AFI 36-2903 and dress/uniform regs and issues

[Swizzle]

Received this e-gem today.......where is your fold?

"This, for some reason, has become an issue with the base. This goes for both the Sage and Black cap.

6.2.8.1. Cap will fit snugly over top of head (tight fit). Adjust cap so it may fit squarely on head. Fold edge of cap all the way around, adjust crease so that the folded edge is no more than 3 inches wide. The back of the cap should run across the nape of the neck and the front should rest within ½ inch of the eyebrows. The watch cap should reflect a diagonal line across the ears moving downwards, from front to back. No bunching and no sagging.

6.2.8.2. It will be commercially designed, plain, solid, sage green knit or fleece/micro fiber material.

6.2.8.3. Rank insignia is not worn on the sage green watch cap.

I know it says no more than a 3 inch wide fold, and that no fold is “less than” 3 inches; however, it WILL be worn with a fold. Lastly, do not wear one with logos on it. There have been people walking around with the under armour caps with logos showing.

Shirt"

[BQZip01]

Received this e-gem today.......where is your fold?

"This, for some reason, has become an issue with the base. This goes for both the Sage and Black cap.

6.2.8.1. Cap will fit snugly over top of head (tight fit). Adjust cap so it may fit squarely on head. Fold edge of cap all the way around, adjust crease so that the folded edge is no more than 3 inches wide. The back of the cap should run across the nape of the neck and the front should rest within ½ inch of the eyebrows. The watch cap should reflect a diagonal line across the ears moving downwards, from front to back. No bunching and no sagging.

6.2.8.2. It will be commercially designed, plain, solid, sage green knit or fleece/micro fiber material.

6.2.8.3. Rank insignia is not worn on the sage green watch cap.

I know it says no more than a 3 inch wide fold, and that no fold is “less than” 3 inches; however, it WILL be worn with a fold. Lastly, do not wear one with logos on it. There have been people walking around with the under armour caps with logos showing.

Shirt"

YGBSM! It's a friggin' hat. When it is -30 here in Minot, no one gives a damn whether the fold is more than 3 inches. The point of the damn thing is to keep your head warm and prevent frostbite!. Adjust it as you need to to stay warm.

[B.L]

YGBSM! It's a friggin' hat. When it is -30 here in Minot, no one gives a damn whether the fold is more than 3 inches. The point of the damn thing is to keep your head warm and prevent frostbite!. Adjust it as you need to to stay warm.

Ha. I had a buddy get scolded for wearing his fleece hat from the squadron to his car. The dude said it was only authorized for wear on the flight line. I thought if you are wearing your winter jacket the fleece hat was fine. Made for an interestingly odd stop by a dude in civilian PTs.

[HU&W]

The shoes will point to the "prolonged exposure" bit and tell you the walk from the Sq to your car is not "prolonged."

pro·long [pruh-lawng, -long]

verb (used with object)

1.to lengthen out in time; extend the duration of; cause to continue longer: to prolong one's stay abroad.

It could be reasonably argued that by delaying you in transit between car and squadron, the shoe himself prolonged your exposure to the cold.

Edit: Stupid formatting.

Edited January 6, 2012 by HU&W

[BQZip01]

Ha. I had a buddy get scolded for wearing his fleece hat from the squadron to his car. The dude said it was only authorized for wear on the flight line. I thought if you are wearing your winter jacket the fleece hat was fine. Made for an interestingly odd stop by a dude in civilian PTs.

That's complete bullshit.

If you are wearing ANY type of authorized outer garment, it's allowed:

6.2.7. Black Watch Cap. Watch cap may be worn only when approved by the installation commander and only when wearing authorized outer garments, service dress, or physical training uniform (PTU).

6.2.8. Sage Green Watch Cap. Watch cap may be worn only when approved by the installation commander and only when wearing ABU authorized outer garments or physical training uniform (PTU).

Nothing quite like outshoe-ing a shoe

[StoleIt]

6.2.7. Black Watch Cap. Watch cap may be worn only when approved by the installation commander and only when wearing authorized outer garments, service dress, or physical training uniform (PTU).

6.2.8. Sage Green Watch Cap. Watch cap may be worn only when approved by the installation commander and only when wearing ABU authorized outer garments or physical training uniform (PTU).

Uh o...so technically I can't wear a watch cap when in my flight suit?

[HerkFE]

Uh o...so technically I can't wear a watch cap when in my flight suit?

