Poll Question

This should apply to private companies as well. Managers are always blaming their workers when they should take responsibility for failure to train, supervise, uphold morale, and maintain a positive work environment. Managers should be axed if they can't run their departments properly. Deflecting blame is an excuse to hide their poor management skills.

Blueneck, then all unions would have to be held accountable, too

Submitted by HM on Wed, 11/10/2010 at 12:50 pm.

Using your analogy, the union bosses should be fired, too. All levels of unions "protect" their union members even after they've demonstrated unsafe work habits, deficient skills, even drinking and using drugs on the job. The union goes to bat with all its money, attorneys, etc. to force the companies to keep the dangerous worker--who easily could kill somebody. Unions have to be held to that same high standard. In the case of many unions, deflecting blame isn't just an excuse to hide their poor management skills, it's an effort to keep the dollars rolling in to the union bosses from even an incompetent, unsafe employee.

Capt James T. Kirk

Submitted by thecandle on Wed, 11/10/2010 at 11:09 am.

always took responsibility for what went wrong on his ship. He set a great standard. Captain Picard followed in his footsteps with the same level of responsibility.

Live long and prosper.

I rarely vote "unsure" but this has always troubled me.

Submitted by Wm D Tabor DDS on Wed, 11/10/2010 at 10:51 am.

I admire the Navy culture of responsibility, but while the Capt is certainly responsible for maintaining good order and discipline, and for providing for adequate training, but do we waste good officers with this policy when a career is ended because of the malfeasance of a subordinate?

For example, if a Capt fails to provide instruction on what areas on a ship are fire hazards and that smoking is prohibited there, then he is responsible for a fire if someone smokes in an unsafe area. But is he responsible if he has provided the training and some sailor hides in a paint locker to catch a forbidden smoke?

Training an officer to the rank of Captain is a huge investment, and I worry if we are throwing away that investment too often.

Affirmative

Submitted by Flyby1 on Wed, 11/10/2010 at 10:46 am.

ZUE

Responsibility

Submitted by RJB on Wed, 11/10/2010 at 10:46 am.

This poll is a double edged sword people. "Everything" is a big word. Let's break this down and look at this question again. Everybody works for someone else. All E-6 and below work for an E-7 through E-9. Each of these ranks works for an O-1 through O-6. Each of these work for some Admiral somewhere who answers to the Department of Defense who answers ultimately to the President. So when an E-1 makes a grave error in judgement, do we blame the President? At some point he falls in that Chain of Command. The CO is responsible for enforcing policy and meeting mission requirements. The CO has a support staff above him/her to ensure that the tools are available to do things properly... You all see where this going. Comments???

Categories of "Everything"

Submitted by NavRet on Wed, 11/10/2010 at 10:36 am.

Yes the CO is ultimately responsible for his command, has been and will always be that way; however, the CO needs to ensure every leader under his command is cognizant of their responsibilities and holds them to it just as he is held accountable. Realistically, he cannot control every "Oops" that happens but he can sure minimize the "Oops" by sound training and leadership. It is a fine line but somebody has to do it. As has been said before: "That's why the CO gets the #1 parking spot next to the brow".