When Veterans Bully other Veterans

The Military community, among all communities or cohorts in the United States, is the most likely to “police” its members.

This is very much by design.  It is hard to see or know this when you are a Private or a Junior Officer.  At this level of experience, you can’t see the Forrest through the trees because you are more focused on what actions you need to take in order to keep your boss off your ass for the next 24 hours.  But this self-policing mechanism allows leadership to know that the individuals at their subordinate units will stay within legal, ethical and regulatory bounds while accomplishing their mission with very little oversight.

But, this mechanism too often bleeds into off-duty hours activities and even worse, to the civilian world.  Now, it is not that I disagree with it carte-blanche.  In fact, it is usually harmless.  But because of our ingrained desire to call others out along with the perceived social benefit of doing so, this policing can quickly become bullying. 

Image taken from this article.  Original source unknown.

Take a look at the picture above.  What is the first thought it elicits?  Is it anger at the circumstances that lead the owner of the sign to contract PTSD?  Is it a desire to be considerate and use fireworks that don’t focus on noise?  Or is it that the owner is an entitled ass who is looking for sympathy and public recognition, deserved or not?

The problem I see is that too often, we assume the third.  Now, I have long felt awkward every time someone thanks me for my service.  Make no mistake, I am proud of my service.  But it took place mostly behind a wired fence, sending emails and coordinating support for real ground-pounders.  So, I find myself with very little mandate to criticize my fellow veterans.

But, let’s pretend that I was such a bad-ass that to find a peer I would have to travel back in time to meet Audie Murphy.  Do I then have the mandate to criticize other veteran’s actions? Do I have the moral authority to judge other veterans, their mental states and their service and then to find them wanting or even detestable?

I would respond with a resounding “No”.

And the reason for this is simple.  There is no reason to judge them in the first place.  There is nothing to gain, and the community does not improve because of it.  You don’t know what they have been through or what their mental state is. Everyone handles stress and trauma differently, depending on who they are and what their experience is.  I have seen manly monsters break down upon receiving an upsetting email from their boss, just as I have seen seemingly meek people run havoc over crisis situations and save the day.  There is no reason to assume anything upon a quick glance.

Now, you can’t stop yourself from having the thoughts or knee-jerk reactions.  To demand that would be inhuman and unrealistic.  The real question is, what action will you take when these thoughts occur?

Screenshot taken this article.  Source of original picture unknown.

The author of this article does not like people who display the signs as shown above.  His entire editorial harangues veterans who have these signs as entitled brats whose service most likely does not meet the impossible standard that the author has set.  He makes wild assumptions based on pictures that he has acquired through Facebook or other social media, seemingly borrowing his assumptions from others then amplifying them.

Screenshot taken from article.  Source of original picture unknown.

In a way, my own article is policing and I am guilty of the same action.  I think that the fact that there is no want for context in the referenced article is the difference.  With any of the pictures that the author presents, there is a major lack of context.  But the author displays his background and thought process, all possible context included save for what he has done to be in receipt of such judgmental license.  He does include a slight out that yes, some veterans are legitimate in their needs for such a sign.  But two token sentences after over 1800 words deriding the signs seems like an intellectual cop-out more than anything.

He also pre-defends himself against accusations that articles like this are the reason that veterans don’t reach out for the care they require.  He states, “First, I think anyone with problems should get help for those problems. I mean actual, professional help, rather than engage in attention-seeking behavior that reeks of entitlement.”

The assumption here is that the veteran has not done that already and that this is not part of what the professional has suggested.  But even if this were not true, perhaps the veteran simply can understand their own limitations.  Maybe they understand that explosions, even of fireworks, can be upsetting to them.  Instead of just “dealing with it” and moving on, taking action to not fear simply existing on the Fourth of July is more than appropriate. Is the sign a panacea that will cure the ills of the veteran? Absolutely not.  It is just a sign, and it is only as effective as long as it is seen and understood. 

So why does the author take such issue with the sign and those who display them?  I could say that they are trying to down someone simply for being week.  But I don’t think that is the case.  The argument the author displays lends credence to that thought, but it is not the purpose of his writing.  Is it that the author is trying to jealously guard some perceived pool of virtue that is exhaustible and beyond value? No, though the author certainly would claim that he and few others have the right to draw from that pool.

The article is really about policing other veterans.  The author finds himself as the arbiter of what is deserving of praise and what is not; of who is truly a combat veteran and how they should act.  Just like he must ensure that everyone maintains their uniformity during an in-ranks inspection, he feels that actions taken when off duty must meet a set of unwritten regulations that the author is privy to.  And in his quest to ensure that these right and left limits are enforced, the only tool he has is to bully and deride others.

