# Pre-release IC Discussion



## Mediman14 (13 Jan 2017)

During one of my o'groups, a discussion was started about "Do it make sense to give a Member a I/C if a that particular member has voluntary release memo pass it". An I/C could lead to a C&P which could lead to a release. Any thoughts?

_- mod edit to clarify thread title -_


----------



## kratz (13 Jan 2017)

Reading and applying appropriate policies takes effort on the part of supervisors and command.  Members know this and will use it to their advantage. So 


> ...If I quit before (insert charge/admin policy/ect...) then it'll be too much work for them to actually do the work to come after me.



There are various versions of this discussion.  

Change the discussion by asking, if it is worth doing the staff work for a promotion / recognition / medal would you do it?
Then the answer is yes, staff the I/C, even if the member releases. Either way, you have completed your job as a leader.

(If the release if cancelled for some reason, your good work will follow through with the member).


----------



## PuckChaser (13 Jan 2017)

Mediman14 said:
			
		

> During one of my o'groups, a discussion was started about "Do it make sense to give a Member a I/C if a that particular member has voluntary release memo pass it". An I/C could lead to a C&P which could lead to a release. Any thoughts?



Not giving the member the IC would be something I consider laziness. Its more about the example it sets for his/her peers, in that you do not condone whatever action spurred the admin action.


----------



## George Wallace (14 Jan 2017)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Not giving the member the IC would be something I consider laziness. Its more about the example it sets for his/her peers, in that you do not condone whatever action spurred the admin action.



Being lazy and not doing the necessary disciplinary actions is like giving a person a FREEBEE "Get out of Jail Card".  What would you think of letting this person back into the CAF after they took a RELEASE to 'escape' disciplinary actions, only to find that they did not like or could not succeed in civilian life and wanted to get back into the Forces?


----------



## Mediman14 (14 Jan 2017)

Hi,
  Thanks for the insight. The thing that is sad about it is that this had came from a CSM, The thought process is that, the member is releasing, what's a I/C going to do, when the end result could be a release regardless. I see the CSM's POV but what message does that give others, what message does that give the member? What about the next time? Would the member think, I could get off with anything! 
  Because of the CSM's POV, I feel that it might be a waste of my time to complete the I/C. The other Snr NCO's in the o'group agree with me., since this particular member was previously charged with AWOL in 2016.


----------



## ballz (14 Jan 2017)

Mediman14 said:
			
		

> Hi,
> Thanks for the insight. The thing that is sad about it is that this had came from a CSM, The thought process is that, the member is releasing, what's a I/C going to do, when the end result could be a release regardless. I see the CSM's POV but what message does that give others, what message does that give the member? What about the next time? Would the member think, I could get off with anything!
> Because of the CSM's POV, I feel that it might be a waste of my time to complete the I/C. The other Snr NCO's in the o'group agree with me., since this particular member was previously charged with AWOL in 2016.



Talk to your Pl Commander. Remedial measures do not belong to the CSM, if your unit has the CSM signing ICs they are doing it wrong. If your Pl Comd supports it then he should talk to the OC who ought to support it, at which point it's a done deal.



			
				Mediman14 said:
			
		

> since this particular member was previously charged with AWOL in 2016.



You'd have to explain how this is relevant.


----------



## Journeyman (14 Jan 2017)

Mediman14 said:
			
		

> The thought process is that, the member is releasing.....


Further to the post by kratz, ensure that the troops understand that it's being done for professional military reasons -- you just need one bitter shit-disturber to start the rumour that it's being done as 'punishment' because the soldier for releasing (or whatever gossip reason fits the circumstances).


----------



## ModlrMike (14 Jan 2017)

Mediman14 said:
			
		

> Hi,
> Thanks for the insight. The thing that is sad about it is that this had came from a CSM, The thought process is that, the member is releasing, what's a I/C going to do, when the end result could be a release regardless. I see the CSM's POV but what message does that give others, what message does that give the member? What about the next time? Would the member think, I could get off with anything!
> Because of the CSM's POV, I feel that it might be a waste of my time to complete the I/C. The other Snr NCO's in the o'group agree with me., since this particular member was previously charged with AWOL in 2016.



I suppose the point is one doesn't escape consequences because of intent to release. In addition, an IC goes on the Pers File, where should the member later attempt to join the Res, or even rejoin the Regs, would be food for thought on the part of recruiting.