Looks like, to me, you can wear the black one...your flight suit/green jacket/leather jacket are authorized outer garments. I'd probably wear the green one anyway just to see how long it took then claim ignorance.

edit to add: Ahhh, but this would be great knowledge/ammo to have in case you saw one of those Tops in Blow fags wearing a bag with a green hat..."um, excuse me but you are going to have to remove your green lid....I don't care if you get frostbite, your ears fall off and you can never wear glasses. The reg says...."

Edited January 7, 2012 by HerkFE

[ram02]

Uh o...so technically I can't wear a watch cap when in my flight suit?

Sure you can. The guidance for that is in chapter 8 which specifically outlines flight suit wear. As previously posted:

8.6.2. Knit Watch Cap is authorized for wear by aircrew personnel subject to prolonged exposure to adverse weather only. Color is restricted to solid black, dark blue or sage green. When worn, a jacket must also be worn.

The green fleece beanie is perfectly legal in your flight suit. I guess you could even technically wear a dark blue watch cap just to out-shoe the shoe.

[Skitzo]

AFI 36-2618... the enlisted force structure

3.1.5. Exhibit professional behavior, military bearing, respect for authority, and high standards of dress and personal appearance, on- and off-duty. Correct other Airmen who violate standards

4.1.5. Clearly meet, and strive to exceed, the standards and expectations levied upon junior enlisted Airmen. Epitomize excellence and lead by example through exhibiting professional behavior, military bearing, respect for authority, and the highest standards of dress and appearance. Instill professional behaviors in subordinates. Correct those who violate standards.

So who are we (the officers) to blame them (the enlisted) for correcting us? It says in the doctrine for their careers exactly what they are doing. By allowing the AF/CCC to publish this manifesto we are asking for it. Correcting "those" and correcting Airmen are just as important are just as important to the Air Force as other qualities. We are raising them this way.

The funny thing is in the same section it talks about duty to correct it also addresses military bearing and respect for authority and mentions those first and foremost which means to me if you can't ask to have a word with me in private to correct my violation in private you have broken your bearing and failed at respecting authority.

Can't wait to out shoe'em all with this...might print it out and stuff it in my pocket

[WABoom]

I love reading all of the responses on this forum and hearing how officers feel about this situation. I would say from my experience as a support guy vs the ops world I live in now, that we literally are living in 2 different Air Forces. I remember when I was in Korea as a young SrA and I saw an A-10 or F-16 pilot with his shades hanging around his neck facing backwards. I remember thinking to myself that these guys get to do whatever they want and that an Amn couldn't get away with that. After cross-training some yrs later I would like to think that after actually flying and supporting the warfighter that I don't get wrapped around the axle by these minor issues. I'm not a big fan of correcting officers, I believe other officers should do that. The only time I have ever said anything to an officer was if something was obviously wrong (i.e ribbons upside down) to stop someone from being embarrassed.

Officers should probably understand by reading 36-2618 that this type of crap is hammered into us from Basic trng and at every PME stop. It will NEVER end, it's sad but I don't see this ever going away. If someone corrects you and they are wrong, let them know it. Use the old adage, praise in public, criticize in private. I would love to see some officers grow some balls and correct some the crap going on in the AF. If a sweaty tries to correct an A-10 pilot after supporting a TIC in Afghanistan ( I actually heard about this happening) then it's the duty of said officer to "correct" this persons thinking/mentality of what is really important. I have an original photo from the Vietnam War in my man room hanging proudly. The picture is of 3 soldiers firing rounds from a Howitzer. The soldiers are obviously in the middle of a battle but they are far from being in the correct uniform. Priorities???

BTW, no disrespect meant by my growing balls comment, I just know it's what the AF needs right now in the crucial leadership positions.

[BQZip01]

BTW, no disrespect meant by my growing balls comment, I just know it's what the AF needs right now in the crucial leadership positions.

We know what you meant and you hit it spot on (sts)!

Taking it one step further, I think people need to grow some thicker skin if that's the kind of tripe that offends them. I, for one, don't give a rat's ass what gender, skin color, ethnicity, religion, (and now sexual orientation), etc. I care if you can get the job done: period. In leadership, I want some leaders with vision and a broad view (sts) of things. Don't get caught up in the minute details (like minor uniform issues. At the Deid they were checking sock color as a prerequisite to eat about 8 years ago. Hello! Hot meal>>>>sock color.

Son, your perspective is like a sniper's bullet: on target and straight to the core. Spread it around!

[theSituation]

Just a heads up, but make sure y'all wear white socks when you go to take your PT test. I'll admit I should have known the reg, but the FACs freaked out and almost didn't let me test today because I was wearing grey socks instead of white ones.

