Ammo against the shoe clerks!

[Guest Hueypilot812]

I bet these guys never got anything done...look at all those uniform violations...

[pawnman]

I bet these guys never got anything done...look at all those uniform violations...

Well they aren't getting into Jango's chow hall, that's for damn sure.

[old crow]

blah blah blah I don't care if you are a CGO or a jr enlisted you will maintain standards and I will correct you if do not.

What about a FGO? Will you correct me? Why specify CGO if you aren't willing to correct all officers?

[Guest Hueypilot812]

Well they aren't getting into Jango's chow hall, that's for damn sure.

And to think at least one of them in that photo (my grandfather) went on to become an O-6.

[tac airlifter]

Vertigo,

I will say this, I don't care if you fly for a living or not....everyone must maintain uniform standards and I don't care if you are a CGO or a jr enlisted you will maintain standards and I will correct you if do not. You know how bad it looks to the jr enlisted when an officer walk around looking like Gomer Pyle? You do your profession a discredit if you cannot maintain military standards....I don't care how nitnoid they might be. I don't like tucking in the PT shirt or wearing a disco belt either, however it's something I have to do. Take some pride in the uniform you wear, look like a professional. If you are too lazy to maintain a professional appearance, what other corners are you cutting? If you are proud of what you do....your appearance will reflect just that. Bash the 'shoe clerks'....for what? Doing the right thing? Enforcing standards? You can still get the mission done and not wear your glasses on your head, don't be lazy....how many pockets do those flight suits have? How long would it take to properly stow those shades?

Spoken like someone who knows nothing about the mission. After several years of doing this I've noticed the only people who care about uniform shit are the dudes who don't have anything more important to care about. Good luck correcting me, I'll politely ignore you.

[Chuck17]

So as you mentor the newer generation of Air Force professionals you are good with telling them follow only the rules you want to and to hell with the rest, so long as you get the job done. Sorry, that shouldn't fly.

This is the difference right here... I would actually rather have a guy that USES HIS BRAIN to know when to break the rules and when not to. There is a difference. Ive flown with guys who knew every rule in the book, backwards and front - and they couldnt make a decision to save their goddamned lives. Honestly! If it wasnt in the book, it simply could NOT BE DONE. I say THATS BULLSHIT. There IS a difference - know when and where to break the rules; it matters - and anyone worth a shit to their organization knows how to BFM the rules. Im not saying break rules as a matter of policy - just USE YOUR BRAIN! Some other unfortunate souls define themselves by the rules. That is MORE dangerous where I live. Thats how you end up not able to make a decision that could save your life or your crews. Period.

That being said, what I do aint what everyone does (i.e. Im not a nuke guy). However, if you define yourself by your rules or the rules of your job, youre only going to go so far - eventually you will run into a situation not defined by your rules. What then?

Question the answers as a matter of policy. Dont be insubordinate, just use your brain. If something makes no sense or a process sucks, change it, ignore it or find a better way to do it. Dont defend idiocy. Dont "think outside the box", instead question if there even is a box! Just because youre an enlisted guy doesnt mean youre a robot dude!

Chuck

Edited October 11, 2010 by Chuck17

[Karl Hungus]

Vertigo,

I will say this, I don't care if you fly for a living or not....everyone must maintain uniform standards and I don't care if you are a CGO or a jr enlisted you will maintain standards and I will correct you if do not. You know how bad it looks to the jr enlisted when an officer walk around looking like Gomer Pyle? You do your profession a discredit if you cannot maintain military standards....I don't care how nitnoid they might be. I don't like tucking in the PT shirt or wearing a disco belt either, however it's something I have to do. Take some pride in the uniform you wear, look like a professional. If you are too lazy to maintain a professional appearance, what other corners are you cutting? If you are proud of what you do....your appearance will reflect just that. Bash the 'shoe clerks'....for what? Doing the right thing? Enforcing standards? You can still get the mission done and not wear your glasses on your head, don't be lazy....how many pockets do those flight suits have? How long would it take to properly stow those shades?

