E9 to retire as E8; is it fair?

TSgt Joshua Copeland — Sat, 31 Jan 2015 11:07:52 -0500

This is a follow up to something that was posted here on RP a few months ago (that I can't find thanks to the less then friendly search function).

Quick back story: As an E6 the member was convicted and serviced 14 days of a 6 month sentence which normally should have ended his career at that point for "missed time" unless the unit commander does a waiver. There is no waiver in is record. This could be an administrative oversight and not directly the members faults. A few months after being released from jail he picked up E7, and within 7 years he had picked up E9.

He was "caught" because someone the knew of the incident as a E6 seen him deployed as an E9 an filed a complaint.

He will retire as an E8 not because he is being demoted, but because he wont have enough TIG to retire as an E9.

While the probe found Soluri did not hide his conviction, it did uncover misconduct for which the chief was disciplined administratively on Jan. 13, McKenna said. "That statute of limitations precluded the Air Force from considering action under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The Privacy Act precludes further comment by the Air Force."

http://www.airforcetimes.com/story/military/2015/01/30/soluri-civilian-misdemeanor-conviction-investigation-retirement/22597391/

So RP is his retirement as an E8 Fair?

Chief to retire at lower grade after probe of 2006 conviction

A technical sergeant who ascended to the highest enlisted rank after a 2006 civilian conviction and jail sentence will retire later this year as a senior master sergeant.

Response by SGT Steven Eugene Kuhn MBA made Jan 31 at 2015 11:27 AM

SGT Steven Eugene Kuhn MBA — Sat, 31 Jan 2015 11:27:26 -0500

Not sure if the question "is it fair" can ever pertain to the Military. Speaking as a compassionate person, no it is not fair.

Response by MSgt Michael Durkee made Jan 31 at 2015 11:47 AM

MSgt Michael Durkee — Sat, 31 Jan 2015 11:47:36 -0500

It is unfortunate, but the "Good Ole Boy" network still exists. I recall in the late 90's a MSgt that was busted for DUI, he retained the rank of Tsgt, tested again and achieved MSgt again. Busted again...and again got MSgt and retired. WTH.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Jan 31 at 2015 12:32 PM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Sat, 31 Jan 2015 12:32:54 -0500

Reading the article, this sounds like a regulatory oversight.

A self-reported, but undocumented 'civilian' crime. The regulations allowed but didn't require inclusion in his military records. Had they been included, it would have been a career finisher at that point.

It's compacted by the nature of the crime. It was a suspended 6 month sentence, which would have barred re-enlistment, but his total jail time was only 14 days. The "lost time" clause likely didn't kick in because of accrued leave.

So what this really boils down to, is was this an allowed discretionary decision, or bad policy that has finally come to light?

The sequence of events over the last 10 years leads me to believe that the 2004-2006 (investigation to conviction) period was convoluted. Was there a Re-enlistment or a promotion selection in that timeframe? As the conviction was not "finalized," (and undocumented, as allowed by regs), then it further compounds the issues.

I'm not sure about "fair" but this really just sounds like a "moving parts" issue more than anything else.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 1 at 2015 11:08 AM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 01 Feb 2015 11:08:49 -0500

He did what he was supposed to do and reported it. It was on the commander to act on that information and he didn't. Most people are not experts in all AFI's and I wonder if anyone was even aware of the requirement to to get the waiver. Also let's be honest, people don't hold their own feet to the fire.

Response by SFC Mark Merino made Feb 1 at 2015 1:26 PM

SFC Mark Merino — Sun, 01 Feb 2015 13:26:05 -0500

Personally, he should take anything above E-5 and consider himself BLESSED.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 1 at 2015 3:03 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 01 Feb 2015 15:03:17 -0500

50/50 on this as well. First off, he has/had some serious self control issues, but possibly was able to work on his temper and better himself, thus, enabling him to continue his service admirably. He did MOVE ON and was able to do well enough to prove his worthiness as a senior NCO and be promoted. HRC happened to "goof up" on his records and the board members/Chain of Command decided to not include his conviction in their promotion decision, not the SM's fault at all. He was indeed very lucky.

On the other hand, I don't condone violence off the battlefield whatsoever. They should've stopped his career in it's tracks and had him retire as an E-6. His TIG/TIS is not the issue. E-8 it is!!

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 1 at 2015 3:34 PM

Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 01 Feb 2015 15:34:05 -0500

I guess the question is should he have made Chief in the first place? Probably not. Sounds like there was a procedural error as he should have been removed from service for having a sentence over 6 months. Being that it was an error of his superiors, should he face those consequences now? The congress woman says the military did not do their job. The case was handled in a civilian court and they did not convict him of rape. He cant be tried for it now just to make a political statement. She is just grand standing on this issue. He had a independent trial and was found guilty of lower crimes.

