BQZip01

Then there was the converse of that. I remember being at ASBC at lunch time when the school dismissed everyone from Polifka Hall (a.k.a. the big blue bedroom). 600+ Lts all walking back to their dorms and some poor airman walks out of clothing sales and has to pass all 600.

The small victories are sometimes the sweetest

Couldn't have said it better. I think the entire process is the problem here. If Airman Snuffy is walking along minding his own business and quietly tells me, "Hey, sir, your collar is folded over," and even helps me fix it in the back, great! One team, one fight. He's looking out for me. The key is that he doesn't make a big deal about it. If 1st Sgt Snuffy sends out an e-mail to all other 1st Sgts on the base saying, "Hey we're gonna go walking around the barracks looking for uniform violations. Meet at the bar at 1800L if you wanna come with! We already have 7 people and could use a few more." [bTW, true story], well, you aren't going to get the same cordial reaction. For officers, subordinates are calling them out in public in front of peers and other subordinates; you're gonna get an uncooperative, awkward reaction. Do it to airmen in front of their peers and it's the same kind of reaction. Problem here is that it doesn't seem we're on the same side and you WILL get an "us vs. them" kind of reaction. If they would simply pull someone aside in passing and tell them, "You need to wear black socks with your ABUs." and leave it at that, they'd probably tell their buddies and everyone would make sure to be wearing black socks within a week: PROBLEM SOLVED and no one feels like "they're against us". As for reflective belts, if you find someone without a reflective belt, have an extra and say, "Hey, you can just return it tomorrow. I work over in XYZ." It'll go a LOOOOOOONG way in giving the impression that you are on their side. Please realize the above is only reflective on how to HANDLE such policies. The wisdom of some policies is another matter altogether.

The committee formed at each base to consider how to re-implement/rewrite the abysmal failure of such an AFI once it fails the second time. Perhaps a specific office in Wing staff, on par with the EO office, dedicated to enforcing such a policy. Perhaps an additional CBT...

converse is RAMF: RedAss motherfvcker

If that's the case, he might be going to Randolph instead of P-cola

Need details. Perhaps you are going to Pensacola instead of Randolph or vice versa. I'm not sure which program is shorter. It could also be that you are going to go to IFT earlier than planned. Are you commissioned yet? Still a cadet? ROTC? OTS? etc.

You crazy ROTC Nazi. What makes you think that the Air Force needs any fresh ideas!?! To answer your question, the reason is that these shoe clerks work for much bigger shoe clerks. If you chew them out (rightly so), they are going to report back to their boss that some guys from your unit (oh, and he'll be happy to take down some names too) chewed him out for enforcing local policy. In short, in this kind of situation, discretion is the better part of valor. Now if a SSgt did the same thing, I wouldn't hesitate to dress him down right there. The other option is to carry a copy of the reg that authorizes it (not the whole thing, just a scaled down printed version of that page. Example: I carry a switchblade with me when in uniform; I have never once said to myself, "man, I wish I didn't have my switchblade with me," but too many times I've said the converse. Some genius on base once stopped me when he saw me using it and told me it was illegal to possess such a weapon. In general, he was right, but military personnel are exempted from this law when in the performance of our duties. I show him a copy of the U.S. law which states that. He looked at me and said, "Oh." In short, when dealing with shoe clerks who know a lot about their opinions, but little on facts and regulations, it helps to be able to bring them crashing back to hard reality and out of their protective shoe clerk world. Edit: Pre-emptive strike to take out an ammo depot for the grammar nazis

Assuming a "sock hat" looks like a "watch cap", tell the friggin' genius to look in AFI36-2903 where those are specifically permitted.

I looked for two hours and all I found was a painting in that post. Maybe I'm just blind...

AFIs 36-2706 and 36-2909 come to mind off the top of my head.

