CAPSTONE - Air Force launches a big change in basic training

[Eclipse]

http://www.stripes.com/news/air-force/air-force-launches-a-big-change-in-basic-training-1.328448



"SAN ANTONIO, Texas (Tribune News Service) — Years after the Air Force increased the length of basic training by two weeks during the Iraq War, commanders have scaled back the core program and added a week of character development to raise awareness about sexual misconduct.

Recruits just starting out at Joint Base San Antonio-Lackland will be the first in memory to not finish training with a formal graduation ceremony on the parade grounds after 7.5 weeks.

Instead, they'll receive five extra days of instruction designed to help them cope with the stresses of life as fledgling airmen.

"Capstone," as it's called, will emphasize core values and skills the Air Force believes airmen will need in their personal lives and careers. It is part of a makeover in basic training prompted by a scandal at Lackland that sparked an Air Force investigation and congressional hearings."

[TheTravelingAirman]

It has been stated that this is just a CYA by AF brass so that they can say to Congress "we tried".

It will cause 0 changes in how people act. No series of briefs they've come up with so far have. It just becomes more time where we zone out and either don't hear, or forget, everything said. 5 wasted days.

Personal opinion, of course.

[LSThiker]

It has been stated that this is just a CYA by AF brass so that they can say to Congress "we tried".

It will cause 0 changes in how people act. No series of briefs they've come up with so far have. It just becomes more time where we zone out and either don't hear, or forget, everything said. 5 wasted days.

Personal opinion, of course.

Is not that true of most mandatory training?  Especially when they are taught by the mandatory slides?

[Shuman 14]

Want to fix the problem? Hammer those who get caught in the misconduct.

Sooner or later the word gets around... stop doing that sh@t, or else.

[TheTravelingAirman]

Is not that true of most mandatory training?  Especially when they are taught by the mandatory slides?

Quite the fact. But 5 days? I usually get a 30 minute "DON'T KILL YOURSELF" brief that I can safely ignore. 5 days of "DON'T RAPE PEOPLE", stuff most normal people already DON'T do? I feel it to be overkill. 1 hour, ok. 4 hours, maximum. But 5 straight 8-hour days... What are they going to do and say I haven't covered in 30 minutes?

I've been part of skits (Korea, people needed to see "This is a scenario you should probably intervene in" since common sense doesn't exist), briefs, bystander intervention training, and the like.

The only 5 day training I've done concerning sexual assault was when I volunteered as a responder. It wasn't for everyone.

EDIT: I agree with Shuman14. You wanna make it stop, briefings won't. The UCMJ will. And it's a bit meaner than civil law.

[Eclipse]

The training includes more then just the harassment content:

"The trainees will be taught by a select group of military instructors and civilian contractors. They will focus on subjects ranging from warrior ethos, the Air Force's honor code, and respect and concern for others. Recruits will learn how to manage finances, balance their personal and professional lives and how to protect themselves against sexual harassment and rape."

Finance management is something sorely lacking in young people today, though most of the other subjects, one woudl think, are instilled by and during the
BMT.

[TheTravelingAirman]

The training includes more then just the harassment content:

"The trainees will be taught by a select group of military instructors and civilian contractors. They will focus on subjects ranging from warrior ethos, the Air Force's honor code, and respect and concern for others. Recruits will learn how to manage finances, balance their personal and professional lives and how to protect themselves against sexual harassment and rape."

Finance management is something sorely lacking in young people today, though most of the other subjects, one woudl think, are instilled by and during the
BMT.

Makes me wish I had read it a bit. Most of that was covered in the old 6 week course. Not the financial management, that was my folks. Adding it is very smart. Not everyone has had great lessons from their folks, something I see almost daily now. "I want to buy a Charger! My old shirt, now the salesman, wouldn't let me. So I have a mom car now." So much facepalm.

[Private Investigator]

Want to fix the problem? Hammer those who get caught in the misconduct.

