PDA

View Full Version : Taking Care of Field Grade Officers on TDY...NOT!!!



Sledge142
06-20-2008, 05:00 PM
I couldn't find what looked like an appropriate thread, but just had to get the word out on this one (and do some venting in the process)...

The Army sends its majors and LTCs to CGSC-ILE which is now 16 weeks long at Fort Lee...it does not PCS them , but rather sends them TDY...in order to save money the Army has the students eat at pseudo-DFACs monday through friday (they house them 10 miles away in a Holiday Inn that is not near anything)...okay, I get it, you are saving money...now here comes the really fun part...

The Army is about to pilot a program (how it got past the "that is a stupid idea" stage I will never know) that gives 70 army majors/LTCs 10 vans for the TDY...and will not reimburse them for rental cars or POV mileage (they now get 24 miles per day, which actually is less than the 40 they have to drive, but that is the best the Army can do)...what this means is...

-car pooling into work everyday for 16 weeks
-car pooling back and forth for meals every evening
-car pooling to the gym (no longer are you able to make last minute decisions on when to study, go to the gym, eat, sleep, etc.)
-oh, by the way, on the weekends when the DFAC is closed, you can not use the vans to go out on town
-also, the vans can not go out on town even during the week
-no rental cars authorized or POV mileage given

So big Army, offer all the bonuses you want to keep people in, but this idea is as worthless an idea I have ever heard of...can someone explain the Army values to me again?:(:confused::mad:

Schmedlap
06-20-2008, 08:08 PM
If money is an issue, then the free use of the rental vans seems like a reasonable amenity. If convenience is the issue, then they can dole out their own money to rent a vehicle for their personal use. I cannot count the number of times that, as a 1LT or CPT, I paid for a rental car and gas on my own dime because it was not authorized on my orders. I also recall a few occasions when I had to share vans with others - in the most recent case, 40 of us shared 3 vans, which required significant coordination between us.

There are two things that I do not understand about this thread...
1 - The reference to "trigger pullers". Are we talking about guys who fire their weapons or are we talking about CGSC-ILE students?
2 - The question referencing the Army Values seems to imply that there is a conflict here between the Army's actions and the Army Values. If so, what is the conflict? If that is not being implied, then what is the question asking?

Steve Blair
06-20-2008, 08:09 PM
It sounds like the Army's trying to prepare its folks for the realities of the working world outside the military with that arrangement.

patmc
06-20-2008, 09:51 PM
My unit currently has several NCOs at a TDY course at Fort Sill. The group was not authorized POV's, and carpooled together in a van. They stay at a hotel off-post, and all share the 1 van. Some of the GTC's do not work, so they have been sharing a GTC. They've been doing this for several months now. I do not envy them, as once they return, we will begin pre-deployment training.

The Army is "saving" money across the board, where it can. I would prefer they readjust future purchases and developments (FCS) in the budget, and focus on Soldiers currently serving, but that is above my pay grade. I also have a hard time believing Majors at Fort Lee are the Trigger Pullers. As a former S4, I can attest that Logisticians do great things, but not that.

Entropy
06-20-2008, 10:47 PM
So Ft. Lee doesn't have enough on-base billeting for CGSC? That sounds like the problem there.

FWIW, for TDY's in the AF one out of every five or so personnel gets an rental car authorized for communal use. It works out pretty well since there obviously aren't any of the government vehicle restrictions.

Ranger94
06-21-2008, 12:04 AM
....humm, and I bet the batteries don't work in the remote control either.

arty8
06-21-2008, 01:46 AM
You have got to be kidding me right? You mean to tell me that you have the opportunity to go to an army school, sleep in a bed, eat real food and you are complaining?

During my BNCOC course at Ft. Bragg in Febuary the heat went out in our WWII barracks and for the next eight weeks we learned to live without heat, just slept in our sleeping bags. Then the hot water heater died and we had to shower in the next building for the remaining seven weeks. Then an ice storm shut down post--including our mess hall--for three days and I had to buy food from the gas station in the nearby town, to this day I can't eat a lunchable.

I got back from Iraq a couple of months ago and all I have to say is count your blessings, your living conditions could be much, much worse.

RTK
06-21-2008, 09:58 PM
I'm going with arty here.

Officer professional education is far above the scale on the quality of life issues when compared to WLC, BNCOC, and ANCOC. It's fairly embarrassing.

So we don't make money off TDY anymore. I got it. As Arty says, there are worse things out there right now. Bring a car with you on TDY, write the milage off on next year's taxes. Majors and LTCs are far more capable of affording these incidentals when compared to the young E5 or E6 at WLC or BNCOC. They just aren't as vocal about it.

Sledge142
06-23-2008, 05:06 PM
...the "suck it up" mentality is completely incongruent with the realities of today...the "vanpooling" issue transcends convenience...it is about facilitating real education (not the death by powerpoint the Army usually calls education)...it is about treating young professionals as they should be treated...it is about a culture of taking care of your people...so what if you had no rental car when YOU went to school...I had to walk five miles through snow uphill to get to mine...

This thread is all about the Army's culture...comments about the remote batteries and such are indicative of a culture that has put the Army thousands of officers and enlisted men short...

And the person who asked if the CGSC-ILE students were trigger pullers...that also is a cultural norm that needs to be discarded...are not we an Army of one...have not the students done their time?...

This thread is very revealing and I will use it to educate the students concerning the "suck it up" mentality that still exists out there...

Ken White
06-23-2008, 05:11 PM
...This thread is very revealing and I will use it to educate the students concerning the "suck it up" mentality that still exists out there...I suspect that is probably a good plan on your part -- and they should bear it in mind for future consideration. :wry:

Steve Blair
06-23-2008, 05:18 PM
Take it as you will, but you'd also be advised to consider it training for what you'll encounter when you get out of the service. When your company expects you to move (without major compensation, if any), travel (with minimal reimbursement and no IG to turn to when your expense claims are delayed or disallowed), no cost of living adjustments or housing allowances...I could go on. And that's corporate culture. Complain as a young professional, and they fire you and find someone else who'll take the beating without complaining (and with the number of college graduates working in jobs they're over-educated for...the complaining young professional isn't hard to replace). Google-type jobs are the exception out here...not the rule.

Think of this as a transition program...although the Army might not have intended it as such.

RTK
06-23-2008, 05:38 PM
.
And the person who asked if the CGSC-ILE students were trigger pullers...that also is a cultural norm that needs to be discarded...are not we an Army of one...have not the students done their time?...


:mad:

No, we're Army Strong. The Army of One touchy feely PBS Kids crap went out the window over a year ago.

Some have done their time, a lot have not. When you look at the inside of the Pentagon with 60% of senior officers and NCOs in there who haven't been deployed during GWOT, I find it hard to be sympathetic. The CSA has done a great job peeling people out of their cubicles.

I have a hard time being supportive of a bunch of field grade officers in Virginia when we, as an Army, can't take care of the wounded warriors in our WTUs. They are the one's who have done their time and done very little bitching comparatively speaking.

Am I telling you to suck it up? You're damned right. You don't have it hard. Ask the E2 with two kids living onpost with a broken car on WIC deploying next month if he feels bad for the Major who has to vanpool with a LTC to his 16 week Army school.

