Disco_Nav963 Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 Okay... Drafted an e-mail to the EFSS/CC and sent it to my DO for pre-screening/top cover. I'll let you know how it goes.
slacker Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 (edited) I thought the last article, "Putting life in perspective 6,000 miles from home" was pretty good. Having to have a reflective belt to eat at the chow hall is no doubt shoe-clerkery run amok. At least he had some perspective when he pinned the article. edit- where'd the article go??? Edited October 22, 2009 by slacker
BQZip01 Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 I thought the last article, "Putting life in perspective 6,000 miles from home" was pretty good. Having to have a reflective belt to eat at the chow hall is no doubt shoe-clerkery run amok. At least he had some perspective when he pinned the article. edit- where'd the article go??? Sounds like an interesting "article", slacker... ...kinda early to be so drunk, but whatever floats your boat...
loadsmith Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 (edited) sorry slacker, went to do some editing and deleted the dam post. Well here are the two articles that he has written during his last deployment and his current deployment. don't lose the bubble putting life in perspective 6000 miles from home Edited October 22, 2009 by loadsmith
slacker Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 ...kinda early to be so drunk, but whatever floats your boat... It's never too early....
Napoleon_Tanerite Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 Ok, received a reply from wing safety. Basic gist is that "since there are 11,000 people on base here, and not all of them wear reflective PT gear, how can we enforce the standard if the majority of the people here (AF people) do not have to wear a belt" He did encourage me to pursue this through the shirt chain, which is exactly what I am doing. I would suggest/request that others do the same. Can't hurt if every shirt on base has people buzzing in their ear waiving AFIs at them, especially a bunch of officer types.
HU&W Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 (edited) Ok, received a reply from wing safety. Basic gist is that "since there are 11,000 people on base here, and not all of them wear reflective PT gear, how can we enforce the standard if the majority of the people here (AF people) do not have to wear a belt" He did encourage me to pursue this through the shirt chain, which is exactly what I am doing. I would suggest/request that others do the same. Can't hurt if every shirt on base has people buzzing in their ear waiving AFIs at them, especially a bunch of officer types. Shirt chain? Would that count as reflective??? https://www.thinkgeek.com/tshirts-apparel/miscellaneous/9080/ On topic - is it too hard just to say that you have to be reflective and enforce that? People should be able to tell of their non-reflective PT gear requires the addition of a belt, vest, or even stickers/tape. Enforcement can't be that hard. Edited October 22, 2009 by HU&W
Disco_Nav963 Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 Well, Wing Safety wasn't the OPR for the AUAB Supp to 36-2903... Nor do they out-authority AFCENTIs or AFIs... So, meh. Has everyone seen the new "No Reflective Belt, No Service -- By Order Of 379 EFSS/CC" signs on the doors of the CC chow hall?
Guest Fogo Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 Well, it actually took longer than I thought. Went to CC Chow Hall before heading to work tonight and taped to each door is a sign saying that "service will be refused during hours of darkness without your reflective belt." So what? I can't take it off once I come inside (sts)? I spent most of my meal being amused by hearing people around me talking about it, but then went I went to the line to grab something to go, I saw two TCNs on a very big power trip about not allowing somebody their food. Sure enough, the dude wasn't wearing a belt. Yeah, lets add that to the list of stupidity. TCN's serving chow now get to enforce pointless rules.
disgruntledemployee Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 (edited) Well, it actually took longer than I thought. Went to CC Chow Hall before heading to work tonight and taped to each door is a sign saying that "service will be refused during hours of darkness without your reflective belt." So what? I can't take it off once I come inside (sts)? I spent most of my meal being amused by hearing people around me talking about it, but then went I went to the line to grab something to go, I saw two TCNs on a very big power trip about not allowing somebody their food. Sure enough, the dude wasn't wearing a belt. Yeah, lets add that to the list of stupidity. TCN's serving chow now get to enforce pointless rules. I am so glad I'm not there. I would make the biggest frackin' scene if some TCN refused to plot the crappy mashed potatoes on my tray due to a relective belt. So mush so that the entire chow hall would probably fall silent. My God, what the is going on there? The last time I heard of food service being refused due to clothing, a young SSgt e-mailed the AF Times and they published the story. Edited October 22, 2009 by disgruntledemployee
Herk Driver Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 As usual Dumbness at the Deid has continued to blossom. The problem with the Deid is the idea put forth by the Safety office. It's the one size fits all mentality. The standard should not be a reflective belt. The standard should be that wearing the AFPTU = wearing a reflective belt. And once you enter a building, wearing a reflective belt is a 'moo' point.
