Question on administrative discipline and discharges

[Sua Sponte]

On 12/25/2021 at 11:55 AM, Skitzo said:

The scenario being described would be unlawful command influence if the member was Article 15d based off of the superior commanders desires. If it was simply admin action only it’s not technically UCI but not the best optic.

Dream-the best example I saw about discussing admin and NJP was from a former MXG/CC I worked for at CVS. There was a weekly forum for all the commanders to discuss ongoing situations with the GP/CC in a private room at the Golf Course over breakfast. This allowed all the commanders to know what was going on and learn from one another 100% complete transparency and the GP/CC never told them or myself to alter their course or plan of action—asked questions sure and gave advice based on his experience but only for the benefit of all to learn from one another.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Proving that level of UCI is almost impossible. If it the choice was truly the Sq/CC's, then why do the Gp/CC and/or Wg/CC need to know? Because they want to make sure the Sq/CC made the "right" choice, per their expectations. If not, then said Sq/CC's OPR/PRF may be adjusted accordingly. Commanders talk a big game about "doing the right thing" and all that filler, but when it comes down to it they are going to take the path of least resistance and threat to their career and potential promotions.

[Skitzo]

Proving that level of UCI is almost impossible. If it the choice was truly the Sq/CC's, then why do the Gp/CC and/or Wg/CC need to know? Because they want to make sure the Sq/CC made the "right" choice, per their expectations. If not, then said Sq/CC's OPR/PRF may be adjusted accordingly. Commanders talk a big game about "doing the right thing" and all that filler, but when it comes down to it they are going to take the path of least resistance and threat to their career and potential promotions.

Not necessarily, the higher level commander has ultimate responsibility for good order and discipline and has every right to withhold the decision at the higher level.

I don’t know what the average is on this stuff but I posted my POV from my experience in command.

Lots of well founded skepticism in this thread and that is good.

Anyone who has been there and done that knows what I’m saying and anyone who has not and would like to discuss further is more than welcome to discuss via message directly to me.

Hit me up.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[frog]

On 12/27/2021 at 8:40 PM, Sua Sponte said:

Proving that level of UCI is almost impossible. If it the choice was truly the Sq/CC's, then why do the Gp/CC and/or Wg/CC need to know? Because they want to make sure the Sq/CC made the "right" choice, per their expectations. If not, then said Sq/CC's OPR/PRF may be adjusted accordingly. Commanders talk a big game about "doing the right thing" and all that filler, but when it comes down to it they are going to take the path of least resistance and threat to their career and potential promotions.

The wing commander can’t direct a squadron commander to issue a certain type of admin action, but they can absolutely pull it to their level and issue the discipline themselves.
 

Now, imagine being a squadron commander and seeking to balance the action that you think is “right” versus what will keep the action within your control. For example, the Sq/CC thinks an LOC is appropriate, but the Wg/CC is going to pull it and issue an LOR (which comes with an UIF for officers). Suddenly, issuing a LOA at the squadron level sounds like a pretty savvy move if you can keep it in your control. You can remove a LOA from a PIF at any time, but you will need to get the Wg/CC to remove the LOR early and close the UIF.

[LookieRookie]

3 hours ago, frog said:

The wing commander can’t direct a squadron commander to issue a certain type of admin action, but they can absolutely pull it to their level and issue the discipline themselves.
 

Now, imagine being a squadron commander and seeking to balance the action that you think is “right” versus what will keep the action within your control. For example, the Sq/CC thinks an LOC is appropriate, but the Wg/CC is going to pull it and issue an LOR (which comes with an UIF for officers). Suddenly, issuing a LOA at the squadron level sounds like a pretty savvy move if you can keep it in your control. You can remove a LOA from a PIF at any time, but you will need to get the Wg/CC to remove the LOR early and close the UIF.

Not anymore broski. Any paperwork filed is permanently in your Officer Selection Record (OSR)

[Sua Sponte]

10 hours ago, frog said:

The wing commander can’t direct a squadron commander to issue a certain type of admin action, but they can absolutely pull it to their level and issue the discipline themselves.
 

Now, imagine being a squadron commander and seeking to balance the action that you think is “right” versus what will keep the action within your control. For example, the Sq/CC thinks an LOC is appropriate, but the Wg/CC is going to pull it and issue an LOR (which comes with an UIF for officers). Suddenly, issuing a LOA at the squadron level sounds like a pretty savvy move if you can keep it in your control. You can remove a LOA from a PIF at any time, but you will need to get the Wg/CC to remove the LOR early and close the UIF.

Very textbook definition of how it works. However, there’s the “unintended consequences” of doing it by doing it by the book.

Dunno if you remember in the mid 2000’s when education was masked to the promotion boards for officers? The CSAF at the time said if the USAF wanted an officer to get a masters, they’d be sent to school. Well, your education was never masked to your senior rater.  A lot of those senior raters used someone having a masters, or not, as a factor when giving a DP/P. I knew a lot of good folks follow that followed the CSAF guidance and got screwed.

No one is truly safe from the stuff mentioned in this thread until they have that magical DD-214.

Edited December 31, 2021 by Sua Sponte