As for the culture of "suck it up" - I take a hell of a lot of pride in being adaptive and completing the mission despite what is thrown at me. I'm pretty sure I could find a work-around on this one.

Use this as a case study. Throw it in the faces of students. Here's another idea - jump yourselves into your rental vans and hop on over to Walter Reed and tell the Soldiers in the wards how tough your life is. I'm sure they'll be pleased to give you their perspective as well.

Jedburgh
06-23-2008, 05:53 PM
...This thread is very revealing and I will use it to educate the students concerning the "suck it up" mentality that still exists out there...
It is revealing. I cannot add more than RTK has already stated pretty clearly. I am frankly disgusted by the behavioral tendencies indicated by the content of the post.

In that regard, I have moved this thread from the Trigger-Pullers forum, because it certainly does not belong there.

wm
06-23-2008, 05:55 PM
...the "suck it up" mentality is completely incongruent with the realities of today...the "vanpooling" issue transcends convenience...it is about facilitating real education (not the death by powerpoint the Army usually calls education)...it is about treating young professionals as they should be treated...it is about a culture of taking care of your people...so what if you had no rental car when YOU went to school...I had to walk five miles through snow uphill to get to mine...

This thread is all about the Army's culture...comments about the remote batteries and such are indicative of a culture that has put the Army thousands of officers and enlisted men short...

And the person who asked if the CGSC-ILE students were trigger pullers...that also is a cultural norm that needs to be discarded...are not we an Army of one...have not the students done their time?...

This thread is very revealing and I will use it to educate the students concerning the "suck it up" mentality that still exists out there...

I led troops in a very simple way--give the troops as much as you can and give yourself as little as you need to survive. A bunch of O-4s and -5s who may not be able to go out and find some TDY fun because they don't have rental cars and get put up in a hotel 10 miles from anywhere does not really register on my "pain-o-meter."
I'd be more interested in knowing whether the "saved" money is being used to better the lives of junior enlisted folks. I suspect from RTK's post (http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showpost.php?p=50596&postcount=12) that it isn't.

I expect leaders to suck it up if that's what it takes to make life better for their troops. I also expect leaders to suck it up if that's what those they are leading have to do. That is the message I would hope you impart to the students.

Cavguy
06-23-2008, 05:59 PM
Stupid question, is this the distance ILE at Ft. Lee? I didn't know we did ILE there?

marct
06-23-2008, 06:12 PM
I cannot add more than RTK has already stated pretty clearly. I am frankly disgusted by the behavioral tendencies indicated by the content of the post.

I'll second that. Honestly, it reminds me of "the dog ate my homework" :mad:. Leaving the Gen Y stuff aside, however, there is a very good point make which is why wasn't there any housing on base? It strikes me that it would be much more cost efficient to have base housing than pay for vans and Holiday Inns.

Getting back to the Gen Y stuff, this attitude is quite common and, if the research on it is right (and I suspect it is), a lot of it has to do with low birth rates and kids being raised that they were "special". Corporations are paying billions of dollars to get and keep Gen Y, which has got to be he most self-centered generation since the Golliard poets!

[/ rant]....


In that regard, I have moved this thread from the Trigger-Pullers forum, because it certainly does not belong there.

Well, don't forget the "trigger" on the PowerPoint projector :D.

Stevely
06-23-2008, 06:40 PM
I'll second that. Honestly, it reminds me of "the dog ate my homework" :mad:. Leaving the Gen Y stuff aside, however, there is a very good point make which is why wasn't there any housing on base? It strikes me that it would be much more cost efficient to have base housing than pay for vans and Holiday Inns.


TDY billeting is often in short supply at Ft. Lee. I spent my first month in OBC living in the Comfort Inn. With all the log schools there, and with the other log branches moving in, I can imagine there not being enough room with existing facilities. There's a lot of construction going on, but I imagine it will be awhile before everything's built and adequate capacity is available.

Hopewell and Petersburg are depressing crap holes, maybe that psychic burden was the real cause behind this snivel? ;)

marct
06-23-2008, 06:45 PM
I really should apologize for that anti-Gen Y rant. I'm afraid I've been spending too much time dealing with them both as research subjects and as students (no, not the same ones ;)).

Hopefully Ft. Lee will get the needed accommodation built soon. Until the, I suppose I could always donate a tent or two ... :D

Sledge142
06-23-2008, 07:29 PM
It amazes me the kind of ire that my posting has produced

As for the "real world" jobs...the majority of my friends are pure civilians (always have been) and I have discussed for 26 years the treatment of military personnel versus the treatment they have given to their charges or have received themselves...they ALL got outstanding treatment...but then again, they all work for or have developed extremely successful businesses...if you are getting treated poorly in a civilian job, perhaps you are working for (or worked for) the wrong type of company...

the fact that there are many people who receive substandard care or live in substandard conditions in the Army is not an argument that everyone should suck it up...perhaps the culture should become a culture of taking care of as many people as possible instead of one that wears substandard treatment, equipment, and conditions as a source of pride

I hope you have tremendous pride that you can get the mission done regardless of what you are given...while that is admirable in most cases; in other cases it means not really getting the mission done, what it probably means is that you did something short of the mission...that significant shortfalls (not immediately apparent) most likely will arise down the line because you were not given appropriate resources...however, that is not your problem, you will have moved onto another job (after receiving your top block) and the long term problem is someone else's...another cultural weakness of the military (short term thinking)

I find it humorous that this posting was moved...why is the postiion I have taken "not worthy"...Generation Y (or whatever the vogue term for younger officers is) is not a perjorative term...just think what your senior officers thought about you...I bet we could save a ton of money if we didn't air condition our office buildings, allowed soldiers to live off base (even if they are married), and allow accompanied tours overseas...you guys really have it soft...I think you need to suck it up...:p

RTK
06-23-2008, 07:46 PM
It amazes me the kind of ire that my posting has produced

As for the "real world" jobs...the majority of my friends are pure civilians (always have been) and I have discussed for 26 years the treatment of military personnel versus the treatment they have given to their charges or have received themselves...they ALL got outstanding treatment...but then again, they all work for or have developed extremely successful businesses...if you are getting treated poorly in a civilian job, perhaps you are working for (or worked for) the wrong type of company...

the fact that there are many people who receive substandard care or live in substandard conditions in the Army is not an argument that everyone should suck it up...perhaps the culture should become a culture of taking care of as many people as possible instead of one that wears substandard treatment, equipment, and conditions as a source of pride

I hope you have tremendous pride that you can get the mission done regardless of what you are given...while that is admirable in most cases; in other cases it means not really getting the mission done, what it probably means is that you did something short of the mission...that significant shortfalls (not immediately apparent) most likely will arise down the line because you were not given appropriate resources...however, that is not your problem, you will have moved onto another job (after receiving your top block) and the long term problem is someone else's...another cultural weakness of the military (short term thinking)

I find it humorous that this posting was moved...why is the postiion I have taken "not worthy"...Generation Y (or whatever the vogue term for younger officers is) is not a perjorative term...just think what your senior officers thought about you...I bet we could save a ton of money if we didn't air condition our office buildings, allowed soldiers to live off base (even if they are married), and allow accompanied tours overseas...you guys really have it soft...I think you need to suck it up...:p

I think it's been explained why the post was moved earlier.

