Leadership at the 'Deid

[Jaded]

Unfortunately, for much the same reason we can't wear civilian PT gear out here, the AUAB policy will override this one because it is "more restrictive".

If I ever take over, the AUAB policy will be re-written into a single line: See the AFI.

It's not more restrictive, it contradicts the AFI.

[BQZip01]

Two SMALL victories...

From the USAFCENT 36-2903 dated 19 OCT 09

2.3.10.2. Wear of the reflective belt is not required in the AFPTU. Because of the reflective nature of the AFPTU, COMUSAFCENT considers the AFPTU uniform as the equivalent of a “reflective belt” in joint and combined domains. If Airmen chose to wear the AFPTU running pants without reflective AF symbols, they must wear a reflective belt during the hours of darkness.

2.3.17. Sunglasses will never be placed on top of the head or hung from pockets or other parts of the uniform. Commanders may authorize the wear of a restraining strap on sunglasses and allow the glasses to hang on the front of the body, around the neck, in duty uniform and AFPTU.

I don't know about you, I think I will run around tonight on AUAB with my PT gear and tell the first person who asks for a reflective belt to get bent.

Here's the new reg for an FYI to all you out there in AFCENT-land

Common sense at the 'deid?!?

I don't know about you guys, but I'm looking for four horsemen...

[loadsmith]

So I am at the BRA last night to meet up with some friends who are passing through from A-Stan back to the states. One young enlisted fellow packed his sneakers in his checked baggage and was planning on wearing Crocs, they were legal last year when he served his 4 months here. He goes to the CC BX and is approached by the Services CC who asks him what the deal is with his choice of footwear. He tells the CC his story and that he will buy sneakers at the BX if that helps, CC says they don’t sell them there. Now young enlisted fellow is unaware that you can wear combat boots in PT gear which wasn’t suggested at the time by the CC but solved the situation later in the night. Well fast forward a little bit and we are drinking at the BRA. Turns out the Services CC saw him buying drinks and called him out again, after he walks out of the DEL some of our other guys are inside to hear CC tell the civilians serving drinks to call the cops if he comes back in because he has already been told twice about his Crocs. We eventually told him just to go throw on his boots which kept him from dealing with any other heartache or going to the firing squad. I love this place

[Pitt4401]

So I am at the BRA last night to meet up with some friends who are passing through from A-Stan back to the states. One young enlisted fellow packed his sneakers in his checked baggage and was planning on wearing Crocs, they were legal last year when he served his 4 months here. He goes to the CC BX and is approached by the Services CC who asks him what the deal is with his choice of footwear. He tells the CC his story and that he will buy sneakers at the BX if that helps, CC says they don’t sell them there. Now young enlisted fellow is unaware that you can wear combat boots in PT gear which wasn’t suggested at the time by the CC but solved the situation later in the night. Well fast forward a little bit and we are drinking at the BRA. Turns out the Services CC saw him buying drinks and called him out again, after he walks out of the DEL some of our other guys are inside to hear CC tell the civilians serving drinks to call the cops if he comes back in because he has already been told twice about his Crocs. We eventually told him just to go throw on his boots which kept him from dealing with any other heartache or going to the firing squad. I love this place

I do believe this is the same "C U Next Tuesday" I saw at the BPC Chow Hall who was inspecting people for the ID card and visi-belt at Dinner time.

I wonder if they have a course module at ACSC called "Field-Grade Hall Monitor"

[Vertigo]

CC tell the civilians serving drinks to call the cops if he comes back in because he has already been told twice about his Crocs.

Yes, because that's how you handle uniform violations... call the cops.

[MKopack]

Yes, because that's how you handle uniform violations... call the cops.

"Airman, I'm going to place you under arrest under the charges of 'poor choice of footwear'."

[JS]

I do believe this is the same "C U Next Tuesday" I saw at the BPC Chow Hall who was inspecting people for the ID card and visi-belt at Dinner time.

I wonder if they have a course module at ACSC called "Field-Grade Hall Monitor"

I think the services CC is a dude (major) and the mission support group CC is also a dude. The MSG CC was a chick about a year ago.

[HU&W]

Hello 911? I'd like to report a croc incident. Could you send the fashion police over immediately? Thanks...