Customs are EVERYONE's responsibility. Courtesies are expected by both sides (unless there is reason not to do so) and are backed up by AFI. Professionalism runs both ways. If you are the exception, then everyone will see that you make an exception for yourself and follow your example. It was official Air Force correspondence; a public document. It wasn't private since the information was intended to be passed down. I would hope so, but I've seen weirder things happen. He might let it happen once, but I can't see him canceling lines because of a simple slip up. Are we being hypercritical? Maybe. But it serves as an example of what to do and what not to do and how we can better our own leadership. It serves as a great example as to how we can improve ourselves and how we can be better leaders (this goes for officer and enlisted alike). Some of the best leaders I've seen are senior airmen. Some of the worst have stars on their shoulders or (worse) are in the senior civilian category. If you don't mind, I'm going to keep that one in my hip pocket for later use.

I am so glad someone else pointed this out. Respect is a two way street. I specifically remember a Major telling me to stand up whenever an IP or superior officer is addressing you. I have no problem with that and I was out of line/out of practice. I did as requested and continued to do so for the rest of my time there. Mind you I wasn't the only one doing it, but this particular Major felt a need to single me out. I was the class leadership and making an example may have needed to be done. I've got no problem there. Later that day, I was told to go talk to the flight commander. He asked me about the incident and told me the Major had written me up for a lack of military bearing. While I still think it was excessive, it also was well within his rights to do so. I signed the form acknowledging the "counseling" provided (the Flt commander actually shook his head in disbelief, but went through the procedures anyway). Now, I want to make it perfectly clear, everything to this point, I was in the wrong and, regardless about my feelings about the severity of the lashback, it was within the Major's perogative to do so... I made sure to tell everyone in the class (either in person or by e-mail for those I wasn't able to talk directly to) The same Major the next day was just chilling with several Studs with whom he was buddy-buddy and he got up to leave. They all snapped to attention and he said, "Ya'll don't have to do that." and then looked at me. Another example along this thread of thought was at ROTC field training where almost all the cadets in our flight were being mercilessly chewed out by the flight commander. He yelled at everyone and got in their face about every single infraction "Fix your fvcking gig line! You look like crap!" "What the fvck is your problem? Do you not understand basic directions?!" "How the hell do you fvck something up so badly?!?" Now the entire day he talked with one of our fellow cadets (one from his detachment) like he was his buddy. Marching to and from chow they chatted: "So how are you doing so far in training? Got to talk to your family since you got here? You can use my phone after dinner if you want." This was all interspersed with more profanity at the other cadets. At the end of the day none of us had any respect for him...including the cadet from his detachment. favoritism=poor leadership The last story I have is from a Colonel who was kind enough to spend some time mentoring me. He was at West Point as the Air Force rep. A decision came down from the officer leadership for the cadets. It wasn't very popular and many of the cadets were badmouthing the decision (it was something about uniform regs that had been allowed by the cadets, but was now being enforced). After talking to the commandant (I assume that's who is in charge over there), the Corps commander came to him and asked him some advice as to what to do since his buddies were badmouthing the decision. He told him 3 things: 1. If it is a lawful order, you must obey it. If you have concerns, take it to the source through the proper chain of command, but when the final decision is made, that's final 2. Your buddies can badmouth it to let off steam, but as the commander, it is yoru responsibility to implement it. 3. To fall back on "The commandant says XYZ so we're going to do it" is not leadership. It is followership and it shows mild contempt/apathy towards leadership. It places the leadership role on those above you when they are expecting YOU to carry out the marching orders. Instead, go with"We're going to do XYZ now." Cite the same rationale and, if desired, expound upon it. "Regulation ABC says...and we're going to follow it. Here's how were going to do that. Any cadet caught will..." Be explicit with the punishment for failure to comply and give clear boundaries (no one likes getting sideswiped by some vague interpretation or unknown punishment). apathy=poor leadership This example is leadership by popularity, IMHO. "Several of us on this email list have noticed a serious lack of professionalism from students lately. We’ve all talked about it but have never done anything about it." Shows that there is a de facto failure in leadership and that you haven't done anything. It is not only wishy washy, but it only degrades your own authority. It should have simply been "Professionalism is lacking and we need to step it up. From now on, any Student or Casual Lt who doesn't..." Cite a regulation if necessary, not as backup, but for example on how to fix the problem; to show where this came from. It should have been sent down to the flight commanders and let them deal with the students. To not do so shows a lack of faith in your subordinate leadership. This would be an effective policy letter when accompanied by a meeting with the Flt commanders. One last little tidbit from a prior squadron commander: Your order of interaction with people (subordinates or superiors) should be "sneaker mail (a.k.a. face-to-face), phone, and then e-mail. E-mail is a last resort. If you can't look someone in the eye and tell them what you need to do, you're in the wrong business.