I should have just told them they were old and dirty or something.

Overall this whle ordeal just furthered my thoughts that PT tests should be done in squadron.

[MaintChief]

I don't know of any specific prohibition from wearing them. People wear them all the time, even in ABUs. I asked someone else in my office and they gave me the ever-predictable "well it doesn't say you CAN wear them either". True, but the AFIs don't specifically authorize you to breathe or take a shit either, so that line of logic is idiotic. I say tell the good Chief to show you where it's not authorized. Then if he gives you the "it doesn't say you can in 36-2903" then ask him where that reg specifically authorizes reflective belts...

I'm coming late to the fight but please allow me to answer. First, I am a retired maintainer, attained the rank of CMSgt, and retired last year. I came on active duty in 1981. Except for 3 years in a depot I spent 27 years in direct flighline roles. So, that established, here are your answers.

In regards to the little zipper clip-on lights:

Per AFI 36-2903,

1.5.1.2. Do not purchase uniform items from unauthorized manufacturers—if it is not authorized or mentioned in this AFI, then it is not authorized for wear (Exception: Allowance Standard (AS) 016 items authorized by commander). The omission of a specific item or appearance standard does not automatically permit its wear.

Next, the reflective belts:

Again, out of AFI 36-2903

2.8.4. Require protective or reflective items when safety considerations make it appropriate

Your installation Commander determines accepatable deviations and wear policies...take it up through your chain of command if you have a problem.

Next, a lot of Chief bashing here. Ok, my philosophy: It is NOT my job or responsibility to babysit or correct officers, be they 2nd Lt or O-6. You have your own formal chain of command that you answer to. You do not answer to me and frankly I could give a dam* what you do. But once you make yourself a public spectacle I will calmly and professionally ask you to please step outside or into a room and I will professionally address your failure to abide by standards. If you get butt-hurt, fine, that is your perogative. But you are still under the same UCMJ that I am and I will take it up your chain if you disregard my professional "advice" and you decide to play I'm an "O", you are an "E" games. And you can't goad me into stepping over the line...I have been at this way longer than you and know how to play the game. Also, remember this, I have a direct line, usually, to an O-6 or higher. They have usually known me or of me much longer than they have known you (for those of you not O-4's and higher). I will not be calling them if I did not decide that something was amiss. Bottom line/take-away: I have better things to do than worry about how you look or wear the uniform. Be discreet and don't be an as*, we'll get along fine.

I am 100% behind the opinion that a lot of Command Chiefs and their syncopath wanna-be Command Chief's (other Chief's) have lost their sense of priority and what they are there for. It is NOT the enlisted forces concern what happens with the Officer Corps. The Command Chief's need to worry about the enlisted. I saw mission creep at Base-X...the Command Chief was worried about what the officers were doing in regards to SARC briefing attendence. Who cares!!!??? Not our problem. That is your flight commanders problem, your squadron commanders problem, and your group commanders problem. Not a problem for a CMSgt.

I'm here to dialogue and share my knowledge and experince, both from the enlisted side and from a career maintainer side. Hope we can have some interesting discussions.

MC

[TheGuardGuy]

I'm coming late to the fight but please allow me to answer. First, I am a retired maintainer, attained the rank of CMSgt, and retired last year. I came on active duty in 1981. Except for 3 years in a depot I spent 27 years in direct flighline roles. So, that established, here are your answers.

- I maintained on the line for a decade, never saw a chief directly involved with anything within 100 yards of the red line....

In regards to the little zipper clip-on lights:

Per AFI 36-2903,

1.5.1.2. Do not purchase uniform items from unauthorized manufacturers—if it is not authorized or mentioned in this AFI, then it is not authorized for wear (Exception: Allowance Standard (AS) 016 items authorized by commander). The omission of a specific item or appearance standard does not automatically permit its wear.

Next, the reflective belts:

Again, out of AFI 36-2903

2.8.4. Require protective or reflective items when safety considerations make it appropriate

Your installation Commander determines accepatable deviations and wear policies...take it up through your chain of command if you have a problem.

Next, a lot of Chief bashing here. Ok, my philosophy: It is NOT my job or responsibility to babysit or correct officers, be they 2nd Lt or O-6. You have your own formal chain of command that you answer to. You do not answer to me and frankly I could give a dam* what you do. But once you make yourself a public spectacle I will calmly and professionally ask you to please step outside or into a room and I will professionally address your failure to abide by standards. If you get butt-hurt, fine, that is your perogative. But you are still under the same UCMJ that I am and I will take it up your chain if you disregard my professional "advice" and you decide to play I'm an "O", you are an "E" games. And you can't goad me into stepping over the line...I have been at this way longer than you and know how to play the game. Also, remember this, I have a direct line, usually, to an O-6 or higher. They have usually known me or of me much longer than they have known you (for those of you not O-4's and higher). I will not be calling them if I did not decide that something was amiss. Bottom line/take-away: I have better things to do than worry about how you look or wear the uniform. Be discreet and don't be an as*, we'll get along fine.

