Posted on Feb 19, 2014
Should Officers be allowed to use first names and have hands in pockets around Enlisted Soldiers?
80.6K
276
176
7
5
2
Discipline
Military bearing
Customs and Courtesies
Posted 12 y ago
Responses: 103
3
3
0
Im just curious....has anyone written to have this stupid rule amended? If not, I'm submitting in next week. More to follow. <div>I'd love some feedback that I can include in my justification. (I am so serious)</div>
(3)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
You could state that the regulation offers no reason as to why a soldier cannot have their hands in their pocket.
The sad part about this whole situation is that a standard has been given....why is it so hard to follow the standard?
The answer? Because people see the Army as a job, and not a Profession.
Another answer? NCOs fail to enfore the standard. When the standards are not enforced, what do we have left?
(1)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
I am not saying that I don't want the regulation changed to allow hands in the pocket, but until it does, I just hope that NCOs are enforcing the standard.
(0)
(0)
SPC (Join to see)
You can drop my name SSG, along with my rank it carries some weight with the higher ups
(1)
(0)
CW3 (Join to see)
Ok for those of us that are still in the army, weigh in. I say go for submitting the change. Then I won't be wrong. The question to answer is does having hands in pockets hurt the look, I say no. Does it hinder operations, no.
For the LT, I say what everyone else has ever told me, do what your rank can handle. If you can tell someone higher than you, your wrong, go for it tactfully. But like someone said below, if that is all that is wrong with your unit that you can effect then you are in the best unit in the Army. There are more grievous things that can be addressed than the old hands thing.
(2)
(0)
3
3
0
As a commander, I've always used first names when addressing my platoon leaders and colleagues, but as a general rule, I try to keep it out of the picture when any enlisted personnel are around. It just doesn't seem to be professional.
That said, it all depends on the environment you're fostering. I've been in certain environments (Civil Affairs world) where using first names even between officers and NCOs is not only acceptable, it's encouraged and mandated. This is generally due to the nature of the work and the fact that we're often in civilian clothes and downplaying our military connection for operational purposes.
As a general rule though, when on duty, I think it's best to keep things on the up and up. You can't expect your subordinates to act in a disciplined way if you're not showing them a proper example of how to do it.
The pockets thing is a non-starter.
(3)
(0)
CW3 (Join to see)
Sir, all due respect, tell that to those in the other thread who dismiss the idea of a 2LT saluting a 1LT. I know, I've tried.
(0)
(0)
LTC Paul Labrador
CW2 Walker, tradtion can hold as much weight (sometimes more even) than regs. That is the nature of the organization we are in.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
A Little military humor...
FT LEONARD WOOD, MO - A soldier with the 318th Military Police Company is being processed out of the Army after being found by his Sergeant Major as having “his goddamn hands in his pockets,” accordin...
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
I can't tell you how many NCOs I have seen with their hands in their pockets or on their belt (which I absolutely hate!). I usually whisper to them (if they are with Soldiers) but if they are alone I don't hesitate to say "Hey Sergeant, get you hands out of your pockets" or "Are you a gun slinger with your hands on your belt like that?" All ranks are guilty of this.
(3)
(0)
SSG V. Michelle Woods
To be fair, CPT Weber doesn't hesitate to correct an NCO OR officer, regardless if they are a peer or senior ranking. I've seen it!
(2)
(0)
Allowed to use first names? Sure. Should they? Depends on the situation.
Hand in pockets? No. 670-1 applies to everyone... officers shouldn't do it among themselves either.
(3)
(0)
MSG (Join to see)
They should not be allowed to use first names around enlisted Soldiers, amongst themselves, sure. No to the hands in pockets question. I am an NCO and I use first names with my peers, but not around lower enlisted Soldiers.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
2
2
0
Until the regulation is updated to reflect that leaving your hand/s in your pocket is acceptable then the standard must be enforced. If we as leaders do not enforce the standard then we have just created another standard. In any case the correction must be done with tact.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
The first name thing is never going away, especially in the Officer and more specifically the Aviation world. We would need to get rid of the pockets in order to keep people from putting hands in them. As a wise person once said, "Ain't nobody got time fo dat."
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
Ask the question, and let it speak for itself. "Why are your hands in your pockets, Sir?"<div><br></div><div>What the hell are they going to say? "Oh, my bad.", or "Mind your business"</div><div><br></div><div>Either way they're wrong, and you're right. If the wanted to keep their damn hands in their pockets they should've gone SF...</div>
(2)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
See, I like that, it's simple and to the point= "Why are your hands in your pockets, Sir?"
Remember, the NCO Corps is there to train, mentor, and ENFORCE the standards on ALL soldiers. Just make sure you all have your shit together first.
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
<p><font color="#000000" size="3" face="Times New Roman">
</font><font size="3"><font color="#000000"><font face="Calibri">Eddy,</font></font></font></p><p><font color="#000000" size="3" face="Times New Roman">
</font></p><p style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;" class="MsoNormal"><font size="3"><font color="#000000"><font face="Calibri">The "right" thing to do is make a tactful,
on-the-spot correction and stand-by for back-blast. In garrison, I would make
the correction all the same. In the field/on deployment, priorities like
staying warm and staying alive may supersede (if only temporarily) 670-1. Our
standard should always be excellence, but when you're going on combat patrols
every day etc etc, priorities may be different.</font></font></font></p><p style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;" class="MsoNormal"><font size="3"><font color="#000000"><font face="Calibri">On another note, I'm glad to see you on RallyPoint, brother.
Hope all's well with you and yours. Shoot me a note if you ever need anything.
College seems like a long time ago these days.</font></font></font></p><p style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;" class="MsoNormal"><font color="#000000" size="3" face="Calibri">-Justin</font></p><p><font color="#000000" size="3" face="Times New Roman">
</font></p>
</font><font size="3"><font color="#000000"><font face="Calibri">Eddy,</font></font></font></p><p><font color="#000000" size="3" face="Times New Roman">
</font></p><p style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;" class="MsoNormal"><font size="3"><font color="#000000"><font face="Calibri">The "right" thing to do is make a tactful,
on-the-spot correction and stand-by for back-blast. In garrison, I would make
the correction all the same. In the field/on deployment, priorities like
staying warm and staying alive may supersede (if only temporarily) 670-1. Our
standard should always be excellence, but when you're going on combat patrols
every day etc etc, priorities may be different.</font></font></font></p><p style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;" class="MsoNormal"><font size="3"><font color="#000000"><font face="Calibri">On another note, I'm glad to see you on RallyPoint, brother.
Hope all's well with you and yours. Shoot me a note if you ever need anything.
College seems like a long time ago these days.</font></font></font></p><p style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;" class="MsoNormal"><font color="#000000" size="3" face="Calibri">-Justin</font></p><p><font color="#000000" size="3" face="Times New Roman">
</font></p>
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google