PDA

View Full Version : Tell us: Is collective punishment the right way to handle liberty problems?



CommunityEditor
07-24-2013, 12:36 PM
Tell us: Is collective punishment the right way to handle liberty problems?

Curfews. Buddy policies. Alcohol restrictions. More training.

Sailors say their liberty time is suffering due to the actions of a handful of no-good, misbehaving shipmates.

Vice Adm.. Scott Swift, head of 7th Fleet, is empowering sailors to “remain vigilant” and correct those who step out of line. He’s also asking junior enlisted what ideas they have for cutting out “unacceptable personal behavior.”

While the Navy looks for new ways ahead, 7th Fleet sailors in Japan continue to experience curfew restrictions.

We want your feedback. What’s life been like under the ever-changing liberty rules? How is morale? Is punishment-for-all a fair way to correct the actions of a few? How would you deal with the problem, or is it even a problem?

Is the media putting an unfair focus on Japan? Are the locals too sensitive?

Sound off below, or email your comments to staff writer Jacqueline Klimas at jklimas@militarytimes.com. Your comments could be used in an upcoming story.

71Fish
07-24-2013, 01:52 PM
In my opinion, it sends a clearer message to come down hard on the offender. "Can you believe what happened to Jim, I'm never doing that" is better than "Jim got drunk and beat up a club owner, now we all have to stay on base". Collective punishment seems like something handed down from colonial times when your peers could take care of you when you stepped out of line, lest they all be punished.

Making everyone wear diapers because one person peed their pants is a lazy way to correct behavior. It obviously doesn't work since the same offenses are committed over and over and over.

Navy Mustang
07-24-2013, 02:34 PM
One crew, one screw! Kinda puts pressure into more intrusive leadership and also shipmates keeping each other in check. It's often one those cases where one gets in trouble and turns out his liberty buddy left him hanging somewhere because they didn't feel like ruining their own night babysitting him and he was being too much of a drunk a-hole to return to the ship.

I'm not a proponent of collective punishment, but the CO has to do something when his crew pushes up the averages with liberty incidents....especially when chopped in a different fleet. For every one you NJP/CM or put on liberty risk, two or three more of these idiots pop up and ruin it for the other 99 percent of the crew.

Fan room counselings used to work wonders.....:damnit-sign2:

Pullinteeth
07-24-2013, 02:37 PM
Seems kinda dumb to me but I get it. The IDEA I get-peer pressure is a mother.. However, is it really justice? Like the various zero tolerence this and zero tolerence that, it is simply a cop-out so leadership doesn't have to actually make any tough decisions.

Stalwart
07-24-2013, 03:24 PM
Is punishment-for-all a fair way to correct the actions of a few?
-Is it fair? No. Is it the easiest way to initiate immediate corrective action? Yes. At the same time, we are shipmates, teammates who all share in the mission and like it or not part of the mission of the Navy is forward presence in foreign countries. I was part of the Enterprise CSG that deployed in 2011 (immediately following CAPT Honors relief for the videos made when he was the XO). I was very disappointed that rather than using this to teach people what is and isn’t appropriate the reaction was to prohibit any video, filming etc. that was not approved by the PAO – the message wasn’t to cut out inappropriate behavior, just don’t tape it.

How would you deal with the problem, or is it even a problem?
There are some problems. The best way to deal with this is involvement of the immediate leadership. If you have a problem Sailor, the LCPO should ID who they are and talk to them, not email, not sign a liberty policy … but sit down and have a no-kidding conversation with their Sailor. If there is a JO who is a problem the Dept Head and XO need to do some mentoring.

Are the locals too sensitive?
Not at all, it is THEIR country and we are their guests. How would we feel if a foreign ship pulled into San Diego, Norfolk or New York and their Sailors were assaulting the locals, using streets as public toilets or any other kind of shenanigans?

garhkal
07-24-2013, 08:44 PM
In my opinion, it sends a clearer message to come down hard on the offender. "Can you believe what happened to Jim, I'm never doing that" is better than "Jim got drunk and beat up a club owner, now we all have to stay on base". Collective punishment seems like something handed down from colonial times when your peers could take care of you when you stepped out of line, lest they all be punished.

