4
4
0
I know an Army reserve PFC who recently had broken his ribs during rollover training (gunner) and also had sustained severe injuries back in basic. He still drills like everyone else, but cannot do PT currently. Even with the He walked in on the commander (LTC) who was laughing and talking about his "fake injury" to other enlisted soldiers and officers and how he (LTC) should break his ribs too. They became real quiet and walked out when they realized he(PFC) came in. They've also made him stay longer by himself to redo web based training when the certificate doesn't expire for 2 more years. Also they tried to withhold pay saying that he never completed AIT but he's been at the unit for 3 years and has the dd 1059/ certificate. There are more examples of things he is forced to do but this was the most recent.
Posted in these groups: 
Equal Opportunity (EO)
Commander
Equal Opportunity (EO) Commander
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 5
4
4
0
Did you personally hear these conversation?
Raised eyebrows from someone claiming a LTC, or anyone else claiming someone didn't complete AIT, or any other course, when it is something that is easily proven, the Soldier should have had a Line of Duty (LOD) investigation completed for the accident, and if it wasn't done, he should request one, in writing.
Other than a possible failure to complete a line of duty investigation, there is no other IG complaint I see in this post.
Raised eyebrows from someone claiming a LTC, or anyone else claiming someone didn't complete AIT, or any other course, when it is something that is easily proven, the Soldier should have had a Line of Duty (LOD) investigation completed for the accident, and if it wasn't done, he should request one, in writing.
Other than a possible failure to complete a line of duty investigation, there is no other IG complaint I see in this post.
(4)
(0)
SGT(P) (Join to see)
1SG (Join to see) the finding was in line of duty. And I've warned him it may be like that so he needs to make sure everything is right
(0)
(0)
SSG Robert Perrotto
ok - reading this thread so far, You have the LOD paperwork, You have the Medical Paperwork that clearly state the Soldier fractured his ribs, you have a claim about the Bat Com speaking about this Soldier in a negative manner in regards to his injuries, and a host of other stuff. Can you get sworn statements from the Soldiers the LTC was speaking with? Paperwork, That is what is going to get this fixed, IG would be the first step, EO at the brigade level would be the next, I would advise that BN lvl be given just a formal heads up that you are going above them ( I would because the LTC is involved). Seems to me this Soldier needs to get removed from a toxic command climate, any senior officer that would openly berate or insult one of their troops to other soldiers is unprofessional, and toxic. Glad you are standing up for your Soldier Sergeant. Make sure every aspect of this is correct on your part, as Command will not take kindly to this.
(2)
(0)
1SG (Join to see)
SSG Robert Perrotto I don't see an EO issue. I see a possible IG issue. In general, you have an EO issue, or an IG issue. Filing an EO complaint after being dissatisfied with the outcome of an IG inquiry/investigation, harms the Soldier's reputation more than it helps any issues. If the IG discovers an EO issue they will address it, or refer it. They won't ignore it.
Although many believe it is a realistic strategy to file both an EO and IG complaint, each has their lane, and it serves mostly to create a perception that the issue is the Soldier (my experience, and opinion only).
In the description of events, I see nothing that would lead me to believe anything is discriminatory or sexual harassment, IG.
Considering there are at least three sides to every story: what one party said happened; what the other party said happened; and, what really happened. In this forum we don't have that luxury, so I will assume all the claims in the post are what really happened.
I see the issues and non-issues, as these:
1. The LTC who was talking to about the Soldier may be unprofessional and juvenile, but not necessarily violate a policy/reg/etc. However, it may reflect some animosity the LTC has towards the PFC.
2. No pay was withheld, as the claim is "tried to withhold," so this may be evidence of animus, or harassment of the Soldier (the why, if true, is what is relevant and is what may require investigation.)
3. Stayed late to complete online training that was valid for 2 years. Without knowing "why" the urgency despite the length of time it remained valid, or whether everyone else was much more recent. There could have been a push at that level or a higher level, which would make it a non-issue. Unless having to stay late violates a policy/reg/etc., that alone is a non-issue. I would agree that if the purpose was solely to harass the Soldier, which would be difficult to prove, then it would remain a non-issue.
4. Other things. Well, each of those would have to be assessed.
When considering an IG complaint consider whether you can state: CDR/CSM/1SG/etc., X "improperly" did, or failed to do, Y, in violation of policy/reg/UCMJ/etc.
I would be offended if I walked in on such a conversation about me or one of my Soldiers, and wouldn't have permitted it to go unchecked. However, that's my personality, not everyone's approach. As stated, it wasn't professional, but that's about it.
With regard to obtaining sworn statements, I'd leave that to the appropriate authority. If they'll give one to you, they'll certainly respond to the IG.
I suggest drilling down and finding the honest motivation for what is being viewed as harassment and a bad command climate. Why? What has the Soldier done or not done? When did it start? What is the command perception of the Soldier and vice versa.
A request to discuss these issues under the Open Door policy shouldn't make matters worse, it may fix it.
Although many believe it is a realistic strategy to file both an EO and IG complaint, each has their lane, and it serves mostly to create a perception that the issue is the Soldier (my experience, and opinion only).
In the description of events, I see nothing that would lead me to believe anything is discriminatory or sexual harassment, IG.
Considering there are at least three sides to every story: what one party said happened; what the other party said happened; and, what really happened. In this forum we don't have that luxury, so I will assume all the claims in the post are what really happened.
I see the issues and non-issues, as these:
1. The LTC who was talking to about the Soldier may be unprofessional and juvenile, but not necessarily violate a policy/reg/etc. However, it may reflect some animosity the LTC has towards the PFC.
2. No pay was withheld, as the claim is "tried to withhold," so this may be evidence of animus, or harassment of the Soldier (the why, if true, is what is relevant and is what may require investigation.)
3. Stayed late to complete online training that was valid for 2 years. Without knowing "why" the urgency despite the length of time it remained valid, or whether everyone else was much more recent. There could have been a push at that level or a higher level, which would make it a non-issue. Unless having to stay late violates a policy/reg/etc., that alone is a non-issue. I would agree that if the purpose was solely to harass the Soldier, which would be difficult to prove, then it would remain a non-issue.
4. Other things. Well, each of those would have to be assessed.
When considering an IG complaint consider whether you can state: CDR/CSM/1SG/etc., X "improperly" did, or failed to do, Y, in violation of policy/reg/UCMJ/etc.
I would be offended if I walked in on such a conversation about me or one of my Soldiers, and wouldn't have permitted it to go unchecked. However, that's my personality, not everyone's approach. As stated, it wasn't professional, but that's about it.
With regard to obtaining sworn statements, I'd leave that to the appropriate authority. If they'll give one to you, they'll certainly respond to the IG.
I suggest drilling down and finding the honest motivation for what is being viewed as harassment and a bad command climate. Why? What has the Soldier done or not done? When did it start? What is the command perception of the Soldier and vice versa.
A request to discuss these issues under the Open Door policy shouldn't make matters worse, it may fix it.
(1)
(0)
4
4
0
SGT(P) (Join to see)
Thank you Sir. I thought this initially but wanted to make sure that could be filed with them.
(1)
(0)
3
3
0
SGT(P) (Join to see)
That's what I thought. I just wanted to make sure it was a complaint that could be filed with them. Thank you ma'am
(3)
(0)
(3)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google