Fraternization Policy?

Two reasons--first, if there is favoritism between a senior and a junior, there can be a breakdown of good order. Think of "teacher's pet" or "the bosses buddy". Second reason relates to the first--the senior may be required to give lawful orders that may likely result in death or injury to junior personnel. If there is a non-professional relationship involved it may result in mission failure, with all the consequences that may entail.

Fraternization policy isn't limited to dating but includes all non-professional relationships between seniors and juniors. The movie U-571 has a lot of flaws, but it addresses some of the issues of being too familiar with your juniors.

That's not to say you can't be friends with your subordinates. But they will always remember that you have their career and even their lives in your hands. That's why the UCMJ article exists.

My $0.02
 
Two reasons--first, if there is favoritism between a senior and a junior, there can be a breakdown of good order. Think of "teacher's pet" or "the bosses buddy". Second reason relates to the first--the senior may be required to give lawful orders that may likely result in death or injury to junior personnel. If there is a non-professional relationship involved it may result in mission failure, with all the consequences that may entail.

Wouldn't this also be true within the ranks of officers? Also within the ranks of enlisted. Not every squad has an officer in charge. Most small boat stations in the coast guard don't have any officers.
 
That's not to say you can't be friends with your subordinates. But they will always remember that you have their career and even their lives in your hands. That's why the UCMJ article exists.

Doesn't sound like you can be friends to me.

Examples of situations where charges have been drafted include, but are not limited to:
  • Shared living accommodations
  • Playing sports off-duty
  • Visiting nightclubs or bars off-duty
 
I get the feeling there are a lot of career military officers that don't want to chime in on this.

Not sure why that would be the case. To those of us who have served more than a hot minute this is a pretty well known and easily followed policy.

Do some folks mess it up? Sure, but it’s not that hard to maintain professionalism.
 
Not sure why that would be the case. To those of us who have served more than a hot minute this is a pretty well known and easily followed policy.

Do some folks mess it up? Sure, but it’s not that hard to maintain professionalism.

I'm sure it is an easy policy to follow....but what is the logic and reasoning behind why this is a policy?
 
In regards to playing sports of duty, would that include officers and enlisted playing together on a baseball or softball team?
 
Every service has its own nuances. Marines tend to probably be most rigid in our formality. As an officer I did play on some of my unit’s teams. We had a handful of Officer, but mostly enlisted. It was less formal, but still a hard line of no first names. They called me Lt (L.T.) on the court or field, but in the office it would always be Lieutenant as Marines don’t call Lieutenants L.T. Just as we don’t call Staff Sergeant, Sergeant for short. If the team went out after we would sometimes attend. If we did, we would buy a round then depart to let them have some fun without us around. Same thing for any unit outings. Make your appearance, buy a round and disappear. As mentioned, friendly, but not friends.

As to why? Good order and discipline. Especially in the USMC, there is a hierarchy, junior enlisted, NCOs, SNCOs, company grade officers, senior officers. It’s tough, especially as you get promoted as relationships shift and morph. I was a Lt and dated another Lt (In the USMC, 1 bar is 1 bar. So Lt and Warrant Officers always call each other by first names outside of work and don’t salute each other). He got promoted to Captain, if I ran across him in uniform while in work mode, I saluted him. Now outside of work there was none of that. In regards to dating, the general rule (no formal rule) was one up or down in rank. Yes, sometimes two happened, usually a promotion happens somewhere. I have seen a Lt marry a LtCol and it created a lot of churn and talk.
 
So what happens after my DS commissions next year, and his three high school buddies and he get together in the future?

My DS will be an Army 2LT, and everyone else in his "posse" is enlisted ( 2 sailors and another soldier).

I have heard from DS:
  • These are pre-existing relationships so it is a bit less rigid.
  • They must be formal and respectful when in uniform. (example, They all got together in uniform (my DS in cadet uniform) for one of the guy's wedding. They were formal during the ceremony but changed their clothes afterwards.
  • They can socialize when out of uniform.
  • They should never be in chain of command together.
Am I on track with this?
 
So what happens after my DS commissions next year, and his three high school buddies and he get together in the future?

My DS will be an Army 2LT, and everyone else in his "posse" is enlisted ( 2 sailors and another soldier).

I have heard from DS:
  • These are pre-existing relationships so it is a bit less rigid.
  • They must be formal and respectful when in uniform. (example, They all got together in uniform (my DS in cadet uniform) for one of the guy's wedding. They were formal during the ceremony but changed their clothes afterwards.
  • They can socialize when out of uniform.
  • They should never be in chain of command together.
Am I on track with this?

Sounds about right. The key is "Good conduct and order". For example, when I was a newly commissioned ensign, my brother was a MM3 (E-4). We'd get together, have a beer or two, but never talk shop to each other, and never get involved in each other's units.
 
I get the feeling there are a lot of career military officers that don't want to chime in on this.
Many of us who have been in for a while have either served in joint units or had occasion to serve with other services and we end up with friendships and potential "helpers" for those with whom we might fraternize. On my second ship (an Amphib), we embarked and worked with a couple of Army units for exercises and even a (short) deployment. If I'd had a relationship/friendship with an Army enlisted person that might have allowed me to influence his/her treatment for the better (or worse). Later in my career, I served on a joint air defense staff with members from all of the services and the same issue is present there. That is why it is the rule. You may think it is silly or whatever but that does not change the fact that it is the case for members of the US military.
 