We're going to have to deploy more security forces to keep up with the demand.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R8TtyZxwYxA

[Disco_Nav963]

Going out sans belt to "press to test" the new AFCENTI. Wish me luck.

On a side note, I get frustrated to no end with people that maintain "you can be more restrictive but not less restrictive than the parent pub" means you can contradict it as long as it creates more ass pain and not less. (Ask a JAG to buy that logic.) You can speak where the parent pub is silent — you can't talk over it — or where it overtly gives you leeway. For instance, para. 3.3.10.4 says Commanders will determine "Additional requirements to incorporate joint and coalition policies" but this doesn't mean the installation pub can contradict 2.3.10.2 which says "the AFPTU uniform [is] the equivalent of a 'reflective belt' in joint and combined domains." (Emphasis mine.)

[Disco_Nav963]

Well, on one hand I just got kicked out of the Indy DFAC for lack of disco belt. On the other hand I'm sitting at the Coffee Beanery where my Sq First Shirt is sitting with no belt in sight.

Question: Do I report the chow hall incident to the MSgt's commander (a Major) knowing I'm a 1Lt and not only will I not carry the day, it will probably wind up getting passed in a distorted version to the OG/CC who has high vis on my job? I'm inclined to go with "No" --> I think the senior Captains and Majors need to fight those battles. I have no problem putting overzealous NCOs in their place -- if for no other reason than CGOs and Lt's in particular need to sack up and do it -- but why make this the issue I'm known for around town?

Going out sans belt to "press to test" the new AFCENTI. Wish me luck.

On a side note, I get frustrated to no end with people that maintain "you can be more restrictive but not less restrictive than the parent pub" means you can contradict it as long as it creates more ass pain and not less. (Ask a JAG to buy that logic.) You can speak where the parent pub is silent — you can't talk over it — or where it overtly gives you leeway. For instance, para. 3.3.10.4 says Commanders will determine "Additional requirements to incorporate joint and coalition policies" but this doesn't mean the installation pub can contradict 2.3.10.2 which says "the AFPTU uniform [is] the equivalent of a 'reflective belt' in joint and combined domains." (Emphasis mine.)

[slacker]

So lack of a disco belt means you can not eat safely? Why would they refuse service and under what authority? Couldn't you say, "Thanks, I must have forgotten it. I'll grab right after I finish eating."

[pawnman]

Well, on one hand I just got kicked out of the Indy DFAC for lack of disco belt. On the other hand I'm sitting at the Coffee Beanery where my Sq First Shirt is sitting with no belt in sight.

Question: Do I report the chow hall incident to the MSgt's commander (a Major) knowing I'm a 1Lt and not only will I not carry the day, it will probably wind up getting passed in a distorted version to the OG/CC who has high vis on my job? I'm inclined to go with "No" --> I think the senior Captains and Majors need to fight those battles. I have no problem putting overzealous NCOs in their place -- if for no other reason than CGOs and Lt's in particular need to sack up and do it -- but why make this the issue I'm known for around town?

Frankly, I think our OG/CC would probably have your back on that one.

[Disco_Nav963]

The words MSgt Shoe E. Clerk quoted to me by rote were "My commander's policy does not allow me to serve you if you don't have your reflective belt during hours of darkness." Clearly this policy exists to enforce the now-overturned one about having to wear the damn belt, but theoretically I can't think of a reason the EFSS/CC couldn't say, "You have to be in DFDUs/ABUs to get served at the chow hall, no PTs period." In other words, the one policy going away doesn't mean the chow hall can't continue to discriminate by belt. Why they'd want to, you've got me (seemed like a well lit place).

The MSgt reminded me of the CAP cadet someone mentioned who was directing parking at an air show and kept saying "My commander says I can't let you park there!" over and over until he was red in the face.

After he refused to serve me their version of T-Bone steak I said, "Fine, I'll serve myself," and grabbed a styrofoam plate which I started piling salad and baked potatoes onto. He then comes over to me and says, "Sir, I'm going to have to ask you to leave." I say something like, "Well, you're going to have to kick me out then" and keep piling stuff on the plate. (I was a little pissed.) He physically grabbed the tray, at which point I asked him who his supervisor was and left. Since I smarted off to MSgt Clerk and questioned his authority to enforce said policy, I don't know how innocent I come off. If I had done the MLK/Gandhi thing and went VFR direct to "Who's your supervisor" and leaving without making him grab my plate first I'd feel better about raising the issue /w Major Clerk.

