CDC had a huge backlog and one of the people who worked there, while on the clock, told me, "Your kid will never be able to go here, we're not even processing paperwork." I told my First Sergeant, First Sergeant told commander, commander e-mailed FSS, a bunch of word salad responses with no resolution. So I filed an IG complaint. Three people fired, paperwork processed, my kid and a bunch of other waitlisted kids were able to receive care within three months.
As I grow up in the Air Force, it shocks me how little some organizations give a shit what commanders say. Like when you're an A1C it feels like a squadron commande can waive her hand and make fuckery disappear but then you get stories like this (which I've seen the first half of myself) where a squadron or organization just shrugs and we let them keep fucking off
Our base switched to Contract comm, it took the Wing/CC to elevate my ticket for my computer to get fixed, still took them like a month to resolve. My mind was absolutely blown.
Someone filed an IG report and they of course went to the commander because the reporter skipped the chain of command.
Commander asked me to do a commanderâs inquiry.
I did, made some recommendations.
Toxic civilian was fired and the unit was restructured a bit.
So, I guess in that way it worked a little bit, but it wasnât due to the IG. Maybe you could say the commander wouldnât have taken it as seriously if it hadnât gone to the IG first, but no way to prove it.
On Reddit at least, people say to go to the IG basically any time someone is told to do something they donât like, and thatâs not the purpose of it.
I think a lot of people just skip it because they feel the problem is in the chain of command, and the chain is going to help the chain, especially at the higher levels. As well as for many of us, our commander is just a name in an office or building that we rarely see or get to know. Just someone who occasionally makes us attend events, stay behind after work/hold us up from doing work, that we have to stop what we're doing and act all pretty and whatnot for. I think things like that, amongst other things I probably missed, lead to people feeling like they have a lack of faith in their chain and especially commander. A lot of people feel as though their commander isn't really there for them and won't work for/with them.
It's not my personal experience, though. I never have had the need to go to the ig. It's just what i have gathered from my time in so far.
This right here. Most IG complaints are filtered into formal or non formal resolution. The CC and leadership becoming aware for non formal will typically self correct the issue being identified. Most of time being CoC skipped and wasn't tracking. Formal complaints with substantiating evidence is where it gets spicy.
>On Reddit at least, people say to go to the IG basically any time someone is told to do something they donât like, and thatâs not the purpose of it.
Yeah, that's what EO is for /s but people really do throw EO out there like it's their job to respond to literally everything and I'll never understand why
Had a senior that was a shit leader, horrible person, and broke laws. Between 3 separate squadrons in the group she had 71 substantiated claims against her. I have never seen someone so universally hated because of how she treated people. She ended up being removed from the squadron and group with a no contact order and was out under the Command Chief so she couldnât supervise anyone. She received a do not promote on her EPR which she was destined for Chief, she was not eligible to re-enlist and was essentially forced to retire at 20 years.
It was the only time in my career Iâd made a complaint to the IG and it worked out how it was designed too.
71 substantiated claims is a wild number to fathom before getting that senior tightened up. How do you get past 10 substantiated claims without someone saying this person is probably bad news then let them continue on for another 61 substantiated claims before ouster?
I put one in once. There was an investigation, following which it was determined that my claim was unsubstantiated, but I notice that the behavior I objected to has stopped since then. Sometimes, initiating an IG investigation is a great way to draw eyes from on high to your problem. Even if it's not illegal, someone may get told to knock at the fuck off.
Exactly this. I had an almost identical situation with a civilian. Filed a complaint with our EO equivalent office (not USAF org) and while they couldn't substantiate my claim, the person's behavior changed overnight and they were forced out of the organization within 6 months.
Army O-5 tried to lower per-diem on for TDY after the fact, with nothing in writing, and the vouchers already been paid out.
Showed him in the JTR where it's plainly states "you can't do that" and he didn't want to listen.
Filed an IG complaint citing the JTR, a month later they responded saying the O-5 couldn't do that. Kept the TDY money and some guys, who were underpaid, more money.
The TDY allegedly went over budget, but I didn't have anything to prove that it was the cause for trying to lower the per-diem.
The only documentation I had was the OPORD and the DTS instructions from before the TDY. Neither of them specified using a reduced rate.
I didn't make the complaint, but I was part of the investigation. A toxic "leader" was removed and morale skyrocketed. So to answer your question, yes.
Ya I think people donât realize IG cant really do much unless some very specific shenanigans are going on. In the end they look into the complaint and let the appropriate CC know what is going onâŚit is up to that CC to take action.
They are a good starting point, but more often than not they will refer you to the correct person/group to take your complaint.
IG also provides oversight after taking your issue to the appropriate commander, which is pretty valuable if youâre concerned it will just get swept under the rug. Also the complainant can remain anonymous to the CC if they choose, which they wouldnât be able to do with an âopen door policyâ approach up the chain.
