Details on fired WG/CC from Hanscom

[Napoleon_Tanerite]

Linkage

A cut/paste from the article that concerns me:

On May 1, 2009, for example, Orr picked up the lieutenant colonel and three unidentified lower-ranking airmen from Hanscom’s Minuteman Club and drove them home after they realized they had drank too much alcohol, the report said. The lieutenant colonel had requested the ride, sending Orr a text message on his Air Force-issued BlackBerry.

The lieutenant colonel’s decision to contact Orr demonstrated he had failed to maintain the appropriate relationship between commander and subordinates, according to the investigation’s findings.

“In normal circumstances,” the report noted, “the last person [an airman] would call or text to arrange a ride home after becoming too drunk to drive would be their wing commander.”

This struck me as pretty bad. How many people have had their boss tell them "if you can't get a ride or your plan falls through, call me and there will be no questions asked"? Granted calling the boss isn't exactly plan A, but the option DOES exist, and I DO know dudes who have called leadership because they were in a bad spot and out of options. The fact that this is being used to bury this guy seems like a dangerous precedent. Granted there is plenty of other stuff that seems to be going on here, but that one particular incident was highlighted. I know some of you guys are in leadership positions, and it would suck for doing something like that for one of your troops and having it bite you in the ass down the road.

[brabus]

WTF is even remotely wrong with that? So apparently you can't call a commander for help...good, here comes the rise of more problems and DUIs for the AF. Whoever "investigated" this is a complete asshat.

[Learjetter]

The interesting part to me is that a Lt Col would call the WING CC for a ride home. There are very few Wing Staff positions that a Lt Col can hold and have their immediate boss be the Wing CC--most Lt Cols in a wing have an additional level of supervision (Group CC) between them and the wing king. The issue isn't that the guy is getting hammered for giving them a ride home, but because HE was SO FAMILIAR with a certain subordinate that SHE thought NOTHING of calling HIM for a ride. That's the issue, IMHO.

Fly Safe!

[brabus]

There are very few Wing Staff positions that a Lt Col can hold and have their immediate boss be the Wing CC--most Lt Cols in a wing have an additional level of supervision (Group CC) between them and the wing king

Who said the person you call/get a ride from (sts) cannot be higher than your direct boss? I guarantee the wing/cc here would give me and any of the other bros a ride back without asking a question...and I also guarantee no one would give a shit, unless some fuckstain like the one who wrote this report was around. I'm not saying every wing/cc is like that, but if you know yours is and he's in a position (sts) to help, then what the hell is wrong with letting him help you? What's the better alternative, "hey dude, you're the least drunk, here's the keys."

HE was SO FAMILIAR with a certain subordinate that SHE thought NOTHING of calling HIM for a ride

But where's the proof of any of that? How does anyone know how familiar he was (without evidence) and who says she thought "nothing" of calling him. Maybe she ran out of options. I don't know, but there should be some solid evidence to make a statement like that.

Edited June 8, 2010 by brabus

[Learjetter]

The proof:

"The lieutenant colonel’s decision to contact Orr demonstrated he had failed to maintain the appropriate relationship between commander and subordinates, according to the investigation’s findings."

From the report. It's about letting your subordinate commanders lead and creating an environment where they lead their units in the direction you've tasked them to go. This isn't about preventing DUIs, it's about the guy's choices as the senior leader. He's a senior rater--with promotion/retention/OPR/EPR(discipline/career-making or breaking power--everyone under his command must believe he's impartial. Fostering a climate like he did destroyed his command.

[Napoleon_Tanerite]

The interesting part to me is that a Lt Col would call the WING CC for a ride home. There are very few Wing Staff positions that a Lt Col can hold and have their immediate boss be the Wing CC--most Lt Cols in a wing have an additional level of supervision (Group CC) between them and the wing king. The issue isn't that the guy is getting hammered for giving them a ride home, but because HE was SO FAMILIAR with a certain subordinate that SHE thought NOTHING of calling HIM for a ride. That's the issue, IMHO.

Fly Safe!

I call fail on this logic. Who says it has to be your immediate boss and immediate boss only? Think of it like this, I go out and get trashed. My buddy's (DD) car won't start and this small town doesn't have a cab service. I am out of options, so I call my flt/cc for help. For whatever reason he doesn't pickup the phone. I'm really in a jam here, so I pull out my SQ issued "if you're out of options" card and call my sq/cc. SHE (hypothetically) answers the phone and comes to pick me up and gives me a ride home. In return, there's a bottle of her beverage of choice waiting on her desk the next work day.

