Should not answering a phone call be subject to UCMJ?

SGT (Join to see) I concur with a lot of other people here. But I have reservations about its implementation.

First, apparently there is a problem. Who is leaving their Leadership on "read" or ignoring their calls? It sounds like there are other failures going on here.

Second, I don't agree with the solution. There is no way this would hold up to UCMJ scrutiny, but I wouldn't use that as an excuse to "fight it". Junior leaders should find a better way to stay connected with their leadership and their subordinates so it doesn't have to resort to this. No one wants to have 4 formations every day, and leaders don't want to have to track down Soldiers every time they have something that needs to get done.

Personally, perhaps because of my rank, position, or relationship with my subordinates, I have never had an issue with getting responses. But in a tactical or operational environment, I went to them unless I needed the information or work done immediately then I used the radio. I dislike carrying wireless phones on duty, personal or otherwise. It detracts from maintaining communication skills with our tactical communications equipment. However, I see the benefits.

Everyone should be accountable. Everyone should consider themselves on call and ready to go. And everyone can maintain contact with leadership.
Having said that…
Those calls or messages are going to get missed occasionally. I don’t answer my phone in the car. Plenty of times my phone rings and I don’t hear it from my back pocket. When that call is returned, it might be outside of that 15-minute window.
You’re a critical asset to your unit, and you need to be available. But unless your unit is deploying right after lunch or you’re the one carrying the nuclear football, your unit should have better contingency plans in place than UCMJ action.

This is an OK idea, poorly executed.

If the problem is people not answering texts, why would you send this in a text?

Also, whatever happened to leader accountability? SGT Snuffy is supposed to know where PVT Schmedlap is. SSG Jones is supposed to know where SGT Snuffy is. SFC Smith is supposed to know where SSG Jones is. Etc. This concept of "you had better answer, or else" is basically admitting that we don't want to hold NCOs accountable for informing their troops or for knowing where they are at and what they are doing.

Hey, if 1SG calls, answer the damned phone!
Understandable and understood. Threatening with "you better call back, or else!" is just poor leadership, IMHO.