- So you have better things to do, but you'll address a failure and cry to your Col/Gen if you don't get your way?

I am 100% behind the opinion that a lot of Command Chiefs and their syncopath wanna-be Command Chief's (other Chief's) have lost their sense of priority and what they are there for. It is NOT the enlisted forces concern what happens with the Officer Corps. The Command Chief's need to worry about the enlisted. I saw mission creep at Base-X...the Command Chief was worried about what the officers were doing in regards to SARC briefing attendence. Who cares!!!??? Not our problem. That is your flight commanders problem, your squadron commanders problem, and your group commanders problem. Not a problem for a CMSgt.

- Once again, if you have better things to do as a Chief, what is this discussion about?

I'm here to dialogue and share my knowledge and experince, both from the enlisted side and from a career maintainer side. Hope we can have some interesting discussions.

MC

Thanks for jumping on board and lending your experiences and take on the situation Chief, but let's get real.... If anything, the flightline wrench turners like yourself are the worst when it comes to queep like this, because they actually WORK for a living. They cannot do their job without cutting up steel toe boots and greasing up their ABUs. Crew dogs that are worth a damn are usually too busy fixing planes and training new troops to even keep up with -2903, and when they find something to wear or use that doesn't jive with some desk jockey's paper opinion, they use it anyway because IT WORKS.

Back to the issue at hand - It isn't about following directives or policy, it's about common sense (or a lack thereof). It's about taking a logical stance on a particular issue and utilizing judgement to make a decision. It boggles my mind that so many Chiefs, senior enlisted members with decades of military experience, would fail at being able to discern the difference between blind following of regulation and creative innovation. In the case of the zipper light - it is an extremely efficient tool to use while night flying, it makes reading charts and approach plates much easier, especially using NVGs; but what is more important - flying more effectively or following a uniform reg? As for the reflective belt - its a management directed CYA rule, and it is not worth discussing, PERIOD.

Edited January 26, 2012 by TheGuardGuy

[MaintChief]

Thanks for jumping on board and lending your experiences and take on the situation Chief, but let's get real.... If anything, the flightline wrench turners like yourself are the worst when it comes to queep like this, because they actually WORK for a living. They cannot do their job without cutting up steel toe boots and greasing up their ABUs. Crew dogs that are worth a damn are usually too busy fixing planes and training new troops to even keep up with -2903, and when they find something to wear or use that doesn't jive with some desk jockey's paper opinion, they use it anyway because IT WORKS.

Back to the issue at hand - It isn't about following directives or policy, it's about common sense (or a lack thereof). It's about taking a logical stance on a particular issue and utilizing judgement to make a decision. It boggles my mind that so many Chiefs, senior enlisted members with decades of military experience, would fail at being able to discern the difference between blind following of regulation and creative innovation. In the case of the zipper light - it is an extremely efficient tool to use while night flying, it makes reading charts and approach plates much easier, especially using NVGs; but what is more important - flying more effectively or following a uniform reg? As for the reflective belt - its a management directed CYA rule, and it is not worth discussing, PERIOD.

You'll find that we agree on more things than we disagree. I am an old school kind of guy...I believe that it was the Lt's or Captains job to go to the meetings and for me to handle the maintenance day-to-day. I walked my aircraft every day that I could. I walked the AGE ready line every day that I could. I wasn't a politican or a Kool-Aid drinker. Making E-9/CMSgt was a surprise...I didn't aim for it. Coming to work every day and doing my best for the aircraft and for the maintainers is what got me promoted. Not PME awards or bake sales.

You missed the point on my original post. I am NOT going to call you out unless you make it a point to be an ass about it. I don't care if your sleeves are rolled up, you have a flashlight on your zipper, etc. But if you are at an off-base eating establishment, say for lunch, with your sun glasses on your head being loud in your flightsuit and garner my attention, I will calmly and politely remind you that you are off base, that you are surrounded by enlisted and civilians, and that you need to represent yourself as a professional member of the USAF. I might not be so wordy, but I will get the point across professionally. How things go after that is up to you. I have more important things to worry about/do, and honestly, I hate this part of the joib, but it comes with the territory. I will not call my O-6 buddy because you have a zipper light on your flight suit. I will call him because you were an ass and made yourself and everyone associated with the USAF look bad.

