Announcement

Announcement Module
Collapse
No announcement yet.

Appropriate Relationship Protocol

Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse
X
Conversation Detail Module
Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Appropriate Relationship Protocol

    Hello All....again

    I have another question, which my boyfriend assures me is fine, but I just want to make sure. I will be enlisting within the next year, once I receive my degree, as a Specialist. My boyfriend, who I have been seeing for a year (known since Jr High though for 23 years) and has been in the Army N.G. for 13 years, is a Captain. As this is a pre-existing relationship, we are assuming it is fine, but I just wanted to ask. Is there anything we need to do to acknowledge the current relationship, so if I WERE to enlist early as enlisted, it would not appear inappropriate and disallowed?

    Thanks!

  • #2
    Re: Appropriate Relationship Protocol

    You are definetly riding a fine line here.

    It definetly does not look good by any means, but the relationship did start before you entered service. Someone please correct me, but I think that unless you are on active duty orders, you are not held under UCMJ. So your relationship would not be considered fraternization. It would be a different situation if your relationship started when you are specialist and he a captain and he is your commander.

    If I were you I would not show any PDA when both of you are in uniform. Just professionalism.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Appropriate Relationship Protocol

      Oh, I absolutely agree! There would not be any PDA in uniform; it wouldn't matter if HE worked at my office NOW. That's not how I roll at work...

      I believe he checked and was told that it was OK because it IS pre-existing. Even if I wasn't seeing HIM, I would never fraternize where I wasn't supposed to or EVER date my boss...LOL And he just finished his third command so I don't think he'll be doing another for a bit, which rules out me working under him. Oh, you know what I mean....

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Appropriate Relationship Protocol

        Chris,

        I enjoyed that you titled the thread (appropriate relationship protocol) instead of the dreadful vernacular of fraternization. The Captain should be very versed in the policy and taking the appropriate measures when you finally become a soldier.

        Just enjoy a healthy relationship.

        FMCS.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Appropriate Relationship Protocol

          Originally posted by rkazer View Post
          You are definetly riding a fine line here.

          It definetly does not look good by any means, but the relationship did start before you entered service. Someone please correct me, but I think that unless you are on active duty orders, you are not held under UCMJ. So your relationship would not be considered fraternization. It would be a different situation if your relationship started when you are specialist and he a captain and he is your commander.

          If I were you I would not show any PDA when both of you are in uniform. Just professionalism.

          No fine line really. Happens alot within the guard and reserves.

          Everyone is still held to UCMJ, it is just more of a headache sometimes for the National Guard to use it against M day soldiers.

          The relationship is fine as it is pre-exsisting relationship there are no issues.

          And of course no PDA in uniform as that is against regulation. Married couples no matter what rank ( could be two E5s in different units ) cannot hold hands kiss or any of that.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Appropriate Relationship Protocol

            You have one year after you enlist to either get married or stop the relationship.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Appropriate Relationship Protocol

              Is there a specific regulation for this? I ha enever heard of this and we have asked alot of people....thanks.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Appropriate Relationship Protocol

                OK...I found the reg, but I am hearing from some on this fourm that I should 'enlist NOW' because the age cut-off might change...which means I would be enlisting as a private and not a Specialist (does this complicate it further or does the same rule apply?

                I didn't think it applied if it was a pre-existing relationship...that seems odd that if we are already together and I choose to enlist, that we are then pressured to MARRY in a year or break up?

                Can someone please clarify this further??

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Appropriate Relationship Protocol

                  This is why we were told is OK, as you see below for the NG (not straight Army) it is slightly different and the scenerio even involves officer-enlisted that are not even in a pre-existing relationship and it appears to not be disallowed.....if anyone has conflicting information, PLEASE let me know! Thanks! :-)

                  4–14. Relationships between Soldiers of different rank c. (1) In the case of Army National Guard or United States Army Reserve personnel, this prohibition does not apply to relationships that exist due to their civilian occupation or employment.

