Army cutting back on award "inflation".

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 26 Apr 2014 07:30:06 -0400

Not sure if others have experienced this, but the Army is cutting way back on award inflation. When I deployed, the team before us got BSMs, we got achievement medals and were told to not even ask for anything higher. Everyone before me at my prior duty station got DMSMs, we got COMs. The days of over inflated medals appears to be over.

Response by MSG Wade Huffman made Apr 26 at 2014 8:20 AM

MSG Wade Huffman — Sat, 26 Apr 2014 08:20:24 -0400

Thanks for pointing this out, Sir! If this is true Army wide, I think it's good. It's logical to take the 'easy' stance that the award should be based on the action; but we all know that all the branches are light years away from this (as a general rule) with arbitrary rank restrictions, time in theater restrictions, etc...
Hopefully this is a first small step to truly moving towards a merit/performance based system. I guess time will tell.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 20 at 2014 4:28 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 20 Jul 2014 16:28:17 -0400

Sir, just as with the promotion points debacle that continues, those who have benefitted the most from inflated awards are the ones who now want to change the system. The haves telling the have nots why they are not worthy.

Response by SSG Warren Swan made Aug 19 at 2014 8:06 PM

SSG Warren Swan — Tue, 19 Aug 2014 20:06:12 -0400

Good point Sir, saw the same when I deployed

Response by MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca made Aug 19 at 2014 9:07 PM

MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca — Tue, 19 Aug 2014 21:07:16 -0400

I agree award inflation had gotten out of hand but hopefully it doesn't swing around and do a complete 180 - "we got achievement medals and were told to not even ask for anything higher" An award is an individual award for valor, performance etc. With that statement it seems like the "group mentality" is still in full force. A soldier deserves what a soldier deserves regardless of rank and as long as they meet the criteria for the award.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 20 at 2014 6:02 AM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 20 Aug 2014 06:02:34 -0400

Sir are you saying that you were given an AAM during a deployment? If so that is not even authorized.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 20 at 2014 7:15 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 20 Aug 2014 07:15:36 -0400

Ok here's my two cents. Your right, awards have been abused during this war. However I'm stuck on your part about " don't even ask for anything higher". Do people actually ask for awards ?

Response by SSG Robert Webster made Aug 20 at 2014 8:17 AM

SSG Robert Webster — Wed, 20 Aug 2014 08:17:50 -0400

Gentlemen and ladies, Award inflation will still occur no matter what the regulations and messages say, you just will not "see" it as much. Award deflation will also continue, no matter what is being said by the brass. Some have mentioned that wording is one of the keys as to whether a particular award is given or not, I believe that is a fallacy. You may want to go back and read the actual award recommendation for a downgraded award and then compare it to one that was not downgraded, you will probably see one of two things - 1. A poorly written award recommendation being approved with no rewrite, where as a well written award recommendation is downgraded for no apparent reason. OR 2. Two well written award recommendations (by the way try to find ones written by the same individual) and the lower ranked individuals is downgraded, where the higher ranked individuals is not.

My biggest problem with number 2 above is that if awards were done they way that the regulations state and we have been taught in our development schools, the lower ranked individual would receive the higher award and the higher ranked individual would receive the lower award or they would both receive the same award, but most of us know that this is not what happens in reality.

Response by SFC Stephen Carden made Aug 20 at 2014 9:59 AM

SFC Stephen Carden — Wed, 20 Aug 2014 09:59:07 -0400

I had a big problem with awards when I was deployed. I personally received two bronze stars (obviously without the V for valor) that I felt should have been MSMs based on my job. I was a detachment NCOIC at a SOTF headquarters. Sure, I did BFC every chance I got, but my guys were the ones out in the suck all the time. They told us that we had two tour award options: BSM or ARCOM. So the way I handled it was, I put all of my team leaders in for BSMs and the ATLs in for ARCOMs, except for about 30% of my ATLs who were exceptional. I should mention that my TLs were all SSGs, and my ATLs were all SGTs and SSGs. They all got the award that I recommended, and I feel that it was mostly based on the way the award was written. It is all about quantifiable bullets and proper wording.

My company leadership in Bagram had the same issue. The CDR and 1SG put each other in for DMSMs, but they were kicked back and the command team was ordered to submit for BSMs. Back when my dad was in Vietnam, a BSM meant something, but now they have been devalued to the status of ARCOMs. Unless they have the little V on them. That still means something.

Response by SFC Stephen Carden made Aug 20 at 2014 10:25 AM

SFC Stephen Carden — Wed, 20 Aug 2014 10:25:19 -0400

I will say that there is one award that has definitely NOT been inflated and that is the Medal of Honor. We have been at war for 13 years, and there have been only 16 MoH awarded. Only 4 were awarded in Iraq, all posthumously. A few years ago, there was a general outcry in the press about the dearth of MoH in the Iraq/Afghanistan conflicts, and since then it seems that every other week we are seeing a new one awarded. The concern was well founded. Below is a breakdown of MoH awarded in each major conflict and the ratio of medals to number of personnel who served in that conflict:

WW I 119 1:40,000 troops
WW II 467 1:35,000 troops
Vietnam 249 1:35,000 troops
Korea 137 1:42,000 troops
Iraq/Afghanistan 16 1:177,000 troops (est.)

