First Name Basis- Ever?

[BMCS Dennis Endicott ret]

I think this topic deserves its own thread. Steve responded to the Customs and Courtesies thread with the below partial quote. I responded below his. What do you all think?


"In addition, when I am in a liberty status at home in my neighborhood with a mix of Coast Guardsmen of varying ranks E5 to O5, we are on a first name basis, but when we are in uniform on base we all address each other in the proper manner. It is an issue of boundaries, knowing what they are and when they need to be enforced or slackened." PAC Steve Carleton


"That is a problem.

You should never be on a first-name basis with a non-Chief. It is detrimental to good order and discipline and probably contributes the forementioned issues. I've found that practice common in the M-field, and among some support units. It's rare on a ship or small boat station.

Look at it this way, even if those Coasties are disciplined enough to call you "Chief" at work when they are calling you by your first name during liberty, they are always thinking of you as "Steve." And, if that's true, they are also thinking of you as a peer.

I'd also suggest that you tolerate and encourage the practice because you want to be friends with those non-Chiefs. That is not your role. You have a separate mess facility, berthing area, and name (Chief) because you require a professional distance. You cannot do your job properly without it. And, you cannot turn it on and off.

If I can figure out how, I'm going to make this its own thread. I think you've hit on a topic that is going to generate a lot of conversation. Good job."
BMCS Dennis Endicott

[ETCS David Kroll]

Good point Dennis,
The problem is worse at smaller units or isolated (not officially isolated) when your the only Chief. And your family and wife want to try and make friends with people they have things in common with. Personally I've always been called Chief on or off duty. Maybe I'm lucky or maybe its my sparkling personality but my crews have always called me Chief or Senior Chief. It is one of those work life issues when dealing with the families. Tough call and a tough one to hold yourself to, but I think your right.

My problem is being addressed as "Senior" and not "Senior Chief". Its a small thing, but it is making me feel old. Should I correct them on this?

Dave

[PACS Steve Carleton]

Senior,

In my own defense, I feel that I should expand on my previous statement.

I think that it is an issue of comfort for our spouses and children. I live across the street from an O4, during the last 17 months I have lived in this neighborhood I have never called up my neighbor and said "Hello LCDR, do you want to come over and have a cold beer?" I don't answer my home phone with "Chief Carleton's residence," if my duty cell phone rings or the caller ID shows that it is the CDO, then I answer it by identifying myself as Chief Carleton.

If my neighbor and I leave the house at the same time in uniform, I don't throw him a salute in the driveway, nor does he expect one from me.

My OPs Boss lives two houses down, he and I are on a first-name basis during non-duty hours. We are not beer drinking buddies, but our families interact during neighborhood block parties, etc. At work, it is Sir and Chief, as it should be. There have been a couple of occassions, when I needed to brief him on something operational after hours, I called him at home and refered to him as Sir, his response was to call me Chief. There is a clear difference between work and home.

We NEVER discuss home/neighborhood issues at work, and very rarely do we discuss work issues at home. He certainly isn't going to cousel me on my marks at home over a cold beer.

When we congregate on the softball field, do you yell out, "great hit Petty Officer, or nice catch Lieutenant Commander?" I certainly don't recall hearing that unless it is your CO or XO playing. The first name thing probably happens more than you might think.

When you drive through base housing at other military service facilities, in some locations, they put your rank on the front door, I haven't seen that at CG housing locations. I think when you attach rank during family time, it adds an a dimension of intimidation, a dimension that my family shouldn't have to face.

As I stated in the previous thread, it is an issue of boundaries, respect for authority and knowing when it is appropriate.

[BMCS Dennis Endicott ret]

Steve,
You seem to be under the assumption that are times when you can relax customs/courtesies. There is not. On the softball field, my reply would be "Great Catch, sir!" And, I would salute that officer living next door.
I also fail to see how proper customs/courtesies has a negative effect on your family. None of the spouses here call me "Senior Chief." They call me "Dennis." None of my crew call my wife "Mrs. Endicott." They call her "Chris."
Having said that, however, there are warrant officers with which I am on a first name basis. I knew them as Chiefs and we are indeed friends. So, I guess there is a line that I'll draw as well. But I still think that you take it too far. You lose a great deal of your "voice" through that familiarity, and you lessen the effectiveness of the entire Chief's Corps when you teach non-Chiefs to put aside your title...even for a little while.

[BMCM Deane Smith]

What a great topic topic to debate. I'm not sure there's a clear cut answer to this one, other than what the Personnel Manual says. I think it's completely up to the individual and what they're comfortable with.

I've lived in both extremes - CG housing in NYC and I've lived in a small community in Oklahoma. Each place was different about how we interacted with each other off-duty. And, it worked in each place.

Personnally, I've done it both ways. I've had frienships or been at social gatherings with officers/non-chief's. Each case was different. Some people, I've told to refer to me by my first name, others I have not. It's up to me to make that call based on my comfort level. All fellow chiefs know where that line is and shouldn't cross it.

If you develop a freindship with an officer or non-chief, I don't think you want to be calling each other by rank/grade when off-duty. Obviously, at official or command/unit sponsored functions, we all use proper protocal.

This is a tough one...

