Discipline Book

Discussion in 'Military Discipline' started by ACIOSHOTSWIFTOS, Nov 11, 2005.

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. Guys,

    Is a disciplinery interview book legal or not when being used as a record or dosier of events, Whats the procedures of its use and how and when is it appropriate
  2. I keep a Troop Sgts discipline book due to the amount of naughty boys i have had in my troop. I started it because at times the Army system appears slow to respond and AGAI 67 action can only go so far.

    As an example...

    Soldier A within my troop constantly came back to work after a weekend either pissed or in bad order i.e fighting.

    Soldier A was a slovenly individual who lacked any moral fibre or soldering skills.

    Soldier A was one of them that would go sick to get out of PT or CFT's.

    After around 4 AGAI 67's for various minor offences he was pulled in for the usual TSM/TC interview
    When this tactic failed and he re offended he was charged and fined.

    When this still had no effect i started his discharge on the grounds that he was unfit for military service. What swayed it was the fact that it had all been logged by me in the book.

    Subsequently said individual is now being discharged. A result, i think so.

    Legal or not it backs you up when you want to get rid of individuals.
  3. woopert

    woopert LE Moderator

    Where I would advise extreme caution is using any "semi-official" means of recording discipline offences that do not get dealt with under the procedures under AGAI67 is that comments must be specific to probl4ems and not have disparaging comments in them a la "Soldier A is a waste of rations". These documents can be called for during an industrial tribunal and would not help defend against claims of unfair dissmisal post-discharge.

    The DTI website links to ACAS and there is good guidance on the 2004 Employment Rights Act that sets out the correct process for dismissal and it's worth being acquainted with it.

    Personally, I think records are a must when dealing with admin cases, but you have to be careful about context.
  4. this is one of the reasons that so many good soldiers are leaving the service, too many **** retentive boss's with rank so far up there arse they feel its there right to keep a hit list on there troops, get a life and talk to your men thats what being a leasder is all about not pumping them
  5. Twist. While I agree that many leave due to bosses who are tubes. There are some people that cannot be helped.

    Books are legal, but as woopert said, context is everything. A date, time and description of the event/occurance is all required. Do not add in anything seen by others or anything which has an opinion attached.
  6. and of course you can (should) keep one on your nco/snco/orifice if you're having problems.
  7. It works in both directions. A slack soldier may keep a record of all the times he/she thinks that he/she is being 'picked on' for use in a claim. If there is no record od why the soldier was diciplined from the viewpoint of the NCO, then they have all the ammunition they need to take the army (and the NCO) to the cleaners.

    If the dicipline is justified, then it should be documented. Not just to be ****, but to back yourself up if the OC/RMP/Lawyers come knocking with a bullying charge in their sweaty little mits. It may be a good idea to have every entry witnessed and countersigned by another NCO or even the soldier themself so that there's no talk of anything being made up or that the soldier knows that their conduct is being recorded. It's sad that it has had to come to this, but it's the world we live in now. Not all soldiers accept dicipline dispite having signed on the dotted line for a life (or a few years anyway) in uniform.
  8. woopert

    woopert LE Moderator

    1. Tubes for bosses happen in all walks of life, not just the army. Equally there are officers who can't manage their way out of a paper bag, so too managers. Anyone leaving the army because "my boss was a tube" is likely to be in for a shock as there are far more of them in Civ Div.

    2. Any officer above the rank of 2Lt who says he's never had an admin case that was beyond help is a liar. Any NCO who has not had to deal with an admin case nausing up his/her life hasn't been an NCO for very long. The fact is that there are people serving who shouldn't be because their only pleasure in life is causing grief for others. These people should be dealt with and done so in a way that closes the doors to any grubby claim of unfair dismissal later. Ergo, the need for a record. If that's in the form of a discipline book then so be it.

    No-one is suggesting stitching soldiers with an entirely unofficial reporting process.
  9. speak to dibble. he'll know!!!
  10. Surely the AGAI 67 system is in place precisely for these situations.

    It has minor sanctions for minor offences e.g. extras or show parades for lateness and more for more lateness and then major sanctions for continual offenders or larger offences. It is recorded and can be used for all from being late or not shaving to awol for 48hrs etc. There is then a step up to QR/MML action for more serious still or repetion of major sanction 67 items. Again all recorded.

    The book just seems to duplicate in an unofficial manner. If you just want it as a record of how many cnuts you have, keep it in the public eye and call it an availability state or something.
  11. i agree with plant_pilot, unfortunately there will always be cases where an individual, despite time and effort invested, becomes a lost cause or beyond help. In these cases, it is entirely neccessary to keep a log with or without a view to further action. as we all know, at the best of times, resources can become limited, so why waste time on one acception to the norm when it can be greater invested in more important matters. The advice to have this record countersigned is definately a must, as those who are beyond help or unwilling to aid themselves will always cry wolf when faced with the final blow, ie, discharge. I for one will always be willing to invest my time to help out another, but will at the same time keep a record incase the unknown shows its head and no-one is willing to help me!
  12. Follow on Question:

    So, if for instance entrys are made in a book clearly marked "Discipline Book" of instances of discussions/disagreements that had been sorted and not classed at the time as formal interviews and just say for instance the originator then calls them "notes" but has digressed to a RO who has made an automated descion on those said notes and that they are in fact incorrect. what then. A breech of the data protection act?

    Note: These entrys were not witnessed by anybody other than the originator
    The book is clerly marked "Dsicipline"

    I am researching this subject as i can find no information on written records etc and there use.
  13. When I was in the Army (pre AGAI67) We maintained a 'Platoon' (insert sub-unit here) Dairy in which minor infringements and sanctions were recorded, along with other details such as those on duty or details ect. It was a well known fact that it existed. I saw this as a vital man managment tool, which I continue in civ div. ACAS in civ div like AGA167 lays down a disaplinary procedure to be followed (i.e. recording a verbal warning in writing, and giving a copy to subject) but it does not cover minor infringments which lead up to the first warning! This is where a Dairy comes in (Note I do not call it a "Discipline Book" as it contains other info on the day to day running of a department (or section/platoon) So that by the time ACAS comes into play, you already have a detailed record of events leading up to it, plus examples of why an person was not picked on individually. In referance to the 'Data Protection Act' It only involves records that are kept on a Computer or Database, and not handwritton records in a Dairy! (One major exception is a Police Pocket Book which is admissible as evidence in court where errors can only be crossed out, and the page (numbered) not removed!)
  14. You're milking this for all it's worth
  15. I thought this sort of thing was banned some time ago?

    I (dimly) remember being told/reading something along the lines of unoffical notes being written about troops msut not be passed onto other persons or used by 3rd parties when disciplining or writing reports etc.

    You were allowed to keep notes for your own use only as a memory aid but they were not to be used for anyother purpose.

    Has this changed or have the port fumes addled what few grey cells I have left?