Do we still need a Good Conduct Medal? Shouldn't every soldier's conduct be better than Good?

SGM Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 02 Oct 2014 08:38:49 -0400

The GCM originated at a time when enlisted soldiers were punished almost daily for even minor infractions. "Ranks" existed mainly in a regiment, so it was not unusual to be busted one day and promoted the next. Officers were held to a higher standard of "officers and gentlemen"--they could simply be dismissed from the service. The system of awards and punishments still isn't perfect, yet it is much more stable today. Which makes us wonder, why isn't the standard the same for every soldier? What message does it send when we routinely give a GCM for behavior that is expected--as though it is rare? isn't Good Conduct a minimum standard?Let's get rid of the GCM and get rid of poor performers in every rank . Then we can do a better job of awarding service and achievements beyond the minimum standard!

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 2 at 2014 10:13 AM

CW5 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 02 Oct 2014 10:13:07 -0400

SGM Private RallyPoint Member, I think we should approach it from another angle: How about making the GCM mean something. For example, if an individual does not have good conduct, he/she doesn't receive the GCM. Set stricter standards for award of the medal.

I don't like the idea of taking away a part of our heritage. I'd prefer to tighten up the standards and keep the GCM on the books.

Response by PO1 Ken Johnson made Oct 2 at 2014 12:21 PM

PO1 Ken Johnson — Thu, 02 Oct 2014 12:21:03 -0400

You mean the Undetected Crime Medal?

Response by Sgt Jennifer Mohler made Oct 2 at 2014 12:59 PM

Sgt Jennifer Mohler — Thu, 02 Oct 2014 12:59:59 -0400

I agree that one's conduct should always be better then good, but alas it is not always. I know in the Marine Corps you see a LOT of Marines with fewer good cookies then they should have.

Response by SFC Mark Merino made Oct 2 at 2014 2:00 PM

SFC Mark Merino — Thu, 02 Oct 2014 14:00:09 -0400

It is only awarded to enlisted members. To me, it is insulting. An officer is expected to conduct themselves in a honorable way, but if an enlisted member can hold it together for 3 years they get a GCM? To me, it is degrading.

Response by CPO Jon Campbell made Oct 2 at 2014 6:24 PM

CPO Jon Campbell — Thu, 02 Oct 2014 18:24:01 -0400

The GCM for the Coast Guard (active duty) is almost automatic as long as a person doesn't get in big trouble. The GCM for the reserve is a different story. It is really a participation award, as it requires full participation in addition to not getting in trouble. The problem is that full participation is difficult when Congress won't pass a budget or when funds run out for drills. I don't think anyone really cares about earning the medal except that with it comes a point toward advancement. In a small service with very light attrition, every single point is critical for advancement.

Response by SFC Dr. Joseph Finck, BS, MA, DSS made Oct 2 at 2014 8:11 PM

SFC Dr. Joseph Finck, BS, MA, DSS — Thu, 02 Oct 2014 20:11:08 -0400

I read with interest each of the posts pertaining to the GCM. I have three over fourteen years of service as I didn't chase them. My perspective is more on awards as a whole. My brothers and sisters in the Marine Corps seem to do more for less personal awards. However, before anyone throws a stone, we should look back from a historical perspective at actions and honors throughout military history. I have read, with bemusement, award citations from World War II and noted PVT SNUFFY who charged a Japanese machine gun pit, singled handedly took out the pit and five Japanese Soldiers and was then awarded ........wait for it, nothing. My Dad is a prime example. He was drafted, served for four years during WWII, was in the second invasion wave at Normandy and the Battle of the Bulge. He received a GCM and no personal award for his service. He opened communications centers for the 3rd Army in numerous locations and fought as an infantryman at the Battle of the Bulge. What this tells me, is the standard has changed. While the written word may not have, the interpretation certainly has.

I am proud of my awards, but feel we should look with a greater degree of emphasis on "exceeding the standard" before any award is considered. This should include the GCM. No Soldier worthy of a flagging action should receive any award, based on "no favorable action." Consequently, if an APFT failure or not in compliance with AR 600-9 (height, weight, and body fat standards) then no GCM should be considered. Further, if a Soldier is an NCO then his NCOERs should be reviewed to ensure he is at least meeting standards. Any Enlisted Soldier who has conduct issues, failure to adapt issues, or who may face a Chapter proceeding and discharge should also not be considered. Finally, don't forget a Soldier who is under investigation is suppose to be flagged, per AR 600-8-2, meaning they would be eligible either.

Just my two cents.....

SFC Joseph M. Finck USA (Ret)

Response by LTC Paul Labrador made Oct 2 at 2014 9:48 PM

LTC Paul Labrador — Thu, 02 Oct 2014 21:48:39 -0400

I think we have to consider who the GCM was aimed at. As stated officers are expected to act a higher standard regardless of grade or age. I would say the same goes for NCOs as well (IMHO, NCOs should no longer qualify for it). So GCM is really aimed at junior enlisted who display a wide variance of maturity and decision making. I think it is a valuable tool for those ranks to encourage good behavior....particularly if there are additional tangible benefits to having the medal.

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 2 at 2014 10:17 PM

Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 02 Oct 2014 22:17:51 -0400

I believe that a young kid out of high school is still growing and developing. Every once in a while they misstep. In my experience I have seen the growth of Airman happen real fast. Some start out very immature still having the schoolboy mentality and sometimes step out of line. Other than a misstep they might be very capable and still be molded to handle higher degrees of responsibility. Sometimes someone needs a sting to be jerked in the right direction and given a wake up call. Sometimes this works and the person becomes a very valuable asset to the mission. Sometimes they do not.

I always thought that the kid who kept his nose clean should be recognized for this fact. I have never been enlisted but I do see that there are challenges, especially when group think and peer pressure is involved and sometimes doing the right thing gets overshadowed by wanting to belong. This is something that is not unique to the armed service. Sometimes a good Airman/Soldier makes a judgement lapse because they want to be with the cool kids. We all know how that is. We hold personnel to high expectations however human nature can be more powerful than textbook ideologies and training expectations.

We send the message by awarding the GCM to those that did not get it that when you do right thing you get rewarded. When you do wrong thing you get a punishment. If the person is salvageable and has not committed an egregious offense then hopefully they see their peers getting rewarded and that makes them realize that they have not performed to the standards set forth. In leadership training they call it the "carrot and stick method." sometimes a positive reinforcement can be more effective than just the guise doing whats right because they will be punished if they don't The movie "Office Space," poignantly expresses this when the main character acknowledges that he only does the bare minimum because he does not want to get fired. This is a human psychological trait that "I will do what tell me and nothing more because I have to and there repercussion if I do not do it." But if there is an incentive to do more than I will.

That is why I think we should keep things like this so that there is some recognition for maintaining standards, especially when it is easy to fall short.

Response by PO1 William "Chip" Nagel made Oct 2 at 2014 10:21 PM

PO1 William "Chip" Nagel — Thu, 02 Oct 2014 22:21:03 -0400

Now that is a damn good point!

Response by SPC James Mcneil made Oct 11 at 2014 6:52 PM

SPC James Mcneil — Sat, 11 Oct 2014 18:52:59 -0400

I am in full agreement.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 15 at 2015 1:23 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 01:23:17 -0500

I think it can be a good motivator for a young kid that needs "that a boys" to perform. I don't want it tampered with for that reason.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 15 at 2015 6:01 AM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 06:01:49 -0500

SGM Private RallyPoint Member Right now, I would be happy with Good. But agree, we need to get ride of poor performers and bad eggs. Also, probably need to look at raising the enlistment / commissioning standards to help solve some of the poor performer problems.