Aryte Posted September 23, 2009 Share Posted September 23, 2009 A situation arose a couple days ago in which a hostile party wished to declare themselves neutral. The NCOIC at the time was informed he/she was not able to make that call and that an officer would have to. I am not within that opinion: an NCOIC has the authority to act as necessary when in command of the region.IV-413: The highest ranking officer present assumes command during defensive postures, regardless of branch of affiliation (see tier of secession). All authority should be derived directly through the officer in charge (OIC)—dissenting commands, suggestions, or impeding of the OIC is classified as insubordination. Although title IV-413 does not explicity mention NCOIC, the spirit of the regulation pertains to NCOIC as well. If an officer is present on map but not acting as the OIC, the standing individual--NCOIC or OIC--is the authority responsible for the region. If an officer wishes to chime in and critique the NCOIC, he or she should be /assuming/ command, not going over the standing NCOIC/OIC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyphre Iredell Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 Weren't the exceptions being that if the individual was of some other hostile party like chaos or VG (or other unruly party, like we have so many of, dishonorable ex-ordo or otherwise) that an officer would have to clear it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scientific Waffle Posted September 27, 2009 Share Posted September 27, 2009 Before I became a W-1, this was a piece of policy (or an interpretation of policy) that I very much disagreed with. Very glad to see this "change" in policy announced. An OIC, even as an NCO, needs the authority and flexibility to command the sim without such impractical hindrances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolf Shaman Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 /bump - There was some questions in comms in relation to this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aryte Posted October 28, 2009 Author Share Posted October 28, 2009 I think I put this in the standing orders, as well. I THINK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolf Shaman Posted April 2, 2010 Share Posted April 2, 2010 /bump again for confusion. Please read people. It's also in the handbook v2.1. Request a copy/move to the Reports section where the other simular orders/clarifications are presented (and because it keeps getting harder and harder for me to track it down every time I quote it lol) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trevor Russell Posted April 2, 2010 Share Posted April 2, 2010 /bump again for confusion. Please read people. It's also in the handbook v2.1. Request a copy/move to the Reports section where the other simular orders/clarifications are presented (and because it keeps getting harder and harder for me to track it down every time I quote it lol)We are working on a policy repository, to make that easier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
