Altus DUI punishment

[GlassEmpty]

Just looking for peoples insights and commentary from a more involved group than the retired hacks that flood John Q's message board with stories from the 80's.

https://www.facebook.com/jqpublic

The most recent/popular article is about Altus' OG/CC requiring mandatory blues this following monday for a DUI that occurred at the front gate this past friday night. To my knowledge, this was the fourth DUI in the OG this month, and these are from cadre for the FTU.
Thoughts on the blues being "punishment" vs "a refocus on professionalism"? And the best way to approach from a leadership perspective to actually get people to follow and preventing DUI's? At this point it's obvious falling on def ears.

Article Below

"The leadership follies continue in AETC, this time at Altus. Apparently, the Operations Group Commander there, dismayed by an alcohol-related incident, has ordered everyone to wear blues on Monday as punishment.

I can recall a time in the Air Force when uniforms were a source of collective pride. In the last decade, they've devolved into a running joke, and now, a source of collective shame. Blues . . . as punishment? How does that work exactly? Is that what AFI 1-2 says?

I can also recall a time when commanders would never use a blunt tool like this one outside of the basic or technical training environments. Those days are long gone. Airmen will now apparently have their working conditions molded around the actions of the few dumbasses who will always choose to step over the line.

By the way, Altus is losing so many instructors between now and the end of the FY that the wing has been reportedly begging everyone from operational wings to the Avon Lady to help fill the gaps and keep training running on time. Commanders in the field, unable to pitch in more manpower, are bound to suggest less training, which would slow upgrade cycles across the force and potentially impact readiness as well as professional development and assignment flows. Seems like, some might argue, the focus should be on keeping instructors motivated and productive. This is not the way to do it. This just pisses off everyone who follows the rules. They exercise more precision in their daily jobs than their boss seems capable of exercising in his basic approach to dealing with disciplinary issues.

Sometimes, rashes of disciplinary issues are a reflection of morale. Courses of action that reduce morale even further will only lead to more incidents."

[Azimuth]

Someone in my Sq here had the current ARI (and actually works for me) that spawned the blues on Monday. The OG here has had four permanent party ARI's since March, with another guy in my Sq receiving the last DUI, which was in March. I realize this is for shock value, however I also realize that something has to be done and the current "climate" we have isn't working, because the OG and base cannot continue this trend.

Edited June 8, 2014 by Azimuth

[nsplayr]

So a mass inspection in service dress is the culture change that's needed?

I don't think anyone's faulting Altus leadership for appearing to do something...they got that base covered. But is what they are doing effective or, as you put it, just for " shock value" rather than actual value.

Is the wearing of service dress meant to be a punishment?

Edited June 8, 2014 by nsplayr

[pawnman]

So a mass inspection in service dress is the culture change that's needed?

I don't think anyone's faulting Altus leadership for appearing to do something...they got that base covered. But is what they are doing effective or, as you put it, just for " shock value" rather than actual value.

Is the wearing of service dress meant to be a punishment?

There was a time when we were proud of our uniforms. Now we wear them when we are shamed into it. Quite a long fall.

[GlassEmpty]

There was a time when we were proud of our uniforms. Now we wear them when we are shamed into it. Quite a long fall.

So are we considering this punishment or refocus on professionalism? What should the response be from an OG & SQ commander level? I've never been there so I'm not sure the pain level in this failure, but is public humiliation an option? Or maybe a call that says what the punishment will be showing zero tolerance? Or is that even legal. And my last question is, did John Q miss the mark on this one? It doesn't sound like a punishment to me. It sounds like commanders scrambling to find and fix a reoccuring leak. Are commanders taking this personal?

Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!

[Azimuth]

So a mass inspection in service dress is the culture change that's needed?

I don't think anyone's faulting Altus leadership for appearing to do something...they got that base covered. But is what they are doing effective or, as you put it, just for " shock value" rather than actual value.

Is the wearing of service dress meant to be a punishment?