Many of us who have been in for a while have either served in joint units or had occasion to serve with other services and we end up with friendships and potential "helpers" for those with whom we might fraternize. On my second ship (an Amphib), we embarked and worked with a couple of Army units for exercises and even a (short) deployment. If I'd had a relationship/friendship with an Army enlisted person that might have allowed me to influence his/her treatment for the better (or worse). Later in my career, I served on a joint air defense staff with members from all of the services and the same issue is present there. That is why it is the rule. You may think it is silly or whatever but that does not change the fact that it is the case for members of the US military.

The problem is its not the "rule". There are many exceptions and the rule is applied differently depending on command. But Social norms change, and the military changes with them now. Silly is your word, not mine.
 
Lurking: I have been trying to grasp the nature of your questions and position. Unfortunately, I haven't gotten a fix on it. Fraternization was never really a part of my military experience - the men and women I dealt with all understood what was (and wasn't) acceptable. I know it sounds unrealistic but it just seems everyone knew what was and wasn't allowed - and very few took the risk or challenged it.

Hoops captures my experiences and recollections in her post above (#29). My last assignment was with a very small Marine guard unit at a very small Navy base. We had just a handful of officers (Navy and Marine). The base had an active intramural sports program and I always elected to join the Marine enlisted team rather than the Navy/ Marine officer team. I made sure that it was understood I was a participant not the leader - I played or sat the bench based on the team captain's decision. I only referred to the teammates by rank and last name; they did the same with me (no first names ever). It built tremendous camaraderie within our Marine unit.

This same base had an "all-ranks" club. It was understood that the officers might stop over after work for a drink but would leave quickly so the Marines could let their hair down outside of our presence. In this club, there might be a pool or darts game between ranks but always in public and decorum was always maintained. In short, we all figured out how to work, play, and socialize in a way that maintained "good order and discipline".

I don't think that the principle against fraternization is viewed differently by different commands but enforcing it may be somewhat subject to local leadership. I suppose some instances could be "shades of grey" but most are not.

I went back to your original post on a hypothetical:
Here is a fraternization situation I asked my daughter about.
Coast guard cutter, has 50 aboard. 3 are single females, one of those is an ensign. Do you allow those 3 females to fraternize? Or do you isolate that female ensign and only allow her to fraternize with the male officers?

I have no experience to address that specific situation but I am sure others on the site do. I would say that you would not "allow someone to fraternize" but you also don't isolate individuals. As a leader, you would find and strike the right balance for your team given the circumstances.

I hope that helps.
 
I went back to your original post on a hypothetical:
Here is a fraternization situation I asked my daughter about.
Coast guard cutter, has 50 aboard. 3 are single females, one of those is an ensign. Do you allow those 3 females to fraternize? Or do you isolate that female ensign and only allow her to fraternize with the male officers?

I have no experience to address that specific situation but I am sure others on the site do. I would say that you would not "allow someone to fraternize" but you also don't isolate individuals. As a leader, you would find and strike the right balance for your team given the circumstances.

I hope that helps.

I compare that to the situation where there are three muslims or three Jews at a command or site. In my career, I saw the latter of those as well as the three women example and while its a little tough for the senior (s) to maintain the proper distance, it can and should still be expected. People can be mentored and/or supported without breaking the expected Junior/Senior barriers.
 
My DS met his future wife in AROTC, when he was an MSII and she was an MSI. The relationship developed slowly and there was never any specific attempt to keep it a secret. Nor was there a belief that they had the "right" because of anyone else's experience. There was however, a constant sensitivity to appearances and an understanding that if the issue were to be raised they would have no recourse. A violation? Technically, yes. In the end, neither they nor anyone else made it an issue.

It would have certainly become an issue if they wasted their time wondering why the rules exist in the first place. If a person can't figure that part out on their own, they'd best just follow the written rule in the most literal way.
 
I went back to your original post on a hypothetical:
Here is a fraternization situation I asked my daughter about.
Coast guard cutter, has 50 aboard. 3 are single females, one of those is an ensign. Do you allow those 3 females to fraternize? Or do you isolate that female ensign and only allow her to fraternize with the male officers?

I have no experience to address that specific situation but I am sure others on the site do. I would say that you would not "allow someone to fraternize" but you also don't isolate individuals. As a leader, you would find and strike the right balance for your team given the circumstances.

I hope that helps.

I compare that to the situation where there are three muslims or three Jews at a command or site. In my career, I saw the latter of those as well as the three women example and while its a little tough for the senior (s) to maintain the proper distance, it can and should still be expected. People can be mentored and/or supported without breaking the expected Junior/Senior barriers.
Curious, and not being sensitive, but how are 2 female enlisted and 1 female officer like 3 Jews on a comand?
 
Hopefully one of our USCGA folks can chime, but on a USN ship they would not share a stateroom or berthing with officer and enlisted. Officers would stay in staterooms and enlisted would be in their respective berthing area.
 
Curious, and not being sensitive, but how are 2 female enlisted and 1 female officer like 3 Jews on a comand?

I was kind of wondering the same thing.

I was half expecting a joke. "So three Jews, three Muslims and three Baptists walk onto a ship's bridge on the Sabbath during Ramadan and the Helmsman asks, "Hey! Do any of you guys....?"

Then I heard the SWAT team from the PC police taking up positions and realized I better back off.
 
Back
Top