[PACS Steve Carleton]

Senior,

I can see your points and that you are passionate about this subject.

My people never call me Steve, I don't expect their spouses to call me Chief.

Because E-City has multiple commands with a diverse mix of Enlisted and Officer, if you want to have any type of social life with neighbors and make friends you have to relax the use of titles to some degree that is acceptable to both parties

I have seen changes in people's attitudes toward my wife when the subject of what I do and my rank comes into discussion. Why should my spouse be penalized because of my title? Is that fair?

I look at in this way, if I am Steve to my CG neighbors, whom do not work at my command they might be more willing to approach me when they need assistance from Chief Carleton, because they know that I have connections/resources.

It comes from the thought that you can attract more flies with honey than with vinegar.

You and I will not agree on this issue, which is fine, I would like to sit back and see what others think on the subject. I also don't want this thread to turn into a continuous discussion between you and I, the other members of this forum would probably hate both of our guts after awhile.

[MKC Art Bailly (ret)]

Another great topic on our new web site. I guess you could say I’m middle of the road on this one. I too have lived in communities ranging from New York, Seattle, and Alaska for the last 11 years with the smallest town had a population of 3000. The only ones at work that call me art, are the other chiefs all 3 of them. The Officers and E-6 and below call me chief. Witch I believe it should be. But away from the ship as Steve said it’s a case-by-case basis on what I feel comfortable. I and I’m sure every chief has made friends while they have made their way from SR to chief. Some people can’t differentiate between work and home life so they need to call you chief but after all we are all adults and should be treated as such. (The flies to honey apply here). I do reply to the officer’s as sir, EO, XO, Captain or mam away from work. There seem to be mixed feelings about away from work activities. I’m not much of a drinker but I do have to say when the ship pulls into a port I do go to the clubs with the crew. I do this for several reasons. 1) I do not condone drinking and driving, so I go to look after my fellow shipmates and if I’m out in port I offer to be the DD when out and have told the crew many of times if your ever to drunk to drive give me a call. I’d rather get up a 2am and give someone a ride home rather then going to a funeral. 2) You’d be surprised how open our junior members are after they have had a few drink and how willing they are to tell you what’s bothering them. I know this is not the best way to find out the feelings of the crew but junior members are so much more willing to lay out on the table to Art then they are at work to chief Bailly. I have taken over that role from a great role model himself and he was a EMSC. Many of time’s I used that relaxed atmosphere to get a few things of my chest that might not have gone over to well in the mess before I was a chief. As long as the chief you are talking to has that openness and is willing to here the unvarnished truth from his subordinates. I have seen and fixed many problems this way and I can honestly tell you our moral on the ship in very high even with the high pace tempo we keep. You can’t fix it if you don’t know it’s broken. And sometimes people just need someone to vent to or just to here them. I have big shoulders and don’t mind the venting from time to time if it helps a shipmate out and have found them to be more open away from work then in the chief’s mess. I do also realize that I am a chief and sometimes I hear things I really didn’t want to here but now that I did I have to take action even though it wont be pleasant. 3) Lastly we are chiefs and we have earned our privileges but that does not make us gods. We are not better then anyone we are just higher ranked. We have to earn the respect of all no matter if were that SR or O-6. I believe in treating other as you your self would like to be treated. In the small towns we put our members in Its unfair to them and us to treat them as if we are better then them in our personal life’s. I have felt this way for many of years before I made chief. It’s hard when you’re the only chief or only officer in town. After all aren’t we one big coast guard family???

[OSC Donald McClain]

Great topic - During my early tours in the CG never did I address anyone by there first name, even when told or asked (he you can call me Bob). I just thought it was disrespectful.

My current assignment (detailed over to another Federal agency) the uniform of the day is suit/tie. This is just for the fact that their be no "power trips" per say. We all are aware of who our supervisor is (other Federal agency). We have 3 O's, 3 Chief's and 3 PO's. Personally - I have no problem when the PO's call me by my first name while at work. Again, this is based on our current work environment.

[BMCS Joe Wright]

I would like to remind everyone that what we do today sets the precedence for tomorrow. If your people are on a first name basis with you, you are setting them up to not like me. They may respect me for what and who I am but they will always think...."my last Chief was a lot NICER...he let me call him by his first name". Now I must honestly say that I am not worried about it. If I cannot gain the respect of my people that is my problem...but you are not helping me.

It is the standard to address senior people by their rank.... if you are not holding them to that standard you are teaching them it is acceptable to bend certain rules...what rules will they chose to bend later...drinking with minors?...arriving late for work?.....wearing of PPE?

Personally, I could never have called a Chief by their first name prior to being advanced, even if they told me to.

Finally, it is by no means arrogant or conceited to expect to be called "Chief". It is your title - wear it proudly.

[SKC Raymond Kurtz]

My wife gets a big kick out of me being addressed as "Chief" when I meet someone who is an E-6 or below off duty. You know, I was of the mind that when off duty I could be addressed by my first name. Reading what you all have said I realize that was wrong. I have always been of the mind that we are always on duty, 24/7 365 days a year. This also pertains to how we interact with the crew.

BTW when my 5 year old acts up my wife has taken to calling out "I'm gonna get the Chief." Or "Oh Chief!" That really puts little Victoria back in line.