Are there veterans who take advantage of the public’s perceptions for personal profit or social status?  Absolutely.  But they are few and far between.  Just like you should not judge all gun owners by the behavior of a mass murder or all preachers by the actions of one pedophile, you should not judge all veterans by the conduct of one jackass.  This is especially true when the behavior has no perceivable consequence to you.

But, should my reasoning seem unconvincing to you, let me suggest a different course of action.  Instead of writing an article deriding what is seen as a breach of conduct, why not speak to the fellow veteran and ask them why they chose to post the sign?  If the suspicions are true, ask the veteran to take the sign down and preserve the pool of virtue.  If they are false, you gain the opportunity to let a fellow veteran know you are there to support them, growing the bond of brotherhood that the uniform creates.

But I have an idea why the author didn’t. And I am keeping that to myself.

CSDP: Types of Responsibility (And notes on being an Aide de Camp)

So these videos seem like they are turning into a Quarterly occurrence.

I do mean to put them up more often, but man are things getting busy here in Europe.  As our old friends LTG Hodges, Commander of USAREUR says, “We have to make 30,000 look and feel like 300,000”.

Speaking of Generals, let’s talk about being an Aide de Camp for a moment.  Now I have never been an “ADC”, but I now know quite a few and work with them closely.  I can assure you that as a learning opportunity, there is probably nothing better than being an ADC, no matter who it is for.  The meetings and places you get to go to offer a glut of information that, quite frankly, you would never get from almost any job you would have in a normal career progression.  On top of that, having an evaluation from a General can only do good things for your career.  As they say, “Not all ADCs make General, but nearly every General was once an ADC”.

But you know what else they say about ADCs?  “You are office furniture.  You will be used until broken and then replaced.”

Ouch.

It is very true.  Every single ADC I have met has suffered through very long days and very rough working conditions.  I am not saying Generals are dicks or that they are bad to work for (though some are).  But the demands of the job and the hours you work are extreme.  My longest days are nearly always shorter than an ADC.  And, if ADC’s are anything, they are expendable.  There are always more Captains and LT’s.

So take that into perspective, if you ever are given the opportunity to be an ADC.  If you are successful as an ADC, you are set for your career.  But you will be sacrificing your personal life and, indeed, your family life (if you have one).

Retirement Calculator

Click here to check my work!

CDSP- The TMHR

So, there was one part of this video I wanted to clarify, but I did not want to expound too much during the video simply because it would have made it too long (and even more boring than it already is).

During the video, I stated that if the ARC (Accounting Requirements Code) in the TM or the TMHR does not match the FEDLOG ARC, that FEDLOG takes precedence.  But is this really the case, and if so, why? This obviously makes hand receipt transfers harder because if you are missing an item that the TMHR states is non-expendable but FEDLOG states it is expendable, it can mean the difference between a simple order and FLIPL. 

Now, before I dive into the regulation answer, I want to take you through the different answers I got.  Of course, the first person I asked was my Supply NCO.  She was utterly confused by the question (as are most people, so no fault to her).  Next, I asked the Battalion S-4.  I did not really expect him to know and, shockingly, he did not.  Next was the PBO.  In my unit, we have a PBO at the Battalion level.  No luck there either.

But I am at a Component Command Headquarters.  I have sever warrant officers and senior officers that work in the G4 within mere feet of my desk.  So I went to the G4 Supply and Services cell, where I spoke with the CW4 in charge of all Class VII items in our command.  Again, a blank stare and confusion.  He tried to explain it, but it seemed like he did not want to be holed into a definite response.

This is aggravating.  Why can no one give me a straight answer?

Well, because there really is not a book answer to the question as I asked it. Let me explain.

DA PAM 708-2 (specifically, page 61) outlines that the Army Master Data File (AMDF) is the repository of all codes and information records for Army material.  If the AMDF says something is Expendable, then by gosh it is expendable.  When the information is entered into the AMDF, they judge the item by the criteria laid out in Chapter 7 of AR 735-5. FEDLOG pulls it’s information from the AMDF, so we are done, right?

This is where we find our issue.  In AR 735-5, each type of property (ARC N, D, X) states the criteria that makes an item that ARC code.  It also states that you can find an Item’s ARC code in FEDLOG.  However, it also states that even if the item is in FEDLOG as a certain ARC, that there are other criteria that could make it’s ARC change.  For example, if an items has a Federal Supply Code of 5110 and has a unit of issue that contains more than one item (such as a package, box, dozen ect…), AND the cost of each single item is less than $50, then the entire set is expendable, not durable, no matter what FEDLOG states.

Fuck these rules can be complex.

Our second issue comes in when an item is non-expendable according to the TM or TMHR, but FEDLOG states it is not.  Why does the TM do this to us?  Certainly they don’t want us to start a FLIPL if we lose a chock block, right?

Well, the concept behind something like this is that the manufacturer is stating to you, the user, that you cannot and must not operate the vehicle without this item.  Does that mean that you should start that FLIPL for your missing chocks? No. Hell no.  You will be laughed out of the room.

