re: Who is Vindman and what did he do?

quote:

---

In a purely military hierarchy, must every issue go directly to the commanding officer? Are there not issues that should be taken up with the XO, or the personnel officer, or the supply officer, etc.?

---

Of course you can talk to other staff officers about day to day business. However if you have an issue or concern about impropriety or anything of negative connotations that directly impacts your office, you go to your direct supervisor, whoever that is.

ETA: And if you are below the staff level, it is expected that you clear it with your supervisor before you talk to the XO, personnel, supply, etc. You don't just go walk in their door.

quote:

---

In a blended military/civilian environment, are there not issues on which a military officer would be required to follow the protocol of the civilian hierarchy? For instance, if a military officer has a problem with a civilian secretary, is he required to take that to his direct (civilian) supervisor, rather than approaching the human resources director?

---

He approaches his direct supervisor. In your example, the supervisor will more than likely direct him to HR. If the supervisor blows him off, he informs the supervisor he is going to the next higher supervisor and/or HR.

In the situation we are discussing, there is absolutely no reason, I repeat no reason, to not inform your supervisor before you do anything else, or if they are not immediately available, you let them know ASAP. Even if your supervisor is the problem.

Thats not how chain of command works. You go to your supervisor not the Commander nor the xo and your direct supervisor makes the call in going further up the chain of command. yes every issue that need direction or approval goes to chain of command.
. There is absolutely no excuse or reason for Vindman not to have followed chain of command . He is in violation and should be subject to the Military Code of Justice.