|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
Go
|
New
|
Find
|
Notify
|
Tools
|
Reply
|
|
Member |
I am stationed at a small unit. Normally in my experience thus far you have a flight chief who is a MSgt, and a flight commander who is an Lt. So I get here, and because of the small unit we have Staff's as flight chiefs and no Officers on flight period. So I was a little surprised when I was informed I would be receiving an Lt. on my flight. I mean, there are only two Officers in the squadron minus the CC.
So here's what it is: The Lt. is a soon to be pilot in training. He is awaiting the start of his class a good number of months down the road. He says he is on what is called 'casual' status. Anyway, what they normally do with these guys/girls (here anyways) is place them with the Med Group or another squadron, helping push papers etc. until their class starts (learned all this from him). So he took it upon himself to come to the LE Desk and ask to speak with our chain, and try to get a more exciting job. I can't blame him for that. So the powers that be got him a firing date, SF supply issued him gear to include a beret, and the unit trainer gave him a powerpoint presentation via email on the Use of Force. And like magic, he is a cop with no formal training to speak of. Now I have been riding/driving around with him a week or so. He is intelligent, has a good head on his shoulders, and would have no problems in this profession. I guess my problem is...is that he is not a cop. He has never been trained to be a cop. He will never go to school to be a cop. But for about half a year, he will be treated as such. The Ops O made a good point in saying that we could take this as an opportunity to show the future leaders of the AF (pilots) what it is we do, and put ourselves in a positive light. I think that is a very positive and interesting outlook. I just don't see why we would basically make him a full blown flight commander and patrolman. I mean, could I go over to the fighter training squadron for six months and start flying a T-38? Could I do 6 months at legal and start practicing law, or be a paralegal? Maybe I could go to the MDG and be a Med Tech? Maybe they need someone over at Aerospace Physiology. All without ever setting foot in something as trivial as tech school of course. This Lt. is a good guy. I see no real troubles with him as of yet. I honestly don't expect any. But only time will tell. I just believe this further minimizes or makes light of what we do. It's one of those things that makes me wish we wore a field cap, because it makes me feel like my beret is worthless. Regardless of what I say, even though I am getting out in a couple years, I do try to find positives in my day to day work. I just feel like this is another kick in the teeth. Only in the military could we turn what should be a couple ride-alongs into a full blown deputizing. I'm thinking about contacting the State Troopers and telling them I am going to be unemployed for 6 months, and see if they'll throw me a cruiser and a shotgun. All joking aside, its cool to ride and speak with someone different every now and then, and to get a different glimpse of what else is happening in the AF. But I definitely feel like this is some sort of social experiment gone wrong. This rant was in no way of a reflection of this Lt. I am just wondering what some other thoughts are about the decision made by overhead to make this guy a cop. |
||
|
|
Basic Training |
Jake,
It would indeed be nice if our supervisors always knew more about the job than we, and had much more experience than the worker bees. This goes especially for the military. When I was in the AF, officers were not supposed to fraternize with the enlisted personnel. Things have changed. I can only testify about my civilian job, product engineer, which I have been in for 35 years. My company usually hires people off the street to become our bosses, and it leaves us cold. The only consolation I can offer is that they may not be the most knowledgeable about the job, but are probably better qualified as managers. That's what I try to fool myself into thinking. heheh |
|||
|
|
Member |
Trentn,
I see where you are coming from and agree to a certain point. I guess the really important thing about this is its law enforcement. How many civilian agencies do you think have a Sergeant or Lieutenant, or Captain who isn't even a cop? If nothing else, thats the one thing they all have in common. They are all cops, have all been to academy and/or P.O.S.T. certified etc. Thanks for the post, I do see where you are coming from. |
|||
|
Member |
Jake I feel for you, I think the big test will be if he has to make an informed decission on a procdure that the cops do, like maybe arresting a DUI suject that happen to be in the flying squadron he's going to. Will he back the troop up and do the DUI, or will he say no lets just warn him/her. As for the civilian side, there was a Sherrif that was elected in a Western Wisconsin county that had no training, thus no POST Cert.. It took him 1.5 years to compleate his degree and then go to the counties acadamy and then get POST Cert.. They have now changed the requirments for running in the election. You Are Not FORGOTTEN! |
