Announcement Announcement Module
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Unsatisfactory attendance Code U Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse
X
Conversation Detail Module
Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: Unsatisfactory attendance Code U

    Originally posted by ParalegalNCO1 View Post
    You cannot make someone stay at drill and not pay them. (Apparently they did that anyway).

    If he didn't pass the run, then he should be flagged for PT failure.

    There has ALWAYS been a rule that said two consecutive failures initiates a seperation packet....just no one does it.

    There is alot of talk about UCMJ stuff here. Some sort of adverse action maybe could have been taken, A. If they paid him, and B. if your state law allows for it.
    Well, she wrote "found guilty for not completing 2 mile run". I do not know if they cheated or disobeyed to not take it or just simply failed it. What does the found guilty mix into it? But yes, I was right about withholding someone's pay as punishment without it being an UCMJ. Sounds like Command can get burnt for that. But this isn't AD so the rules may be different lol
    Last edited by Chief Kemosabe; November 5th, 2012, 10:58 AM. Reason: realized this isn't AD

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Unsatisfactory attendance Code U

      Originally posted by WIBecky74 View Post
      So if a stink is made about the no pay, it will probably get worse is what i'm getting from this.
      It came down to SM not checking in with grader after the 2MR. (SMs side) It was looked into and the decision made by the Co was SM guilty of not participating (no one saw SM on track) in that event. There is no more to the "story".
      Yes I process flags, bars, and other actions all day long at my Tech job. One failure is a flag, two (consecutive) failures can cause a bar or discharge. 9/10 tmes its a bar, not a discharge at that point.

      Can they go back and pay the SM and then do the adverse action? I called being taken off the EPS list for 6 months an adverse action, that might not be the proper term for it.
      Ok, this is not AD so no UCMJ action so what were there formal charges?
      Last edited by Chief Kemosabe; November 5th, 2012, 10:57 AM.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Unsatisfactory attendance Code U

        Originally posted by fmcityslicker View Post
        Ok, this is not AD so no UCMJ action so what were there formal charges?
        Don't make this any more confusing. There were no formal charges. Instead of attempting some proper punishment, they just yanked her their check....can't do that.

        On a side note there can be UCMJ chargews in theory depending on the state.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Unsatisfactory attendance Code U

          Wisconsin. We are one of the few that updated their state code recently. We just had our JAG brief and warned when googling and such make sure its the latest and greatest.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Unsatisfactory attendance Code U

            Originally posted by ParalegalNCO1 View Post
            Don't make this any more confusing. There were no formal charges. Instead of attempting some proper punishment, they just yanked her their check....can't do that.

            On a side note there can be UCMJ chargews in theory depending on the state.
            That was going to be my next question. Did they decide on the punishment AFTER the fact? I could see them deciding once the Solider ALREADY drilled that weekend. Hence why they completed the drill weekend. Also, I can actually see the logic of "you didn't participate/were unaccountable during a training exercise. Therefore, you weren't "there" during a MUTA to get paid. I've had several Commanders make this threat. But, I'm not sure if this was truly allowed by law.

            Is that what you are saying, Paralegal? That by law a Commander can't do that if the Soldier was there? For example, if a Soldier hides away during drill weekend in their car. They are technically "there", but they are not where they are supposed to be. Or, if they show up for first formation, but heads down to the 7-11 without getting approval. Or, as in this example, they skip out on a run.
            Last edited by RyCass; November 5th, 2012, 11:49 AM.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Unsatisfactory attendance Code U

              Originally posted by RyCass View Post
              That was going to be my next question. Did they decide on the punishment AFTER the fact? I could see them deciding once the Solider ALREADY drilled that weekend. Hence why they completed the drill weekend. Also, I can actually see the logic of "you didn't participate/were unaccountable during a training exercise. Therefore, you weren't "there" during a MUTA to get paid. I've had several Commanders make this threat. But, I'm not sure if this was truly allowed by law. Is that what you are saying, Paralegal? That by law they can't do that if the Soldier was there? Even after the fact?
              If the soldier was there for drill, you pay them. End of story.

              If I was at drill for 48 hours but skipped out on a class, or my APFT, then fine...punish me; but do it properly. Docking pay without due process is a no go.

              Imagine how sticky this gets if the guy got hurt at a drill that he wasn't paid for and technically had no status.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Unsatisfactory attendance Code U

                Originally posted by RyCass View Post
                That was going to be my next question. Did they decide on the punishment AFTER the fact? I could see them deciding once the Solider ALREADY drilled that weekend. Hence why they completed the drill weekend. Also, I can actually see the logic of "you didn't participate/were unaccountable during a training exercise. Therefore, you weren't "there" during a MUTA to get paid. I've had several Commanders make this threat. But, I'm not sure if this was truly allowed by law.

                Is that what you are saying, Paralegal? That by law a Commander can't do that if the Soldier was there? For example, if a Soldier hides away during drill weekend in their car. They are technically "there", but they are not where they are supposed to be. Or, if they show up for first formation, but heads down to the 7-11 without getting approval. Or, as in this example, they skip out on a run.
                If they do this, then we start collecting a paper trail of counseling statements. Then they get lit up on their NCOER or 4100. It's easier this way. Chances are these are the same type of soldiers that will fail APFTs as well.