(I don't expect to be referred as Chief by my wife and daughters, around the house I am just another flunky.) :)

[BMC Kerry Wagoner]

Out of uniform and by ourselves, I am on first names with several officers and they are with me as well. In uniform or around other Coasties, we resort to the standard greetings. In addition, in our housing area, I live near E-6 and below as well as officers. At our house and theirs, we are on first a first name basis. My crew, no matter where we are or what we are doing, refer to me as Chief. Their spouses, call me by my first name, after all they are not in the military.

I believe there is and should be a seperation between work and home. If two grown people cannot call each other by their first names, then it is time to re-check the way we are heading. There is a time and place to be formal and a time and place not to be.

[BMCS Dennis Endicott ret]

Kerry,

"I believe there is and should be a seperation between work and home."

Absolutely. However, being in the military is not work. Or rather, it is not a job. There is a big difference in keeping your factory job separate from your home life, and turning off/on military professionalism. You are in the CG, 24/7.

"If two grown people cannot call each other by their first names, then it is time to re-check the way we are heading."
It's got nothing to do with being adults. It's about military discipline-professionalsim-courtesy. You cannot turn it on and off. It's either there or it's not.

"There is a time and place to be formal and a time and place not to be."
Agreed. No need for formality with civilians, spouses, or peers. However, in regards to officers and junior enlisted, your ranks and paygrades are always pertinent. When you return to the civilian community or retire, you may call relax your military bearing. Not before.

I was truly suprised to see a BMC write these things. I hope your not expressing a common practice among your peers.

[BMCM Deane Smith]

Dennis,

I was truly suprised to see a BMC write these things. I hope your not expressing a common practice among your peers.

As a BMC (soon to be BMCS) I'm finding some diffuculty understanding your BMC comment, can you clarify this for me and my fellow BMC's?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As I went back and read this thread again, It sounds like most of the people that are calling or allowing themselves to be called (myself included at a previous unit) by first names are in a CG/DOD Housing situation. I would hope that no chief is running around their unit being called by their first name. The issue is housing and social gatherings. When I lived in Base housing in NYC, we lived on a street that was E-7 and above. I called and expected to be called by first names those people that I developed friendships with. I'm talking 3 or 4 people on the entire block.

It is unreasonable (that's right I said unreasonable) to expect people who live next door with fellow coasties (or another branch of service) not to develop friedships. And, it's completely ridiculous to spend time socializing with your friends without calling them by their first names.


Deane

[BMC Kerry Wagoner]

BMCS Endicott,

No, I do not promote first names among my crew. However when someone of equal or higher rank is at my house for dinner and drinks, I am not going to address the individual as LT. ---- or Mr. ----, especially when I have known this person for several years. I believe that you can seperate work and home, maintain professionalism, respect and customs at the same time using first names when dealing with friends. Even in the military, you can have friends, friends that are there for you and you for them both on and off duty. Don't get me wrong, in uniform I always show the respect no matter what the situation is. For example, my brother-in-law is a LT in the Coast Guard. Now when I see him in uniform and we are around anyone, I show his the respect that he is due. However when we are away from others or in a casual sitting, no one should expect me to call him Mr.---.

Being a BMC has nothing to do with the way I think about this matter. I would think the same way if I were a BM1 or a Captain.

I guess we will just have to choose to disagree with this topic. I understand and respect your comments regarding this issue. This post is exactly what I thought this board would be about, Chiefs coming together to share and discuss their beliefs and concerns. At the same time being able to share their comments and receive feedback. Thanks for starting this site and I hope we can continue to share common threads in the future.

[DCC Gary White]

I personally do not have a problem calling an officer by their first name off base/out of uniform if they don't have a problem with it. As a DC I have had many opportunities to do carpentry/construction for officers at their house and all of them with the exception of one (because it felt strange calling an 06 "Phil"), I called them by their first name. I might be a bit biased since I am married to a LT, but I show her the same respect at work as I do other officers. There is a line in the sand and as long as you don't cross it, people should be able to deal with it as mature adults. BMCS you can dissect this email like you do everyone else's, but just remember that the majority of E7+ do not agree with you.

[BMCS Dennis Endicott ret]

Deane- It surprised me that a BMC wrote the remark because BMC's find themselves in the dual role of deckplate leader and officer's advisor much more often than their counterparts in other rates. I think that the command cadre aspect of the rate has a lot to do with it. As such, all of the ones I've worked with or around, have kept that line unblurred because they know that it will eventually effect their ability to do the job (refer to previous posts on this thread to clarify that last line).

Kerry- Having dinner and drinks with officers and junior enlisted, other than in a group setting or for a special occassion, is inappropriate. And, although, I have warrant officer friends with which I break that rule, I do know that I'm breaking a rule. I too hope we can continue the discussions. I enjoy the debate.

Gary- I won't dissect your email like I do everyone else's. It obviously doesn't sit well with you.
On second thought... you shouldn't be doing carpentry at officer's homes. If they are paying you, it will lend to the perception that you hold some influence over them. If you do it as a favor- same perception. It even smacks of fratenization.

All- please don't take the discussion personally. I'm smart enough to know that I'm wrong as often as I'm right. Remember that the board is about discussing issues. This is one of them.