I don't think it's being used a punishment tool, I believe he's using it as a reminder that we're in the military and held to a higher personal accountability standard than civilians, a lot of people forget about that and need to be reminded from time to time. Wearing of blues/service dress (which we only have to wear blues tomorrow) due to discipline issues in a organization has been around the past 13-years I've been in. I remember formations in full service dress in 2001 because someone got in trouble, etc. People wear full service dress when being court martialed. I like how all of a sudden people are upset that folks are being told to wear blues to an ARI, however these are the same folks who were trying to schedule flights or sims to get out of blues Mondays a few years ago. I'm PCSing in 25-days and I'll be wearing my blues tomorrow, not bitching, because I know this isn't a message to the old guys like me, this is a message to all the new guys that you'll pay the price when you make decisions like this. Plus due to Altus being so small and a multiple MDS FTU, there are more options to get free rides home than I've ever seen at my previous four assignments. There was really no reason for this person to do what he did.

If you were the 97 OG/CC, how would you approach this? Because the rumor mill has spread for the past few ARI's, and folks know what happened to those individuals (demotion, instructor status stripped temporarily, etc) who were involved in the ones since March.

So are we considering this punishment or refocus on professionalism? What should the response be from an OG & SQ commander level? I've never been there so I'm not sure the pain level in this failure, but is public humiliation an option? Or maybe a call that says what the punishment will be showing zero tolerance? Or is that even legal. And my last question is, did John Q miss the mark on this one? It doesn't sound like a punishment to me. It sounds like commanders scrambling to find and fix a reoccuring leak. Are commanders taking this personal?

Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!

I can tell you that the current OG here is a lot more personable with people than the last OG. And the Sq/CC I currently have (he's about to leave this week) is the best Sq/CC I've ever had in my career. It's not an issue with commanders taking it personal, I think commanders gave too much latitude in certain areas and you'll always have some people that when given too much latitude will make poor decisions. For the most part folks here are responsible and do the right thing every day. You'll just have the 5% of people that occupy 95% of your time and resource in a negative manner.

Edited June 8, 2014 by Azimuth

[Cap-10]

I have always hated the "one person shits, so everyone wears diapers" method...

How about a good ole fashion wall to wall ball kicking of the person that screwed up....crush him...hold him responsible for his actions.

Novel concept...I know.

Cap-10

Edit for me spellun goodly.

Posted from the NEW Baseops.net iOS App!

Edited June 8, 2014 by Cap-10

[SocialD]

Is the wearing of service dress meant to be a punishment?

It certainly seems like punishment in this case. If the uniform of the day was flight suits, but suddenly was changed to blues after a DUI...then, yes I would consider it punishment.

So are we considering this punishment or refocus on professionalism?

Why do I, someone who did nothing wrong, need a refocus on professionalism?

I've never been there so I'm not sure the pain level in this failure, but is public humiliation an option?

Yes. I've seen an officer in service dress at the front gate holding a sign after a DUI.

I like how all of a sudden people are upset that folks are being told to wear blues to an ARI, however these are the same folks who were trying to schedule flights or sims to get out of blues Mondays a few years ago. I'm PCSing in 25-days and I'll be wearing my blues tomorrow, not bitching, because I know this isn't a message to the old guys like me, this is a message to all the new guys that you'll pay the price when you make decisions like this.

This is nothing new...it's always pissed me off when leadership applied the, "one person shits, everyone wears diapers," leadership style. How about you just hold the person who committed the act accountable? Explain the situation, the punishment and reemphasize your expectations to your people (not via a fucking e-mail). Don't make them feel like they've done something wrong (if they have not), just because of a few dumbasses! What a crazy idea!!

Edited June 9, 2014 by SocialD

[nsplayr]

I don't think it's being used a punishment tool...I remember formations in full service dress in 2001 because someone got in trouble, etc. People wear full service dress when being court martialed.

So wait...is the wearing of one particular uniform or another a punishment or not? Do you wear blues because it's a uniform like any other that represents pride in your country and your service to it or is it basically a diaper that you're only supposed to put on when you've shit your pants? Because it can't really be both.

If you were the 97 OG/CC, how would you approach this? Because the rumor mill has spread for the past few ARI's, and folks know what happened to those individuals (demotion, instructor status stripped temporarily, etc) who were involved in the ones since March.

Ball kicking, paperwork, losing previously earned positions of trust, checking IDs at the gate, terrible hours, etc. Commanders have so many tools available to adequately educate the guilty on the error of their ways that don't involve added BS to the 98.69% of people who have done nothing wrong.

A guy in my former squadron got a DUI as an LT...got an article 15, didn't make Captain when he was supposed to, and likely will not make AC anytime soon. Around the same time, another ARI happened involving multiple people from our squadron and our sister squadron, prompting a stand-down day in our community to discuss risk management and decision making. As someone who did nothing wrong I was not affected in any way other than having to participate in the stand down day, and after that our community returned to the mean and let some other poor bastards make the next inevitable ARI-linked mistake.

