Posted on Dec 19, 2013
You Decide: Leave a Platoon Sergeant in Position if they fail an Army Standard?
47.7K
181
130
9
9
0
You're the CSM and you have a Platoon Sergeant that has just failed either the Army Physical Fitness Test or the Army Body Composition Program........<div><br></div><div>Leave him in position or remove him?</div><div><br></div><div>Defend your answer.</div>
Edited 12 y ago
Posted 12 y ago
Responses: 61
Why is this even a question to be entertained? Remember that one time when your high speed squad leader took your job because your fat? ....... Yea that's today!!!!! Hahaha
(2)
(0)
CSM Maynard,
The 1SG counsels the PS. In it he sets the the plan to rectify the problem. 1SG allots a proper/fair amount of time to rectify the problem, monitors progress, provides motivation and guidance. When the time is up you follow through on the counseling and remove the PS if the standard has not been met. We need to hold leaders to the standard.
Basically you hold the PS to the same standard as you would any other NCO, but you don't hang him out to dry. Every soldier may falter or fall at some point, we pick each other up and drive on with the goal of enabling success.
The 1SG counsels the PS. In it he sets the the plan to rectify the problem. 1SG allots a proper/fair amount of time to rectify the problem, monitors progress, provides motivation and guidance. When the time is up you follow through on the counseling and remove the PS if the standard has not been met. We need to hold leaders to the standard.
Basically you hold the PS to the same standard as you would any other NCO, but you don't hang him out to dry. Every soldier may falter or fall at some point, we pick each other up and drive on with the goal of enabling success.
(2)
(0)
CSM Mike Maynard
SSG Taylor,
You describe a scenario above that is reactive in nature. We, as leaders, need to be pro-active.
Why would't you include in your initial counseling to the PSG that there is an expectation to meet standards? And let them know that if they choose not to meet the standard, they will be removed and not considered for future leadership positions until they meet standard.
Seems irresponsible to wait to address failing to meet a standard after the fact.
You describe a scenario above that is reactive in nature. We, as leaders, need to be pro-active.
Why would't you include in your initial counseling to the PSG that there is an expectation to meet standards? And let them know that if they choose not to meet the standard, they will be removed and not considered for future leadership positions until they meet standard.
Seems irresponsible to wait to address failing to meet a standard after the fact.
(0)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
I had imagined in this scenario the PSG had already been initially counseled. Upon arrival under me all soldiers get my expectations in their initial counseling, and NCOs get to sit with me and we do their initial counseling and 2166-8-1.
(1)
(0)
Most people would want to crucify this PSG, but how often do you see leaders fail at the range? What's the corse of action on an any soldiers unqualified at the range? Send them through until they qualify. I've seen so many officers who couldn't qualify on an m16 to save their life so they get moved to the s3 shop and qualify with a pistol. In any case, they should be given remedial training and tested a second time. If the army punished every soldier to the full extent when they fail a task, this would be a very small army.
(2)
(0)
CSM Mike Maynard
SSG Evans, we're not talking about punishing every Soldier/NCO for failing to meet an Army standard.
We're talking about whether an PSG deserves or needs to be in a Leadership Position if they can't meet an Army standard.
Are we really hurting that bad for quality NCOs that we can't even expect all of our PSGs to "pass" an APFT and their ABCP and qualify at the range?
If that's the case, maybe we need to be a smaller Army.
(2)
(0)
1LT (Join to see)
SFC (Join to see) Completely agree. We have an unhealthy myopia on PT, while letting other soldier skills slide (qualifications, MOS skills, etc). If you can't shoot or communicate, I don't really care if you can move.
(0)
(0)
A leader should meet the standards period, but I see people talking about a double standard, there is a regulation 600–9 in place for a reason, if a Soldier at any rank or position (excluding Command, CSM or 1SG) fails to meet the standard  they should be placed on the program and given six months to get right. We cannot pick and choose what part of the regs we will obey by.  Nowhere does it state that you cannot hold a platoon sergeant position while on the program, it's a tough right to swallow but if the PSG fails to conform, trust me, s/he will be shown the door.
Here is an excerpt from AR 600-9 (3-6):
(1) Have a DA Form 268 placed on their record to suspend favorable personnel actions. Some of the ramifications
of the flagging action include:
(a) Are nonpromotable (to the extent such nonpromotion is permitted by law).
(b) Will not be assigned to command, command sergeant major, or first sergeant positions.Â
(2)
(0)
CSM Mike Maynard
Great research 1SG and this excerpt shows what the Army's expectation is - that leaders meet standards.