Sooner or later the word gets around... stop doing that sh@t, or else.

Best answer!

So called NCOs (officers too) have looked the other way long enough. It is about "moral courage" and it is running thin today. JMHO 

[abdsp51]

Trying sitting through the SARC/SAPR briefings annually and then bystander training.  I addressed it at a wing day that the DoD was only taking the topic serious because an officer got into trouble about it.  I said then that the only way for the point to be driven home is to prosecute it fully, remove commanders from the criminal process for it and quit blaming the victim.  When those items are done then the message will be driven home and the issue will be taken seriously. 

[kwe1009]

Trying sitting through the SARC/SAPR briefings annually and then bystander training.  I addressed it at a wing day that the DoD was only taking the topic serious because an officer got into trouble about it.  I said then that the only way for the point to be driven home is to prosecute it fully, remove commanders from the criminal process for it and quit blaming the victim.  When those items are done then the message will be driven home and the issue will be taken seriously.

You are absolutely correct but this will never happen.  It is a very rare thing to see an officer get more punishment than having to retire and maybe lose one rank they they generally get back a few years later.

Change doesn't come through briefings that nobody listens to.  Change comes from leadership and action.

[Private Investigator]

Trying sitting through the SARC/SAPR briefings annually and then bystander training.  I addressed it at a wing day that the DoD was only taking the topic serious because an officer got into trouble about it.  I said then that the only way for the point to be driven home is to prosecute it fully, remove commanders from the criminal process for it and quit blaming the victim.  When those items are done then the message will be driven home and the issue will be taken seriously.

+1 spot on. 

[DoubleSecret]

You are absolutely correct but this will never happen.  It is a very rare thing to see an officer get more punishment than having to retire and maybe lose one rank they they generally get back a few years later.

Change doesn't come through briefings that nobody listens to.  Change comes from leadership and action.

I think you'll find that when an officer "loses rank" in retirement (more precisely, their highest grade isn't deemed to be the highest grade in which they served satisfactorily and they retire in their lower, satisfactorily-held grade - see 10 § U.S.C. 1370), they don't get it back without extraordinary intervention (board of correction of military records or federal court).

Warrant officers and enlisted members who retire with less than 30 years of service are entitled to be advanced on the retired list to the highest grade in which they served satisfactorily, as determined by the service secretary.  See 10 § U.S.C. 8964 for one such provision.  How this sometimes plays out in the USAF is:

E-7 reduced to E-1 by court-martial, has no punitive discharge, SecAF determines highest satisfactory grade to be E-6 (one lower than the misconduct), member retires as E-1 and advances to E-6 on the retired list when their active plus retired time equals 30 years.  Retired pay is calculated at the E-1 rates and E-6 rates at the appropriate times, in an exception to the well-known "high 3" rule.

Agreed about the O vs. E disparity in punishments.  One would hope officers got hammered harder because their grades confer a greater responsibility to obey the law, but we're in the real world.  Different spanks for different ranks.

[sarmed1]

It has been my experience that in the USAF, officers that are reduced in grade as a judicial or non judicial punishment don't fair well in longevity.  If they are an O1/2 and in some cases captain, they may make it back but won't likely make it to major.   
And unless you have over E time you will not likely make it to retirement as a captain.
MK

[DoubleSecret]

It has been my experience that in the USAF, officers that are reduced in grade as a judicial or non judicial punishment don't fair well in longevity.  If they are an O1/2 and in some cases captain, they may make it back but won't likely make it to major.   
And unless you have over E time you will not likely make it to retirement as a captain.
MK

I'd be interested in hearing the particulars of said experience, since there is no mechanism by which an officer can be reduced in commissioned grade as a punishment under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.  None.