Set your expectations and clearly communicate the rules of the road, take care of your people and trust them to get the mission done. When bad things happen, give special attention to those who need it (and those responsible for them i.e. immediate supervisors and subordinate commanders) and let the rest of your otherwise high-quality force carry on. A great leader will know how to solve issues like this with his people while avoiding taking actions that just give the appearance of action but which produce little real progress.

It's not an issue with commanders taking it personal, I think commanders gave too much latitude in certain areas and you'll always have some people that when given too much latitude will make poor decisions. For the most part folks here are responsible and do the right thing every day. You'll just have the 5% of people that occupy 95% of your time and resource in a negative manner.

So it sounds like if that's what you believe then the Commander (along with the guilty obviously) should be punished, not the whole squadron or group. Edited June 8, 2014 by nsplayr

[GlassEmpty]

How about you just hold the person who committed the act accountable? Explain the situation, the punishment and reemphasize your expectations to your people (not via a ######ing e-mail). Don't make them feel like they've done something wrong (if they have not), just because of a few dumbasses! What a crazy idea!!

So you would have the member (in service blues maybe?) address everyone early Monday morning and the explain or tell the story to a early am CC call? I'm not sure what "next day" action you can really do. This individual at fault has a pretty packed schedule the following duty day after this shitstorm occurs. And don't forget, no action by CC's will make them look poorly. These guys have to protect their careers as well. But since you see it as a punishment Social, how many days do you wear your blues that you aren't forced to? We do this to ourselves. I'm assuming you'd bitch if blues Monday came back even if it wasn't a punishment.

And I'll follow that up with I don't wear blues unless req'd. But its the status quo we've created.

Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!

Edited June 8, 2014 by GlassEmpty

[Azimuth]

I don't consider blues as a punishment. But then again I had to wear blues and BDU's for five years in a different job before I flew. There are folks who wear blues four days a week on staff, bet they don't consider it a punishment. Ball kicking, demotion, stripped of instructors status, referral EPR, and TCN duty deployed for six months were given to the last guy who got an ARI....and guess what....we just had another one. So what do you do to stop the trend? Obviously I'm a realist, people are still going to get DUI/DWI's, people are still going to make bad decisions, but if you can mitigate the amount, how would you do that? Every time someone has gotten in trouble, we've had the Sq/CC Commander's call and he flat out told us what the individual did, what's most likely coming for him punishment wise, however he also tells us not to ex-communicate this individual, and to look for him, keep him on the team, help him bounce back, etc.

[nsplayr]

There are folks who wear blues four days a week on staff, bet they don't consider it a punishment.

Exactly...the blues uniform is just that, a uniform. I'd wager most people would prefer to wear ABUs or especially a flight suit but it's not something that should mandated due to a fuck-up. Especially if you are not the guilty party.

Ball kicking, demotion, stripped of instructors status, referral EPR, and TCN duty deployed for six months were given to the last guy who got an ARI....and guess what....we just had another one. So what do you do to stop the trend? Obviously I'm a realist, people are still going to get DUI/DWI's, people are still going to make bad decisions, but if you can mitigate the amount, how would you do that?

Take care of your people. Use your creativity, resources and experience to figure out ways to keep your high-risk-of-fuck-up population out of trouble. Mentor them, find peer mentors for them, put them in a position to succeed. Accept that you will never have 100% compliance and meter out punishment appropriately to those who, despite your best efforts, fail to do the right thing. This is kind of the heart of what being a leader is about.

If, as a commander or subordinate leader, you can't figure out a solution you should be replaced with someone who can. Leader enable their people to succeed, bottom line, period dot. If you can't achieve that given the tremendous financial and human capital resources available in even a below-average USAF unit, you are not a very good leader.

[xaarman]

Does Altus have a X Against Drunk Driving hotline for Friday/Weekend afternoon/nights?

[Azimuth]

Does Altus have a X Against Drunk Driving hotline for Friday/Weekend afternoon/nights?

AADD and there's a drunk bus that's free.

[GlassEmpty]

It does. And its heavily utilized. There's a drunk bus that works off of tips that swings by the club and charlie's too. And there are cabs that hang out of the only bar in town.

Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!