|||
|
|
Member |
Greg,
Very good example. Obviously it's slightly different when you are talking about an elected official versus a hired or appointed position. But again, good example of the system going wrong. I don't see him having any more difficulty with one of his own, than we would have in deciding about one of ours. Just depends about who's on scene to make the call. Even if this Lt. made every "right" call at every scene for 6 months, its a bad idea, and a horrible example to others. It send out a Geico message about cops..."So easy a caveman can do it". Now regardless what the truth is in that or not, its not the message to give to the public. You don't want anyone asking if the cop that shows up is a real cop or just a substitute. |
|||
|
|
Basic Training |
Having a son just out of SF tech school I probably shouldn't comment. BUT...Certainly the Lt. is not being left alone to handle a SF job? Are they thinking that with his prior experience that he/she can be OJT'd into SF in lieu of tech school training? Perhaps some of what you do can be learned from observing and or reading a manual. Not all is learned the rest is earned. We see this in the civilian world everyday. It's called; bosses kid, nephew, neice, who ya know, or parents in high places with money. Be thankful you've got a decent guy and show him what SF do. Perhaps he is truly interested in the work you do and finds it exciting. In my world these would be the Vet school students that annoy me that I tell, "go get that German Shepherd out so I can draw some blood".
 |
|||
|
Member |
Total outside oberserver here. We have lots of casuals in our squadron so I will comment. I thought you had to have an SF AFSC to wear the beret. Wouldn't that be like a casual in a PJ squadron donning a maroon beret because he has read a few power points and has done PT with them. I can assure you that doesn't happen. Everything other than the beret makes him sound like a manning assist cop, which I have done several times during events. They never gave me a beret, nor would I have asked for it. Everyone has a specialty. This kids will be flying a plane. I say to him...wait your turn junior. Don't try to be something you aren't.
|
|||
|
|
Member |
Canine,
Just to be clear he is not there to serve as a boost to manning. We have ample manning for the flight. He is not performing auggie duty. But I have heard of plenty of squadrons giving their auggies berets before. Thankfully I have never been part of one of those units, but this one might as well be one I guess. The only thing he doesn't have is a badge...but we are in tactical vest, so you cant see it anyway. Not to mention that SF Lt's who have not even been to SF Academy get their badges and berets even if they are just awaiting school (I have worked with a few). We on the other hand are awarded same upon successful completion of SF Academy. Double standard as expected. Oldfart, I totally get the hookup based on who your father is, or your brothers brother etc. I just don't get it in this particular case involving police. Its one thing to already be a cop and get promoted or positioned above someone else. The difference is, you kind of legally need to be a cop first. Just out of curiosity, what would you think if you were pulled over tonight...and when the would be cop approached your window, turns out he wasn't even a cop. I guarantee whatever he found in your car would be an unlawful search. Whatever he cited you for would be thrown out by any decent lawyer. Again, I have no problems with the guy. He seems sincerely excited and interested, and capable. Its the principle of the matter, not to mention the legal liability. What happens if he got into a bad shoot? We all know the chances are slim to none. But that doesn't excuse the bad decision. Lastly, he has no prior experience. |
|||
|
|
Experienced Member |
Well I wrote a comment--so disregard what doesn't apply. I understand your perspective and I’m sympathetic to your feeling. But security forces have always had on the books the requirement to bring on augmenters from other AFSCs to perform base defense duties. This info might help or it might not. Currently as I understand it, there is no separation in the AFSC that those members doing law enforcement don’t wear beret but those member doing security duties do. Thus I suppose it comes down to (1) if this person has been designated being an augmenter performing security duties, (2) has completed SF ready augmentation training through an approved unit training program, and (3) if augmenters only perform security duties or can the perform either security or law enforcement, or both?
