Authority between members of the same rank

[bender248]

Hi, I've been reading the QR&Os and can't find anything relating to a situation that has arisen. So I'll explain what is going on and well maybe someone will be able to answer.

So we have two corporals one (A) with 4 years of seniority in his rank and (B) with 7 years of seniority. Cpl (A) has been appointed once in a while as supervisor in a section with members of ranks between Pte and Cpl. One of his task is to ask the members for a briefing of their functions. All so far is very normal, however Cpl (A) has been asking for the members and even Cpl (B) to come to attention while giving the briefing. Does Cpl (B) or for that matter any member of the section have the right to refuse to come to attention while giving the briefing and if so or not what is the reference that would support either ?

 

[lethalLemon]

I don't think there's any regulation on that. However, REGARDLESS of rank and seniority, if someone is appointed as supervisor or (I forget the term at the moment - wait out, over) "in charge" will do for now - they are basically given authority over that particular group of people in which they've been tasked to for that period of time. BUT! If for some reason they have a MCPL or SGT in this group... well, the "supervisor" still must respect their rank and seniority as it is clearly defined but they still have some level of authority over the MCPL+ as it is the "supervisors" tasking to take charge.

In this case, where you have two Corporals - One (A) with 5 yrs, one (B) with 7 yrs. I will assume that Corporal (B) is still infact a CPL and has not received appointment to MCPL.

They are still both Corporals, nobody walks around saying "I'm (B) with 7 yrs, I don't have to listen to you because you're only (A) with 5" and their badges certainly don't have their pay grade and time in printed on it. If (A) is tasked as supervisor/to take charge and requests that the group he/she is briefing to come to attention, then I don't see why they can't and it would be silly for anyone to refuse... I look at it this way: (A) is trying to ensure that the group is paying attention and absorbing the briefing and not just standing there with their arms crossed staring off into space or whispering to buddy next to them.

 

[Good2Golf]

Two issues in this question. 

The first deals with appointments and how those affect the relationship amongst members of equal rank - an appointment of a member (by the Chain of Command) to a position of seniority grants that member responsibility over other members.  Let's look at another example and see how the concept is consistent no matter the rank; a unit DCO and an Ops O and some Company Commanders (OCs) or Flight Commanders....all Majors, but is there any question that the DCO is the Major who by appointment has authority and intra-rank authority over the other Majors (even if he or she is younger than the other Majors)?  The example queried refers to an appointment of a more temporary nature than the structure of a unit's leadership, but the concept is the same.

The second issue deals with the unit SOPs for conduct of unit briefings.  If the unit SOPs are that the briefing attendees come to attention when the briefer arrives, then so be it.  If it's just something that Cpl A instituted on his/her own, then the briefing conduct should be clarified by the MCpl/Sgt responsible for the conduct of the briefings.

Regards
G2G

 

[armyvern]

Hi, I've been reading the QR&Os and can't find anything relating to a situation that has arisen. So I'll explain what is going on and well maybe someone will be able to answer.

So we have two corporals one (A) with 4 years of seniority in his rank and (B) with 7 years of seniority. Cpl (A) has been appointed once in a while as supervisor in a section with members of ranks between Pte and Cpl. One of his task is to ask the members for a briefing of their functions. All so far is very normal, however Cpl (A) has been asking for the members and even Cpl (B) to come to attention while giving the briefing. Does Cpl (B) or for that matter any member of the section have the right to refuse to come to attention while giving the briefing and if so or not what is the reference that would support either ?

QR&O Vol III, 103.18 (note c):

103.18 – INSUBORDINATE BEHAVIOUR

(1) Section 85 of the National Defence Act provides:

...

(A) The expression "superior officer" is defined in section 2 of the National Defence Act to mean any officer or non-commissioned member who, in relation to any other officer or non-commissioned member, is by that Act, or by regulation or by custom of the service, authorized to give a lawful command to that other officer or non-commissioned member. Unless this relationship exists, the charge must be laid under section 129 of the National Defence Act (see article 103.60 – Conduct to the Prejudice of Good Order and Discipline).
   
(B) A service tribunal should be satisfied, before conviction, that the accused knew that the person, with respect to whom an offence in this section was committed, was a superior officer. If the superior did not wear the insignia of his rank, and was not personally known to the accused, evidence would be necessary to show that the accused was otherwise aware that he was his superior officer.
 
