5 ms·

Contractors don't fall in the military hierarchy and the example given isn't interfering with field activities. Basically, a Capt can say what ever they like b

Contractors don't fall in the military hierarchy and the example given isn't interfering with field activities. Basically, a Capt can say what ever they like but if it's just not possible to be fixed in the field then it's not going to happen. Also, you don't get thrown into jail everytime you disobey an order. Especially when it comes to technical equipment.

avmich 5y ago
I'm not a lawyer, but I'd assume when a field unit conducts operations, in the field, and some equipment fails, it's the job of the supply chain to do everything possible to help mitigate the issue reasonably fast. Definition of "reasonably fast" would be an expectation, carried from previous history of similar cases, and definition of "similar" is carried from previous history of purchasing equipment for the army. In other words, one can't just say "oh, this is more complex, and suddenly you can't rely on your practices anymore" without first - when the equipment was talked about - making that clear. And "everything possible" would include tools, electronic or software, and software codes - and yes, possibly engineers who created them on the line, something like what was done when Apollo project had landings on the Moon. Only in this case I'd assume different kind of responsibility than just contractual. I don't fall in the military hierarchy at the moment, but that doesn't mean I can give aid and comfort to enemy. Again, I'm not a lawyer - that's why it's a tribunal - but for a court to give go-ahead to this (absent more prompt collaboration beforehand) would be something to expect. What would you expect if you'd be in the field in this case?
- azernik 5y ago
  And that's the point - for such a contractor, the only punishment available is through courts, with more or less a presumption of innocence, and where the officer is in a lot of career jeopardy if the tribunal digs up that they were being unreasonable. By contrast, a soldier in the chain of command can be punished administratively, and disobeying orders is a crime that in most militaries is only excusable if the order is criminal, not if it's stupid. Rarely brought, but the spectre of it is there
  - loonster 5y ago
    You can always refuse the NJP and demand a court martial. In most cases, it's an extremely bad idea. As you go up the chain, more severe punishment can be applied. I have seen it work with one pissed off LCpl. The officer decided to back off.
- michaelmrose 5y ago
  The requirements and financial penalties for failing to perform the duties specified in the contract are spelled out... in the contract. The biggest one is the government could neither give you a pile of money nor give you the opportunity to earn more piles of money in the future. There is no way you could do your job badly enough for it to be treason nor as far as I know subject one to a military tribunal.

avmich 5y ago

I'm not a lawyer, but I'd assume when a field unit conducts operations, in the field, and some equipment fails, it's the job of the supply chain to do everything possible to help mitigate the issue reasonably fast. Definition of "reasonably fast" would be an expectation, carried from previous history of similar cases, and definition of "similar" is carried from previous history of purchasing equipment for the army. In other words, one can't just say "oh, this is more complex, and suddenly you can't rely on your practices anymore" without first - when the equipment was talked about - making that clear. And "everything possible" would include tools, electronic or software, and software codes - and yes, possibly engineers who created them on the line, something like what was done when Apollo project had landings on the Moon. Only in this case I'd assume different kind of responsibility than just contractual. I don't fall in the military hierarchy at the moment, but that doesn't mean I can give aid and comfort to enemy. Again, I'm not a lawyer - that's why it's a tribunal - but for a court to give go-ahead to this (absent more prompt collaboration beforehand) would be something to expect. What would you expect if you'd be in the field in this case?

azernik 5y ago
And that's the point - for such a contractor, the only punishment available is through courts, with more or less a presumption of innocence, and where the officer is in a lot of career jeopardy if the tribunal digs up that they were being unreasonable. By contrast, a soldier in the chain of command can be punished administratively, and disobeying orders is a crime that in most militaries is only excusable if the order is criminal, not if it's stupid. Rarely brought, but the spectre of it is there
- loonster 5y ago
  You can always refuse the NJP and demand a court martial. In most cases, it's an extremely bad idea. As you go up the chain, more severe punishment can be applied. I have seen it work with one pissed off LCpl. The officer decided to back off.
michaelmrose 5y ago
The requirements and financial penalties for failing to perform the duties specified in the contract are spelled out... in the contract. The biggest one is the government could neither give you a pile of money nor give you the opportunity to earn more piles of money in the future. There is no way you could do your job badly enough for it to be treason nor as far as I know subject one to a military tribunal.