The end of NATO?

[Brett327]

While I don't think the IG 'success' rate should be 100%, unsubstantiated cases are a waste of valuable government resources.

While you can explain to people what their means of redress are, you cannot tell people they can't complain, nor can you impose consequences when they complain about things that aren't illegal, immoral, unethical, etc. I have had people bring up things that aren't in the EEO realm as such (I.E. they just don't like their supervisor), and you can direct them to the appropriate means of redress.

Otherwise, I'm not sure what you're complaining about other than humans will behave like humans.

I think what any of us should be interested in - and perhaps what the new SD policy is about - are the reports that are filed fraudulently. I suspect this is extremely rare.

Edit: People just want to be heard, and if you don't create a command climate that fosters transparency, and a healthy means of feedback to leadership, then people are going to become frustrated and feel like the IG is their only option.

 

[taxi1]

Army report that has data to demonstrate the staggering amount of IG reports vs substantiated claims:

https://ig.army.mil/Portals/101/Documents/IG%20Training%20Documents/web_FY23%20DAIG%20Annual%20Report.pdf

What is in the new "No More Eggshells" policy anyway?

 

[Mos]

What is in the new "No More Eggshells" policy anyway?

https://media.defense.gov/2025/Apr/25/2003697394/-1/-1/1/RESTORING-GOOD-ORDER-AND-DISCIPLINE-THROUGH-BALANCED-ACCOUNTABILITY.PDF

 

[Flash]

While you can explain to people what their means of redress are, you cannot tell people they can't complain, nor can you impose consequences when they complain about things that aren't illegal, immoral, unethical, etc. I have had people bring up things that aren't in the EEO realm as such (I.E. they just don't like their supervisor), and you can direct them to the appropriate means of redress.

There has to be an avenue for folks to report illegal activity along with the oft talked about 'fraud, waste and abuse'. IG's weren't created in a vacuum and are there for a very good reason, I haven't had a reason to utilize one yet but it is nice to know that they are there if needed.

 

[Spekkio]

What is in the new "No More Eggshells" policy anyway?

No idea and really I have no solutions on how to thread the needle between bitching to the IG and Congress about parking spots (to use Brett's example) and stymieing legitimate complaints.

My overall point is that there comes a crossover where watchdog organizations become overloaded with handling bullshit rather than addressing legitimate issues, and the Army IG report implies that we have reached or exceeded that tipping point.

Everyone applauded the reduction in GMT, but I think there's a lot to be gained to re-adding some CMEO mandatory training back into the mix... because they're not only there to help address racism and I think a good portion of sailors don't know that. Maybe re-naming them to "command climate specialist" or something that implies that their function is more broadly about ensuring fair treatment and a healthy work environment rather than solely addressing discrimination could help, especially since they're supposed to be a significant lead on the CRT. It also communicates a more pro-active role to the people have the collateral duty - their job isn't merely to process complaints, but to assist in training the crew and front-line leaders on expectations for a proper work environment.

 

[Brett327]

CMEO mandatory training

It's already mandatory. A 20 minute training once a year isn't going to dissuade someone from making a complaint that they think is justified. That's not how most people's brains work.

 

[taxi1]

handling bullshit

I will say that last century I was in a unit with a female officer who underperformed, but kept playing the woman card against the male COs around fitrep time with veiled threats of IGs, and kept rising ever higher in her career.

Until we got a female CO.

 

[Spekkio]

It's already mandatory. A 20 minute training once a year isn't going to dissuade someone from making a complaint that they think is justified. That's not how most people's brains work.

The equal opportunity program and the whole treating people with dignity and respect that was being pushed a few years back are not one of the seven mandatory GMT requirements:

https://www.mynavyhr.navy.mil/Portals/55/Messages/NAVADMIN/FACT_SHEETS/Fact_Sheet_NAV_236_23.pdf

If there is a mando requirement within the CMEO program guidance, I believe through several data points that they are largely checking that box concurrent with the command climate debriefing.

The point of the training is to baseline everyone to expectations and prevent or minimize organizational drift from those expectations. Those expecations also tend to change over time as our society and culture evolve.... for example, you would think grown adults wouldn't have to be told to take down nude photos of women in the work place, but that had to happen as women were integrated into submarines. If people understand those expectations more clearly, the accuracy of reporting incidents should increase.

As an aside, I think that the misunderstanding of what is sexual harassment (CMEO) vs sexual assault (SAPR) significantly contributes to the perception that the majority of female veterans don't think their commanders took SA seriously.

It's also to remind everyone how to seek informal and formal resolution within the command so you don't get people running to the IG for every issue, part of the encouraging open dialogue and feedback you were talking about in your previous post.

I'm merely postulating that maybe the decision to determine that such training was a waste of everyone's time wasn't the right one.

I agree if that if it's treated like clicking through a canned power point, the training will be ineffective. Like any training or education, the instructor / teacher can make a big difference in making the material relatable and engaging.

Where we see how these trainings work is how everyone knows it's a huge no-no to text classified sensitive information on signal.

 

[sevenhelmet]

I will say that last century I was in a unit with a female officer who underperformed, but kept playing the woman card against the male COs around fitrep time with veiled threats of IGs, and kept rising ever higher in her career.

Until we got a female CO.

I think this speaks volumes about the fear surrounding the letters "IG", and how that is occasionally used as a lever against commanders who may not have a complete understanding of the process themselves and its potential ramifications on their career.

An "innocent until proven guilty" process that is better understood could help guard against this kind of abuse. Regarding some of the other comments on the IG, is it "first come, first served", or do they actively scrub the incoming complaints for higher priority investigations? I would think it's the latter, but I've been in this business long enough to know it might not make intuitive sense.

 

[Flash]

Canada's Liberal Party defeated the Conservatives in yesterday's election, preliminary results indicate that the Liberals may fall a few seats short of a majority but they gained about 17 seats and remain at least 20 seats ahead of the Conservatives. The Conservatives actually gained seats from the last election but several small parties lost a good chunk of their representation, with the New Democratic Party (NDP) projected to lose 17 of their 24 seats. Of note, the Conservative Party leader lost his seat to a Liberal.

The result is quite different than what the polls were indicating up until January of this year before Prime Minister Trudeau resigned and the President was inaugurated, followed by some rhetoric related to Canada that proved unpopular with much of the Canadian public.

Poll tracker courtesy of CBC.