(C) Where the accused is charged with an offence against a superior officer who is of the same rank, evidence must be adduced to show that the latter is the accused’s superior on some other ground, for example, by reason of the appointment which the superior officer holds. 

(D) Where a charge is for using threatening or insulting language, the particulars must state the expressions or their substance and the superior officer to whom they were addressed.

(E) In the case of threatening or insulting words, they must have been expressed to a superior officer and with an insubordinate intent, that is to say, they must be, either in themselves, or in the manner or circumstances in which they were spoken, insulting or disrespectful.
 
(F) In the case of contemptuous behaviour, the act or omission complained of must have been within the sight or hearing of the superior officer in question .

So, if dude was tasked as the OPI of said activity - he's the guy in charge even if he is of the same rank; just went through this here.

 

[Jungle]

Making other Cpls stand to attention to brief him...  : Regardless of regulations, maybe Cpl A is not ready to be in a supervisor position; I smell a power trip.

 

[lethalLemon]

QR&O Vol III, 103.18 (note c):

So, if dude was tasked as the OPI of said activity - he's the guy in charge even if he is of the same rank; just went through this here.

Case solved!  ;D

 

[PuckChaser]

Making other Cpls stand to attention to brief him...  : Regardless of regulations, maybe Cpl A is not ready to be in a supervisor position; I smell a power trip.

Concur completely, Cpl A needs a one-way conversation from his/her supervisor.

 

[CountDC]

Making other Cpls stand to attention to brief him...  : Regardless of regulations, maybe Cpl A is not ready to be in a supervisor position; I smell a power trip.

Maybe or maybe it is the units SOP for briefs or maybe there was some other reasons we are missing.  On the other side of the coin Cpl B with 7 years should know that when the person in charge says stand at attention you stand at attention.  If you have an issue you discuss it with him/her later and if not satisfied with the result bump it up a level. 

From pers experience - we had a Sgt briefing Ptes to Capt (who was also the OC) make us all stand at attention for 5 minutes during his brief as some members looked like they were zoning out.  No one complained or questioned it as he was in charge.

 

[Neill McKay]

It's not really germane to this situation, but for the sake of completeness QR&Os do provide direction on determining who is the senior between two members of the same rank.  First, it's by time in rank.  If that's equal then it's by time in previous rank.  If that doesn't break the tie, then it's by age.

But in the specific situation the OP describes, as others have pointed out, when a member has been designated to take charge of something then that's pretty well it.

 

[armyvern]

Making other Cpls stand to attention to brief him...  : Regardless of regulations, maybe Cpl A is not ready to be in a supervisor position; I smell a power trip.

That's what investigations are for.

But, the QR&O exists. So "Cpl A was tasked to have the others give him briefings on their jobs ..." He "was tasked", by who? How was he tasked to have them actually do the briefing?  perhaps he is doing exactly what he was tasked to do exactly how he was tasked to do it. Especially if this is a section that is of the type where they normally brief Snr personnel etc ... getting them used to how it ought to be done?

That's why QR&Os exist, and why investigations are impartial --- things smell all the time, but that does not necessarily a power trip make.

I especially love how the "facts" and "details" always seem to differ when told to put it in writing in statement form as it often also turns out that Cpl B is overblowing the details to his buddies (or anyone else he can complain to) because he was not the 'chosen' one.

 

[captloadie]

I'm interested to know what kind of briefing one needs to do standing at attention? A short report, maybe, but I have never been in a briefing were the presenter stands at attention looking straight out.

 

[armyvern]

I'm interested to know what kind of briefing one needs to do standing at attention? A short report, maybe, but I have never been in a briefing were the presenter stands at attention looking straight out.

If that is indeed what occured then the type of briefing would interest me too. I don't consider anything I see posted on this form an official statement though --- the reality may (and probably does) differ than the inferance.

 

[bender248]

Maybe I should've been a tad bit more precise, I didn't mean briefing as "mission brief" but rather as in a post briefing. Like you are doing your job at a specific post or station and you have a supervisor that goes around and can opt to ask the member to give a quick report of what his duties are (like Sea Training might ask on a ship). But said post brief with the standing to attention is not a Canadian created SOP but an American one (working NATO here).

I could be adding as many details as I want I think that Cpl (B) would be ultimately wrong, however for moral and cohesion Cpl (A) may not need to be quite as formal when there are no disciplinary issues, no one is a bag of **** in this case so the standing to attention stems from a practice from another military.