[DCC Gary White]

BMCS-
I haven't ran across an officer (all O4-O6) yet that thinks doing a little side job for them or another officer is a big deal, on most cases its preapproved through the command. If you think people perceive that I hold some sort of "influence" on them, well.... that narrows it down to people like yourself, and that sits just fine with me. You seem to have some very opinionated views on what others think, I hope you don't have a problem with mine.

[BMC Kerry Wagoner]

If having dinner/drinks with officers, which are also my close friends is inappropriate and "breaking a rule", than I guess I will continue to do so. It, as several others have posted, is a personal choice and if you can keep work and play seperated, then it is ok, as far as I am concerned.

I know about 8H and I know that others may consider being social with anyone not equal to you in rank is incorrect. If I listened to others, then I would only be able to socialize with other E-7's, give me a break.

I also understand that the Coast Guard is more than a job, it is a way of life. But when the Coast Guard decides with whom I socialize with, it is time to consider priorities.

Several years ago, I thought the Guard was my whole life. I put the service before everything, even my family sometimes. I had a very bad wake -up call on that matter. From that day on, I decided not to put the Guard first, but myself and my family. I continue to give the Guard everything I have 100% of the time, however I just now have a different priority ladder.

Enjoying the discussion......... :)

[BMCM Deane Smith]

Dennis - Thanks for the reply.

It surprised me that a BMC wrote the remark because BMC's find themselves in the dual role of deckplate leader and officer's advisor much more often than their counterparts in other rates. I think that the command cadre aspect of the rate has a lot to do with it. As such, all of the ones I've worked with or around, have kept that line unblurred because they know that it will eventually effect their ability to do the job (refer to previous posts on this thread to clarify that last line).

That's an interesting statement. I've been in command cadre positions since 1996 and have never thought that any activity that I choose to participate in would eventually effect my ability to do my job. If people think that something will eventually effect their ability to do the job, then those people are predisposed to that type of activity. That's not good.


Deane

[BMCS Joe Wright]

I know about 8H and I know that others may consider being social with anyone not equal to you in rank is incorrect. If I listened to others, then I would only be able to socialize with other E-7's, give me a break.


I believe there is and should be a seperation between work and home. If two grown people cannot call each other by their first names, then it is time to re-check the way we are heading. There is a time and place to be formal and a time and place not to be.

Well I guess these comments explain the direction we are headed....disregard for current policy because of personal opinion must be OK now.....wonder what kind of message this sends to my subordinates?

It is much more than calling someone by thier first name...it is about policy, fact, support, and precedence. Remember, we don't always know the message we are sending...that is why we must always strive to send the right message, and bending the rules isn't it.

CPO, SCPO, MCPO Evaluation form:
Responsibility - 4
Required self, subordinates, and others to
conform to military rules and regulations.
Enthusiastically supported policies and
decisions of seniors. Initiated appropriate
administrative and disciplinary action
when necessary. Enforced standards
uniformly.

I hope you guys aren't accepting anything higher than a three.

[ENS Craig Dente (OSC)]

Easy folks,

I think that Kerry has a valid point for two reasons:

1. Many of my friendships in the CG started way before the day that I made QMC. Do I tell all of my old buddies that they must address me as Chief when we are having a beer talking sea stories when I bump into them at the e-club while TAD? Or am I prohibited from my friendships because I advanced faster than some of them, or some became officers?

2. If you live in CG housing, should you address your neighbors as sir or seaman? Do you tell your neighbor that he can't come to your barbeque or party because he's an officer or below E-6? Can you order your neighbor to cut your grass, or can your neighbor order you to cut their grass? Should your children call their friends parents commander or seaman...if not, what do you call them? My point is that structurally, if CG housing not strictly segregated by rank or eliminated, some degree of fraternization will naturally occur.

Don't get me wrong, I'm pretty rigid when it comes to protocol.

An element of common sense must always prevail.

[BMC Ken Gouge]

Good topic, and in my opinion there is NO middle ground or exceptions, but there are loopholes. When I meet one of my people's significant other I am introduced as Chief, to which the obvious response is please call me Ken. There is no uncertainty about the fact that this offer is directed to the spouse and not the member. Our enlisted people should be looking forward to the day that they get a new first name, and I must instill that or reinforce that.

The loophole I spoke of presents itself when you find yourself in a conversation with someone whose name you know you should remember but can't. (maybe I'm old :) ) It is possible to carry on a conversation without a name or title ever coming up. You've been there haven't you? This tactic is helpful in off-duty gatherings more for placing the non-military folks at ease than for the comfort of the member, but it works. Like Dennis said, you throw in the occasional "sir" when appropriate (their spouse get's a kick out of it too), you receive the occasional "chief" and no breach in protocol occurs.

If my people call me by my first name they can expect a butt chewing, if it is off duty it will be discretely and not in the presence of their significant other.

[DCCS Keith Wilbee]

(b) Breach of custom of the service. A breach of a custom of the service may result in a violation of clause 1 of Article 134. In its legal sense, “custom” means more than a method of procedure or a mode of conduct or behavior which is merely of frequent or usual occurrence. Custom arises out of long established practices which by common usage have attained the force of law in the military or other community affected by them. No custom may be contrary to existing law or regulation. A custom which has not been adopted by existing statute or regulation ceases to exist when its observance has been generally abandoned. Many customs of the service are now set forth in regulations of the various armed forces. Violations of these customs should be charged under Article 92 as violations of the regulations in which they appear if the regulation is punitive. See paragraph 16c.