Does this give an appearance of an unprofessional relationship? I sure would hope not!

ETA: Saw you replied again after I posted

The proof:

"The lieutenant colonel’s decision to contact Orr demonstrated he had failed to maintain the appropriate relationship between commander and subordinates, according to the investigation’s findings."

From the report. It's about letting your subordinate commanders lead and creating an environment where they lead their units in the direction you've tasked them to go. This isn't about preventing DUIs, it's about the guy's choices as the senior leader. He's a senior rater--with promotion/retention/OPR/EPR(discipline/career-making or breaking power--everyone under his command must believe he's impartial. Fostering a climate like he did destroyed his command.

that logic is bunk too. Just because someone writes on someone else doesn't preclude them from helping that person out if the ratee is in trouble. What would be improper is if the leader picked up one individual and ignored another under the same circumstances. Taking the article posted at face value (I have no further information on the subject) that doesn't seem to be the case.

Edited June 8, 2010 by Napoleon_Tanerite

[brabus]

it's about the guy's choices as the senior leader

Copy, he should have told her to fuck off and find another way home. Yep, that would have been a better and "safer" career choice (unfortunately it would have been a "safer" career choice...and that's BULLSHIT).

[TMFan]

Why is it HIS fault what his subordinates do when they're drunk, especially if no one did anything illegal? Some things may seem like a good idea after several rounds. "Hey, guys, remember when Col Orr said to call him if we needed a ride home??? Dare me to call him?!" Imagine if he'd answered the phone, told them to f--- off and the Lt Col got a DUI.

[Guest atlantis15]

I think it's tough to have a discussion on this because the reality of this situation, according to the article, is that there were other things going besides just a pick up from the club....especially since the female Lt Col was found guilty of fraternization and the whole promotion scandal between the WG/CC and the general's staff above him.

Now, a hypothetical situation, should a WG/CC get in trouble if this was the case? Definitely not, he's doing what a good leader should do. But in this case, it is just another piece of evidence that supports the issue of favoritism.

[Learjetter]

Fellas, I'm trying to ishow how this DUI prevention incident illustrates the command climate this guy fostered as described in the article. I never said I had a problem with the guy giving the tipsy folks a ride home. I have a problem with a Wing Commander (or any senior rater) who fosters a command climate as was described in the AF Times article: Exhibit A: deliberately hiding unfavorable information about a subordinate (lack of accountability). Exhibit B: Documented fraternization and inappropriate relationships with subordinates--no senior rater should be so familiar with subordinates that they text about non-official business. Exhibit c: Rating a subordinate based on favoritism rather than generally-accepted standards. The lesson is clear: the higher up the ladder you go, the more your decisions, and behavior, need to be based on facts and sound logic. I'm just saying that if you read the whole article, I think you'll come to the same conclusion I did. If not, then we'll just have to agree to disagree. For the record, I'm glad he prevented the DUI, but he should never have made his command vulnerable and put himself in that position, with his subordinates, in the first place.

Fly Safe!

Another Link to AF Times Article

[HuggyU2]

Sad to hear. Dave and I were FAIPs together.

And for all you Perry Mason's out there, it wasn't just the DD callout issue, so don't focus on it. LearJetter is spot on: that was simply one indicator of a larger issue. Every investigation I've seen like this in my career has had multiple flags that got the attention. Had it been one thing, it wouldn't have raised an eyebrow.

Edited June 8, 2010 by Huggyu2

[brickhistory]

On May 13, 2009, Orr initiated an investigation of the lieutenant colonel after airmen complained that she was having unprofessional relationships with enlisted airmen.

Ok so far.

In early June 2009, with the investigation ongoing, Bowlds’ staff asked Orr to provide promotion recommendation information on the lieutenant colonel. Orr did not mention the inquiry, rated her as “definitely promote” and ranked her as among his top officers.

To me, still ok. An investigation is just that, not a determination of guilt. If the investigation had come up dry, by putting this into the promotion process, it's guilty without proof. And the USAF would never do that, right?

Last July 14, Orr received the inquiry’s findings, which confirmed the fraternization allegations. He responded by counseling the lieutenant colonel and chose not to inform Bowlds about the findings, the report said.

