in.

Response by CPL Jeff Tappan made Apr 18 at 2018 2:54 PM

2018-04-18T14:54:37-04:00

If everyone is a leader, nothing gets done
Not everyone should be in charge; not everyone wants to be in charge.

Response by Capt Andrew Hairston made Apr 18 at 2018 3:21 PM

2018-04-18T15:21:11-04:00

While I do agree with most on here that not all servicemembers are born to lead, I do not agree that they should be barred from service after being relieved. As some have stated, and I hate the phrase, but it is definitely situationally dependent. I think the responsibility falls more on the service to ensure they place the right people in the right positions, and you shouldn't fault every individual for failing in a position they potentially shouldn't have been placed in to begin with.

Response by PO1 Joseph Feldhaus made Apr 18 at 2018 5:11 PM

2018-04-18T17:11:58-04:00

I tend to agree. Either they need to go, or step down into a role for which they are more qualified. I've seen too many good techs promoted into positions they are not suited for, and they fail miserably. The "move up, not out" mentality doesn't always allow us to maintain the best people for the job, but we don't let the perfect private remain a private forever.

Response by SSG Ronald Rollins made Apr 18 at 2018 5:13 PM

2018-04-18T17:13:23-04:00

It is true not all can be a leader. That is what specialist ranks were for. Bring them back and use them.

Response by SGT Brian Currier made Apr 18 at 2018 5:40 PM

2018-04-18T17:40:31-04:00

Humans on general are either leaders or followers. Part of the problem is the word follower. It seems to say that a follower is less important. We forget that many followers will follow leaders through the gates of hell. I guess it should be a case by case basis.

Response by SPC Bobby Breaker made Apr 18 at 2018 7:13 PM

2018-04-18T19:13:23-04:00

Leading, team building, mentoring along with integrity and expertise in knowing how to use the knowledge and skills of subordinates to accomplish a task/mission should be developed at the 1st and 2nd Lutenant. If there is no evidence of the development of most of these attributes then there is no need to proceed to O3 Or any command whatsoever. This type of officer is a dangerous thing to have around in a combat situation. The command of a desk in a undesirable Duty station would encourage a hasty separation.

Response by COL Robert Beaver Jr. made Apr 18 at 2018 7:46 PM

2018-04-18T19:46:52-04:00

Sorry, but every successful officer is a leader foremost and a problem solver second most. Sure, competent officers who lack solid leadership skills can work on staffs as MAJs and still make LTC. I suspect the senior staff officers for whom those MAJ/LTC’s work is leadership gifted and either going to or coming from a leadership intensive assignment, such as command but also XO/S3. That said, an Army officer relieved of command has exercised poor judgment that demands the civilian equivalent of being fired and therefore unemployed. A tough call but one that was risked knowing the penalty .

Response by PO1 Buddy Summers made Apr 18 at 2018 8:13 PM

2018-04-18T20:13:08-04:00

No they shouldn’t the Army is real fast to kill an NCOs career but love to protect their officer core.

Response by Sgt Walter Sobchek made Apr 18 at 2018 8:18 PM

2018-04-18T20:18:14-04:00

I think everyone in every branch of service has known someone on the career path that they were convinced couldn't hack it anywhere else. It's not only common now, but so common throughout history that it's become a trope. Rare are the military sagas that don't have a Lt. Dike or a "Captain America" somewhere. But getting rid of them is always going to be a function of the higher chain of command, based on their observations of said individual's performance, and the performance of the unit. I don't think ANYONE in a leadership position could survive if their career depended on a handful of highly subjective opinions of subordinates.

Response by CPT William Jones made Apr 18 at 2018 8:18 PM

2018-04-18T20:18:48-04:00

The biggest mistake the military makes is the must command and be promoted or must leave. There are lots of officers and EM that are happy and excellent in certain jobs and woild love to do them for their entire term of servicebut are forced out because they are made to do something they cannot handle for various reasons.lots of money could be saved by putting them where they shine and enjoy what they are doing.

Response by SGT Franklin Edwards made Apr 18 at 2018 8:34 PM

2018-04-18T20:34:47-04:00

Had 1 that was harmful to his enlisted 3 injury by him for being stupid

Response by Cpl Andrew Tucker made Apr 18 at 2018 8:46 PM

2018-04-18T20:46:17-04:00

The biggest mistake the military as a whole makes is assuming that the only way to become an officer is getting a college degree. Why does a piece of paper automatically make you a leader of men? Personally I think everyone should be enlisted before they are chosen to become an officer.

Response by PO1 Don Hand made Apr 18 at 2018 9:31 PM

2018-04-18T21:31:07-04:00

Some people March in the parade, some wave from the sidewalk. Both jobs are important.

Response by PO1 Steven Hufferd made Apr 18 at 2018 9:38 PM

2018-04-18T21:38:17-04:00

People have different temperaments and leadership skills. Running an organization where “one size fits all” has often lead to disaster. Evals can be written to reaveal strengths and weaknesses, or they are “walk-on-water” reports which reveal essentially nothing of value. Evals which would honestly hover between 3.4 and 3.8 should not be destructive to a career, but it is. ‘Had an ET SCPO who was an ace technician, but was promoted from CPO, which he loved. The promotion removed him from the hands-on aspect of his rating, and he hated being SCPO. He had little patience with paperwork tedium.
So, no. Officers in higher positions need to do their jobs and do some honest and effective evaluating.. there are many officers who have no talent in being assigned Line Officers.

Response by COL Marco Marin made Apr 18 at 2018 9:50 PM

2018-04-18T21:50:17-04:00

Agree with concept of a career staff officer or NCO vs line officer. But at what rank should they become stabilized? Perhaps bring back senior specialist positions for NCO's? Good dialog.

Response by SSgt Gerald Davis Jr made Apr 18 at 2018 10:50 PM

2018-04-18T22:50:46-04:00

Up or out just like enlisted.

Response by MAJ Dt Knight made Apr 18 at 2018 10:55 PM

2018-04-18T22:55:34-04:00

Officers are to lead, while in command or staff! If that measure is not met remove from active duty now not later!,,,

Response by LCpl Aaron Freeman made Apr 18 at 2018 11:05 PM

2018-04-18T23:05:43-04:00

No! If an officer is too incompetent to lead, maybe they shouldn't be in the service! Officers, for far too long, have been exempt from punishments, often meted out to the enlisted... they don't hesitate to burn a nonrate, for even the least egregious offences! No, it's time they face the same punishments, the enlisted do... this'll piss off a few, but it needed to be said!