SuperWSO Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 As usual Dumbness at the Deid has continued to blossom. The problem with the Deid is the idea put forth by the Safety office. It's the one size fits all mentality. The standard should not be a reflective belt. The standard should be that wearing the AFPTU = wearing a reflective belt. And once you enter a building, wearing a reflective belt is a 'moo' point. This is so easy that even the Army can figure it out. When I was in Baghdad in 07-08, the rule on the FOB was reflective belt after dark except for AF PT gear. They all agreed that it was more than suitably reflective and a belt with AF PT gear was redundant.
Guest Fogo Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 (edited) I forgot to even mention that there were a couple hall monitors trolling the CC gym this afternoon checking everyone's shirts... And they weren't even trying to be subtle. I"m sure there are some that would tell us to KIO on the disco belt issue, that "who really cares?" But thats not the point for me... I was here this time last year, and none of this was an issue. Didn't have to wear one while in PTs at all, and didnt have to wear one in CC in uniform. Nobody assaulated you for agregious uniform violations. If it spiraled out of control this fast in one year, what happens with the next issue? Somebody said it a few pages back, but it is just now striking a point with me: We (mainly CGOs) have sort of let it happen by just giving in to the DDs because we'd rather get where we are going rather than put up with their crap. Don't know that a disco belt is the fight to pick... but I'm afraid it'll lead to something that would be. If things continue to amp up in A-stan, there are just more important things to worry about. Edited October 22, 2009 by Fogo
lloyd christmas Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 What is the accident rate for folks getting run over by a bus? Has the accident rate gone down since the introduction of the reflective belt? My point is that these things are not usefull at all. They aren't good for a damn thing except giving powerless shoe clerks more power than they need. I have a complete lack of confidence in senior officers. How are they so blind that they allow the basic officer/enlisted relationship to completely fall apart. MSgts grabbing LTs trays at chow halls? Really?
Napoleon_Tanerite Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 Well, Wing Safety wasn't the OPR for the AUAB Supp to 36-2903... Nor do they out-authority AFCENTIs or AFIs... So, meh. Has everyone seen the new "No Reflective Belt, No Service -- By Order Of 379 EFSS/CC" signs on the doors of the CC chow hall? well, in the interest of fairness, AUABI 91-1001 (basically the base safety reg) also has a bit in there about the reflective belt, so SE does have their finger in the pie a little bit, but you're right that they have no control over 36-2903. I'm happy to report i've gone a full 24 hours without a reflective belt, and not been accosted. I have a copy of the AFCENT AFI and 33-360 in my murse.
BQZip01 Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 (edited) Ok, received a reply from wing safety. Basic gist is that "since there are 11,000 people on base here, and not all of them wear reflective PT gear, how can we enforce the standard if the majority of the people here (AF people) do not have to wear a belt?" He did encourage me to pursue this through the shirt chain, which is exactly what I am doing. I would suggest/request that others do the same. Can't hurt if every shirt on base has people buzzing in their ear waiving AFIs at them, especially a bunch of officer types. 1. Wing Safety is really that stupid? "How can we enforce the standard..."? WTF!?!? The standard is already spelled out for you: PT gear=reflectivity & no need for an additional belt. If they aren't wearing reflective PT gear, then they need a belt. This is NOT difficult to grasp. 2. Wing Safety encouraging you to go through your first sergeant is an amazing abdication of authority by the officer corps. They are the leadership of the Air Force, not the first shirts! Step up and be a leader! Officers shouldn't have to get 1st Sgt approval before things get done. IMNSHO, you should get every officer (and enlisted if you want) together who agrees with you and go to your COMMANDER. Where the hell is the leadership?!?! ...oh wait, this is the 'deid... well, in the interest of fairness, AUABI 91-1001 (basically the base safety reg) also has a bit in there about the reflective belt, so SE does have their finger in the pie a little bit, but you're right that they have no control over 36-2903. I'm happy to report i've gone a full 24 hours without a reflective belt, and not been accosted. I have a copy of the AFCENT AFI and 33-360 in my murse. AUABI XX-SUCKIT doesn't matter if higher headquarters directs otherwise. If an AFI and local instruction are in conflict, the AFI wins. In this case HHQ has uncharacteristically come up with the common sense solution. Characteristically, the 'deid has seen fit to ignore common sense... And good on you for following orders from HHQ in the face of stupidity at lower levels! I assume you've been able to eat chow? Edited October 22, 2009 by BQZip01