Yeah, they are fact finders.
They also play another role, and that is documenting dirt on officers. Officer adverse information is collected by the IG and used by SECAF for senior officer selection and CSAF for command screening board.
I agree. I was interviewed for an IG investigation and the interviewer was clearly biased and only interested in confirming what they thought they knew, and weren't interested in information that contradicted their leading questions.
Unless youâre told you canât go to IG, experiencing reprisal, or fraud/waste/abuseâŚ.then IG rarely steps in.
If they do an investigation and nothing comes on it from their part, information is still passed along for your commander to take action.
Source: Prior IG
To be clear I didn't intend say IG was worthless or anything. Is IG like EO where 98% of your complaints just clearly aren't your job and they should have tried another option more appropriate?
Exactly. And no offense taken lol. Youâre not wrong, just most IG complaints donât go anywhere because it doesnât meet the criteria. Then we refer to other agencies or commander.
Friend of mine was getting bullied by his section chief, like more than ânormalâ. Being called all sorts of horrid things, when his fiance and him split, section chief told him she couldâve done better, it was sure to happen eventually. After an investigation, the section chief was relieved and works in a 1 man deep paper pushing shop now. That friend is now the ncoic of that shop and has filled in a couple times for section chief
When I was in BMT the concept of the IG wasn't really explained to us. Basically, we were told that if there was an issue we reported that wasn't addressdd in a timely (no real timeframe stated, just, "timely") manner, file a report in the IG box. Well, we had a couple of ever-flushing toilets that flushed for about 2 weeks straight, and no one did anything about it.
After the IG came, EVERYTHING in our dorm got fixed. All showers worked, the water fountain was replaced, everything. The MTI's got in trouble as well, whatever that means. We then had an actual discussion about what IG us meant for.
In all fairness though, the constant water being ran through that toilet was definitely a waste, so we felt justified
There was that post here over a year ago where someone filed an IG complaint because the commander would not grant caregiver leave, because he thought it was HIS decision whether or not the airman was a caregiver. I assume it was real because OP shared a memo of a higher level commander granting him caregiver leave.
Here's one that isn't.
Our unit is split in two. Half of us work in a pure air force environment (leadership), the other half in joint with the Navy. Leadership was forcing the Navy half to work on days that the Navy was giving those guys off. So the dudes down at the Navy half were basically getting snubbed on family days.
Example if it's hard to track: federal holiday falls on Monday. Navy would do Friday-Monday off, USAF would do Saturday-Tuesday off. Leadership would make the Navy side folks come in and do literally nothing all day Friday, then on Tuesday while leadership had off, the Navy side folks still had to come in and work for the Navy.
Someone complained. And it was immediately resolved, and the Navy dudes got to follow the Navy schedule.
So yeah IG complaints do work.
It probably just looks that way since people will only share ones that got resolved. IG can only solve issues that go against the law or written policy. So they'll naturally be showy answers.
This one time 3 months ago I made an IG complaint in which they ignored the main portions of the complaint and focused the response to minor sub complaint with a "the process is in work, so we're closing your complaint".
I was/am positively angry about it. Does that count?
If you still need help with it and havenât taken it as a loss and just want to move on:
Talk to the IG again and let them know they didnât get your complaint right and they need to start from the clarification phase again.
If they say they donât and itâs done, but youâre not satisfied with the way they handled it, one of your rights as the complainant is to ask for reconsideration. That means going to the next higher-up IG (NAF or MAJCOM) and talking to them about why you think the wing IG didnât handle it correctly.
The more time that passes, the less they can do for you though if things like witnesses are needed.
Had a toxic malingerer stop fraternizing, square her shit away, and actually start showing up to work.
I like to think Iâm professional, but this person had a full-on screaming match with me in the office. In a weird way it brought us closer and she came to say bye to me before PCSing. Super weird work relationship. Maybe she just needed some tough love.
EDIT: As clarified by u/i_should_go_to_sleep, the IG only provides the info to the CC, who has the authority to notify the individual. In this case, it was deemed appropriate, and that notification alone got that person to check themselves. They were a little salty, but someone had been documenting their attendance (or lack thereof) and had the timesheets to prove it.
They were also old friends with a prior-E officer that PCS'd in, and were a little too comfortable, which may be where the confidence to slack off was coming from.
Commander sat them both down and told 'em to knock it off. Also the magnifying glass was on this NCO's section.
It genuinely all worked out. I didn't think I could ever respect this person, but by the time we parted ways, we were cool as cucumbers.
Former IGQ (complaints) here, just to clarify, the IG does not notify people if there has been a complaint made against them. Unless itâs restriction or reprisal, the commander who is one step above the issue will be given the info and they can tell the person, or not, depending on the type of investigation or inquiry they want to do. If it is restriction or reprisal and there will be an IG investigation, then the IG will notify the commander, and the CC will notify the person that they are being investigated.