Response by COL Charles Williams made Apr 18 at 2018 11:20 PM

2018-04-18T23:20:18-04:00

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member My gut tells me, if you are relieved, you should go... But, I suspect the regulations allow for it. If you are relieved, you are finished as far as future advancement. But, I am sure you are allowed to serve until retirement or MRD.

Response by SPC Joe Weddington made Apr 19 at 2018 12:52 AM

2018-04-19T00:52:26-04:00

Some folks are just not cut out for command or ascending the ranks but are good at something and useful somewhere. This is why specialist ranks should be reinstated spec4 through spec 6 but in their absence, a lot of mostly unqualified folks make it to SSG. I do agree that many officers should be Warrants.

Response by SPC Jose Vidrotiru made Apr 19 at 2018 9:38 AM

2018-04-19T09:38:52-04:00

Sure

Response by SSG Arlo Gleghorn Jr. made Apr 19 at 2018 9:42 AM

2018-04-19T09:42:39-04:00

I agree... not every soldier can lead or push troops.. be it officer or enlisted.....but they can be valuable assets within the military in some other profession....

Response by PO1 Jim Tullis made Apr 19 at 2018 9:46 AM

2018-04-19T09:46:04-04:00

No, he should not be “encouraged” to separate or retire early, he should not be given an option! If you have been relieved of command, your case should be immediately reviewed by an impartial panel of officers. If it is determined that the removal was justified then you should be retired, or separated.

Response by SSG (ret) William Martin made Apr 19 at 2018 10:06 AM

2018-04-19T10:06:01-04:00

I realize I am probably staying the obvious but if he or she should be allowed to serve and be paid until the investigation is complete and an outcome has been reached.

Response by PO3 Anthony Nichols made Apr 19 at 2018 10:56 AM

2018-04-19T10:56:14-04:00

So you mean like non leader NCO's and Officers like pilots, nurses and doctors? And any DIrect Input Limited Duty Officers. The Navy is clear on this you are a Line Officer or a Staff Officer. Staff officers can not take command of a ship. I am pretty sure Line officers that are releived of duty have no where to go. NCO's on the other hand probably retire. Never thought about it, or ran into it either.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 19 at 2018 11:18 AM

2018-04-19T11:18:36-04:00

I've seen Officers who were prior enlisted have to revert back to being enlisted because they didn't make Major. Why can't regular Officers be reverted to enlisted if they are found to be incompetent as an officer. On the other side of the coin why can't enlisted that have demonstrated time and time again they are worthy of being an officer be commissioned and placed in leader positions. Audie Murphy did it. It's all about people management. If they are poor performers then you pay them what they are worth, not more.

Response by PFC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 19 at 2018 11:24 AM

2018-04-19T11:24:51-04:00

I think if the army implemented a plan for a new rank system after specialist not nudging a a solider to be an nco if he not a leader but still giving him the opportunity to rank up it would help the problem

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 19 at 2018 11:53 AM

2018-04-19T11:53:02-04:00

I'm with SGM Dawson on this...one of the problems in the force that I have seen is the inability to think out of the box and come up with other options...leaders are just as ineffective when acting hasty or pondering of other options to b used as they are to ineffectively lead in any other way...it is lazy to just entirely give up on our ppl without considering other options

Response by SGM John Barnett made Apr 19 at 2018 12:17 PM

2018-04-19T12:17:11-04:00

The Army has an inherent problem of just moving not only Officers but also enlisted to other units just to get rid of them. The practice of providing a mediocre evaluation and moving them on can be a cancer and doesn't break the chain of incompetence. I experienced a situation of a LTC that had been assigned to a unit as a 1LT and was relieved and transferred, years later that 1LT returned to the HQ of the previous subordinate unit as an LTC. This LTC was a text book example of a failed system that allowed an incompetent individual to surpass other more qualified soldiers to advance. You guessed it and this LTC was relieved again, I made it my mission to ensure that said LTC was forced to retired and the CG agreed. Just a humorous incident that occurred with this LTC and her first meeting with the Commanding General. The CG asked the LTC how long she had been in the military, her reply, "Since I was a 2LT" He looked at me, I swear, I started laughing so hard, he rolled his eyes and never spoke to her again that day. He later asked me if the response to his question was typical of the way she responded to everyday mission issues, unfortunately it was. This example shouldn't be downer, this is just a small example and after 34 years of service my experience has shown me that those that choose to serve are the most inspired and driven people in any profession. I am only unset that I don't have another 50 years to serve with America's best.

Response by Maj Michael Spehar made Apr 19 at 2018 12:58 PM

2018-04-19T12:58:12-04:00

It is very often the other way around. Everyone has uneven talent. Very often, an officer may possess unique skills, developed through work and circumstance, yet be denied the chance of command because he or she hasn't filled one of the required squares for command - often because of the same circumstances in which they excelled In such cases they are usually forced out of the Service, regardless of their skills or dedication.

Response by Sgt John Garrett made Apr 19 at 2018 4:26 PM

2018-04-19T16:26:36-04:00

The job of every officer is to command. It doesn’t matter what his assignment is, his first duty is command. If he is not fit to command he shouldn’t be an officer.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 19 at 2018 5:43 PM

2018-04-19T17:43:06-04:00

NEVER......

Response by SSG Will Phillips made Apr 19 at 2018 6:11 PM

2018-04-19T18:11:51-04:00

You do not get relieved of command for minor things. If the DOD is feeling magnanimous, allow him to retire. If not at a minimum Article 15 him for the offence that got him relieved of duty and force him out.

Response by LCDR David Christopherson made Apr 19 at 2018 7:51 PM

2018-04-19T19:51:20-04:00

I don't know how it is in the other branches. But in Naval aviation unless you screen for command - you are a desk jockey and game over at 0-5. 0-4's do not command but are major department heads and compete with fellow 0-4's for the early promote ticket and a #1 or 2 fitrep from the CO - out of 5 LCDR's in the squadron. Once they make CDR 0-5, the real sweat starts to see if they will screen for operational command. (a squadron). IF they complete the squadron tour sucessfully and are the #1 or #2 out of all of the squadrons in the CAG (carrier air group) they promote to CAPT 0-6, and now again they sweat to see if they will screen for Major Command, a Carrier Air Wing job (CAG) or a deep draft ship (oiler etc) some may go straight to the Nuclear power command pipeline as a Carrier executive Officer. Now the competition for a star begins. 12 carriers - 12 CAPT's 0-6. Maybe 1 or 2 will get a star as a RADM. Non screen Commanders usually become Naval Air Station executive Officers . Non Major Command screen Captains become Naval Air Station Commanding Officers and or training command Commaning Officers.

