Posted on Jul 29, 2019
Why does the Army appear to have a discipline issue with the lower enlisted ranks?
73.9K
871
404
228
228
0
Please understand, I am NOT bagging on the Army here, I am simply asking a question based on my own observations. I served two tours on two different Army posts and witnessed first hand how lower enlisted soldiers (PV1 through SPC) interacted with soldiers of higher rank (CPL through SSG) and I found their lack of respect and lack of discipline to be a bit disturbing. So, my deeper question is this; is this perceived problem of discipline due to the size of the Army as compared to the Marine Corps where we do not have this type of discipline issue, is it due to smaller unit cohesion, or is it something else? I am writing a white paper on military discipline and any information will be helpful. Remember, at the end of the day, we are one military with different missions toward the same end goal, so please do not use this thread as a means to bash other branches of service. I have not done that to the Army; I have great respect for the Army and for its mission and I am simply looking for others' observations about discipline.
Discipline
Enlisted
UCMJ
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 257
147
147
0
It's more what part of the Army you're in. The Army is really more like several Armies under one banner. I've been in units where a PFC stands at parade rest for a SPC, and while in that unit witnessed another unit where a PFC showed up for a detail without a blouse or hat, and his NCO had to practically beg him to go get his stuff.
Why does this happen and why is the USMC different? Well the USMC is a brand. There's one single brand. The Army is a bunch of brands. The pride of a paratrooper is to the 82nd, or the 173rd, whatever unit they're from, not "The Army". So, units that have a long history of pride and service, tend to have a higher level of discipline.
Why does this happen and why is the USMC different? Well the USMC is a brand. There's one single brand. The Army is a bunch of brands. The pride of a paratrooper is to the 82nd, or the 173rd, whatever unit they're from, not "The Army". So, units that have a long history of pride and service, tend to have a higher level of discipline.
(147)
(0)
CW3 Dick McManus
Well, it appears I need to share with you how to deal with difficult people. Learning to be a good leaders starts with being a good following and leading by example. Whey you get promoted you become a boss and yet we do not teach what words to use and not use . If you have a difficult subordinate, the key words are "You are expected to do such and such.." Then listen for the subordinate to say something or not say anything." If you get back-talk or irrational excuses, re-repeat..."You are expected to do such and ... What is the soldiers say "Fuck you as a reply.? You are expected not to say that to me." And again. You may have to re-say "You are expected not to say that to me." I would walk away and/or continue with what the hell I was doing before this conversation started. But I would make a written not to myself about his subordinate's back-talking. I would look for something his soldier does or did that was outstanding, and thank him/her.
The Science of Assertiveness theory -- aka folk knowledge (trial and error science)
Assertive (Leadership) behavior of humans: Builds relationships
Ask yourself, “Will the long-term affects be worse than any short-term discomfort I may feel if I am assertive in the first place?”
The word "NO", you may have to be repeated over and over, as in a broken record.
An angry and loud communication can be assertive if one is expressing feelings (Using the word "I", ( I am really goo damn anger at you ...)
vs. HOSTILE behavior-destroys a relationship: ... You dumb ass, didn't your mother teach you to report to work on time, etc. etc. Why, didn't you do such and such.... Normal people should do such and such without I have to tell you.
If someone has a habit of saying, "Why, don't you do such and such..." we all understand this to mean "I want you" to do such and such. There seems to be some kind of a taboo in our culture against people saying straight up, that we want.
On the use of the word YOU:
...the use of the word "you" is assertive when a person is acting in the role of boss, parent, or leader, for example, a law enforcer, a teacher, the chair of a meeting. For example, “YOU are expected to be recognized by the Chair before speaking at our meetings.” "You are expected to" (follow the rules, etc) , then every time the other person comes up with excuses, sob stories, etc, repeating this phase again and again ("You are expected to" (aka using the broken record shows the other person that you are not afraid to stand your ground and they need for them to rethink their poor behavior.
When someone asks you with a “WHY not? The assertive answer is not answering.
But remember being skeptically silent is assertive. Meaning, if I try to get in the last word.. will I get punched in the nose or some other bad result.
Speaking up in a group to speak is assertive because one is taking the "psychological space" of the whole group.
Hostile behavior: A person uses sarcasm and intimidation to get what they want. One may get what they want, but destroys the relationship afterwards.
It is easy to give up the benefits of hostile behavior when we value ourself enough to avoid getting agitated over minor issues and when I am imperfect and incorrect.
Non-assertive behavior: (shy behavior) doing nothing about unpleasant situations and simply try to ignore ones feelings and desires. While it may prevent conflicts with others, one probably will wind up feeling helpless, exploited, angry, and disappointed with one’s self.