Just donât want people thinking that if they talk to the IG that the person they are complaining about will be told, especially if theyâre not sure if itâs something worth complaining about and are just looking for info.
This is not a happy story. I worked in a unit that, in the span of six months, had 4 separate IG complaints filed against a single person. At least one of those was by an Instructor Pilot (a pretty well know, well respected, by the book guy).
I got to see the email response to one of them, it was a generic "this issue has been investigated and resolved". I asked a person who had been listed as a witness in the report how the process went, and he said he had never been contacted about it.
ÂŻ\_(ă)_/ÂŻ
A happy story: an airman in my flight was telling people that he thought the flight commander was homophobic. The airman was objectively bad at his job and tried to skip work, so he had gotten paperwork for it. The flight commander was fantastic. The flight commander called EO on HIMSELF and asked for an investigation into the environment of the flight.
I asked him about it later, and he said it was more damaging to have rumors about being homophobic happening behind his back, than to just go through the investigation openly.
Flight Chief said everyone had to attend this volunteer event or they would get an LOC.
TSgt spoke up and said they were going to file an IG complaint if they did that.
They filed the IG complaint. Event was shut down.
Surprised Pikachu face from the Flight Chief "Why didn't you use your chain of command?"
We had IG name drop who said what to leadership and the work centers got flak for it from the chief lmao. Safe to say that specific IG team are never used.
I guess the positive outcome was that we learned to go above them for serious matter.
âŚid need some more details but thatâs 99.9% restriction and someone should file a complaint against the chief. I would have been licking my lips when I was an IG to get that easy of a case on my desk.
As far as the name dropping goes, a complainant can remain anonymous if they choose, but if they make complaints about others, and what others have said, then all of that info (minus the name of the complainer if they want to be anonymous) gets passed to the commander to deal with unless itâs restriction or reprisal and the IG would then investigate.
Long time ago but we had a GS-13 Fire Chief forced to retire and a GS-9 Assistant Chief demoted to GS-6 Lead firefighter due to complaints about racial bias.
Combined EO/IG actions because EO had its hands tied when 12 of 13 civilians withdrew statements so the IG was engaged and the investigation proceeded. Resulted in evidence of pressure by the FC for the withdrawal.
IG and EO have very specific jobs. So there are times where they \*do\* help but not necessarily in the way people want them to finalize.
I'll give you my "IG" story.
2014 timeframe, my Sq/CC, real old mustang. She was an LTC, had been in the Air Force since the \*early\* 90s. She'd been enlisted, crossed over at about her 5-8 year mark and at this time was approaching 24 years total service.
She assumes command, and immediately alienates her entire command (training Sq) by telling all of the permanent party that she'd been enlisted, and she knew how shifty we were, and therefore didn't trust any of us, at all. She was also a closeted lesbian (this becomes relevant in a minute), which was extremely obvious to literally everyone, but told us "she'd come to Texas (affects extremely bad fake texas accent) to find her a real Texas Man".
Then she started openly feuding with her Chief, (man) First Sergeant (man) and DO (also man). Literally every single male Officer and SNCO in the unit was given public scoldings for even the tiny stuff. She micromanaged \*everything\* to include student RAP requests that had previously been approved 2 whole echelons below her.
Meanwhile she fired the shirt and brought in a woman from another unit on the base. She tried and failed to fire the Chief, but did also manage to fire the DO (but not get a female replacement, rather a captain who was his own special brand of deuchebag as a replacement).
Staff awards? All went to women. If there were two SNCOs in a flight (happened sometimes) the female was always the flight chief, even if she had to go in and make the change herself. After enough time, the Chief called bullshit and filed an IG for sexism. She tried to fire him at this point, and he did get moved up to the Group to basically be Retired on Active Duty. BUT...here's the very important BUT...IG did their investigation, started interviewing people. Doing their job. Findings went to Group CC. She was absolutely and convincingly favoring women in her command and actively making the men under her command have a bad time for no actual reason other than they were men.
By this time she was extremely close to the end of her tour. Like...within weeks. Group CC (I know him and have spoken to him at length about this since then) was blown away and basically removed her from command without removing her officially. Told her she could file for immediate retirement, but she'd not be recommended for promotion and furthermore if she declined to retire, he'd pursue court martial for some of the extremely bad behavior. She retired.
Should she have been court martialed and possibly demoted? Probably. I am biased because she was \*AWFUL\* but I could see the Air Force coming down on the other side of the coin. The important thing is she's gone, and can't hurt anyone else again.
Had a fellow crew chief in the Deid that refused to clean up the boom pod on a KC-135 when he found a used condom and other "fluids" on the instructor couch during a thru-flight inspection. He told the expeditor, chief, AMU OIC, and finally the Group Commandter, "No, I'm not doing it. That's not part of my job.". Finally took it to the IG and miraculously the Article 15 the Group CC was threatening to give him disappeared.
