Scenario: Dangerous Liaisons

Group Size: 4-15

Scenario

Chief Warrant Officer (CWO) Paul Morin and Master Warrant Officer (MWO) Kim Cho are serving in a Canadian camp abroad, in support of an international NATO-led mission. They are four months into their second six-month tour of duty. “Good morning, Chief,” says MWO Cho, the camp Sergeant Major. “I need to speak with you as soon as possible. We may have a big problem on our hands.”

“What’s going on?” asks CWO Morin.

“It’s what’s going on with the big boss,” says MWO Cho.

“Do you mean, our Commander?” asks CWO Morin, looking her square in the eyes with raised eyebrows.

“Yes, I am very serious,” says MWO Cho. “The troops are talking about what’s going on with one of our platoon Warrant Officers (WO) and the Commander. It’s no secret anymore. I interviewed a few members of that section. According to them, the WO doesn’t spend much time in the tent anymore. Many in the section have seen the WO entering the commander’s suite late at night and not return until early morning. It’s becoming a joke and it’s hard to control this type of gossip.”

“These are very serious allegations,” says CWO Morin.

“Chief, this is starting to affect our work and the worst thing is that the warrant has apparently bragged about it,” continues MWO Cho. “I’m not sure how to deal with this one, so I am coming to you. The last thing I need is a harassment charge. What can I tell you, I have done an investigation in this matter, and this isn’t right.”

Later, CWO Morin meets with the Commander’s Executive Assistant (EA), Major (Maj) Neil Stauffer, in private to discuss some serious allegations. “Sir, have you seen any strange behaviour lately between our Commander and a certain WO?”

“I’m not prepared to talk to anyone about whether there is or there is not anything going on,” says Maj Stauffer.

“But Sir, this has become a big problem, and I can’t expect the whole camp to turn a blind eye. In my opinion, its eroding morale,” explains CWO Morin.

“And you think I should speak with the boss about this?” asked Maj Stauffer. “Let me explain something to you, Chief. You and I leave this rat hole in two months to go home to our families and a normal life. I may be looking at a promotion after this and from what I’ve heard, you may be offered a senior appointment. Do you want to jeopardize that? I certainly don’t.”

Just then, the head of the operations cell (G3), Colonel (Col) Clements sits down with them. “Major, Chief, what’s going on today? You are both looking pretty serious.”

“Sir, we’re just discussing a dangerous liaison, so to speak.”

“Ah, yes, the Commander seems fairly happy lately,” responds Col Clements. It is obvious that many people know of the fraternization between the Commander and the warrant.

Categories

• Principles: Respect the Dignity of all Persons, Serve Canada before Self, Obey and Support Lawful Authority
• Values: Integrity, Courage, Stewardship, Excellence, Loyalty
• Cultural themes: Service, Identity, Leadership, Teamwork
• Misconduct types: General Misconduct, Abuse of Power
• GBA Plus themes: Rank
• Audience: Canadian Armed Forces

Facilitator’s Guide

Learning Objectives

• Discuss the ethical principles to “Respect the Dignity of all Persons,” “Serve Canada before Self,” and “Obey and Support Lawful Authority” in this situation.
• Discuss the ethical values of integrity, loyalty, courage, stewardship, and excellence in deployment and operational settings.

Facilitation Questions

1. What would you do in this situation? What are the considerations?
   • Allow open discussion from the group.
     • The Commander is not setting an example of ethical leadership.
     • The Commander and the WO are breaching the loyalty, integrity and trust of subordinates, colleagues, and superiors. They are committing a service offence. There is also an element of abuse of power and an inappropriate relationship.
     • The Col and Major are aware of the relationship, yet the Major doesn’t want it to be reported for reasons related to his personal gain (a promotion). How does this affect integrity and loyalty as well as duty, the professional expectation in the CAF ethos?
     • These deployed CAF members may feel at odds with regards to loyalty (for the Commander and WO vs the mission, Canada, and the rest of the deployed personnel). In an operational setting, this behaviour could undermine the operations trust in the Commander’s judgement and leadership which could erode morale and potentially put lives at risk.
     • There is evidence of fear of reprisal or wrongdoing in this scenario.
2. What is the ethical dilemma in this situation?
   • There is an element of competing values between knowing the Commander’s behaviour is not appropriate and loyalty to the chain of command.
   • Individuals considering reporting the offence feel that there may be repercussions on their imminent career promotions.
   • The fact multiple people know and have not taken any action makes it more difficult to be the one who steps forward as the whistle blower.
   • In addition, this is a situation which reflects a clear power imbalance and could expose the NCM in question to exploitation.
3. What are some potential courses of action that could be taken in this scenario?
   • Option 1: Report the offence regardless of the potential career repercussions knowing that lives or unit morale issue could potentially be put at risk.
   • Option 2: Continue to ignore the issue since it is obviously common knowledge throughout the operation, and some members feel the no-fraternization rule is outdated.
   • Option 3: Together with other senior officers, confront the Commander and discuss the issues arising from his behavior and the need to end the fraternization.

Note to facilitators: Please review DAOD 5019-1, Personal Relationships and Fraternization and discuss as it applies to CAF members in relation to this scenario.