For example, “I am sorry to bother you.” This is an example, of how being NICE sucks us into a non-assertive down-hill fall. vs. “I want to talk to you.” “ I need your help or I need or want to talk to you.”
or "It was nice talking to you." (when we didn't enjoy talking to someone).
Basic Assertive Rights:
The right to act in ways that promote my dignity and self-respect as long as others’ rights are not violated in the process.
The right to be treated with respect.
The right to say no and not feel guilty.
The right to experience and express feelings.
The right to take time to slow down and think.
The right to change my mind.
The right to ask for what I want.
The right to do less than I are humanly capable of doing.
The right to ask for information.
The right to make mistakes.
The right to feel good about myself.
Must I always assert my rights?
No, I am always free to choose not to assert myself, assuming that I am also willing to take the responsibility for whatever consequences may then occur.
Source: The Assertive Option by Patricia Jakubowski and Arthur J. Lange
and NO TRESPASSING by Barker and Barker.
The Science of Assertiveness theory -- aka folk knowledge (trial and error science)
Assertive (Leadership) behavior of humans: Builds relationships
Ask yourself, “Will the long-term affects be worse than any short-term discomfort I may feel if I am assertive in the first place?”
The word "NO", you may have to be repeated over and over, as in a broken record.
An angry and loud communication can be assertive if one is expressing feelings (Using the word "I", ( I am really goo damn anger at you ...)
vs. HOSTILE behavior-destroys a relationship: ... You dumb ass, didn't your mother teach you to report to work on time, etc. etc. Why, didn't you do such and such.... Normal people should do such and such without I have to tell you.
If someone has a habit of saying, "Why, don't you do such and such..." we all understand this to mean "I want you" to do such and such. There seems to be some kind of a taboo in our culture against people saying straight up, that we want.
On the use of the word YOU:
...the use of the word "you" is assertive when a person is acting in the role of boss, parent, or leader, for example, a law enforcer, a teacher, the chair of a meeting. For example, “YOU are expected to be recognized by the Chair before speaking at our meetings.” "You are expected to" (follow the rules, etc) , then every time the other person comes up with excuses, sob stories, etc, repeating this phase again and again ("You are expected to" (aka using the broken record shows the other person that you are not afraid to stand your ground and they need for them to rethink their poor behavior.
When someone asks you with a “WHY not? The assertive answer is not answering.
But remember being skeptically silent is assertive. Meaning, if I try to get in the last word.. will I get punched in the nose or some other bad result.
Speaking up in a group to speak is assertive because one is taking the "psychological space" of the whole group.
Hostile behavior: A person uses sarcasm and intimidation to get what they want. One may get what they want, but destroys the relationship afterwards.
It is easy to give up the benefits of hostile behavior when we value ourself enough to avoid getting agitated over minor issues and when I am imperfect and incorrect.
Non-assertive behavior: (shy behavior) doing nothing about unpleasant situations and simply try to ignore ones feelings and desires. While it may prevent conflicts with others, one probably will wind up feeling helpless, exploited, angry, and disappointed with one’s self.
For example, “I am sorry to bother you.” This is an example, of how being NICE sucks us into a non-assertive down-hill fall. vs. “I want to talk to you.” “ I need your help or I need or want to talk to you.”
or "It was nice talking to you." (when we didn't enjoy talking to someone).
Basic Assertive Rights:
The right to act in ways that promote my dignity and self-respect as long as others’ rights are not violated in the process.
The right to be treated with respect.
The right to say no and not feel guilty.
The right to experience and express feelings.
The right to take time to slow down and think.
The right to change my mind.
The right to ask for what I want.
The right to do less than I are humanly capable of doing.
The right to ask for information.
The right to make mistakes.
The right to feel good about myself.
Must I always assert my rights?
No, I am always free to choose not to assert myself, assuming that I am also willing to take the responsibility for whatever consequences may then occur.
Source: The Assertive Option by Patricia Jakubowski and Arthur J. Lange
and NO TRESPASSING by Barker and Barker.
(0)
(0)
SGT John Ball
I never had to beg an ate up troop to be in the proper uniform. Because, they knew an epic smoking was coming their way if they wanted to argue with me about being in the prescribed uniform. If that was my troop rest assured he/she would have been low crawling to their barracks room to get it. But, that's just me and the way I was taught.
(2)
(0)
(1)
(0)
CPO Michael Burns
Capt Michael Wilford lol WRONG. Marine’s “own amphibious” forces are what, exactly? You go nowhere without an LHA/LHD. Don’t have our own ground forces? ROFL Marines WISH they could hold a candle to Navy SEALS. Get over yourself. You’re not that impressive, except to civilians.