Making everyone wear diapers because one person peed their pants is a lazy way to correct behavior. It obviously doesn't work since the same offenses are committed over and over and over.

Plus we are always being told to act like adults and be responsible, but when our chain of commands treat us like we are all still teens, there gets to be a disconnect between how we want to act and how we are regarded.

efmbman
07-24-2013, 11:40 PM
Collective punishment never was, and never will be, the right way to handle anything. Personal responsibility and accountability is the key. Those that do follow the rules and act the right way should not be subject to disciplinary measures. That maintains the incentive to do the right thing even when no one is watching.

smart45556
07-25-2013, 01:18 AM
Its even worse for Army in Japan because we are placed on the same restrictions as the other services when it wasn't even one of our own committing the actions!

If a marine gets drunk and gets a DUI, everyone on island gets a DUI. If an airman talks on his phone while driving and gets a ticket, we all get a ticket. Thats the attitude we get from the command here. I guess we are expected to not only police up our battle-buddies but also our "wingmen", "shipmates" and fellow "Devil-Dogs".

garhkal
07-25-2013, 06:30 AM
Too true. Had a marine just after our ship pulled into Sasebo for a sub repair, who got a DUI (iirc at osaka), and OUR ship along with the others had to do a DUI standdown day.

Salty Old Dog
07-25-2013, 04:41 PM
Group punishment worked well in boot camp, where you lived and worked with the same (relatively) small group of people, and peer pressure to straighten up and fly right could correct some deficiencies, thus preventing a malcontent from being rolled back (out of the company). It helped build comraderie and taught team work.....to a bunch of mostly 18 and 19 year old kids.

But once you're out of that environment, it has limited effectiveness. You start punishing everyone, for any one person's infraction, too often, and you're only going to get back resistance to this lazy form of "leadership". If you're part of the 99% that's keeping their nose clean, but repeatedly being punished by having to put up with extra nanny rules on yourself and your shipmates, you're going to start resenting it. It's bad enough having the double standard between officer and enlisted (and it's there, no matter how much some officers would like to claim it doesn't exist), but if you further degrade the attitudes of your people by treating them like school age children, don't expect to have high morale in your crew.

Crack down, HARD, on the trouble makers, and treat the remainder of your crew with respect, and you'll get a lot further.

MACHINE666
07-25-2013, 06:03 PM
Do you punish the entire football team because just a few players refuse to show up for practice?

If you have a wart on your finger, do you cut off the entire arm?

But yet, if some idiot throws a frog into the intake of an F-16 engine, you punish the entire base by putting it on lock down for the weekend.

(Kunsan *cough* *cough* *cough*)

BURAWSKI
07-26-2013, 12:04 AM
Group punishment worked well in boot camp, where you lived and worked with the same (relatively) small group of people, and peer pressure to straighten up and fly right could correct some deficiencies, thus preventing a malcontent from being rolled back (out of the company). It helped build comraderie and taught team work.....to a bunch of mostly 18 and 19 year old kids.

But once you're out of that environment, it has limited effectiveness. You start punishing everyone, for any one person's infraction, too often, and you're only going to get back resistance to this lazy form of "leadership". If you're part of the 99% that's keeping their nose clean, but repeatedly being punished by having to put up with extra nanny rules on yourself and your shipmates, you're going to start resenting it. It's bad enough having the double standard between officer and enlisted (and it's there, no matter how much some officers would like to claim it doesn't exist), but if you further degrade the attitudes of your people by treating them like school age children, don't expect to have high morale in your crew.

Crack down, HARD, on the trouble makers, and treat the remainder of your crew with respect, and you'll get a lot further.


Yes, exactly. I always wondered why senior officers don't have this kind of insight. It is a no-brainer.

efmbman
07-26-2013, 12:26 AM
Yes, exactly. I always wondered why senior officers don't have this kind of insight. It is a no-brainer.

