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

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

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

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

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

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

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...

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.

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

Why is the one with no leadership ability a commissioned Officer

Incompetence is no excuse

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.

They should be retss as ined and given another chance if they meet certain criteria.

I think there is a place for every skill set except for those who lack integrity.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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!