Navy Community - discussions, photos, video - Navy Times

Letters

No waivers for higher-ups

The Aug. 17 cover [“5 new ways to kick out sailors”] makes it seem as if there is a witch hunt with the intention of getting rid of sailors just for the sake of reducing numbers. How about “5 new methods of enforcing substance abuse regulations”?

Next, a box with the article about the new rules states: “You’re out if ... you are involved in a drug- or alcohol-related incident within three years of substance-abuse treatment. Waivers are available for higher-ranking officers and sailors.”

Why should anyone be able to get a waiver? A rule is a rule, and rank should have no effect.

This sends a message that you can get away with it if you have [high] enough rank. This is ridiculous and only serves to undermine the effectiveness of our rules and regulations.

Any individual who violates this rule should receive the same treatment, regardless of rank.

In the same issue, Hospital Corpsman 3rd Class Bert Stanisz comments: “We complain about stupid rules, but we have lost sight of following those rules without hesitation” [“‘Tired’ of sloppy sailors,” Letters]. This can be applied to the substance-abuse issue.

These waivers will tell people to question regulations that are in place. Higher-ranking personnel — enlisted and officer alike — must set the example and demand higher-quality personal conduct, not be exempt from it.

— HM1 (FMF) Erik English, Richlands, N.C.

BUPERS MAKES MISTAKES

I was not surprised to read that [personnel officials] advanced people by mistake and now want to take back the advancement [“Promotions pulled back,” June 8].

The only surprise was that they admitted a mistake. In 1950, I was stationed at Naval Air Station Midway Island. I received a letter with a packet advising me that I was being promoted to chief and that I should order my uniforms as per the information in the enclosed packet.

We had a small exchange on the island that only had wash khakis. With only four months to go on my 24-month tour, I planned to buy the rest of the uniforms when I returned to Pearl Harbor.

The chiefs’ list came out, and I wasn’t on it. I took the letter to the executive officer, and he sent a wire. The Bureau of Personnel’s reply was that only five dental technicians were advanced, and I was No. 6.

In 1953, while onboard a carrier operating off the coast of Korea, I received the same letter and packet so I could order uniforms. The ship was due back in Japan on the date of advancement, so I planned again to fill my sea bag later.

Again, the list came out and I was not on it. Again, I took the letter to the XO, who wired BuPers. The response: Only 15 DTCs, and I was No. 16.

In 1957, I received orders to a school in San Diego for radiation detection and decontamination. Then I was assigned to atomic testing at the Bikini Atolls in 1958. Again, I received a letter and a packet from BuPers to order uniforms for chief. We were due back at Pearl Harbor by the advancement date, so I planned again to buy uniforms when I got back. The list came out, and again I was not on it. This time, I filed the letter in the round file and did not say anything to anybody.

As for BuPers, I never heard a word, not a “we made a mistake” nor a “sorry.”

— DT1 Robert Moore (ret.), Springfield, Ore.

TIME TO SHAPE UP

I was troubled by retired Chief Engineman Ron Baptista’s letter concerning sloppily dressed sailors [“Pride in uniform, service,” Letters, Aug. 17].

Baptista mentioned an officer of the deck aboard a cruiser who had an ill-fitting uniform and a too-large hat, probably used to cover his long hair. When this happens, it means that the command structure on that ship or station is lacking, and someone should be fired.

On the carriers I served on, you stood watch with proper haircut, in a neat and correct uniform. But we had outstanding commanding and executive officers who made sure the ship and crew were doing their jobs and ordered that the uniform be worn correctly.

If you are a sloppy watchstander, you will be a sloppy warrior.

— Lt. Leonard Vsetecka (ret.), Brunswick, Ga.

MISPLACED PRIORITIES

In her July 27 column [“Congress acting to aid troops, vets, families”], House Speaker Nancy Pelosi opines that military families and veterans must be protected with a new federal health care system. It is clear to me that the constant need to fix veterans health care is evidence of the government’s inability to run any health care program. Pelosi should consider this before forcing government health care on all Americans.

Military families are much more concerned about the Obama administration’s shift in policies than we are about social programs for families. We want to know our husbands are furnished with the best weapons and equipment, supported by the best intelligence programs, and have the freedom to use these advantages. We want to know our husbands are risking their lives for the sake of freedom and peace, which must come through victory in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Our husbands are at war and Pelosi thinks our greatest concern is day-care centers? That’s insulting.

— Anna Baker, Okinawa, Japan

TRY SHOPPING AROUND

Thank you for your article about the commissary and savings [“A real bargain,” July 20]. I once thought the commissary had the lowest prices, but I have found tactics for coupon use — often not at the commissary — that can save money.

A key rule is to not be loyal to one brand. Another is to clip every coupon because chances are almost all coupon items will go on sale.

I still buy meats at the commissary because their prices can’t be beat. For everything else, I shop somewhere else.

— Monette Eames, Albany, Ga.

KEEP FALLEN AT FOREFRONT

Ever since Military Times papers started printing The Human Toll, listing casualties in operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom, my personal tradition has been to turn to that page as soon as I pick up a copy to read the names and see the faces of those we’ve lost.

I was disappointed to see that section moved from the front pages to virtually the last. I think, at a minimum, we owe it to our fallen brothers and sisters in arms to keep them in the forefront of our minds and not shove them back to just before the classifieds.

— Army Chief Warrant Officer 2 Todd White, Fort Bragg, N.C.