Saturday, April 10, 2010

USCG goes nuclear

That will leave a mark.
The Coast Guard is demoting and retiring a former commander of its Anchorage office who was charged with having inappropriate relationships with staff members over a period of more than 13 years.

The Coast Guard said Herbert M. Hamilton III will retire on July 1 as a lieutenant with a general discharge instead of undergoing a court-martial.

Hamilton was a captain when he was relieved of his Anchorage command last May.

The Coast Guard said the deal with Hamilton "is the result of a pretrial agreement and Hamilton's
unsatisfactory service in the grades of captain, commander, and lieutenant commander."
Some things are just not worth it. Junior officers - hoist this across the transom and give it a good long sniff.

Hat tip RZ.

41 comments:

  1. Anonymous18:33

    Can't claim to know a heck of a lot about Coasties... but HTH did this guy make it to Captain if his performance at LCDR and CDR was unsat?

    And doesn't he get to retire at his highest commissioned rank for purposes of retirement pay?

    Failing to court martial this guy is a mistake.  

    ReplyDelete
  2. XBradTC19:48

    Guest, the LT accepted the demotion in lieu of a court martial. And what retirement pay? He was discharged, not retired.

    As to his performance as a LCDR, CDR, I'm guessing that during the pretrial proccess, there was some admission on his part that this was an ongoing pattern of behavior, commencing when he was a LCDR. Even if no allegations were raised during that time, that admission would be cause for demotion.

    If he didn't think that was fair, he could have gone to Court Martial.

    ReplyDelete
  3. XBradTC20:25

    I erred.

    He is indeed retiring.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Retirement pay will be at LT rate.  If UCSG retirement law is the same as USN, a general discharge will mean the individual remains on the books until the 30 year mark, at which time the individual will be transferred to the retired list.  At that point the individual may petition for reinstatement to the highest rank held, but must past Flag & Sec review that performance at that rank was completed satisfactorily.

    He'd never pass muster.  It's LT pay and he's probably VERY lucky to be drawing it.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous21:06

    Retirng at LT vs CAPT is a huge pay cut. He is still lucky to have a retirement.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Retired pay will be at LT (O-3).  If UCSG retirement law is similar to USN/USMC, the individual will remain on the books until the 30 year mark, at which point he will be moved to the retired list. The individual may, at that point, petition to be reinstated to the highest rank held.  That petition though must undergo PersCom, Flag and Sec review/approval to verify performance at that rank was completed satisfactorily.

    He'll never pass muster.  It's LT pay and he's probably VERY lucky to be drawing it.

    ReplyDelete
  7. UltimaRatioRegis21:46

    So....  the USCG must have different rules for administrative and disciplinary punishments for its officers? 

    TMK, under RCM 1003, the UCMJ does not allow for a commissioned officer to be reduced in rank, unless reduction to "permanent" rank from a temporary one or loss of lineal number (which are both administrative), unless specifically demanded by the service secretary under wartime, and then I believe it is a reduction to E-1.

    ReplyDelete
  8. UltimaRatioRegis21:48

    <span>So....  the USCG must have different rules for administrative and disciplinary punishments for its officers?  
     
    TMK, under RCM 1003, the UCMJ does not allow for a commissioned officer to be reduced in rank, unless reduction to "permanent" rank from a temporary one, (which is administrative), unless specifically demanded by the service secretary under wartime, and then I believe it is a reduction to E-1.</span>

    ReplyDelete
  9. John21:49

    Well, the LT general discharge was one option.  The other would involve free room and board at taxpayers' expense for quite a while.

    He made lots of bad choices, but this may not be one of them.

    ReplyDelete
  10. SJBill22:00

    If a civilian manager or director had be in such a predicament while the private sector he'd have been fired.
    Just wunnerin: why is this former O-6, and soon to be O3 being retired and still receiving a paycheck and healthcare at the public's expense?
    Why not: Fire. His. A$$. The current job market might be punishment enough, but I do see a future in politics for the CAPT.

