What are standards, if not upheld?

SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 23 Feb 2015 03:26:51 -0500

It's bad enough that we have a courtesy patrol that goes to bars, night clubs and gentleman's establishments. However, what are standards and regulations if not upheld by the leadership? Is it ok to pick and choose what applies, and who is applies to or not, or should we hold everyone accountable at all times, even if it means calling out those above us?

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 23 at 2015 3:33 AM

CSM Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 23 Feb 2015 03:33:42 -0500

I am not really clear on what your point is?

Nobody can pick or choose what rules they choose to follow if they are in the military.

Response by GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad made Feb 23 at 2015 3:33 AM

GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad — Mon, 23 Feb 2015 03:33:48 -0500

No, it is not okay. If leadership is not going to uphold the standards and regulations issued, they should simply rescind them.

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 23 at 2015 6:59 AM

CW5 Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 23 Feb 2015 06:59:56 -0500

If not upheld, standards are essentially meaningless, SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member.

Response by SPC James Mcneil made Feb 23 at 2015 7:33 AM

SPC James Mcneil — Mon, 23 Feb 2015 07:33:46 -0500

If standards are not upheld, they are not standards. JMHO of course.

Response by SGT Jim Z. made Feb 23 at 2015 7:46 AM

SGT Jim Z. — Mon, 23 Feb 2015 07:46:36 -0500

If standards are not upheld the are not standards. No one is above the standards and someone should be held accountable. I quote the NCO Creed third paragraph:
" I will not compromise my integrity, nor my moral courage. I will not forget, nor will I allow my comrades to forget that we are professionals, Noncommisioned Officers, leaders!"

You as a NCO need to uphold standards and enforce them even if it means rocking the boat.

Response by WO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 23 at 2015 8:34 AM

WO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 23 Feb 2015 08:34:23 -0500

Standards are standards, regardless of grade or position it makes no difference. They must be upheld or they are no longer a standard. Unfortunately there will always be hypocritical and egotistical leadership throughout the military. Just try not to be one of them!

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 23 at 2015 8:49 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 23 Feb 2015 08:49:31 -0500

Standards apply to everyone...regardless of rank. You "lose face" as a leader if you are unwilling to live by the standards you are enforcing. Who wants a leader counseling them about the overweight program when that leader is overweight as well. If you are making an on the spot correction to enforce a standard and getting flak for it, just remember that you are in the right and those that refer to you as a "boy scout" are in the wrong. I don't know about you SSG Scott but the last time I checked being a boy scout was not a bad thing. Next time someone calls you a boy scout ask them if they need help crossing the street.

Remember, every time you walk by and do not enforce the standard....you just created a new standard.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 23 at 2015 10:13 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 23 Feb 2015 10:13:25 -0500

What are standards, if not upheld? Dead letters. Discipline Is the difference between an army and a mob.

Response by COL Jean (John) F. B. made Feb 23 at 2015 10:37 AM

COL Jean (John) F. B. — Mon, 23 Feb 2015 10:37:06 -0500

All standards, policies, procedures, rules and regulations should all be upheld or, if not, done away with.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 23 at 2015 12:09 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 23 Feb 2015 12:09:46 -0500

Standards, when not upheld, become guidelines. Guidelines then become irrelevant and thus disregarded and forgotten. Then chaos ensues.

That being said... There should always be room for flexibility in regulations. A good leader knows when to set aside regulations and standards in the interest of helping those whom they lead.

Becoming too rigid has the tendency of forgetting who your number one asset is as a leader, your people.

Just my opinion. :)

Response by Cpl Jeff N. made Feb 23 at 2015 12:34 PM

Cpl Jeff N. — Mon, 23 Feb 2015 12:34:36 -0500

To use your example of courtesy patrols (I've heard them mentioned on RP before) and extend it a bit. If there are courtesy patrols that means senior leadership doesn't believe the troops are following the rules. Those rules are taught starting in basic training and go through to schools and into the "regular Army".

The need for these patrols speaks to the the failure of effective training and correction when the policies are not followed. It also tells you that punishment for infractions is neither swift nor significant enough to change the behavior.

