Posted on Nov 5, 2022
Why do a lot of units not like training soldiers in combatives?
15K
65
29
12
12
0
Is it conflicting issues? Afraid of the established pecking order? Worried about soldiers getting hurt? Don’t think it’s relevant? I’m curious to know. If you comment and just wanna start drama and be insulting then do not comment.
Combatives
Company Commander
1SG
Platoon Sergeant
Battalion Commander
Posted 2 y ago
Responses: 17
15
15
0
1. Commanders don't like their Soldiers getting hurt. Combatives have a high injury rate, even higher when you have young Soldiers with big egos. Even higher when you have unqualified instructors working on the ground without mats.
2. Most units don't have anyone qualified to instruct. A commander isn't going sign off on a risk assessment for training where there isn't a qualified instructor.
3. Most large posts have a fight house where you can arrange training, units simply don't arrange the training. Commanders aren't going to dictate what you do for PT, so the failure is on the NCOs who don't arrange the training.
2. Most units don't have anyone qualified to instruct. A commander isn't going sign off on a risk assessment for training where there isn't a qualified instructor.
3. Most large posts have a fight house where you can arrange training, units simply don't arrange the training. Commanders aren't going to dictate what you do for PT, so the failure is on the NCOs who don't arrange the training.
(15)
(0)
SGM Erik Marquez
"Commanders aren't going to dictate what you do for PT, so the failure is on the NCOs who don't arrange the training."
Ahh, what?
In 27 years AD Army Infantry Privet to Sergeant Major, I never found your observation to be true. NCOS ran PT, but it was directed or approved by the commander.
As to why some commander chooses not to direct or allow combatives to be conducted.. I can only assume they are ignorant in the training benefits that are not just physical. And if they are sitting on tier hands because they don't have a qualified level 3 combatives SM in the company, or cant borrow a LV3 or 4 from a company in the BN or BDE, well it was just not a priority for them..sucks for the unit to be let down like that.
Ahh, what?
In 27 years AD Army Infantry Privet to Sergeant Major, I never found your observation to be true. NCOS ran PT, but it was directed or approved by the commander.
As to why some commander chooses not to direct or allow combatives to be conducted.. I can only assume they are ignorant in the training benefits that are not just physical. And if they are sitting on tier hands because they don't have a qualified level 3 combatives SM in the company, or cant borrow a LV3 or 4 from a company in the BN or BDE, well it was just not a priority for them..sucks for the unit to be let down like that.
(4)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
SGM Erik Marquez in my experience of mostly combat unit, NCOs created the PT plans, directed what the training for PT would be in, and commanders sign off on it. Other than directing that we should start training for the ACFT when it was first announced, I've never seen a commander dictate what PT will be. Even then, that's only because the leaders of the Army directed commanders to have their units train for the upcoming ACFT implementation.
The Army got rid of level 4 about a decade ago and rolled it into 3. They restricted level 3 to only being taught at the school house at Ft Benning and prohibited anyone from being certified as a level 3 outside the schoolhouse. There's a limit to how many level 3 instructors they can train in a year. On some bases It's almost impossible to find more than a handful of level 3 instructors.
The Army got rid of level 4 about a decade ago and rolled it into 3. They restricted level 3 to only being taught at the school house at Ft Benning and prohibited anyone from being certified as a level 3 outside the schoolhouse. There's a limit to how many level 3 instructors they can train in a year. On some bases It's almost impossible to find more than a handful of level 3 instructors.
(1)
(0)
CSM William Everroad
SGM Erik Marquez, I am going to have to agree with SFC (Join to see) on this one. Commanders dictate fitness goals and NCOs create the plan, get it approved, and execute. If Commanders were "owning" the whole program, they were not utilizing their NCOs' or MFT's capabilities.
The issue in units where the PT good idea fairy sits on the shoulders of the Officers, it is because NCOs (from PSG to 1SG) were either not:
1. creating a plan in the first place; or
2. the plan did not adhere to regulatory guidance (Fitness or training management doctrine).
Platoons and First line leaders are responsible for individual skills development, why is fitness any different?
In both cases, because fitness is a Commander's responsibility along with everything else, someone had to plan something and since NCOs let down the Commander in the first place, why would they trust them to do it? This creates a culture in a unit that can carry over between multiple Commanders.
The issue in units where the PT good idea fairy sits on the shoulders of the Officers, it is because NCOs (from PSG to 1SG) were either not:
1. creating a plan in the first place; or
2. the plan did not adhere to regulatory guidance (Fitness or training management doctrine).
Platoons and First line leaders are responsible for individual skills development, why is fitness any different?
In both cases, because fitness is a Commander's responsibility along with everything else, someone had to plan something and since NCOs let down the Commander in the first place, why would they trust them to do it? This creates a culture in a unit that can carry over between multiple Commanders.
(3)
(0)
I'm very much with SFC (Join to see)'s comments about time being a finite resource.
When I was a Battalion Commander, I remember telling my Brigade leadership during a QTB that my job was to manage failure.
After getting the stare of death from him I went on to explain that the requirements I had exceeded the amount of time I had to accomplish them and it was my responsibility to determine what tasks could be dropped without (too many) consequences and which ones were critical tasks that had to be done.
So, why no emphasis on combatives? While this would be an unpopular opinion to some, I really didn't care about them and my O6/O8 didn't care about it either. Sure, it might be a fun thing to do for the Soldiers (maybe), but from the leadership side, I cared about mission accomplishment, resource allocation, and Soldier development.
Frankly, combatives don't fit into any of those categories for me. I'm not saying that it would be the same for some other unit that would focus on a close-combat mission, but for me, having a focus on a 'fun activity' would just be a waste of resources.
When I was a Battalion Commander, I remember telling my Brigade leadership during a QTB that my job was to manage failure.
After getting the stare of death from him I went on to explain that the requirements I had exceeded the amount of time I had to accomplish them and it was my responsibility to determine what tasks could be dropped without (too many) consequences and which ones were critical tasks that had to be done.
So, why no emphasis on combatives? While this would be an unpopular opinion to some, I really didn't care about them and my O6/O8 didn't care about it either. Sure, it might be a fun thing to do for the Soldiers (maybe), but from the leadership side, I cared about mission accomplishment, resource allocation, and Soldier development.
Frankly, combatives don't fit into any of those categories for me. I'm not saying that it would be the same for some other unit that would focus on a close-combat mission, but for me, having a focus on a 'fun activity' would just be a waste of resources.
(7)
(0)
4
4
0
I think they are afraid of injuries
and overall mood of conducting battle task skills!
and overall mood of conducting battle task skills!
(4)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
I understand the injuries;however, soldiers can injury themselves at anytime. Heck, you see soldiers get hurt in the field, motorpool, and even rolling their ankle walking in the parking lot ! Haha.
(2)
(0)
SFC David Reid, M.S, PHR, SHRM-CP, DTM
SSG (Join to see) But they don't want to be the causation factor of that!
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google