Text.
“Though not specifically mentioned in this chapter, all disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces, all conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces, and crimes and offenses not capital, of which persons subject to this chapter may be guilty, shall be taken cognizance of by a general, special, or summary court-martial, according to the nature and degree of the offense, and shall be punished at the discretion of that court.”
Elements. The proof required for conviction of an offense under Article 134 depends upon the nature of the misconduct charged. If the conduct is punished as a crime or offense not capital, the proof must establish every element of the crime or offense as required by the applicable law. If the conduct is punished as a disorder or neglect to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces, or of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces, then the following proof is required:
(1) That the accused did or failed to do certain acts; and
(2) That, under the circumstances, the accused’s conduct was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces or was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces.
Explanation.
(1) In general. Article 134 makes punishable acts in three categories of offenses not specifically covered in any other article of the code. These are referred to as “clauses 1, 2, and 3” of Article 134. Clause 1 offenses involve disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces. Clause 2 offenses involve conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. Clause 3 offenses involve noncapital crimes or offenses which violate Federal law including law made applicable through the Federal Assimilative Crimes Act, see subsection (4) below. If any conduct of this nature is specifically made punishable by another article of the code, it must be charged as a violation of that article. See subparagraph (5)(a) below. How-ever, see paragraph 59c for offenses committed by commissioned officers, cadets, and midshipmen.
(2) Disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces (clause 1).
(a) To the prejudice of good order and discipline. “To the prejudice of good order and discipline” refers only to acts directly prejudicial to good order and discipline and not to acts which are prejudicial only in a remote or indirect sense. Almost any irregular or improper act on the part of a member of the military service could be regarded as prejudicial in some indirect or remote sense; however, this article does not include these distant effects. It is con-fined to cases in which the prejudice is reasonably direct and palpable. An act in violation of a local civil law or of a foreign law may be punished if it constitutes a disorder or neglect to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces. However, see R.C.M. 203 concerning subject-matter jurisdiction.



See Paragraph 60.

Fraternization:
Elements.
(1) That the accused was a commissioned or warrant officer;
(2) That the accused fraternized on terms of military equality with one or more certain enlisted member(s) in a certain manner;
(3) That the accused then knew the person(s) to be (an) enlisted member(s);
(4) That such fraternization violated the custom of the accused’s service that officers shall not fraternize with enlisted members on terms of military equality; and
(5) That, under the circumstances, the conduct of the accused was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces or was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces.
Explanation.
(1) In general. The gist of this offense is a violation of the custom of the armed forces against fraternization. Not all contact or association between officers and enlisted persons is an offense. Whether the contact or association in question is an offense depends on the surrounding circumstances. Factors to be considered include whether the conduct has compromised the chain of command, resulted in the appearance of partiality, or otherwise undermined good order, discipline, authority, or morale. The acts and circumstances must be such as to lead a reason-able person experienced in the problems of military leadership to conclude that the good order and discipline of the armed forces has been prejudiced by their tendency to compromise the respect of enlisted persons for the professionalism, integrity, and obligations of an officer.
(2) Regulations. Regulations, directives, and orders may also govern conduct between officer and enlisted personnel on both a service-wide and a local basis. Relationships between enlisted persons of different ranks, or between officers of different ranks may be similarly covered. Violations of such regulations, directives, or orders may be punishable under Article 92. See paragraph 16.
Lesser included offenses. Article 80—attempts
Maximum punishment. Dismissal, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 2 years.
Next Article > Article 134 - (Gambling with subordinate) >


I know its long, could have went on forever. Im guilty of allowing others to call me by my birth name when not in uniform. I havent found a manual or courtesie yet that says they cant. Officers would be considered fraternization. My standard is when in uniform everyone calls me chief, even my CWO, And New LCDR. When off work, not in Uniform my juniors call me Keith. Joe: I have very good evaluations, and wouldnt accept anything but good ones. Im directly responsible for the attitudes of 26 junior enlisted and two civilians, of which I play a hugh role with evals. This is by far the best job Ive had yet, and it is a direct correlation because im a Chief. I believe in finding answers, if being called by my first name is wrong by junior petty officers and non rates after hours, please direct me to the manual that we may be misconstrewing our information from. I didnt see in that marks block " Called Chief by his first name"

Keith

[BMCS Joe Wright]

OK - In the theme of the Chief's Mess, I am listening.....it appears I am out numbered in my thinking (not alone, but out numbered).

With that said I am close to conceding to your point of view. I will continue to uphold my standard, but will back down from knocking yours.

I will also continue to disagree and feel that you may be setting your people up for at least a difficult situation, if not all out failure.

Before I totally concede, one question -

Where do you now draw the line? If I tell my people it is OK for them to call me by my first name out of uniform, to whom is it not OK? The MCPOCG, an Ensign, a Commander, a Captain, an Admiral.