If SNCO's and Officers are not following the same rules and the troops see it then you have a very significant problem. I believe the fish rots from the head down. That may be the leadership in an individual unit or the Army/NG etc as a whole. I couldn't tell you for sure but courtesy patrols are evidence of some real issues with standards in the Army.

Response by Sgt James Morse made Feb 23 at 2015 12:47 PM

Sgt James Morse — Mon, 23 Feb 2015 12:47:54 -0500

Standards not upheld are sharks without teeth-- impressive to look at, but nothing to worry about. This wasn't a problem in STA Plt. when I was there-- at least until the Marine Corps, in its infinite wisdom, decided to invent a new MOS for officers and put butter-bars in charge of sniper platoons. In our case, this resulted in a major drop in unit effectiveness and cohesion.

Originally, all of our candidates had to pass a stringent 3-day process of evaluation in order to get picked up. The course was very tough both physically, and mentally, but it needed to be in order for us to know that the Marines we picked up would be up to the task of running the kinds of missions that we excelled at. Because of the efforts of the Marines that were in the platoon when I passed my indoc, and the standards that they set and enforced with almost brutal conviction our platoon was generally well-respected by the rest of our battalion (which was not usually the case with snipers). It was also because of their work and the work of myself and the Marines that came after that we actually set the standard for snipers throughout our regiment (and, after I PCS'd, the division).

Once the LT showed up, things went to hell in a hand-basket fairly quick. He was all about enforcing uniform regs in the field, but he had no idea ow to operate as part of a Scout/Sniper unit. The day he reported to the platoon, we had been in the field for 4 days performing tests of equipment and tweaking SOP's; the BC had tasked us with coming up with more efficient ways to conduct business after we told him that how we did things could be improved, and as a part of that same evolution we were given the go-ahead to try out some new gear, clothing and the like. The LT shows up at our assembly area and tells our radio watch to call the teams back in immediately, and not to tell anyone why they were coming back. I was in charge of the evolution, and we had just spent several hours prepping for the next phase of testing when the call went out. Imagine my glee when the radio-watch told me that I was to just stop asking questions and get back to the assembly area...

When we all get there, tired, smelly, hungry, covered in mud and caked-on camo paint, wearing our boonies or do-rags and non-regulation gear, the LT stood up on the back of a Humvee and started reading us the riot act over our lack of professionalism and complete disregard for Marine Corps standards. I especially remember his statement that if he could have on shined boots in the field, WE should have on shined boots in the field. (For those not familiar with USMC sniper operating procedures, we were actively discouraged from wearing the color black because it serves as a "target indicator; without going into a lot of detail, this is why most camo patterns, after the Woodland pattern, dropped the color black, and why issue boots are no longer smooth black leather).

I mention all of this to illustrate a little bit about this guy. He was a real piece of work, to be honest; after the platoon spent six months testing and confirming procedures, and after I spent 3 more months writing, illustrating, and editing the Bn Sniper SOP, our gallant LT put himself in for a NAM for "writing, consolidating, and editing," the entire project. This was the standard being set by our platoon commander. The irony is that we had to explain most of the SOP to him, and once he showed up he insisted on continually repeating work that had already been done on the grounds that we hadn't tried it "his way." (This eventually led to me getting sacked-- another long story, but the gist is that after a couple months of LT Deerkoski costing us time, energy, resources and morale, I finally broke and said, "You're right sir, you weren't here when we did all of this work. You were still in Basic School, while we were learning how to be better snipers." Not my most tactful exchange.)

I think I'm starting to ramble here, but as this applies to the leadership question, the overall problem was that Deerkoski had one set of standards for himself, and another set of standards for the platoon. Both sets of standards were subject to change based on which company- or field-grade officer he was doing his Linda Lovelace impersonation for. This naturally set a poor example for Marines who didn't know any better, but on a wider view it weakened the unit as a whole. With standards being, at best, somewhat malleable it became impossible to know what we were supposed to achieve in the most basic tasks in garrison, let alone what we were meant to accomplish in the field. It wasn't at all unusual for the platoon commander to issue orders in the field with any clarification, despite the fact that to follow those orders in practice would have meant mission failure, and had he pulled that crap in a real-world situation, it would have killed Marines.