"A commissioned or warrant officer or a cadet, or midshipman may not be reduced in grade by any court-martial. However, in time of war or
national emergency the Secretary concerned, or such Under Secretary or Assistant Secretary as may be designated by the Secretary concerned, may commute a sentence of dismissal to reduction to any enlisted grade."  MANUAL FOR COURTS-MARTIAL, UNITED STATES, R.C.M. 1003(c)(2)((A)(i) (2012).  That rules out judicial punishment.  Even the reduction to enlisted grade is via clemency, is in lieu of a punitive discharge, and is actually a reduction of the adjudged punishment.

Then there's nonjudicial punishment.  See MANUAL FOR COURTS-MARTIAL, UNITED STATES pt. V, ¶5.b.(1)[paragraph] 93c (2012):

b. Authorized maximum punishments. In addition to or in lieu of admonition or reprimand, the following disciplinary punishments subject to the limitation of paragraph 5d of this Part, may be imposed upon servicemembers:
(1) Upon commissioned officers and warrant officers—
(A) By any commanding officer—restriction to specified limits, with or without suspension from
duty for not more than 30 consecutive days;
(B) If imposed by an officer exercising general court-martial jurisdiction, an officer of general or
flag rank in command, or a principal assistant as defined in paragraph 2c of this Part—
(i) arrest in quarters for not more than 30 consecutive days;
(ii) forfeiture of not more than one-half of one month's pay per month for 2 months;
(iii) restriction to specified limits, with or without suspension from duty, for not more than 60
consecutive days;

Some commissioned officers retire in a grade lower than their highest grade, because officers retired in the highest grade in which he/she served satisfactorily.  See 10 § U.S.C. 1370.  That's not a judicial or nonjudicial action, it's administrative.  Google the case of Major General (now retired Colonel) Thomas Fiscus for an example.  Also google the case of Colonel (now retired 1st Lt) Michael Murphy.

Some commissioned officers forfeit a temporary grade (3 and 4 star grades are temporary grades) and revert to a lower permanent grade, usually 2-star, and then a determination is made as to which grade to retire them in.  Google the case of GEN (then MG, now retired LTG) Kip Ward as an example.  Again, this is administrative, not judicial or nonjudicial punishment.  See 10 § U.S.C. 601 and 10 § U.S.C. 1370.

The President has the authority to vacate the promotion of a 1-star officer who has served less than 18 months time in grade.  Google the case of BG (now retired COL) Janis Karpinski.  Again, this is administrative, not judicial or nonjudicial punishment.  See 10 § U.S.C. 625.

[LSThiker]

I would be curious as well. The only reduction in officer rank that I have seen is an administrative reduction. That was for the National Guard where an M-day officer wanted an AGR position but was already too high for the slot. So the Guard administratively reduced his rank to be eligible for the slot.   I have heard that for both officer and enlisted.

[DoubleSecret]

I would be curious as well. The only reduction in officer rank that I have seen is an administrative reduction. That was for the National Guard where an M-day officer wanted an AGR position but was already too high for the slot. So the Guard administratively reduced his rank to be eligible for the slot.   I have heard that for both officer and enlisted.

I've seen that for enlisted personnel, yes.  Someone with appropriate authority would cut administrative orders and the person would don their new stripes.
For officers, it's not quite so simple, and would likely involve a termination of one appointment for the purpose of accepting another appointment in a lower grade.

Remember, commissioned officers aren't simply appointed as commissioned officers.  They're appointed in a particular grade, and that grade is their office:  "Second lieutenant, United States Air Force," "Commander, United States Navy," etc.  Each new grade is in fact an appointment to a new office.  To deprive them of the grade is to deprive them of the office, and there must be authority for same.  See my previous post for examples on revoking a promotion, reverting to a lower temporary grade, etc.

Just as the President can't just look at the Secretary of State and say "your performance displeases me (or you have committed a crime), I hereby demote you to Deputy Secretary of State," he can't reduce a first lieutenant to second lieutenant.  He can terminate the present appointment held by each, and offer reappointment in the humbler office.  Both the Secretary and the lieutenant could decline to accept. 