I'm not sure if I would consider it a wast of time. If for no other purpose than to go through the exercise to gain experience.


----------



## kratz (14 Jan 2017)

This I/C could have training value as well. Not only are you and other peers learning, but 2 I/C learn and as others posted, subordinates  learn release is no escape from staff work (AKA dreaded paperwork).


----------



## Fishbone Jones (14 Jan 2017)

..........or you could look to booting his ass to the curb as soon as possible the expedient exercise. Why would you want to keep him around just to satisfy your point. Just get rid of him.


----------



## ModlrMike (14 Jan 2017)

recceguy said:
			
		

> ..........or you could look to booting his *** to the curb as soon as possible the expedient exercise. Why would you want to keep him around just to satisfy your point. Just get rid of him.



Bad pennies have a habit of turning up where you least expect them.


----------



## George Wallace (14 Jan 2017)

recceguy said:
			
		

> ..........or you could look to booting his ass to the curb as soon as possible the expedient exercise. Why would you want to keep him around just to satisfy your point. Just get rid of him.



....And let him go back to his PRes undisciplined?  Problem just comes back to bite you in the ass later.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (15 Jan 2017)

Getting rid of him means releasing him. Not sending him back to a PRes outfit.


----------



## George Wallace (15 Jan 2017)

recceguy said:
			
		

> Getting rid of him means releasing him. Not sending him back to a PRes outfit.



Although a Component Transfer is possible, I doubt it would happen IF disciplinary action had been taken and that option was taken away by the category of Release the person was Released under.  However, if there is no disciplinary action taken, and the Release category upon Release permitted, the member could easily rejoin the PRes on their own accord.

I have witnessed a person Released, who was not supposed to ever be accepted into the CF or PRes, go back to their home PRes unit and sign up again.  Within three or four years, that person was back in the Reg Force, in the same Trade and working with me.  You don't do due diligence and the paperwork and these things happen.


----------



## PuckChaser (15 Jan 2017)

What happens if the member decides to try to pull their VR and Ottawa says "Ok" despite the CO saying no? Now you're scrambling to issue an IC that should have been done right away. The further away a punishment/administrative action is away from the incident reduces its effectiveness to correct the behaviour.


----------



## ballz (15 Jan 2017)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Although a Component Transfer is possible, I doubt it would happen IF disciplinary action had been taken and that option was taken away by the category of Release the person was Released under.  However, if there is no disciplinary action taken, and the Release category upon Release permitted, the member could easily rejoin the PRes on their own accord.



An Initial Counselling is *not* disciplinary, it is remedial.

Very unlikely an IC stops a component transfer (although it would affect their competitiveness, so it depends on how many CTs are being planned for), and it most certainly isn't going to change anyone's release category.

Regardless, an IC should be issued if its warranted... doesn't matter if the person already has a release in, or threatens to release in response... in fact, if they threaten to release because of something as small as an IC, you should encourage them to, they clearly aren't cut out to be an adult.


----------



## OldSolduer (15 Jan 2017)

Just a thought but if they release without the IC then re enrolling if they want is easier. If this member is a true s$$t pump then IC them. It may make a difference if they decide to re enrole.


----------



## Mediman14 (16 Jan 2017)

It had came to light today, Mbr had received a 5B in early Dec for something non related to this (out of dress) on field ex, IC for lying to his previous CoC. All of this was not passed on to me until know. Last fiscal year, AWOL charged. 
  Two questions was asked, would everyone else in the platoon/ section get treated the same way? Unfortunately, I suspect the answer is "no", which doesn't make it right. Second Question - Don't you think an IC is a bit extreme for not following orders?


----------



## PuckChaser (16 Jan 2017)

If the member has made a habit of not following orders, and has been previously counseled with informal conversations and 5B PDRs, I see no reason why you wouldn't issue an IC. Some people need a firm kick in the butt, that a summary trial wouldn't accomplish.


----------



## kratz (16 Jan 2017)

Mediman14 said:
			
		

> It had came to light today, Mbr had received a 5B in early Dec for something non related to this (out of dress) on field ex, IC for lying to his previous CoC. All of this was not passed on to me until know. Last fiscal year, AWOL charged.
> Two questions was asked, would everyone else in the platoon/ section get treated the same way? Unfortunately, I suspect the answer is "no", which doesn't make it right. Second Question - Don't you think an IC is a bit extreme for not following orders?



All stop:
This site is not here to "decide for you" what to do.


----------