I came to the conclusion that it is because those senior leaders are not the ones that have to enforce or implement the mass punishment. Once the order is given, they can now monitor their subordinate commanders to verify if the orders is being carried out. An added benefit to the senior leader is now there is someone else to blame if the policy is flawed. Those subordinate leaders will not question the order, nor will they interpret the order. They will only follow the strict wording of the order. They want to be that senior leader one day, remember. By using common sense, offering an alternate and perhaps more effective course of action will only earn that subordinate leader a bad evaluation - "Not a team player". No promotion for you! And so the cycle will continue because the subrdinate leader will learn from this experience that the word of the senior leader is like the voice of a god and will be blindly obeyed. The next generation of senior leaders will be just like the ones of today, perhaps slightly worse. Get results no matter the cost or damage to morale and spirit of the troops. The bottom line is creating and enforcing policy, good or bad, that causes the results the political and civilian leaders demand.

BURAWSKI
07-26-2013, 01:32 AM
I came to the conclusion that it is because those senior leaders are not the ones that have to enforce or implement the mass punishment. Once the order is given, they can now monitor their subordinate commanders to verify if the orders is being carried out. An added benefit to the senior leader is now there is someone else to blame if the policy is flawed. Those subordinate leaders will not question the order, nor will they interpret the order. They will only follow the strict wording of the order. They want to be that senior leader one day, remember. By using common sense, offering an alternate and perhaps more effective course of action will only earn that subordinate leader a bad evaluation - "Not a team player". No promotion for you! And so the cycle will continue because the subrdinate leader will learn from this experience that the word of the senior leader is like the voice of a god and will be blindly obeyed. The next generation of senior leaders will be just like the ones of today, perhaps slightly worse. Get results no matter the cost or damage to morale and spirit of the troops. The bottom line is creating and enforcing policy, good or bad, that causes the results the political and civilian leaders demand.

I am certain that there were some subordinate commanders who argued for common sense (behind closed doors). The problem is that ANY disagreement voiced is considered as being disloyal or, as you stated, a non-team player. The Navy would run a lot better if commanders felt that voicing their disagreements/alternative suggestions with arcane policies wouldn't be held against them by their bosses.

efmbman
07-26-2013, 01:56 AM
I am certain that there were some subordinate commanders who argued for common sense (behind closed doors). The problem is that ANY disagreement voiced is considered as being disloyal or, as you stated, a non-team player. The Navy would run a lot better if commanders felt that voicing their disagreements/alternative suggestions with arcane policies wouldn't be held against them by their bosses.

I agree. All services would benefit from that. I know that when I went through my 4 levels of PME I was told constantly that it was my duty to offer alternative solutions if I believed the unit and the mission would benefit from the suggestion. A nice theory in the classroom, but very unwelcome in the operational setting.

Once I realized the stunning contradiction of doctrine and practice, I decided to retire. Now I am a very happy and stress-free GS-11 doing all I can to help Veterans. I do not regret my decision at all.

CORNELIUSSEON
07-26-2013, 02:37 AM
Group punishment has been a time-honored tool for all branches of the Military in situations just like this. Traditionally, the result has normally been that the innocent hold the guilty in check so they don't all have to experience that ever again.

For those who say that that form of punishment is unfair to those who didn't run afoul of the order, I say that they should remember that they are in a Military unit, NOT a civilian job.

Measure Man
07-26-2013, 03:11 AM
Obviously, the idea behind the group punishment is that the group will "look out for each other" so as to avoid getting punished.

Nothing builds a team better than having a common enemy...even if that enemy is the commander. :-)

Mr. Squid
07-27-2013, 05:29 AM
Many claim that mass punishment hurts morale. Sure it does, temporarily, but the punishment itself is temporary. Guess what happens to morale when that punishment is lifted, and no one in punished because no one screws up? http://s16.postimg.org/4mrx0l2r5/bulb1.gif

Mass punishment works. I'm not saying I enjoyed every instance, but it incentivizes peers to keep everyone else in check, and that social tool gets the point across.