[flyboy53]

I would be curious as well. The only reduction in officer rank that I have seen is an administrative reduction. That was for the National Guard where an M-day officer wanted an AGR position but was already too high for the slot. So the Guard administratively reduced his rank to be eligible for the slot.   I have heard that for both officer and enlisted.

Been a while since I had experienced this issue. Doesn't that officer still retire at the higher rank if they don't make it back first?

It has been my experience that in the USAF, officers that are reduced in grade as a judicial or non judicial punishment don't fair well in longevity.  If they are an O1/2 and in some cases captain, they may make it back but won't likely make it to major.   
And unless you have over E time you will not likely make it to retirement as a captain.
MK

Those are sad cases. I knew an ROTC honor grad who never made it above second lieutenant in four years of active duty.

Is ROPA still in effect? Do officers still resign their commissions and carry on as enlisted members?

I had met/worked with a lot of former officers who turned enlisted members during my career. The retirement ceremonies were always interesting when the guy you knew as a staff sergeant showed up at the ceremony wearing the uniform of a captain...or my personal favorite was a tech sergeant who retired as a full colonel.

Regarding CAPSTONE, I understand why, however, let's see whether the program evaluation correlate with the behavior statistics in the field. 

[LSThiker]

Oh, I have no idea how it worked. I am sure it required the approval of NGB and higher. I just know it has been done.

I have also seen where AMEDD has "reset" an officer's TIG after branch transferring into MSC. Again, no idea how it is done.

Of course, I think we all know that some times the way the Army does it does not always align with how the regs are written. I have had that argument plenty of times.  Grab the reg and show the NCO where it says so and so is too be done this way but get the response "well that is not how we do it".  Especially where it says x can be added for retirement points and tbey say no it cannot. Always frustrating.

[Flying Pig]

In the late 90s I was forced to sit in a seminar called "Harness the Rainbow and celebrate diversity".   In the Marines at age 21, in the infantry, the only diversity people cared about was "Are you a Marine?"  "Yes?  OK, welcome."   "No?  Get out of my face."    The course was taught by a female Major, speaking to a Marine infantry regiment.   In the Marines, there are 3 classes of people.  Non-Marines, Marines who are not infantry....and then at the top of the food chain, Infantry Marines.      It was one of the best 2 hour naps Ive ever had in the sitting position.

[Майор Хаткевич]

[sarmed1]

I never saw one actually demoted, it came up in conversation regarding dui,'s when I was at DM back in the late 90's.  Where enlisted might be able to survive a reduction in grade for said dui but it would be a career ender for an officer.  It was assumed in the conversation that they could choose to continue to serve.  Based on the current  google-fu I may be mistaken in the details of the conversation.  A LOR sounds like the more likely punishment to fit the conversation.

MK

[LSThiker]

Remember that nuclear incident in 2007 between Minot and Barksdale AFB.  This article describes where the officers went after the firing:

http://formerspook.blogspot.com/2008/01/where-are-they-now.html

Not one was demoted over that incident and all allowed to stay in.  Some have gone onto other command positions.  Col Westhauser has given talks to the ASCS class about the incident.  I got to see his talk.  He was quite humble over the incident. 

[DoubleSecret]

I would be curious as well. The only reduction in officer rank that I have seen is an administrative reduction. That was for the National Guard where an M-day officer wanted an AGR position but was already too high for the slot. So the Guard administratively reduced his rank to be eligible for the slot.   I have heard that for both officer and enlisted.

Been a while since I had experienced this issue. Doesn't that officer still retire at the higher rank if they don't make it back first?

An officer retires in the highest grade satisfactorily held.  10 U.S. Code § 1370.  So, suppose you have an officer who worked up to O-6 with 3 years time in grade in the medical corps.  For some reason the O-6 and USAF decide he should be a line officer.  He resigns as a medical corps colonel, immediately accepts a commission in a lower grade in the line of the Air Force (LAF), and never works his way back up to O-6.  That officer would be eligible for retirement in the higher grade.

