Exactly, a contract which says specifically the job that the person will do. A person does not sign for the needs of the Army.
I dont know why the Army would want someone who obv. doesnt want to do this, even moderatley near potential recruits. It sounds like a bad recipe for disaster.
My contract guaranteed me a training of choice... and they fullfilled their obligation they trained me well to do an MOS that I never even came close to doing... not that I minded, I have a pretty bright future ahead of me...
As to the people that do not want to do the DS or Rec duty they need to remember the parts of the Soldier's Creed called the Warrior Ethos...
"I will always place the mission first" and "I will never quit"
It is time to remember that what we do every day is larger and more important than ones comfort or desires... Soldiers will always complain and that is our right but at a certain point, once the objections have been heard and the decision made, it is time to be the professional and mature person you have been trained to be and drive on.
Special duty assignments are just as much a part of being a Soldier as training exercises, deployments. etc. not everyone loves those things either but what would you say to a troop that wouldn't accept the reality of the matter and kept trying to shirk their duties?
To defend this type of action is just beyond my ability to understand.
Posts: 126 | Location: University of Iowa | Registered: 30 April 2007
Im my opinion, the Army now is just a buisness like any other. In order to attract and keep employees, the Army offers large amounts of bonuses and perks such as choice of duty station of choice of training. This is the same thing as a 401k or profit sharing or a corprate apartment that other companies will do.
I think that in order to keep its employees, the Army should not force duty (deployments are an exception) on those who are willing to ruin their career to get out of it. The original poster could do more for the Army by staying where he/she is than talking negativley to potential recruits.
Think about that. Does the Army really want to put someone in that position? Someone who is willing to do almost anything to get out of her assignment and they want him/her to talk to recruits? Thats really dumb. Thats really bad pr for the Army.
Im offering my advice to the original poster: You cant stay a recruiter if you dont meet your numbers.
Are you shirking your duty? Depends on your perception. Did you enlist for "honorable" reasons? Or did you enlist for the secure job benefits, healthcare, and retirements benefits?
Even if the other posters hate to admit it, the majority of soldiers are in the Army for the tangible benefits and if one of the reasons the original poster joined is he/she likes that they are doing, then they should do what it takes to remain doing it.
Originally posted by whyme: I think that in order to keep its employees, the Army should not force duty (deployments are an exception) on those who are willing to ruin their career to get out of it. The original poster could do more for the Army by staying where he/she is than talking negativley to potential recruits.
Some Soldiers, believe it or not, need to be told what to do and when. Some even thrive in this situation. The original poster may LOVE recruiting duty once placed in the position.
And I may enjoy walking on hot coals but Im not going to start doing it in order to find out.
However, I do agree with your comment about some soldiers needing more guidance than others. I do not believe Karen fits in that category. She has been deployed twice and has been given the nod to be a recruiter.
According to the other posters, that means the Army thinks she is reliable, trustworthy and dependable. Im guessing she is at least an E6.
Now, that doesnt sound like someone who needs to be told what to do every day and how to do it, so we CANNOT start assuming things about her character. All we have are the facts and unless she posts something else, we shouldnt conclude she is a bad soldier. We also cannot let our own personal prejudices cloud what should be an objectional discussion.
Why wouldn't this NCO fit the "needs to be told what to do" category? She's openly admitted she is willing to ruin her career to get out of recruiting duty! It not a matter of if we should or shouldn't assume things about her character, she's made her type of character perfectly clear just by the title of the post. The "Army" isn't some all knowing entity that selects this Soldier and that Soldier based on reliability, or trustworthiness (if that's even a word) to do a job. In the grand scheme it's a number system, this Soldier is such and such rank, is female or male, has this much time in service/grade, so on and so forth. If it were based on a Soldiers reliability, and trustworthiness there would be no need for background checks and what not. As far as the conclusion that she is a bad Soldier, I will say this, it doesn't matter how awesome and hardworking a Soldier used to be, it's about the kind of Soldier they are now. You could win the Medal of Honor, but if you're never on time to formation, or get a DUI, or slap the commander, etc, slowly but surely the fact that you at one point in time went above and beyond the call of duty fades away, and you would have to be dealt with accordingly. In closing, I will not forget NOR WILL I ALLOW MY COMRADES TO FORGET, that we are professionals, Noncommissioned Officers, leaders!!!
