Is there a military document that goes into significant detail on the chain of command and the appropriate of actions both upwards and downwards of that chain?
Like what happened to the Navy with Capt. Crozier?
Quote from: JohhnyD on June 22, 2020, 02:22:32 PMLike what happened to the Navy with Capt. Crozier?
The events surrounding that, the CDI, the post-disciplinary actions, yes, all of that is making for some significant CoC discussion points in my area.
AFI 1-1:
https://static.e-publishing.af.mil/production/1/af_cc/publication/afi1-1/afi1-1.pdf
"1.7.1. Chain of Command. The chain of command provides the command, control and
communication necessary to accomplish the mission. Each "link" in the chain is a level of
responsibility and authority extending from the President of the United States—as
Commander in Chief—through the Secretary of Defense, to Combatant Commanders, and
then through each commander at every level, including your command. Different levels
within the chain have different responsibilities and authority; however, all levels have some
things in common. Each level in the chain is responsible for all lower levels, and
accountable to all higher levels. The chain cannot work without loyalty to every level.
Loyalty up and down the chain makes a system efficient and effective. Everyone is a part of,
and subject to, the chain of command and must use it properly. The key principle is to
resolve problems and seek answers at the lowest possible level. If it becomes necessary for
you to continue up the chain, you should, if practicable, request assistance at each level
before going to the higher level and advise that you are doing so. (There are qualifications to
this guidance covered in subparagraphs 1.7.4.5 and 1.7.4.6 below)."
CAP Chain of Command
https://www.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/CAP_Chain_of_Command_091230_B9C1DA8EFB2A9.pdf
1-1 is what I was looking for
Quote from: Holding Pattern on June 22, 2020, 02:40:10 PMQuote from: JohhnyD on June 22, 2020, 02:22:32 PMLike what happened to the Navy with Capt. Crozier?
The events surrounding that, the CDI, the post-disciplinary actions, yes, all of that is making for some significant CoC discussion points in my area.
Based on publicly available information, this was
not a chain issue, it was that someone leaked the messages that were sent properly. No messages were sent above his immediate CC.
Quote from: Eclipse on June 22, 2020, 02:55:18 PMQuote from: Holding Pattern on June 22, 2020, 02:40:10 PMQuote from: JohhnyD on June 22, 2020, 02:22:32 PMLike what happened to the Navy with Capt. Crozier?
The events surrounding that, the CDI, the post-disciplinary actions, yes, all of that is making for some significant CoC discussion points in my area.
Based on publicly available information, this was not a chain issue, it was that someone leaked the messages that were sent properly. No messages were sent above his immediate CC.
Read this (and watch the 40 minute video):
https://www.defense.gov/Explore/News/Article/Article/2226839/navy-former-uss-theodore-roosevelt-commander-will-not-be-reinstated/source/GovDelivery/
And this:
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/6953087/Roosevelt-report.pdf
The memo confirms what I said in regards to his actions chain-wise,
the rest is opinion regarding whether his actions were appropriate,
non of which wold have likely been questioned had the situation not
been leaked.
This is more an OPSEC discussion then a chain discussion.
At the end of the day it's eagles arguing with stars about who can make a higher mark
on the wall, and in most cases the stars will always win.
It's got nothing to do with CAP, and would be a poor choice as any sort
of example or discussion if trying to apply it in a CAP chain context, and
thankfully wouldn't be allowed as such for cadet forums, though I can certainly
see people trying to shoe-horn it in.
Quote from: Eclipse on June 22, 2020, 03:49:54 PMThe memo confirms what I said in regards to his actions chain-wise,
the rest is opinion regarding whether his actions were appropriate,
non of which wold have likely been questioned had the situation not
been leaked.
This is more an OPSEC discussion then a chain discussion.
At the end of the day it's eagles arguing with stars about who can make a higher mark
on the wall, and in most cases the stars will always win.
It's got nothing to do with CAP, and would be a poor choice as any sort
of example or discussion if trying to apply it in a CAP chain context, and
thankfully wouldn't be allowed as such for cadet forums, though I can certainly
see people trying to shoe-horn it in.
Well one example from the video that got a lot of conversation in my area was how it was not appropriate for higher levels of command to discipline people multiple chains below them, but instead to let the lowest command element in the chain deliver whatever disciplinary or administrative action was needed. Our wing has a micromanagement by exception perspective which includes disciplining members direct from the wing commander to squadron members without looping in the command chain above that member, so that part caused quite a bit of commentary.
Another area was the discussion of fearless communication with the chain of command, something which also does not exist here. Most people stopped communicating upwards when they realized that they can't be micromanaged if the higher elements don't know what they are doing.
Another area was appropriate actions to take when one has exhausted each level of the chain of command, when it is appropriate to skip a level (or 2, or 3, or 4) as it becomes increasingly clear that concerns are not being met even when regulations are being violated.