XBradTC

By

XBradTC

·

129 Army battalion, brigade commanders fired since 2003

The Army has relieved 129 battalion and brigade commanders since 2003 and implemented several initiatives in its ongoing effort to hold leaders and commanders accountable for their actions, senior leaders told Army Times. “I think the narrative comes out of many soldiers who rightfully or wrongfully believe that the Army doesn’t hold senior leaders, senior…

The Army has relieved 129 battalion and brigade commanders since 2003 and implemented several initiatives in its ongoing effort to hold leaders and commanders accountable for their actions, senior leaders told Army Times.

“I think the narrative comes out of many soldiers who rightfully or wrongfully believe that the Army doesn’t hold senior leaders, senior military officers accountable in the same fashion they hold junior officers or enlisted,” Army Secretary John McHugh said. “I view it as a multilevel challenge, and we’re trying to respond in a number of different ways.”

Since 2003, the Army has relieved 98 battalion commanders and four lieutenant colonel staff officers, according to information provided by the Army. Twenty-four of those reliefs were conducted in combat.

In that same time period, 31 brigade commanders and four colonel staff officers were relieved; one of those was conducted in combat.

via 129 Army battalion, brigade commanders fired since 2003.

I’d like to see a breakdown on the causes for relief.

The Navy tends to be more up front about reliefs of its commanders. Hardly two weeks go by without seeing a notice in Navy Times about one. The Army, apparently, doesn’t “name and shame” to the same degree.

Which is the better approach? I think that’s open to debate. But surely publicizing the most cause most likely to get you relieved might help one or two officers avoid such activity.

Tags:

  1. Gunny G

    Reblogged this on Gunny.G: BLOGGING.BAD ~ ORWELL '84+.

    Like

  2. timactual

    Where did they all go? It doesn’t do much good to relieve them if they are only going to put take up another slot that can be used to retain good officers. And no generals?

    I’d say Sec. McHugh still hasn’t answered the question about accountability.

    Like

  3. M1A1TrkTrror

    There were a couple of Generals in there.

    Plus, relief doesn’t always mean you should never get another shot. I’d rather we relieve for more minor things, then give people a second shot somewhere else, with the hope they learn and mature from their mistakes.

    This would have to depend very heavily on figuring out what you should be relieved for and what you should be drummed out of the service for, however.

    Like

  4. Esli

    While the idea that we can relieve officers and then give them a second shot seems nice, the reality is that there is no way that would work without massively restructuring officer management, and adding a large number of extra officers at the LTC and COL levels.
    -Officers are selected for command about a year ahead of assuming command, and they are usually at a different installation when they are selected. They then transfer to the new post and assume command. There is not a surplus of spare LTCs and COLs waiting in the wings, on each post, for someone to do poorly on this week’s tactical maneuvers and then they move into command until they themselves screw up. I’d hate to be the guy at Fort XX told to get to Fort YY next week to assume command.
    -In theory (and this is where the Army could improve), those officers that are selected for command are the best. It certainly is a hard cut (20% is about the norm in the Armor community). I’d say at least double that number are qualified to command but weren’t selected. If they need retraining now, there is an issue.
    -The Army promotes XX and selects YY for command each year. The escalator keeps moving up, and those not selected for promotion or command get off on the lower floors. There is no room for them to get back on the escalator with “another chance” when they feel like it because they are now pushing someone else off the escalator. Command billets are a known and finite quantity.
    -Command and selection for promotion are based on proven performance. How do you document that “We had to pull this guy out to retrain him, but he’s really not that bad. We’ll give him another chance.” That evaluation is the kiss of death for subsequent promotion/command.
    -Do you want the guy who was on his second chance commanding your son/daughter? I don’t.
    -Now, whether the Army actually selects the right guys (tactically savvy, combat leaders, etc) for command, as opposed to “party line” eloquent speakers that are on board with the corporate bureaucracy is a different question all together.

    Like

  5. xbradtc

    I have a sneaking suspicion that most officers relieved are not fired for lack of tactical savvy, but rather failures as leaders (which isn’t likely to be fixed in a short interval) or for moral failures, such as zipper or bottle problems. Those guys don’t deserve a second chance, not when there’s a pool of non-selects who don’t have those issues.

    Like

  6. Jeff Gauch

    Nimitz ran his first command aground. Sherman suffered a nervous breakdown at the beginning of the Civil War. Grant went on a multi-day bender during the Vicksburg campaign. Sal has a post up about one of the best fighter aces in the Pacific who raised the landing gear after landing on a training flight. The board of inquiry voted to drop him from flight training.

    I understand that command billets are limited, but torpedoing people at the first infraction is going to leave a lot of talent on the ground.

    Like

  7. Esli

    Exactly. I am not arguing that they should be fired for tactical mistakes in training, but refuting the idea that they should be given other chances. I am for firing those who fail. Those who don’t are stratified into those that performed somewhere between okay and exceptionally, and those that peformed the best are promoted and selected for continued command at the next level.

    Like

  8. Quartermaster

    If you mess up the right way, you might find yourself exiled to Hohenfels. 😉

    Like

  9. Casey Tompkins

    Jeff, I’d like to see some evidence for the claim about Grant. All I’ve ever heard were rumors and unsubstantiated claims. Certainly Bruce Catton never accepted them.

    Like

  10. Esli

    Ouch. Wish somebody’d warned me…

    Like

  11. timactual

    On the other hand, McClellan ( and others) was given repeated chances. How many thousands of lives did that cost?

    Like

  12. Quartermaster

    Casey, the reports I’ve seen on the bender were written by a reporter that stayed with him during the multi-day bender. I think Catton’s rejection is more a matter of not wanting to believe than anything else. Grant had serious problems with the bottle that started at Eureka, and that was what put him out in the first place. That problem was never conquered.

    time, The problem with Mac was inertia. His performance at Antietam was quite good. Mac was much like a Brit in WW2 called Montgomery.

    Like

  13. Quartermaster

    But, I just did. Was I too late?

    Being an OC would probably be better duty than being in the crucible yourself. My youngest brother like Graf when the weather was decent. I liked Germany when we lived there in the late 60s, although things were changing politically when the socialist coalition was elected in ’66, IIRC. Kurt Kiesinger, I think, was elected Chancellor in ’69, and things really started downhill politically then.

    Nice country, though.

    Like

Leave a comment