How about I get the Comptroller SQ involved by claiming a missed meal on my split disbursement at the end of the month? Since they won't process the Family Sep Allowance I'm entitled to, I don't see that going anywhere either. ("You'll have to send that to your home station." "They're just going to re-send it to Ellsworth, why can't you do that for me?" "I'm sorry, you'll have to send it to your home station and they'll send it to Ellsworth.") Finance Guy?

[BQZip01]

So I am at the BRA last night to meet up with some friends who are passing through from A-Stan back to the states. One young enlisted fellow packed his sneakers in his checked baggage and was planning on wearing Crocs, they were legal last year when he served his 4 months here. He goes to the CC BX and is approached by the Services CC who asks him what the deal is with his choice of footwear. He tells the CC his story and that he will buy sneakers at the BX if that helps, CC says they don’t sell them there. Now young enlisted fellow is unaware that you can wear combat boots in PT gear which wasn’t suggested at the time by the CC but solved the situation later in the night. Well fast forward a little bit and we are drinking at the BRA. Turns out the Services CC saw him buying drinks and called him out again, after he walks out of the DEL some of our other guys are inside to hear CC tell the civilians serving drinks to call the cops if he comes back in because he has already been told twice about his Crocs. We eventually told him just to go throw on his boots which kept him from dealing with any other heartache or going to the firing squad. I love this place

"Call the cops"? WTF? If this is a discipline issue, you call his supervisor (or anyone up his chain of command), not the cops. Wearing Crocs isn't a crime...

...yet...?...

I wonder if they have a course module at ACSC called "Field-Grade Hall Monitor"

ROTFLMAO

Going out sans belt to "press to test" the new AFCENTI. Wish me luck.

On a side note, I get frustrated to no end with people that maintain "you can be more restrictive but not less restrictive than the parent pub" means you can contradict it as long as it creates more ass pain and not less. (Ask a JAG to buy that logic.) You can speak where the parent pub is silent — you can't talk over it — or where it overtly gives you leeway. For instance, para. 3.3.10.4 says Commanders will determine "Additional requirements to incorporate joint and coalition policies" but this doesn't mean the installation pub can contradict 2.3.10.2 which says "the AFPTU uniform [is] the equivalent of a 'reflective belt' in joint and combined domains." (Emphasis mine.)

We want to hear results!

...might want to carry a copy of the AFCENTI with you...

[Disco_Nav963]

...might want to carry a copy of the AFCENTI with you...

Present and accounted for; I'll be adding a copy of the page in AFI 33-360 that references not contradicting the parent pub as soon as I get to a printer tomorrow.

[loadsmith]

"My commander's policy does not allow me to serve you if you don't have your reflective belt during hours of darkness."

I will bet my 3 drinks that his CC is the same guy from my BRA story. This guy is making friends quick.

[slacker]

In my best Paul Harvey voice- "And now....page seventy."

[discus]

Page #70

Disco,

I think that as a 1LT the first thing you should have done was threaten said MSgt with charges of assaulting an officer, but that should have been done when he grabbed the plate out of your hands, and not after the fact. In fact, I think I would have clearly identified myself and told him to stand at attention while I explained this. THEN I would have asked to speak to his supervisor. I am guessing from your language you are in a high profile job there, and more than likely work for more than one set of silver eagles. I know it might be hard to rock the boat, but this is clearly in-excusable on the part of the MSgt.

In the words of Brad Pitt "Naw, more like an ass chewing, I've had ass chewings before". This is the most it would garner you, and I doubt even that. Put that Shoe in his place. Good on you for going as far as you did including starting to serve yourself. If more people did stuff like this and more, the buffonary would end very quickly.

[Napoleon_Tanerite]

I've been going all night without a belt, though I haven't pressed to test the chow hall yet. I heard the shoes we out in force in response to some BOLO email regarding belts. Heard of several guys sent away tonight for lack of beltage.