First regarding SF authority to wear the beret—AFI 36-2903 DRESS AND PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF AIR FORCE PERSONNEL, Table 3-4 Distinctive Uniforms-Security Forces, Item Beret, note 7. Worn only by SF personnel assigned to officer Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) 31PX and enlisted AFSCs 3P0XX/A/B (or augmentees performing security forces duties when authorized by the Chief of Security Forces). EXCEPTION: Do not wear the shield with the Mess Dress Uniform. SF personnel working duty-out-of-control (i.e., SF member not assigned to a 31PX or 3P0XX billet) will not wear a SF beret or shield). Second regarding augmenter training it would appear augmenters can do both security and LE duties once trained by the unit—AFI 36-2225, SECURITY FORCES TRAINING AND STANDARDIZATION EVALUATION PROGRAMS, para 1.9. SF READY Program Training. AFI 10-217, Resource Augmentation Duty (READY) Program, identifies augmentation requirements, training, and administration. MAJCOMs may establish additional requirements. ANG base commander will determine the need for a READY program. Develop the unit training program for the augmentation program based on local requirements and the requirements stated in the following subsections: 1.9.1. Training Section Support. The training section develops training schedules with units/agencies that provide augmenters. The unit READY coordinator maintains augmenter training records. Augmenter training need not be as complex as security forces AFS training. If paragraph 1.9. applies, ANG units will use the following minimum training requirements. Minimum augmenter training should include initial training in the following areas: 1.9.1.1. Weapons. 1.9.1.2. Use of force. 1.9.1.3. Rules of engagement. 1.9.1.4. Communication procedures. 1.9.1.5. Legal considerations and jurisdiction. 1.9.1.6. Security forces concepts and operations. 1.9.1.7. Tactics. 1.9.1.8. Searching and handcuffing. 1.9.1.9. Bloodborne pathogens. |
|||
|
|
Basic Training |
EXACTLY! He should never be allowed to work without someone present with the proper credentials. So he's worthless other than a ride along. Tough situation. Seems to me like your going to have to make some lemonade. Like in the civilian world your name, money, power, degree, etc. can get you there. It can't however keep you there! |
|||
|
Basic Training |
Welcome to the wonderful world of SF.
This is the Air Force, and they will put officers - and sometimes enlisted - in the slots that the powers that be consider most advantageous. You're lucky in that this guy seems to have a good attitude. I had to deal with a banked pilot/shift commander who would spend the entire shift *****ing about having to wait until the day he got into a cockpit. Absolutely did NOT want to get involved in ANY non-pilot BS. I complained to the Ops Officer who shrugged his shoulders and said "what do you want me to do? On paper, he works for the Ops Group." Once as an Airman, our shift commander was a dentist. I'm not sure how you get fired/quit from dentistry, but until he got a slot of the officer's course, he was our problem. Funny thing is they never told us he hadn't been to the academy yet, so it took awhile for us to figure out he wasn't a moron, just not trained. I've also had two commanders who were grounded pilots. In the interest of fairness, the first one turned out decent. We went from "I hope we don't get a jerk like Major Bonfiglio" to "Oh crap, it IS Major Bonfiglio." to "Actually, Bonfiglio ain't that bad." The other one WAS an idiot. And he was in charge of a nuke unit. The 50 foot cordon he established during a MARE exercise is still a classic: {Stan Eval walks into CSC, looks at the plotting board and goes "Why haven't you set up the cordon yet?" I point to the board an reply "I have." "No, not a circle around the $%#@! chopper, the cordon you idiot!" "That IS the @#$! cordon." "the Fire Marshall did that!!??" "Nope, Major Pf** overruled the Fire Chief." "Oh ****, I better get to the Group Commander before the Wing King does."} They still didn't fire the idiot. |
|||
|
|
Member |
Johca,
Good information as always. If they were declaring him as an augmentee I might understand. But he is not doing that at least not in the traditional sense. We are not low manned. We are not meeting or trying to exceed any type of security or LE standard as far as manning goes. The guy just basically didn't want to do the jobs that the FTS gives out to those on casual status. He was proactive, good for him. As for the training, we'll just say other than the CATM portion which he did have, I have had to OJT everything. Oldfart, Thus far he is not riding alone yet. He still rides with me. It still boils down to what happens if a large scale situation, or something gets out of control and I can't spend my time watching him. The last person I need to be worried about on scene is my partner. Thats part of why I joined K9. I know how my partner (MWD) is going to react. Again, I agree that there are similarities in the civy world, but generally speaking not like this particular one. You still have to be trained and certified to be a police officer, unlike here. I was a reserve police officer for a couple years. Basically like an augmentee. I still had to attend 13 weeks of training and P.O.S.T. certification. Frank, You aren't kidding. I am very lucky that he is smart, and has a good attitude. The only downside is he is way to motivated. Every time we pass any type of violation from not using a turn signal to j-walking, he wants to pounce on it like gangbusters. And I have to try and explain if we did that, we would never get anything done. And then we discuss officer discretion etc. Nice story by the way. 50 feet...what was he setting up on, a firecracker? Ha ha. |