Comrade
07-27-2013, 03:33 PM
I'm of the mindset that mass punishment can be useful, but only when it's meted out to a group that is relatively close to the offender. What good does it do to lock down Yokota because of some incident at Kadena? The farthest up the chain I see it having any actual effectiveness is at the base level. Anything beyond that just causes mass disgruntlement.

garhkal
07-27-2013, 07:25 PM
I'm of the mindset that mass punishment can be useful, but only when it's meted out to a group that is relatively close to the offender. What good does it do to lock down Yokota because of some incident at Kadena? The farthest up the chain I see it having any actual effectiveness is at the base level. Anything beyond that just causes mass disgruntlement.

Good point. Or say locking down the USS Hornblower, cause someone on the USS Mybiarch messed up.. IMo all that does is stir up resentment.

Chief Bosun
07-29-2013, 04:21 PM
Is it fair - no.

Is it effective - it can be so long as the dirtbag responds to the peer pressure to clean up their act. If they don't, then the chain of command needs to use the other tools at their disposal to deal with the issue.

thorshammertime
07-29-2013, 06:22 PM
I don't think it is a very effective tool in today's Navy. Perhaps the Navy of yore, when a group would get punished for the actions of one, and the one who screwed the group over would get the crap kicked out of him until he understood not to screw over the group again. While I was in 'A' School, we had one particular student in my class who just openly didn't care about following the rules. He knew that if he came back late from break, our next breaks would be secured or severely shortened. He didn't care. When we, the other students, tried to reason with him, he just smiled and told us he didn't care; if he was going to get in trouble, he might as well get us in trouble too. The staff at the school just shrugged and basically said 'hey, welcome to the Navy, one team one fight'. All I could think to myself was, "What sort of super-powerful, mighty, efficient global Navy is going to succeed with this mindset?" In the end, if we could've taken the guy out for a little picnic, we wouldn't have had a problem. However, without any way to convince him to stop screwing us over without just using words (which didn't work), we were doomed to failure. I think that if the Navy wants to keep going down this PC route, they're going to have keep changing things to accommodate. Either that, or they can just give us our balls back, and we'll take care of it.

Chief Bosun
07-29-2013, 07:05 PM
I don't think it is a very effective tool in today's Navy. Perhaps the Navy of yore, when a group would get punished for the actions of one, and the one who screwed the group over would get the crap kicked out of him until he understood not to screw over the group again. While I was in 'A' School, we had one particular student in my class who just openly didn't care about following the rules. He knew that if he came back late from break, our next breaks would be secured or severely shortened. He didn't care. When we, the other students, tried to reason with him, he just smiled and told us he didn't care; if he was going to get in trouble, he might as well get us in trouble too. The staff at the school just shrugged and basically said 'hey, welcome to the Navy, one team one fight'. All I could think to myself was, "What sort of super-powerful, mighty, efficient global Navy is going to succeed with this mindset?" In the end, if we could've taken the guy out for a little picnic, we wouldn't have had a problem. However, without any way to convince him to stop screwing us over without just using words (which didn't work), we were doomed to failure. I think that if the Navy wants to keep going down this PC route, they're going to have keep changing things to accommodate. Either that, or they can just give us our balls back, and we'll take care of it.

And with that comment the staff at your school set you up for failure.

There is nothing wrong with handling an issue at the lowest level - however, there comes a time where it needs to be bumped up to the next level for resolution. That means documented counseling, Extra Military Instruction, a Disciplinary Review Board and if all else failed, Mast. But then, that requires work, taking the time to document the steps you take to correct the situation, and the intestinal fortitude and maturity to admit that you were not able to handle the situation when it had to be forwarded to the next level for action. The staff basically taught the miscreant to go ahead and do what you want - no one wants to be bothered holding you accountable for your actions. I'm willing to bet, though, if you had held a blanket party and the loser whined, there would have been an investigation, and your class would have ended up with a lot of Sailors doing time in the brig. Not saying you would have been right or wrong in going "old school" to fix the issue, just what could have happened if you did.

imported_WINTHORP1
07-29-2013, 07:34 PM
Collective punishment just doesn't work. The theory behind it is that we will "fix and/or prevent" any issues so we won't be punished again. But in the modern Navy, what can we do? Everyone has the right to be stupid and if we hurt their feelings by telling them they are stupid, we get in trouble. If we try some shaft ally counseling, we get in trouble for hazing. If we try to talk to them, they blow us off because they now there is nothing we can do to them. The easy fix is to just kick them out of the Navy in a public forum. If you commit a crime in a foreign country, let their legal system take care of it and kick them out. If you truly have a zero tolerance policy, then you'll see these issues go away, because the standard will be set. If you're dumb, you'll be kicked out.

