The Power of Fill Your Boots; Real or imagined?

And that means that I turn my back on every wrong that I encounter? Or do I apply sound military judgement where I see fit...
I'm not putting words into your mouth, so don't put words into mine.

It was you who stated that you're not prepared to question or defend an individuals right (inline with POLICY) regarding alcohol related matters, which clearly states (do I really need to quote it again?) that responsible drinking can lead to bonding and therefore success on Ops (where is your "sound" "military" "judgement" now eh?).

I never suggested you "turned your back on every wrong".

Just the difficult ones, like the booze "guidance"; which brings me neatly back to moral courage, or lack of, and how this leads to places like FYB existing for disgruntled adults who don't see their Officers fighting for their rights.

Do me a favour, pop down the QMs and sign a spine out.
 
I'm not putting words into your mouth, so don't put words into mine.

It was you who stated that you're not prepared to question or defend an individuals right (inline with POLICY) regarding alcohol related matters, which clearly states (do I really need to quote it again?) that responsible drinking can lead to bonding and therefore success on Ops (where is your "sound" "military" "judgement" now eh?).

I never suggested you "turned your back on every wrong".

Just the difficult ones, like the booze "guidance"; which brings me neatly back to moral courage, or lack of, and how this leads to places like FYB existing for disgruntled adults who don't see their Officers fighting for their rights.

Do me a favour, pop down the QMs and sign a spine out.
I think he's going to need to sign your pushbike out soon.
 
I'm not putting words into your mouth, so don't put words into mine.

It was you who stated that you're not prepared to question or defend an individuals right (inline with POLICY) regarding alcohol related matters, which clearly states (do I really need to quote it again?) that responsible drinking can lead to bonding and therefore success on Ops (where is your "sound" "military" "judgement" now eh?).

I never suggested you "turned your back on every wrong".

Just the difficult ones, like the booze "guidance"; which brings me neatly back to moral courage, or lack of, and how this leads to places like FYB existing for disgruntled adults who don't see their Officers fighting for their rights.

Do me a favour, pop down the QMs and sign a spine out.
This policy reduced the availability of booze not completely wiped it out. I didn’t see the impact of it, only that the bars on camp remained as empty as they always had been, and non of the community events were alcohol free. If I was going to chest poke CFA, it would be for something worth while not the availability of booze to soldiers, which was still widely available noting that the vast majority of incidents processed by RMP are booze related. Right, where’s the QMs?
 
I presume that you are entirely happy with your Cpls blaming you for the shit tasking you pass onto them?

Out of curiosity, do you take responsibility for anything bad happening in your troop, and can you give us an example?
I tell my whole Troop when I have shit tasks for them. I'll explain either someone higher than me has made the decision or that it's shit but has to be done. It's not exactly a hardship to talk to your soldiers.

Had a two day event (going back to camp at night) I misread the AI and thought the ration assassin's were in the field fo both days (it said 2nd day) ended up paying 66 quid for a load of whopper meals.

I've fucked up a few times as have my sgts and JNCO. The majority of toms are actually quite understanding when you own up as oppose to hiding behind your rank.
 
Is it ok to just slip this in here?

Cheers.

Relevant to the original post by @spaz in a way.

No hot water for months at good ole Keogh Aldershot. From the BBC so a bit patchy as per.

Barracks 'worse than the frontline'
The response to this won't be to fix the heating, they will be tracking down who blabbed to the media about it.
 
I tell my whole Troop when I have shit tasks for them. I'll explain either someone higher than me has made the decision or that it's shit but has to be done. It's not exactly a hardship to talk to your soldiers.

Had a two day event (going back to camp at night) I misread the AI and thought the ration assassin's were in the field fo both days (it said 2nd day) ended up paying 66 quid for a load of whopper meals.

I've fucked up a few times as have my sgts and JNCO. The majority of toms are actually quite understanding when you own up as oppose to hiding behind your rank.
That completely depends the impact of the fuck up. Your small fry example, could have just as well been handled by telling them to pay and claim it back as they were entitled. You would have got a bollocking from the RAO but be £66 richer. MoD isn’t receptive to learning from proper fuck ups just appointing the blame. Because of that, there’s not a lot of point admitting to anything, because nothing is learnt and the shit will stick.
 