Response by SFC Rob Williams made Apr 19 at 2018 8:02 PM

2018-04-19T20:02:43-04:00

Lead , follow or get the hell out of the way !

Response by PVT Jack Williams made Apr 19 at 2018 8:45 PM

2018-04-19T20:45:59-04:00

I think they should be allowed to continue serving just not i a command positions. I also agree that not all are fit to lead, that said the Army should bring back the specialist ranks i.e. sp4, sp5, sp6 and so on and something for the O ranks.

Response by LTC Robert Brock made Apr 19 at 2018 10:20 PM

2018-04-19T22:20:49-04:00

Many armies allow 20 plus year Captains and 30 year sergeants. Not everyone needs to get to general/ sergeant major. We lose skilled soldiers every day due to up-or-out policies.

Response by SSG Lemuel Genovese made Apr 19 at 2018 10:55 PM

2018-04-19T22:55:29-04:00

This is where the 1970s book "The Peter Principal" comes into effect. Leaders should only rise to their highest level of competence. There are limits to certain skill sets of management, problem solving, delegating and assigning critical missions and tasks to the appropriate personnel. Once those limitations are reached, finding a proper fit for those people should be part of the program, not an aberration. The concept of promoting less than qualified O-5+ and E7+ to higher ranks is doing them and the personnel they lead a disservice.

Response by Col Jonathan Brazee made Apr 19 at 2018 11:05 PM

2018-04-19T23:05:43-04:00

A fellow lieutenant went arty where he failed big time. He was not leadership material, and he had no business leading Marines. Because he had a degree in computer science (this was while the Corps was all papers and files) they stuck him on some make-do project at New River where he could watch over the installation of a new computer system. He took issue with the civilian contractor and basically took over, revamping the system. I don't think he was ever in a leadership position during his entire career, but he retired as a lieutenant colonel, and I had a general tell me once that this guy probably did more for readiness than any other single officer he knew.

Response by SSG Tanya Gomer made Apr 20 at 2018 12:48 AM

2018-04-20T00:48:08-04:00

If they are incompetent to lead then there is no need for them. Anyone relieved of command should be separated at the same time.

Response by SPC Peter Hawley made Apr 20 at 2018 1:40 AM

2018-04-20T01:40:23-04:00

There can be a lot of contributing factors to being relieved of duty. It's evident just reading the comments on this article. I agree the army made a mistake getting rid of the higher specialist ranks. I think I might have been interested in promotion as far as making SP5 rather than sergeant. Another thing to consider is retention. I may or may not have been a good leader. The up or out policy may be detrimental in another way. The military loses competent, trained personnel. There is the high cost of training people today.

Response by SSgt Bruce Probert made Apr 20 at 2018 4:04 AM

2018-04-20T04:04:15-04:00

It is the responsibility of every leader to mentor and prepare their subordinates for leadership. It is also their responsibility to evaluate each subordinate as to their weakness's and strengths. This is not an easy task and for most is the hardest thing they do. We as leaders need to make sure we don't promote some one beyond their ability. As a leader we hold another's future in our hands some can't handle this part of leadership, we must remind our selves that the good of our Corps is our first obligation every thing else is secondary. It is and always has been about promotion based on merit than any other consideration. The mediocre and the timid cost lives and must be thanked for their service and separated rather than promoted into critical billets where they will fail. We as leaders bear that responsibility, we owe that to those we lead, I would much rather tell a man that he won't be promoted than write the letters as a result of a failure I could have prevented. Every appointment of a fire team leader, squad leader or Platoon Sgt has a direct effect on performance and the lives involved. We have to make solid evaluations and act on them.

Response by Jerry Rivas made Apr 20 at 2018 6:07 AM

2018-04-20T06:07:13-04:00

Probably.

Response by CPL Joe Claridy made Apr 20 at 2018 6:45 AM

2018-04-20T06:45:09-04:00

I don't see the issue here, this was a common practice during World War II. General Marshall fired generals left and right but he also reassigned them to duties where they could still be of use. Getting relieved during that period didn't automatically equate to being a bad officer nor was it a career killer. Marshall knew that there were generals and senior officers that weren't suited for command leadership roles so if one person couldn't cut it they'd be replaced. From the start of World War II until Korea generals policed themselves. Unfortunately this came to an end when MacArthur got canned by Truman.

Response by 1SG Chip Sahoy made Apr 20 at 2018 8:36 AM

2018-04-20T08:36:09-04:00

If their previous supervisors had done their job when it came OER time..... This question would never need asking.

Response by CW2 Guy Compton made Apr 20 at 2018 8:50 AM

2018-04-20T08:50:11-04:00

"Up or Out" is an outdated philosophy that defies logic. Many other armies throughout the world have proven this. If someone is competent and wishes to be, for instance, a career captain or career E5, good on them. Frankly, the US has too many pay grades especially in the enlisted realm. We would probably be better served with a structure like the British with few grades but actual pay based on tenure in grade. Yeah, I said it. Sacrilege.......maybe........will we ever even consider it..........probably not........for such an inovative culture, we sure hate change. Especially to our systems.

Response by CW3 Kevin Storm made Apr 20 at 2018 11:10 AM

2018-04-20T11:10:42-04:00

I have long been an advocate of getting rid of the up or out process we use. I worked with the German Army and they have a policy where a LT or Captain can refuse moving up and gets to stay at the company level. They make the best LT's and Captains I have ever worked with. They could teach us something about leadership.

Response by SFC Dan Collins made Apr 20 at 2018 2:56 PM

2018-04-20T14:56:54-04:00

Depends on the offense. Sometimes it is just a personalty clash. Sometimes it is political. Had an Empty Uniform LTC ... came from Pentagon for Command Time ... screwed up really bad [17 points on ARTEP] rotated back to Pentagon for fast track promotion. Some officers could have enough experience to remain on active service as an NCO. I know one who did that. Major hard working ... great attitude ... for the troops ... BN Commander denied him two weeks command time for promotion to LTC. He was demoted to SFC. Had a MP platoon leader [female] constantly on the carpet for screwing up [male officer would have been tossed-out for first mistake]. She screwed up - got a fourteen year old girl killed [cover-up]. Kept her job.

Response by Sgt Van Livingston made Apr 20 at 2018 4:01 PM

2018-04-20T16:01:01-04:00

I don't think it is black or white. Depending on why they were relieved for, are they a true leader or just have rank and what was their track record before the incident. As Capt. Waddell said, some people get caught in a bad situation and it is no fault of their own where some people should never be put in a position of responsibility. I worked for a Capt. that thought you had to be working constantly, wether or not there was any thing to do, or he would be put in a bad light. No leadership ability whatsoever. Another was our company commander and the first time real pressure was put on him he resigned hi commission. On the other hand, had a chief that gave us time off for finishing stuff early. When I worked for this man we had won awards because we were treated so good which made us work harder and had a good time doing it.