Similar things happen with former Air National Guard adjutants general who held the grade of Maj Gen/Brig Gen for the requisite period, and later accepted an appointment in a lower grade when replaced as AG.

When Maj Gen Fiscus got in trouble and had to retire as a colonel, he was a major general right up until the end of his active duty tenure.  He was placed on the retired list in his highest satisfactorily-held grade, colonel, as determined by SecAF.

Short version:  It's not highest grade held, it's highest grade satisfactorily held as determined by the service secretary.  In cases of misconduct or inadequate performance, the highest grade held is sometimes deemed not to have been held satisfactorily.  Heck, look at Admiral (later retired Rear Admiral) Kimmel of Pearl Harbor fame.  He reverted to RADM on relief and never got the other two stars back.  This practice has been around for awhile.

[PHall]

The usual way Officers are shown the door is by being passed over for promotion twice in a row. A couple of "bad" OER's can usually ensure you won't get promoted.
So will an UIF from getting an Article 15.
There are also High Year of Tenure rules that state how long you can stay in the service at each grade.
The main one that sticks out to me is that Major (O-3) has a HYT of 18 years. But they can be "Selectivity Continued" for 2 more years if they're in an AFSC the Air Force really needs.
(I've seen that done more then once!)

[lordmonar]

The usual way Officers are shown the door is by being passed over for promotion twice in a row. A couple of "bad" OER's can usually ensure you won't get promoted.
So will an UIF from getting an Article 15.
There are also High Year of Tenure rules that state how long you can stay in the service at each grade.
The main one that sticks out to me is that Major (O-3) has a HYT of 18 years. But they can be "Selectivity Continued" for 2 more years if they're in an AFSC the Air Force really needs.
(I've seen that done more then once!)

ehhhhhmmmmmm.........O-3 is a Capt.   

But yes....it does not take a whole lot to screw up an O's career.  Also.....most things that are bad enough to get an O demoted......usually also get the O booted for conduct unbecoming.   Also.....officers can resign at the drop of a hat (if they have not accrued a Active Duty Service Commitment and even then....the service is willing to waive for someone the are ready demote) so most officers faced with a demotion just get out.

[Storm Chaser]

In the Air Force, enlisted members may recover from an Article 15 or the like. That's not the case with officers. An Article 15 will most likely end their careers. That's the main reason an officer may get a Letter of Reprimand (LoR) for an offense that an enlisted member would likely get an Article 15 for.

[lordmonar]

In the Air Force, enlisted members may recover from an Article 15 or the like. That's not the case with officers. An Article 15 will most likely end their careers. That's the main reason an officer may get a Letter of Reprimand (LoR) for an offense that an enlisted member would likely get an Article 15 for.

An official letter of reprimand for an enlisted guy may result in an UIF....control roster....bad EPR.  Six months to a year later......it may be as if it never happened (except for the EPR...that will follow you for up to 10 years).   For an officer the LOR goes into the promotion file for ever.   They can still get promoted....but they will have to deal with that screw up for their entire career.

I used to have this discussion with my Airman from time to time when they heard about some officer or senior NCO getting off "easy" on something that would have cost an airman a stripe. 

[PHall]

Depends on what your job is. If you have a high level security clearance and especially if you're on PRP, your UIF will never really go away, it will just be listed an "inactive" and will still be visible to your Commander.

[lordmonar]

Depends on what your job is. If you have a high level security clearance and especially if you're on PRP, your UIF will never really go away, it will just be listed an "inactive" and will still be visible to your Commander.

That's true....but generally.....you can even survive a PRP disqual or even a SCI disqual....a whole lot easier then an officer can.