We are 100% in agreement about why we have the reflective belt rule. And who makes the rules? The installlation commander is an officer, usually rated. The Chief of Safety is an officer, usually rated. The Chief of Staff of the USAF is an officer, always rated. A lot of rocks are thrown at the enlisted SNCO corps, some of them warranted, but the underlying problems and issues are caused at the paygrades that start with "O".

The Command Chiefs and the SNCO Corps have been hijacked by a careerist mentality. And it came to a head when the philosophy of everyone an "Airman" instead of identifiying with your AFSC/community came about. When I came in, I came in to be an aircraft avionics (pick your flavor) specialist. That has fallen by the wayside. It is more important to do the bullshi# stuff now. It used to be more important to know your job. The Command Chiefs think they are E-10's, and use their function as gatekeepers to the WIng CC for EPR's, strats, and decorations as their tools to keep the other Chief's in line. If you are too public in your disagreements with the Wing CCM, your people suffer.

The CCM position needs to go away. Revert back to SEA's. Disband the PME mafia. One PME tour in a career, then back to the field. Same with the 1st Sgt position, one tour and back to your AFSC. That would be a start to correct some of the stupidity out there. But the officer side of the house has their responsibility in this too. You guys get to make policy...I just implement it/carry it out.

I agree that common sense has fallen by the wayside. And it is on both sides of the fence, both officer AND enlisted.

[pawnman]

I'm coming late to the fight but please allow me to answer. First, I am a retired maintainer, attained the rank of CMSgt, and retired last year. I came on active duty in 1981. Except for 3 years in a depot I spent 27 years in direct flighline roles. So, that established, here are your answers.

In regards to the little zipper clip-on lights:

Per AFI 36-2903,

1.5.1.2. Do not purchase uniform items from unauthorized manufacturers—if it is not authorized or mentioned in this AFI, then it is not authorized for wear (Exception: Allowance Standard (AS) 016 items authorized by commander). The omission of a specific item or appearance standard does not automatically permit its wear.

Next, the reflective belts:

Again, out of AFI 36-2903

2.8.4. Require protective or reflective items when safety considerations make it appropriate

Your installation Commander determines accepatable deviations and wear policies...take it up through your chain of command if you have a problem.

Next, a lot of Chief bashing here. Ok, my philosophy: It is NOT my job or responsibility to babysit or correct officers, be they 2nd Lt or O-6. You have your own formal chain of command that you answer to. You do not answer to me and frankly I could give a dam* what you do. But once you make yourself a public spectacle I will calmly and professionally ask you to please step outside or into a room and I will professionally address your failure to abide by standards. If you get butt-hurt, fine, that is your perogative. But you are still under the same UCMJ that I am and I will take it up your chain if you disregard my professional "advice" and you decide to play I'm an "O", you are an "E" games. And you can't goad me into stepping over the line...I have been at this way longer than you and know how to play the game. Also, remember this, I have a direct line, usually, to an O-6 or higher. They have usually known me or of me much longer than they have known you (for those of you not O-4's and higher). I will not be calling them if I did not decide that something was amiss. Bottom line/take-away: I have better things to do than worry about how you look or wear the uniform. Be discreet and don't be an as*, we'll get along fine.

I am 100% behind the opinion that a lot of Command Chiefs and their syncopath wanna-be Command Chief's (other Chief's) have lost their sense of priority and what they are there for. It is NOT the enlisted forces concern what happens with the Officer Corps. The Command Chief's need to worry about the enlisted. I saw mission creep at Base-X...the Command Chief was worried about what the officers were doing in regards to SARC briefing attendence. Who cares!!!??? Not our problem. That is your flight commanders problem, your squadron commanders problem, and your group commanders problem. Not a problem for a CMSgt.

I'm here to dialogue and share my knowledge and experince, both from the enlisted side and from a career maintainer side. Hope we can have some interesting discussions.

MC

I could live with the REMFing if everyone executed it with by pulling you aside, quietly having a few words, and starting and ending the conversation with "sir". In my experience, more often it's an E-6 shouting a command at an O-3..."Hey, get those sunglasses off your head!" from across the chow hall.

Delivery is a big part of the problem. I think if all the enlisted folks making these corrections were as respectful as you, we wouldn't be having so much discussion about REMFs. I do believe we'd still be bitching about the reg, because you only THINK we make the rules...they come from above our paygrade too.