Our third issue comes when the PBO decides on their own to make certain items non-expendable.  Yea, they can totally do that.  On a whim.  For example, AR 735-5 clearly states that any Cellphone under $500 should be considered durable property.  But, because cell phones are pilferable items and acquiring them is usually a pretty complicated project, the PBO can mandate they go on the books and be treated as non-expendable property.

So the short answer? Go with what is on FEDLOG, no matter the discrepancy.  If you have a question, ask your Supply or PBO.  But you may not like what you get.

CSDP- How to Find Your Listing, Part 1-TM Basics

“Where is that D*mn TM?”

I have said the previous statement (or derivatives of it) more times than I can count in my military career.  During PMCS, during inventories, during inspections, it does not matter.  The TM is never there when you want it, or need it.

Thanks to the ubiquity of technology, LOGSA has certainly helped to stem this problem.  Electronic TM’s in CD and Web format are very useful, and provided that your computer has the right CAC certificates (always a fun time trying to get everything to use it on your home PC).  Maintenance shops are even issued Maintenance Support Devices, which are basically rugged laptops (using that term very loosely) that you can load TM’s on to so you can take it with you to the vehicle.

But when you need that paper copy, it just is not there.

I remember before each of my Change of Command inventories, I sat down behind a computer with a copy of the Property Book and pulled up the TM for every item.  I downloaded it, printed up the cover and the BII sections and put them in a stack, ready to go just in case the outgoing commander did not have them ready.  Which, most of the time, they did not.

But TM’s are needed for more than just inspections, inventories and PMCS.  It is critical that you have them on hand so that you can take emergency remedial action or to complete tasks that make you use the equipment in ways that you are not accustomed to.

The easiest way to ensure this is not to lose it in the first place.  As this is not always in your control, it is vital that you make good friends with (or become) the Publications Manager.

Each unit has one of these (usually a secondary duty with a pubs clerk at the Company and a pubs manager at the Battalion).  I have not seen many successful publications programs in my time, but when they are successful, they are very easy to get a hold of.  That is why I say it may not be a bad idea to become it (if not on orders, maybe just effectively).  It will help you, and your Soldiers, remember a key fact about these manuals that often gets overlooked: Pubs cost Money.  Lots of money.

So treat your TM’s with respect.  And if at all possible, do not operate your equipment without one.

First new content of the year done! BOOOM SHAKALAKA!!!

How We Learn

Welp, I owe you all an apology of sorts. 

I have not posted a new video or comic in some weeks.  Though I have plenty of excuses to levy, none of them are worth the lack of content provided.  I will have a new video out before the New Year, I promise. 

The problem I keep running into is that I hate leaving specifics out.  Now that I am in the supply and components section, I feel like that if I leave anything out, I am dooming you potential hand receipt holders to some level of failure and, even worse, financial liability.  I don’t know why I shoulder the responsibility of your pocketbook, but for some reason, I do.

But that brings up a very interesting, albeit unintentional, topic.  As officers, How far do we take the development of our peers and subordinates? 

Many of you will agree with me that the Officer professional training courses are lacking.  Whether this is intentional or not, I don’t know.  But, in my opinion, this is reflective of the expectations of what officers are supposed to be/do.  Officers self-develop.  Officers learn on their own and find the knowledge that they need to accomplish their mission.

I don’t agree with this sentimentality, on a personal level.  To a certain extent, everyone needs to self-develop.  No one can count on others to provide the knowledge they need to survive in this world and become successful.  However, when you have an institution as large as the US Army, you would think that it serves its own interests by preparing its people to assume the accountability and responsibility that they decide to assign to them.

No, in real life, political expediency (not just politics in a Democrat-Republican, CNN-Fox News kind way) nearly always takes front seat.  This is both an institutional problem (within each corps or branch) and an overall military problem. 

Here are a few examples:

EO and SHARP training is mandated to an exacting degree.  Several hours per quarter must be spent training these subjects to every member of the United States Army.  Yet, there is no hard-fast requirement for training Property Accountability, PMCS, or Training Management.

In Quartermaster and Logistics PME for officers, two weeks at a minimum are spent on petroleum management and the theory of petroleum operations.  Two days are spent on property accountability.  No days are spent on training management. In fact, more time is spent reviewing laundry and shower procedures than training management and property accountability.

OPD/LPD sessions at battalion and above level are often focused (at least in my experience) on historical battle rides and exceedingly specific subjects that are branch specific rather than administrative or problem focused topics.

How does this change? I don’t know for sure, but I have some suggestions.

1. Work hard and prepare training

It is so easy to pull some random PowerPoint training session pulled off of google or to steal it off of the share portal.  Spend 10-20 minutes (at best) reviewing the material, then off you go!  You are the subject matter expert.

