Three Brigadiers in three months - sacked or suspended…

See my red highlight. In other words:those who could have (and should have) supported what he was trying to do, but either didn't have the moral courage to do so, or had their own private agendas to follow (i.e. don't rock the Royal boat,or maybe they had theor own little scams going on). I agree that this was "civvie street", but then again it wasn't: Yeoman Warders are ex military. This was, to all intents and purposes, a military system, in which a protected clique were taking the piss.
Seems he fitted in as a RNLI lifeboat helmsman on the Thames for over six years, both full time and volunteer. He must have fitted in. I would imagine if he was a pompous official type his crews would have soon f*cked him off.
 
At least 1 of the officers in question has a nice little number in the same rank in NW London, but obviously that can’t be right because the Daily Mail says different ^~
Presumably, innocent or guilty, none of them will get their command appointment back, so will have been penalised whatever the outcome of the investigations.
 
How on earth did he “accept failure was part of the process”, yet sacked 3 RSMs? Perhaps the failure lay closer to home!
Fail once and you got mentored. Fail twice, you got bollocked. Fail a third time an you got sacked.

That and the fact he set very high personal standards; field discipline, fitness (Army athlete as a 1*) and integrity. And he didn’t tolerate alcohol related issues.
 
You may well be right
I suspect his intentions were good but his manner of operating wasn't

We had a family friend who was a Beefeater, he did make mention of the 'Spanish Practices' which were carried out by only a small number of the Beefeaters and who were resented by quite a few of the others. Some of the extreme scams as reported very likely never happened, but those that did were enough to cause unease. It is to the General's credit that he tried to address the problem.

His downfall was maybe that he forgot that he was a civvie in charge of other civvies who were basically tour guides' that were living in 'a close-knit community with its fair share of petty jealousies and rumour'**

Civvie street is a different country, they do things differently there', as someone might have paraphrased, and, acting the way he did, to put it kindly, by 'letting off steam', wasn't going to work in the same way it might have done in Army life. There is a maxim that 'people who have the power to get the last laugh, usually make use that facility'.
It seems that, from the outcome of the tribunal that there was a sustainable case against him for instant dismissal and so he went; those who could have stopped his going, opted not to do so.

** evidence given at the industrial tribunal on behalf of Historic Royal Palaces by Gen Cima's deputy and successor. From what our friend told us, petty is probably an understatement,
His downfall was Danatt who wanted the house that went with the Governor’s job
 
If I haven't told at least five people to fu{k off, called 10 people cu^ts and thrown several hammers around in a day then I'm probably on leave. I do enjoy when I get several woooperts a week popping into the workshop for a brew, some top level sweary-rants and some constructive deconstruction.

We aren't a huggy happy-clapper community. If people haven't got the onions to put up with some fruity language or respond in turn with a quality 5 star kunty comebacks then maybe this ain't the right job for them.
Not even funny . . . !! :( .
 
Presumably, innocent or guilty, none of them will get their command appointment back, so will have been penalised whatever the outcome of the investigations.

He did slightly over a full 2 years in Command and isn’t exactly doing a ‘backwater’ job currently. Not quite sure how that equates to “sacked or suspended” :)
 

Sarastro

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Albeit US, I had an incident where one of my Jr Enlisted responded to me with a “whatever” in the JSOC. I immediately raised my voice, called her outside, and proceeded to correct her behavior. Utter silence in the tent which was packed with Officers.

A passing MH Officer started to chide me for being “mean and out of control”. I responded with “THIS is none of your business Ma’m. You are NOT in my Command Chain, nor are pertinent to this. If there isn’t an emergency, I’ll be carrying on” . She was quite miffed.

Interestingly enough, the other NCOs came to my aid and supported me 100%. Even offering to take over as the enlisted fucktard was from another branch. I never saw them gather behind me.

My CO heard about it and offered to write up the Jr. I declined as the attitude was adjusted.


When I wrote up my unit for Mission awards, hers was dropped to the lowest I could find. She did an otherwise stellar job, but had to suffer the consequences.

Now, I just sigh loudly and tell them how disappointed I am. It gets the point across.
This is all fine.
This is a massively dick move.

There were consequences, you just outlined them. You also said she did a stellar job, so apparently her initial lacksadaisical attitude was either corrected by your remonstration, or didn't get in the way of her work. Punishing her months later for something minor (attitude to / undermining you is not a mission critical fuckup, it sounds more like an ego/leadership challenge to me) sounds like a grudge, not 'consequences'.

I too 'corrected' various of my soldiers at times, preferably as early as possible, because earlier meant there was less chance of mistakes having a real impact. Some of them didn't learn the lesson, and their reports reflected that. But if I had taught a lesson for minor inconsequential mistake at the start of a tour; they had learned and adopted it; then I had downgraded their tour report for it regardless; that would have been because I was shit at reporting, not because they were bad at learning.