                  (2) Dating -

                  (c) Personal relationships between members of the National Guard or Army Reserve, when the relationship primarily
                  exists due to civilian acquaintanceships, unless the individuals are on active duty (other than annual training), on full-time National Guard duty (other than annual training), or serving as a dual status military technician.

                  (d) Personal relationships between members of the Regular Army and members of the National Guard or Army Reserve when the relationship primarily exists due to civilian association and the Reserve component member is not on active duty (other than annual training), on full-time National Guard duty (other than annual training), or serving as a
                  dual status military technician.

                  Here is a scenario directly from the Department of the Army Pamphlet 600-35 ‘’Relationship Between Soldiers of a Different Rank’’

                  ‘’…….2-22. Officer—enlisted (Army National Guard and Army Reserve)

                  a. Situation. CPT John Smith and SSG Mary Clark, both Army Reserve soldiers, are
                  in the same troop program unit (TPU). They are not in the same rating chain and
                  have no official relationship as far as duties or positions are concerned. They
                  have spoken on occasion during drill. They recognize each other at the mall, strike
                  up a conversation, and subsequently begin dating on a regular basis. You are the
                  battalion commander. Someone tells you they saw the two at a restaurant. Is
                  there a violation of the new policy?

                  b. Explanation. No. Although the two individuals first met each other through the unit,
                  their relationship exists primarily due to a civilian acquaintanceship. They are
                  therefore covered by the Reserve exception in AR 600-20, paragraph 4-14c(2)(D).
                  The prohibition against dating does not apply to them….’’

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Appropriate Relationship Protocol

                    It's a very fine line. I've seen it cause issues with in the command, especially with such a large rank difference. You probably won't hear about it but he will.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Appropriate Relationship Protocol

                      Originally posted by RedLeg View Post
                      It's a very fine line. I've seen it cause issues with in the command, especially with such a large rank difference. You probably won't hear about it but he will.
                      Sounds like it...we will tread lightly and make sure everything is appropraite in regards to regulation (I prefer not to rely on preceident); I do not want to have it negatively impact him getting promoted to Major.

                      Thank you for your input.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Appropriate Relationship Protocol

                        If you're not in the same Unit, it's not going to be a huge problem. Especially in the guard, it's not common knowledge unless you make it that way. I had a SSG and a CW1 that were together for 2 years and we all had no clue.
                        Just make sure if you go to military functions together, you wear a dress instead of your uniform, or vice versa. And try to shy away from the FB thing.
                        It's what you make of it, discretion is key
                        Last edited by EOrsini; December 2nd, 2010, 09:37 AM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Appropriate Relationship Protocol

                          The one thing that caught me eye was... "I will be enlisting within the next year, once I receive my degree, as a Specialist". Why not join as an OCS candidate?



                          Originally posted by Chris36 View Post
                          Hello All....again

                          I have another question, which my boyfriend assures me is fine, but I just want to make sure. I will be enlisting within the next year, once I receive my degree, as a Specialist. My boyfriend, who I have been seeing for a year (known since Jr High though for 23 years) and has been in the Army N.G. for 13 years, is a Captain. As this is a pre-existing relationship, we are assuming it is fine, but I just wanted to ask. Is there anything we need to do to acknowledge the current relationship, so if I WERE to enlist early as enlisted, it would not appear inappropriate and disallowed?

                          Thanks!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Appropriate Relationship Protocol

                            Sounds like she wants to work for a living, sir.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Appropriate Relationship Protocol

                              Originally posted by Teuvil View Post
                              Sounds like she wants to work for a living, sir.

                              Yes, I do! However, I am assured by many that the maximumcut off age may be going down and as I am already 36; I may be enlisting very soon here, as an OCS candidate, and completing my degree once I return from BT over the summmer. I woulld LOVE to finish it first, but universities don't have age limits, let alone ones that move, and the Army does. So apparently I will be going in as a Private (also found out I wouldn't be promosted to Specialist upon graduation; I would have had to have the degree first).

                              But I WILL complete my degree; I'm very close and as I have said to others, I am not as worried about the rank on my chest as the flag on my arm; I just want to get my chance to serve my country before its too late. The degrees and promotions will come.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X