Army recruiter tells unqualified applicant to get a fake diploma so he can enlist

DTechBA,

Tom was actually referring to Mr. Charles Abell, Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel & Readiness. His bio states:

http://www.defenselink.mil/bios/abell_bio.html

See the thread where he says:

http://forums.degreeinfo.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=19462

He has made himself look ridiculous, first by obtaining the bogus Columbus Masters of Science, and again by trying to pass it as a legitimate degree. He is an embarrassment to the DOD and the Administration. I've made not attempt to defend his amazing lack of judgement. I agree, should either resign or be fired.

 

Re: Lets be real here

"Yes" regarding your point about allowing him to retire. "Maybe" regarding the "no fault" military.

Once you're eligible to retire, it would take a major crime adjudicated in a court martial to prevent it. The sergeant might get busted in rank or fined, but would likely be able to retire.

If he's not eligible to retire, this kind of offense might still be survivable, but not without ramifications. Again, if he's offered non-judicial punishment, he'll likely be fined and/or busted in rank. But he could get promoted again and retire honorably. If prosecuted and tried in a court martial, however, he'd likely get a discharge along with his other punishments.

This is all speculation, of course. The point is, enlisted personnel (especially mid- to late-career NCOs/Petty Officers) are often able to recover from major mistakes.

An officer pulling this stunt would normally be out on his rear end.

 

pour encourager les autres

Getting a degree mill phony degree is not an "amazing lack of judgment."
It's an appalling lack of honour and ethics.

Hang him high as Haman, as Genl Jackson was wont to say.

 

No career

No career can survive non-judicial punishment. If you are already locked in to retirement you may make it. However, you will never be promoted beyond your current grade. It is the way it is....

 

In the past, I have personally worked in the recruiting brigade that is responsible for those recruiters.

Recruiting is not an easy business and the majority of recruiters are hard working, honest people (yeah, yeah, yeah…I can hear is now…I put recruiter and honest in the same sentence…an oxymoron).

Don’t let a couple dishonest recruiters tarnish the truth about the majority of recruiters: mainly that they are honest. When I worked in the recruiting brigade, I heard many recruiters tell me that the problem with recruiting isn’t so much with finding willing applicants as it has more to do with finding qualified applicants. Recruiters turn away many potential leads than the general public realizes.

It is an interesting news story and I don’t doubt that it actually happened. In fact, I forwarded the story to a couple of my past recruiting brigade coworkers.

 

Being an ex-navy guy, I will be the first to admit that there are unethical recruiters among the recruiting commands. Although I feel that this recruiter should be severely punished, I do not think what he did is representative of military recruiters at large. But, at the same time, I do not think this is an entirely isolated incident. So, I do believe that each military service recruiting command needs to continue its serious house cleaning to help ensure that the likelihood of this happening again is remote.

 

Not to excuse what the recruiter did, because it's inexcusable, but quota demands on recruiters are fierce. Unless it's changed in the last few years, a successful tour as either a recruiter or a drill sergeant is almost required to make the jump from E-6 to E-7 in the Army.

 

Never was true..

These positions are still a small portion of the active duty E-6's. It helps but unless you have other things it isn't a guarantee. I knew very few people who made E-7 in the secondary zone. None of those that had were ex-DS's or Recruiters.

It is kind of the same chicken and egg thing you have with the Ivy League. If only the best are selected for recruiting or drill school, wouldn't they have made it anyway...

 

Re: No career

This isn't true. As a commander, I issued many, many cases of nonjudicial punishment. Most of those people continued in their careers and many were subsequently promoted. I have first-hand experience with all of this.

In the Air Force, qualitative judgments on enlisted promotions do not begin until the pay grade of E-8. While nonjudicial punishment would, no doubt, affect one's "points" towards promotion (because of lower performance reports), those don't last. In fact, such an incident will affect only one annual report. An otherwise stellar performer could easily be promoted in the next cycle (or in the next few). This makes promotion through Master Sergeant (E-7) a real possibility.

In discussions with commanders from other services, this is even more so. The Air Force is the most selective, and most likely to prevent a member's retention. The Air Force is also less likely to punish its members--it is rare compared to the other services. It is much more a career-ender than it is in the other services--but not definitively so, even in the Air Force.

 

Incredibly so. I feel the government has made joining the military a very unattractive thing. But, typically, they've shifted the burden of that right on down to the individual recruiter. But if they're all (figuratively) missing their goals, does that mean they're all a bunch of slugs? Of course not. They're being asked to sell a product their target audience doesn't want.

 

Severely punished, no - but punished, yes. (we may just have a different opinion of what severely punished means...when I see severely punished, I think of jail time)

I also do not believe that this is an isolated incidence and I don't think it is representative of military recruiters as a whole.

The Recruiting Command should investigate to determine potential reasons these recruiters felt the need to be dishonest (i.e. unrealistic command expectations). If these recruiters felt they couldn't meet their quotas "by the book," then there are probably other reasons for this type of behavior.

Of course, I could just be wrong and these guys could simply be dirt bags.