Rusty Jones
07-29-2013, 09:56 PM
Mass punishment may have worked decades ago, when everyone could get together and kick the shit out of the guy who fucked up. Now, anyone who fucks up and gets everyone in trouble... is not to be touched.

Another major problem that mass punishment causes is that it disincentivizes reporting an incident that needs to be reported. For example, when I was a PN2, I was in the duty section and we were down in one of the berthings for DC training; specifically on shoring. The section leader hadn't made it down to the berthing yet; but we looked over in one of the racks, and saw a fully loaded M9 with two full magazines, a radio, and a vest just laying there. We also heard the shower running. And then it hit us - the guy standing internal rover watch decided that he was going to hit the shower in the middle of his watch; and just leave that shit on his rack.

OS1 saw this, and instructed us to grab those things off of his rack and hide them. He also went into the shower, and told that guy to stay in the shower and not come out until he was told.

Truth is, this guy should have been reported and sent up. However, this is the kind of thing where, if the section leader and CDO found it, then extra duties or checks would be added to that watch; or maybe even an extra watch would be stood up.

efmbman
07-29-2013, 11:48 PM
Is it fair - no.

Is it effective - it can be so long as the dirtbag responds to the peer pressure to clean up their act. If they don't, then the chain of command needs to use the other tools at their disposal to deal with the issue.

I see your point, but as a leader I would always view mass punishment as the cop-out of the leader. To me, it was the leaders way of telling the unit "I am not an effective leader. I do not have the tools and experience to deal with this problem or person. Therefore, I will make you all miserable in the hopes that you can do my job." In addition, if the mass punishment leads to a physical altercation the leader has distanced him/herself from the altercation. Just a total cop-out and a total failure of leadership. Just my point of view...

Vrake
07-30-2013, 12:35 AM
Mass punishment may have worked decades ago, when everyone could get together and kick the shit out of the guy who fucked up. Now, anyone who fucks up and gets everyone in trouble... is not to be touched.

Another major problem that mass punishment causes is that it disincentivizes reporting an incident that needs to be reported. For example, when I was a PN2, I was in the duty section and we were down in one of the berthings for DC training; specifically on shoring. The section leader hadn't made it down to the berthing yet; but we looked over in one of the racks, and saw a fully loaded M9 with two full magazines, a radio, and a vest just laying there. We also heard the shower running. And then it hit us - the guy standing internal rover watch decided that he was going to hit the shower in the middle of his watch; and just leave that shit on his rack.

OS1 saw this, and instructed us to grab those things off of his rack and hide them. He also went into the shower, and told that guy to stay in the shower and not come out until he was told.

Truth is, this guy should have been reported and sent up. However, this is the kind of thing where, if the section leader and CDO found it, then extra duties or checks would be added to that watch; or maybe even an extra watch would be stood up.

Good post Rusty it is a duel edged sword.

Your first instinct is to take care of a shipmate. Yet how many times does it take before you get in hack trying to take care of a shipmate? ( or in my case hanger buddy :))

Chief Bosun
07-30-2013, 12:45 PM
I see your point, but as a leader I would always view mass punishment as the cop-out of the leader. To me, it was the leaders way of telling the unit "I am not an effective leader. I do not have the tools and experience to deal with this problem or person. Therefore, I will make you all miserable in the hopes that you can do my job." In addition, if the mass punishment leads to a physical altercation the leader has distanced him/herself from the altercation. Just a total cop-out and a total failure of leadership. Just my point of view...

I get your point as well.

What I was getting at is peer pressure is also a powerful tool to get someone to fall in line, just like it can be a powerful tool to get someone who wants to obey the rules to do something stupid just to fit in with a particular clique. However, there is a time and a place where you need to say "OK, I/we worked with this person, here's where the situation stands, LPO/Chief, I/we need help in dealing with it". At that point as a leader it becomes my issue, and I need to take ownership of it.

