We need to let a few more go from the Army...
Your Experiences With "Toxic Leaders"
- Thread starter Marauder06
- Start date
We need to let a few more go from the Army...
Interesting article on the Adjutant General from CA. You have to read most of the article but at the end he states he's exempt from double-dipping rules/limits because of his status as the AG. Never heard of this happening before and to be honest, Guard pay confuses the heck outta me.
http://www.military.com/news/articl...ed-over-double-dipping.html?col=1186032325324
http://www.military.com/news/articl...ed-over-double-dipping.html?col=1186032325324
As a former Guard guy this isn't surprising. Like any organization the Guard has bad apples and bad policies and those two combine for some...unique situations. The most important guys and gals in the Guard are those who control the funding.
I know it was a political decision, but the Guard should have never kept the combat arms units in the 90's. Those should have gone to the Reserves with the CS and CSS units staying in the Guard. I'd have been out of a job, but I think the Reserves would be a better place for the combat arms units out there, to include the SF Groups.
I'm a firm proponent of the Guard, but it needs an enema.
Control and funding. Guard units serve two masters, the State and the Feds, whereas the Reserves don't have that issue. For example, a Guard SF Group had (pre-9/11) at least 3 pots of money to draw from: Federal, State, and USASOC/ USASFC. States would play games with the State money using the excuse that USASOC was covering our funding, and so they would send money destined for us to some other unit in the state. Highly illegal, but done quite frequently.
Then there is the Military Support of Civil Authorities, aka "The State Mission." We had to train, or at least pencil-whip training, for our state mission which in FL was frequently hurricane and wildfire relief. Other units spent a weekend training for their state mission of riot control. Meanwhile, we're focusing on that instead of our warfighting role....which a CS/ CSS unit is better suited for in the Guard. If the CA units were in the Reserves they would have somewhat more money and more time to devote to shooting, moving, and communicating.
We had some "old guys" in my unit who were in Guard or Reserve SF Goups in the 80's. Hands down the Reserve Groups had the best training, the most schools, and the best AT periods/ TDYs. When the Guard was struggling to send guys to anything beyond MOSQ schools and doing home station AT periods during the summer, the Reserve Groups saw more schools and far more deployments and training opportunities.
I'm sure some won't share in my belief that combat arms shouldn't belong in the Guard, but I think it was a big, politically-driven mistake to allow them to remain under State control.
Kraut783
SOF Support
I think one of my biggest issues while in the NG was how Army Regs were ignored. I was in a CID unit, which the NG had no control over once put on title 10...which drove the BN over us crazy, eventually causing our unit adverse effects on the day to day issues while on the title 32 status. We would try and follow guidance, training requirements, schools...etc from CID command, but would be shut down at the state BN level, when pointing out any AR's that supported us, we would be told, well in the NG we do things different...(?)
This drove many of our members away from the unit and the NG itself. I finally was able to go IRR and have a USAR unit pick me up from there.
This drove many of our members away from the unit and the NG itself. I finally was able to go IRR and have a USAR unit pick me up from there.
Brill
SOF Support
I got called out today and was told my actions were toxic! LMAO!
(post edited...I am "wanted" and do not need to give them any excuse...until AFTER this horseshit is over.
)
(post edited...I am "wanted" and do not need to give them any excuse...until AFTER this horseshit is over.
)
Fuck man. Sorry to hear this. Nothing like leadership that actively works to sabotage its own guys.
Brill
SOF Support
We're about to pull a "Band of Brothers" moment. Nothing like drama right before deployment!
Brill
SOF Support
BN SGM is coming out for a sit down. Apparently when I invoked the I will inform "alphabet soup" if this isn't resolved things started happening. :-"
Tough situation you're in, Lindy. Hope it works out for the best.
RetPara
SOF Support
Over the 20-30 years I have become absolutely convinced that the Army National Guard (ANG), as now organized needs to be eliminated/major restructured. Certainly a good number of ANG units can be absorbed into a much larger reserve force structure. The rest can be the nucleus of a State Militia or much smaller Army National Guard. The political shenanigans and waste that go on in the ANG cannot be justified.
