Discussion in 'Military Discipline' started by fnusnunfi, Dec 1, 2006.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. I have just been AGAI 67 d (as a SNCO) as my OC is considering placing me on a formal warning for an alledged incident. The only incident I can think about was minor debate regarding leave with a Jr Offr, and was in both my and his opinion was sorted 5 hours later following our shift. Additionally my units 2IC overode this Offr and insisted due to the operational tempo I needed leave (2 days only to make a long weekend) Now 6 weeks later I have been given a week to prepare for an alledged incident, details of which I will not find out about until the interview it's self in less than a weeks time. Help, advice, tips - thanks in advance.
  2. Please tell us that in English, slow down a bit, and as a SNCO sort your spelling.

    Do you have an RCMO? If not, there are people on here who will help. My first suggestion would be Biscuits_AB (my adversary in crime), other than that, Soldier_Why.

    PM me if you want.

    Slug x
  3. So you've been warned for administrative action without being told what it's for?

    If you're on the level, you can relax: your superiors are clearly clueless with respect to the workings of AGAI 67. Once they've had a chance to actually read the document, they'll calm down.

    I'll paint a scenario not a million miles from what you're involved with from the sound of things and based on events with which I was personally involved:

    An SNCO reprimands a JNCO in front of recruits for which the JNCO was responsible. The JNCO later approached the SNCO to discuss the events and the SNCO agreed that he should have taken the JNCO to one side before reprimanding him. He apologised and considered the matter finished.

    The JNCO, however, wanted the events to be recognized at a higher level as he was not persuaded that the SNCO would not do the same thing again in a similar situation. He submitted a request for redress of complaint under AGAI 70 to the CO (via the Adjt).

    After investigation, the Adjt submitted a report to the CO who then interviewed both parties.

    The JNCO was informally reprimanded by the CO for over-reacting (no AGAI 67 action involved - strictly interview-without-coffee stuff) when the matter could have been dealt with by the Tp Comd or Sqn 2IC.

    The SNCO was given a Recorded Oral Warning (AGAI 67) for conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline (primarily due to the language and aggression used in the initial reprimand). The ROW was subsequently reflected in the SNCO's CR to the effect that he should work on his approach to the management of subordinate JNCOs - no mention was made to the AGAI 67 action and the ROW was purged from his P File when he was posted (on promotion, incidentally).

    At the outcome, everyone was pissed off: the Adjt and CO had had their time wasted by the JNCO's spurious complaint; the JNCO had botted his own reputation by appearing to over-react; the SNCO had a blot on his CR record (although it didn't prevent his promotion). However, on the positive side, the command team did identify an area where the SNCO had a weakness that could easily have become more serious; a message was sent to all ranks that complaints were handled seriously but that there was still room for them to backfire on the complainant; and OCs were briefed by the CO to ensure that SNCOs understood how to deal effectively with JNCOs without undermining them.

    Whole affair took four working days to resolve thanks to Adjt being fully up to speed with the AGAI 67 regulations at the time.

    I hope that at least gives you some idea of how these things are conducted and how they can resolve without necessarily blighting the rest of your career. If you have any more detailed questions, feel free to elaborate.

  4. Firstly, get a copy of the AGAI and read it yourself so you know what you're dealing with.

    Secondly, it would appear from what you say that the alleged incident involves potential insubordination, which could lead to breach of the service test, and that minor action is proposed with a recorded oral warning as the likely sanction if transgression is proved on the balance of probabilities.

    If awarded, this would identify any shortcomings and what needs to be done to rectify them. Lesser awards could include extra duties etc.

    If, indeed, the junior officer and you now see eye to eye on this matter, it may help you to get a statement from him confirming his view of the discussion. He may or may not want to do this, and you should not attempt any pressure.

    Any other mitigating factors involved in the issue (why you wanted leave so much etc) might also be relevant.

    Without knowing any further details, it is also possible that a complete show of contrition might be the best bet - hold your hand up and say you were wrong and now you are sorry. This could go in your favour and lead to a lesser sanction.

    Lastly, you are entitled to seek a review of the decision, the sanction or both, if you are not happy.

    Hope this helps, happy to discuss by PM, although someone within your unit would probably be better placed.
  5. You've understandibly been very scant with the details (keep it that way)so in real terms, don't expect much from here, but you should seriously consider what occurred (you referred to it as a 'debate'). If you've been chopsy take it on the chin. Either way, you do have a right to appeal and you can take it to your unit EOA if you feel that you have been treated less than fairly.

    It's not that common for a SNCO to be AGAI'd, so do you have previous issues? Did your 'debate' take place in the presence of juniors? Was your side of this 'debate' perhaps a bit strong? Are there mitigating circumstances for what you said and how you said it (heat of the moment? stress?)? If so, highlight them. Don't expect them to be a 'get out clause' but put them forward. Have you got someone who can speak up for you?

    At the end of the day mate, the other party is an Officer and, I'm sure that there were other routes available to you where you could have sorted out the issue, without resorting to 'debate'.

    Nobody here is judging you mate, but only you know what the 'alleged incident' was.

    They do however, have to provide details of the allegation to you, so that you can prepare your case. If they haven't done so already (and from what you say this appears to be the case), take it up with you EOA. The least he/she can do is put them right and obtain the information which you will require.
  6. i don't understand why anyone would want to go on leave with a junior officer anyway :)
  7. Lets get this into perspective, AGAI 67 constitutes admin action (breaches against employment law or contractual breaches) not disciplinary action (criminal law), to be given a Formal Warning your OC must provide evidence showing a sustained pattern of events for which you are being warned for, not a one off incident, if I were the C of C of your unit I would seriously be considering Legal Advise right about now, I suggest you do the same.
  8. Whatever happened to the good old "take him round the back and give him a quick dig routine" Political Correctness has a lot to answer for! A quick dig/boot *********** used to sort out problems and neither side carried a grudge ie the NCO made his point and the soldier learnt his lesson.
  9. Rubbish.

    You have quite clearly never been beaten remorselessly for something that you haven't done, on the basis that some fool thinks it is his place to dispense summary justice.
  10. Reading between the lines it sounds like you were "gobbing it" to your Pl Comd. If that is the case, whether you believe it was justified or not, I would take it on the chin and move on.
  11. You should have a right to find out what it is you are in trouble for before acting going in front of the OC.
  12. Wrong: AGAI 67 constitutes admin action (breaches against employment law or contractual breaches), he/she will be briefed by the OC accordingly, this is NOT discipline.
  13. Thats a bit harsh. Surely you should be told before hand what you have are supposed to have done wrong.
  14. It would be the done thing normally, there is obviously more going on here than meets the eye, however, he has no right to be told prior to an interview, he will get a chance to Redress/Appeal once any paperwork has been served on him. Under Major Admin Action (AGAI 67) if he so wishes, his case can be looked at by a "Reviewing Officer".
  15. Actually it is quite difficult for him to be told what is going on without making it the 'initial interview' at which the complaint is formally laid down for him. At some point he has to be told what the complaint is, but I agree that to give hima week's warning for incoming bad news is pretty harsh!