Posted on Sep 5, 2015
Should enlisted be allowed to date officers in another unit?
87.7K
239
112
20
20
0
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 36
As long as neither is in the direct line of command. I had an E-5 that was married to an O-3 Nurse. Funny, guys can date guys, girls can date girls, but dating between ranks not good?
(16)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
PO3 Robert Sampier - My question has always been, how is this any different from siblings, parent/child, etc serving together? How do you give orders to your brother/sister/son/daughter/parent in a stressful situation? The answer is simple: You just don't put them in a position where they are in the same chain of command. As long as they are not in the same unit or branch of service, there is no conflict. That may not be the "right" answer, but it is the logical one.
(0)
(0)
PO1 Lyndon Thomas
I agree with MCPO Roger Collins on this one. I've actually seen this one as well. Female enlisted married to an O5. He was an aviator and she a structural mechanic and model outside the uniform. Two entirely unrelated commands and neither likely to serve with or in-lie of the others COC.
(0)
(0)
PFC Bradley Frye
These rules exist for a reason. yes, it is not good that the military can tell you who or who not to be with romantically, but it must impact readiness, or there wouldn't be rules against it.
(0)
(0)
PO1 Orlando Miller
Rules are rules right? I can't help but smile as I'm reading MCPO Collins comment. You made my morning.....
(0)
(0)
I've read the comments here and I see the "right" answers posted over and over here. Why don't we talk about the truth? The truth is we all know it happens and most of the time leadership turns their head and looks the other direction. The deciding factor most of the time for if this is going to be a problem or not is the maturity level of the individuals involved. My observation is that there is usually more noise about it if the female out ranks the male than other other way around. To make it clear what I'm saying here is let's not stick our heads in the sand about this and pretend like it isn't going on just because we give the "right" answer.
(14)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
SFC Jerry C. - Yes I edited it because apparently I wasn't clear enough. This is the added part for anyone who is interested in what change was made, "To make it clear what I'm saying here is let's not stick our heads in the sand about this and pretend like it isn't going on just because we give the "right" answer."
(1)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
SFC Jerry C. That's fine. I wanted to be clear for anyone reading this what my intent was and I didn't change my original words at all I added to them for clarities sake. If one person misunderstands the intent then that means another one may too.
(1)
(0)
TSgt Sean Tolle
I had a friend (SrA) dating a female 1st Lt pilot. Not same unit or Chain of command. Unit commander caught wind of it and told him to stop seeing her. He didn’t. Next thing you know he was an A1C with 90 days of extra duty. He broke the rules and paid for it. This was 25 years ago. Has the military really gone soft?
(0)
(0)
I know a few that have, AF Enlisted-Army Officer... No harm, no foul, translation: never got caught, deeper translation: no one told on them...
(12)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
many years ago when I was USAF enlisted, buddy of mine, SSGT was married to a Capt from another squadron.
(1)
(0)
SMSgt Tony Barnes
You all introduce 'leadership dilemmas' that should be handled by the senior ranking...not have policies out of DC regarding such. The fraternization rules are archaic and need to end. Leaders need to be leaders.
(2)
(0)
SMSgt Tony Barnes
Yes...the regulation is clear...but is it necessary to have a regulation...or should leaders be leaders?
(0)
(0)
CPT Earl George
SFC(P) (Verify To See) - I can tell you 10 times to keeps your hands out of the cookie jar. Doesn't mean your going to listen to me.
(1)
(0)
SFC Robert Walton
SMSgt Tony Barnes - The regulation is there because not all leaders can be leaders.
(0)
(0)
While I am not specifically expressing an opinion. I can see the point SMSgt Tony Barnes is trying to make. Yes, I understand the regulations and that they are there for a reason. However, maintaining good order and discipline could also be said to be difficult if two enlisted or two officers. I have met a fair share of people who work together and then play together but when the relationship goes sour, one or both parties create an environment not condusive to productivity or professionalism. It is up to the individuals themselves, to ensure that work is not affected, power is not abused, and so on. Leadership may have to step in from time to time, just as leadership may have to step in from time to time in normal 'authorized' relationships.
You may be thinking, it's more about good order and discipline, the rank structure and perception when it comes to mixing officers and enlisted. But play devil's advocate and change your perspective to see the debate from a different angle. Perhaps the ruling of fraternization may be dated and seemingly archiac in this day and age as indicated by SMSgt Tony Barnes . As mentioned by MCPO Roger Collins, today, we have same sex couples openly engaged in relationships, we have transgender personnel serving, etc. Whether you are right or left wing, you cannot deny that our society as a whole has become more open and tolerant of behaviours and choices than we were 100, 50, 20 or even 10 years ago.
While I believe that there should be no fraternization within the same unit, perhaps we could open the doors just a crack and allow it when members are from diffrent brigades or whatnot so long they are in different chains of command. Or at the very least, allow cross service relationships such as an AF officer and Army enlisted. If both parties can display appropriate conduct, professionalism and order in relationships of the same rank structure, why not with others?
