Army Blocks Disability Paperwork Aid at Fort Drum

[sullygoarmy]

Wow that's just a frustrating article. Just when you think we're getting better about taking care of these heros, (Warrior Transition Units, putting a Combat Arms 1 star in charge), this crap happens. Someone ought to get flamed.

[Ken White]

involved are heroes and I'm even more sure that this is one side of a story and even more sure than that the disconnect between the services -- all of them -- and some (not all) 'veterans' organizations is quite adversarial.

I'd also suggest that both links provide only superficial knowledge of what may or may not have occurred; that the VA and Armed Forces differences in the handling and judgment of disability amounts is long standing, that a VA workers assistance with the Army's processes might sow more confusion than it could help.

As WM pointed out, a lot of 'Veterans Service' organizations -- to include State government agencies get involved in the process and many have muddied the water as much as they've helped.

Having a son who was medically discharged due to a jump injury, I do know the Army process is lengthy and tedious (as are many things...) but it was, in his case at least, fair (and that tracks with friends who have gone the same route); that he had a wait for the VA benefit to kick in and that much of that delay is due to the fact that the Army gives you severance pay when you're medically discharged. By law (Your Congress again) the VA must recoup that amount before the VA pension begins.

In the case cited in the first link the guy says: "“The Army certified me 10 percent disabled and medically discharged me in December 2006. I appealed that determination and was eventually certified 100 percent unemployable because of my injuries,” said Delmonte, who now receives a VA disability pension."" Possible but last time I knew, the Army didn't do that 'unemployable' bit, the VA did -- so I think he's at least mixing apples and potatoes

Things may not be all they seem in this case...

[Cavguy]

I think it's most likey a typical case of someone making well intentioned guidance based off of improving process, without considering how it gets interpreted by those on the receiving end.

A statement intended to reduce the possibility of paperwork confusion was interpreted by the VA as a desire to prevent an increase in successful claims and ratings. And if the service was discontinued, then you work against the mission of providing help to the soldiers in a complex process if no replacement process was made.

There's a great RAND paper about Vietnam called "Bureauacracy does its Thing", which probably is the most apt description of the whole issue. The process is the obstacle.

On a high note, BG Tucker is absolutely the right guy to be the DCG of the Medical Command. As a former NCO and Tanker, anyone whose served under him knows of his patience for things that don't make sense. God help the individual who isn't ready to be flexible and go above and beyond what is required to help a soldier.

"Operation Free Chicken" is still legendary in 1AD - he busted the difficult European supply process to allow us to turn in literally all our excess property that clogged the supply rooms and connexes with a minimum of hassle to the unit - and made the log agenices come to us instead of us going to them. My supply sergeant often made long road trips trying to dispose of or repair equipment only to be turned back by short working hours, new paperwork requirements, or other factors. (In Germany the BCT bases are mostly distributed away from the supporting logistics site for routine matters, legacy of the Cold War dispersion).

My contact inside of the WTU process told me that shaking up the medical command bureaucrats who just frankly didn't care was the hardest part.

"Go to window 7, get a stamp, go to window 9, you need the new TPS cover sheet on this, no you need an O-7 signature, etc."

I think the Army will be proactive on this and is already hyper sensitive to the issue. I just hate that it takes a soldier going to the media or congress to get people moving.

[Ken White]

I think it's most likey a typical case of someone making well intentioned guidance based off of improving process, without considering how it gets interpreted by those on the receiving end.

Probably true; that happens all too often...

There's a great RAND paper about Vietnam called "Bureauacracy does its Thing", which probably is the most apt description of the whole issue. The process is the obstacle.

As does that...

On a high note, BG Tucker is absolutely the right guy to be the DCG of the Medical Command... My contact inside of the WTU process told me that shaking up the medical command bureaucrats who just frankly didn't care was the hardest part.

True -- that was a good move on Schoomaker's part. I chuckle thinking about the Medics reaction to that...

I think the Army will be proactive on this and is already hyper sensitive to the issue.

Agree.

...I just hate that it takes a soldier going to the media or congress to get people moving.

At the risk of being called old school, reactionary 'hard core' and a number of probably well deserved less appealing names including unsympathetic and compassion challenged, I don't think soldiers do that. Sometimes people who are or have been in the Army do. Not the same thing in my book.

Also been my observation over the years that most of the time -- not all -- the going was not required and frequently does more harm than good. Particularly if Congress is involved; most of them mean well but they don't understand the systems and stick their busy fingers in all the wrong holes too often. That and they play to the crowd. Plus, a lot of the Staffers are former military types with pet rocks (and bruised egos)...

[John T. Fishel]

receiving end of a Congressional inquiry conducted at the staffer level. The real issue was that things were not happeningfast enough for the soldier in question who was concerned that nothing at all was happening. A phone conversation between me and the staffer clarified things - the staffer understood that I was on the soldier's side but it was going to take a little time to resolve.

My experience with Congress and staffers has been that they are patriotic people who try to be reasonable when doing constituent service.

Cheers

JohnT

[Ken White]

receiving end of a Congressional inquiry conducted at the staffer level. The real issue was that things were not happeningfast enough for the soldier in question who was concerned that nothing at all was happening. A phone conversation between me and the staffer clarified things - the staffer understood that I was on the soldier's side but it was going to take a little time to resolve.

My experience with Congress and staffers has been that they are patriotic people who try to be reasonable when doing constituent service.

Cheers

JohnT

There was one minor problem with the kid who was kidnapped off Hay Street in Fayetteville and whisked to Miami in a white Cadillac and whose mother was convinced this was all that was required to explain his sixteen days AWOL/ UA. Fortunately a move from her cousin the Congessman's staffer to that persons boss got that straightened out...

Don't let my Congress bashing obscure the fact that I think I've said several times that they generally mean well -- and that I understand they're necessary and think they generally do an all round marginally acceptable job.

I agree with you that they are very responsive and responsible when doing constituent service -- my concern is that when they get into their legislating and oversight roles they in too many cases do not understand all they know about what they're doing. Let me also clarify that when I mention many staffers have pet ideas they push, that too is in the lawmaking and scrutiny side of the work and is particularly applied to the Armed Services Committees, their members and staffers.

I do not question the loyalty or patriotism of anyone on Capitol Hill. Nor do I have any doubt about their concern for their State or District and its voters.

I do question their tendency to put those concerns and a quest for reelection as well as their political party ahead of the good of the Nation even though I understand the realities of the situation. I also question some laws that get passed, generally as kneejerk reaction to an event, simply so they can say "We did something" and a number of laws that seem to transcend reality. In short, I wish they put as much effort into the nuts and bolts of their lawmaking as they do into voter services.

[selil]

Ah Ken you make the same mistake many men of military mind make about congress. You can't expect a body politic bent on the needs of some, agreed to by a few, organized by a couple, and working towards some goals to have the efficiency of the military hierarchy which as we all know isn't much better at the higher levels. The Constitution of the United States is about insuring inefficiency and obstructing change without consideration for the needs. 2 years elected for representatives and six years elected for senators. Emotional in one chamber responding to whims and staid and considering in the other chamber. A President sitting between. A Supreme court above them all appointed for life.