Officers, NCO's and anyone in a leadership billet need to not only adhere to the standards that are set in stone-- whether they be published orders, traditions or operating practices-- but they need to set a higher standard to which others may aspire. True, if you have a Marine that isn't quite overweight but sits riiiiight at the edge of the limit (this was a problem for me for my entire enlistment period, as I have a very square-shaped torso) it's not cool to be dinging him. On the other hand, it is still incumbent on the leader to encourage better performance, and if (as in my case) the same problem applies to the leader, he needs to be seen taking his own advice.

A Marine outdoors in uniform, leaning against a post, uncovered, with one hand in his pocket and the other holding a cigarette, is unsat regardless of whether the Marine in question is a Lance Corporal or a Lieutenant Colonel. A good leader needs to know this and to HAVE THE COURAGE to do something about it.

It is called a "standard" because it applies to everyone equally, at all times. It is not unusual for some standards to be modified or dispensed with entirely, if applying those standards reduces the effectiveness of the people involved, but this is almost never the case in a rear-area scenario. As snipers, we wore boonies and jew-boots and gear purchased from Blackhawk or London Bridge Trading Company. But in the rear, we sported spit-shined boots, sharply creased cammies, perfectly folded sleeves and starched covers worn to exact uniform standards. We saluted females not because it was mandated (it was one of those rare regs that was left to the individual's discretion) but because it set a good example.

If nothing else, we should follow standards because those standards were set by warriors who sweated and bled and paved the way for the warriors of today, and because we have a responsibility to act and perform in ways befitting the honor of those men and women. We should also follow standards because whenever we allow a standard to be set aside, we weaken the authority of ALL leaders by demonstrating that-- to a few people, at least-- the standards are at best cumbersome, and at worst, meaningless.

I'm gonna leave y'all (FINALLY!!!) with a pretty cool story I heard. It originally started with, "No shit, this really happened," so I know it's probably a myth. A newly-minted lieutenant was walking across the quad one morning, when he passed a private rushing toward the battalion office. The private may have been within 30 paces of the officer, but if he was, it was a near thing, and the private was obviously distracted. Sensing an opportunity to make an example of the young Marine, the lieutenant barked at the private and ordered him to come over to where he was standing.

The private, of course, races over, gets within a few paces of the officer, snaps-to, and executes a crisp salute. The lieutenant glares at the private, makes one or two laps around him, and then steps back in front of the Marine and asks,"Do we no longer salute officers, Private?"

"No, sir!"

"We don't?!"

"No sir! What I mean is, we do salute officers. Sir!"

"Huh. I don't think you really believe that, Private. I want you to show me 100 salutes, just so I can be assured that you know how to show respect to a Marine officer."

The private, obviously chagrined but with bearing too good to reveal it, begins snapping off salutes, counting each one out loud. As he is performing his penance, the Battalion Sergeant Major steps up next to the lieutenant and says, "Good morning, sir. What's going on here?"

"Well, Sergeant Major, this Marine seems to have forgotten that officers rate a salute, so I thought it would be a good idea to remind him."

The Sergeant Major nodded thoughtfully, and stood by quietly as the private finished his last few salutes. The lieutenant gave the private a hard look, and asked, "Do you think you have it down, now?" The private responded in the affirmative. "Fine. Dismissed, Marine." With that, the private began to turn to the Battalion office, and the lieutenant took a step toward the barracks when the Sergeant Major stopped them both.

The lieutenant, somewhat annoyed by the delay in his activities, asked the Sergeant Major what the problem seemed to be.

The Sergeant Major smiled a little as he said, "Well... SIR... I know that you are well-versed with Marine Corps regs, and you are obviously serious about seeing those standards upheld."

"Yes, Sergeant Major, I thought that should be obvious. What is your point?"

"Well sir, as you well know, when an enlisted or otherwise junior Marine salutes an officer of higher rank, the officer is obligated to return that salute.

"So, by my count, sir, you owe this Marine 102 salutes. Would you like to count, or should I?"