Army Directive Prohibits Retaliation for Reporting a Crime
The Secretary of the Army last week issued a directive specifying that retaliating against someone for reporting a crime is itself a crime.
“No Soldier may retaliate against a victim, an alleged victim or another member of the Armed Forces based on that individual’s report of a criminal offense,” the new Directive states. See Prohibition of Retaliation Against Soldiers for Reporting a Criminal Offense, Army Directive 2014-20, June 19, 2014.
Prohibited forms of retaliation include adverse personnel actions and ostracism, as well as “acts of cruelty, oppression or maltreatment.”
The directive implements a requirement that was enacted by Congress in the 2014 defense authorization act (section 1709) as part of a legislative response to instances of sexual assault in the military.
These ideas aim to advance the detailed policy solutions needed to foster public trust and implement fairness in the adoption of AI across diverse domains, from healthcare and government benefits to rural access, education, and worker protections.
The evidence is clear: algorithmic pay-setting is established in app-based work, and payroll/timekeeping failures show how software can produce systemic wage harm at scale
While a few states have taken steps to implement decision-making mechanisms for certain AI systems, too many leaders are simply accepting narratives about AI’s purported public benefit at face value – jumping to the “how” of AI implementation before thoroughly vetting potential systems and deciding whether they are appropriate to use at all.
When properly structured — with specific numeric targets, secured financial obligations, independent monitoring, and meaningful enforcement — CBAs transform data center deals into durable community partnerships.