Please ignore the other Big XII teams in the top 15 (3 in the South Division alone...)

I don't go bar hopping, so imagine my surprise when I find out I've been to two of the stateside seven: Rusty's Last Chance and McGuire's I HIGHLY recommend McGuire's in Pensacola. I was there for 4 days doing water survival and we went there 2 nights. 18 cents for their soup plus homemade beers & homemade root beer too. Rusty's was a great place to visit, but I only had 30 minutes to enjoy the charm of the place. Left off the list is the Dixie Chicken. While it is indeed a college hangout, its military roots with Texas A&M (the largest Senior Military College in the U.S.) lends itself to a lot of military tradition. I highly recommend it.

That would be the "Good Idea" part.

I thought I'd start a thread on USAF policies that don't make a heck of a lot of sense as a place where people can go to discuss "genius" ideas from leadership and ideas that aren't so bad. This is not meant as criticism of leadership, but as a place to discuss solutions to problems. To start things off: Bad idea: Reorganizing the Maintenance units under Operations (Ops guys don't need to focus on wrench turning and wrench turners don't need to focus on planning for a strike. It's the Wing Commander's job to balance the two while the Group Commanders can focus on accomplishing their marching orders) Good idea: Rethinking this and keeping the units the way they currently are. Good job at the staff level

If it were on a tanker, quite frankly the nav isn't needed much for day-to-day ops anymore. The advent of GPS kinda eliminated the need for celestial and grid navigation. That said, an expert in tactical planning is quite useful in the low-level realm, IMHO (yes, I realize 3000 ft AGL isn't what some of you would consider "low-level", but when you are limited in maneuverability because of weight & Gs, there is much less tolerance for error when you're flying between mountain peaks).

If I am EVER in charge of the Air Force, I WILL institute a system like this. Leadership NEEDS to be approachable and this guy epitomized it and showed what it could do. I think the Marine Corps benefited from this and those Marines I know concur with this style of leadership. B!tching needs to be done at the bar (and this is its virtual equivalent), then let it go.

I'm ACC (Barksdale) and we're wearing long sleeves starting next week. Not looking forward to it though... What concerns me about the long sleeves is that there appears to be no consideration made for weather. In North Dakota, it isn't going to get so warm that it's going to matter, but Louisiana is still in the 70s. I guess that's up to the base commanders to make that call, but from their quick reactions, I would assume they are just going to go along with whatever comes down. I think that a detailed explanation (which is lacking) would solve a lot of these problems/questions. Over a month and no picts?!? Still waiting...

You work at McGuire AFB? https://www.flyingsquadron.com/forums/index...showtopic=13507

FOR THE LOVE OF GOD!!! DON'T GIVE THEM ANY MORE IDEAS!!!!!!

You need to be reflective if you're nowhere near a road...why? ...in an alleged combat zone? Pardon me for asking such questions, but it doesn't seem to make much sense to me. I mean if you are walking near a road with no sidewalks, that's one thing, but if you aren't near a car... ...and what about PT gear? It already has reflective properties to it. 3 years ago they realized that and said you didn't have to wear them with PT gear, but I guess that logic has skipped a tour and we're back to this **** again

The Navy? No wonder. ...but AETC ain't much better. Enjoy Lieutenant Daycare...

I am all for a nine ribbons or less thing. It would eliminate the gaudy Mexican General look of some people. This has nothing to do with the awards (everyone who received one deserves credit), but the whole "I'm gonna make a quilt" mentality is somewhat out of control. We had that back in ROTC to discourage the selfish display of ribbons and it seemed to get people more involved in specific tasks instead of lots of little ones just to get ribbons.