Response by MAJ Lee Goehl made Apr 20 at 2018 7:11 PM

2018-04-20T19:11:53-04:00

Having spent alot of time in my career as a staff officer I can tell you, some of the best and brightest planners make terrible commanders.

Response by MAJ Dave Groom made Apr 20 at 2018 7:54 PM

2018-04-20T19:54:05-04:00

Bring back SRB for all services

Response by 1SG Daniel Bellina made Apr 20 at 2018 8:01 PM

2018-04-20T20:01:44-04:00

AATW Brother

Response by CW4 Michael LaGrave made Apr 20 at 2018 11:37 PM

2018-04-20T23:37:10-04:00

One of the worst commanders I ever had was relieved; however he was a technical genius. He had no people skills whatsoever. He went on to serve in a technical position the rest of his career and was a contributor to the Army. On the other hand, the absolute worst commander I ever had left his soldiers both mentally and physically on the battlefield. He was relieved and asked to leave the Army, but he went on to serve on the ARNG, I knew a few folks who served with him in the ARNG and he went on to be a complete and total turd. So, to answer the question. If an officer has something else to offer, they should be allowed to continue to serve, provided they are actively contributing in a positive manner. On the other hand, if you have nothing to give, you should go and never be allowed to serve in any capacity.

Response by SGT Kurt Lembcke made Apr 20 at 2018 11:47 PM

2018-04-20T23:47:31-04:00

It’s called RIF, reduction in force. Not a matter of choice.

Response by LCDR Robert Turner made Apr 21 at 2018 4:52 AM

2018-04-21T04:52:02-04:00

Being relieved of command is a crushing blow that should not necessarily be the free fall to unemployment. Everyone needs to be put to their highest and best use. Leaders lead, administrators administer, teachers teach. We flush a lot of good people and loose the investment in training and experience every time.

Response by Maj David Kraklow made Apr 21 at 2018 11:13 AM

2018-04-21T11:13:25-04:00

Heck no! Moving failures around just to cover them up it what the military does best. I find this practice horrible! If you’re a failure, you’re gone and that’s it!

Response by TSgt Don Mott made Apr 21 at 2018 12:07 PM

2018-04-21T12:07:19-04:00

I also worked under a great commander. He inspired and led in an extremely ballanced personal and mission oriented way!
That being said, he was also a womanizer, a bigot and a narcissist! Cross him and he would spend every moment he could making you miserable!
I Guess what I am saying, is even individuals that are born leaders should not necessarily be in positions of authority!

Response by PFC George Warm made Apr 21 at 2018 3:11 PM

2018-04-21T15:11:59-04:00

Put the officer with grave registration

Response by PFC George Warm made Apr 21 at 2018 3:16 PM

2018-04-21T15:16:34-04:00

I served with good officers and NCOs. Also the power hungry ones who love to bark orders and pass out article 15s like candy on holloween. But when things go bad they blame those under them and never accepting responsibility. Those people need to relieved of duty.

Response by PFC George Warm made Apr 21 at 2018 3:17 PM

2018-04-21T15:17:40-04:00

Leaders can deligate authority, but they cannot deligate responsibility.

Response by CPO Kenneth Keane made Apr 22 at 2018 10:51 AM

2018-04-22T10:51:30-04:00

Yes

Response by CSM Guy R. Niles made Apr 22 at 2018 10:57 AM

2018-04-22T10:57:15-04:00

Why is this question coming up now? This is a 40+ year old problem!!!

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 22 at 2018 11:02 AM

2018-04-22T11:02:11-04:00

I don't know how to fix the officer side of the house but the enlisted side would do well to bring back the Speciaist 5 through 7.

Response by Cpl James Hess made Apr 22 at 2018 2:24 PM

2018-04-22T14:24:59-04:00

I personally think it should be evaluated on a case by case basis... some things are out of the control of command and they are looking for a head to roll.. and in other situations it is direct fault of Individual...

Response by SSG Greg Beyer made Apr 22 at 2018 9:27 PM

2018-04-22T21:27:54-04:00

Not all are cut out for command.
Leadership is gifted more than learned.
However Almost everyone has a spot they can fill

Response by 1SG Patrick Holmes made Apr 23 at 2018 5:26 AM

2018-04-23T05:26:46-04:00

There are subtle ways of making that Officer think his exit was his idea.

Response by SPC Nanette Porter made Apr 24 at 2018 8:14 PM

2018-04-24T20:14:22-04:00

I have had some great leadership and I had some that should never have been there ever. I had a first Sargent that was band from ever being a first Sargent again and with good reson I will not go into why because to my knowledge he is still serving and I hope that he is doing good. I also had a CO that wasn't any better and was removed not only from his command but the military as well. Now my Commander yes he needed to step down and let someone else take his place. Now my first Sargent I hope the army made the right decision. The first Sargent that replaced him was a good leader he knew what he was doing. So no not everyone is made to be a leader but in the military that's what is expected of you to do is climb the ranks. So it is what it is for now. And I am very grateful for the amazing leadership that I did have.

Response by SSgt George Plunkett made May 3 at 2018 2:24 PM

2018-05-03T14:24:16-04:00

There is room in the military for officers of many different strengths.............viet62

Response by Lt Col John Culley made May 7 at 2018 1:06 PM

2018-05-07T13:06:45-04:00

Chester Nimitz was allowed to continue to serve after grounding a warship while it was under his command.

Response by Lt Col John Culley made May 7 at 2018 1:08 PM

2018-05-07T13:08:05-04:00

Bill Halsey was allowed to continue to serve after running his fleet into a hurricane.

Response by MSG Gene Nichols made May 7 at 2018 5:58 PM

2018-05-07T17:58:02-04:00

i recall working for a very intelligent Captain. He didn't make the cut for Major, so he was forced out. I encouraged him to take an enlisted rank, because his knowledge was valuable He choose not to, Army's loss.

Response by SSG Robert Perrotto made May 7 at 2018 6:16 PM

2018-05-07T18:16:40-04:00

depends on what he was relieved for - drunk driving, sexual misconduct, drug dependency, gross misconduct, got troops injured or killed due to negligence - then absolutely not - heres the door, and btw - no retirement for you. - if lower enlisted and NCO's get booted for those things, and usually with a less then honorable discharge (which means they lose most - if not all - of their benefits) then officers should be hit harder for it.