This policy reduced the availability of booze not completely wiped it out. I didn’t see the impact of it, only that the bars on camp remained as empty as they always had been, and non of the community events were alcohol free. If I was going to chest poke CFA, it would be for something worth while not the availability of booze to soldiers, which was still widely available noting that the vast majority of incidents processed by RMP are booze related. Right, where’s the QMs?
Blimey. Firstly, before I make my point, can I just say that it isn't POLICY. POLICY is AGAI 64. This is/was GUIDANCE. For someone who is the R.SIGS, you're pretty poor at communicating.

Whether or not you saw no impact, it impacts on Soldiers because guess what, they don't like, as adults, being told when and where they can drink when they're not on duty.

What should happen is let the adults do what they want, and hammer those who transgress from the POLICY. Most adults can tell the difference between what is a couple of sociable and what is irresponsible drinking; those that can't tell the difference require punishing and educating until they do. Don't impose limits on everyone because of the minority.

I don't know whether you're being deliberately obtuse to generate an e-fight, or whether you really don't understand why young Soldiers get pissed off by their CoC and the wider "Good Ideas Club", and flock to sites like FYB to bellyache and moan.
 
That completely depends the impact of the **** up. Your small fry example, could have just as well been handled by telling them to pay and claim it back as they were entitled. You would have got a bollocking from the RAO but be £66 richer. MoD isn’t receptive to learning from proper **** ups just appointing the blame. Because of that, there’s not a lot of point admitting to anything, because nothing is learnt and the shit will stick.
So the lads who did not have money on them are shit out of luck.
 
So the lads who did not have money on them are shit out of luck.
That’s not what I said is it. At the end of the day @stacker1 made Good his mistake, which was an honest one that he shouldn’t really have to stick his hand in his pocket for. If between a group of well paid soldiers, the price of a burger and chips can’t be covered for a short period then there’s more to worry about than a missed meal. Situation dependent of course.
 
OK, as it is guidance then the chest
Blimey. Firstly, before I make my point, can I just say that it isn't POLICY. POLICY is AGAI 64. This is/was GUIDANCE. For someone who is the R.SIGS, you're pretty poor at communicating.

Whether or not you saw no impact, it impacts on Soldiers because guess what, they don't like, as adults, being told when and where they can drink when they're not on duty.

What should happen is let the adults do what they want, and hammer those who transgress from the POLICY. Most adults can tell the difference between what is a couple of sociable and what is irresponsible drinking; those that can't tell the difference require punishing and educating until they do. Don't impose limits on everyone because of the minority.

I don't know whether you're being deliberately obtuse to generate an e-fight, or whether you really don't understand why young Soldiers get pissed off by their CoC and the wider "Good Ideas Club", and flock to sites like FYB to bellyache and moan.
poking should have taken place at a much lower level, which is completely different from chest poking a two or three star because the drinking at work rules have tightened up.
 
A CO gets two reports in command, that’s it, that’s the snapshot. They might be shit in command but awesome in an HQ, and need the command prior to an HQ tour. So what I’m getting is that it’s OK to hang an officer out to dry because of some negative comments from people that have signed off. And what is that going to do for officer retention, which is as bad, if not worse that other ranks?
If you are shit at your job, you are generally sacked, Officers should not be exempt from this.
 
That completely depends the impact of the **** up. Your small fry example, could have just as well been handled by telling them to pay and claim it back as they were entitled. You would have got a bollocking from the RAO but be £66 richer. MoD isn’t receptive to learning from proper **** ups just appointing the blame. Because of that, there’s not a lot of point admitting to anything, because nothing is learnt and the shit will stick.
Maybe in your part of the army, not in mine, retention in my Troop must be close to the best in the army.

You just seem to constantly make excuses for shite management.
 
Why not? Soldiers in the ranks are. I can guarantee youve met hundreds of them.
Soldiers rarely have the same positions of power as officers.
If they want the pay, the perks, the alleged respect, then they can try taking some responsibility,
 
If you are shit at your job, you are generally sacked, Officers should not be exempt from this.
I completely agree, but what you are still yet to offer is a workable process for doing this taking into account all the environmental factors. What you have said so far is that someone should be sacked because the sign off rate at their unit is higher than average, spiced up with subjective opinion from those that have signed off. This is laughable at best. MoD would be taken to the cleaners for millions and every officer would avoid command jobs like the plague.
 

Similar threads

Top