Napoleon_Tanerite Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 1. Wing Safety is really that stupid? "How can we enforce the standard..."? WTF!?!? The standard is already spelled out for you: PT gear=reflectivity & no need for an additional belt. If they aren't wearing reflective PT gear, then they need a belt. This is NOT difficult to grasp. 2. Wing Safety encouraging you to go through your first sergeant is an amazing abdication of authority by the officer corps. They are the leadership of the Air Force, not the first shirts! Step up and be a leader! Officers shouldn't have to get 1st Sgt approval before things get done. IMNSHO, you should get every officer (and enlisted if you want) together who agrees with you and go to your COMMANDER. Where the hell is the leadership?!?! ...oh wait, this is the 'deid... AUABI XX-SUCKIT doesn't matter if higher headquarters directs otherwise. If an AFI and local instruction are in conflict, the AFI wins. In this case HHQ has uncharacteristically come up with the common sense solution. Characteristically, the 'deid has seen fit to ignore common sense... And good on you for following orders from HHQ in the face of stupidity at lower levels! I assume you've been able to eat chow? I did eat chow tonight (after dark) without a belt visible (i've been keeping it handy under my shorts for if push REAAAALLLYYYY came to shove, aka someone who outranks me flat out orders me to put it on) but I was able to eat my dinner unmolested. It wasn't a full up press-to-test though, since I only got food from the self-serve bar. Nobody tried to snatch my tray out of my hand or anything though, so I still put a mark in the W column for common sense.
BQZip01 Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 I did eat chow tonight (after dark) without a belt visible (i've been keeping it handy under my shorts for if push REAAAALLLYYYY came to shove, aka someone who outranks me flat out orders me to put it on) but I was able to eat my dinner unmolested. It wasn't a full up press-to-test though, since I only got food from the self-serve bar. Nobody tried to snatch my tray out of my hand or anything though, so I still put a mark in the W column for common sense. Promote that man!
JeepGuyC17 Posted October 23, 2009 Posted October 23, 2009 What is the accident rate for folks getting run over by a bus? To my knowledge, it has never happened. Last year though a Col claimed to have almost been hit by one, which led to the speed limit in CC being reduced to less than that of a school zone.
M2 Posted October 23, 2009 Posted October 23, 2009 MSgts grabbing LTs trays at chow halls? Really? If it happened, then the Lt's next comment should have been..."See if you can guess what I am now?" Followed by... "I'm a zit! Get it?" To which, the Reflective Belt Nazis would have responded... "All right, you bastard. Let's go, right here!" Thus requiring the call of "FOOD FIGHT!" Which would have resulted in the Base Commander looking like... But I am beginning to look more and more like Bluto! Cheers! M2
JarheadBoom Posted October 23, 2009 Posted October 23, 2009 Words fail to describe my disbelief at the turn this thread has taken. We're our own worst enemy. UNFUCKINGBELIEVABLE.
Q1Checkride Posted October 23, 2009 Posted October 23, 2009 Has everyone seen the new "No Reflective Belt, No Service -- By Order Of 379 EFSS/CC" signs on the doors of the CC chow hall? wow.
Toasty Posted October 23, 2009 Posted October 23, 2009 Would someone please forward this thread to all deployed base commanders? They obviously have no f'ing clue.
Murph Posted October 23, 2009 Posted October 23, 2009 Has everyone seen the new "No Reflective Belt, No Service -- By Order Of 379 EFSS/CC" signs on the doors of the CC chow hall? Looks like I'll have to bring a permanent marker next time I go to the chow hall and make a few modifications to the signs.
JS Posted October 23, 2009 Posted October 23, 2009 Would someone please forward this thread to all deployed base commanders? They obviously have no f'ing clue. I thought about doing that, but I figured a 70-page thread from an "unofficial," semi-anonymous website coming from little old me would probably not be the best thing. Nor do I think that my Sq CC would be very keen on provoking the general with said 70 page thread from the internet. What about someone emailing this thread to him from a commercial gmail/yahoo account back in the states? I can provide email addresses for those interested, even though it would not be that difficult to figure them out on your own. On a side note, a lot of people here probably know that the base commander/wing commander here is a pee-on when it comes to rank compared to some of the other brass at AUAB. There are numerous "higher headquarter" type organizations located here that are run by multi-star commanders. They make the one-star base commander look like a new LT as far as rank. It would be great to happen to include these higher officials in on the email that goes to the base commander with this thread.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now