                Eventually, their career will come to a close.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Unsatisfactory attendance Code U

                  Polo makes a good point about a paper trail. Frequently with these things the commander gets frustrated because he wants to do something but he hasn't done his part to support an action properly so his hands get tied and he gets cranky.

                  I guarentee this soldier in the past came late, didn't shave, mouthed off, or did something along the lines of stupid.....and no one counseled him, or doucmented anything.

                  Then, when the same guy comes back and does something more severe, instead of a plethora of options, you have limited ones....because the leadership was lazy.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Unsatisfactory attendance Code U

                    Originally posted by Polo08816 View Post
                    If they do this, then we start collecting a paper trail of counseling statements. Then they get lit up on their NCOER or 4100. It's easier this way. Chances are these are the same type of soldiers that will fail APFTs as well.

                    Eventually, their career will come to a close.
                    Tracking. I figured that there would need to be some kind of paper trail. It makes it all the more interesting that this particular Commander went ahead and docked their pay. Seems like a risky venture all around.

                    Thanks, gentleman, for the input!

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Unsatisfactory attendance Code U

                      Originally posted by RyCass View Post
                      Tracking. I figured that there would need to be some kind of paper trail. It makes it all the more interesting that this particular Commander went ahead and docked their pay. Seems like a risky venture all around.

                      Thanks, gentleman, for the input!
                      Counselings/paper trail is a way of life on AD. I have had Soldiers with counseling packets thicker than bibles. Chapters are inevitable.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Unsatisfactory attendance Code U

                        Originally posted by fmcityslicker View Post
                        Counselings/paper trail is a way of life on AD. I have had Soldiers with counseling packets thicker than bibles. Chapters are inevitable.
                        You should bind all the counseling packets together like a bible. Separate them and assign them book titles. Then go into each of those and assign chapter and verse numbers. When finished, take a lighter and lightly burn the edges of this bible.

                        "Can you explain why this NCO did poorly on this section of his NCOER?"

                        "Sir, I most certainly can. If you go to Book X, Chapter Y, Verse Z, it says... (proceed with your fire breathing sermon)".

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Unsatisfactory attendance Code U

                          Originally posted by Polo08816 View Post
                          You should bind all the counseling packets together like a bible. Separate them and assign them book titles. Then go into each of those and assign chapter and verse numbers. When finished, take a lighter and lightly burn the edges of this bible.

                          "Can you explain why this NCO did poorly on this section of his NCOER?"

                          "Sir, I most certainly can. If you go to Book X, Chapter Y, Verse Z, it says... (proceed with your fire breathing sermon)".
                          Awesome and so true

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Unsatisfactory attendance Code U

                            [QUOTE=ParalegalNCO1;170798]If the soldier was there for drill, you pay them. End of story.

                            QUOTE]

                            That's not exactly accurate, at least in the sense that simply being present authorizes pay. The U = Unsatisfactory. For example, if a soldier shows up to first formation with a haircut that does not meet regulation they can be coded U for the fire UTA and told to return later in the day with a proper haircut. You could say that a U on the perstat is an arguably tricky way of punishing without a formal process, but it's as simplistic as sending an employee home when they show up to work and don't perform. I've done this twice in the last year, although in contrast, I did not keep the soldier at the armory.

                            Drill pay, like any salary, is not an intrinsic right unless conditions of employment are met. An employee at Burger King couldn't show up for work wearing a tu-tu, and instead of running the register, unilaterally decide to sweep the parking lot. Now, this type of behavior would likely get the employee fired in a "right to work" environment, but even if termination didn't result the employee could not expect to be paid for the time they were there not ready or willing to work.

                            I would assert that is the very reason the U(Unsatisfactory) code on the perstat exsists in the first place! If it wasn't copacetic I would question the validity of its existence.
                            Last edited by Mongoose772; November 6th, 2012, 07:44 AM.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Unsatisfactory attendance Code U

                              Ok, I see I'm getting late to this thread, but since this is my bread and butter I'm gonna get in on it.

                              Yes, you can discharge for 2 consecutive APFT failures. This is not new by any means, this is straight out of the AR 135-178 and has been that way for as long as I can remember. It just hasn't been inforced during our time of war for the most part because bodies have been needed.

                              Yes, you can code someone "U" and essentially not pay them for not meeting the standards while they are at drill. "U" has 2 uses, "Unauthorized Absence" (AWOL) or "Unsatisfactory Performance" ..."member who fails to meet the standards as prescribed by the Military Departments concerned for attendance at training drills, attendance at active duty for training, training advancement, or performance of duty."


                              Now, that being said, I think they handled this wrong given the description of the situation. The Soldier should have just been flagged for APFT failure and if there was more to the story, such as the guy tried to get over on the system and lied and said he ran when he didnt, then the unit should have looked at other actions to be taken against him/her.

                              In answer to your other question about changing the codes after the 1379 is complete. Yes, its fairly simple and just requires an MPS message.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Unsatisfactory attendance Code U

                                In addition, if this is the only mark against this person they can't just "take them off the list" for six months. I'd like them to provide the reference that gives them this authority.

                                If they would just flag them as they should for failing the APFT, they will not be eligible for promotion until the flag is lifted anyways.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X