So are you a student? It just dawned on me that you've been a member for 2 months and still have yet to introduce yourself (http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showthread.php?t=1441&page=34).

Since when do we do ILE at Ft Lee?Disregard: Googled my answer. It's becoming much clearer now.


ILE Curricula

ILE consists of two segments: a core course and an advanced FA qualification course. All majors, regardless of their branch or FA, study an identical core curriculum within ILE. When an officer graduates from the ILE core course, the Army awards him Military Education Level 4 and Joint Professional Military Education (JPME) Phase I credentials. [JPME is a two-phased system designed to qualify joint specialty officers. Phase I is taught as part of the curricula of the intermediate and senior service colleges in both resident and nonresident formats. Phase II is taught only in residence through the National Defense University.] Then, depending on his FA, the officer receives additional FA education, which, in effect, provides him with branch-qualifying educational credentials.

Operations Career Field ILE

All Operations Career Field (OPCF) majors attend ILE in residence at CGSC. OPCF officers are those who continue to serve in their basic branch and that branch is part of the Army Competitive Category (ACC). OPCF also includes officers in three FAs, regardless of their basic branch: Psychological Operations (FA 37), Civil Affairs (FA 38), and Multifunctional Logistics (FA 90).

The ACC excludes officers in the Chaplain Corps, Judge Advocate General’s Corps, and all Army Medical Department branches (Medical Corps, Dental Corps, Army Nurse Corps, Medical Service Corps, Medical Specialist Corps, and Veterinary Corps). So, with a few exceptions, these officers do not attend the CGSC in residence at Fort Leavenworth. These exceptions generally are limited to Medical Corps officers who will serve as division surgeons or Medical Service Corps officers who also are FA 90 officers (such as those serving in the medical companies of brigade support battalions).

Other-Than-OPCF ILE

All “other than OPCF” majors attend ILE core in-struction at what are known as “ILE course location sites” rather than at Fort Leavenworth. Course location sites currently exist at four places in the United States: Fort Belvoir, Virginia; Fort Lee, Virginia; Fort Gordon, Georgia; and the Navy Postgraduate School at Monterey, California. The Army selected these sites because they are located at or near large concentrations of other-than-OPCF officers who are serving or attending school.

Who are other-than-OPCF officers? They include officers in the—

• Medical Department (other than those having FA 90).
• Chaplain Corps.
• Judge Advocate General’s Corps.
• Operations Support Career Field (OSCF), includ-ing Foreign Area Officers (FA 48) and the Army Acquisition Corps (FA 51).
• Information Operations Career Field (IOCF), including Information Systems Engineering (FA 24), Information Operations (FA 30), Strategic Intelligence (FA 34), Space Operations (FA 40), Public Affairs (FA 46), Information Systems Management (FA 53), and Simulations Operations (FA 57) officers.

Institutional Support Career Field (ISCF), including Human Resource Management (FA 43); Comptroller (FA 45); Academy Professor, U.S. Military Academy (FA 47); Operations Research and Systems Analysis (FA 49); Force Management (FA 50); Nuclear Research and Operations (FA 52); and Strategic Plans and Policy (FA 59) officers.

It is apparent that other-than-OPCF officers are less involved in the direct, operational combat actions of the Army on the battlefield. They are more likely to be involved in aspects of supporting the Army from within a theater of operations, from the strategic base in the Continental United States (CONUS), or from power-projection platforms between the theater and CONUS.

However, it is quite possible to find other-than-OPCF officers working within divisions, corps, Army component commands, various joint organizations within a theater of operations (such as a joint task force or joint force land component command), or on the staffs of any of the various combatant commands, such as the U.S. Central Command, U.S. European Command, U.S. Southern Command, U.S. Northern Command, U.S. Pacific Command, U.S. Joint Forces Command, U.S. Special Operations Command, or U.S. Transportation Command.

Wth the exception of FA 48, this should make it even clearer why this was pulled out of the trigger puller forum. I heard they don't have the course in the fall, because the students would starve to death with all the leaves on the ground.

Ken White
06-23-2008, 07:47 PM
or not... :D

This of course applies to Sledge 142's post ending with "I think you need to suck it up..."

RTK's got faster fingers than I do...

Cavguy
06-23-2008, 09:21 PM
Without heading too far down this road ...

I'm going to stick up for Sledge a little here.

First, he's new to the board. Even though he started with a rant, we shouldn't reinforce the (sometimes stated) perception that the SWC is an echo chamber "clique" where the new guys are beat up on, Ken dispenses sage wisdom, and then Steve Metz shows up with a joke to end the thread. ;)

Show a little patience and respect for what he is articulating as an injustice. Let's argue the points if we disagree rather than head down the road of personal insult.

Back on topic ....

While there is an amount of "call the waaahbulance" in the post (I lived in a hotel during my OBC and drove my POV to Knox), perhaps the arrangements for the students could be a little better. It does suck being mobility limited around a hotel.

However, I don't think this should be an insurmountable problem for Majors attending MEL 4. I'm suprised no one has a POV for car-pooling or loaning. RTK has a point, lots of guys are sucking down a lot more. Additionally, what good does complaining on SWC do? Have they taken it up with the chain of command? What was the response? Is there a middle ground rather than the Army paying for each student a POV rental for the duration? (When I go TDY with multiple people we have to share rentals 3x person).

Just some thoughts. Let's keep SWC professional and inclusive.

Niel

selil
06-23-2008, 09:28 PM
123456

Ranger94
06-23-2008, 10:44 PM
Show a little patience and respect for what he is articulating as an injustice.

What injustice was articulated? No reimbursement for miles in and around TDY site? A O4 or O5 may have to manage their time a little better?

"-car pooling to the gym (no longer are you able to make last minute decisions on when to study, go to the gym, eat, sleep, etc.)"

On a side note, I would love to know how this relates to COIN. Is it that we are losing experienced mid-level COIN officers because of rental car/milage reimbursment?

Maybe the huge amount of brain power on this site ( I am a self diagnosed dummy so I am not included) could contribute in other ways then to figure this one out.

Entropy
06-23-2008, 11:02 PM
The situation Sledge describes is not anything close to hardship, imo, but from my perspective it's just plain dumb and is probably false economy. I can see much to criticize in the system, but not for reasons of hardship. For example, it seems really stupid to me that the DFAC is closed on weekends and the authorized transport cannot be used to go to a restaurant. Where is one supposed to eat? It would piss me off too, but I'd just bring my PoV and that would be that. Still, I think Sledge's last sentance has some merit:


So big Army, offer all the bonuses you want to keep people in, but this idea is as worthless an idea I have ever heard of...can someone explain the Army values to me again?

As an all-volunteer force, and as one that is experiencing problems with retention, one would think it would be in the Army's best interest to reduce queep as much as possible. In this case, simply establishing some rules to use the vans for authorized unofficial uses would go a long way to making everyone happier IMO.