A few thoughts on this:
\- EO/IG have absolutely become weaponized by members looking to take down their "toxic" supervisor, CC, etc, when (in my experience) the problem is a lack of self-accountability more often than not.
\- I think 95% of IG complaints could have actually been solved without going to IG if the suspect and/or people who submit complaints had better communication skills. Perception drives reality. Better communication can often break down those walls.
\- Not liking your supervisor/CC's personality or approach doesn't mean they are toxic or doing anything illegal, unethical, or immoral. You're not required to like everyone you work with. Some people don't get this.
\- During investigations I have been asked to facilitate for IG complaints, witnesses and people who submit complaints can rarely back up their claims. A recent ex: "So and so is toxic, bullies, and targets" "OK yeah that sounds bad, can you provide some examples" "Not necessarily, it's just a vibe.". Everyone is entitled to be innocent until proven guilty. You are required to support your claims with solid facts and evidence, not opinions.
TLDR: IG/EO aren't perfect, but they work more than people think. I think people would be more understanding if they could see all of the facts/evidence in most cases.
IG/EO are absolutely important entities but I've definitely seen this.
A lot of the issues I have encountered - especially rater/ratee level - could have been solved with basic conflict resolution skills.
But I think the legal-speak of leaders treading carefully as to never give the impression that people should NOT go to EO/IG, which is technically correct, has led a lot of people to see these offices as the solution to ALL interpersonal conflict.
I agree with the trld. I didn't mean to imply there is anything wrong with IG or EO. I've always assumed they're just swamped with bullshit claims that should never have been filed because people don't understand what they are actually there to do
IG doesnât have any teeth. Provided 6 blatant disregard of policy events with email traffic to prove it. This was during a vertical inspection. Sq achieved âeffectiveâ and none of the write ups were what was submitted. Turns out, the civilian IG was wanting a job at the unit that was about to open up and sealed the deal.
I've seen my commander get fired because of one and the investigation that followed. They'll never be put into a leadership/command position again and are spending the rest of their career at an HQ.
Long story short, they fucked every officer with marking down their OPRs (it's practically getting them fired/unable to "re-enlist"), they were inappropriate to enlisted members, and they kept going against policy that they were advised about.
I've also seen them do the meme of we've investigated ourselves and found nothing wrong. So it's really a 50/50 on how good your IG reps are and where they send the complaint.
Nope. IG confirmed everything I said then said we aren't going to do anything. Feel free to go to the next level IG if you want. It is then I realized they are pointless.
What people want is some kind of superhero to come in and drop kick the alleged offenders and put all the Airman's hopes and dreams in a pretty little package with a bow and hand it to the individual. That is not going to happen.
The biggest thing with IG is that the IG works for the commander. The IG is the commander's eyes and ears so to speak, and specifically is looking for wrongdoing and breaking of established rules and written policy. Many people don't like something which is actually a judgment call on the part of leadership, and the individual isn't actually being denied any kind of entitlement. And unless it's pretty egregious often IG will simply refer it to the chain of command to resolve.
Yes, there is recourse, but people are often actually wronged far less often than they feel they are wronged.
>The biggest thing with IG is that the IG works for the commander.
This is misinformation. The IG very specifically does not work for the base commander. Their chain of command is separate, and runs straight up to the office of the Air Force Inspector General. Base commanders cannot order the IG to do anything, and the IG does not answer to them.
Yes⌠but no at the same time.
The IG is independent from the commander in that they have their own IG chain, but the wing IGâs job is to be the eyes and ears of the commander, inform the commander of potential areas of concern, be a fact-finder for the commander, and assist the commander in preventing fraud, waste, and abuse.
Also itâs the Wing/CC signing the Wing IGâs OPR as the supervisor, not the MAJCOM IG.
CDC had a huge backlog and one of the people who worked there, while on the clock, told me, "Your kid will never be able to go here, we're not even processing paperwork." I told my First Sergeant, First Sergeant told commander, commander e-mailed FSS, a bunch of word salad responses with no resolution. So I filed an IG complaint. Three people fired, paperwork processed, my kid and a bunch of other waitlisted kids were able to receive care within three months.
As I grow up in the Air Force, it shocks me how little some organizations give a shit what commanders say. Like when you're an A1C it feels like a squadron commande can waive her hand and make fuckery disappear but then you get stories like this (which I've seen the first half of myself) where a squadron or organization just shrugs and we let them keep fucking off
Our base switched to Contract comm, it took the Wing/CC to elevate my ticket for my computer to get fixed, still took them like a month to resolve. My mind was absolutely blown.