    ReplyDelete
  11. SJBill22:03

    <span></span><span>Just wunnerin: why is this former O-6, and soon to be O3 is being retired and still receiving a paycheck and healthcare at the public's expense? <span>If a civilian manager or director had be in such a predicament while the private sector he'd have been fired. </span></span><span>Why not just: Fire. His. O-6. A$$?</span>
    <span>The current job market might be punishment enough, but I do see a bright future in politics for the CAPT.</span>

    ReplyDelete
  12. UltimaRatioRegis22:06

    Maybe they're afraid he still has time to run for Congress in 2010! >:o

    ReplyDelete
  13. UltimaRatioRegis22:21

    The wording of the Anchorage News article is strange.  Under Title X, an officer cannot be awarded a discharge by a CM, but can only be dismissed.  Which is not retired.  Is Title XIV different in this respect?

    ReplyDelete
  14. DM0522:40

    A few things come to mind: A) No matter how sorry a man gets, there is always some woman to follow him around, albeit officer's bars attract. B) The heck with politics, entertainment is in his future; front man for David Letterman is perfect.

    Good riddance, and dang dude, the 0-6 to 0-3 smack has gotta hurt.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Skippy-san22:50

    Curious what happened to the women he was with.

     By all accounts the sex was consensual so it seems that they probably knew what they were doing was against the regulations.  Of course they were probably promoted early-and oh by the way, the USCG has a probably the worst recrod of creating situations that encourage fraternization. Just saying.....

    ReplyDelete
  16. Grumpy Old Ham22:50

    URR -- agree there is some odd wording in the article.  I focused on the "pre-trial agreement" and "instead of undergoing court-martial" and interpreted those statements to mean the ex-CAPT was allowed to resign in lieu of facing a court-martial.  Since he was already retirement eligible, he was allowed to retire in the highest grade in which he satisfactorily served, O-3. 

    IANAL nor do I play one on Al Gore's Amazing Internet(tm), but I have seen similar situations play out the same way (although the individual involved usually only drops one grade).

    What I find more bothersome about this story is that it took 13 years for someone to finally blow the whistle.

    ReplyDelete
  17. SJBill00:42

    Given all the details, will he be representing hisself as retired LT General?

    ReplyDelete
  18. SCOTTtheBADGER01:25

    I thought someone blowing his whistle was the problem?

    ReplyDelete
  19. LT B07:32

    Dude, they are females, they can do know wrong.  Two sets of rules, ya know. 

    ReplyDelete
  20. ActusRhesus07:52

    wtf? Sorry, but in a frat situation the lion's share of the blame belongs on the senior person, regardless of gender.  I've seen plenty of female ensigns throw their career away before it began for that "really cute second class".  Save the indignation for a situation that warrants it.

    ReplyDelete
  21. ActusRhesus07:54

    little confusion here.  An officer cannot be reduced at a court-martial.  HOWEVER, that's different than what happened here.  An officer CAN have their rank altered at retirement to the lowest rank at which they performed honorably.

    ReplyDelete
  22. LT B08:12

    It should be the senior in trouble, but if you think the rules are equal I think you are naive.  Granted, you are a female that wants equal treatment, but there are many a senior officer through moral cowardice that do not play that way due to the political pressure of the female activists.  I've seen it first hand.  It is not a level playing field with equal consequences for all.  Just look at the USS Cowpens CO. 

    ReplyDelete
  23. UltimaRatioRegis09:27

    Roger that, this seems to be an instance.  Boy the USCG has to be proud.  "The last rank in which you were worth a sh*t was LT, so that is how we are retiring you, Captain!"  Ouch. 

    Holly Graf, anyone?  Just sayin'....

    ReplyDelete
  24. Anonymouse09:30

    I don't think this was a mistake. This was a relatively fast hand-down of a message that should echo through the organization. Far from a slap on the wrist, the fellow receives something for the deeds done in the organization that weren't colored with bad judgment.

    I don't know this fellow, but I'm relatively sure that his fitness reports didn't say "Crazy in the sack. Recommend for advancement." He had to do something valuable. Say what you want, but vesting that many years in an organization - regardless of extracurricular activities - has to be worth something in most cases. If it isn't, then all senior officers would be overrun with paralyzing paranoia... Oh, wait.. :P

    ReplyDelete
  25. QMC(SW)(ret)15:24

    The CG 17th District press release is here, it has a little more info than the newspaper article.

    http://www.uscgalaska.com/go/doc/780/474403/

    ReplyDelete
  26. ActusRhesus17:09

    again, my experience in frat cases...and I've seen a LOT of them...is that when a senior is boning a junior, the senior gets it.  Maybe the females haven't gotten it as hard as this guy, because the females I've seen tended to not be as senior.  But I guarantee you, giving an Ensign a NPLOC and a mast conviction has effectively ended her career...and that's the typical punishment I've seen for the ensign screwing the blueshirt fact pattern.