You may be thinking, it's more about good order and discipline, the rank structure and perception when it comes to mixing officers and enlisted. But play devil's advocate and change your perspective to see the debate from a different angle. Perhaps the ruling of fraternization may be dated and seemingly archiac in this day and age as indicated by SMSgt Tony Barnes . As mentioned by MCPO Roger Collins, today, we have same sex couples openly engaged in relationships, we have transgender personnel serving, etc. Whether you are right or left wing, you cannot deny that our society as a whole has become more open and tolerant of behaviours and choices than we were 100, 50, 20 or even 10 years ago.
While I believe that there should be no fraternization within the same unit, perhaps we could open the doors just a crack and allow it when members are from diffrent brigades or whatnot so long they are in different chains of command. Or at the very least, allow cross service relationships such as an AF officer and Army enlisted. If both parties can display appropriate conduct, professionalism and order in relationships of the same rank structure, why not with others?
(5)
(0)
We all know the regulatory answer by now. I am a little on the fence with this one though. It was ok when I first joined. I remember a female PFC in my unit that was dating a Major from another command. I never heard of any issues. I was not a leader at that time in the Army so I did not hear the possible multitude of issues that could come with this. With the current direction the Army is evolving into, I could see it changing back to the old rules and not much coming from it. Hard to tell.
(5)
(0)
funny story...passing through one day and I saw a young female 0-2 lean in and kiss an E-6. Not sure how to react as she is walking toward me, until she smiles and says, "he's my dad."
(4)
(0)
I'm a female soldier, who used to be in Air Force ROTC. I know plenty of officers who I met as cadets (Army and Air Force). I'm also an enlisted soldier with a Bachelor's degree. I would love to date someone with my education level who's somewhat close to my age. Instead I'm stuck with enlisted soldiers who act like little boys, and civilian males who will always be wondering if they actually wear the pants in the relationship. There are many service members who do not have maturity to have this sort of relationship if the fraternization policies were changed. I understand why the policies are there, but it does hurt service members who wish to pursue a relationship with their job capacity already limits them. My concern right now is why in the Army an E-4 can't date an E-5, who thought that one up?
(4)
(0)
1SG (Join to see)
Good on you for your education. But the fact remains that it is there to promote good order and discipline. E-1 to E-4 are not "considered" leaders with the exception of Corporal in training. In my opinion it has the same effect as a relationship with an officer. Junior NCO's are separated as that.
(0)
(0)
Suspended Profile
Absolutely not. Officers are often social with their peers in other units. That would be vastly detrimental to good order and discipline if an officer is friends with their enlisted SO's commander/supervisor.
Suspended Profile
I live and work at an Air Force base, and have an incredible respect for my enlisted flight engineers. You don't know me and you don't know what you're talking about.
SMSgt Tony Barnes
LTJG James Jones I know enough of Navy culture from my time in the Marine Corps and time on the USS Constellation to know your answer is typical of what one can expect from a naval officer. Your present work situation doesn't negate the culture of your branch with which you are attached.
(1)
(0)
Suspended Profile
Obviously, the rules regarding fraternization across the DoD are endemic of only the Navy; how could I have been so blind?
It has nothing to do with the social strata. It has everything to do with a perception of preferential treatment. If an enlistee is dating an officer within another unit, it's pretty obvious there will be other people from those commands that know one another. If the enlisted individual is perceived as receiving special treatment due to their relationship with any officer - even one in another unit, and even if that perception is 100% baseless - that is the most basic definition of fraternization detrimental to good order and discipline.
It has nothing to do with the social strata. It has everything to do with a perception of preferential treatment. If an enlistee is dating an officer within another unit, it's pretty obvious there will be other people from those commands that know one another. If the enlisted individual is perceived as receiving special treatment due to their relationship with any officer - even one in another unit, and even if that perception is 100% baseless - that is the most basic definition of fraternization detrimental to good order and discipline.
Fraternization can cause a breakdown in morale and discipline, even if it is between different branches. You're an NCO responsible to lead, to assign duties and develope personnel into a cohesive unit. But everyone knows that one person is rubbing shoulders with brass regularly while dating an officer. You have a problem, because there will be a perception of favoritism and more opportunities for that person. And things won't go back to normal when the relationship ends.
Not a dating situation, but I was with one unit where we had a MSgt who was an alcoholic. He had a few non-rates and Cpls that he regularly had over to his house to binge drink. There was some favoritism at work, but the perception was much worse than the actual problem. It tore the unit apart until the situation was finally corrected. I don't think there should even be fraternization between grades. Non rates with non rates, NCO's with other NCO's, and Staff and above with other staff. When I was in, even the clubs were segregated like that. And the ONLY time I saw inside an O Club was on a work detail long before it opened!
Not a dating situation, but I was with one unit where we had a MSgt who was an alcoholic. He had a few non-rates and Cpls that he regularly had over to his house to binge drink. There was some favoritism at work, but the perception was much worse than the actual problem. It tore the unit apart until the situation was finally corrected. I don't think there should even be fraternization between grades. Non rates with non rates, NCO's with other NCO's, and Staff and above with other staff. When I was in, even the clubs were segregated like that. And the ONLY time I saw inside an O Club was on a work detail long before it opened!
(3)
(0)
Read This Next
Fraternization
Officers
Enlisted
UCMJ
Dating
