RAF Chinook pilot jailed for sexual assault
Appropriate Behaviour 22. The operational imperative to sustain team cohesion and to maintain trust and loyalty between commanders and those they command imposes a need for a standard of social behaviour more demanding than those required by society at large. This is equally necessary both on and off operations, on and off duty. It is important to acknowledge in the tightly knit military community the need for mutual respect and the requirement to avoid conduct that offends others.
23. Social misbehaviour can undermine trust and cohesion and, therefore, damage operational effectiveness. It is not practicable to list every type of conduct or relationship that may constitute social misbehaviour6 , but it includes: unwelcome sexual attention; over-familiarity with the spouses or partners of other Service personnel; displays of affection which might cause offence to others; behaviour which damages or hazards the marriage or personal relationships of Service personnel or civilian colleagues within the wider defence community; and taking sexual advantage of subordinates. The seriousness with which misconduct will be regarded will depend on the individual circumstances that prevail at that time and the potential for adversely affecting operational effectiveness. Nevertheless, misconduct involving abuse of position, trust or rank, or taking advantage of an individual’s separation will be viewed as being particularly serious.
23. Social misbehaviour can undermine trust and cohesion and, therefore, damage operational effectiveness. It is not practicable to list every type of conduct or relationship that may constitute social misbehaviour6 , but it includes: unwelcome sexual attention; over-familiarity with the spouses or partners of other Service personnel; displays of affection which might cause offence to others; behaviour which damages or hazards the marriage or personal relationships of Service personnel or civilian colleagues within the wider defence community; and taking sexual advantage of subordinates. The seriousness with which misconduct will be regarded will depend on the individual circumstances that prevail at that time and the potential for adversely affecting operational effectiveness. Nevertheless, misconduct involving abuse of position, trust or rank, or taking advantage of an individual’s separation will be viewed as being particularly serious.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ExAscoteer2 View Post
It's certainly what I was taught at Cranditz in the CESR lessons (Customs, Etiquette, and Social Responsibility). It's generally referred to as 'Officer Qualities'.
OQs and PQs as I recall
At Britannia Royal Naval College, Dartmouth we were hammered on how to act as future officers and gentlemen. They were called Officer Like Qualities. Thus OLQs and discussed as "Oily Qs"
Originally Posted by ExAscoteer2 View Post
It's certainly what I was taught at Cranditz in the CESR lessons (Customs, Etiquette, and Social Responsibility). It's generally referred to as 'Officer Qualities'.
OQs and PQs as I recall
At Britannia Royal Naval College, Dartmouth we were hammered on how to act as future officers and gentlemen. They were called Officer Like Qualities. Thus OLQs and discussed as "Oily Qs"
The following 2 users liked this post by flown-it:
I believe that KRs and QRs ** in the past never felt the need to explain how to be a decent person. Miscreants were dealt with by their peer group as often as not, from what I read and hear.
** I have a near complete set of ARMY Sovereign's Regs from about 1840 to date, because I have become an historian of sorts. Sorry about that, and I am sure RAF Regs are better!
** I have a near complete set of ARMY Sovereign's Regs from about 1840 to date, because I have become an historian of sorts. Sorry about that, and I am sure RAF Regs are better!
The reason that until recently only the OR's received the Long Service and Good Conduct Medal was that Officers were expected to have good standards and OR's had to prove it as sadly some did not! I know of several who didn't get the madal because of small mistakes whilst junior airmen/airwomen now aviators, whereas officers got away with High Jinks!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by ExAscoteer2 View Post
It's certainly what I was taught at Cranditz in the CESR lessons (Customs, Etiquette, and Social Responsibility). It's generally referred to as 'Officer Qualities'.
OQs and PQs as I recall
At the Royal Naval College, Dartmouth we were hammered on how to act as future officers and gentlemen. They were called Officer Like Qualities. Thus OLQs and discussed as "Oily Qs"
Originally Posted by ExAscoteer2 View Post
It's certainly what I was taught at Cranditz in the CESR lessons (Customs, Etiquette, and Social Responsibility). It's generally referred to as 'Officer Qualities'.
OQs and PQs as I recall
At the Royal Naval College, Dartmouth we were hammered on how to act as future officers and gentlemen. They were called Officer Like Qualities. Thus OLQs and discussed as "Oily Qs"
Don T (RIP), one of our ex-Halton 'supertech' ex-Apps at RAFC, though quite tall, was once advised by his Flt Cdr (not the sharpest tool in the box) that he had 'Unofficer-like bone structure'....
Come the graduation photo, they wanted the taller members to be placed in a preferred location. "Not Don", I said in something louder than a stage whisper, "He doesn't have officer-like bone structure"!
Don T laughed, his Flt Cdr scowled as he tried to find who'd made the comment.