(0)
(0)
91
91
0
Lot of great responses here. If you are writing a white paper you will have to define your terms. Respect and discipline have very different meanings and they tend to differ between junior and senior enlisted ranks and even among officers and branch. Further each can be different in tactical or garrison environment.
Anecdotally, I have interacted with units who "look" undisciplined, but are extremely respectful and tactically proficient and others who walk the walk and salute the salute, but are tactically and technically garbage.
Is it a case of whole units not being disciplined/respectful or individual Soldiers not being disciplined/respectful? If it is a unit issue, you can't really blame the individuals because there is no expectation and accountability for respect and discipline. If it is a Soldier issue, one-off cases, then is could be a leader issue.
Disrespect and poor discipline thrive in environments where there is no accountability, so if we have a discipline and respect issue in the Army, it is simply because we have a leader problem.
I have heard senior leaders complain about discipline issues in their units, but when asked how many company grade ART15s they recommend, I get blank stares and excuses of not wanting to ruin a Soldiers' career. You can only yell at a rock so many times, it is our job as NCOs to enforce the standard, but sometimes it just easier to get stuff done if you cut them some "slack". The downside is slack starts becoming a culture.
Anecdotally, I have interacted with units who "look" undisciplined, but are extremely respectful and tactically proficient and others who walk the walk and salute the salute, but are tactically and technically garbage.
Is it a case of whole units not being disciplined/respectful or individual Soldiers not being disciplined/respectful? If it is a unit issue, you can't really blame the individuals because there is no expectation and accountability for respect and discipline. If it is a Soldier issue, one-off cases, then is could be a leader issue.
Disrespect and poor discipline thrive in environments where there is no accountability, so if we have a discipline and respect issue in the Army, it is simply because we have a leader problem.
I have heard senior leaders complain about discipline issues in their units, but when asked how many company grade ART15s they recommend, I get blank stares and excuses of not wanting to ruin a Soldiers' career. You can only yell at a rock so many times, it is our job as NCOs to enforce the standard, but sometimes it just easier to get stuff done if you cut them some "slack". The downside is slack starts becoming a culture.
(91)
(0)
1SG Clifford Barnes
SFC James Welch l totally agree and I have had to raise a few 2nd LT’s in my career.
(0)
(0)
SGT Steve Talley
The quality of people in our military is direct reflection of our criminal Govt destroying the foundations of our military and country and its been going on for decades.
(0)
(0)
CSM William Everroad
SGT Steve Talley - I disagree. The quality of our leaders in the military is a reflection of our ability to train and develop leaders. If we have garbage leaders, it is because people like us allow it.
You would have to specifically highlight why you think the administration or "government" has some sort of influence in how we train our leaders to mentor our Soldiers.
You would have to specifically highlight why you think the administration or "government" has some sort of influence in how we train our leaders to mentor our Soldiers.
(0)
(0)
32
32
0
Capt Michael Wilford great question, but I'd like to ask you one as well. Is the experience you described from your late 1990s-early 2000s service, or are you referring to more recent times?
I ask because I have always felt that part of this discipline decline perception is almost universal for each generation that serves, like the "when was "old school" question. I went in in 1977, shortly after the start of the all volunteer Army. There was constant chatter about lowering of standards, lack of discipline, softer soldiers who demand to know "why", etc. Then, around the end of the 1980s the Army changed basic training, and THAT became the "soft, undisciplined" Army and the mid 70s became old school. By the late 1990s, THEY became the soft group. And so on. So when I got out in 1999, the feeling was that soldiers coming in were less disciplined, less fit and more questioning than ever. And the possible causes put forth were the same as today. Maybe it's drill sergeants not being demanding enough, maybe it's PT not being a priority anymore, etc.
Yet today, on RP, I read threads about how we need to go back to the old school discipline and fitness regimes of the 1980s and 90s! Go figure. So in a way I wonder if things are really as bad as it seems. The bad soldier always sticks out, catches ones attention, and makes an impression that is remembered. But consider what you remember more-- one soldier you see walk by an officer without saluting and talking back when stopped, or the 10 or 20 you walk by who salute and you walk on by with little thought.
I have no clue what it is like in units today. But I am confident that the cause remains the same. As they say, "your standards are what you allow to occur around you". So if troops are often out of shape and disrespectful, that is a problem with the competence of the company grade officers and NCOs of the unit, not the privates. Privates arent the ones setting the standards (or shouldnt be). Yet on these types of message boards, it is usually phrased like "the Army" lowered its standards, or "the Army" coddles troops, but no one seems to say "my platoon sergeant" or "my platoon leader" or god forbid, "I" may be part of the problem. I doubt the Chief of Staff of the Army decides how to handle an individual disrespectful private.