    I think you are tilting at windmills here.  Frat is frat.  There may be other areas where some leaders don't enforce equal standards, but frat ain't one of them.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Therapist119:44

    If he could make it that far with the unsatisfactory performance in the previous grades, then that says a lot about the USCG promotion boards and overall leadership.

    ReplyDelete
  28. C-dore 1423:26

    I was once the senior member of a "show cause board" for one of those Ensigns.

    ReplyDelete
  29. ActusRhesus05:26

    if you don't mind my asking, how did the board find?

    ReplyDelete
  30. C-dore 1413:57

    T1, Not sure that I agree.  Often previous misdeeds don't come to light until an investigation begins.

    ReplyDelete
  31. C-dore 1414:04

    AR, Let's just say that she was given the opportunity to find another line of work.  Unfortunate case in a poorly led command where standards were not clearly articulated or enforced.  However, as you correctly note, a USNR Ensign with a Mast, a NPLOC, and a FITREP that reflects those facts was going to be headed home at the end of that tour anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  32. UltimaRatioRegis14:05

    C-14,

    I could agree more with your assertion if he'd not been promoted three times with what has been defined as "unsatisfactory service" in the previous grade.

    ReplyDelete
  33. C-dore 1414:13

    Agree.  I personally know two officers who had been selected for their second star and are now retired O-6s as a result of adultery committed while they were O-7s.  They were disciplined at Admiral's Mast, possibly to avoid a CM for a Flag Officer.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Skippy-san14:24

    Frat is frat to be sure-but I think one should not so lightly dismiss an atmosphere that sets people up to fail. Ask yourself the important question here, why is the  USCG going so hard here? Because for every case that gets found out like this guy-they have five that are not getting caught and will never be caught.  They are trying to send a message because the amount of it has gotten out of control. And USCG has no one to blame for that but itself-and they way it has catered to one gender over an other. I guarantee you-if it had been a female Captain and a male junior officer, that person would be retiring as an O-6.

    The services got what they wished for when the followed the "Star Trek" model of gender integration.

    ReplyDelete
  35. C-dore 1414:37

    Point taken.  Of course I'm curious about why they didn't proceed to CM with a case that was as extensive as this one was.  A few years back at Camp Lejeune there was the case of a Navy O-6 psychiatrist (and former USMC artillery officer) who was seducing his patients.  The Marines made a point of taking him to a GCM (although he was ready to plead from the minute charges were filed) to ensure he was convicted and dismissed from the service.  Seems to me that this would have been a more appropriate result for the CG O-6.

    ReplyDelete
  36. UltimaRatioRegis14:40

    Wait, wait, wait.

    There was a Navy head-shrinker that was a former Marine Artillery Officer?  HE musta been a barrel of laughs in the FDC!

    ReplyDelete
  37. C-dore 1414:57

    URR, Yep...true story.  The Marines really liked the guy too until they found out about his "extra-curricular activities" too.  BTW, he's not the only former line Medical Officer I knew either.

    ReplyDelete
  38. UltimaRatioRegis15:03

    Wow.  That is a BIG paradigm leap from "Blow stuff up and drive over it!" to "Discuss with me how that makes you feel".   I bet I knew the guy, too.  At least in his indirect fire incarnation. 

    ReplyDelete
  39. C-dore 1415:19

    URR, If you were an East Coast Marine you had a pretty good chance of running into him as a Dr. since he did multiple tours with FMFLANT.

    ReplyDelete
  40. ActusRhesus17:09

    probably cost played a factor.  A lot of cases deal out when there are two wars to be budgeted.

    ReplyDelete
  41. C-dore 1418:16

    AR, Could be or maybe they just wanted the case to "go away" or they weren't convinced that they had a sure conviction.  In the case I mention above, they had the guy dead to rights (at least one of the women he was hitting on wore a wire).

    ReplyDelete