I'll use my own experience as an analogy. I first joined the Navy as an enlisted intel specialist in the early 1990's. I spent over a year in various intense schools along with the expense (to the government) of a high-level security clearance, etc. I finally got to my first duty assignment, inprocessed and after a week was told to report to the base Gym for my "TAD" or "Temporary Additional Duty." My job? Hand out towels for three months. Every E-4 and below gets a bit of TAD love, or at least they did back then. My job was actually cushier than most. Still, it seemed at the time, and it still seems to me all these years later, that it was an incredible waste, particularly right after all that schooling, not to mention a morale killer. I didn't, after all, join the f'ing Navy to pass out f'ing towels! :mad: All that information that had been crammed into my head wasn't exploited and built upon immediately at my new unit. If TAD is so important, why not let me apply my skills for a few months and then do my TAD? It's one of those memories that's stuck with me and continues to serve as the emblematic memory of all the things wrong with the Navy that I saw.

So, my point is that sometimes the little stuff matters. Sometimes the little stuff stays with you and often a lot of little stuff can add up to something big. False economy and queep are two little things that can add up. While I might criticize the tone of Sledge's post, the content, particularly how it might affect the big picture, deserves a look.

Cavguy
06-24-2008, 12:03 AM
What injustice was articulated? No reimbursement for miles in and around TDY site? A O4 or O5 may have to manage their time a little better?

"-car pooling to the gym (no longer are you able to make last minute decisions on when to study, go to the gym, eat, sleep, etc.)"

On a side note, I would love to know how this relates to COIN. Is it that we are losing experienced mid-level COIN officers because of rental car/milage reimbursment?

Maybe the huge amount of brain power on this site ( I am a self diagnosed dummy so I am not included) could contribute in other ways then to figure this one out.


Perhaps my word choice was poor - (agree all your points - as I said in my post, this shouldn't be an issue for MEL 4 students) Agree also - why post this on SWC?

Ken White
06-24-2008, 12:11 AM
I'd say Ranger 94 also has a point:
"On a side note, I would love to know how this relates to COIN. Is it that we are losing experienced mid-level COIN officers because of rental car/milage reimbursment?"Seems to me that picking the proper forum for a complaint can be mildly important; pick the wrong one and one is likely to get wrong answers -- or raucous catcalls.

With that pearl of sophomoric wisdom; I'll now cue Steve.

Steve. Steve. Ste - STEEVE -- SHUT THAT THING OFF SO YOU can hear. Better. Thanks. Uh, you're up...

Ranger94
06-24-2008, 12:55 AM
....before this gets cut off or moved can I do my touge-in-cheek rant about waiting in the long line at Potbelly in Crystal City underground? No? Fine, if you must (with dejected expression).

Sargent
06-24-2008, 12:58 AM
Selil wrote:


A couple months back I realized that there were very few people on SWJ/C that have extensive business world experience. Though I'm the age of most of the majors or ltcols I got out of the Marines in 1986, and left law enforcement for corporate in 1993. Most of the academics are traditional academics. I've been all the way to a director level position in a fortune 500 company and I have never once been paid to move.

I have about 10 years in the private sector, before, after, and during my graduate education. For a lot of it, I was a paralegal, so I like to think of it as being "prior enlisted." I was like a gunny.

Of course, I worked mostly for law firms and we were treated quite well. The defense consultancy was not quite so.

Sledge wrote:


the fact that there are many people who receive substandard care or live in substandard conditions in the Army is not an argument that everyone should suck it up...perhaps the culture should become a culture of taking care of as many people as possible instead of one that wears substandard treatment, equipment, and conditions as a source of pride

I hope you have tremendous pride that you can get the mission done regardless of what you are given...while that is admirable in most cases; in other cases it means not really getting the mission done, what it probably means is that you did something short of the mission...that significant shortfalls (not immediately apparent) most likely will arise down the line because you were not given appropriate resources...however, that is not your problem, you will have moved onto another job (after receiving your top block) and the long term problem is someone else's...another cultural weakness of the military (short term thinking)

Two points: First: Historically, the guys at the absolute front line have traditionally suffered shortfalls in just about everything needed to fight a war. An American force has never lost a war because of this. You can get the job done without all the resources needed -- it's the rule of 4/6ths, where you only ever get 4/6ths of what you need to get the job done. Comes from a great quote from Chosin, a battle weary Marine tells a female reporter that the most difficult part of the campaign was trying to get four inches of [bleeeeep] out of 6 inches of clothing. Apparently you can. Yeah, you don't have everything you need -- consider it a tactical problem. To the extent that you need to take care of people, you need to focus on those at the pointy end first. That might mean some scraping for the garrison folks. So be it. (And yes, there remain problems at the pointy end, even in the age of DFAC's Five Flavors.) Second: Did you not notice that there has been a precipitous rise in gas prices? Vanpooling and driving around less sounds sensible. I stay at plenty of crappy motels in the middle of nowhere. When I'm staying there, I walk from Ft. McNair to the metro station/Safeway at night. You can always walk somewhere.

But then, I'm just a poor grad student, and we pay for all my research and other related trips ourselves -- on a Major's salary (and that's a no-bonus Major in the Marine Corps -- artillery has never, ever received a bonus). So, take it from me, it could be worse. [Imagine a cutesy emoticon here.]

Cheers,
Jill

Schmedlap
06-24-2008, 01:45 AM
The reactions on this thread are a mix of confusion and incredulity that a field grade officer would complain about such trifles and express such a sense of entitlement. None of us were owed anything more than what it took to get the mission accomplished, plus 4 hours of sleep. Sometimes, it is just amazing to behold what some people complain about.

This reminds me of a trip that I made to a FOB in OIF III. We only went to drop some stuff off at mortuary affairs and to get warlocks installed, but we happened upon the PX and were in dire need of AA batteries and 9-volts. I hadn't had a shower in 2 months, most of my Soldiers hadn't had one in at least 3 or 4 weeks. We lived on MREs, except for 2 hot meals per week, so when we went into the PX we were looking around like a family on its first visit to Disney World, wide-eyed, in awe of the absurd selection of pop-tarts, chips, condoms, video games, et cetera. One of my Soldiers commented about all of the food. Someone in her IPFU and reflective belt dryly pointed out, "it's usually not this good. They run out of chocolate pudding every other day." That moment has been seared into my memory. I felt like I was in a bad B-rated war movie. I thought it was foolish to complain when living amidst such luxury, variety, and security. But complaining about accomodations here in the US kind of takes the cake.

Everybody says or types something stupid every now and then. It is best to just acknowledge it and move on. I'm not sure why sledge chooses to keep arguing this. But, it could be worse. At least sledge had the good judgment to use a pseudonym.

selil
06-24-2008, 02:06 AM
123456

Ken White
06-24-2008, 02:49 AM
but didn't wanta ask... :o. Weird in my book. Made me wonder if the Army senior NCOS have their Dress Blues over there??? :D )

Mark O'Neill
06-24-2008, 03:44 AM
Just a side question: What is up with the reflective PT belts? What purpose do they serve? After a few previous comments I started watching news reports and dang there they were on people in the gym, walking around, etc.. Retro reflective stuff in a combat environment? Ummm. I'm sorry I truly don't understand. I got my melon thumped for not covering everything reflective and it was only training. Bizarre.

Sorry. that creaking sound is my eyes opening.