[abdsp51]

It still doesn't stop the issue that this has been around for who knows how long and only gets attention when its a higher up that gets into trouble for it.  The DoD has made progress with dealing with it but at the end of the day all the little programs that have come about due it have not done anything to alleviate the problem.  I would like to see the data that shows that SARC/SAPR has had anything to do with an ounce of prevention.

Swift, and firm prosecution for anyone committing these types of offenses is what is needed regardless of what is worn on the collar or sleeve.  No mitigating, no downgrading nothing when you are found guilty and the sentence is done then let it be done. 

[flyboy53]

In the Air Force, enlisted members may recover from an Article 15 or the like. That's not the case with officers. An Article 15 will most likely end their careers. That's the main reason an officer may get a Letter of Reprimand (LoR) for an offense that an enlisted member would likely get an Article 15 for.

An official letter of reprimand for an enlisted guy may result in an UIF....control roster....bad EPR.  Six months to a year later......it may be as if it never happened (except for the EPR...that will follow you for up to 10 years).   For an officer the LOR goes into the promotion file for ever.   They can still get promoted....but they will have to deal with that screw up for their entire career.

I used to have this discussion with my Airman from time to time when they heard about some officer or senior NCO getting off "easy" on something that would have cost an airman a stripe.

It depends on where the Article 15 and UIF occurs during their career. Early on, it may mean earning the rank back but not changing the discharge code or character of discharge. Later on, its a career ender.

I knew an ANG senior master sergeant who was recalled to Air Force active duty as a technical sergeant and had alcoholism issues. After two years on active duty, the stress of our duties was such that he started drinking even when on the job and got passed over (red lined) for master sergeant because of his conduct.

Obviously, there were LORs and a UIF opened but the drinking continued. One morning, he was found passed out in his car in an off-base parking lot instead of reporting for duty. Then came an Article 15 and reduction in rank to staff sergeant. The issues continued. He self admitted himself to the base hospital for treatment but that didn't stop a new Article 15 and a reduction to senior airman. His issues didn't end and the last action was an administrative discharge at E-4 to avoid reduction to airman basic. He was over 20 for pay purposes but not even retirement eligible reserve-wise.

If my memory is correct, that process occurred over the course of eight months.

[flyboy53]

In the Air Force, enlisted members may recover from an Article 15 or the like. That's not the case with officers. An Article 15 will most likely end their careers. That's the main reason an officer may get a Letter of Reprimand (LoR) for an offense that an enlisted member would likely get an Article 15 for.

An official letter of reprimand for an enlisted guy may result in an UIF....control roster....bad EPR.  Six months to a year later......it may be as if it never happened (except for the EPR...that will follow you for up to 10 years).   For an officer the LOR goes into the promotion file for ever.   They can still get promoted....but they will have to deal with that screw up for their entire career.

I used to have this discussion with my Airman from time to time when they heard about some officer or senior NCO getting off "easy" on something that would have cost an airman a stripe.

It depends on where the Article 15 and UIF occurs during their career. Early on, it may mean earning the rank back but not changing the discharge code or character of discharge. Later on, its a career ender.

I knew an ANG senior master sergeant who was recalled to Air Force active duty as a technical sergeant and had alcoholism issues. After two years on active duty, the stress of our duties was such that he started drinking even when on the job and got passed over (red lined) for master sergeant because of his conduct.

Obviously, there were LORs and a UIF opened but the drinking continued. One morning, he was found passed out in his car in an off-base parking lot instead of reporting for duty. Then came an Article 15 and reduction in rank to staff sergeant. The issues continued. He self admitted himself to the base hospital for treatment but that didn't stop a new Article 15 and a reduction to senior airman. His issues didn't end and the last action was an administrative discharge at E-4 to avoid reduction to airman basic. He was over 20 for pay purposes but not even retirement eligible reserve-wise.

If my memory is correct, that process occurred over the course of eight months. Gives a whole new meaning to how hard it might be to earn a Good Conduct Medal for some people.