Response by MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca made May 8 at 2018 7:10 AM

2018-05-08T07:10:27-04:00

Command is leadership as an art form. You have to first understand what leadership is and then apply any number of styles and methods to it, to make command your own. Command involves influencing a great number of people on a hierarchical level - you influence your subordinate leaders who influence theirs and so on down. You have to understand yourself as much as you have to understand those you command in order to be successful - that can be a tough thing and it's not for everybody.

I was an OK company commander but was a much better staff officer & section leader. Being a 25A technoid, I felt most comfortable around my merry band NCO and soldier techies. Principles of command still apply but on a much smaller scale. This was my comfort zone and I knew it. Had I stayed to make LTC, even knowing it would be a career staller, battalion command wouldn't be for me.

Relief from command is a pretty big deal but the circumstances surrounding the relief should determine that individual's next career move. Nothing ever fits the cookie cutter. If the individual was relieved for anything involving mistreatment of subordinates or dereliction leading to or causing harm to subordinates, that might be a pack it in type of offence in my opinion.

Response by LTC David Stark made May 8 at 2018 12:07 PM

2018-05-08T12:07:34-04:00

I recently read "The Generals", by Thomas E. Ricks. You might find it enlightening, as it discusses the differences in leadership in the military from World War 2 to the present. In WW2, there were a number of flag grade officers relieved of a combat command, who later went on to a different combat command and performed quite successfully under other conditions/circumstances.

I agree that not every officer is going to be a great battlefield commander, but leadership is not exclusively a combat situation. I personally like the German system I saw when I was there in the late 70s, where there were some commanders who are identified early as rising stars, while others peaked at company command. The German Army had (has?) what amounted to a dual track leadership program -- Company-level commanders who were very good at that level, but might not do well at higher levels, were allowed to remain as "professional" company commanders for their careers, and excelled in that role.

Response by MSG Thomas Currie made May 13 at 2018 12:47 AM

2018-05-13T00:47:34-04:00

Two observations:
1. In response to the basic question, I'd say "Sure, why not?" -- of course the OER that comes with the Relief For Cause would certainly be a career-ender today; but I have seen officers relieved under circumstances that were dubious at best. I'd venture that the majority of officers relieved of command are not relieved for something the officer did or failed to do, but for something that someone under their command did or failed to do. Sometimes that is the fault of a poor "Command Climate" other times it can be a single mistake. An officer who is relieved for cause should be given the opportunity to resign; but if the officer chooses to continue to serve I feel it is the responsibility of the chain of command to both support and evaluate the individual, with and honest and open-minded intent to determine whether rehabilitation or separation is the more appropriate course. Unfortunately I don't think this is realistically possible because in today's military the attitude is absolutely one-strike-you're-out if that first strike makes it into your official record. We won WWII and could have won Korea with a military where many senior officers and NCOs had previous court martial convictions in their records.
2. I am not convinced that Up-Or-Out is good for the military. I understand that the idea is to prevent stagnation in the middle grades, with the intent of making more promotion opportunities available. In my old career field, if everyone who was good at their job but not qualified for the next job could stay put, all the E4 and E6 positions would be filled by people who would never be promoted, which could make it more difficult for that next Future-SMA to get through the logjam. On the other hand, none of the services are able to meet their recruiting and retention goals today. Does it really make sense to force people into jobs that they don't want and aren't really qualified to perform properly? Back when I was a young SP5 (remember those?) I recall a retirement ceremony where the retirees included a couple of E7's, a bunch of E6's, and one SP4 who was only promoted to SP4 the day before his retirement (and, no, he had never been busted - he just spent 20 years happily working at the level where he belonged).

Response by 1SG Lance Bedson made May 18 at 2018 5:58 PM

2018-05-18T17:58:42-04:00

People volunteer to serve our country. If they should fail we should thank them for their time and send them home.

Response by Maj Walter Kilar made May 20 at 2018 10:45 PM

2018-05-20T22:45:08-04:00

Line officers should be expected to lead. In a perfect world, a line officer who is relieved of command should be removed from the line. Whether that means the officer should be placed into a non-line position or reduced in rank depends on what rank structure exists in this perfect world.

Response by CAPT Hiram Patterson made May 23 at 2018 11:40 AM

2018-05-23T11:40:17-04:00

Yes, unless that officer is a detriment to their service or just not competent. Most have a lot of expertise to contribute to their services.

Response by SMSgt Allan Pochop made May 25 at 2018 10:14 AM

2018-05-25T10:14:42-04:00

Peter Principle, Most organizational hierarchies promote personnel to the level of their incompetence....failure at this level, removed to level where they can functional operate. Unfortunately, our political/senior leadership in DC, do not abide to this principle.

Response by SGM Harvey Boone made May 27 at 2018 7:57 AM

2018-05-27T07:57:52-04:00

Response by SSG Dave Johnston made Jun 1 at 2018 11:46 PM

2018-06-01T23:46:48-04:00

When I was in uniform, I had the dubious honor of "educating" senior NCO's that had "Homesteaded" Medac/Medcom assignments till they made E-7, now they want some CBT arms experience to qualify for 1SGT course. NOT FUN. On the "Reserve" side of the house, is having ones [Det. NCOIC, PLT.SGT, 1 SGT, SMG] with 0 to 6 years of Active Duty(0 years = BCT/AIT + any Leadership courses that required MOB orders) now attempting to instruct you (16+years AD with CBT ARMs/Garrison Assignments), on how to perform your MOS and the leadership aspects of the rank and position held in the unit[Aaaarrrrrrrrrggggggggggggggg].

DA/DOD has a lot to fix, and a lot of it came to a head early on due to the current conflict. Reserve components (USAR/NG) training standards/physical fitness standards/equipment/personnel readiness, and those that are not qualified to lead should be removed to civilian status because if they can't lead when promoted to the position by orders, what are they going to do when they're promoted under fire?

Response by SSG Dave Johnston made Jun 2 at 2018 12:04 AM

2018-06-02T00:04:05-04:00

It's too bad that couldn't have been applied to Congress when they accepted the last BRAC assessment and closed the original "Walter Reed AMC" while were still receiving patients from theater... What was it, Two Generals had their careers ruined over Congresses incompetence?

Response by 1LT Otis R. made Jun 2 at 2018 1:04 AM

2018-06-02T01:04:48-04:00

IMO it depends. I was a very effective staff officer, straight 1’s on my staff OER. I was not the most effective line officer. Last OER in a line company was less than average. While I wasn’t relieved I was more effective in a support role and command recognized that. It did change the arc of my career but I have no regrets. Sometimes it takes a failure to see where we can succeed.