And this, ladies and gents, perfectly sums up why I can't wait to get out of active duty Air Force. To say that this isn't the Air Force I thought I was getting into would be an understatement.

My grandfather, C-47 pilot who lost a lot of friends flying the Hump, would be ashamed of what we have become.

[SurelySerious]

When is your enlistment up? Send out a save the date, I can't wait. One more hurdle we won't have to jump over to get the mission done. Cut all this "I'm for the mission" crap, you've already described earlier in this thread you won't flex to help the ops out.

[JarheadBoom]

Once again, I am disgusted by the attitude of one of my enlisted "peers".

[matmacwc]

This is the difference right here... I would actually rather have a guy that USES HIS BRAIN to know when to break the rules and when not to. There is a difference. Ive flown with guys who knew every rule in the book, backwards and front - and they couldnt make a decision to save their goddamned lives. Honestly! If it wasnt in the book, it simply could NOT BE DONE. I say THATS BULLSHIT. There IS a difference - know when and where to break the rules; it matters - and anyone worth a shit to their organization knows how to BFM the rules. Im not saying break rules as a matter of policy - just USE YOUR BRAIN! Some other unfortunate souls define themselves by the rules. That is MORE dangerous where I live. Thats how you end up not able to make a decision that could save your life or your crews. Period.

That being said, what I do aint what everyone does (i.e. Im not a nuke guy). However, if you define yourself by your rules or the rules of your job, youre only going to go so far - eventually you will run into a situation not defined by your rules. What then?

Question the answers as a matter of policy. Dont be insubordinate, just use your brain. If something makes no sense or a process sucks, change it, ignore it or find a better way to do it. Dont defend idiocy. Dont "think outside the box", instead question if there even is a box! Just because youre an enlisted guy doesnt mean youre a robot dude!

Chuck

We'll put Chuck, this is also the reason I don't think E's should "fly" RPA's.

[Butters]

I bet these guys never got anything done...look at all those uniform violations...

Shoe: "Hats gentlemen?"

Crew: "No Thanks, we already have hats in our pockets."

[Guest Jango]

Ok, lots of responses, let's see if I can concisely answer all in one post. As a support person I do care about the mission, you can look sharp doing and still get the job done. Uniform wear gets relaxed on worksites all the time ie: not wear your ABU top, hat....ect. Once you leave the jobsite you adjust back to the proper standard. So going from the flightline to say the base side you would need to adhere to the standards. Not wanting to do so because you are tired or think you are entitled to it does not count. When I was a convoy commander in Iraq once we got off the FOB, morale patches went on and uniform standards were relaxed, once we were near another FOB to drop off cargo morale patches came off and were got back into standards. So yea I understand the concept of bending the rules to get the job done. Converts...no not looking for converts here gents, it would be nice to modify the mindset just a little bit. And yes pawnman, there is a HUGE difference between "Get those sunglasses off your head now!" and "Sir, the reg says you can't have your sunglasses on your head", customs and courtesies should always be adhered to. If someone disrespects your rank to correct you....make that SOB stand at attention and give them a refresher on customs and courtesies.

FGOs or CGOs I was generalizing....and with that respect my comment was for all officers flyers/qweeps/and support types. Joe1234, seriously if my opinions didn't matter to you....why did you hit reply and post a response?

Chuck, I agree with you on using your brain and bending the rules, there is a time and place for it. And you said it best yourself "If something makes no sense or a process sucks, change it, ignore it or find a better way to do it." If you guys don't like the policy....why not change it? Surely you either are or going to be policy makers one day rather flouting the rules? That makes more sense to me.

When is my enlistment up? What does that even matter? Won't flex for Ops? I go out of my way for them, what I won't flex for is something that clearly violates the AFIs, DoD or policy. Does my support end there? Sure doesn't, if I know another way to get the job done and meet your needs I do it. Here is an example: fini flight for Col X, he wants a DV Van to take his parents/family/friends into the secure area on the ramp and show them around. Can I give him a vehicle and driver for this? No. What do I tell Col X? Sir we can't do that and this is why....and this is what I can do, send me another request for driver fam training, what you do with it on the ramp isn't my concern. Again the difference between following the rules and doing the right thing. Purposely breaking the rules to be lazy....please.