Again, I will say you are setting a precedence that you cannot answer how far your people will take. It is up to us as Chief's to draw the lines so our people will not only succeed now, but for many years to come.

If you help make the line fuzzy.....expect the worst.

And one final question.......WHY??? My title to anyone subordinate to me is "Chief". Why is it so difficult to have them call me that. I never had a problem calling anyone by there title, regardless of the setting. And with that would not have called them anything else regardless.

[BMC Kerry Wagoner]

Man, this is a good topic. Let me start by saying that some people have taken what I posted and turned it around and upside down. Maybe I am not the best at writing what exactly I am trying to say, so I will try it again.

None of my crew are on a first name basis with me, ever, at my house at dinner or at a softball game. Their spouses call me Kerry, their dependent children call me Mr. Kerry.

The people that I am on first name basis with are those which I have known for years, yes some are junior and some are senior. For example, my next door neighbor is a E-6, he calls me by my first name as do I call him by his first name. When ever we are at work he refers to me as Chief. Still others, which are officers, away from work in a casual setting out of uniform (dinner or around town) we call each other by our first names. At work, we refer to each other as Chief or Sir.

I do not feel that I have "crossed a line" with this type of behavoir nor have I undermined any customs. You can have a life away from the Guard and you can deal with others differently at different times.

On the job, these people are either my superiors or juniors and we treat each other as such. Away from the job, we are friends and treat each other like friends.

[OSCS Janet Ferritto]

Wow! What a thread this is! Thanks for the energy that has been placed into this topic.

If all the threads are read, it becomes evident that it is a matter of personal preference and personality. Because there is no regulation against referring to a fellow Coastie by his/her first name while off-duty, we all must go with what the situation dictates and how we feel about it.

I have come to understand the term "fraternization" means in a biblical sense not a first name basis sense.

Common sense would dictate that if someone is not comfortable, they should let you know.

Personally, for the 9 years I was active duty and for all the Reserve years since, I have never seen any data showing that calling someone by their first name or allowing them to call you by your first name, while off-duty, has contributed or caused any negative impact on Coast Guard missions or unit morale. Conversely there is no data to show that having everyone always call each other by their rank has a positive impact on Coast Guard missions or unit morale.

In fact, in 26 years, I have never met a Coastie Chief that insisted that they be called "Chief" 24 hours a day. My experience has been that we have a Chief hat and, while on duty, we will always insist on being addressed as Chief, even if an Admiral trys to call us by our first name. I always respectfully ask that I be addressed as "Chief". I am rigid in this way. The only ones that can call me by my first name while I am at work are fellow Chiefs and, yes, Warrant Officers. I wear the anchors very proudly and am fully aware of my unique position.

However, in the off-time, I do not wear my Chief's hat. I have found that getting along on a first name basis, like on a ball team, actually promotes good order and morale because it is a way to guage when a person is mentally on duty and mentally off duty. I am not certain that staying mentally on duty 24 hours a day is what the Coast Guard wants because of the toll it takes on the body. It's could be too stressful for some folks.

I have lived in many different Base Housing situations, my husband is active duty Coast Guard, and first names have been the norm during off-duty time. And, while off-duty, if my CO wants me to call him or her by her first name than I am certainly going to offer the same.

If have been an active duty member, a reserve member, an enlisted spouse and an officer spouse. I have worn many hats and, frankly speaking letting people know that I am something other than "Chief" works for me.

That's just my opinion but I do not judge others if they want to stay "Chief" 24/7, that is their prerogative, just like it is mine not to.

Great thread!

[BMCS Dennis Endicott ret]

I took time to do some research and also did not find anything specifically prohibiting the use of first-names, after-hours, out-of-uniform. So, in that regard, I stand corrected and concede the point.

The issue then boils down to whether the practice is condusive to good order and discipline. Joe Wright made some very salient points in this regard and I won't re-hash his and my argument, other than to say...

You are not engaging in this practice to make your crews more comfortable. You are doing it to make yourself comfortable. I miss hearing my first name too, but I know I am more effective in my role as a Chief when I maintain that professional distance.

I won't comment on the topic again. I'll give you all the last word.

Thanks for the debate. I enjoyed it.

[BMC Kerry Wagoner]

I too enjoyed all the different views from this topic. I fully understand everyone's point of view and their concerns. I respect each person's view and the reasons behind them. One point that many have failed to notice concerning my posts is that no one in my command ever calls me anything but Chief. Even if they are at my house for dinner or I am at their house, I am still called Chief. The first names are used between my friends away from work, at my home and has nothing at all to do with either my command or my chain of command. I guess as with many other issues, it is up to the member to make the decision what is right and what is not.

Thanks for the very well presented debate and great point of views on this topic. This is exactly what this site is about, Chief's coming together to express their view points on topics of importance. :)

[PACS Steve Carleton]

As the spark that started this debate and then just let it roll, I too enjoyed the debate.

Kerry and I are on the same page, and it was a great exercise in the power of the debate on this board. I hope that all of our discussions (sic: debates) merit the same amount of intensity and passion.

Great job to all who posted.

[BMCS Shawn Vredenburg]

Once upon a time the Chiefs were held in the highest esteem by everyone.

Those times are slipping away from us. As someone put in another thread, this comes from both internal and external causes.