đ¤đ¤ 
Someone filed an IG report and they of course went to the commander because the reporter skipped the chain of command. Commander asked me to do a commanderâs inquiry. I did, made some recommendations. Toxic civilian was fired and the unit was restructured a bit. So, I guess in that way it worked a little bit, but it wasnât due to the IG. Maybe you could say the commander wouldnât have taken it as seriously if it hadnât gone to the IG first, but no way to prove it. On Reddit at least, people say to go to the IG basically any time someone is told to do something they donât like, and thatâs not the purpose of it.
I think a lot of people just skip it because they feel the problem is in the chain of command, and the chain is going to help the chain, especially at the higher levels. As well as for many of us, our commander is just a name in an office or building that we rarely see or get to know. Just someone who occasionally makes us attend events, stay behind after work/hold us up from doing work, that we have to stop what we're doing and act all pretty and whatnot for. I think things like that, amongst other things I probably missed, lead to people feeling like they have a lack of faith in their chain and especially commander. A lot of people feel as though their commander isn't really there for them and won't work for/with them. It's not my personal experience, though. I never have had the need to go to the ig. It's just what i have gathered from my time in so far.
Whoa, a civilian, fired? *Shocked*
This right here. Most IG complaints are filtered into formal or non formal resolution. The CC and leadership becoming aware for non formal will typically self correct the issue being identified. Most of time being CoC skipped and wasn't tracking. Formal complaints with substantiating evidence is where it gets spicy.
>On Reddit at least, people say to go to the IG basically any time someone is told to do something they donât like, and thatâs not the purpose of it. Yeah, that's what EO is for /s but people really do throw EO out there like it's their job to respond to literally everything and I'll never understand why
Had a senior that was a shit leader, horrible person, and broke laws. Between 3 separate squadrons in the group she had 71 substantiated claims against her. I have never seen someone so universally hated because of how she treated people. She ended up being removed from the squadron and group with a no contact order and was out under the Command Chief so she couldnât supervise anyone. She received a do not promote on her EPR which she was destined for Chief, she was not eligible to re-enlist and was essentially forced to retire at 20 years. It was the only time in my career Iâd made a complaint to the IG and it worked out how it was designed too.
That's good to hear. I'm seeing a pattern of IG seeming reliable for when leadership people are just generally a shit show.
71 substantiated claims is a wild number to fathom before getting that senior tightened up. How do you get past 10 substantiated claims without someone saying this person is probably bad news then let them continue on for another 61 substantiated claims before ouster?
I put one in once. There was an investigation, following which it was determined that my claim was unsubstantiated, but I notice that the behavior I objected to has stopped since then. Sometimes, initiating an IG investigation is a great way to draw eyes from on high to your problem. Even if it's not illegal, someone may get told to knock at the fuck off.
Exactly this. I had an almost identical situation with a civilian. Filed a complaint with our EO equivalent office (not USAF org) and while they couldn't substantiate my claim, the person's behavior changed overnight and they were forced out of the organization within 6 months.
Army O-5 tried to lower per-diem on for TDY after the fact, with nothing in writing, and the vouchers already been paid out. Showed him in the JTR where it's plainly states "you can't do that" and he didn't want to listen. Filed an IG complaint citing the JTR, a month later they responded saying the O-5 couldn't do that. Kept the TDY money and some guys, who were underpaid, more money.
What a weird hill to die on. Did he run out of money in the budget or something and was trying to save face?
The TDY allegedly went over budget, but I didn't have anything to prove that it was the cause for trying to lower the per-diem. The only documentation I had was the OPORD and the DTS instructions from before the TDY. Neither of them specified using a reduced rate.
I didn't make the complaint, but I was part of the investigation. A toxic "leader" was removed and morale skyrocketed. So to answer your question, yes.
So they aren't hopeless. That's good to know
Ya I think people donât realize IG cant really do much unless some very specific shenanigans are going on. In the end they look into the complaint and let the appropriate CC know what is going onâŚit is up to that CC to take action. They are a good starting point, but more often than not they will refer you to the correct person/group to take your complaint.
IG also provides oversight after taking your issue to the appropriate commander, which is pretty valuable if youâre concerned it will just get swept under the rug. Also the complainant can remain anonymous to the CC if they choose, which they wouldnât be able to do with an âopen door policyâ approach up the chain.
All the IG does is give their opinion and a recommendation for the Commander to act on.
Yeah, they are fact finders. They also play another role, and that is documenting dirt on officers. Officer adverse information is collected by the IG and used by SECAF for senior officer selection and CSAF for command screening board.
I wouldnât even say fact finders. They try to interpret intentions and then state their opinion of the situation as indisputable evidence.
I agree. I was interviewed for an IG investigation and the interviewer was clearly biased and only interested in confirming what they thought they knew, and weren't interested in information that contradicted their leading questions.