|||
|
|
Member |
I don't think you're ranting at all! and your very elloquent discussion warrants praise!!!! You're still a good guy! I think the Air Force lost it's scrupples concerning how they develop and employ officers. This career field is not to be taken so lightly! On the other hand, your Operations Officer too is an officer and may have attempted to smooth an already "slippery slope", when he explained the situation! This "LT" could have easily been placed n harm's way on any number of situations where he would have been considered the "decision-maker" in certain dicey situations. Like a domestic disturbance with violence involved. Or a barracaded suspect, robbery, or a multitude of problems you as an enlisted member may have had to handle alone or with the help of your flight chief. Yes, someone should have thought this one out! But on your own, you found a way to make peace with this in your own mind. Now did anyone pay attention to that? I sure did! I'd take two of "you" compared to a whole boatload of LTs! That's my story and I'm stickin to it! |
|||
|
|
Experienced Member |
Agree, but this is also very very true on how the AF develops NCOs too. Unfortunately IMO it is so by one-to-many members of the careerfield also. However it’s up to the members of the careerfield to police standards and to train, educate, develop their own. This unfortunately results from failure in both leadership and in the person having command. Although commissioned is always superior to NCO, this does not bring with is authority to self appoint mission ready certifications and qualifications. It also doesn’t bring it authority to assume being the superior in charge in all situations and circumstances, certainly-so when doing the mission requires mission qualifications, certifications, and proficiencies in doing the tasks and work of the tasked mission. It is a difficult discussion many lacking the mission experience will have difficulty understanding and is not such a trivial discussion of my feeling are hurt because he gets to wear the beret. It is also not a situation or circumstance that presents itself very often either. However, if the ride-along tourist commissioned is not there to perform augmentation duty and is not fully trained and qualified to perform augmentation duty and more importantly is not integrated into the units operations to perform augmentations duty the probability is there. What happens if he got into a bad shoot is not specifically the problem, consider the situation of you get shot and suddenly he or she is there by themeelves and backup arrives and he takes charge of the entire incident response as on-scene command because he has the rank but not all the required training and experience to make the better decisions. Such a situation you are encountering would not happen in my former careerfield exactly for this reason and others I have not mentioned and if needed addressing it would not be about beret wear. |
|||
|
|
Member |
Beret wear was not the spirit and intent of this thread. I just brought it up because its a smaller issue in the bigger picture, and it obviously gets on my nerves. So if thats the way it came across then it was not my intent. As mentioned from the beginning, it was a rant, but hopefully with a purpose of questioning a decision. We've covered legal liabilities, insufficient training, use of force issues, on scene commander issues etc. |
|||
|
|
Experienced Member |
I brought it up because if you decided to provide leadership from below to your superiors concerning certifications, qualification, and proficiencies of why what is being allowed is wrong, then wear of beret should not be mentioned. Providing leadership from below is dangerous to career progression—when pursuing such actions knowing exactly what result is desired and willingness to accept risks-- and the consequences if the risks come to be--need to be thoroughly understood. FYI-I never got a letter of counseling, latter of reprimand (no UIF, no CR) or any other punitive actions during my career, but I have provided leadership from below on several occasions. added:
This message has been edited. Last edited by: johca, |
|||
|
KEEP WHAT IS USEFULL,THROW OUT WHAT IS USELESS |
K9 Jake, I feel for you pal and agree with you. Have to chuckle though. Seems things haven't changed much since I was in. This Lt. sounds like a nice enough guy, regardless of him being Gung-Ho at the slightest little infraction. But you seem to be handling it PERFECTLY, so just keep doing what it is you're doing and you'll be alright.