It is my understanding that it is a force protection issue - too many people were being run over on FOBs by lunatic driving. Someone's analysis of the situation obviously suggested that one of the reasons they were being run over was that they were not been seen. We were 'issued' said belts at a Coalition staging base in the Middle East prior to entering Iraq. We never wore them again the minute we left that base.

Regarding wearing them in a 'combat' environment - the only people I saw wear them off a FOB were SOI / CLC - they were part of the initial uniform / identification kit that many were given. And for the most part I think it worked for them insofar as most coalition soldiers could not help but notice the reflective belts and hence would not immediately reach for a weapon at the sight of an armed Iraqi in civvie clothes dominating a street....

Tom Odom
06-24-2008, 12:18 PM
Regarding wearing them in a 'combat' environment - the only people I saw wear them off a FOB were SOI / CLC - they were part of the initial uniform / identification kit that many were given. And for the most part I think it worked for them insofar as most coalition soldiers could not help but notice the reflective belts and hence would not immediately reach for a weapon at the sight of an armed Iraqi in civvie clothes dominating a street....


Ahh so they are VS17 panels for host nation forces? :D

Reminds me of being lectured in training about finding a place to live where I would blend in--when I got to Africa :wry:

Tom

Shek
06-24-2008, 02:53 PM
Just a side question: What is up with the reflective PT belts? What purpose do they serve? After a few previous comments I started watching news reports and dang there they were on people in the gym, walking around, etc.. Retro reflective stuff in a combat environment? Ummm. I'm sorry I truly don't understand. I got my melon thumped for not covering everything reflective and it was only training. Bizarre.

Here's the decision briefing:

Reflective moments in history . . . (http://www.chairforce.com/CHAFE_07/fun/files/reflective-moments.pps)

Schmedlap
06-24-2008, 02:56 PM
I considered writing a book about my FOB experiences. I even have drafts and a very good outline for how it would be structured. My only reservation about contacting a publisher is that it would be difficult to pull it off without the book reflecting poorly on the military. Therefore, it will probably never leave my hard drive and will only serve as a source of entertainment among my friends and I.

I never lived on a FOB, but I visited them about every 3 or 4 weeks (thankfully only for hours at a time) during OIF III and passed through them several times in OIF V. EVERY time that I visited a FOB, I discovered some new rule that made absolutely no sense. I am not just talking about a rule that one would regard as a little dumb. I mean rules that you could not make up. By OIF III, I had been in the Army for 6 years, so there were some weird rules that I could anticipate (ground guides, wearing a helmet to drive a HMMWV 50 meters, etc). But the rules at places like LSA Anaconda and FOB Speicher were just out-of-this-world, scratch-your-head, stand-up-and-scream stupid.

The reflective belt thing was, indeed, a safety measure to prevent people from being run over. It has since become one of those things that is so prevalent on FOBs that all FOB dwellers can relate to it and it is something that they can all laugh about - a shared garrison quirk that they were all subjected. A shared "hardship" I suppose. To some extent, the rule makes some sense. But, then there are other rules...

My personal favorite was the requirement for an "O-6 memo" in order to drive a HMMWV without a "TC." What O-6 has the time to write someone a memo to drive a HMMWV without a TC? The MP with the flashing blue lights who was doing the traffic stop couldn't answer that question either. And, of course, for those of us who do not live on FOBs, how are we supposed to know about such an obscure rule? He couldn't answer that one either. And whose idea was it to send the "traffic ticket" to my company commander at our patrol base? (It arrived 4 days later, via LOGPAC, with a pallet of track, roadwheels, and two pallets of water. I'm not kidding.)

MikeF
06-24-2008, 03:49 PM
I considered writing a book about my FOB experiences.
Schmedlap

Sounds like a wonderful submission to SWJ Magazine.

My favorite was returning to a FOB for a briefing and seeing that all the road signs were changed to Monopoly names. My boys started calling it FOB Candyland.

I preferred the patrol base. Although we did not have salsa night and green beans, we felt satisfied knowing that we were actually accomplishing the mission.

Fact Non Verba

Cavguy
06-24-2008, 03:59 PM
I preferred the patrol base. Although we did not have salsa night and green beans, we felt satisfied knowing that we were actually accomplishing the mission.


Agreed there. It allowed a lot of freedom from the rampant FOB stupidites, like PT belts.

I remember having the BCT CSM come down to the CO COP and get mad because he saw guys lounging in T-Shirts without a blouse on (inside, and in the common areas outside). He chewed my 1SG for allowing lax uniform discipline, and lectured him that on the FOB there was no working or lounging in T-Shirts only. This was the same CSM who wanted the polar fleece worn under the ACU top. We rolled eyes and complied until he left the FOB for Green Beans. The advantage of living on the COP were able to do what makes sense, and my officers and NCO's maintained combat discipline. (Clean weapons, ready vehicles, etc).

All that said, not everyone on the FOB is a Fobbit, and everyone has their role. It's easy to throw stones at those who have it less hard, but they do perform vital roles. The vast majority also understand that as well and bend over backwards for the forward deployed, but there are always a few petty tyrants.

MikeF
06-24-2008, 04:11 PM
Just trying to bring a little humor and change the absurdity of this thread so we can move on to more important topics- minor issues like Iraq and Afghanistan instead of relentlessly debating the complexities and hardships of TDY.

I'll stop rambling now.

v/r

Mike

jkm_101_fso
06-24-2008, 06:54 PM
I considered writing a book about my FOB experiences. I even have drafts and a very good outline for how it would be structured. My only reservation about contacting a publisher is that it would be difficult to pull it off without the book reflecting poorly on the military. Therefore, it will probably never leave my hard drive and will only serve as a source of entertainment among my friends and I.

I never lived on a FOB, but I visited them about every 3 or 4 weeks (thankfully only for hours at a time) during OIF III and passed through them several times in OIF V. EVERY time that I visited a FOB, I discovered some new rule that made absolutely no sense. I am not just talking about a rule that one would regard as a little dumb. I mean rules that you could not make up. By OIF III, I had been in the Army for 6 years, so there were some weird rules that I could anticipate (ground guides, wearing a helmet to drive a HMMWV 50 meters, etc). But the rules at places like LSA Anaconda and FOB Speicher were just out-of-this-world, scratch-your-head, stand-up-and-scream stupid.

The reflective belt thing was, indeed, a safety measure to prevent people from being run over. It has since become one of those things that is so prevalent on FOBs that all FOB dwellers can relate to it and it is something that they can all laugh about - a shared garrison quirk that they were all subjected. A shared "hardship" I suppose. To some extent, the rule makes some sense. But, then there are other rules...

My personal favorite was the requirement for an "O-6 memo" in order to drive a HMMWV without a "TC." What O-6 has the time to write someone a memo to drive a HMMWV without a TC? The MP with the flashing blue lights who was doing the traffic stop couldn't answer that question either. And, of course, for those of us who do not live on FOBs, how are we supposed to know about such an obscure rule? He couldn't answer that one either. And whose idea was it to send the "traffic ticket" to my company commander at our patrol base? (It arrived 4 days later, via LOGPAC, with a pallet of track, roadwheels, and two pallets of water. I'm not kidding.)