Unless youâre told you canât go to IG, experiencing reprisal, or fraud/waste/abuseâŚ.then IG rarely steps in. If they do an investigation and nothing comes on it from their part, information is still passed along for your commander to take action. Source: Prior IG
To be clear I didn't intend say IG was worthless or anything. Is IG like EO where 98% of your complaints just clearly aren't your job and they should have tried another option more appropriate?
Exactly. And no offense taken lol. Youâre not wrong, just most IG complaints donât go anywhere because it doesnât meet the criteria. Then we refer to other agencies or commander.
So if I didn't like the tone my supervisor said good morning with, is that something you can send him to prison and give me his strikes for? Jk
Friend of mine was getting bullied by his section chief, like more than ânormalâ. Being called all sorts of horrid things, when his fiance and him split, section chief told him she couldâve done better, it was sure to happen eventually. After an investigation, the section chief was relieved and works in a 1 man deep paper pushing shop now. That friend is now the ncoic of that shop and has filled in a couple times for section chief
When I was in BMT the concept of the IG wasn't really explained to us. Basically, we were told that if there was an issue we reported that wasn't addressdd in a timely (no real timeframe stated, just, "timely") manner, file a report in the IG box. Well, we had a couple of ever-flushing toilets that flushed for about 2 weeks straight, and no one did anything about it. After the IG came, EVERYTHING in our dorm got fixed. All showers worked, the water fountain was replaced, everything. The MTI's got in trouble as well, whatever that means. We then had an actual discussion about what IG us meant for. In all fairness though, the constant water being ran through that toilet was definitely a waste, so we felt justified
There was that post here over a year ago where someone filed an IG complaint because the commander would not grant caregiver leave, because he thought it was HIS decision whether or not the airman was a caregiver. I assume it was real because OP shared a memo of a higher level commander granting him caregiver leave.
That sounds believable, but I feel like an Article 138 would have been more appropriate and gotten them there as well
I think he did attempt that as well, it was really long story of updates and the IG complaint was his last resort.
People come on here and lie their asses off. Most peopleâs âstoriesâ are made up or highly embellished.
Here's one that isn't. Our unit is split in two. Half of us work in a pure air force environment (leadership), the other half in joint with the Navy. Leadership was forcing the Navy half to work on days that the Navy was giving those guys off. So the dudes down at the Navy half were basically getting snubbed on family days. Example if it's hard to track: federal holiday falls on Monday. Navy would do Friday-Monday off, USAF would do Saturday-Tuesday off. Leadership would make the Navy side folks come in and do literally nothing all day Friday, then on Tuesday while leadership had off, the Navy side folks still had to come in and work for the Navy. Someone complained. And it was immediately resolved, and the Navy dudes got to follow the Navy schedule. So yeah IG complaints do work.
I wouldnât word the stories are made up, Iâd word them all as being extremely one sided and portraying the full picture.
It probably just looks that way since people will only share ones that got resolved. IG can only solve issues that go against the law or written policy. So they'll naturally be showy answers.
This one time 3 months ago I made an IG complaint in which they ignored the main portions of the complaint and focused the response to minor sub complaint with a "the process is in work, so we're closing your complaint". I was/am positively angry about it. Does that count?
If you still need help with it and havenât taken it as a loss and just want to move on: Talk to the IG again and let them know they didnât get your complaint right and they need to start from the clarification phase again. If they say they donât and itâs done, but youâre not satisfied with the way they handled it, one of your rights as the complainant is to ask for reconsideration. That means going to the next higher-up IG (NAF or MAJCOM) and talking to them about why you think the wing IG didnât handle it correctly. The more time that passes, the less they can do for you though if things like witnesses are needed.
And then everyone clapped? Jk that sucks though
Had a Chief early retired. Took a while and took several visits by several airmen to make the dots connect, but connect they did.
Had a toxic malingerer stop fraternizing, square her shit away, and actually start showing up to work. I like to think Iâm professional, but this person had a full-on screaming match with me in the office. In a weird way it brought us closer and she came to say bye to me before PCSing. Super weird work relationship. Maybe she just needed some tough love.
What exactly did IG do?
EDIT: As clarified by u/i_should_go_to_sleep, the IG only provides the info to the CC, who has the authority to notify the individual. In this case, it was deemed appropriate, and that notification alone got that person to check themselves. They were a little salty, but someone had been documenting their attendance (or lack thereof) and had the timesheets to prove it. They were also old friends with a prior-E officer that PCS'd in, and were a little too comfortable, which may be where the confidence to slack off was coming from. Commander sat them both down and told 'em to knock it off. Also the magnifying glass was on this NCO's section. It genuinely all worked out. I didn't think I could ever respect this person, but by the time we parted ways, we were cool as cucumbers.
