Posted on Apr 9, 2017
MAJ Telecommunications Systems Engineer
108K
1.39K
385
139
139
0
Bb73918b
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 in these groups: 200210106b CommandGeneral of the army rank insignia OfficerDod color DoD
Avatar feed
Responses: 267
Votes
  • Newest
  • Oldest
  • Votes
TSgt Johnnie Keller
2
2
0
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!
(2)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SFC John Chase
2
2
0
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.
(2)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
Maj James Tippins
1
1
0
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.
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
CH (COL) Geoff Bailey
1
1
0
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.
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
A1C (Other / Not listed)
1
1
0
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!
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
MAJ Bob Firth
1
1
0
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.
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SFC Dennis Yancy
1
1
0
Anyone can be useful just need to find out where. Not everyone can be a leader.
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
1px xxx
Suspended Profile
Not if they get people killed!!
Cpl Charles Donohoe
1
1
0
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.
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SGT Greg Gold
1
1
0
Hey, the world needs staff officers and NCO's.
(1)
Comment
(0)
MAJ Telecommunications Systems Engineer
MAJ (Join to see)
7 y
The supporting description to this question outlined the situation where the semi-hypothetical officer in question *was* a staff officer who exhibited telling signs of dysfunction. Are you implying that staff sections must necessarily bear the burden of a dysfunctional leader just because they are "staff" and are, as a consequence, less worthy of having a good leader at the helm? Going to a staff position does not necessarily alleviate an officer of the requirement to lead effectively; the only thing that changes is the scope of the leader's influence. Relegating staff positions to the collective leper colony where all the ash and trash goes can negatively impact the unit to coordinate its operations and function well under adverse condition.
(1)
Reply
(0)
SGT Greg Gold
SGT Greg Gold
7 y
Is the officer in question an O3 or an O6? There is a big difference between an ex company commander with a bad OER and a former brigade commander who is rapidly closing in on their 20th year. More details are needed.
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.