Response by SGT Chas Brothers made Jun 6 at 2018 9:38 AM

2018-06-06T09:38:07-04:00

Demote the person that gave this unqualified officer the position in the first place, demote the involved officer to NCO status and reassign so he's not in a position over people.

Response by SPC Rodney Kittle made Jun 6 at 2018 11:40 PM

2018-06-06T23:40:05-04:00

As long as he has not done anything unlawfully, just not able to handle the commission,then he let him serve

Response by SFC David Reid, M.S, PHR, SHRM-CP, DTM made Jun 7 at 2018 9:01 AM

2018-06-07T09:01:52-04:00

I think they should be retained.We learn more from failure, than from self perceived glory!

Response by PO1 Todd McMillin made Jun 10 at 2018 9:07 PM

2018-06-10T21:07:02-04:00

It depends on what he was relieved of command for. If it's something due to POLITICAL CORRECTNESS and SCAPEGOATING; they shouldn't suffer FOOL'S GLADLY. The problem is we see too many officers held accountable for GRADE "A" Fuck-Ups from the lower ranks that were hidden by the Leadership in-between. There's a time and place for mistakes and tolerance if you can improve and fix a person who is capable of being better. However, when you keep the kids who are unable to function no matter what you risk causing more harm than good to the whole of the command or unit. Therefore the command's actions should also be held to the same standard and in some cases; the CO should be given the benefit of the doubt of being the sole cause.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Jun 10 at 2018 10:32 PM

2018-06-10T22:32:31-04:00

In theory his OERs would separate him from others.

Response by CW3 Kevin Storm made Jun 11 at 2018 12:55 PM

2018-06-11T12:55:22-04:00

Yes, depending on the circumstances. Not every officer is meant to be a leader, some a very adept at other things and should be utilized for that purpose. We have an archaic system of up or out and following a pre-ordained system. I can't say I agreed with what I saw during my career. the concept of taking ROTC personnel who have degrees in worth while fields and making them combat arms, IMHO is a failure for both the Army, and that officer to whom the taxpayer has invested a lot of money into.

Response by SSgt Daniel d'Errico made Jun 15 at 2018 8:05 PM

2018-06-15T20:05:27-04:00

Officers removed from their command position, are often put somewhere out of sight. I had a squadron commander relived for conduct unbecoming an officer. He was send to a aircraft maintenance shop, where he was put under the supervisorary watch of a E9 Chief Master Sgt. This officer had no say about any of thhe day to day happenings of that shop.

Response by Sgt Frank Staples made Jun 15 at 2018 11:23 PM

2018-06-15T23:23:28-04:00

Years ago there was a book that businessmen passed around that said that people will get promoted to one level higher than where they are competent and I have found personally that this is true quite often. I believe the book was called The Peter Principle. Leadership then frequently leaves them in that position and everybody suffers.

Response by SSgt Bryan Keller made Jun 16 at 2018 4:27 PM

2018-06-16T16:27:53-04:00

In AT Leadership School, I won the debate on whether leaders were born or made. By the end of the debate, only one other Airman still believed they were made, not born. So I asked him if he thought Pee Wee Herman would make a fine wing commander.

Response by SFC David Pope, MBA made Jun 18 at 2018 12:14 PM

2018-06-18T12:14:47-04:00

I have seen NCO's and Officers who were completely different people when not in a command situation. However when they are removed from command, they are outstanding in their jobs. They just don't know how to handle the pressure of leadership. I feel the military puts too much emphasis on everyone being a leader, and if they can't lead then they are no good. However there are thousands of military personnel that are outstanding in their job, and do it better than anyone else. The Marine Corp has a program for enlisted. After they become a Gunnery Sergeant they have the option of going command route, or staff route in their career. The Army is a little different where they are not restricted to one or the other. The answer to the initial question would be no.

Response by SPC Jesse Jack made Jun 18 at 2018 8:43 PM

2018-06-18T20:43:56-04:00

If it was for a court martial type of offense absolutely NO.

Response by SGT Greg Gold made Jun 24 at 2018 10:03 PM

2018-06-24T22:03:53-04:00

Hey, the world needs staff officers and NCO's.

Response by Cpl Charles Donohoe made Jun 26 at 2018 7:15 PM

2018-06-26T19:15:18-04:00

In order to maintain discipline the commissioned officer positions are an absolute necessity. Maybe commissioned officers should get "busted down" like enlisted members do. That way they maintain their respect within the community without being transitioned to another command position they aren't ready to handle. No one is perfect. Sometimes commissioned officers get promoted and immediately thrown into command positions they aren't ready for. Instead of "relieving them of command" and then thrown into command of something else, maybe they should demoted and put into a less responsible position. They get to stay in and keep their respect if they want to retire. Being in charge of large military units is one of the hardest jobs in the world, if not THE hardest. Let them continue to serve without destroying their reputation due to the "relieved of command" scar. Relieve their rank and responsibility vs. their reputation and dedication to serving their country.

Response by PO1 David MacLEAN made Jun 29 at 2018 4:30 AM

2018-06-29T04:30:41-04:00

Seems like too many folks have forgotten the Peter Principle...a person is promoted to his level of incompetence and the left there. This came out in the 1980s and seems to have been forgotten. Tome to bring it back to the selection boards.

Response by Sgt John Mizell made Jul 8 at 2018 11:15 PM

2018-07-08T23:15:31-04:00

Not if they get people killed!!

Response by SFC Dennis Yancy made Jul 9 at 2018 9:50 AM

2018-07-09T09:50:44-04:00

Anyone can be useful just need to find out where. Not everyone can be a leader.

Response by SPC Amanda Silvestri made Jul 10 at 2018 2:15 PM

2018-07-10T14:15:29-04:00

The Army is large enough to find a place where he can excel as long as he is willing to to do the job. Everyone has something to offer as long as the job fits the man. What has he done well in the past? Let that be a guide.

Response by MAJ Bob Firth made Jul 13 at 2018 2:30 PM

2018-07-13T14:30:01-04:00

Relief for cause can be complicated. It could be for a very just reason, or sometimes just bad luck or that a scapegoat needed to be sacrificed. Some Commanders or NCOs that should be relieved never are.

Response by SSG Brian G. made Jul 15 at 2018 11:47 PM

2018-07-15T23:47:46-04:00

If he lacks the technical expertise to be in a department, then he should be utilized in an area that fits his skill set. Separation or retirement is one of those things that denies the Military component of an individual that they have invested time and effort into.

Response by A1C Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 31 at 2018 9:24 AM

2018-07-31T09:24:07-04:00

The military in one respect is the same as a civilian employer: They follow the "Peter Principle" where one advances to his/her level of incompetence. Separation isn't necessary if you just move that individual back to the last level of competence!