And if you want to keep beating a dead horse, I am game. I have said what I needed say. Am I leaving the forums? Dropping this topic not in the least.

[Guest]

A good friend of mine used to say "If you hammer shoe shines, haircuts and patches the big things will fall right into place!" anytime someone (leadership) got focused on queep and lost sight of the real objective that if you execute your role to the best of your ability and play every play like it is your last the win will take care of itself.

[MKopack]

"Rules are for the guidance of wise men and the obedience of fools."

- Douglas Bader

___________________________

Sir Douglas Bader was a WWII Royal Air Force Group Commander who decided to fight the rules that active pilots must have legs - he'd lost his in a pre-war flying accident. The RAF, citing their standing regulations fought hard to keep him from the cockpit. In the end, it worked out well for him, and the RAF, as he ended with over 20 kills flying Hurricanes and Spitfires before becoming a POW and escaping his captors several times. With his leadership, the 'Big Wing' tactics changed the air war in Europe and may well have affected the future of the conflict. He was honored by leading the victory flypast over London at VE Day.

Imagine if he'd decided it wasn't worth it to fight something so insignificant as wearing sunglasses on your head.

A good friend of mine used to say "If you hammer shoe shines, haircuts and patches the big things will fall right into place!" anytime someone (leadership) got focused on queep and lost sight of the real objective that if you execute your role to the best of your ability and play every play like it is your last the win will take care of itself.

If you hammer the mission win above all, the amount of pride that can develop in a unit, if you play it right, will more than take care of the shoeshines, haircuts and patches.

Build morale by kicking ass in the Mission and the small stuff will take care of itself, rather than kicking ass with the queep and hoping that will help the Mission.

Edited October 11, 2010 by MKopack

[Guest Jango]

Your criticisms about a lack of professionalism imply that you're trying to guilt trip the people you're talking to into following uniform standards. Your statement that rank doesn't matter and you're going to correct us implies a thinly veiled threat (whether you intended it that way or not).

I am simply informing you that these things are irrelevant and ineffective. You can either use that information, or discard it.

Veiled threat? Sorry, perhaps I didn't say what I meant to say. If I see something that isn't right and it so happens to be someone above my pay grade, I will render proper customs and curtesies and explain what I have observed and why its wrong. If he or she acts on it, fine....I have done my part to correct the situation. Getting rude with a person who outranks me even in a public forum is not going to have a positive outcome. Shame on anyone who lets a jr. ranking person rudely and unprofessionally attempt to correct them in public or private. Guilt trip people into following uniform standards? You make it sound like I am trying to get someone to go to church, not the case. "Uniform standards" can be found in AFI 36-2903, I shouldn't have to guilt trip someone into following established rules.

[Guest Alarm Red]

Jango, why are you here? You will not convince anyone here of your viewpoint. It is unlikely anyone here will convince you of theirs. We don't go to the bus driver forum and troll, so please let it go.

[Techsan]

We don't go to the bus driver forum and troll, so please let it go.

Well said.

This Bus Driver forum looks like a good one to start trolling...whose with me?

[Guest Crew Report]

Veiled threat? Sorry, perhaps I didn't say what I meant to say. If I see something that isn't right and it so happens to be someone above my pay grade, I will render proper customs and curtesies and explain what I have observed and why its wrong. If he or she acts on it, fine....I have done my part to correct the situation. Getting rude with a person who outranks me even in a public forum is not going to have a positive outcome. Shame on anyone who lets a jr. ranking person rudely and unprofessionally attempt to correct them in public or private. Guilt trip people into following uniform standards? You make it sound like I am trying to get someone to go to church, not the case. "Uniform standards" can be found in AFI 36-2903, I shouldn't have to guilt trip someone into following established rules.