Edited January 26, 2012 by pawnman

[brabus]

I could live with the REMFing if everyone executed it with by pulling you aside, quietly having a few words, and starting and ending the conversation with "sir". In my experience, more often it's an E-6 shouting a command at an O-3..."Hey, get those sunglasses off your head!" from across the show hall.

Agreed. If an E-6 comes up to me and discretely/professionally lets me know about something I'm doing wrong, then I'll respect him for being professional about it, I'll say, "thanks Sgt for letting me know" and we can both go on our way...leave it up to me as the officer to make my own call. That's why I'm "paid the big bucks" and if I decide to still wear my gray socks, my not approved benie on the flightline, etc., don't go running to Daddy and accept my decision. The biggest reason this "chief bashing" exists is because of douche bag E-X's who think its appropriate to yell at an O for something (reference the sunglasses example above). You pull that shit and you're going to get an O vs. E showdown.

It's about mutual respect...I wouldn't yell at an E across the chowhall for something unless it was a big deal and needed correction faster than I could walk over to him and have a talk (so probably only if he was about to hurt someone). So I expect an E to do the same. Only problem is a lot of E's do not do the same an instead feel they have the right to say whatever they want to an O, damn near order an O to do something, etc. It's unbelievable that this shit is allowed to happen. Does anyone realize in any of the other services an E would be crushed 100% of the time for shit like this?

Edited January 26, 2012 by brabus

[Duck]

I have never been upset for someone pointing out one of my many uniform infractions (sleeves up or sunglasses on head). I had a E-8 respectfully say to me "uh, Sir, I don't think that is authorized, I don't care, but I would hate for you to get called out by someone who does." He did it privately and I actually fixed it out of respect for him. Two weeks prior: some female E-7 yells from about 15 feet away that I need to roll my sleeves down while I am in a group of other officers and enlisted. Did I do it? Nope, I completely ignored the b*tch and still to this day I wear my sleeves up in honor of her.

Its all in the approach.

[MaintChief]

I could live with the REMFing if everyone executed it with by pulling you aside, quietly having a few words, and starting and ending the conversation with "sir". In my experience, more often it's an E-6 shouting a command at an O-3..."Hey, get those sunglasses off your head!" from across the chow hall.

Delivery is a big part of the problem. I think if all the enlisted folks making these corrections were as respectful as you, we wouldn't be having so much discussion about REMFs. I do believe we'd still be bitching about the reg, because you only THINK we make the rules...they come from above our paygrade too.

Oh, I know who makes the rules. And I am all for an O-3 directly confronting the E-6 and reaming them a new one in the case stated above. Yes, the O-3 may be in the wrong about his/her sunglasses, but the E-6 is also wrong in their approach and in their deportment.

[LearR0ck3t]

This was brought to my attention earlier and I figured this belonged here. I bolded the part at the bottom because I still find it hard to believe someone's priorities can be that backwards.

p.s. First post and all, I'll owe beers for all my mistakes.

Chiefs’ Corner

by Chief Master Sgt. xxxxxx

I recently became intrigued with the phrase, “You’ve been chiefed.” Apparently, getting “chiefed” happens when you are corrected on the spot about blatant violations of regulations or reminded about customs and courtesies, something each Airman should subscribe to anyway. Of course, “getting chiefed” can only be done by a chief master sergeant. Unfortunately, it appears that more chiefs are forced to refocus from the strategic level of operations to address issues noncommissioned officers would normally take care of at the tactical and operational levels. The issues with an Airman getting “chiefed” are probably because they weren’t “sergeant-ed” or “captain-ed” by their first line supervisors. We are called to lead in many capacities.

As a leader, walking past problems hoping someone else will address them or not being familiar with the regulations used in day to day operations is wrong.

If it takes a chief to address issues that are easily fixed at lower levels, then we have failed as leaders. I submit that if we do not correct our Airmen we set them up for failure. How would they have the skills to lead later? Being a leader is about adhering to standards that are prominently and perfectly placed to affect good order and discipline. What may seem trivial can be the difference between life and death in combat and is vital to our profession of arms.

The concern is not solely on proper uniform wear, the issue of addressing a senior master sergeant as “senior” or how long it takes an Airman to remove the sage green fleece when indoors — that scope would be mistakenly minuscule for this monologue. It’s about having the mindset that understands the small things do matter. This perspective focuses on paying attention to details of dress and appearance, AFIs, and technical order compliance to help us execute the mission on a broader scale. These details are the rules and make us all better warriors.

