Why do some leaders not follow guidance that has been established?

Number one for all of those talking about the CSM's tab on his combat SSI; it is NOT an Airborne tab, it IS a Mountain tab. Either some of you need new glasses as I do, or you need to take a closer look and not be confused.

Next, before spouting off about what is authorized, etc. learn about the individual, in this case the CSM. And if they have a published biography, check it out first before opening mouth and inserting foot. The CSM while an E-8 and while assigned to A Co 3/187th IN (MTN) in 2003 and 2004.

Next check the history of the unit that said individual was assigned or attached to when they earned their combat recognition. The 86th IBCT (MTN) SSI was only reauthorized in 2006. The authorized SSI of the unit in 2003 and 2004 was the First Army SSI w/Mountain tab.

Finally the question about the Mountain tab has been heavily discussed ever since the 10th Mountain Division was reactivated. Most individuals just do not remember about the VT Army NG and their Mountain Warfare School and unit. This is not the first time that the question has been raised since 2002.

Without seeing the actual video, I can only make limited assessments, however there were some key phrases that were quoted:

"A reader watched the video and flagged Army Times, commenting: “The CSM of the Vermont National Guard has outlawed soldiers from wearing the OCP until January, which seems to be in defiance of the SMA's policy and intent.”

A READER said that, not the CSM. The Army Times didn't even say it. They didn't cite their source, they just provided E4 Mafia scuttlebutt info.

When we get deeper, we find:

“I really do not want to see my E1s through E5s rushing out and spending two months drill pay to get this uniform,” Quick told Army Times, saying soldiers might feel compelled to buy them if others did. “I 110 percent support [the SMA]. He said it’s going to take time, we’re going to have mixing and matching of UCP and OCP, and it’s ok. And I agree with him.”

This seems more accurate, and actually goes straight to the horse's mouth so to speak. This actually seems reasonable, and based on my limited interaction with SGM Steve Wettstein, I could see him saying something along the same lines. Or something to the effect of (not to put words in his mouth):

"Guys, don't waste money if you're uniforms are still servicable. You've got plenty of time until the wear out date. Don't rush out and feel you have to swap to the new pattern."

All that said, this seems like the Senior Enlisted Adviser providing clarification, and actually trying to take care of his guys. He's in a drill unit, and he's trying to save his folks money. I have a feeling a handful of troops got the message garbled, and it went from "Don't worry about getting the new pattern immediately" (which is exactly within guidance) to "Don't get the new pattern until next year" (which is outside guidance).

Sounds like "Do as I say not as I do"!

How the fuck do you know what is and is not acceptable? You need to have a full time assistant to keep up with the 670-1. It changes by the hour. You want to stop all this confusion? Get a damn uniform and stick with it. Chocolate Chips, ACU, BDU, Whatever they are calling this turd, Multi Cam, DCU. That is just what you wear to the places where people try and kill you. God forbid you go to the office. What do you wear for that? Big Army get your shit in one bag!

I would say the SGM has a bit of selective hearing. When the Army was transitioning to ACU's, there was a lot of similar guidance with mixed uniforms for formations. I think in this example the Vermont SGM was trying to prevent his 'Call of Duty' reservist Soldiers from going out and spending all of their money to replace all their uniforms and equipmen in the first months after release.

I see a couple of subtle differences between what is quoted and what is inferred, and to me this is nothing to be alarmed about.

1. "refrain from" ≠ "outlawed"
2. “as little mixing in formation as possible" ≠ "can't mix and match"

SMA Dailey's spokesperson is also mentioned as saying it’s not Dailey’s intent nor his job to micromanage units over uniforms.

I will stick out a better question. Why is the Army changing uniforms again? Didn't they just do that a few years back? Seems like a waste of taxpayer money.

Some think they're better than the established practices most just weren't mentored as they rose thru the ranks and don't know better .

SGM Steve Wettstein
"The more things change the more they stay the same."
Leaders always enforced standards that they themselves didn't feel the need to follow, at least during my career.

It's a lot easier to ask for forgiveness than permission sometimes... I've seen this done Base/Wing level the past by some good Sr NCO's that were just as confused as their troops, and rather than let the troops get the repercussion, they (more than one) would knowingly "defy" the rules in order to force higher to further clarify. After all, who's gonna yell at a bunch of E9's for attempting to follow a rule that wasn't "clear" to him and the rest of the affected force to begin with? And it usually immediately got the desired result. However, I don't think this is the case here, and leaders like those have become almost non existent...