So what is different about this conflict? Do troops have less chance to display heroism above and beyond the call of duty? Do shorter deployments play a role? Are the standards more stringent than they used to be? Better question: before the administration was put under pressure to award more MoH, did you have to die to be seen as worthy for the medal? It is interesting that, before the attention was brought to the low number of MoH, the recipients were mostly deceased but since have been mostly living recipients. Is that for PR? I don't mean to hijack the thread, but I wonder if anyone else agrees.

Response by SGT James Elphick made Aug 20 at 2014 1:33 PM

SGT James Elphick — Wed, 20 Aug 2014 13:33:24 -0400

I'm going to say that at least they got to the point that they actually awarded soldiers something. I deployed twice, and along with the other lower enlisted in my company, was finally given an AAM after the second deployment. Also myself and 2 buddies were put in for BSM w/ V device but they were kicked back because they would have refuted our PSG's BSM w/ V that he later got upgraded to a Silver Star (basically he got the credit for our actions). So over all, I don't feel too bad about doing away with award "inflation"

Response by SGT Richard H. made Aug 20 at 2014 1:36 PM

SGT Richard H. — Wed, 20 Aug 2014 13:36:52 -0400

I know that it's all cool & stuff to have a bigger fruit salad on your class A's, but I always hated the idea of awards by rank. To me, it takes more away from the award than it gives to the individual.

Response by PO1 Walter Duncan made Aug 20 at 2014 3:57 PM

PO1 Walter Duncan — Wed, 20 Aug 2014 15:57:11 -0400

The disconnect between the federal government, congress, etc. that I have experienced since being out of the service and the civilian population is similar to that in the military. So many things are similar. Fighting for scraps while the higher echelon seems unaware or disconnected to the plight that is life for most of America. Even when data shows a negative result to a case study, a spin will be placed to bring it to a positive light and the subject or the narrative will switch. Such is politics and the human endeavor now in this country. Sorry.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 20 at 2014 10:33 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 20 Aug 2014 22:33:31 -0400

Unfortunately, the award conundrum will probably never be solved. The wording for what constitutes specific awards is very broad and general. The process of giving awards is subjective at best and, at worst, based on something arbritrary such as rank or position. I think this will be a problem long after most of us retire.

Response by Capt Jeff S. made Sep 8 at 2014 7:27 PM

Capt Jeff S. — Mon, 08 Sep 2014 19:27:48 -0400

This article, written by a Vietnam Vet, takes a brutally honest look at the awards given out by the military, and it discusses the political nature of the process of determining who gets them. It's a very good read.

Response by SSgt James Connolly made Jul 28 at 2015 9:41 PM

SSgt James Connolly — Tue, 28 Jul 2015 21:41:06 -0400

The old saying CYAP they don't want someone else getting something they did't think about

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 2 at 2015 3:34 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 02 Oct 2015 15:34:13 -0400

I was very uncomfortable with the award process. I was deploy to EOF in 2008. Looking back on it, I think DoD or DA needs to codify the requirements for those awards traditionally not given in a combat area, like the MSM, but are being awarded for service in a combat area now. Good points about responsibility and impact have been made here thus far, and I think my idea address them adequately.

MSM vs BSM

BSM (w/o the V device) should be awarded for in a COMBAT AREA ONLY, for duties that routinely (more than 50% if you feel the need to quantify it) expose the service member to a high (75%, again, if you feel like putting a number on it) likelihood of being placed in contact (not just direct/indirect fire, remember the 7 forms of contact)with an armed opponent. I guess the litmus test would be asking "Is this Soldier pretty likely to get a CIB/CAB/CMB?" I admit that's a VERY subjective way to address this, but its the best thing I've come up with. MSMs would be would be the award for those in a combat area who don't necessarily meet the enemy contact criteria. Is it ironclad? Probably not, but that's where commanders apply their knowledge, judgment, and experience.

Rank based awards

Our troops have really done a great job in the last 13 years and many have been under recognized for their contributions. ARCOMs struck me a little underwhelming. I've often wished for a combat only equivalent to the ARCOM or something in between the ARCOM and BSM/MSM. I saw a few junior officers and NCOs get shortchanged, IMHO. Those Soldiers deserved more, but I know they were kicked back because of rank. I seem to recall an email going out with a statement of "All O4s are eligible for BSM EOT awards. Only 25% of O3s will receive BSMs for an EOT award." or something to that effect.

(Full disclosure: My EOT awards was a MSM. I also received a BSMV and CAB. I remain somewhat conflicted about my awards.)

Response by GySgt Bill Smith made Feb 25 at 2016 5:45 PM

GySgt Bill Smith — Thu, 25 Feb 2016 17:45:47 -0500

Meanwhile, Marines be like.

Response by Sgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 28 at 2018 7:19 AM

Sgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 28 Jan 2018 07:19:18 -0500

thank God, it became a joke

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 20 at 2018 2:28 PM

CW5 Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 20 Jul 2018 14:28:41 -0400

Good. Long overdue

Response by SFC David Reid, M.S, PHR, SHRM-CP, DTM made Aug 5 at 2019 2:20 AM

SFC David Reid, M.S, PHR, SHRM-CP, DTM — Mon, 05 Aug 2019 02:20:03 -0400

It’s about time. I have seen Bronze Stars given out to those with lesser authority- than those who were truly deserving.