Posted on Sep 17, 2020
Combat vet fights separation board in case that traces back to the Bin Laden raid
3.02K
32
9
5
5
0
SSG
Responses: 5
11
11
0
For those of you who this story sounds confusing, let me explain what the article doesn’t. This Soldier was separated under QMP for receiving a negative evaluation as a SSG. His DD214 RE code should have been a “4” meaning never allowed on AD again. But someone at transition messed up and made it a 1 because with QMP you just receive a new ETS date from HRC. A new transition clerk would see that no flags and just an ETS, so they must be good. The recruiter brought him back in and someone took it upon themselves to do some detective work and say the Soldier should have never been allowed back in.
This article really highlights the power and influence Commanders have. The Article 15 he received was pretty ridiculous, but the commander at some level pushed for that. The QMP board doesn’t usually separate a Soldier for one negative NCOER alone and when there are other positive evaluations and letters from commanders in the packet, the Soldier is usually retained. Finally, it’s a commander who is pushing for this fraudulent enlistment. There is no data system that goes through old DD214s checking to see if they’re correct. A Career Counselor was going through his service documents as they are required to calculate the Soldiers time in service and noticed this mistake. Whether or not they should have brought it to the command is a bit more of an ethical dilemma. But that Career Counselor doesn’t have the ability or the authority to initiate a separation for fraudulent enlistment. That is another commander who is pushing the his decision.
Now, we don’t know whether he has just had a string of bad commanders who are headhunters, or if he’s just a marginal Soldier who the command feels shouldn’t remain in the Army. QMP boards don’t know that either. This is why Command recommendation is so important to QMP recommendations, just how much power they have to create healthy or toxic command climates.
This article really highlights the power and influence Commanders have. The Article 15 he received was pretty ridiculous, but the commander at some level pushed for that. The QMP board doesn’t usually separate a Soldier for one negative NCOER alone and when there are other positive evaluations and letters from commanders in the packet, the Soldier is usually retained. Finally, it’s a commander who is pushing for this fraudulent enlistment. There is no data system that goes through old DD214s checking to see if they’re correct. A Career Counselor was going through his service documents as they are required to calculate the Soldiers time in service and noticed this mistake. Whether or not they should have brought it to the command is a bit more of an ethical dilemma. But that Career Counselor doesn’t have the ability or the authority to initiate a separation for fraudulent enlistment. That is another commander who is pushing the his decision.
Now, we don’t know whether he has just had a string of bad commanders who are headhunters, or if he’s just a marginal Soldier who the command feels shouldn’t remain in the Army. QMP boards don’t know that either. This is why Command recommendation is so important to QMP recommendations, just how much power they have to create healthy or toxic command climates.
(11)
(0)
(3)
(0)
CPT Lawrence Cable
Have been in that Admin role myself, what are the chances that no one every sat down and explained to him the ramifications of the QMP separations? My experience says about 50/50. I have to agree, the Article 15 does seem petty and if one bad eval puts you out of the service these days, the Army is off the track.
His current unit seems happy with his performance, let him serve out his time. It probably shouldn't have been done in the first place, but it certainly isn't his fault that some clerk didn't code him correctly.
His current unit seems happy with his performance, let him serve out his time. It probably shouldn't have been done in the first place, but it certainly isn't his fault that some clerk didn't code him correctly.
(1)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
CPT Lawrence Cable unfortunately, QMP was reinstituted about a year after his Article 15. I’m sure they didn’t intend for the NCOER to get him separated, only to affect his promotion potential. Lots of people survive one bad evaluation, in fact I’ve never seen anyone separated for a bad evaluation unless it was connected to a DUI.
I absolutely think this guy will be retained by the separation board. I can’t imagine a bunch of senior leaders sitting on a separation board saying they’ll just kick this guy out three years from retirement just because of an erroneous number on a DD214
I absolutely think this guy will be retained by the separation board. I can’t imagine a bunch of senior leaders sitting on a separation board saying they’ll just kick this guy out three years from retirement just because of an erroneous number on a DD214
(0)
(0)
CPT Lawrence Cable
SFC (Join to see) - I certainly hope so, and you are more in tune with how the system works today.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
3
3
0
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google