Posted on Apr 9, 2017
Should an officer be allowed to continue to serve on Active Duty after being relieved from command?
108K
1.39K
385
139
139
0
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?
Posted 8 y ago
Responses: 267
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.
(0)
(0)
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.
(0)
(0)
In the marines, if an NCO or a officer lacks leadership skills, they’re gone
(0)
(0)
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.
(0)
(0)
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......
(0)
(0)
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.
(0)
(0)
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.
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.
(0)
(0)
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.
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.
(0)
(0)
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.....
(0)
(0)
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.
Ken SFC , USA Retired.
(0)
(0)
Should resign or be forced into a glorified paper pusher position. No command and no promotions whatsoever.
(0)
(0)
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.
(0)
(0)
Who has determined that he lacks Leadership ability? You , and if so are you his subordinate and just don't like his Leadership style.
(0)
(0)
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.
(0)
(0)
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.
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.
(0)
(0)
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.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next