I am in an aviation unit. There is a soldier in my unit that has failed his APFT test for 3 1/2 years. I was in his company and when they found out I was going to turn him in for being flagged, they transfered me to a different company. My old RNCO doesn't like me as much because I like to do most things by the book. Here is one more thing I would like to do by the book. I would like to know the publication and reference about getting him taken off flight status...
Geez, if you really want to ruin a guys career that has already been moved out of your everyday sight, then you really should do the legwork on your own.
Actually, since you were the one who was moved...maybe you should take a good long look at yourself and decide if its really that other guys fault.
Why are ya'll jumping on him, I mean, sure, he's a bit of a big meanie for sticking to the book, but that's all he's doing. Whyme, I've seen you tell guys who are looking to circumvent the regs to just "meet the standard and you won't have a problem" so why is he so bad about wanting to basically do the right thing. He was going hem him up for not meeting standard, they moved him so he couldn't do his job, and so now he's just trying to find the reg that says this is the way it should be.
While I agree he should look for it himself first, and like I said in the beginning, he's a bit of a prick for going so far out of his way to do it, shouldn't your barbs be better served to the soldier who hasn't passed an APFT in 3 1/2 years ?
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ Advice... Go upstairs, grab your big girl panties, and put them on....
Posts: 277 | Location: Fort Campbell, KY | Registered: 15 February 2008
Wife....only once have I suggested someone stick to the regs and just suck it up. That was when someone was complaining about not having enough time to shower and his 1sgt made him shower at the company. I thought he had no grounds for his arguement.
Now this time, Im suggesting the OP let bygons be bygons. He is not in his direct chain of command anymore nor is he even in the same unit. Besides, regardless of my past comments, I will always have the same attitude toward someone who wants to kick someone out but wont do the legwork on his or her own. Someone who'd rather go to an internet forum instead of researching the AR's and FM's himself. Its a guys career.....not someone who was wearing his beret wrong.
I agree with you that he's being a bit of a prick about it, but, there's a reason that you have to be within regs to be on flight status. It's not a career the guy is screwing with, it's just him being taken off flight status until he is within regs. The guy's chain is letting him skate by and not enforcing the standard which isn't in accordance to regulation. And if you noticed, he may not be in his direct line of sight, but they are still in the same unit, just different companies. Why not look at it this way, if he is taken off flight status, then that opens up a spot on that bird for a soldier who is within the regulation to get what I am sure is invaluable training.
Like, I said, he should do his own research if he is that hard up on it, and he is being a prick, but i just don't understand the whole jumping all over him for trying to square some guy away.
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ Advice... Go upstairs, grab your big girl panties, and put them on....
Posts: 277 | Location: Fort Campbell, KY | Registered: 15 February 2008
Ok, all valid points. Not that you are right or anything, just valid points.
Look, what gets me is this guy is saying he was going to turn this other guy in because he had failed his PT test for a few years. But instead of the soldier getting paperwork started for failing the PT test, the guy who was trying to enforce the regs was moved away from the soldier. Thats hard for me to believe. He says he is disliked because he does things "by the book". I dont believe for one second that anyone with a little bit of rank in that entire company is overlooking that soldiers skating and moving anyone who asks questions about it. Hes saying that he is the only one in the entire company that is trying to follow regs and he was moved because of it.
Hello everyone! Well I am new to this forum but reading through some of the responses and analyzing some of the criticism I noticed quite a few of you were quick to judge both parties. Now, like the dude above I will say that some have valid points and some have senseless remarks. But for the initial poster, have you, as a soldier, confronted the soldiers first line supervisor and notified him of the soldiers “malingering” (in a sense), have you constructed a plan of action for the soldier to improve his pt, have you implemented any of your verbal skills to sit the soldier down and possibly see why there is such a lack of motivation? In most situations I do not support paper trails on people nor do I support anyone ruining someone’s carrier simply because of a pt test. The failed pt test(s) might result from an injury that is unknown to you or something of that nature. Now, the only reason I say this is because we all know how incompetent some army doctors are. However, don’t mistake me for attempting to conjure up some excuses for this guy. Long story short, I think that before you make any rash decisions to put a fairly large ding in this guys carrier, you should take a step back and see if you have done everything you can as an NCO, a Professional, and as a mentor to fix this guy. If you have….then I would agree with you to burn this dude.
Posts: 18 | Location: FT. Hood | Registered: 17 July 2008
Thats how it should be i was flagged less than a month after surgery on my leg for being 1 % over on body fat, but i guess that motivated me to loose it.
Half days are a gift from god!
Posts: 196 | Location: germany | Registered: 25 April 2008
I'm got flagged from a field grade A.R.15 & I recently switched units. I heard that when you switch units your flag is not supposed to follow you. Is that true, & is there an A.R. that covers this issue?
The AR (army regulation) is AR 600-8-2: Suspension of Favorable Personnel Actions (Flags)
1–11. Categories of flags Suspension of favorable personnel actions is mandatory when an investigation (formal or informal) is initiated on a soldier by military or civilian authorities. Flags are classified into the two categories described below, depending upon the specific action or investigation. a. Non-transferable. The flag may not be transferred to another unit (except where consistent with paragraph 1–15). b. Transferable. The flag may be transferred to another unit.
Posts: 18 | Location: FT. Hood | Registered: 17 July 2008
ArmyStudyGuide Community 