Come the graduation photo, they wanted the taller members to be placed in a preferred location. "Not Don", I said in something louder than a stage whisper, "He doesn't have officer-like bone structure"!
Don T laughed, his Flt Cdr scowled as he tried to find who'd made the comment.
As a civilain I think 212mans article 22 manages to be quite extyensive as wel as concise about the kinds of behavious which are inapaprorpiate to verging on if not actual criminal offences. It also specifically sets outt he responsibilities of those involvig senior/junior rank interaction and interaction with family memebrs . A pretty good guide which could and should be suitable for many organsiations.
The only thing I do take isue with is , and I am amazed its still around, is theseemingly archaic officer and a gentleman or officers and 'other ranks' (a dismissiveand to my mind insulting term for the majority in any military unit. I believe the U forces , despite the Richard Gere film dont discrimninate to the same degree. Any one in the service should be made very clear what misuse of position or rank means be that an AVM or Corporal not just the oficer ranks.
However I was impressed with Article 22 and thought it a very good model for business .workign and adult life in general
The only thing I do take isue with is , and I am amazed its still around, is theseemingly archaic officer and a gentleman or officers and 'other ranks' (a dismissiveand to my mind insulting term for the majority in any military unit. I believe the U forces , despite the Richard Gere film dont discrimninate to the same degree. Any one in the service should be made very clear what misuse of position or rank means be that an AVM or Corporal not just the oficer ranks.
However I was impressed with Article 22 and thought it a very good model for business .workign and adult life in general
As a civilain I think 212mans article 22 manages to be quite extyensive as wel as concise about the kinds of behavious which are inapaprorpiate to verging on if not actual criminal offences. It also specifically sets outt he responsibilities of those involvig senior/junior rank interaction and interaction with family memebrs . A pretty good guide which could and should be suitable for many organsiations.
The only thing I do take isue with is , and I am amazed its still around, is theseemingly archaic officer and a gentleman or officers and 'other ranks' (a dismissiveand to my mind insulting term for the majority in any military unit. I believe the U forces , despite the Richard Gere film dont discrimninate to the same degree. Any one in the service should be made very clear what misuse of position or rank means be that an AVM or Corporal not just the oficer ranks.
However I was impressed with Article 22 and thought it a very good model for business .workign and adult life in general
The only thing I do take isue with is , and I am amazed its still around, is theseemingly archaic officer and a gentleman or officers and 'other ranks' (a dismissiveand to my mind insulting term for the majority in any military unit. I believe the U forces , despite the Richard Gere film dont discrimninate to the same degree. Any one in the service should be made very clear what misuse of position or rank means be that an AVM or Corporal not just the oficer ranks.
However I was impressed with Article 22 and thought it a very good model for business .workign and adult life in general
Jack
Does it require formal training by the Military for Officers to grasp the concepts of proper conduct when dealing with members of the opposite sex?
(For the Record I adhere to the definition of the sexes that is based upon the plumbing issued at birth....which is logical, reasonable, simple by today's standards very much old fashioned.....and unqualified as I am not a Biologist )
(For the Record I adhere to the definition of the sexes that is based upon the plumbing issued at birth....which is logical, reasonable, simple by today's standards very much old fashioned.....and unqualified as I am not a Biologist )
Indeed....mutual respect and courtesy applies equally to all of us on this Blue and Green Orb.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,723
Received 2,716 Likes
on
1,154 Posts
Ahhhh, every night will be a dining in night. Just a shame they never gave him more.
The sad part in in all of this is his pension, his wife has probably lost her married quarter or if in their own home, now has the problem of keeping it over her head and that of the children, and with the pension gone her future security has also evaporated.
Tragic.
The sad part in in all of this is his pension, his wife has probably lost her married quarter or if in their own home, now has the problem of keeping it over her head and that of the children, and with the pension gone her future security has also evaporated.
Tragic.
The following users liked this post:
Ahhhh, every night will be a dining in night. Just a shame they never gave him more.
The sad part in in all of this is his pension, his wife has probably lost her married quarter or if in their own home, now has the problem of keeping it over her head and that of the children, and with the pension gone her future security has also evaporated.
Tragic.
The sad part in in all of this is his pension, his wife has probably lost her married quarter or if in their own home, now has the problem of keeping it over her head and that of the children, and with the pension gone her future security has also evaporated.
Tragic.
The following users liked this post:
Where has it been stated he will lose his pension? It seems highly unlikely
https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/...8-1.pdf#page37
https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/...8-1.pdf#page37
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,723
Received 2,716 Likes
on
1,154 Posts
Where has it been stated he will lose his pension? It seems highly unlikely
https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/...8-1.pdf#page37
https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/...8-1.pdf#page37
