In my unit, we are required to wear reflective belts in PTs. I forgot to wear mine this morning. I was carpooling with my battle buddy, and when I realized my mistake (we were 45 seconds from the barracks) he didn't want to turn around because we were "cutting it too close." My response was "Roger, I'd rather deal with an ass chewing for being out of uniform than both of us get in trouble for being late."
I didn't get an ass-chewing, just a simple question from my squad leader (also a sergeant), "Where's your PT belt?" I told her that I had forgotten it in the barracks, and she smiled and shook her head. The PT instructor did not adhere to what was on the schedule (which I publish), and during the AAR I brought this up as an "Improve." My squad leader made the call to change what I had planned because "We aren't in good enough shape to do 60:120s." As another improve, my squad leader's husband (a Specialist) submitted that "Next time we should make sure everybody brings their gear." Being the only D-bag that his statement applied to, I shook my head and said "This motherf**ker."
Instead of going to chow at 1200 like I normally do, I was called into the office of another squad leader (a staff sergeant) so that she could counsel me in comfort. I stood at parade rest (in front of the SSG) while she spun back and forth in her rolling chair reading what she had written on my 4856.
Of note in my counseling was that I should have returned to the barracks (which was significantly farther than normal today) to get my PT belt. It then went on to say that it didn't matter what her husband said, what context he said it in, or the audience he said it in front of... the bottom line is that I'm not allowed to refer to soldiers as "motherf**kers."
Corrective training for my offenses is easy enough, just have to hand-write the NCO creed and type up a quick 1,000 word essay on what it means to live the Army values as an NCO.
Like I said at the beginning, I was wrong. What I am upset about is the selective enforcement of standards in my organization. If I had said anything to any of the other soldiers for putting me on blast, this would have been a non-issue. She gets overly upset when her husband gets corrected or referred to in a negative manner, and goes on an emotional rampage until she gets some resolution.
Can her actions in regards to her husband be considered a conflict of interest? Please advise.
1. Random NCO is my squad leader. She's not promotable, but she has me by TIG and we're short on SSGs. 2. She started dating the guy last year, when he was a PFC... Suffice it to say that certain key leaders (who have long PCSed) looked away in hopes it would never become an issue. 3. I've done all my corrective training except hand write the NCO creed. That one is of particular interest to me bc every time she's recited it she's skipped entire lines. 4. This part of the backbone needs a chiropractor badly.
Wheeler, I'm not sure if this particular incident shows a conflict of interest. She can back up the counseling by saying she counseled you because you called a Soldier a mf'er, I don’t think it matters that she is married to him. It does sound like a jacked-up situation though.
Is the SSG actually part of the SPC’s chain of command (she shouldn’t be), or do all of you just work at the same clinic? Either way, I assume you work at the main clinic on Hohenfels and it’s a small place. IMO they should have moved one of them once they got married. Also, not sure if you care, but you realize that pretty much anyone at Hohenfels who reads this thread will know who you are and who you are talking about, right?
An interesting situation. I would have chosen a different route. For calling the Soldier and M*****F***er, I believe a verbal warning would have sufficed. As far as the gear, I think we all have forgotten our PT belt a time or two. For someone to make a comment about it in a derogatory manner, I think could and should have been interpreted by the NCOIC conducting the AAR and verbally squashed.
The fact of the matter is that nobody remembers how something got started, they only remember how it finished. Had you said nothing at all, it may have ended differently, but unfortunately that is the last thing remembered and the other stuff got thrown in for general purpose.
I strongly agree with counseling a Soldier, but there are things that warrant a verbal and there are things that must be annotated on paper. This is a situation I believe could and should have been verbally squashed.
Connect with more Leader tools from me at http://leadertank.com/. You can also get both my #1 books Leadership Solved (The 10 Rules of LEADERSHIP) and the motivational/inspirational Daily Fuel for LIFE and LEADERSHIP.