Beyond just testing the waters I also took it another step-- I shot an email off to wing safety quoting page, paragraph and text of both the AFCENT AFI and 33-360. We'll see how that goes.

The sad thing is just how willing most people are to accept queep like this with no griping. I tried to spread the word to several people on my own crew and they actually argued in FAVOR of belt wearing! Not so much that they wanted to wear the belts, as they are universally hated, but how I was wrong about the AFIs being on our side with this issue. This is how queep becomes doctrine-- guys too lazy, cowardly or jaded to fight it.

[JeepGuyC17]

AFI 33-360:

2.3. Conflicting Publications. When guidance in a publication issued by a field unit conflicts with the guidance issued by a higher-level unit, the higher-level publication takes precedence.

2.9. Supplements. In order to minimize the release of conflicting guidance and duplicate information, Air Force activities add organization-specific guidance to higher headquarters publications by issuing supplements to implement higher headquarters publications, rather than issuing separate publications (see Table 2.1.). Supplementary guidance cannot be less restrictive than the basic publication, but it can be more restrictive. Supplementary guidance must not contradict the basic publication.

Edited October 21, 2009 by JeepGuyC17

[loadsmith]

here is the email that I am sure was sent in response the "Croc incident" and now has the Services CC declaring war on all things not important:

ALCON,

Been getting a lot of the "I didn't know the rules changed" from our

transients and new AEF personnel when correcting improper wear of the

uniform etc. There really are no excuses. They're briefed at PERSCO upon

arrival and at Right Start. We all need to play an active role in enforcing

the Wg/CC's uniform policies. With that, personnel must be in proper attire

to receive services in any EFSS facility. Would greatly appreciate any

efforts to educate your folks and to help us enforce those standards when

you see non-compliance around the base...

[Ziplip]

Would greatly appreciate any

efforts to educate your folks and to help us enforce those standards when

you see non-compliance around the base...

Shoe clerks will be out hunting now, Jesus when will it end

[Disco_Nav963]

So what's my COA? Do I go to Maj Clerk, outline what happened, and say, "Please straighten your MSgt out" like I'm telling the Major what to do? Or do I outline what happened and pose a question like, "Please clarify—was your MSgt simply mistaken or is it EFSS policy that people have to wear a safety item inside a well-lit building that isn't required outside after dark in order to get served?" Or do I pull the ultimate reverse-REMFing and report the incident to my chain?

[pawnman]

So what's my COA? Do I go to Maj Clerk, outline what happened, and say, "Please straighten your MSgt out" like I'm telling the Major what to do? Or do I outline what happened and pose a question like, "Please clarify—was your MSgt simply mistaken or is it EFSS policy that people have to wear a safety item inside a well-lit building that isn't required outside after dark in order to get served?" Or do I pull the ultimate reverse-REMFing and report the incident to my chain?

I'd take a polite, but firm tone with this DD's commander..."Sir, MSgt xxx was out of line for reasons X, Y, and Z. I'm sure that you will make every effort to take appropriate action". However, I'd definitely follow (or even precede) that email with a head's up to your chain of command.

[JS]

.....After he refused to serve me their version of T-Bone steak I said, "Fine, I'll serve myself," and grabbed a styrofoam plate which I started piling salad and baked potatoes onto. He then comes over to me and says, "Sir, I'm going to have to ask you to leave." I say something like, "Well, you're going to have to kick me out then" and keep piling stuff on the plate. (I was a little pissed.) He physically grabbed the tray, at which point I asked him who his supervisor was and left. Since I smarted off to MSgt Clerk and questioned his authority to enforce said policy, I don't know how innocent I come off. If I had done the MLK/Gandhi thing and went VFR direct to "Who's your supervisor" and leaving without making him grab my plate first I'd feel better about raising the issue /w Major Clerk....

I still can't believe he grabbed the tray you were holding. What did you do after that? I would consider the tray an extension of my person and assume the universal right to self-defense applied. Honestly, I don't know how I would have responded to that situation, but I think there is a good chance that I would have at least told the clerk that if he puts his hands on any part of my person again, I will defend myself and he will find himself on his back. I would be curious to see how that one would be sorted out. Clerk and pilot are arrested for chow hall fight - pilot claims clerk initiated conflict by enforcing indoor reflective belt policy that does not exist.