Safety vs. accountability: What would you do?

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 26 Aug 2015 07:32:53 -0400

Here's the scenario: Your USAR unit drills at Fort Meade, MD. The only thing on the training schedule for the day is a training event at Fort Washington, MD. You have several soldiers that live in Virginia. Which course of action do you take?

1. Make a list of those who live in Virginia, and hold the senior soldier accountable for responsibility. Direct them to report to Fort Washington MD at the training location, and release them from there at the end of the day.

2. Insist that all soldiers report at Fort Meade, and provide transportation to and from Fort Washington.

When you respond, be DETAILED as to why you chose the option you chose.

Response by Cpl Jeff N. made Aug 26 at 2015 7:50 AM

Cpl Jeff N. — Wed, 26 Aug 2015 07:50:55 -0400

Are there any requirements/policies about reporting for the USAR that states they MUST report first to their duty station (Fort Meade in this case) and then go to the next location (Fort Washington) in a duty vehicle?

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 26 at 2015 8:09 AM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 26 Aug 2015 08:09:58 -0400

Safety? I thought safety was only important after something happens that way the Additional Duty Safety Officer can be the scapegoat? Sorry for being so sarcastic.

Occam's Razor suggests I choose #1. Why? Its the simplest solution.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 26 at 2015 9:50 AM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 26 Aug 2015 09:50:17 -0400

Honestly, I would have to bear both options in mind before I make a choice. But, based on the info given, I would more than likely choose #1 as it is more cost effective and accountability is still being held.

Response by CW4 Guy Butler made Aug 26 at 2015 10:10 AM

CW4 Guy Butler — Wed, 26 Aug 2015 10:10:43 -0400

Having driven through the 95 funnel into Virginia, I'd much rather go with option 1. However, I'd also look at the number of Soldiers this would involve, and the loading/unloading and driver requirements at the Reserve Center.

Response by COL Vincent Stoneking made Aug 26 at 2015 10:34 AM

COL Vincent Stoneking — Wed, 26 Aug 2015 10:34:42 -0400

1. I make transportation available from Fort Meade at X hour minus 60 minutes (or whatever the appropriate travel time is).

2. I direct that first formation will be held ay Y location at Fort Washington at X hour.

3. Final formation is at Z hour, with transportation available to Fort Meade at that time.

I do this to waste as little of people's time as is possible. I am assuming, based on the question, that there is no need to draw significant equipment prior to movement.
Counterpoint: there is something to be said for moving as a unit.

I don't consider safety to be a large factor in this scenario. Why, Soldiers are expected to get themselves to and from drill. Changing the formation location doesn't change that. (the busses are to save those who live closer to Meade from having an increased commute).

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 26 at 2015 12:10 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 26 Aug 2015 12:10:11 -0400

Report to assigned duty station then transport to training area.
Reasons:
1. Some may need LIK
2. The USAR does mandate for soldier to drill at unit of assignment anything else will have to have orders
3. Safety- driving distance and time they leave home etc

Response by SFC Kenneth Hunnell made Aug 26 at 2015 6:33 PM

SFC Kenneth Hunnell — Wed, 26 Aug 2015 18:33:03 -0400

Whether it be 1 or 50 that live in Virginia is irrelevant, or if you have 1 or more training events is still irrelevant. I would have them all report to Fort Meade, MD..
There is a reason why the training site is at Fort Washington, MD. Not noted.
Having everyone report to Fort Meade, MD. would allow for some good convoy training, allow the vehicles being used and exercised.
The training schedule is actually an order by the unit commander, I am sure the unit commander thought about this or was discussed by the senior leadership prior to signing it.

Both Safety and Accountability would be covered down on.
The only thing that allowing individuals drive their own POV would save the Soldier money on travel cost.
My question is, where would they be going if Fort Washington, MD wasn't part of the equation?
I am sure it would have been Fort Meade, MD

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 26 at 2015 8:07 PM

CW5 Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 26 Aug 2015 20:07:03 -0400

If the place of duty is Fort Meade and the Soldiers are expected to show up there for accountability, formation, etc., then there's only one answer. The Army is not here for the convenience of the Soldiers. The senior leader might ask the commander for permission for the Soldiers to report directly to Fort Washington. If that permission is given, those who live in Virginia are good to go. If the commander does not give that permission, those Virginia Soldiers gotta suck it up and report for duty at Fort Meade.

Frankly, the non-active force is bit of a puzzle to me, clearly because I was only active duty during my 30-year career. There was nothing like this while I was on active duty, at least not that I can recall. If there was a formation, for example, it didn't matter where I lived or, frankly, what my excuse may have been ... I was expected to be there or face the consequences of being absent.

I do admit that I'm pretty much clueless about standards in the Guard and the Reserve. I would think that standards are generally standards, no matter a person's status, but I could be wrong about that.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 26 at 2015 8:22 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 26 Aug 2015 20:22:25 -0400

This sounds like you know the answer based on what happened and are trying to justify the command decision or contradict it, passive aggressively, through a military forum resulting in an "I told you so!" moment!?

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 27 at 2015 4:34 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 27 Aug 2015 04:34:15 -0400

I don't really know the area setup, but I can still give a valid opinion. As a Reservist myself I have been in situations where it would make no sense to drive to the unit to be transported back to the duty location. For example, if I live in Oklahoma City it makes no sense for me to drive to Wichita, KS to get in a van and drive to Ft. Sill. For safety, it makes more sense to send the Soldier the shortest distance for training (my opinion). If accountability has been an issue, then it makes sense to have everyone report to the unit before moving to the training site. It really depends on the Soldiers in the unit and the command team's trust in them.

It was previously mentioned about convoy training and I'd have to agree; if there are vehicles and a need for training take that route. You can never train too much for things you will definitely do in a war zone.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 27 at 2015 6:47 AM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 27 Aug 2015 06:47:03 -0400

Accountability in the Army evolved before cell phones. Formations and bugle calls were all about communicating accountabilty in a pre-technology world.

Our job in the Reserves is to ensure Soldier readiness. Many of those readiness tasks involve things not even doable at reserve centers. (online courses, LHI, etc.)

Allow the Soldiers who live closer to the training site to report directly there, with an accountabilty/communication plan. Trust but Verify. Counsel based on breakdowns.

Response by SSG Leo Bell made Aug 27 at 2015 9:45 AM

SSG Leo Bell — Thu, 27 Aug 2015 09:45:52 -0400

I would have them report to Fort Meade for accountability and provide transportation for the training. 1 you can't take all you training equipment in a POV ( ie weapons and ammo) plus you will have more control over who shows up to training without and excuse for not showing up at Fort Washington.