What policy or rule would you like changed and to what and why?

2018-08-25T16:33:29-04:00

Be detailed and it can be anything.

Response by LTC Stephan Porter made Aug 25 at 2018 4:43 PM

2018-08-25T16:43:14-04:00

Frocking...if you’re in a position and promotable, then we should be able to have you wear the rank.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 25 at 2018 4:49 PM

2018-08-25T16:49:52-04:00

Ft. Bliss here, we have a program that requires a soldier to make contact with another soldier in the target unit. Ideally to discuss the post, surrounding area, rules, regs, the unit, nuances, etc..
My beef is that should not be the case. I strongly agree with one high speed SFC in my AIT. SFC H.S. spoke along these lines:
"An NCOs duty is to see to his soldiers success. In every aspect from PT and work, to off duty and fun."
The Sergants minute is a great form for this spirit, and in my experience and thoughts should be made congruent with this:
Every X day, suggested to be Thursday, there will be a relaxed formation where Soldiers can ask questions, take up debates, question regs and policies, etc.
The Sergants duty is to answer any of them he knows, submit the ones he doesn't know, and find the answers for the Friday safety brief.
I can say that I didn't know about hardly any army programs or resources until I did my own work, took leave just to drive around post and walk into any building I didn't know the purpose for.
Conclusion being,
NCOs must look out for soldiers, soldiers mustn't ne afraid of taking initiative and finding out themselves. This is an Army. A family.
With respect,
-SPC. Flanigan, CBRN Specialist.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 25 at 2018 5:53 PM

2018-08-25T17:53:04-04:00

I am reclassing right now so I am currently at AIT at Fort Sill. If I could change one thing it would be the way everyone walks on their tiptoes around privates. Scared to say certain things because it might be considered offensive. Platoon Sgts and instructors are the only ones that are supposed to correct the privates. I was told on day one (as a SSG), leave the privates alone, dont correct them, dont wake them up etc....these kids sleep through class, the instructor threatens them with counselings but they never happen. When they do get "smoked", its 10 push ups and a couple power jumps. Really weak. No hardcore ass chewings. No knife hands. Was a big culture shock coming from the Corps to the Army.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 25 at 2018 5:56 PM

2018-08-25T17:56:24-04:00

Let me apologize up front, because this has the potential to be pretty long winded (depending on which rabbit holes I choose to run down along the way).

LTC Porter touches on it when he spoke of frocking. In my opinion, the senior enlisted promotion system needs an overhaul. I will say that it’s worked out in my favor every time I’ve (my packet anyway) went before a centralized promotion board, but for every example where the board got it right, I can easily point to two where it has failed in the ways pointed out in the next paragraph.

I would argue that the “big army” has failed to adequately promote deserving individuals into positions of increased responsibility, and in so doing has erroneously promoted a relatively high percentage of undeserving personnel into those same positions of trust.

What’s the issue you may ask. The lack of personal, first hand knowledge of performance, work ethic, and MOS knowledge by board members. The new NCOER strove to eliminate bloated evaluations, and has achieved a small measure of success in that endeavor, but much work remains to be done.

My recommendation would be for centralized boards to be moved from the purview of DA/HRC and delegated to senior enlisted leaders at the division level. This would allow for personnel within a Soldier’s rating chain to provide a real world assessment of those before the board that simply can’t be matched by bullet points or three line paragraphs covering potential contained within the NCOER.

Each Division would be allocated X number of promotions to a given grade within a MOS and select the best qualified for those positions. I understand the challenges in forecasting vacancies at each grade/MOS across the force at the DA level, but that would be greatly alleviated by relying on subordinate reporting units (Divisions/Brigades) to crunch the numbers and figure out what’s needed at their level. Potentially, this could lead to units where promotions stagnate based on the longevity of senior leaders currently in position, but PCS can help to solve that from year to year. This leads me on another tangent....

PCS moves and how they’re conducted by HRC, are another system that needs to be revamped. Find me a Fortune 500 company anywhere that is totally dependent on a single point of failure (eg. Branch Manager) to move personnel from location to location for no reason other than “broadening” the selected person’s portfolio or filling vacancies brought about by those same broadening moves of other personnel. Anywhere else in the world where organizations seek high performers and to be the best company/business/organization, an interview process takes place for lateral appointments or promotions, ensuring not only that the best personnel are selected for promotions, but also that those personnel will fit well within the existing framework of a business.

As it currently stands, if we’re being honest with ourselves, most moves of personnel (at least in the grades of E6-E8) are completely arbitrary and do little to achieve organizational goals at the gaining or losing unit. Allow leadership at the BN level to accept “applications” from interested individuals at the required (or -1) pay grade and select them as appropriate based on the needs and mission set of the organization. This will serve two purposes; personnel with strengths, ASIs, and SQIs identified as critical by a gaining units can be actively sought in order to facilitate increased lethality/efficiency in the conduct of wartime missions. Additionally, personnel whose skill set doesn’t provide much value added can be identified and selected for additional institutional training by home station units IOT build their organic units capability in conducting full spectrum, decisive action wartime missions.