This responsibility to follow the rules does not solely fall on a chief master sergeant’s shoulders. It is shared at all levels of leadership. So, have you been “chiefed” lately? Each of us should take an introspective look and ask if we are properly focused to execute the mission. Have we lost focus on details to “get the mission done?”

Let’s commit to living the Air Force Core Values and being leaders in our Air Force. Don’t get “chiefed.” Do it right the first time.

[nsplayr]

The concern is not solely on proper uniform wear, the issue of addressing a senior master sergeant as “senior” or how long it takes an Airman to remove the sage green fleece when indoors...

WTF is he talking about here? Are SMSgts not called "senior" out of respect rather than the regs-approved "sergeant" and are we stopwatching airmen when they step foot indoors to see if they take their freaking fleece off? There needs to be a smiley that's blowing it's brains out...

Edited February 29, 2012 by nsplayr

[capt4fans]

This was brought to my attention earlier and I figured this belonged here. I bolded the part at the bottom because I still find it hard to believe someone's priorities can be that backwards.

p.s. First post and all, I'll owe beers for all my mistakes.

Chiefs’ Corner

by Chief Master Sgt. xxxxxx

I recently became intrigued with the phrase, “You’ve been chiefed.” Apparently, getting “chiefed” happens when you are corrected on the spot about blatant violations of regulations or reminded about customsand courtesies, something each Airman should subscribe to anyway. Of course, “getting chiefed” can only be done by a chief master sergeant.Unfortunately, it appears that more chiefs are forced to refocus from the strategic level of operations to address issues noncommissioned officers would normally take care of at the tactical and operational levels. The issues with an Airman getting “chiefed” are probably because they weren’t “sergeant-ed” or “captain-ed” by their first line supervisors. We are called to lead in many capacities. As a leader, walking past problems hoping someone else will address them or not being familiar with the regulations used in day to day operations is wrong. If it takes a chief to address issues that are easily fixed at lower levels, then we have failed as leaders. I submit that if we do not correct our Airmen we set them up for failure. How would they have the skills to lead later? Being a leader is about adhering to standards that are prominently and perfectly placed to affect good order and discipline. What may seem trivial can be the difference between life and death in combat and is vital to our profession of arms. The concern is not solely on proper uniform wear, the issue of addressing a senior master sergeant as “senior” or how long it takes an Airman to remove the sage green fleece when indoors — that scope would be mistakenly minuscule for this monologue. It’s about having the mindset that understands the small things do matter. This perspective focuses on paying attention to details of dress and appearance, AFIs, and technical order compliance to help us execute the mission on a broader scale. These details are the rules and make us all better warriors. This responsibility to follow the rules does not solely fall on a chief master sergeant’s shoulders. It is shared at all levels of leadership. So, have you been “chiefed” lately? Each of us should take an introspective look and ask if we are properly focused to execute the mission. Have we lost focus on details to “get the mission done?” Let’s commit to living the Air Force Core Values and being leaders in our Air Force. Don’t get “chiefed.” Do it right the first time.

First off, edit it so it can be read without me zooming in to 3000% on my computer, and then put the Chief's name back into the article, so we can all email him and correct his mistakes. And then send me a 6 pack.

Additionally, the "Chief" and I use that term loosely, might want to read up a little on AFI 36-2903..."Exception: Local commanders have the authority to allow indoor wear of the sage green fleece jacket as mission needs dictate.)"

On the plus side, I can wear that nice Authorized Leather A-2 Flying Jacket wherever the hell I want, indoors, or outdoors, in front of the Chief, or beside him, and he can't say shit about it. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.....moron.

Edited February 29, 2012 by capt4fans

[OL Patch]

.Unfortunately, it appears that more chiefs are forced to refocus from the strategic level of operations

Fail....not your job CMSgt.

Edited February 29, 2012 by OL Patch

[BQZip01]

I think I'll have some fun with this...

I recently became intrigued with the phrase, “You’ve been chiefed.” Apparently, getting “chiefed” happens when you are corrected on the spot about blatant violations of regulations or reminded about customs and courtesies, something each Airman should subscribe to anyway.

Apparently this Chief is intrigued by menial bullshit too. Being corrected is one thing. Being anal about stupid details that don't matter and/or hamper gettng the mission accomplished is "getting chiefed". Helping a colleague fix their collar is not the same as a superior enlisted person correcting a junior enlisted loudly & impolitely in front of his peers.

Of course, “getting chiefed” can only be done by a chief master sergeant.

Puh-lease. I've seen people get chiefed by people who merely want to be Chiefs

Unfortunately, it appears that more chiefs are forced to refocus from the strategic level of operations to address issues noncommissioned officers would normally take care of at the tactical and operational levels.