 

[aesop081]

Is it realy that big a f*****g deal ?

Hes been placed in charge, he has authority and he wants it done a certain way. Everyone's job at that point is to do it.

 

[OldSolduer]

Maybe I should've been a tad bit more precise, I didn't mean briefing as "mission brief" but rather as in a post briefing. Like you are doing your job at a specific post or station and you have a supervisor that goes around and can opt to ask the member to give a quick report of what his duties are (like Sea Training might ask on a ship). But said post brief with the standing to attention is not a Canadian created SOP but an American one (working NATO here).

I could be adding as many details as I want I think that Cpl (B) would be ultimately wrong, however for moral and cohesion Cpl (A) may not need to be quite as formal when there are no disciplinary issues, no one is a bag of **** in this case so the standing to attention stems from a practice from another military.

You never served in Cyprus. Privates and corporals stood to attention when briefing anyone of higher rank or appointment.

Is it realy that big a f*****g deal ?

Hes been placed in charge, he has authority and he wants it done a certain way. Everyone's job at that point is to do it.

I concur. Get on with the job and stop the bitching.

 

[Pusser]

Just someone in a command position can do something, doesn't mean he should.  Clearly, if Buddy has been placed in charge, he can require reports in this manner.  However, he should be prepared to reap what he sows.  If he's a complete jerk about it, he may find himself left out in the cold when he needs to call on his peers for help or support in the future.

Another thing to consider though is maybe you should cut Cpl (A) some slack.  Has he always been a D**K and this is just another manifestation, or is he an otherwise decent guy and this is just one thing?  As others have said, maybe there are other factors that you don't know about.  How is this done in other sections?  If this is the normal practice in a multi-national unit, everyone should fall in line and follow suit.  Just because it is not the Canadian custom, doesn't mean we shouldn't do it in mixed company.  The CF has an international reputation for being well-disciplined and professional.  Sometimes that means conforming to the prevailing custom (provided it doesn't violate Canadian law or sensibilities).

I once worked in a multi-national HQ where some of the (mostly eastern European) officers would go around every morning and greet each person individually with a handshake.  The American, Canadian and British officers found this rather odd, but we did it anyway simply because it wasn't worth the hurt feelings that would have occurred had we chosen to refuse on the basis that it wasn't "our way."

 

[aesop081]

Just someone in a command position can do something, doesn't mean he should.  Clearly, if Buddy has been placed in charge, he can require reports in this manner.  However, he should be prepared to reap what he sows.  If he's a complete jerk about it, he may find himself left out in the cold when he needs to call on his peers for help or support in the future.

True, but that is another matter entirely. That is for the individual in charge to worry about. If he's willing to live with it, so be it. For the ones that are subordinates, their job is to follow lawful orders. You don't have to like it, you just have to do it.

 

[Good2Golf]

Maybe I should've been a tad bit more precise, I didn't mean briefing as "mission brief" but rather as in a post briefing. Like you are doing your job at a specific post or station and you have a supervisor that goes around and can opt to ask the member to give a quick report of what his duties are (like Sea Training might ask on a ship). But said post brief with the standing to attention is not a Canadian created SOP but an American one (working NATO here)...

Ah, so it is an organizational/coalition SOP...I would them question why Cpl B would STOP standing to attention then if it was the accepted coalition SOP?  Was it because the "Post Brief" recipient (Cpl A) is now a Canadian NCM with an equal rank?

Hmmm....I may have a few bars, but I still stand to attention when giving my declaration to the RSO, no matter his/her rank.  :nod:

My gut feel is leaning even further in favour of Cpl A reasonably expecting all members at their posts to brief at attention.  Not sure how the actual "pushback" from Cpl B, and Cpl A's response to it, is happening...but I'd have to ask myself how would they both be reacting if the RSM or CO were wandering around and passed by as Cpl B was briefing Cpl A?

Regards
G2G

 

[Kat Stevens]

Rules and customs are great, Cpl A just better be prepared to live by ALL of them... Karma lurks everywhere, and we all know what she can be.  I happen to think making anyone get up to the chow to tell their immediate sup that they're installing a left handed widget into the gypsum saddle pump is a knob move.

 

[aesop081]

knob move.

Maybe or maybe not, either way it doesn't matter. If that's how he wants it, that's how its going to be.

If it is truly inappropriate, that guy's supervisor will surely provide some guidance.