Response by CH (COL) Geoff Bailey made Sep 7 at 2018 7:35 AM

2018-09-07T07:35:04-04:00

I would argue that it is case/situation dependent. Some commanders are relieved due to personal or professional failings. There is usually a show for cause board following any action above a GOMAR for these officers. We have to trust that the board reviews the case and makes a decision based upon the best interests of the service. There are some officers relieved to make a statement and not because of any failings directly attributed to action or inaction of the officer. These officers should not see their careers ended due to a systemic appetite for a scape goat. Then, there are those who are relieved but didn’t do enough to merit any further administrative action so they continue serving and advancing while performing as poor leaders (whether in command or a staff section OIC) and failing to develop their subordinates or leading well. Truth be told, poor leaders rise within every branch of the military and sector of civilian service. While it stinks working for a poor leader, we still learn from even the negative examples and are better leaders because of it.

Response by CPT William Jones made Sep 1 at 2019 6:13 PM

2019-09-01T18:13:11-04:00

assuming every officer 'should make general or every enlisted soldier want to be CSM OF THE SERVICE and they do not take test and requirements to advance but have excellent reports on job performance should be allowed to stay in service.I am sure we loose lots of good talent because of the policy. just because a soldier is the best draftsman in the army does not mean he could be in charge of a section. an officer may be the best at the battalion level but cant handle anything bigger so to either one would be a great loss of talent if required to quit and leaves room for others to advance that want to.

Response by LT Ed Skiba made Sep 1 at 2019 6:57 PM

2019-09-01T18:57:19-04:00

If it were me, I wouldn't want to.

Response by Maj James Tippins made Nov 18 at 2019 8:15 AM

2019-11-18T08:15:12-05:00

Should an officer be allowed to continue to serve on Active Duty after being relieved from command?

Based on this example, I would think his superiors would force him out by poor OERs.
If he/she cannot command an organization, that should not be sufficient to force him/her out. All of my reasoning goes out the door if they did something illegal.

Response by Cpl Bernard Bates made Dec 29 at 2019 11:53 PM

2019-12-29T23:53:03-05:00

I was in the 54th Ord. Co. (Ammo) in 63-65 It was newly formed to go to Vietnam. We had a Captain who was our Company Co. I don't where he come from but the company couldn't pass an inspection. I was just out of the Marine Corp. Their carbines were dirty gasmasks were filthy. The co. didn't know the first thing about running a company. He had been passed over three times for promotion, So he had to resign. Then we got a New Co. and we finally started passing inspections. Semper Fi.

Response by LTC Lee Bouchard made Dec 30 at 2019 2:38 AM

2019-12-30T02:38:03-05:00

I'd like to see his OER's over the last 10 years. Both the rater and sr. rater. How he was rated and why? One of the purposes of the rating system is to evaluate the potential of the individual and contribution to the Army etc. Another purpose is to weed out those who are not qualified to lead or command. Too many raters and sr. raters want to evaluate with their hearts instead of what is best for the individual and the Army. We need to promote and replace ourselves with those who are in many ways better, smarter and will take the organization further into the future. In another words, we become "Head Hunters" for the future. All NCO raters and Sr. NCO Raters need to do the same in order to protect the proud NCO Corps tradition today and for tomorrow. This applies to E-6 and above. Officers. O-2 to O-6.

Keeping mediocre performers is not in the best interest of the nation and the service, Officer or NCO.

When rating a Mid-level field grade officer on his OER I made the following statement.
"This individual has never failed to accomplish the mediocre standards he has set for himself".
Within a year...he was gone.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 3 at 2020 7:01 PM

2020-01-03T19:01:54-05:00

I've seen plenty of awesome leaders at the platoon and company levels that completely bombed at the higher levels. Especially as they moved farther away from regular interactions with the junior enlisted. They lost that connection with the foundation of their command as the administrative portion of their duties overrode those times to connect.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 3 at 2020 10:26 PM

2020-01-03T22:26:02-05:00

Unfortunately, it happens all the time just to allow scumbags to make it to retirement. Billets created, etc., just to give them a place to quietly hide until they can squeak out to save face for a commander/unit/whatever.

Response by SPC Joe Greco made Jan 25 at 2020 3:47 PM

2020-01-25T15:47:08-05:00

No they should not command well my time in the military in the 70s we had so many command his sergeant majors that were alcoholics and they were no good

Response by Lt Col Bill Fletcher made Jan 26 at 2020 3:10 PM

2020-01-26T15:10:02-05:00

There is no blanket correct answer. Why was the officer relieved of command? His personal bad acts, then no, he should be encouraged to retire. Perhaps he was a better staff officer( who was promoted to a job above his ability) who could actually provide benefit to the Service by returning to a Staff position. Is that officer going to go much further, probably not, but no reason to waste his ability by an early release.

Response by Lt Col Bill Fletcher made Jan 26 at 2020 3:13 PM

2020-01-26T15:13:01-05:00

There is no blanket correct answer. Why was the officer relieved is the start point. Was it it for his bad acts? If so then that officer should be released. If it was for other factors then it depends what they are. Was the officer promoted to a position he could not handle, but he was a good staff officer? If so return to staff position and allow him to continue until retirement. We all know his promotion opportunities have ended, but he may still provide a benefit to the service.

Response by SSG J F Texas made Jan 30 at 2020 12:58 AM

2020-01-30T00:58:58-05:00

They will run an enlisted member out of the service so the same standard should start within the officer corps too. Incompetence, lack of leadership ability or just a dirt bag, officers need to police their ranks instead of just shuffling their undesirables out of sight.

Response by Lt Col Leo Shockley made Jan 31 at 2020 7:07 PM

2020-01-31T19:07:13-05:00

I’ve seen top leaders being “fired” because of mistakes of those under them. If eligible, they may have to retire or else be moved somewhere else, not everyone is a leader but remember, if those under the leaders do not do those best, the leaders may pay the price,

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Feb 4 at 2020 1:51 PM

2020-02-04T13:51:49-05:00

Did he do well as a commander?

I reflect upon my own career and the appealing aspect was a diversity of experiences and work requirements from me. It is a doubled egded sword that diversity of work requirements entails steep learning curves and leading those who are technically more proficient. Some of the fields I worked in were aviation, armor, finance, dfas, national guard, homeland security, DTS, and budget. I had to constantly reinvent myself.