Please publish the book...you could always use your SWC name as the author! I have also regailed many of my rediculous experiences in Iraq on my hard drive, not limited to FOB madness. I also proudly never resided on a FOB; just patrol and fire bases. That has nothing to do with my performance or position, but just luck.
Per you quote, my first question would be, "WHY ARE THE MPs BEING UTILIZED AS FOB COPS AND NOT OUT IN SECTOR DOING THEIR JOB?" What an absolute waste of a combat asset! A perfect example of Army inefficiency and another reason why Iraq is (was) such a mess.

patmc
06-24-2008, 09:29 PM
I was at Speicher for OIF IV, and thankfully the pt belt rule had not arrived yet, but we did encounter its introduction at LSAA when my guys were refused access to midnight chow bc they did not have PT belts with their IBA's. (note: we got them into chow)

One of my drivers got a ticket for speeding on the Speicher perimeter road after refueling (if you've driven it, you know). We were more concerned at why MPs were patrolling Speicher and not ASR Hershey, but that was above our level.

Uboat509
06-24-2008, 09:40 PM
I was at Speicher for OIF IV, and thankfully the pt belt rule had not arrived yet, but we did encounter its introduction at LSAA when my guys were refused access to midnight chow bc they did not have PT belts with their IBA's. (note: we got them into chow)

One of my drivers got a ticket for speeding on the Speicher perimeter road after refueling (if you've driven it, you know). We were more concerned at why MPs were patrolling Speicher and not ASR Hershey, but that was above our level.

I spent some time at Speicher in OIF V. Apparently if you go to the DFAC without your reflective belt then the sun won't come up, or something like that. I do remember there being some MPs on post, not enough to be of any use off post, just enough to annoy us. If I recall correctly, the MPs were there for patrol on post and to be the post QRF, in lieu of the division band who were also deployed there for reasons that are entirely lost on me.

SFC W

selil
06-24-2008, 11:34 PM
I'm starting to remember why I like being a civilian... yeah.. it is becoming quite apparent.

As a professor if I don't like a rule I ignore it.

Ski
06-25-2008, 02:04 PM
As a field grade who's done enough TDY in the last year to last me a lifetime, I can only say this:

"This is what we are worrying about in today's Army?"

Steve Blair
06-25-2008, 02:30 PM
I'm starting to remember why I like being a civilian... yeah.. it is becoming quite apparent.

As a professor if I don't like a rule I ignore it.

And your classified staff must just LOVE you for it....:D

Van
06-25-2008, 06:56 PM
I'm with Ski.


"This is what we are worrying about in today's Army?"

I'm much more concerned about the goals of ILE, the relationship between content and goals of ILE, and the lack of understanding of the difference between education and training in ILE than the mechanics of the delivery medium for ILE.

On the other hand, the corner-cutting appearence created by these 'other than Leavenworth' ILEs re-enforces the perception that these are the "No Major Left Behind" options.

I stress perception because it may well be only perception; the content may be a perfect mirror of what is taught at the 'premier' ILE souce, Leavenworth. But will board members believe this? Will the peers and leaders of the graduates of these programs viscarally believe this?

I'm in a better position than many to say that the distance-learning, web-based ILE reflects the core curriculum of resident CGSC Common Core (did one, married to someone who just completed the other, and have no vested interest in the perceptions, failure, or success of either program other than its impact on the Army and the Army's future). But when the people going to the outlying ILE programs feel like red-headed step children, it would be easy to come to the conclusion, right or wrong, that the program isn't as good.

Hacksaw
06-26-2008, 01:50 PM
I'm real pressed for time, but will offer the following....

1) the satellite ILE curricula is based on the common core ILE content by design and purpose

2) Reason being that the intent was to use this resource a the ILE experience for those who didn't need the "warfighting" portion of the curricula (e.g. the school population would be non-basic branch officers)

3) Conditions have changed since... plenty of capacity to educate basic branch MAJ at leavenworth, availability of students has been the issue for the past 5 years

4) Leavenworth was directed (should be finished, but I'm a little dated) to build web-based version of warfighter course for those officers (basic branch types) who attend satallite sites due to time constraints

5) Intent is to go back to all basic branch officers attend Leavenworth (with some exceptions for advanced civil schooling, and to work down a significant backlog)

6) Will this impact promotability of satallite site, basic branch officers? Initial evidence emphatically points to NO! For a couple of reasons.... Promotion rates are so high to LTC that it makes no difference, because of PERSTEMPO of the past 5 years - several officers were promoted on waivers for no ILE experience (that number has grown each year) Just don't think its an issue

Perhaps larger question is the relevance of ILE to future success as FG Officer. Seems to be plenty of examples of officers who have succeeded just fine as a MAJ without the benefit of ILE. I don't really believe this the case, but its the question that CGSC ought to be asking itself because someone else will when Rep Skelton move on.

Live well and row

Bill Moore
06-26-2008, 02:49 PM
I agree with most of the comments that said this was the wrong place for such a post, but disagree with the response in general. Some of the replys were off the mark, such as why don't you drive your POV? If a guy is stationed in Germany or the other end of the country, he/she is not going to drive their POV. The issue isn't making money, but to have rules where our Soldiers don't lose money, and the current rules are non-functional, and that is the issue that needs to be addressed. We're trying to keep our best and our brightest in, and you do that through good leadership. If this issue is another straw on the camel's back, then we (Army) need to address it. IN the big picture the Army is saving pocket money, while putting the burden on the Soldier (enlisted and officer). We deal with these issues all the time, and the amount of money (based on the school, location, duration, on post housing availability, etc.) that comes out of a Soldier's pocket to go to a directed school at times is ridiculous. Leaders don't blow this stuff off and say there isn't an issue, they see what the issue is and they try to fix it, unless "Soldiers first" is just an empty mantra. Since we deal with this frequently (we don't blow it off), we know what the real issues are and what the empty complaints are, and we're trying to fix the real issues with our higher, not turn a blind eye to it.

Van
06-26-2008, 03:25 PM
4) Leavenworth was directed (should be finished, but I'm a little dated) to build web-based version of warfighter course for those officers (basic branch types) who attend satallite sites due to time constraints

They have, Advanced Operational Warfighting Course (AOWC). Although not required to take it, I took the leadership and history portions in addition to the mandatory ILE-CC. After the history and leadership, AOWC is a protracted bout of redundant iterations of MDMP. Again, it mirrors the CGSC Leavenworth curriculum very closely, but it is training not education. Multiple iterations of one drill, no matter how complex, aren't the same as critical thinking, which is the cornerstone of education.

The underlying issue is the relevance of ILE/CGSC, and getting all the uncountable factions of the Army (and Joint) PME system on one sheet of music, with a common goal. Right now, it appears that every element with a voice in the curriculae is only concerned with the most short-sighted and parochial agenda. OK, an overstatement, but the folks with their eyes on the future are getting drowned out by shrill voices of the folks who think the point of the hockey match is the Zamboni.

The whole business of penny-pinching on the folks going to the satellite sites makes it look like the point of ILE is the faculty rather than the students.

AdamG
06-27-2008, 04:38 PM
I considered writing a book about my FOB experiences. I even have drafts and a very good outline for how it would be structured. My only reservation about contacting a publisher is that it would be difficult to pull it off without the book reflecting poorly on the military.

So? How else will the rest of the world learn of the nonsense we live with, day-to-day.