One of the internal causes is that Chiefs LET IT HAPPEN!

I am no better of a person than SA Garcia who just reported aboard my unit. However, I am a CHIEF...he is not. This doesn't make me "better" than him, but it does set us apart.

Admiral Collins is no better a person than I am. However, he is the Admiral, and I am not. This doesn't make him "better" than me, but it does set us apart.

I think Gary hit the nail on the head...but maybe pushed it a different way than he meant to when he wrote "As a DC I have had many opportunities to do carpentry/construction for officers at their house and all of them with the exception of one (because it felt strange calling an 06 "Phil")" Why do you feel strange calling an O-6 "Phil"? Because that's the way is used to be, and that's the way it should be.

Used to be that everyone (from E-1 through E-6 and O-1 through O-10) felt a little strange calling a Chief "Phil". Sounds like if the Chiefs Corps looks in the mirror they will find the reason this has changed!

I am always a Chief. Whether I am at home asleep, at home drinking my rum & coke, TAD, at work, underway, etc.

The active duty folks I encounter treat me as a Chief (including the appropriate title) at all times, and I treat them likewise.

[BMCS Dennis Endicott ret]

There has been some discussion on "The Deckplate" about the use of first names. The posters seem to believe that the practice is inappropriate even at their level. I'm interested to see if the other school of thought chimes in there.

[BMC Mark C. Lewis]

Before I made Chief I had people call me by my nickname, but I told them to. I did not call anyone by anything other than their title or rank unless asked to do so. All the units I have been at have been on a first name basis with the exception of Chiefs and Officers.

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

I was Slesh for the first nine years of my Military career. I started going by other aliases after going afloat where it was command sponsored. I always liked Slesh, I was the only one. Other people were offended if you referred to them by their last names. I like to see the Petty Officer that is professional and that demands that people subordinate to them refer to them by their rank. Take pride in your accomplishments. Personally, Ive never put that much stock into names. I know Senior Chiefs that will dress someone down for calling them Chief, or Senior. I take that on a case by case basis, myself.

[EMC Travis S. Parks]

I am on a first name basis with high performing senior petty officers outside the workplace, but I certainly understand those who chose not to be. I advise those same petty officers not to be on a first name basis with non-rated personnel INSIDE the workplace. I think this is even more important than we Chiefs maintaining our distance. It's hard to do when you live together for 6 months at a time, but it's still important and needs to be done. It all starts with how they introduce themselves. If they never extend the invitation chances are no one will do it on their own.

[YNC Josh Braarud]

Another past thread I'm digging up...

One of the strange policies from when I was in the Army was the mandatory use of first names around the Fort Bragg area when you were in civilian clothing. The Army is known for being pretty strict with protocol, but this one threw me for a loop. The reason given was for security purposes. Me, being the smart-aleck E-2, asked my squad leader what I was supposed to do if met the Division Commander. He told me even then it would be first names only, if we were in civvies. That way if someone walked by they wouldn't know he was a general officer.

Just something to think about. The time frame for this was 89-92

[DCCS Todd Holcomb]

during my short stint in the Army, rank and title were the word of the day. If you were an E-2 you stood at parade rest when talking to an E-3, now that was in uniform. In civvies pretty much the E-4 and below went by first names but if you were an E-5 or above you were called by rank and title even in civvies. This was an infantry unit in Germany.

I personally take it on a case by case basis, I will never address someone who is senior to me by anything other than rank or title until told by them it's what they want, on or of duty. Whether initiated or not Senior/Master Chief's are now and will always be just that while in the office (civvies or not), in uniform and around anyone else not in the Chief's mess. I guess that's a trait held over from the Army, they earned the rank and I will address them as such. Just my personal perrogative. Now in civvies, off work, and hanging out is a different story but again that's up to them as to how they want me to address them.

The biggest problem I've seen especially at TACLET is that some of the junior members get to call the OIC or Chief by first names in certain areas while in civvies, they fail to realize those are specific circumstances. I have had to correct several junior members at work who think it is ok. It's not OK to address the Chiefs or Officers by name in the office, regardless of what relationship you have outside of work.

What has worked for me in the past is I will lay out the specifics of when it is OK to use my name vice rank or title I go on to further explain that the members need to be able to differentiate between work and play, if they can do that then no problems, if they can't, again no problems our relationship will always be "Chief" to whoever. that usually fixes pretty quick.


Just my 2 cents
Todd

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

Then it would appear that the Army changed a bit from my days, in the south at least. I knew people who made their wife refer to them as staff sargent. I knew people who were given Article 15s for lean on a superior's desk. That time frame was 81-86.

[YNC Josh Braarud]

during my short stint in the Army, rank and title were the word of the day. If you were an E-2 you stood at parade rest when talking to an E-3, now that was in uniform...

If I'm getting an arse-chewing, I go to parade rest. I still use it when speaking to senior enlisted personnel who I'm meeting for the first time. That's one thing that got pretty well ingrained.

I'm thinking the first name issue at the time was only a Fort Bragg thing. If you've spent any time there, you'll know it's an odd corner of the Army. Nothing like meeting a 27-year-old E-8 with out-of-regs hair, calls themself a "systems technician," but looks like the Ironman Triathlon would be a piece of cake. Yeah.