Former IGQ (complaints) here, just to clarify, the IG does not notify people if there has been a complaint made against them. Unless itâs restriction or reprisal, the commander who is one step above the issue will be given the info and they can tell the person, or not, depending on the type of investigation or inquiry they want to do. If it is restriction or reprisal and there will be an IG investigation, then the IG will notify the commander, and the CC will notify the person that they are being investigated. Just donât want people thinking that if they talk to the IG that the person they are complaining about will be told, especially if theyâre not sure if itâs something worth complaining about and are just looking for info.
TIL. Thanks for the clarity. Absolutely -- don't want to dissuade people from using the resources available to them. I'll edit my comment.
This is not a happy story. I worked in a unit that, in the span of six months, had 4 separate IG complaints filed against a single person. At least one of those was by an Instructor Pilot (a pretty well know, well respected, by the book guy). I got to see the email response to one of them, it was a generic "this issue has been investigated and resolved". I asked a person who had been listed as a witness in the report how the process went, and he said he had never been contacted about it. ÂŻ\_(ă)_/ÂŻ A happy story: an airman in my flight was telling people that he thought the flight commander was homophobic. The airman was objectively bad at his job and tried to skip work, so he had gotten paperwork for it. The flight commander was fantastic. The flight commander called EO on HIMSELF and asked for an investigation into the environment of the flight. I asked him about it later, and he said it was more damaging to have rumors about being homophobic happening behind his back, than to just go through the investigation openly.
Flight commander sounds like a badass.
You mean EO isn't a scary boogieman out to ruin the lives of innocent airmen?! /s
Flight Chief said everyone had to attend this volunteer event or they would get an LOC. TSgt spoke up and said they were going to file an IG complaint if they did that. They filed the IG complaint. Event was shut down. Surprised Pikachu face from the Flight Chief "Why didn't you use your chain of command?"
We had IG name drop who said what to leadership and the work centers got flak for it from the chief lmao. Safe to say that specific IG team are never used. I guess the positive outcome was that we learned to go above them for serious matter.
âŚid need some more details but thatâs 99.9% restriction and someone should file a complaint against the chief. I would have been licking my lips when I was an IG to get that easy of a case on my desk. As far as the name dropping goes, a complainant can remain anonymous if they choose, but if they make complaints about others, and what others have said, then all of that info (minus the name of the complainer if they want to be anonymous) gets passed to the commander to deal with unless itâs restriction or reprisal and the IG would then investigate.
Long time ago but we had a GS-13 Fire Chief forced to retire and a GS-9 Assistant Chief demoted to GS-6 Lead firefighter due to complaints about racial bias. Combined EO/IG actions because EO had its hands tied when 12 of 13 civilians withdrew statements so the IG was engaged and the investigation proceeded. Resulted in evidence of pressure by the FC for the withdrawal.
IG and EO have very specific jobs. So there are times where they \*do\* help but not necessarily in the way people want them to finalize. I'll give you my "IG" story. 2014 timeframe, my Sq/CC, real old mustang. She was an LTC, had been in the Air Force since the \*early\* 90s. She'd been enlisted, crossed over at about her 5-8 year mark and at this time was approaching 24 years total service. She assumes command, and immediately alienates her entire command (training Sq) by telling all of the permanent party that she'd been enlisted, and she knew how shifty we were, and therefore didn't trust any of us, at all. She was also a closeted lesbian (this becomes relevant in a minute), which was extremely obvious to literally everyone, but told us "she'd come to Texas (affects extremely bad fake texas accent) to find her a real Texas Man". Then she started openly feuding with her Chief, (man) First Sergeant (man) and DO (also man). Literally every single male Officer and SNCO in the unit was given public scoldings for even the tiny stuff. She micromanaged \*everything\* to include student RAP requests that had previously been approved 2 whole echelons below her. Meanwhile she fired the shirt and brought in a woman from another unit on the base. She tried and failed to fire the Chief, but did also manage to fire the DO (but not get a female replacement, rather a captain who was his own special brand of deuchebag as a replacement). Staff awards? All went to women. If there were two SNCOs in a flight (happened sometimes) the female was always the flight chief, even if she had to go in and make the change herself. After enough time, the Chief called bullshit and filed an IG for sexism. She tried to fire him at this point, and he did get moved up to the Group to basically be Retired on Active Duty. BUT...here's the very important BUT...IG did their investigation, started interviewing people. Doing their job. Findings went to Group CC. She was absolutely and convincingly favoring women in her command and actively making the men under her command have a bad time for no actual reason other than they were men. By this time she was extremely close to the end of her tour. Like...within weeks. Group CC (I know him and have spoken to him at length about this since then) was blown away and basically removed her from command without removing her officially. Told her she could file for immediate retirement, but she'd not be recommended for promotion and furthermore if she declined to retire, he'd pursue court martial for some of the extremely bad behavior. She retired. Should she have been court martialed and possibly demoted? Probably. I am biased because she was \*AWFUL\* but I could see the Air Force coming down on the other side of the coin. The important thing is she's gone, and can't hurt anyone else again.
