Offr-NCO-NCM Relationships

[Pikache]

I‘ve never quite understood the reason why officers aren‘t suppose to fraternize with the troops.

Apparently Canadians are a bit lax in this standard, but still, why does it exist?

 

[chrisf]

Originally posted by RoyalHighlandFusilier:
[qb] I‘ve never quite understood the reason why officers aren‘t suppose to fraternize with the troops.

Apparently Canadians are a bit lax in this standard, but still, why does it exist? [/qb]

Two reasons.

Tradition. Traditionally, officers were members of the upper class, or even aristocracy, and as such didn‘t WANT to associate with the troops, who were members of the lower classes.

Need. It‘s harder to order somone to do somthing potentionally life threatening, no matter how nessascary, if you‘re good friends with them.

 

[Padraig OCinnead]

Would it still be habitual behavior (re: tradition) from bygone days where class differences were more evident? I still believe that there is a certain requirement for this distance. It may even be reinforced into their psyche during officer training.

Not many supervisors/managers/leaders in the civilian world order their personel into a task that may destroy them. A military leader can in fact destroy the very thing they love or care for deeply. Perhaps by limiting the amount of fraternization this avoids conflicting self doubt during crucial events.

Or am I being to mushy? It may be just the way it is.

Slainte,

 

[Padraig OCinnead]

Sorry the post from my fellow Jimmy made it as I was typing this one up. So my post is somewhat redundant.

 

[dano]

There are points in the Cadet Manuals of the Relationship Between Officers and NCMs.

Though, those are points I know that you are not referring.

I have a example that may un-shroud you‘re understanding.

For example, In a school. There are Teachers, students and principle(s) (Admin).

Students are the new recruits. Teachers are the NCMs. The Principle(s) are the officers.

Now from personal experience, have you seen generally, teachers talking to the principle like a old chum, or friend. Likely no. Some cases yes of course, but you can say the same for any other Military/school.

I don‘t want to have to go in to detail since, I know you are not in kindergarten.

The principle is to have an image that is professional as well as smart.

Fraternizing, can ruin that image.
Mind you, that is only one example. Could be right, could be wrong, I just think it is a good referent.

 

[kurokaze]

Being one of the stripes, one reason you do not fraternize with the troops is that you are never to be in a position where you can take something from them.

This is especially true in romantic relationships, and made much worst if the male is an officer and the female is an NCM.

 

[Pikache]

I personally don‘t buy it.

Any one in leadership position (MCpl/Sgts and warrant officers) may also be in position as an officer would, such as ordering someone on dangerous missions.

Personally I‘d like to know the people I‘m working with.

 

[kurokaze]

Originally posted by RoyalHighlandFusilier:
[qb] I personally don‘t buy it.

Any one in leadership position (MCpl/Sgts and warrant officers) may also be in position as an officer would, such as ordering someone on dangerous missions.

Personally I‘d like to know the people I‘m working with. [/qb]

Agreed, and during their leadership training they have the same "maintain your distance" lecture drilled into them as it was into me. It becomes more important the further up the chain you go.

This of course, doesn‘t mean you can‘t be personable, just have to know where to draw the line.

 

[Pikache]

The thing is that a sergeant and a corporal may be friends.
Heavens help a CFR ending up commanding a platoon full of guys he knows when he was a troop.

Personally I think our profession needs us to be sometimes as ruthless as possible in order to do our job, even if it means sending a buddy to danger.

But, I believe that shouldn‘t prevent us from having few pints with people we work with and get to know them a bit.

We are after all, only human.

 

[winchable]

Be a friend, Not a Pal or a buddy.

I would like to hear more thoughts on this idea of a tradition from the days of rigid class structure, I think it has a little more to do with it then we are giving it credit for.

 

[Padraig OCinnead]

I think we are looking at this with the views and attitude of modern 21st century soldiers. Now that officers can often be the guy you hung out with as a kid, or the tenant in the apartment next to yours we see each other in a more socially equal setting. This is even more so if CFR‘d. It maybe simplistic of me to say but all that separates Offr and NCM is university education, at least initially.

Being a NCM I do feel uncomfortable being too close with an officer. I‘d rather keep it professional. That is not to say that I won‘t exchange pleasantries with him as we wait for our kids to get out of kindergarten or BS each other when we run into one another at the pub saturday afternoon. A good place to notice this is in the dressing room at inter section hockey games where the teams are combined.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

This is slowly coming to a topic that I wanted to post before but did‘nt want to start a holy war. In this day and age do we really need the officer system? I‘m not trying to insult anybody here but I firmly believe that a high school dropout could turn out to be as good a leader as anyone in history but with the system we have now, how would we ever know? However I must admit I used to hate seeing our 20 year TSM following around a recent grad. on morning inspections so if I have a little bias, there it is. OK start throwing fruit at me! CHEERS

 

[Padraig OCinnead]

It‘s only as recent as WW1 that many offr from the Brittish army were almost totally from the middle and upper class. Those few that were CFR were almost always put in positions where their previous skills would be most useful, and more importantly, deemed not proper work for offr. An example of this would be QM or Tpt sections. Yes there are a few soldiers who went on to make fine company comanders and Bn comds. However, there were very very few who went on to command Bde or Div.

