Rusty Pipes Posted October 31, 2013 Posted October 31, 2013 (edited) This is why Finance is always closed for "training" apparently… Unbelievable! https://www.vance.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123368125 Senior Air Force leaders have made clear that sexual harassment and sexual assault have no place in today's Air Force. One local commander decided to go beyond briefings and PowerPoint slides and try to catch her people doing the right thing. "I wanted to see if anyone in my unit would say something about a questionable photo in the work place," said Mazza. She picked the lieutenant's desk because she thought an airman would be easier to approach than the new officer in the organization. It needed to be a challenge for her people. Edited October 31, 2013 by Rusty Pipes
pcola Posted October 31, 2013 Posted October 31, 2013 Looks like another victory for the enemies of America.
TreeA10 Posted October 31, 2013 Posted October 31, 2013 If it is AF policy to not display such items and this person intentionally displays such an item, is this person guilty of violation of AF policy? What other rules are okay to violate to see if someone calls you on it? Speeding? Altitude restrictions? Financial fraud? I don't think this is should be an acceptable technique for the evaluation of AF guidance. 2
nsplayr Posted October 31, 2013 Posted October 31, 2013 (edited) Already being discussed in thread. Edited October 31, 2013 by nsplayr
Rusty Pipes Posted October 31, 2013 Author Posted October 31, 2013 (edited) Already being discussed in thread. Point was more about what TreeA10 made, not the same discussion as in the thread you linked. Blows me away that a sitting Sq Commander would take the time to purpously take away from the focus of the mission to use those under their supervision to conduct a "gotcha" social experiment. She has no business commanding anything… yet this behavior is celebrated by the Big Blue management. She purposly put the picture on an Officer's desk in a predomenantly enlisted environment… for what purpose? Are we training the future "sock checkers" in the AOR at the E-1 through E-3 level? Edited October 31, 2013 by Rusty Pipes 2
WABoom Posted October 31, 2013 Posted October 31, 2013 Are we training the future "sock checkers" in the AOR at the E-1 through E-3 level? Yes.
HU&W Posted October 31, 2013 Posted October 31, 2013 (edited) I saw the same thing happen once with a Sq/CC who purposefully wore an "out of regs" tie tack with his blues one day. He spent the first half of the day taking down the names of everyone he met who didn't call him out on his tie tack (nobody did). He then held an impromptu commander's call where he called those individuals out for failing to uphold standards. Edited October 31, 2013 by HU&W
TarHeelPilot Posted October 31, 2013 Posted October 31, 2013 (edited) Point was more about what TreeA10 made, not the same discussion as in the thread you linked. Blows me away that a sitting Sq Commander would take the time to purpously take away from the focus of the mission to use those under their supervision to conduct a "gotcha" social experiment. She has no business commanding anything… yet this behavior is celebrated by the Big Blue management. She purposly put the picture on an Officer's desk in an predomenantly enlisted environment… for what purpose? Are we training the future "sock checkers" in the AOR at the E-1 through E-3 level? Let's be honest. She's now destined for O-7+ Edited October 31, 2013 by TarHeelPilot 2
BitteEinBit Posted October 31, 2013 Posted October 31, 2013 If it is AF policy to not display such items and this person intentionally displays such an item, is this person guilty of violation of AF policy? What other rules are okay to violate to see if someone calls you on it? Speeding? Altitude restrictions? Financial fraud? I don't think this is should be an acceptable technique for the evaluation of AF guidance. Wait...this might actually help us! Next time I get in trouble for something, I'm just going to say "I was just testing people to see if they'd call me out on it...Good Job Sir/Ma'am! You got me! Now, I'm going to just keep these socks/Friday shirt/patch/younameit on to see how many other people "get" me"
TreeA10 Posted October 31, 2013 Posted October 31, 2013 Wait...this might actually help us! Next time I get in trouble for something, I'm just going to say "I was just testing people to see if they'd call me out on it...Good Job Sir/Ma'am! You got me! Now, I'm going to just keep these socks/Friday shirt/patch/younameit on to see how many other people "get" me" I was thinking exactly that. SImilar to when the CINC addressed cases of sexual harassment/assault thus putting undo command influence on legal proceedings that is immediately used by the accused as a defense. I'm all for innocent until proven guilty but I'm not for the guilty going free due to commander sponsored stupidity. Again, the AF has enough problems without idiots inventing more.
Rusty Pipes Posted October 31, 2013 Author Posted October 31, 2013 What's next? "Have a seat over there. I noticed you failed to report an image of exposed skin on your coworker's desk. Please sign your LOR." "But I'm a Captain... an A1C can't give an LOR to a Captain!?!" "Sir, I got two Bronze Stars for working in Finance at Al Udeid and Manas... Not only am I a Warrior, I'm pretty sure I outrank you now! Oh, the second LOR is for not having your Masters... scumbag!" 1
Spoo Posted October 31, 2013 Posted October 31, 2013 I saw the same thing happen once with a Sq/CC who purposefully wore an "out of regs" tie tack with his blues one day. He spent the first half of the day taking down the names of everyone he met who didn't call him out on his tie tack (nobody did). He then held an impromptu commander's call where he called those individuals out for failing to uphold standards. I would've called him out for using shitty leadership technique. I guess he was out checking refelective belts and socks when they had the "praise in public, punish in private" class. Douchebag.
Lawman Posted October 31, 2013 Posted October 31, 2013 I'm curious how many people in his formation are combat lifesaver or whatever the AF equivalent is. Or any of about 2 dozen other useful tasks they could have been doing other than mastering resiliency by learning that life is really full of gumdrops and sunshine if you think hard enough.Just thinking of the time wasted in some command and staff meeting discussing this while troops in some shop somewhere were waiting for their commanders and NCOs to return so they could continue the days duties is infuriating. "Hey we gonna fly today?" "I can't get mission approval because the boss is stuck in a training meeting listening to Cpt Knoblicker publicly congratulate himself for 30 minutes so were gonna run out of duty day..."
pawnman Posted November 1, 2013 Posted November 1, 2013 At least one civilian author is disgusted with the recent "bikini photo sting" https://www.jqpublic-blog.com/?p=558
RASH Posted November 1, 2013 Posted November 1, 2013 At least one civilian author is disgusted with the recent "bikini photo sting" https://www.jqpublic-blog.com/?p=558 You know he's a retired Lt Col and former squadron commander, right?
guineapigfury Posted November 2, 2013 Posted November 2, 2013 What a shame, Vance used to have a pretty damn good finance shop.
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