Unfortunately, in today's PC world, too many folks that are assigned to leadership positions are simply too lazy to be bothered doing the work necessary to get the person to fall into line or to document what is going on in the event they need to move the issue up another link in the chain because the miscreant does not respond.

Vrake, yes we all want to take care of our shipmates. However, taking care of them does not mean shielding them from the consequences of their actions. Unfortunately, in the case that Riusty cites, the First Class should simply have cut to the chase and had someone go to the Quarterdeck and had the word passed for the CDO to lay to that berthing compartment, and allowed him to see for himself that the rover had placed everyone at risk.

RobotChicken
07-30-2013, 02:28 PM
Mass punishment may have worked decades ago, when everyone could get together and kick the shit out of the guy who fucked up. Now, anyone who fucks up and gets everyone in trouble... is not to be touched.

Another major problem that mass punishment causes is that it disincentivizes reporting an incident that needs to be reported. For example, when I was a PN2, I was in the duty section and we were down in one of the berthings for DC training; specifically on shoring. The section leader hadn't made it down to the berthing yet; but we looked over in one of the racks, and saw a fully loaded M9 with two full magazines, a radio, and a vest just laying there. We also heard the shower running. And then it hit us - the guy standing internal rover watch decided that he was going to hit the shower in the middle of his watch; and just leave that shit on his rack.

OS1 saw this, and instructed us to grab those things off of his rack and hide them. He also went into the shower, and told that guy to stay in the shower and not come out until he was told.

Truth is, this guy should have been reported and sent up. However, this is the kind of thing where, if the section leader and CDO found it, then extra duties or checks would be added to that watch; or maybe even an extra watch would be stood up.
"Great post 'RJ'; in my day the 1st class would send the culprit down to the 'Brig' for an extra day of special military training at the mercy of the MARINES....guy would turn into a 4-0 sailor overnite!! (and that Brig would shine for days after that) 'RC'.

thorshammertime
07-30-2013, 02:35 PM
And with that comment the staff at your school set you up for failure.

There is nothing wrong with handling an issue at the lowest level - however, there comes a time where it needs to be bumped up to the next level for resolution. That means documented counseling, Extra Military Instruction, a Disciplinary Review Board and if all else failed, Mast. But then, that requires work, taking the time to document the steps you take to correct the situation, and the intestinal fortitude and maturity to admit that you were not able to handle the situation when it had to be forwarded to the next level for action. The staff basically taught the miscreant to go ahead and do what you want - no one wants to be bothered holding you accountable for your actions. I'm willing to bet, though, if you had held a blanket party and the loser whined, there would have been an investigation, and your class would have ended up with a lot of Sailors doing time in the brig. Not saying you would have been right or wrong in going "old school" to fix the issue, just what could have happened if you did.

Oh, it would have definitely been trouble. I know it was a bit of an extreme circumstance; most people will respond to peer pressure, and probably in most cases didn't even realize they were hurting everyone else until someone says something. That situation just really bummed me out.

Chief Bosun
07-30-2013, 04:59 PM
Oh, it would have definitely been trouble. I know it was a bit of an extreme circumstance; most people will respond to peer pressure, and probably in most cases didn't even realize they were hurting everyone else until someone says something. That situation just really bummed me out.

Yep, things like that have unwanted repercussions. None of us like it, especially when the folks that are supposed to set the example simply decide to not dirty their hands doing their job.

Rusty Jones
07-30-2013, 06:24 PM
I think that the whole "police your own" is a cop out; a poor excuse. For one thing, E2 and E3 Sailors are incapable of giving lawful orders. And E3 can tell an E1 to do something, and that E3 will get cussed out. And there's nothing that the E3 can do about it, but shout back and hope that he wins the pissing contest. But either way, the E1 is still going to do whatever he wants to do. They may be able to get him on a few things with an NJP, but disobeying a lawful order won't be one of them. Or, if it is, it won't be the "order" that the E3 tried to give.