I don't think he ever should have promoted above E-6. However since they did, taking it away now, are they punishing for the prior act or just trying to save face?

Response by TSgt Joshua Copeland made Feb 1 at 2015 6:10 PM

TSgt Joshua Copeland — Sun, 01 Feb 2015 18:10:44 -0500

Regardless of if you actually served with him, there is a decent chance you have seen him on TV. The Chief is famous for leading the security "on screen" (and off) at the Full Throttle Saloon during Sturgis every year. He is featured in the TruTV coverage of the bar pretty well.

Response by MAJ(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 3 at 2015 1:06 AM

MAJ(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 03 Feb 2015 01:06:47 -0500

Very fair. He went to jail. He was allowed to stay in. He's still retiring appropriately to the regulation (I speculate). It sounds like the issue is that he was "caught."

It's not about compassion. It's about being fair and impartial. Being allowed to retire, much less as an E8, is a blessing.

With the manning guidance of today's Army, if you serve time in jail, you're lucky to stay in; much less retire at such a distinguished grade.

Response by PO1 Glenn Boucher made Nov 13 at 2015 1:35 PM

PO1 Glenn Boucher — Fri, 13 Nov 2015 13:35:05 -0500

The whole situation sounds very fishy.
Okay so he was convicted and served time for a civilian offense.
His command didn't include it in his performance evaluations or anywhere else in his service record.
He get promoted to E-9 and because someone makes an anonymous complaint, which by the way ends up being a legitimate complaint, he is now being basically demoted and allowed to retire at E-8.
I don't like it but he obviously was promoted on his leadership and good old boy connections and I think if he decides to get an attorney he will end up receiving his E-9 retirement because he had, I am assuming here, a good clean record since that arrest that got him in this mess.
Again I don't like it and I do not know all the legal avenues or AF regulations on this but it seems like he is being punished for his previous commanders not doing their duty properly.

Response by SFC William Farrell made Dec 20 at 2015 8:17 PM

SFC William Farrell — Sun, 20 Dec 2015 20:17:39 -0500

As others have said TSgt Joshua Copeland, the good ole boy network is alive and well; in fact it never disappeared. I think he's very lucky to be allowed to retire. What about the domestic abuse statutes that preclude civilians and service-members alike from possessing firearms? This in itself should have ended his career. Perhaps that charge was swept under the rug!

Response by SFC William Farrell made Dec 20 at 2015 11:33 PM

SFC William Farrell — Sun, 20 Dec 2015 23:33:40 -0500

Interesting article on the chief (intentionally not capitalized because i don't think he deserves that title). The comments below the article also say something of the man. http://www.watertowndailytimes.com/article/20130222/CURR04/702229985

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 28 at 2018 1:59 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 28 Oct 2018 13:59:09 -0400

Nothing unfair about it.
If you don't meet the service obligation time for the promotion, you don't ETS or Retire at that grade. Nothing unfair about it, and at that grade you know the requirement.
If something you did catches up with you, that also is fair.
Seems he gets a huge pass being able to retire. Yes, he did the service time, and I'm not certain how Navy promotions and flags go, but I don't know how he got promoted after the Court Martial. Was he on the promotion list and an error was made that resulted in the firat promotion after the CM?
First duty assignment was at US Army Separation Transfer Point, Ft Jackson. Saw more than a few SSG and SGT who were separated at the lower grade because the failed to meet the time requirements. Coupled pleased to be extended to meet requirement, but that ship sailed when they departed OCONUS.

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Oct 28 at 2018 6:20 PM

SFC Michael Hasbun — Sun, 28 Oct 2018 18:20:08 -0400

There are some MOS's (At least in the Army), where due to population density and a lack of senior positions, the bulk of a CMF will retire as SSG's through no fault of their own. Given that, I'd say he's extremely fortunate indeed considering his record.

Response by CSM Darieus ZaGara made Oct 30 at 2018 3:45 AM

CSM Darieus ZaGara — Tue, 30 Oct 2018 03:45:43 -0400

It is the regulation. For whatever reason He left service before achieving the appropriate TIG. Thank you for your service.

Response by LTC Jason Mackay made Oct 30 at 2018 2:48 PM

LTC Jason Mackay — Tue, 30 Oct 2018 14:48:52 -0400

TSgt Joshua Copeland so he never got a periodic reinvestigation for a security clearance?

He had a Lautenberg conviction and he was still allowed to work LE? WTF. Should have been chaptered on the spot.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Oct 31 at 2018 5:35 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Wed, 31 Oct 2018 17:35:54 -0400

Is the problem he has not been an E-9 for three years?

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 31 at 2018 7:06 PM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 31 Oct 2018 19:06:06 -0400

Considering there are many chief warrant officers in the army in all components who were denied promotions based on things that happened in their records 15 years prior and much less serious than this, I'd say this bama got over. Funk his couch.