This is not how training works.  This is not how experts and professionals teach others.  But I find it hard to blame others fully for this, as those few that could competently put together a training session are usually overburdened with other work.

But, should you find yourself with the need to teach a class, do yourself and those who you are teaching a favor.  Build the lesson yourself.  Do the research yourself.  You will find yourself not depending on the slides and teaching relevant information, rather than reading slides and going over only the seemingly applicable highlights.

2. Leave your ego out of it

Everyone loves to do it.  Finding a way to highlight how good you are, or conversely (if you are a douchebag), how bad everyone else is.  Hoarding information or making others feel stupid for not having knowledge or the wisdom to know what they don’t know.

Acting this way will only lead to others despising you and your lesson.  On top of that, you will end up setting up a mental attitude that leads to ignorance of others abilities and needs. 

In short, don’t be a toxic asshole.

                                                                            Yea, don't set others up for failure

3. Define what is important, and what is not

You are a big boy.  You are in charge.  There are going to be few others that can really figure out what training is important to your unit’s operations than you.  There are a few ways to accomplish this. 

You can use a METL assessment; defining your key tasks and training on those.  Or you can identify key weaknesses by observing the day to day operations.  However you do it, figure out what is important.  Just because it is a weakness does not mean you need to spend time on it.  I am very weak at PMCS’ing LMTV trailers.  I have very little to no need to use them.  So why waste my time?

Sure there are those items that you must train by regulation regardless of your strength or weakness.  But only you can develop your priorities. (Note: This whole part more applies to unit training rather than leader training, but the concept still applies).

So, here is the crowd interaction part.  What do you think about professional development training?

CSDP- Components

This video is not exactly groundbreaking stuff.  If you are aware that components exit, then you are aware, generally, of the fact that these items are components. The difference between COEI and BII in the terms of how you account for them is very little.  In fact, this video is just one of those videos I felt that I needed to do in order to put together the groundwork for future videos.

But I would like to highlight two things from this video that are not common sense. First, the point about AAL items and when you do (or do not) account for them. Every time I have ever done a layout, it is just the common thought process that you do not account for AAL. It is not really all that common that AAL items are present, but it is almost never considered.

But how would you even know? This is where the outgoing hand receipt holder and the supply NCO must have their records in order. It is so easy for the an AAL item to be lost in the system if people who work that system fail to either do the right thing or to be competent enough to know what to do. Once the part is on hand, it must be continually tracked. Lose a record or fail to transfer the information that the item is on hand, and the item becomes lost in the record, and therefore you lose accountability of it. The item itself may still be on hand, but without the tracking system, it will inevitably be separated and then lost.

The second point I wanted to highlight is the fact that tool kits that are accounted for by SKO sometimes have COEI and BII.

Take, for example, the SATS trailer tool room. The SKO does not list any of the BII or COEI items for the set. Items such as the trailer ramps, the generator, the air conditioner, the trailer itself and many other items are only listed in the TM, not by the SKO. 

It is not likely that many of these items will walk away. But without knowing this, you will miss the BII that comes with the generator, or possibly the short ramp that also comes with the trailer. Those items can end up costing quite a bit of money.

So, when doing an inventory, make sure you check for all four types of items. It should only take a few minutes of prep time prior to doing the inventory, and it can save you quite a bit of money if someone is trying to pull the wool over your eyes, either by incompetence or purposefully.

Rarely will you run into the person trying to deceive you on purpose.  But they are out there.  And your best defense is humility and preparation.

CSDP- The DA 2062

So… yea. I did not realize it had been a whole month since the last video. Sorry. PCS/TDY excuses.

That being said, the DA 2062 is one of those forms that you are forced to start using virtually your first day in the Army with no training on what it is or what it means. I suppose it should not take much training to figure out the DA 2062 on a very basic level; however once you are in charge of a Sub-Hand Receipt or a Primary Hand Receipt, knowing how it works and how to deal with annexes becomes much more important, especially from a conceptual level. The PBUSE hand receipts are basically electronic 2062's with much more information on them. But if you don't know how the basics work, how can you be expected to know how the major league hand receipts work? 

Every single time I have ever done a command inventory, people are surprised when I ask for the Shortage Annex. Most do not even know what it is or what it means. This becomes so critical because, to put it bluntly, this is where people lose money. But that is just an example of how we just don't know the basics.

This is one of those small ways that, as leaders, our assumption leads to our and our subordinates ruin. It is understandable if we, as leaders, assume that our subordinates will teach themselves or find a way to learn. But it is inexcusable if leaders do not inspect and check. Without this, small errors or ignorance are never brought to light, which creates false expectations or incorrect standards.

How can you inspect or check if you do not know what to do and how to do it? 

I will go into components next week. I may spend a video just talking about components, then do the component hand receipt as its own video the week after that.

Or, the month after that. Who knows?

                          Me after a PCS