Fail although if the PRF cut-off had passed, then it's a gut check as this was not an official part of the record.

[GearMonkey]

Maybe the WG/CC was the only DD option because the Club sucked (like they all do) and nobody else was there.

I too was troubled by this case. On one hand there are some actions which are clearly not textbook. On the other hand, we have an O6 protecting his people and handling stuff in his way and at his level. They didn't really give much detail about the investigation into the Lt Col (the one the Col didn't tell the General about). This could have been serious, as was implied, or it could have been something stupid that he didn't think the General needed or wanted to hear about.

Unfortunately we'll probably never know the full story here so we will never know how good or how bad a leader he really was. In the non-WWROD Air Force this doesn't surprise me at all.

Edited June 8, 2010 by GearMonkey

[HU&W]

So, does a wg/cc need to tell the 3-STAR about every little disciplinary issue he handles? Being a DD checks without crossing boundaries, especially if she was on his staff. Issuing a DP with an ongoing inquiry checks since it (probably) matches the records on file.

AF times seems to be hyping relative non-issues. As written, sounds like an issue of a 3-star being mad that he signed a DP without having every nitty gritty up to the minute detail.

CAVEAT: Bosses can do what they want, and there's probably much more to this than what was published.

[Guest]

There's got to be more to this. NFW the Wg/CC gets shitcanned for something this minor.

FWIW, it used to be standard to call the Wg/DO and Wg/CC to the club...so they could buy. If they didn't show they got roof stomped. If they did show they bought some rounds before they got roof stomped.

[Napoleon_Tanerite]

There's got to be more to this. NFW the Wg/CC gets shitcanned for something this minor.

FWIW, it used to be standard to call the Wg/DO and Wg/CC to the club...so they could buy. If they didn't show they got roof stomped. If they did show they bought some rounds before they got roof stomped.

these days a roof stomp is a good way to get arrested

[Guest]

these days a roof stomp is a good way to get arrested

I don't doubt that but I bet there are a few cool commanders out there somewhere...

[brabus]

these days a roof stomp is a good way to get arrested

WTF? Granted I've only been to three bases, but every single one it was not only OK, but encouraged.

If they didn't show they got roof stomped. If they did show they bought some rounds before they got roof stomped.

Well played. I will say there's at least one place left in this world where that still happens. Even better is somewhere around 4 am when the boss wants to go to bed and he can't get inside his bedroom because every piece of furniture in his room his stacked to the ceiling on the other side of the door. Punks win...again.

[Vertigo]

I call fail on this logic. Who says it has to be your immediate boss and immediate boss only? Think of it like this, I go out and get trashed. My buddy's (DD) car won't start and this small town doesn't have a cab service. I am out of options, so I call my flt/cc for help. For whatever reason he doesn't pickup the phone. I'm really in a jam here, so I pull out my SQ issued "if you're out of options" card and call my sq/cc. SHE (hypothetically) answers the phone and comes to pick me up and gives me a ride home. In return, there's a bottle of her beverage of choice waiting on her desk the next work day.

Does this give an appearance of an unprofessional relationship? I sure would hope not!

The only question I have is this: Was the Wing/CC her first call for a pickup? If so then it points to a unprofessional relationship. If on the other hand she had tried to contact others and wasn't getting any help then I have no problem with the ride. But if/when your first choice of personnel to call for a ride is the Wing King then something isn't right there.

I'm not saying don't call them for a ride if you need it, especially when the offer is out there, but it should be your last option not your first.

[ClearedHot]

I don't doubt that but I bet there are a few cool commanders out there somewhere...

Exactly...there are still a few great ones out there.

[Butters]

Has anyone thought to ask if this Lt Col is hot?

[Hacker]

There's got to be more to this. NFW the Wg/CC gets shitcanned for something this minor.

FWIW, it used to be standard to call the Wg/DO and Wg/CC to the club...so they could buy. If they didn't show they got roof stomped. If they did show they bought some rounds before they got roof stomped.

Rainman, I think you'll find that the O-Club rules are sadly no longer the O-Club rules. So far as leadership is concerned, it's a race to see who can appear to be the most conservative and straight-arrow, and unfortunately bar hijinx are considered to be bad. It's unbelievable.

[Cooter]

Exactly...there are still a few great ones out there.

2...and have participated in one in the last 6 months of a WG/CC.

[Guest Crew Report]

Exactly...there are still a few great ones out there.

2