Posted on Jul 14, 2015
Why don't we use military vehicles for work instead of POV?
5.37K
32
31
4
4
0
I think that use of military trucks is being overlooked. Every unit I have been to in my 7yrs of service only used there trucks for field problems and ranges. These trucks accumulate so many issues by dry rotting and still fluids. The budget has been a issue but instead of letting these vehicles self destruct I think we should use them as our daily vehicle. This would make soldiers more responsible and accountable for their vehicles. I have put more miles on my personal POV on post during work hours than I have off post off work. The higher gets drivers and nice government POVs al I ask is to use the unit trucks during work hours instead of my personal POV
Posted in these groups: 
POV
Government
POV Government
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 8
3
3
0
The simple answer is convenience.
It is "inconvenient" to use Government vehicles. There is a level of accountability associated with them that is not associated with privately owned vehicles (POVS). It sounds great in practice, but in execution, it is a pain.
As an example, imagine going to the motor pool at 0600 checking out a vehicle, getting your trip ticket, and fuel card, running around all day, annotating how far you went per stop, how many people were in the vehicle per leg, filling the vehicle up at the end of the day, and ensuring it was washed each and every time before you could turn it in, and heaven help you if you didn't get it back to the Motor Pool before 1800. This is NOT Hyperbole. This is was actual USMC policy on MCB Quantico if you needed a Government vehicle as an E1-E5. As a E6+, you could check out a vehicle for 7 days "if" it was being parked on base.
So basically, it came down to, unless you absolutely needed a Government vehicle, you avoided it like the plague. They weren't worth the hassle or the administrative burden.
It is "inconvenient" to use Government vehicles. There is a level of accountability associated with them that is not associated with privately owned vehicles (POVS). It sounds great in practice, but in execution, it is a pain.
As an example, imagine going to the motor pool at 0600 checking out a vehicle, getting your trip ticket, and fuel card, running around all day, annotating how far you went per stop, how many people were in the vehicle per leg, filling the vehicle up at the end of the day, and ensuring it was washed each and every time before you could turn it in, and heaven help you if you didn't get it back to the Motor Pool before 1800. This is NOT Hyperbole. This is was actual USMC policy on MCB Quantico if you needed a Government vehicle as an E1-E5. As a E6+, you could check out a vehicle for 7 days "if" it was being parked on base.
So basically, it came down to, unless you absolutely needed a Government vehicle, you avoided it like the plague. They weren't worth the hassle or the administrative burden.
(3)
(0)
SGM Steve Wettstein
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS Many a day My Soldiers and I would be at the motor pool at 0600 dispatching vehicles.
(2)
(0)
SGT(P) (Join to see)
This is our job and just like anything we don't like it gets done because we can't bend to lazy people. Majority of line units have so much free time y not
(0)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
SGT(P) (Join to see) It's not about being "lazy." Administrative & Operational burdens destroy efficiency. Some are necessary, and some are asinine. Some promote Mission, and some detract from Mission.
In the case of Government Fleet vehicles, the vast majority of the time (from my anecdotal experience), they are a detraction. They waste more time than they are worth. Checking a vehicle out, and checking a vehicle in is a 2 hour affair that can be spent doing something else related to some other part of mission. That isn't "laziness." It's finding better uses for the one resource we cannot reclaim, Time.
In the case of Government Fleet vehicles, the vast majority of the time (from my anecdotal experience), they are a detraction. They waste more time than they are worth. Checking a vehicle out, and checking a vehicle in is a 2 hour affair that can be spent doing something else related to some other part of mission. That isn't "laziness." It's finding better uses for the one resource we cannot reclaim, Time.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
So when an 18 yr old pv2 side swipes you brand new 2015 mustang gt with a hummer , good luck trying to get reimbursement in a timely manner, you better have full coverage with rental car from geico
(1)
(0)
SGT(P) (Join to see)
That makes no sense they can side swipe u in they POV then what ? Everyone dispatch requires a tc correct? Does a POV require one ? You can't justify a driver wrecking in any vehicle without stating the obvious accident but u want a soldier to able to drive in combat but can't on garrison? Do they learn while they deployed or backwards planning ?
(0)
(0)
Capt Mark Strobl
SGT(P) (Join to see), in the event of an accident involving a GOV & a POV, the U.S. Government will assign an impartial officer to investigate. If the driver of the POV is deemed to be at fault, tough cookies. Should the driver of the GOV be assigned fault, the POV owner will have to wait until the inspecting officer can determine the value of the damaged car at the time of the accident. Chances are pretty good that you'll see your DD-214 before that reimbursement check comes off the press.
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
I see a lot of humvees used all over Bragg so someone is dispatching them for use. I also noticed that they don't wear kevlars unless they are going to the field.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google