"No Hook Ups" Topic

While a Warehouse Chief with 3/1 back in 1993-96, one of the jobs me and my Marines had was running the Issue Point (IP) for 782 gear. Back in the day, a suite of gear (kit, to our UK brethren) was issued upon check in to the unit. It was replaced as wear and tear took its toll, eventually the Marine had to turn the gear in before reassignment out of the unit. It's done differently now, but that's another story.

I made a huge sign for the wall at the back of the IP so anyone coming to the window could see it plainly, "NO HOOK-UPS."

My definition of a hook-up was pretty straight-forward: I did not allow forgiveness for no-fault loss of missing gear that was signed for. Anything else I considered open to negotiation, so long as no one on either side of the IP personally profited. Like a good supply guy, when the opportunity arises, I'd lie, cheat, swap, steal, deceive, obfuscate, whatever it takes to support the unit. We never pursued opportunity, or actively sought it, just when it presented itself, we did not hesitate. I made it VERY clear about no one *personally* profiting from our exploits.

I used to get call after call from SNCOIC's trying to run interference to get this Marine or that one signed off at Supply so they can execute transfer orders despite their missing gear. My subordinates would deny them at the IP, pointing to the sign. Eventually, I got with the CoGy's and made a suggestion – tell your Marines to hit the surplus stores in town, buy a replacement (serviceable or not), and turn it in. I did not allow it with body armor or helmets, though.

I realized in some cases it created a vicious circle: Supply sends broken gear to DRMS, DRMS auctions it to surplus, Marine buys it at surplus to turn in to Supply. But almost half the time, the things we got from the surplus was still workable or easily repaired (patch up a hole, rivet a packframe, replace an H-Harness strap, good to go.) I rationalized that it was a better route for unit readiness and gear availability than going the "official" route and the unit possibly charging the Marine under Article 13 or a Page 11 entry over something relatively minor. Accountability was maintained and irresponsible Marines were still penalized by purchasing the replacement.

A year or so after I had left my tank platoon, my old platoon sergeant and one of the tank commanders were court-martialed for policing up unsecured CVC helmets and then selling them to the troops when it came time for them to clear the Central Issue facility.

The unit had been formed together, and so a lot of the original crew PCSed in the same timeframe. I guess the temptation to take advantage of that "opportunity" was just too much. I was very disappointed in them; they had never failed to accomplish the mission or to take good care of the troops, otherwise.

Allen

My rationalization to my guys was that I would defend them to the end as long as it was for the unit, that I had a kind of, "out," but they would twist in the wind w/o my support if they personally profited in any way from, "the deed."

And by, "the deed," I mean things like finding a sleeping bag on the side of the main road that might have fallen off a vehicle, or when we saw a cammie net fall out of a helo door and land in the bush a half-mile nearby, snagging it and adding it to our own stocks.

If someone ever found a way to know we had taken it and not turned it in to (?????), I felt I could defend that, because it was for the unit. But if they took that sleeping bag and tried to sell it in town or whatever, they are on their own.