That's the problem, most of the "Jr. Ranking" people who correct senior Officers and NCO's aren't professional when they do it.

Perfect example, a Major (Pilot) lost her hat at the chow hall somehow. Well she isn't going to sit in the chow hall for the rest of the deployment so she walks out going back to her dorm. Some MSgt stares at her and points, "Major, your hat! Put it in your head now!" No salute, no "Excuse me Ma'am/Major", nothing. She then has to explain to the MSgt why she doesn't have a hat because she lost it. Now I don't know what military you're in but Rock, Paper, Oakleaf, a FGO doesn't need to explain shit to any Enlisted person. That's one of the reasons why they make more money. That pretty much sums up the attitude of the Shoe's in the AOR.

It seems that 36-2903 is the only AFI that Shoe's know. Don't ask them about any other AFI pertaining to their AFSC/Duties. You'll see the Windows hour glass appear above their head and have them give you the deer in the headlight look.

Here's a tidbit that you might not know. Any Officer has the authority to apprehend you (Article 9 UCMJ) as an Enlisted person, and disrespect to a superior commissioned Officer (Article 89) is punitive article in the UCMJ. So keep that in mind when you're "correcting" someone who ultimately outranks you.

[HerkDerka]

I shouldn't have to guilt trip someone into following established rules.

One time, I broke at least three flying rules to medevac a grunt who had been shot in the head. He lived. I weighed my options and made a sound decision. I guess in hindsight I should have manned up and followed established rules. Feel free to preach to me all you want about professionalism...I don't care, I'm not a professional. You can tug on the koolaid all you want.

[Boxhead]

Here's a tidbit that you might not know. Any Officer has the authority to apprehend you (Article 9 UCMJ) as an Enlisted person, and disrespect to a superior commissioned Officer (Article 89) is punitive article in the UCMJ. So keep that in mind when you're "correcting" someone who ultimately outranks you.

Totally agree. However, Art 9 covers arrest or confinement, a very different monster from apprehension, which is covered in the MCM, Rule 302, para b.1...Gotta get that one right...if you just arrest/detain/confine, you don't get to give that mo'fo' a full up search incident to apprehension, and then when all his kiddie porn falls out of his pockets while you are jacking them up, it's all inadmissible because you did it wrong!

God I wish I did not remember that, I would thunk that penguin fell off the iceberg long ago. Gonna have a few more drinks...try to force him off...

[Steve Davies]

"Rules are for the guidance of wise men and the obedience of fools."

- Douglas Bader

___________________________

Sir Douglas Bader was a WWII Royal Air Force Group Commander who decided to fight the rules that active pilots must have legs - he'd lost his in a pre-war flying accident.

Hmm.

1) Bader lost his legs because he didn't follow peacetime training rules (and it very nearly cost him his life)

2) Bader only got back in the cockpit because there was a a war on and we were exceedingly short of pilots

I suspect that you know better examples to cite, Mike.

[BQZip01]

Standing by for the line about how "if you dont follow the rules about sunglasses and PT shirt-tuck-ins, you wont follow the rules when it counts," because apparently every aircrew member with an unzipped flight suit pocket and a friday nametag or pen-patch is without-a-doubt going to be behind the next Mai-Lai massacre... in 3...2....1...

Woah there sparky. A lot of our Friday traditions are actually in the uniform regs:

"Commanders may authorize crewmembers to wear a designated unit standardized color undershirt at home station on Fridays."

"3.2.5.7. MAJCOM commanders must approve all emblems/patches not specifically addressed in this instruction."

I'll admit I'm reading between the lines here, but it doesn't say they must approve in writing, only that they "must approve". I believe it is reasonable to assume that since there is no explicit direction NOT to wear such patches, it isn't prohibited and, therefore, they approve. If ANYONE says anything about them, I would simply remove them. Our commander doesn't let them get crass or inappropriate. Most are just humorous or benign (like a school patch).