A subordinate wanting to know the "why" behind an order or mission isnt in itself disrespectful. Hell, decades ago the Army added the Commanders Intent (the why) as part of the OPORD format. Because if subordinates know why they are doing something, it allows them to react betterif conditions change. The classic example was if the mission is to take hill 123 in order to destroy the enemy, and as you approach you see they are in the valley instead of on the hill, you know to still attack the enemy vs seizing an empty hill. So we.have been training our people to ask why for years.
Anyway, I just wonder how bad things really are compared to the past. I spent my time in Airborne units, and there were always other units less in shape and less disciplined than we were. So I suspect that the overall impression may be a selection bias that makes people remember the negative incidents more than the positive. But I'm just guessing.
I ask because I have always felt that part of this discipline decline perception is almost universal for each generation that serves, like the "when was "old school" question. I went in in 1977, shortly after the start of the all volunteer Army. There was constant chatter about lowering of standards, lack of discipline, softer soldiers who demand to know "why", etc. Then, around the end of the 1980s the Army changed basic training, and THAT became the "soft, undisciplined" Army and the mid 70s became old school. By the late 1990s, THEY became the soft group. And so on. So when I got out in 1999, the feeling was that soldiers coming in were less disciplined, less fit and more questioning than ever. And the possible causes put forth were the same as today. Maybe it's drill sergeants not being demanding enough, maybe it's PT not being a priority anymore, etc.
Yet today, on RP, I read threads about how we need to go back to the old school discipline and fitness regimes of the 1980s and 90s! Go figure. So in a way I wonder if things are really as bad as it seems. The bad soldier always sticks out, catches ones attention, and makes an impression that is remembered. But consider what you remember more-- one soldier you see walk by an officer without saluting and talking back when stopped, or the 10 or 20 you walk by who salute and you walk on by with little thought.
I have no clue what it is like in units today. But I am confident that the cause remains the same. As they say, "your standards are what you allow to occur around you". So if troops are often out of shape and disrespectful, that is a problem with the competence of the company grade officers and NCOs of the unit, not the privates. Privates arent the ones setting the standards (or shouldnt be). Yet on these types of message boards, it is usually phrased like "the Army" lowered its standards, or "the Army" coddles troops, but no one seems to say "my platoon sergeant" or "my platoon leader" or god forbid, "I" may be part of the problem. I doubt the Chief of Staff of the Army decides how to handle an individual disrespectful private.
A subordinate wanting to know the "why" behind an order or mission isnt in itself disrespectful. Hell, decades ago the Army added the Commanders Intent (the why) as part of the OPORD format. Because if subordinates know why they are doing something, it allows them to react betterif conditions change. The classic example was if the mission is to take hill 123 in order to destroy the enemy, and as you approach you see they are in the valley instead of on the hill, you know to still attack the enemy vs seizing an empty hill. So we.have been training our people to ask why for years.
Anyway, I just wonder how bad things really are compared to the past. I spent my time in Airborne units, and there were always other units less in shape and less disciplined than we were. So I suspect that the overall impression may be a selection bias that makes people remember the negative incidents more than the positive. But I'm just guessing.
(32)
(0)
Capt Michael Wilford
Thank you, sir, great question. My experience was from late 1990s to mid 2000s. So, in perspective, I would have to say that it was a generational thing and if I am being equitable, I would say that it it is only getting worse. I do remember the "old salts" when I was a boot Marine waxing on about the Old Corps and when I became the old salt, I did the same thing. What I am observing, even now as a VA doctor, is some misplaced sense of entitlement from this millennial generation of troops, not just Army. I am all for explaining the why, if mission parameters and time allow, but to explain it just because, no. There is still such a thing as good order and discipline and it is the civilian who must meet the standard and adjust to the military, not the military to the civilian hoping to become Soldier, Sailor, Airman, Marine, or Coast Guard.
(5)
(0)
PO3 Jake Lucid
I applaud your response sir. This is quite well thought out and well meaning and intentioned. And to the point....accurate
(0)
(0)
SGT Carl Watson
I felt that the answer was in the last and possibly first book by the commanding general in Iraq-Afghanistan, Schwarzkopf. He wrote how doing WWII 48% of the country's population was involved; 14% were involved in Vietnam while less than 2% were and are involved in the last two wars. More patriotic Americans do not want to join the Army or other branches especially what has occurred in the Middle East. There are more previous gangsters and supremist in the present Army. The Army and some other branches are hard up to get descent males and too many rapes are being swept under the military carpet. The Air Force and Navy struggle to keep pilots. Civilian pay is much more affordable. Too many bases are infected with mole or poison water. The information is getting out to the public and the news has shown how soldiers feel in the present.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google