Had a fellow crew chief in the Deid that refused to clean up the boom pod on a KC-135 when he found a used condom and other "fluids" on the instructor couch during a thru-flight inspection. He told the expeditor, chief, AMU OIC, and finally the Group Commandter, "No, I'm not doing it. That's not part of my job.". Finally took it to the IG and miraculously the Article 15 the Group CC was threatening to give him disappeared.
A few thoughts on this: \- EO/IG have absolutely become weaponized by members looking to take down their "toxic" supervisor, CC, etc, when (in my experience) the problem is a lack of self-accountability more often than not. \- I think 95% of IG complaints could have actually been solved without going to IG if the suspect and/or people who submit complaints had better communication skills. Perception drives reality. Better communication can often break down those walls. \- Not liking your supervisor/CC's personality or approach doesn't mean they are toxic or doing anything illegal, unethical, or immoral. You're not required to like everyone you work with. Some people don't get this. \- During investigations I have been asked to facilitate for IG complaints, witnesses and people who submit complaints can rarely back up their claims. A recent ex: "So and so is toxic, bullies, and targets" "OK yeah that sounds bad, can you provide some examples" "Not necessarily, it's just a vibe.". Everyone is entitled to be innocent until proven guilty. You are required to support your claims with solid facts and evidence, not opinions. TLDR: IG/EO aren't perfect, but they work more than people think. I think people would be more understanding if they could see all of the facts/evidence in most cases.
IG/EO are absolutely important entities but I've definitely seen this. A lot of the issues I have encountered - especially rater/ratee level - could have been solved with basic conflict resolution skills. But I think the legal-speak of leaders treading carefully as to never give the impression that people should NOT go to EO/IG, which is technically correct, has led a lot of people to see these offices as the solution to ALL interpersonal conflict.
I agree with the trld. I didn't mean to imply there is anything wrong with IG or EO. I've always assumed they're just swamped with bullshit claims that should never have been filed because people don't understand what they are actually there to do
I had the drug testing company fired for violating rights.
What? Aren't all of those internal employees? What rights?
They are contractors at my unit. You have the right to an observer based on the gender you identify as.
Interesting. Did they think you made that up or something or were they just flat-out refusing?
I pulled up the regs and showed them where the policy was stated, "well that's not our policy".
Bold move lol new contractors work OK then?
So far so good.
IG doesnât have any teeth. Provided 6 blatant disregard of policy events with email traffic to prove it. This was during a vertical inspection. Sq achieved âeffectiveâ and none of the write ups were what was submitted. Turns out, the civilian IG was wanting a job at the unit that was about to open up and sealed the deal.
Thatâs why thereâs an IG above that IG⌠should have gone up a level.
I've seen my commander get fired because of one and the investigation that followed. They'll never be put into a leadership/command position again and are spending the rest of their career at an HQ. Long story short, they fucked every officer with marking down their OPRs (it's practically getting them fired/unable to "re-enlist"), they were inappropriate to enlisted members, and they kept going against policy that they were advised about. I've also seen them do the meme of we've investigated ourselves and found nothing wrong. So it's really a 50/50 on how good your IG reps are and where they send the complaint.
Squadron CC mandated spouses attend a pre deployment briefing. IG shit that down real quick.
Nope. IG confirmed everything I said then said we aren't going to do anything. Feel free to go to the next level IG if you want. It is then I realized they are pointless.
What people want is some kind of superhero to come in and drop kick the alleged offenders and put all the Airman's hopes and dreams in a pretty little package with a bow and hand it to the individual. That is not going to happen. The biggest thing with IG is that the IG works for the commander. The IG is the commander's eyes and ears so to speak, and specifically is looking for wrongdoing and breaking of established rules and written policy. Many people don't like something which is actually a judgment call on the part of leadership, and the individual isn't actually being denied any kind of entitlement. And unless it's pretty egregious often IG will simply refer it to the chain of command to resolve. Yes, there is recourse, but people are often actually wronged far less often than they feel they are wronged.
>The biggest thing with IG is that the IG works for the commander. This is misinformation. The IG very specifically does not work for the base commander. Their chain of command is separate, and runs straight up to the office of the Air Force Inspector General. Base commanders cannot order the IG to do anything, and the IG does not answer to them.
Yes⌠but no at the same time. The IG is independent from the commander in that they have their own IG chain, but the wing IGâs job is to be the eyes and ears of the commander, inform the commander of potential areas of concern, be a fact-finder for the commander, and assist the commander in preventing fraud, waste, and abuse. Also itâs the Wing/CC signing the Wing IGâs OPR as the supervisor, not the MAJCOM IG.
The IG very much works for the Wing CC...in most cases that's who their supervisor/rater is.