Response by CMDCM Steve Ketchum made Feb 27 at 2020 4:52 PM

2020-02-27T16:52:14-05:00

It depends upon why the officer was relieved. Having said that, officers have a senior enlisted who should be keeping them on the right path along with a senior officer who should be giving guidance and corrective steps. If an officer or senior enlisted leader fails it's usually because they entered an environment that they weren't qualified to be in but there are always those who always think they know better than everyone else and soon find themselves on a raft in the middle of the pond without a paddle.

Response by SSG(P) Danielle Birtha made Mar 1 at 2020 2:14 PM

2020-03-01T14:14:55-05:00

The Military has a way of dealing with that... Performance Review should address his shortcomings.
If he is not capable, he shouldn't be leading anyone.
If it's that bad, he should be denied re-enlistment.
Too many lives depend on leaders doing the right thing...
Why allow him to continue to lead?
Government Issue that is defective should be replaced ;)
my opinion
caveat: I served under two who should not have been commissioned, imo...
One was delusional and would have gotten our entire unit slaughtered if we went into combat (gung ho busted Pathfinder who was certain an air traffic control unit should be Ranger qualified)... the other was fraternizing on and off duty with his E-4 aide.
Both are probably still serving.

Response by Capt John Schmitt made Mar 8 at 2020 7:17 PM

2020-03-08T19:17:05-04:00

Two separate issues to me. Technical competence is likely not needed to head up and lead the unit. A basic understanding, definitely.
Leadership to counsel and mentor those in his-her unit, absolute requirement.
Also, being previously relieved of command would depend on circumstances. May not have significance in different billet, particularly a purely staff function.

Response by 1SG Robert Rush made Mar 15 at 2020 5:43 PM

2020-03-15T17:43:27-04:00

I have had a few soldiers promoted to the rank of SGT, E-5 because of their performance. After a period of time, they could not preform in a leadership position. I monitored each individual's chain of command, Squad Leader and Platoon Sergeant to insure he was getting good leadership training for the position he was in. When it can apparent to his chain and myself that he was not ready to be a leader, I would ask him to voluntary step back because he was not ready for that position. I did not pressure the individual, we talked and he would give up that position and rank. I never had to take his rank. As far as what you are talking about, hare the Army Regulations!

Response by 1SG Michael Farrell made Mar 16 at 2020 1:59 AM

2020-03-16T01:59:03-04:00

My first 1SG assignment let me experience the sort of hell that John Wayne and Ward Bond played in Fort Apache...except my CO lied, was paranoid, deranged and possibly sociopathic. Screwed me over with a miserable SEER, but it made it possible for me to taking my diamonds back every chance I got. Realizing that I'd been screwed over, a couple of CSMs got to let me see one of the senior raters comments. "Do not assign this officer to lead soldiers again." He was SERBED, and landed a position in HS ROTC. And, given our branch specificity, heard he was and still be an effective ROTC trainer...

So, I learned a few things that were really tough love. One thing was that if you focused on the problem in the relief documents and evaluations, and take the time to do it right, the Army will listen. And Karma is not so much a bitch as it is and can be a resolution.

Response by 1SG Michael Farrell made Mar 16 at 2020 2:21 AM

2020-03-16T02:21:32-04:00

The bad part of those riffs was that a lot of great soldiers were screwed. On the other hand, a lot of those former officers were placed in their old ranks or in Warrant officer positions. Lots of great soldiers stayed on active duty and were great mentors for the rest of us.

Response by SGT Lenise Hamilton made Mar 16 at 2020 5:02 AM

2020-03-16T05:02:25-04:00

Depending upon the circumstances, If lives were lost unecessarly, they should be (CM) Court Martialed and booted out ASAP. If they are just incompetent/total Rag-Bag, nine times out of ten, they are thrown somewhere in a dusty desk drawer and always given another assignment else-where.. As the saying goes out-of sight/out-of mine.

Response by TSgt Robert A Nichols made Mar 22 at 2020 3:06 AM

2020-03-22T03:06:44-04:00

I said that the reason that caused the being relieved, must be look into first. Having saying that, no that person has showed can’t be trusted to handle the power that come with command.

Response by LTJG Richard Bruce made Mar 24 at 2020 8:28 PM

2020-03-24T20:28:35-04:00

I realized by career was over when I didn't get a second at-sea billet. Too many JO's and not enough jobs. My ship's Captain didn't get the HQ assignment he wanted. Needed it to be considered for Admiral. The Up-or-Out system does not allow stagnation. Staff jobs are not designed to have officers homestead, but to allow senior officers to evaluate command potential. There are openings for specialists in a civilian role. I'm waiting to hear about a civilian intel I applied for last week.

Response by LTC David Howard made Mar 25 at 2020 8:46 AM

2020-03-25T08:46:20-04:00

Being relieved of command was once a common tool used in the military to quickly replace a non effective leader. It was not career ending, and because of that, was used often and effectively. Some of our most famous and capable military leaders, such as U.S. Grant, had been relieved of command at one time or another. In more current times, the action of relief was the "kiss of death" for an officer, and therefore superiors were hesitant to use that tool except for the most egregious incompetence. But being relieved of command does not mean that the individual was a total failure as an officer, only that he failed in that particular situation. Failure may not be due to technical incompetence, or inability to lead. Some like Gen. George McClellan, was loved and admired by the troops, was credited with enormous skill in the assembling, training and equipping of the larges army ever put together to that time in the country, but whose hesitancy to attack the enemy due to his constant over estimation of enemy strength finally led to President Lincoln relieving him. And this ended up happening more than once. Up until and including WWII, commanders were relieved when just not getting the job done, but often contributed in other ways, or even in command again, to help us win the war.

Response by SFC Melvin Brandenburg made Mar 31 at 2021 3:38 PM

2021-03-31T15:38:15-04:00

I think there is a place for every skill set except for those who lack integrity.

Response by 1SG Leroy Lucero made May 1 at 2021 10:28 PM

2021-05-01T22:28:55-04:00

They should be retss as ined and given another chance if they meet certain criteria.

Response by Sgt Dale Briggs made Jul 11 at 2021 7:35 PM

2021-07-11T19:35:03-04:00

Have to say in my short stint in the military the officers were about invisible and they didn’t lead shit. The Sr NCOs ran the units, their word was law and they were there every day, hell you might see your Plt Commander once in a blue moon, really no idea what he did, and Top ran the show. You needed something you went to Top or you went to the Gunny, most officers just stayed away.

Response by SSG Edward Tilton made Jul 18 at 2021 9:59 AM

2021-07-18T09:59:50-04:00

Incompetence is no excuse

Response by SSG Edward Tilton made Sep 4 at 2021 7:46 AM

2021-09-04T07:46:00-04:00

Why is the one with no leadership ability a commissioned Officer