Why are we more concerned about hurting feelings than we are about developing leaders who actually strive to be the change they want to see?

I agree, sir. This forced toleration of garbage allows those who wish to act as only a 2 or a 3 to continue to get away with their garbage. It makes doing the job the AF tells you you should do very difficult, because they've tied both hands behind your back.

CW4 (Join to see) could you cite a few examples of these lawsuits the military has had filed against them by these "victims" that you say have made the Army hypersensitive? I haven't seen anything like that, particularly in regards to correcting grammar. I find it hard to believe that you, as a senior WO, couldn't come up with a way to help that LT without being accused of racial discrimination. Senior NCOs and WOs have been guiding and developing LTs for as long as the Army has existed. Did you actually get accused of this after trying to help the LT? Or is this a hypothetical situation?

LTC (Join to see) - I did, in fact, receive this alleged email. The Soldier who sent the email was serving as the BN S1 while I was a Rear-D CDR. The BN CDR knew his S1 was messed up. Yes, I could have done some mentorship own my own, but shouldn't it be the BN CDR? The Soldier was the type that would have used the excuse that it is ok to be send an email like and if it was a memo, it would be written properly. As far as the "victim's lawsuits" that is only speculative. I can't think of another reason why NCO's are no longer allowed to "smoke" soldiers as a form of corrective training. I just know for a fact that from a legal stand-point I had a very difficult time making any sort of corrections. There was one particular scenario where a known turd was trying to re-enlist, but as Rear-D CDR I was unable to bar him from re-enlistment because his NCO failed to provide any negative counselings. I was a brand new Rear-D CDR and was unaware that NCO's were not doing their paperwork. I had no idea that re-enlistment was a right that must be lost rather than a privilege that must be earned. WO's typically are not required to be commanders and this was a special situation. However, I gained a new respect for commanders at every level during that 7 months. I would never want to be a commander again. Those are special people who earn every dollar and perk that comes with commanding.

CW4 (Join to see) - thanks for the clarification, Chief. A couple of thoughts on the situations you described. I'm not sure what the term "smoke" exactly means today, but in my time if someone got smoked it generally involved getting a bunch of obscenities and insults yelled at them, often in front of other soldiers to add to the humiliation. Some considered that the normal way to correct subpar performance. Of course that is far from an optimal approach and it certainly isn't in line with any Army leadership doctrine or Army values related to treating soldiers with respect. There are much more effective ways to correct, teach, and discipline when necessary. My impression of a leader who cannot get something done without "smoking" subordinates would be that he has a gap in his leadership skills. There are no legal barriers to making corrections or identifying substandard performance.

Now, if you are referring to smoking as in after hours PT sessions as punishment for non-PT related problems, there are legal aspects to that. Taking a soldiers off duty time as punishment is usually considered extra duty, and there are rules about who can impose Extra duty and the procedures to follow. On the legal note, it looks like you did in fact get a taste of the legal workd with the bar to reenlistments. They teach every LT and CPT in the basic and advanced courses about the requirement for negative counseling. It makes sense. Without it, you could have cases where a good soldier could be indiscriminately barred by a commander for any reason with no justification at all. Think about it this way. If a soldier was so bad that he needed to be barred from reenlistment, how could he have not messed up earlier to a degree that warranted a counseling statement? There would have to be a record of the subpar performance. If NCOs and officers failed to do that, it's not a paperwork problem it's a leadership problem.

It appears to me that you may be assuming the worst about some of these situations. For example, from your initial post, I thought there had been lawsuits, but then you said that was a speculative example. At first I thought you had actually spoken to the LT and he told you he didn't care about emails, but on second reading it appears that you didn't, and were just assuming that as you wrote "would have used the excuse..." rather than did. So it seems that some sensitivity training sessions or discussions with the JAG people have left you gunshy about correcting things. Unless things have changed drastically since I got out, I feel quite certain you can take effective action without fear of legal backlash. But you do have to be aware of what you say and eliminate racial or other connotations that aren't really necessary to make the point.

I don't mean to lecture you, Chief, I am sorry if my comments come across that way. I just sensed a great frustration in your post about instances of low standards and your belief that those things cannot be effectively dealt with anymore. I believe they can, but it may entail breaking some old habits that probably weren't the best practices anyway. Leaders have to uphold standards and coach and develop soldiers. But we must be able to do it in a manner that doesn't leave the soldier feeling demeaned or uses references to things like race, sex, or other topics usually covered in sensitivity training. There are such things as hostile work environments and it is not the work atmosphere we as leaders want to create or allow. But avoiding a hostile work environment doesn't mean you have to stop correcting substandard performance.

That is excellent sir. Mind if I put that in my "useful quotes" book for later use?

Capt Helen Ensley - Of course, LT. I'd be honored if one of my nuggets of knowledge was used elsewhere.