Heck, when I was in, I remember this airman, who just happened to be in the Honor Guard, was caught stealing at the BX. What did they to with him you ask........Why....... They made him an S.P. of course. Seems like all the screw-ups ended up in the Security Police field. And WHY, is beyond me. And you are RIGHT AGAIN K9Jake, when you mention the Beret......OUR Beret. I understand COMPLETELY what johca is saying about it, I just don't happen to agree with him. (Get over it johca. You're TOO "Regulation" for me) I.......NO!........Cross that out. ALL of us SPs were always angry about how some in charge considered OUR BERET to be nothing more than.........A HAT, when someone from the outside came in and simply doned one. Pizzed me off to no end. We had a First Shirt come in from CBPO and SHAZAM! He got a beret AND a badge. What a joke! But you know what K9Jake, there's nothing you, or anyone else is gonna do about it. It's "Typical" Air Force. They were screwed up when I was in and they'll be screwed up long after you get out. What a shame. And shame on them. You just always remember K9Jake, that you EARNED yours the RIGHT way. Be proud of that. Because while the beret may not be Everything, it is a symbol of who you are and what you had to do to EARN IT. And we that wore it before you, know EXACTLY how you feel. EXACTLY. Keep Up The Great Work. SALUTE.  |
|||
|
|
Member |
Before we go down that road, know that I am nothing but respectful to this Lt. I have given him no indication whatsoever of my discontent with the situation. I have trained him like I would any of my troops, except that I am training him to be a Flight Commander. The only difference is he has never heard any of the info before, so it all starts at ground zero, instead of refresher training. I would never be so ignorant as to tell him why I don't think he should be riding with us. I train him to the upmost of my ability, because after all, he has my back. I am also not fighting the chain on this one. I along with everyone else, was told to shut up and go along with the program long before this event was even finalized. The chain expected flak from whatever flight got him as soon as they announced the remote possibility. There is no sense in fighting a guaranteed loss such as this one. The only guys/girls that have a problem with it, are the ones that actually work flight. No one in the back office has even blinked. As for the SELARM article: We had SELARM in Korea. Its a good program. It puts owner/user responsibilites on certain groups/units especially during simulated wartime or exercises. It should be noted that most if not all SELARM are security type forces, not law enforcement. They are basically taught to protect their own ****. And while it is an intresting system, such is not the case here. We are not short manpower, and are in no need of a SELARM force or augmentees at present. The beret has no real signifigance to me other than I earned it and he didn't (the beret has a different meaning to each of us). Its what it represents to the public, and I don't mean the heritage. When in public with a weapon, that beret symbolizes there is a law enforcement official present. Again, I think if this were a civilian cop, there would be a real public problem with it. The department wouldn't let the guy out the front door for fear of a million dollar lawsuit on a daily basis. But being the AF, the general consensus seems to be "Man that sucks, deal with it". I think it simply demonstrates what a low opinion some must have of our career field. But at the same time, if we can't show respect for ourselves, how can we expect for anyone else to show any. |
|||
|
|
Experienced Member |
LOL--you think. I only present one side of me on these forums. There is a time and place to bend the regulations, ignore regulations and even disregard an order, but if you don't understand or lack awareness of the policies and how and why decisions are being made, bucking the system will result in much unhappy career. I have spent much closed door in a superior officers’ office to include wing commander and higher commander office, some of those discussion lasted several hours and were not atta boy good job conversations. |
|||
|