[DCCS Todd Holcomb]

Then it would appear that the Army changed a bit from my days, in the south at least. I knew people who made their wife refer to them as staff sargent. I knew people who were given Article 15s for lean on a superior's desk. That time frame was 81-86.

Senior, I was in 86-88 The 2 year enlistment deal. Yeah I had some of those crusty SSG, SFC, MSG and CSM who were Vietnam era and they still believed in the "old Army". heck I even had a few SGTs who were well traveled and getting ready to retire. Article 15s, didn't used a lot while I was there but I did see the "woodline" get used the same as the Bosunhole used to.

Todd

[BMC Paul Wells]

OK, I guess I will throw in my 2 cents worth.

My crew calls me "Chief" wether on or off duty/in or out of uniform, not because I told them to, but because they all see the anchor and know what it means to be wearing one. They all know my time in service and where I have been so they know what I bring to the table for expirience.

I dont agree with letting some of your people call you by whatever name you go by and yet others have to call you Chief based on their performance, it just confuses the junior people and gives the "appearance" of favoring one over the other. This could very well bite you in the butt come marking period if you are not careful....

The same can be said for the officers here at my unit, they all call me Chief at all times, and again....not because I asked them to. There has to be a separation whether you are at work or not.
The lines are simple -
- Petty Officers(throw in the non-rates here too)
- CPO's
- Officers

I am stationed at an MSST and on the road constantly with my detachment. Which means I see my guys everyday and night on and off duty. I do not put myself into a position at the local "Gin joint" drinking with them and letting them call me by my first name, or letting them speak their mind to me when they are half in the bag. Occasionally I will go to dinner with some of my senior E6's and a few of the younger kids, but I only stay until dinner is done and then I leave so they can relax without me around. When I am invited to go to someones house for a BBQ, I will go for a short time and then leave them so they can party. This is how it always was in my time coming through the ranks and I always appreciated the Chief stopping by to say hi, and then leaving so I could relax and let loose.

Maybe its because I am "Old Guard", but the way it always was... non-rates and Petty Officers dont hang with Chief's.

I worked long and hard to attain the rank of Chief, as we all have done, and I expect the respect that goes with wearing the anchor. You have to respect the rank..... personal respect I will earn by my leadership abilities, knowledge, expirience, and how well I take care of my people.

just my 2 cents for the day!!!

[BMC Chris Gempp]

Paul,
Excellent point. When I was a BM2 my OIC let me call him by his first name at softball games, we played on the same team. I have to say it seemed really weird calling a Chief by his first name and I really didnt do it all that often.
I am the same way here, everyone calls me Chief on and off duty and I have no intention of changing it whatsoever.

[BMC Paul Wells]

Just two more quick notes on this topic....

First, I used to play in golf tournys with my OINC and BMC when I was a BM3. They would both harp on me to call them by their first names, which I never did. Wether or not on or off duty I always showed the respect they earned.

Second, I was approached by a young E4 not too long ago that was fairly new at my unit and he felt compelled to let me know he did not have much respect for me and therefore he shouldnt have to call me Chief but instead be able to call me by my first name....I quickly reminded him he had no choice but to respect my rank, there is no grey area here!!! Then I went on to inform the young lad that I really didnt give a $#*& what he thought of me personally and that it was more important what I thought of him as his immedeate supervisor.....My BM1 quickly took him aside and gave him a quick run down on my career to make sure he understood what I have accomplished in my 21 years!!! (smart Bm1!)

This will get me going on another topic...what the hell is boot camp teaching these kids today??? There sure isnt the same attitude or respect given when these kids get out in the field.

[MSTCS Jerald P. Motyka]

On a more jovial level - I have always addressed Chiefs by their first name.

"Chief"

And now I demand the same from those who deal with me on a professional level. The only people that call me "Jerry" are E-7/8/9 and behind closed doors or in the mess... and they usually have to call me twice, as I'm not used to hearing it. :rolleyes:

[BMCS Jim Madsen]

Forget boot camp... An E-4 should know better.

[BMC Paul Wells]

He is lucky he still is an E4!!! He must have caught me on one of my better days..... :)

[PAC Darrell Wilson (Ret)]

Unfortunately Paul, I don’t think that is an isolated incident. I think it is a sign of changing times. You see it in the work place and in school. There is no more discipline.

[BMCS Nick Pupo]

Paul; from the story you tell about the E-4 I have to say this. Looks like there is a failure in leadership both up and down the chain. How can an E-4 ever feel that it is ok to display such disrespect for a supervisor? Now, I do understand that this particular E-4 may have additional issues, and if so lets hear them.
But you have to applaud him/her for either feeling comfortable enough in that enviroment that he feels that he can say that. Or, you gotta give him props for having a "big set" but very little common sense.

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

Knowing nothing more about the situation, I'd lean towards the "big set" and no common sense. But there still is discipline. Paul enforced that. If he hadn't the next Chief would have had bigger problems with this "kid". And Paul's right, people don't have to respect him, but they do have to respect the rank that he has earned. If they can't do that, show them the door.

[BMC Chris Gempp]

I would have throttled the kid and broke him down to parade rest...quick..fast..and in a hurry