Rank has its privileges means what precisely?

I like your example Scott; Captains are glorified Privates indeed.

CPT Gurinder (Gene) Rana that seems like a different issue. Courage is not something that only exists on a battlefield. There are many ways that one can show it. It is guaranteed that if this "leader" uses his power inappropriately once, he'll use it again similarly. I suggest capturing his lawlessness on a recording device and using the IG. If he tries to punish you, request a trial by court martial. It will bring spotlight on everything.

SGT Tony Clifford I used to say it to my joes all the time. I phrased it a little differently, though. “Shit rolls downhill. BUT..the higher up the hill you are, the bigger the shitball is when it runs you over. By the time it gets to the bottom for you barbarians, it barely smells.”

Of course rank has its privileges. Higher ranks often have better privileges. Frankly, I’d find it a little weird if at the end of the duty day, a bunch of privates went home to their nice on-post homes with their names on placards on the front yards while all the colonels piled into the barracks to get ready for a madden tournament.

Lower ranks sometimes have the better privileges. I saw a lot of wild stuff in the Army, and I can remember just as many awful leaders as great ones. What I can honestly say I NEVER saw was, in a group setting, officers or NCOs eating first. Privates first, always. Without exception. Then junior NCOs, etc etc. Sometimes, it just pays to be a PVT.

Rank, as they say (sometimes High, sometimes Low), indeed has its privileges.

CPT Gurinder (Gene) Rana - Then they should have neither. If you don't stand up to that kind of abuse of Rank, then you are complaisant in the problem.

Never be complacent with abuse of power, position or authority, and never allow waste. Thanks

CPT Gurinder (Gene) Rana - With rank comes power. Some leaders will use that power to threaten others. While that's bad leadership in my book, it isn't really against the rules. If I have tasking authority over you, then I can task you with any lawful duty that I want so that you "feel my wrath". That's a bad place for you to be in for sure but it doesn't really constitute violating policies and rules. Plus, "unusual activities" is pretty vague. Are the activities themselves breaking the rules or just unusual? Hard to answer without more specifics.

MAJ (Join to see) - " Some leaders will use that power to threaten others. While that's bad leadership in my book, it isn't really against the rules." Actually it is against the rules if they're doing it as retaliation for whistleblower actions or really anything. Some people might get away with masking it as a lawful duty but anything can be challenged.

What CPT Gurinder said it does depend on his activities but if a superior threatens someone who would report unlawful activity that is illegal.

SFC Kelly Fuerhoff - I agree fully. Honestly, the entire question seems a bit off to be coming from a CPT. We (those who have been in a while) should know that no one has a license to violate rules and policies regardless of their rank. His comments seem to indicate that there is something major going on but he has provided no details. So it leads me to believe (rightly or wrongly) that there's more smoke than actual fire. But it doesn't matter what I think. He's already talked to IG. If they don't see a problem, RP can't help him.

CPT Gurinder (Gene) Rana - I don't know what a CXO is. I assume it is some sort of Executive Officer.

If your CXO was involved in some sort of unusual activity (immoral, unethical, or illegal); it was your moral obligation to shine the light of day on that activity, REGARDLESS of the personal consequences.

In your comment to MAJ (Join to see) "I spoke to the IG MAJ Jaren Glover Sir and, I was advised that perhaps the CO was ignorant of the law, rules and regulations." I don't know to whom you spoke, but ignorance of the law, rules and regulations is no excuse. If the CXO was in violation of the law, rules and regulations for ANY reason, including ignorance, the IG was duty bound to investigate and address the unusual activity. If the CXO was not in violation of the law, rules and regulations, the IG was duty bound to give you a clear explanation and understanding why they felt your complaint had no merit. Furthermore, they are duty bound to maintain confidentiality.

If the IG failed to investigate and address, failed to explain, or failed to maintain confidentiality; you recourse does not end there. I suggest a letter to your Senator, Congressional Representative. Furthermore, if there is even a hint of repercussions, you need a lawyer. If you tolerate illegal, immoral, or unethical conduct by your seniors you are essentially complicit in the questionable activity. You and you alone must look into the eyes of someone junior who pays the price you would not. As a Captain, I paid the price when two field grade officers would not step up. It affected how I saw them for the remaining time I had in the Marine Corps.