Same thing, when the person screwing up is senior to you, regardless of your paygrade.

So what do you do then? Do you report it? Nope, because you'll get the mass punishment anyway. If you're going to get the mass punishment anyway; you may as well not snitch, and hope they don't get caught. That way, at worst, you can postpone the mass punishment; or even avoid it completely if you're lucky.

Chief Bosun
07-31-2013, 03:04 PM
I think that the whole "police your own" is a cop out; a poor excuse. For one thing, E2 and E3 Sailors are incapable of giving lawful orders. And E3 can tell an E1 to do something, and that E3 will get cussed out. And there's nothing that the E3 can do about it, but shout back and hope that he wins the pissing contest. But either way, the E1 is still going to do whatever he wants to do. They may be able to get him on a few things with an NJP, but disobeying a lawful order won't be one of them. Or, if it is, it won't be the "order" that the E3 tried to give.

Same thing, when the person screwing up is senior to you, regardless of your paygrade.

So what do you do then? Do you report it? Nope, because you'll get the mass punishment anyway. If you're going to get the mass punishment anyway; you may as well not snitch, and hope they don't get caught. That way, at worst, you can postpone the mass punishment; or even avoid it completely if you're lucky.

Yep, and that a failure of the chain to back itself up.

When it comes to your seniors, that is a stickier situation. In my case, all I could do was quietly try to pull the person off to the side, and try to get them to change their conduct. If not, then I had to take it to their senior, and see how things fell out.

I can't speak for everyone else, but when I found out that one Sailor was screwing up, I believed in holding that Sailor accountable, not the entire group. Now, if the entire group knew about it and kept their cakeholes shut, that was a different matter entirely.

Desk Pilot
07-31-2013, 03:35 PM
[QUOTE=Rusty Jones;643972]I think that the whole "police your own" is a cop out; a poor excuse. For one thing, E2 and E3 Sailors are incapable of giving lawful orders. And E3 can tell an E1 to do something, and that E3 will get cussed out. And there's nothing that the E3 can do about it, but shout back and hope that he wins the pissing contest. But either way, the E1 is still going to do whatever he wants to do. They may be able to get him on a few things with an NJP, but disobeying a lawful order won't be one of them. Or, if it is, it won't be the "order" that the E3 tried to give.

Same thing, when the person screwing up is senior to you, regardless of your paygrade.
QUOTE]

That's where I see this issue differently. It's not about giving lawful orders at a bar or elsewhere to get a person to stop being drunk and stupid. It's about pulling the person aside and saving them from themselves (and ultimately, selfishly, yourself).

garhkal
08-02-2013, 07:53 PM
Mass punishment may have worked decades ago, when everyone could get together and kick the shit out of the guy who fucked up. Now, anyone who fucks up and gets everyone in trouble... is not to be touched.

Another major problem that mass punishment causes is that it disincentivizes reporting an incident that needs to be reported. For example, when I was a PN2, I was in the duty section and we were down in one of the berthings for DC training; specifically on shoring. The section leader hadn't made it down to the berthing yet; but we looked over in one of the racks, and saw a fully loaded M9 with two full magazines, a radio, and a vest just laying there. We also heard the shower running. And then it hit us - the guy standing internal rover watch decided that he was going to hit the shower in the middle of his watch; and just leave that shit on his rack.

OS1 saw this, and instructed us to grab those things off of his rack and hide them. He also went into the shower, and told that guy to stay in the shower and not come out until he was told.

Truth is, this guy should have been reported and sent up. However, this is the kind of thing where, if the section leader and CDO found it, then extra duties or checks would be added to that watch; or maybe even an extra watch would be stood up.

That guy should have been wrote up for not just dereliction of duty, but leaving his weapon and ammo around.


Unfortunately, in today's PC world, too many folks that are assigned to leadership positions are simply too lazy to be bothered doing the work necessary to get the person to fall into line or to document what is going on in the event they need to move the issue up another link in the chain because the miscreant does not respond.

If its that bad where he is not responding at that level, how do they think he will respond by punishing everyone else? IMO all that does it shows the mess ups they are going to get away with it.