The Air Force got it right the way their Air NG units are comprised. I don't believe the Army could do that mix of active/civ tech/active guard/whatever the Air NG does.
Funding from DOD to the states would allow them to retain some small commo units, medical, MP, and transportation. No combat arms or major end maintenance units. I have serious issues with states have ANG aviation units... but it would help make the medicine more palatable.
The Air Force got it right the way their Air NG units are comprised. I don't believe the Army could do that mix of active/civ tech/active guard/whatever the Air NG does.
Funding from DOD to the states would allow them to retain some small commo units, medical, MP, and transportation. No combat arms or major end maintenance units. I have serious issues with states have ANG aviation units... but it would help make the medicine more palatable.
Agree, the only reason I serve in the Guard is the lack of other combat arms options, and I may cross over to Civil Affairs when this enlistment is up. I think I'll start a new thread on this topic to help this thread stay on topic..
Reed
Reed
pardus
Verified Military
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2006
- Messages
- 10,534
We're about to pull a "Band of Brothers" moment. Nothing like drama right before deployment!
Good for you for standing up for whats right.
Just remember that in Band of Brothers, One guy was booted from the unit as a result...
Brill
SOF Support
To caveat, since I've been on AD orders, I have encountered nothing less than the utmost professional interaction and support from my AD counterparts from both RTSB and SF. I feel like I'm back home again with my brothers and am considered a valued member of the AD unit.
After this experience, I am now of the opinion that Guard AGR soldiers should have maximum tour lengths and should have to re-compete for their positions vice the incestuous (AKA toxic?) relationship that now exists. The "good old boy network" simply reinforces the stereotype of "lazy Guardsman" and is actually an obstacle to those soldiers who desire to be just as competent and proficient as their AD counterparts.
Clearly my opinion does not proliferate to all AGR soldiers as my experience is extremely narrow and of short duration but there is definitely a pattern.
I completely agree with RetPara, Guard needs restructuring and SF especially, should be moved to the Reserves.
After this experience, I am now of the opinion that Guard AGR soldiers should have maximum tour lengths and should have to re-compete for their positions vice the incestuous (AKA toxic?) relationship that now exists. The "good old boy network" simply reinforces the stereotype of "lazy Guardsman" and is actually an obstacle to those soldiers who desire to be just as competent and proficient as their AD counterparts.
Clearly my opinion does not proliferate to all AGR soldiers as my experience is extremely narrow and of short duration but there is definitely a pattern.
I completely agree with RetPara, Guard needs restructuring and SF especially, should be moved to the Reserves.
I hope all goes well for you Lindy. One thing that I have noticed is that a lot of senior leadership these days hasn't gotten used to the fact that those under their charge are not as dumb as they think, and will speak up when something is fucked up. I think the senior leadership in place right now grew up in an army that wasn't as well educated as todays army, and certainly not as seasoned. They grew up saying "roger sarn't" and blindly executing, whereas for todays soldier who has been to combat and knows what happens in combat (and what consequences can happen), the "roger sarn't" mentality isn't always acceptable. They won't just accept a fucked up situation, they will challenge it and ask "why" and offer potential alternate COA's that aren't necessarily in line with what was originally put out. I think this has left the senior leadership both confused and dismayed, and the only explanation in their eyes is a "lack of standards and discipline".
EDIT: The above was not meant to degrade the service of those who came before us, but rather to sharpshoot the current senior leaderships mindset.
EDIT: The above was not meant to degrade the service of those who came before us, but rather to sharpshoot the current senior leaderships mindset.
Agree times a billion, though enlisted willing to ask questions have always been around. Those on here that served during the early and mid-90's can confirm. The system simply promotes those that are good in super structured environments (which war ain't) and are good at paperwork and have been waiting patiently for these wars to end so they could get back to "real soldiering". Until you fix personnel command, this shit will remain cyclic.
Reed