[SocialD]

So you would have the member (in service blues maybe?) address everyone early Monday morning and the explain or tell the story to a early am CC call? I'm not sure what "next day" action you can really do. This individual at fault has a pretty packed schedule the following duty day after this shitstorm occurs.

Poor wording on my part. What I meant is, as the CC I would address my people, explain the situation/punishment and reiterate my expectations. I would treat my people like adults.

And don't forget, no action by CC's will make them look poorly. These guys have to protect their careers as well.

Ah yes...because if you don't do something visible, you have done nothing at all, line of thinking. I particularly love this leadership style...it usually goes hand-in-hand with the everyone wears diapers method.

I'll default to nsplayrs post for forms of punishment. If questioned by leadership what I have done, I would have plenty (public shaming, paperwork, stripped of IP/FL/etc...) to show them. Is this not enough?

But since you see it as a punishment Social, how many days do you wear your blues that you aren't forced to? We do this to ourselves. I'm assuming you'd bitch if blues Monday came back even if it wasn't a punishment.

Let me be clear, I have no problem using it as punishment...for the individual, but not the whole group/squadron. I've never worn my blues, when I wasn't forced. As far as the blues monday...the last time that rule was put in place, our OG didn't require us to wear blues, as we could always be thrown on the schedule. So no, I probably wouldn't bitch that much.

Edited June 9, 2014 by SocialD

[Azimuth]

Exactly...the blues uniform is just that, a uniform. I'd wager most people would prefer to wear ABUs or especially a flight suit but it's not something that should mandated due to a fuck-up. Especially if you are not the guilty party.

Take care of your people. Use your creativity, resources and experience to figure out ways to keep your high-risk-of-fuck-up population out of trouble. Mentor them, find peer mentors for them, put them in a position to succeed. Accept that you will never have 100% compliance and meter out punishment appropriately to those who, despite your best efforts, fail to do the right thing. This is kind of the heart of what being a leader is about.

If, as a commander or subordinate leader, you can't figure out a solution you should be replaced with someone who can. Leader enable their people to succeed, bottom line, period dot. If you can't achieve that given the tremendous financial and human capital resources available in even a below-average USAF unit, you are not a very good leader.

That's all fine a dandy, and this type of stuff still happens. I lead 21-people, have had DG's in PME, first time folks make MSgt, and given out referral EPR's and denied decorations, watched people get promoted/demoted, etc. I've had a guy who had seven PT failures from his last base (and the Wing King there retained him), start getting in the mid-80's now on his PT tests. But you're our shoes, you praise the great things people are doing, you punish those who fuck up, however you try to get them back on the team and not cast them away, you enable people to overcome their weaknesses and make them better, but you still have your 5% that fuck up and don't honestly give a shit. You've sent the message to your subordinates that this shit won't be tolerated and they'll be dealt with appropriately. Should you be replaced if you're doing in your power to stop them from making bad decisions, yet they still make them?

[GlassEmpty]

Poor wording on my part. What I meant is, as the CC I would address my people, explain the situation/punishment and reiterate my expectations. I would treat my people like adults.

Ah yes...because if you don't do something visible, you have done nothing at all, line of thinking. I particularly love this leadership style...it usually goes hand-in-hand with the everyone wears diapers method.

I'll default to nsplayrs post for forms of punishment. If questioned by leadership what I have done, I would have plenty (public shaming, paperwork, stripped of IP/FL/Etc status,etc...) to show them. Is this not enough?

Let me be clear, I have no problem using it as punishment...for the individual, but not the whole group/squadron. I've never worn my blues, when I wasn't forced. As far as the blues monday...the last time that rule was put in place, our OG wrote a policy for us to NOT wear blues. His logic was that we could always be thrown on the schedule (and often were), so our uniform of the day was always flight suits. So no, I probably wouldn't bitch that much.

Well put. I agree that no visibility doesn't mean things aren't being done. But an appearance of 4 DUI's in the first 6 months of a year in your OG and having visible action definitely will draw attention of upper brass. Azimuth makes it sound as if the this Sq/CC is top notch and that attention is given to the subject and the people. But Nsplayers post makes it seem that one DUI means a CC should be fired and that s/he can't lead. I think we're just highlighting a problem in the Air Force that is absolutely uncontrollable occurrence without extreme action. Maybe a one and done, immediate departure from the AF will be enough of a deterrent?