Pray tell: how does correcting fleece wear correspond to even the "tactical" (much less "operational" level)? You never go into that do you?

The issues with an Airman getting “chiefed” are probably because they weren’t “sergeant-ed” or “captain-ed” by their first line supervisors. We are called to lead in many capacities.

Oh goody! The whole reason you "have to" single people out over truly insignificant details is because no one else already did that? How about you just assume that they made an honest mistake or help them with whatever their problem is. I've never once menioned a uniform problem to someone without the intent to help them. I was always respectful and did so in private: "Sir, your nametag is crooked"/"Ma'am, your collar is folded over". I did so because I know most military personnel inherently want to perform their best and look their best at all times. Being Chiefed is stopping someone who is carrying a large box into a building just as they enter the building and loudly querying "Why don't you have your hat off?!" Yes, by the regs, the person should remove their hat even if that means setting down the box and picking it back up again. However, what is actually gained other than wasting time or potentially breaking whatever is in the box by setting it down twice. Instead, why not ask the guy "Can I get the door for you? Want me to get your hat?" to which I'm sure the airman would say, "Yes please. Thank you"

As a leader, walking past problems hoping someone else will address them or not being familiar with the regulations used in day to day operations is wrong.

If it takes a chief to address issues that are easily fixed at lower levels, then we have failed as leaders.

I see. You are beneath such work. "If I have to get involved, then chiefs are failures."

I submit that if we do not correct our Airmen we set them up for failure. How would they have the skills to lead later? Being a leader is about adhering to standards that are prominently and perfectly placed to affect good order and discipline.

I'm still not seeing anything in here about applying common sene to a situation...

What may seem trivial can be the difference between life and death in combat and is vital to our profession of arms.

Right. The color of my socks is the difference between life and death. So is that crooked nametag or folded-over collar. Something as simple as wearing a fleece more than 2 steps inside a building is NOT critical to fighting a war and never will be.

The concern is not solely on proper uniform wear, the issue of addressing a senior master sergeant as “senior” or how long it takes an Airman to remove the sage green fleece when indoors — that scope would be mistakenly minuscule for this monologue. It’s about having the mindset that understands the small things do matter. This perspective focuses on paying attention to details of dress and appearance, AFIs, and technical order compliance to help us execute the mission on a broader scale.

These details are the rules and make us all better warriors.

No, it's the discipline to know what the rules are and make proper judgement calls that makes us better warriors. Blind adherence to rules without an application of common sense and decency simply erodes unit/individual morale.

This responsibility to follow the rules does not solely fall on a chief master sergeant’s shoulders. It is shared at all levels of leadership. So, have you been “chiefed” lately? Each of us should take an introspective look and ask if we are properly focused to execute the mission. Have we lost focus on details to “get the mission done?”

YHGTBFSM!!! The mission IS the most important detail!!! If you spent 2 hours every day to look perfect in uniform down to a lack of any trace of lint, but the jets don't take off, what's the point? If you stop that wrench-turner (a term of endearment for my maintenance brethren) from completing his job so he can "Go back to the dorm and change uniforms. That one is covered in grease" you have decided that appearances are more important than substance.

Let’s commit to living the Air Force Core Values and being leaders in our Air Force. Don’t get “chiefed.” Do it right the first time.

Promote the AF Core Values by living them, not by making the lives of others miserable for trivial details...(see the AUAB thread)

[Hacker]

Have we lost focus on details to “get the mission done?"

We have identified the root cause.

This is the kind of thought process that is killing an organization whose #1 job it is to "get the mission done". This is the type of cancer that needs to be eradicated from the USAF, and is unfortunately being spread as gospel by USAF management at numerous levels...and the young and impressionable are buying it.

Additionally, this also gets back to the OTHER problem that yields these types of moronic tirades from the SNCO corps: O-6s and above who allow it to be this way. These Chiefs all work for commissioned officers whose job it is to establish the policy that the Chiefs execute. When a CMSgt is publicly offering critiques on officership, it is because his boss is tacitly endorsing it. We know this because, as soon as an officer critiques said Chief on stepping out of his lane, the Chief is quick to cry to daddy about the insolence of said officer. The circle of life is completed when daddy O-6 lays into the officer for his 'disrespect' of the SNCO...instead of there being any discussion or consideration of the reason the officer offered the critique to the Chief.

The O-6s can stop this trainwreck at any time they so desire. It is 100% in their capability, authority, and responsibility to do so.

Edited March 2, 2012 by Hacker