(0)
(0)
I would remove him but I would be very discreet about it. I would do it for this reason. While I was deployed in Iraq, as a Squad Leader, we had another squad leader that was out of shape and had back issues. Because he was a good guy they let me be a squad leader. Being a good guy has nothing to do with job performance, or I haven't seen it when I rate an NCO on an NCOER. While on a patrol his back went out and all of sudden the mission had to stop and we had to recover him and take him back. He should have never been out there. If we were in contact and his back went out he would have created a bad situation. If you can't perform your duties or are physically able to pass an APFT you need to do the right thing and step aside.Â
(2)
(0)
He must be removed from that position ASAP. If he is not and his Soldiers find out that he has failed one or both some may lose respect for him as a Senior NCOS, and the others may think it is ok for them to do the same. Also if his Soldiers see this standard being broken and nothing coming of it then they may push the limits on other standers.Â
I know if I was a squad leader in a platoon where the PLT SGT fails one of thoughts I would have a hard time taking orders from him because I expect my Soldiers to meet these standers and the PLT SGT is supposed to set the slandered for his Platoon.Â
(2)
(0)
I'd remove him/her from their position and place someone who can fill that position and maintain/exceed standards. Being in any green tab position - you're a mentor/role model; how can I expect that person to be such if they can't meet all the requirements/standards expected of them? Soldiers will see him/her as a failure and then view the higher CoC as failures for not doing anything about it - which could result in junior Soldiers thinking it's ok if you don't meet the Army standards (physical/academic/tactical/etc..) because they will have the attitude that the CoC won't do anything about it. Just my .02
(2)
(0)
I speak from a position of not knowing the Army Regs. That said my opinion is: Determine the reason of failure first. Can it be readily resolved? If the answer is yes, it can be resolved, leave him/her in position pending review (can he/she pass if retested?) If they pass, leave things alone but make a notation in the training file. If no, remove from position for cause and notate accordingly. Why intentionally screw an otherwise good soldier's career.
When I was on AD 40 years ago we had an E-6 who could not pass the run. He was in great shape too. He also exceeded weight standards at 6'1" and 260lbs. The man was solid as a rock with out any fat. His problem was he was shot after 200 meters. He had trouble making the mile and flunked it. His review went up the flag pole and a final review left him in place based on his other physical attributes. None of us are built identical. We all have out own pluses and minuses. Unfortunately, the fitness and composition program is NOT a one size fits all situation. I doubt the O-6 and above in most cases could pass.
When I was on AD 40 years ago we had an E-6 who could not pass the run. He was in great shape too. He also exceeded weight standards at 6'1" and 260lbs. The man was solid as a rock with out any fat. His problem was he was shot after 200 meters. He had trouble making the mile and flunked it. His review went up the flag pole and a final review left him in place based on his other physical attributes. None of us are built identical. We all have out own pluses and minuses. Unfortunately, the fitness and composition program is NOT a one size fits all situation. I doubt the O-6 and above in most cases could pass.
(1)
(0)
CSM, in my personal opinion yes they should be removed. This leaders need to have military presence and meet the APFT, HT and WT standards like everyone else. Do we keep the lower enlisted if they fail? Do we flag them immediately and enroll them in the appropriate programs in accordance AR 600-9? These regulations are made for everyone and there should be no exceptions made.
(1)
(0)
No question, they have to be removed. There is no difference between them or any other Soldier who cannot maintain the standard. Sorry there is a HUGE difference we are leaders and as leaders we are supposed to lead. WE are the STANDARD BEARERS and that responsibility is HUGE. Sometimes people lose sight of that and assume that they are safe because of their position or rank.
Standards are standards, AR 600-9 doesn't have a special Fat kid section for PSG and above, a fat kid is a fat kid. The Army doesn't have a Special Section in FM 3-21.20 for PSG only different age groups. Failures are failures. Pass or fail
Live the standard, BE THE STANDARD. I am an old guy, I am not impressive I have a P2 profile so I can't do Pushups, but I get as close to 100 an each event I can do as possible. I feel that it is the only way I can motivate my guys to do the same. Not saying that I expect 300's from them I just want them to pass. I am just saying that I believe that I have to BE the example to SET the example at least in all the ways I can. If I can't well, then I guess I understand getting fired, and I refuse to get fired for something like that.
Standards are standards, AR 600-9 doesn't have a special Fat kid section for PSG and above, a fat kid is a fat kid. The Army doesn't have a Special Section in FM 3-21.20 for PSG only different age groups. Failures are failures. Pass or fail
Live the standard, BE THE STANDARD. I am an old guy, I am not impressive I have a P2 profile so I can't do Pushups, but I get as close to 100 an each event I can do as possible. I feel that it is the only way I can motivate my guys to do the same. Not saying that I expect 300's from them I just want them to pass. I am just saying that I believe that I have to BE the example to SET the example at least in all the ways I can. If I can't well, then I guess I understand getting fired, and I refuse to get fired for something like that.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next

APFT
Platoon Sergeant
ABCP