Get the book published, even if you fictionalize it.

We need more CATCH-22's for the 21st century, or the Colonel Cathcarts of this world will escape un-mocked.

[dons full-body condom and suit-of-bubblewrap, before resuming Lanes training]

Van
06-27-2008, 05:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schmedlap
I considered writing a book about my FOB experiences. I even have drafts and a very good outline for how it would be structured. My only reservation about contacting a publisher is that it would be difficult to pull it off without the book reflecting poorly on the military.

So? How else will the rest of the world learn of the nonsense we live with, day-to-day.

Get the book published, even if you fictionalize it.

Have you considered Lulu publishing (http://www.lulu.com/)? It's kind of like CafePress (http://www.cafepress.com/), but for books. No cost to put your book on their website, they publish on demand, and you set your profit margin for yourself. Be sure you get security vetting for it though.

I'm looking forward to these fireworks.

jcustis
06-27-2008, 08:02 PM
Hmmm...

Schmedlap
06-27-2008, 08:11 PM
So? How else will the rest of the world learn of the nonsense we live with, day-to-day.

Get the book published, even if you fictionalize it.

We need more CATCH-22's for the 21st century, or the Colonel Cathcarts of this world will escape un-mocked.

[dons full-body condom and suit-of-bubblewrap, before resuming Lanes training]

The military gets enough illegitimate criticism. I don't want to add to it, even if my criticisms are legitimate. There is also the risk of my tales being interpreted as the norm for the Army as a whole, rather than as humorous, outrageous behavior of people determined to make FOBs and stateside garrison areas exactly the same.

sandbag
06-28-2008, 05:52 PM
Let's see if I can summarize this thread. I'm not quite sure if I understand it, so bear with me.

OP: This satellite ILE site is pretty jacked-up in terms of chow and transportation conditions. You'd think it was better thought through. This is a rant. Thanks for listening.

Generic Response Type 1: Wrong forum! This is for combat arms stuff!

Generic Response Type 2: You're lucky you're not living in a ditch and eating bugs to survive! Why are you complaining?

Generic Response Type 3: Yeah, Type 2 is right! When I went to Insert_School_Here, we had to road march fifty miles each way. So, if it sucked for me, it should suck for you, too.

Generic Response Type 4: Screw you, FOBbit! Screw Os, too!

I think the only thing I might have missed was the obligatory "82nd-Airborne-is-the-greatest-we-single-handedly-won-every-war-we've-ever-been-in" post. Hell if I know. My attention span started to wane.

Come on, guys, I thought we were adults. We used to beat Soldiers when I enlisted, but we stopped because it's just a plain stupid thing to do. What does that have to do with some Major having to carpool to his ILE site? Simple: why settle with mediocrity? If we adopt stupid historical precedent as policy, we'll be the same Army that starched our combat uniforms "because that's the way we've always done it". If we're going to do that, let's start forming ranks 300 abreast and firing muskets. It's equally dumb.

So OP posted some frustrations in the wrong forum. I'm not so much ashamed of that as I am by the responses. Honestly, if that is the kind of response posters can expect, we as a professional forum are no better than a bunch of kit whores arguing about what badass sling we can buy from our local "tacticool" vendor that allows us free range of movement in the DFAC. To assume that OP concerns aren't valid because he's not 11-series or whatever is juvenile. What if OP's done four combat rotations and a few hundred convoys? Is there an SWJ standard for body count or something to be considered a valid contributor? Gee, what is it? I sure hope I qualify!

I guess the whole point of the exercise is that we as an Army should be constantly looking for ways to make things better for our people. If we're going to go down the road that only certain groups of people are worthy of respect and good treatment (regardless of rank, folks; tough, but I know we can do it!), how are we going to get people to do the jobs that aren't deemed worthy?

Ken White
06-28-2008, 06:44 PM
...We used to beat Soldiers when I enlisted, but we stopped because it's just a plain stupid thing to do.I first enlisted in the USMC in 1949, went to Parris Island. Not then noted as a vacation spot -- but beating troops was illegal. Totally -- and it did not happen in my observation.

Then I enlisted in the Army in 1956. Beating troops was illegal. Did someone go off the rails occasionally and lose his temper? Yeah, and more than one lost stripes over it. Generally, it did not happen and the better the unit, the less likely it was to occur. Stayed that way for the next 27 years 'til I hung up the war suit and the further 18 I was a DAC in close proximity to the working Army. If they were being beaten when you came in, you must be really old... :D
I guess the whole point of the exercise is that we as an Army should be constantly looking for ways to make things better for our people. If we're going to go down the road that only certain groups of people are worthy of respect and good treatment (regardless of rank, folks; tough, but I know we can do it!), how are we going to get people to do the jobs that aren't deemed worthy?In my opinion, no one really went that far. He sniveled and sniveling will draw flies. Always has in my observation. Bitching is okay, sniveling gets flak. Difference? In the eye of the reader or listener. Solution? Try to avoid even coming close to it.

That seems to apply regardless of branch, experience, rank or whatever.

Surferbeetle
06-28-2008, 07:01 PM
He sniveled and sniveling will draw flies. Always has in my observation. Bitching is okay, sniveling gets flak. Difference? In the eye of the reader or listener. Solution? Try to avoid even coming close to it.

That seems to apply regardless of branch, experience, rank or whatever.

...and it makes one wonder...if a field grade officer can't find a solution to a simple problem in the land of plenty how in the world he will be able to operate effectively down range...:eek:

Schmedlap
06-28-2008, 07:02 PM
To assume that OP concerns aren't valid because he's not 11-series or whatever is juvenile.

The concerns were generally regarded as invalid because they smack of an entitlement mentality that offends the sense of selfless service that members of all specialties and services hold dear. There is a world of difference between denying a Soldier the opportunity to fulfill his desire to serve his country and denying a Soldier an amenity to fulfill a sense of entitlement. The complaints from the OP fall into the latter category, in my opinion.

The opinions here tend to be subjective, so it is understandable that some disagree. But they are subjective in that everyone has a different perception of what servicemembers are entitled to. To assume that the uproar was a reaction to MOS or location of the OP is to completely ignore most of the content in the thread.

I made the first response and drew attention to the "trigger-puller" self-characterization of the OP. That was not a knock against any MOS. It was calling the OP out for attempting to cast him/herself as someone in the line of fire without the tools necessary to fight, win or survive. Instead, regardless of MOS, the OP is someone stateside, griping about amenities. There is a world of difference. The characterization would have been dishonest whether the OP were an ODA team sergeant back from his 4th tour in Iraq or a mess kit repair specialist waiting to deploy for the first time.

Ken White
06-28-2008, 07:42 PM
67J20, Meat Can Model 1932 Repair Technician -- who fortunately got later converted to MOSC 00Q3P, Small Unit Coward, non-tactical -- I appreciate your mention of my former worthy if potentially dangerous employment.

I also respect and agree totally with your characterization of the locale and temper versus the thrust or background of the original poster.

Jedburgh
06-28-2008, 09:13 PM
Given current tracking in the discussion, I should clarify something here. Without making any specific ID, the original poster is not a service member, but a DA civilian who works at the school and is bitching about something that doesn't affect him directly. I just wanted everyone to know that this is not a case of a field grade officer sniveling anonymously in a public forum about his TDY amenities.