Told you it could be long. Sorry.

TLDR; move promotions to the division level, and change PCS moves to an “interview” process ensuring that only personnel who are truly going to be an asset to units are selected for promotion or selected to work at a given unit.

Response by SR Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 26 at 2018 8:00 AM

2018-08-26T08:00:04-04:00

Tattoo policy should be changed. I understand that face a neck tattoos shouldn't be allowed but as for wrist tattoos and hand tattoos they should be allowed. These kinds of tattoos don't constitute people being bad soldiers or sailors.

Response by MSG Frank Kapaun made Aug 26 at 2018 1:10 PM

2018-08-26T13:10:03-04:00

Reinstate the ban on gays in the military.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 26 at 2018 6:27 PM

2018-08-26T18:27:36-04:00

Anything that doesn't contribute to making the Army a lethal force.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 27 at 2018 2:02 AM

2018-08-27T02:02:29-04:00

The time limit for length of time a commander is required to perform an inquiry IAW AR 623-3 p 4-5f. Dirty commanders can delay, or fail to forward requests in a timely manner, and abuse the intent. In my example, one command, completely refused to perform the inquiry, and then when I escalated it up the chain, even The Adjutant General refused because at that point, it was past the 60 days of last signature requirement. Zero accountability. Separate part of the same command, ignored Open Door Policy requests, then failed to forward a request for Commanders Inquiry, until it was past the signature timeframe. SO.. I'd say policies that give unscrupulous leaders a chance to skirt accountability for their actions, need to be changed.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 27 at 2018 2:23 AM

2018-08-27T02:23:57-04:00

Recently, AR135-205 was replaced by AR135-178. One of the protections to prevent wrongfully separating Soldiers, under the QRP (Qualitative Retention Program) who may be unfairly deprived of opportunities to take actions that would remove them from the scope of applicability (specifically, Soldiers under most flagging actions). That protection, was not put into AR135-178. I submitted a DA2028 on or about 20180322, I'm still waiting on a response though.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 27 at 2018 2:33 AM

2018-08-27T02:33:41-04:00

The policy where promotions occur after the Enlisted Qualitative Retention Boards, so if it happens that the Soldier is over 20 years, and happens to be recently promotable, they run the risk of being put out when they would otherwise be promoted. Seems to deprive the Army of qualified Soldiers, unnecessarily.

Response by SFC(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 29 at 2018 1:31 AM

2018-08-29T01:31:34-04:00

Honestly, I know I am going to get some slack from the true believers and all my Drill Sergeant Battle buddies...in the immortal words of Heath Ledger's Joker...."HERE WE GO!"
"AR 670-1 Section 1.9 (3) While in uniform, personnel will not place their hands in their pockets, except momentarily to place or retrieve objects."
Before the "deHATatation" begins let me be clear,
1. I am not for the removal, omitting, or degradation of TC 3-21.5's position of attention, rest positions at the halt, or hand salute.
2. Customs and courtesies would still be in effect.
3. Non-judicial punishments would still be in effect.
Now that we have got that out of the way, here are my reasons (personal and professional) as to why this particular regulation should be changed, altered, or removed.
Professionally Speaking:
1. It offers additional cold-weather mitigating measures.
2. One-handed pocket technique could assist those with public speaking issues. (having an anti-anxiety aid in the pocket while giving said speech or lecture)
3. Hands would have to be removed in the event someone of higher rank/grade addresses you.
4. Since we are making this a more "resilient" Army, that could add to the appeal of not being so hard. (this I say tongue-in-cheek, lol)
Personally Speaking:
1. WE AS LEADERS ARE NOTORIOUS FOR DO AS I SAY NOT AS I DO!!!!
2. Countless times have I seen leaders E5-E9/O1-O4 tell junior enlisted soldiers to remove their hands from their pockets, no sooner than the carbon dioxide leaving and exchanging into the atmosphere from the utterance of the last syllable of their contradictory mouth, do they in turn place their hands in their pocket and continue their last conversation.
3. How horrible is it to see individuals (that are peers) standing by in a holding pattern with their hands in their pockets, really? If there are no training requirements at the time, where's the crime?
4. IMO, it is because of that ONE idiot that did not salute, stand at attention/parade rest, we are having this discussion today.

Now for the hilarious pictures...

Response by MAJ Matthew Arnold made Aug 29 at 2018 3:56 PM

2018-08-29T15:56:51-04:00

I think the services could benefit from the elimination of the zero tolerance attitude. To be clear, I served from 1978 to 2002. During that time there was very little tolerance for making mistakes. There was also no war, well, Grenada, and Panama. My point is, we learn from our mistakes, and retaining people who have made mistakes is more likely to improve the force than to degrade the force.