ACC Sup explicitly approves of friday nametags:

3.2.5.2. (ACC) Nametags...first name, initial(s), or common nicknames are optional provided they are in good taste (e.g., member may use "SAMUEL P. JONES," "SAM JONES," "S. JONES," "ACE JONES," or "JONES"). For enlisted personnel; last name and abbreviated rank (e.g., SSgt, TSgt, MSgt, etc.), initial(s), or common nicknames are optional provided they are in good taste (e.g., member may use "TSGT SAMUEL P. JONES," "TSGT SAM JONES," "TSGT S. JONES," "TSGT ACE JONES," or "TSGT JONES").

The pocket containing your hat is optional to be closed

I only point this out to let you realize that there is a lot of stuff you seem to be thinking you are "getting away with" that is either explicitly or implicitly codified.

Hmm.

1) Bader lost his legs because he didn't follow peacetime training rules (and it very nearly cost him his life)

2) Bader only got back in the cockpit because there was a a war on and we were exceedingly short of pilots

I suspect that you know better examples to cite, Mike.

I know a Special Operations helicopter pilot who is missing part of his leg due to a landmine blast. Last I saw of him about 5 years ago, he was a squadron commander...

[HuggyU2]

I had almost the same thing happen. Couldn't find my hat... I get chewed out by some shoe who looks like I just killed his first born child. "What kind of example do you think you're setting, strolling around base without your cover!?!?" ..... His response was, and I quote: "Well get on with it. You're an Officer, start acting like one!"

I did something like that recently. A Captain in a flightsuit (RQ-4 guy, didn't know him) was leaving the building and halfway to the parking lot. No hat. You could tell from his expression/demeanor that he felt "caught", and had probably waited until the coast was clear. He sheepishly looks at me and salutes,... I return the salute, smile and say, "good afternoon!" while looking right at him, and continue inside.

There was no doubt that he simply couldn't find his hat.

There was no doubt that I recognized it.

There was no doubt he was going to fix it ASAP.

There was no doubt he appreciated that I didn't berate him on the obvious.

There are communication skills and techniques other than verbal. It appears that many in the USAF are weak in that area.

Now,... rather than discuss hats and sunglasses-on-the-forehead of officers, let's morph this discussion into why so many USAF Enlisted can't render a proper salute in a timely manner and with some military bearing, like the other military services can.

[Guest Jango]

One time, I broke at least three flying rules to medevac a grunt who had been shot in the head. He lived. I weighed my options and made a sound decision. I guess in hindsight I should have manned up and followed established rules. Feel free to preach to me all you want about professionalism...I don't care, I'm not a professional. You can tug on the koolaid all you want.

Apples and oranges bro, I know you aren't that stupid to think that's in the same league as dress and appearance.

Now,... rather than discuss hats and sunglasses-on-the-forehead of officers, let's morph this discussion into why so many USAF Enlisted can't render a proper salute in a timely manner and with some military bearing, like the other military services can.

I think this one goes both ways, I have seen Es and Os regardless of AFSC avoiding each other in let's say the BX parking lot so that they don't have to salute. These are more than likely the same people that go running indoors when they hear retreat start to play.

[MKopack]

Hmm.

1) Bader lost his legs because he didn't follow peacetime training rules (and it very nearly cost him his life)

2) Bader only got back in the cockpit because there was a a war on and we were exceedingly short of pilots

I suspect that you know better examples to cite, Mike.

I agree Steve, the Bulldog crash isn't a good example for "ranking the importance of individual regulations". It was probably a 'learning opportunity' that I'd bet he'd have rather not gone through, though. (...although given his reputation I don't think I'd have asked him about it...)

"Crashed slow-rolling near ground. Bad show."

- logbook entry for that flight.

I was more thinking about his pushing against the regulations that would let him fly. While it was only approved because of the war, in the end, you've got to admit, it worked out pretty well and in some cases opened the door for others to follow, WWII and beyond.

Sorry to take this off topic, I'm done now.

Edited October 12, 2010 by MKopack