 

Phd2b:


When I said severely punished, I did not mean that the recruiters should be doing time at Leavenworth. I meant that these guys should get more than a slap on the wrist. At the very least, they should lose a stripe. I also agree with you in that the recruiting commands should do some serious analysis to see whether if these types of incidents are due to unethical recruiters or unrealistic recruiting goals. If the analysis reveals unethical recruiters, then the military needs to be more picky in recruiter selection. If it is unrealistic quotas, the military needs to look at the recruiting process as a whole.

 

Then we are on the same sheet of music.

I agree...at a minimum there needs to be some sort of Article 15 proceeding.

This subject kind of strikes a nerve with me since I have worked with recruiters. When people read stuff like this, it fits in with their ideal of unethical, dishonest recruiters. From my experience, there are many more honest recruiters than there are dishonest ones. Recruiters do more good for the community that they recruit out of and for the applicants they recruit than the public realizes.

 

You say "...doing time at Leavenworth..." like that's a BAD thing. If they were to do time at Leavenworth, they would have some TIME to think about the consequences of their criminal act(s), and it would serve as an excellent warning to those who would consider doing something similar.
Just my opinion, I could be wrong.

 

I am sure most recruiters are honest. I fear, though, that Mr Abell's ideal may be just what you describe. But then, I doubt if he reads degreeinfo--or, apparently, much of anything at all. I mean, why bother?

 

An act such this is not considered criminal, would not be punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), and subsequently would not merit jail time in Leavenworth. This type of action would however, be punishable by non-judicial means (i.e. Article 15).

Trust me on this one…they didn’t do themselves any favors in the successful completion of their military careers.

 

Clarification: Article 15 (Captain's Mast in the Navy) is punishment under the UCMJ.

Furthermore, the recruiters in this case are subject to the UCMJ and are subject to trial by court-martial under any number of articles such as:

Article 84 - Effecting unlawful enlistment, appointment, or separation (maximum punishment: Dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 5 years).

Article 92 - Failure to obey order or regulation/Dereliction in the performance of duties (maximum punishment: Dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 2 years; maximum punishment in the case of dereliction in the performance of duties: Bad-conduct discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 6 months.

Article 107 - False official statements (maximum punishment: Dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 5 years).

Article 81 - Conspiracy (maximum punishment: the maximum punishment authorized for the offense which is the object of the conspiracy , except that in no case shall the death penalty be imposed).

Article 134 - Soliciting another to commit an offense (maximum punishment: the maximum punishment authorized for the offense which is the object of the conspiracy , except that in no case shall the death penalty be imposed.)

Nonjudicial punishment is definitely an option, but it is not the only option.

 

True. And the truly sad thing is this from his bio:

"Mr. Abell entered active duty service as an enlisted soldier and concluded his Army career by retiring as a Lieutenant Colonel. He served two tours in Vietnam in various positions; Infantry Platoon Leader, Company Commander and Cobra Attack helicopter pilot. His career progressed through increasingly responsible positions at every level of Army operations. His decorations include the Legion of Merit, (2) Bronze Stars (Valor), Purple Heart, the Meritorious Service Medal (with four Oak Leaf Clusters), 14 Air Medals (two for Valor), the Army Commendation Medal (for Valor), and the Combat Infantryman's Badge. "


By most standards of measurement, he's done his share and then some. Why in the world would you then resort to lying about a master's degree? Even more, once it has been pointed out that you have lied about it, why would you not take it out of your c.v. and off the website?

Again, he should resign or be fired.



Tom Nixon

 

Hmmm...

I thinks me stands corrected...

From my experience, more than likely, these recruiters will not see jail time.

The most they will probably get is reduction in rank (possibly to E1), forfeiture of pay, extra duty, a general officer letter of reprimand, and possibly kicked out of the Army. These punishments are regarded as non-judicial, carried out by a commander in the recruiter’s chain of command, and, this is where I went astray, covered under UCMJ.

 

This is incorrect. Nonjudicial punishment under Article 15 (of the UCMJ) is offered in lieu of going to court-martial. A commander offers it when he/she could prosecute, but is offering the suspect an opportunty to cop to the accusation and accept punishment instead of being tried (and risking a Federal conviction).

A commander should never, ever offer nonjudicial punishment if what he/she can prove does not rise to the level of a court-martial offense. Those violations should be handled administratively (letters of reprimand, letters of counseling, etc.).

The accused has the right to decline nonjudicial punishment and accept trial by court-martial. If that happens, the commander would look like an idiot if he/she had to withdraw charges because a conviction in court-martial would not be likely. That's the litmus test: if the member goes to trial, is the government likely to prevail? If not, don't offer nonjudicial punishment under Article 15. Any JAG who advises differently is doing an incredible disservice to the commander.

Nonjudicial punishment under Article 15 is used to dimiss minor offenses without the trouble--and the risk to the member's career and future--brought on by a trial. But every charge proferred under Article 15 is, indeed, a court-martial offense.

NB: As a commander, I adjudicated dozens of Article 15 punishments. I never had a member refuse punishment and take a trial. And I never had to withdraw the charges I made. If I ever had any doubts, I'd handle it administratively where the level of proof--preponderance of the evidence--is much lower.

(Sorry....this looks like I'm piling on. I didn't read the rest of the thread first before responding.)