 

[Padraig OCinnead]

Didn‘t the German army of WWII implement something along those lines? I mean did they start recruiting from combat experienced Sgts (or similar ranks) to turn them into offrs? Taking the top 25-20% of applicants and put them through offr training and accept only the best of those graduates?

 

[kurokaze]

Going back to what Che said. You can be friends with an officer, and officers can be friends with the troops but it has to stop there.

Part of it has to do with respect and discipline from the troops (which in most cases isn‘t an issue if both sides are professional enough). The officer must always be able to maintain control of his troops. It becomes far more difficult to do that if the troops think of him/her as a buddy.

Secondly it also serves to prevent potential immature or immoral officers from using rank to pursue personal interests at the expense of the troops.

Thirdly I think it‘s also an image issue. An officer must set the example to be followed. The troops should never see an officer piss drunk and making an *** out of him/herself. That‘s why we‘re told that can you accept a drink from the troops but you can‘t drink with the troops.

All this of course is not meant to be a complete dossier on how to be an officer, and different units/officers will have different styles of leadership (some even becoming very involved with the troops).

 

[kurokaze]

Originally posted by Bruce Monkhouse:
[qb] This is slowly coming to a topic that I wanted to post before but did‘nt want to start a holy war. In this day and age do we really need the officer system? I‘m not trying to insult anybody here but I firmly believe that a high school dropout could turn out to be as good a leader as anyone in history but with the system we have now, how would we ever know? However I must admit I used to hate seeing our 20 year TSM following around a recent grad. on morning inspections so if I have a little bias, there it is. OK start throwing fruit at me! CHEERS [/qb]

Yes but who would the senior NCOs blame when things go wrong

Basically, an officer is the policy maker and the NCOs implement the policy.

 

[winchable]

It is possible for a highschool dropout to be commissioned from the ranks is it not? I am not sure on the exact policy, but I suppose it could happen.

Here‘s a little article I found a while back about the value of officers having degrees etc.

 

[winchable]

I think the current situation is a mixture of old tradition of officers being from the upper class, and the recognised need for officers to be seperated from the men in order to do their job as effectively as possible.

 

[Pikache]

Kurokaze
Part of it has to do with respect and discipline from the troops (which in most cases isn‘t an issue if both sides are professional enough). The officer must always be able to maintain control of his troops. It becomes far more difficult to do that if the troops think of him/her as a buddy.

Secondly it also serves to prevent potential immature or immoral officers from using rank to pursue personal interests at the expense of the troops.

Again, I don‘t buy it.
If everyone follows work hard/play hard philosophy and be professional, knowing when it‘s okay to joke around and when to be serious and do as ordered, I don‘t see a problem.

Thirdly I think it‘s also an image issue. An officer must set the example to be followed. The troops should never see an officer piss drunk and making an *** out of him/herself. That‘s why we‘re told that can you accept a drink from the troops but you can‘t drink with the troops.

I can only speak from my own personal perspective, but I‘ve seen my pl. comd. drunk.
Heck, I‘ve seen my OC drunk. (very rare)

So what. They are human, and they are having a good time with troops on special occassions. The troops bought them so much drink because they like them and respect them and their ability to lead them.

To me, seeing officers spending time with troops, getting to know them and showing the troops that they are human after all is better than those who the troops don‘t know them at all.

Mind you, the officer has to be switched on first. If he‘s a bag in the field, then no matter what he does, he‘s junk.

 

[Franko]

Personally...I keep it on the professional side. My troop and officers have gone out together for a night on the town...relieving some stress and such. It‘s a good thing...builds bonds of confidence(to a point) and familiarity with each other. But there must be a limit. Too much of a good thing and it may be misconstrued as "brown nosing".

There is no harm with this until the NCO starts refering to the officer by their first name...then it‘s gone TOO far.

As for one officer who I can actually say he has my respect(not naming names...don‘t want his head to get too big) he actually knows EVERYTHING about the men in his troop. From daughters names and birthdates to how your wife(insert name) is doing at her job at(insert name). He did research on everyone and memorized it all..including boot sizes. A good troopie indeed. He HONESTLY cared about his guys and their welfare.

Regards