Ken White
06-28-2008, 10:03 PM
forget my former mild bemusement and chuckles at what I thought had occurred.

Now, as a former overpaid DAC, I can get torqued off at a guy who may have a valid point but knows so little about his environment he posts about the issue in a totally inappropriate place instead of doing something concrete about it like forcing it up the chain of command and giving the always slow system time to react. Nobody's going to fire him. If that doesn't work, going public as a last resort can work -- but in the media, not on a weblog...

Umar Al-Mokhtār
06-29-2008, 03:06 PM
Steve Blair and Sam Liles, corporate America is quite skimpy on the "PCS" move issue (I think it boils down to they feeling if you want the job bad enough you'll DITY). While one actually can get "moved" in the traditional service sense (I'm one for three) there are often some interesting rules:

Lodging: They paid for the room but not the taxes on the room (so I made every effort to stay at bases between CA and SC).

Expense reimbursement: In addition to the room rate, I also received "per diem" which was at the government rate per where we stayed each night. The best part was that my total "reimbursement" for my expenses incurred was viewed by the IRS as "income." :eek:

I never once during a TAD got a rental car authorized, even when unable to get billiting and had to stay in hotels off base; however, during TDYs under the auspicies of the USAF I did get a Udrive. :D

Sledge142
07-02-2008, 07:39 PM
...Thanks to all who replied...I am a big boy and was very amused by some of the postings (do some of you actually believe there is a difference among MOSs etc, or that one should be proud to have taken cold showers on TDY, or that comparing the personnel at Walter Reed with students is actually an argument that passes any sort of intellectual muster?)...but I feel that more important things need to be debated...the first line of my posting was that I couldn't find an appropriate spot for the rant so I posted it there...I do get it...I ranted and paid for it...

I am a DAC...with 24 years in the Navy (with over 49 months of deployed overseas time on ships, so I am not a neophyte) and combat time in Bosnia and Iraq flying in F-14s (not like some of your combat time, but time nonetheless)...and 10 years of PME education teaching...etc etc the point is not my credentials, but that I feel it is time to change the culture of the Army (Walter Reed, PTSD treatment of returnees, etc all are facets of the Army not really doing what needed to be done except when forced to by the media)...

And this blog will be an excellent teaching tool...don't be afraid though, I always let my students make up their own mind about what is right and wrong...all I will do ask them questions concerning aspects of the various points made in the pages of the blog...they may think I am a buffoon (as many of you will probably agree)...

Keep on going for it...

Sledge

cj.kirkpatrick
07-02-2008, 10:24 PM
While I didn't originally include a shortage of funding for rental vans in my list, I think it still ranks pretty close to the bottom of all the problems the Army faces.

I'm proud of the Army's "suck it up" and "mission accomplishment" mentality. It feels good to know I'm a part of an organization that, across all it's levels, never quits and finds no challenge overwhelming. Frankly, I'm a little ashamed you're detracting from it.

Feel free to join your civilian friends, perhaps we'll redirect your salary to purchasing more vans.

RTK
07-03-2008, 01:39 AM
...Thanks to all who replied...I am a big boy and was very amused by some of the postings (do some of you actually believe there is a difference among MOSs etc, or that one should be proud to have taken cold showers on TDY, or that comparing the personnel at Walter Reed with students is actually an argument that passes any sort of intellectual muster?)...but I feel that more important things need to be debated...the first line of my posting was that I couldn't find an appropriate spot for the rant so I posted it there...I do get it...I ranted and paid for it...

I am a DAC...with 24 years in the Navy (with over 49 months of deployed overseas time on ships, so I am not a neophyte) and combat time in Bosnia and Iraq flying in F-14s (not like some of your combat time, but time nonetheless)...and 10 years of PME education teaching...etc etc the point is not my credentials, but that I feel it is time to change the culture of the Army (Walter Reed, PTSD treatment of returnees, etc all are facets of the Army not really doing what needed to be done except when forced to by the media)...

And this blog will be an excellent teaching tool...don't be afraid though, I always let my students make up their own mind about what is right and wrong...all I will do ask them questions concerning aspects of the various points made in the pages of the blog...they may think I am a buffoon (as many of you will probably agree)...

Keep on going for it...

Sledge


Then I take great pleasure in knowing I'm in no danger of attending ILE where you teach. I always thought continuing professional education was meant to make one better at their craft, not take a knee and bitch about things that have little to do with one's warfighting function.

As far as your crack about "some of you believing there is difference between MOSs." Yeah, I believe that, for very good reason too. I don't remember hearing about a combat arms unit who hid in their floorboards while ambushed and dumping the sand out of their bolts in their rifles. I had a DENTAC Major salute me when I was a 2LT because he had no idea how the Army rank structure worked. There are huge differences.

Good luck with your "teachings."

Ken White
07-03-2008, 01:55 AM
if it is a matter of concern to you, what, precisely have you done about it officially? If you think it's a critical item, surely you've done something about it.

Oh, another thing -- if MOSs aren't important, why mention your F-14 time? :D

Bill Moore
07-03-2008, 02:18 AM
Sledge142 your points are valid, I reason you drew so much heat is the way they were presented. I have 30 years (and I'm still kicking) in the Army, most of them in tough muddy boots assignments. I have been very fortunate to have been brought up by some great leaders (both NCO and Officer) over the years. Of course that is the nature of Special Forces and Airborne units.

The priorities in military leadership are mission, your men, then yourself. Whenever you are required to suck it up because the mission requires it, then it is expected of you. However if you're in a leadership role, your role is to limit the items your men have to suck up. Sometimes saying suck it up is a leadership failure to improve conditions for their men. These leader's priorities are mission, themselves, then their men. When you are required to suck it up, leaders will explain why and inspire their men to do so.

While issues about money for rental vans are trival compared to having adequate time on the range, having the right body armor down range, having money to get guys to school, etc., it is still an issue that impacts retention of mid to senior grade NCOs and Officers. It is another proverbial straw on the camel's back. Soldiers are as important as equipment, and strong consideration should be taken before cutting funds for professional development, PTSD recovery, family counselling, etc. The issue isn't necessarily the van, but that the service doesn't provide a viable alternative such as a barracks, BOQ, dining facility that is open during the weekend, etc. If the service provides the necessities (in priority, gym, food, gym, billets, etc.) and you desire to go out on the town, then the rental car is on you or your unit, but if they don't provide the necessities and severely limit rental cars then there may be an issue. You just need to present it as problem, discussion and recommendation, instead of a complaint.

marct
07-03-2008, 02:54 AM
And this blog will be an excellent teaching tool

I agree, and steer a number of my students here as well.


...don't be afraid though, I always let my students make up their own mind about what is right and wrong...all I will do ask them questions concerning aspects of the various points made in the pages of the blog...they may think I am a buffoon (as many of you will probably agree)...

Afraid? Of what - anonymous troll attacks? Nah, I'm not worried about that :cool:.


Sledge142 your points are valid, I reason you drew so much heat is the way they were presented.

Bill, you are spot on! Sledge, speaking as one teacher to another, use this thread as an example of cross-cultural miscommunication.

Marc