______________

I raise this because it seems like an example of the thread point I was going to make. Often it isn't the loud bullies who are the worst - although they are clearly not good. The worst toxic leaders are the ones who quietly hold grudges and seek to destroy subordinates for challenging them, perceived or real slights, or just general dislike. Throwing a chair and shouting give you overt, witnessed behaviours to challenge. Quietly informing you that you are going to get a career-ending report is a he-said-she-said problem that is almost always resolved in the favour of the ranking individual.
 

Yokel

LE
This is all fine.
This is a massively dick move.

There were consequences, you just outlined them. You also said she did a stellar job, so apparently her initial lacksadaisical attitude was either corrected by your remonstration, or didn't get in the way of her work. Punishing her months later for something minor (attitude to / undermining you is not a mission critical fuckup, it sounds more like an ego/leadership challenge to me) sounds like a grudge, not 'consequences'.

I too 'corrected' various of my soldiers at times, preferably as early as possible, because earlier meant there was less chance of mistakes having a real impact. Some of them didn't learn the lesson, and their reports reflected that. But if I had taught a lesson for minor inconsequential mistake at the start of a tour; they had learned and adopted it; then I had downgraded their tour report for it regardless; that would have been because I was shit at reporting, not because they were bad at learning.

______________

I raise this because it seems like an example of the thread point I was going to make. Often it isn't the loud bullies who are the worst - although they are clearly not good. The worst toxic leaders are the ones who quietly hold grudges and seek to destroy subordinates for challenging them, perceived or real slights, or just general dislike. Throwing a chair and shouting give you overt, witnessed behaviours to challenge. Quietly informing you that you are going to get a career-ending report is a he-said-she-said problem that is almost always resolved in the favour of the ranking individual.

Thank you for raising the issue of the toxicity of the passive-aggressive 'leader', such as one that gets a subordinate to destroy records and spreads rumours. I do not mean suggesting that person x is crap at his job, I mean rumours that allege criminal misconduct and isolate someone from their peers and generally screw up their life.
 

Sarastro

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Thank you for raising the issue of the toxicity of the passive-aggressive 'leader', such as one that gets a subordinate to destroy records and spreads rumours. I do not mean suggesting that person x is crap at his job, I mean rumours that allege criminal misconduct and isolate someone from their peers and generally screw up their life.
Yes, well, Int Corps dontchakno. There wouldn't be enough 'spirit' to Frankenstein together even a mildly barky dog from the combined parts of all Majors and above in that Corps, so passive-aggressive toxicity is the go-to style. I think many of the non-combat arms are the same: they just never occupy the posts that require or give leeway for them to be "leaders".

As I've said before, one of the above types is presently a Brigadier, and it's not the one who was Comd ISR Bde. Others have gotten almost as far up the ladder with basically everyone in the Corps knowing they are toxic, but without it seeming to have much effect on their trajectory.

Personally, I'll take the shouty chair throwers.
 
Last edited:

Yokel

LE
Yes, well, Int Corps dontchakno. There wouldn't be enough 'spirit' to Frankenstein together even a mildly barky dog from the combined parts of all Majors and above in that Corps, so passive-aggressive toxicity is the go-to style. I think many of the non-combat arms are the same: they just never occupy the posts that require or give leeway for them to be "leaders".

As I've said before, one of the above types is presently a Brigadier, and it's not the one who was Comd ISR Bde. Others have gotten almost as far up the ladder with basically everyone in the Corps knowing they are toxic, but without it seeming to have much effect on their trajectory.

Personally, I'll take the shouty chair throwers.

I have only met one former Int Corps person and seemed decent enough but he had gone on to wear a beige beret.

I was unfortunately speaking from personal experience. Some so called leaders are so toxic that they get service complaints upheld against them by a one star, but do everything to deflect the blame from themselves. You will understand why I am cannot go into too much detail, but I share the view that the problem is people who are in roles that escape any sort of accountability or oversight.

The Biblical quote that in my signature block relates.
 
My DS on Staff Course was Int Corps and he was brilliant.
 
Yes, well, Int Corps dontchakno. There wouldn't be enough 'spirit' to Frankenstein together even a mildly barky dog from the combined parts of all Majors and above in that Corps, so passive-aggressive toxicity is the go-to style. I think many of the non-combat arms are the same: they just never occupy the posts that require or give leeway for them to be "leaders".

As I've said before, one of the above types is presently a Brigadier, and it's not the one who was Comd ISR Bde. Others have gotten almost as far up the ladder with basically everyone in the Corps knowing they are toxic, but without it seeming to have much effect on their trajectory.

Personally, I'll take the shouty chair throwers.

The army has never lacked spiteful cowards.
 
I was unfortunately speaking from personal experience. Some so called leaders are so toxic that they get service complaints upheld against them by a one star, but do everything to deflect the blame from themselves. You will understand why I am cannot go into too much detail, but I share the view that the problem is people who are in roles that escape any sort of accountability or oversight.
.
Are you going to let this define your entire life or are you going to get over it?
 

Yokel

LE
Are you going to let this define your entire life or are you going to get over it?

I am trying to deal with it, but it takes time - administrative processes always do. The self serving Oxygen thieving miscreant bastards responsible also caused damage to the Service and operational capability.

Operational capability is closely related to personal responsibility.
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top