[Prozac]

Not sure how a group is supposed to consider this type of action as anything other than punishment. OG: "We just had another DUI and I'm mad as hell! All of you will now report in in Service Dress Monday morning!" Sure sounds like punishment to me. I've never understood how this type of action addresses the problem at hand. If the desired effect is to remind people of their duty to be more professional, there are far more effective ways to do it. Let's think about what might be leading to this rash of incidents for a moment, if, in fact that's what we have here: Could it be that there are far more second assignment instructors at Altus than ever before? Perhaps this younger, less experienced cadre bring with them issues not typically seen with when dealing with FTU instructors. Maybe these same folks have morale issues that need to be addressed. Again, more people have been non-vol'd to this assignment than typically seen in the past. Additionally, at least up to the time I left, AETC was becoming more and more draconian in their policies towards their instructors. Like it or not, people are going to have to blow off steam in such an environment. Some of them will make dumb decisions in the process. I can tell you that civilian employers face similar situations on a daily basis. Almost without exception, the individual is dealt with and the company continues to operate. I'm not so sure a radically different approach is called for when dealing with a group of qualified and experienced military operators.

[nsplayr]

Should you be replaced if you're doing in your power to stop them from making bad decisions, yet they still make them?

If you're taking care of your people and there's the persistent 5% that aren't meeting the minimum expectations then work as hard as you can to A) keep them engaged and B) get them off your team. Obviously not as easy in the AF as the private sector. 7 PT failures and retained by the WG/CC...must have been quite the guy!

But Nsplayers post makes it seem that one DUI means a CC should be fired and that s/he can't lead.

No way! In the story I told, my squadron had a DUI and another ARI within like a month of each other...the CC kept his job and rightfully so. If it's a long-term trend item and you're not able to take care of your people enough to keep them out of significant trouble then that's where you're failing as a leader. If I'm in charge of 169 airmen under age 30 there's gonna be some shit that happens, that's just a fact. At some point repeated failure of subordinates is the fault of the leadership, but that's not the case on incident #1.

Way too often we see a zero mistake AF where one minor incident is cause for career-ending punishment...it leads to CYA and more bad leadership.

Edited June 8, 2014 by nsplayr

[Smokin]

It doesn't help that the military/congress invented the Alcohol Related Incident to elevate "incidents" into a handy three letter crime. What is the civilian equivalent of an ARI? I've heard of multiple ARIs that were not in of themselves crimes, but because alcohol was involved, now it is a crime. Why don't we have a Tobacco Related Incident? Think of the long term health benefits and medical cost savings we could achieve!

[GlassEmpty]

It doesn't help that the military/congress invented the Alcohol Related Incident to elevate "incidents" into a handy three letter crime. What is the civilian equivalent of an ARI? I've heard of multiple ARIs that were not in of themselves crimes, but because alcohol was involved, now it is a crime. Why don't we have a Tobacco Related Incident? Think of the long term health benefits and medical cost savings we could achieve!

I don't see your point... you're saying because we, military folk who make acronyms for everything, use an acronym to describe a few nationally accepted acronyms that these events are worse than they were before the term "ARI" came to fruition? YGBFKM... the issue here isn't the elevation of how bad a DUI is (although I don't think society takes it serious enough) it's how to prevent them within our own society. These actions affect the mission, more so than just stripped qualifications and punishments that affect individual morale. You don't want to be in a unit that has an ARI that results in a death or paralysis (I use the acronym just for you).

I agree that events shouldn't be ARI because someone had just one beer, but I'm sure stats show that often isn't the case. Regardless, I see the sarcasm in your post but I have a feeling there is some seriousness in the first two lines.

[Jaded]

No, he's saying that anything you do (talking back to a chief, tripping and spraining your ankle) becomes a significantly worse event if you've had a beer, even if said beer had nothing to do with why the incident occurred. That's why if you hurt yourself off duty, the first thing they will ask you is "Was there alcohol involved?" so they can get the pain train rolling later.

[ARIs 'R' Us]

Our old Wg/CC would send emails to the wing distro every time somebody got an ARI...my favorite was the one describing a female Airman waking up to discover that lewd & inappropriate images had been drawn on her in Sharpie , which she angrily reported to SF (I assume). She & the host of the party received paperwork...I can only imagine that counseling session.

[SocialD]

we military folk who make acronyms for everything, use an acronym to describe a few nationally accepted acronyms that these events are worse than they were before the term "ARI" came to fruition?

I had actually never heard of the term ARI until this thread.