Originally posted by whyme: Im offering my advice to the original poster: You cant stay a recruiter if you dont meet your numbers.
whyme, have you been a detailed recruiter before or are you basing this "advise" off of some regulation? If so, please share your prior recruiting experience or provide the appropriate regulation that states one cannot stay a recruiter if one does not make their numbers. If you have prior recruiting experience, you would surely know that not ALL recruiters meet their monthly mission, but even the worst recruiter will stumble upon a contract every now and then--the Army knows this and places its mission based on this knowledge. Good Soldiers will do their utmost to accomplish a mission. Virtually every post you have made is derogatory in nature and argues against the Army and its way of conducting operations. If you are so against so many things about the Army, why exactly are in and why don't you just ETS?
Posts: 126 | Location: Fort Sill (FORSCOM) | Registered: 08 January 2008
Im just argueing for the person and not the Army. If it weren't for the person, then there would be no Army.
If by derogatory, you mean I stand up for individual rights, then yes I admit I have made derogatory comments.
If you think people who speak up for themselves need to ETS, then tomorrow then will be a mass exodus towards the civilain market.
I enjoy what I do in the Army and I tactfully represent my ideas and opinions. Not once have I said anything specifically offensive to the Army, anyone in the forum or this country.
The original poster asked a question and she received personal and biased responses. If someone could have made a logical arguement, without resorting to emotional appeals, then this thread would have been put to rest by now.
Originally posted by whyme: Im just argueing for the person and not the Army. If it weren't for the person, then there would be no Army.
If by derogatory, you mean I stand up for individual rights, then yes I admit I have made derogatory comments.
If you think people who speak up for themselves need to ETS, then tomorrow then will be a mass exodus towards the civilain market.
I enjoy what I do in the Army and I tactfully represent my ideas and opinions. Not once have I said anything specifically offensive to the Army, anyone in the forum or this country.
The original poster asked a question and she received personal and biased responses. If someone could have made a logical arguement, without resorting to emotional appeals, then this thread would have been put to rest by now.
Very well then...the original post asked how she can get out of recruiting duty, even at the expense of her career, correct? Below there is a list of things she can do.
1. Do drugs 2. Assault a commissioned officer 3. Assault a senior Noncommissioned Officer 4. Go AWOL 5. Disobey any and all lawful and/or direct orders.
Those are just a few things she could try, and I'm more than positive recruiting duty will be the least of her concerns afterward. So there you have it, her question has been answered, I didn't defend the Army nor did I attack the Soldier with a bias opinion. Let's see what happens.
I have had many private messages from people telly me that it is not wise to use my real name which I have not. Karen is my middle name and Watkins is my former last name. I have also received a lot of hate mail also this is why I feel that I must post a reply. I am not a sh!t bag NCO. I am an E-6(P) with a little over 9 years in the Army. I love my job and I love taking care of Soldiers (now, now, I dont need ten thousand replies telling me if I love my job then when my job changes to a recruiter I will love that too). I do NOT want to be a recruiter becasue I feel that I can better serve the Army as NOT a recruiter. I have came to terms with the fact that I will have to do it even if I don't want too. I can not think of a way to get out of recruiter duty with out ruining my life! I am not going to get knocked up or get a DUI. It is just not worth it. Yeah you might think that I am disgruntled becasue I am. I have yet to meet a single former recruiter that didn't tell me that if they could of got out of it they wouldn't have. I have decided to ETS and pursue an education as a civilian once my contract expires in 2011. No I am not quitting but this has really opened my eyes to a reality that has always been there but I had never noticed becasue I loved what I did. That I want to call all the shots in my life and do what I feel is right for me and only me.
Are you shirking your duty? Depends on your perception. Did you enlist for "honorable" reasons? Or did you enlist for the secure job benefits, healthcare, and retirements benefits? orginally posted by "whyme"
I joined the Army when I was 17 years old. I am not sure what I was thinking. As I got older I realized how good the benefits were but I do not think I joined the Army for the benefits I was a kid that did not want to go to college and I had a recruiter that really sold the Army to me. Was it all that he said it would be? Hell no but I have had a pretty good time while I have been in.
ArmyStudyGuide Community 
