Probably one of the least understood concepts in employment is insubordination. The dictionary defines insubordination as unwilling to submit to authority. It may be difficult to acknowledge sometimes, but usually everyone has a boss. Being “boss” gives the person some supervisory rights. Management is expected to exert some leadership to direct the institutional operations. These rights, however, are limited by law, the contract, and other rules and regulations.
Refusing to perform an action that is not ethical or legal is not insubordination. Refusing to perform an action that is not within the scope of authority of the person issuing the order is not insubordination. Insubordination is probably one of the easiest charges to prove against an person. However, to be guilty of insubordination, you must be aware of a rule or directive, although it need not be written. Furthermore, the rule of reason dictates that your noncompliance should be brought forcefully to your attention probably through a verbal warning and/or written reprimand before you can be disciplined or dismissed for insubordination. One order you don’t have to carry out is one which could reasonably result in injury to personal health or safety.
In general. Article 91 has the same general objects with respect to noncommissioned, as Articles 89 and 90 have with respect to commissioned officers, namely, to ensure obedience to their lawful orders, and to protect them from violence, insult, or disrespect. Unlike Articles 89 and 90 however, this article does not require a superior-subordinate relationship as an element of any of the offenses. This article does not protect an acting noncommissioned officer nor does it protect military police or members of the curticy patrol who are not noncommissioned officer.
In the military relations context and especially in authoritarian regimes, police patrols are usually dedicated internal security agencies. These are combat, intelligence, or counter-intelligence units regimes create to monitor the attitudes and activities of the military, other security services and civilian opposition groups.
Now by disrespecting an NCO I am automatically subject to punishment under UCMJ article 91. None of this would have ever happened if i had just kept my mouth shut said good to go but, I chose to show my immaturity and blurt out stupid comments. There should have been no reason why I should have had a problem with the order I was the only PFC in the that did leave my bags, on top of that the most junior soilders there it was a solid act of immaturity that should have never occurred, I should not have let my opinions come out like that cause they do not matter an NCO told me to do something and i should have just kept my mouth shut and did it.
1. When members of the armed forces abandon their assigned military units or evade assigned duties.
2. When members of the military abandon or give up operational command to dissident groups or opposition movements.
3. When members of the military aid opposition groups or dissident movements with materiel or intelligence. Military officers may in some instances also come out in open support and publicly ally themselves with such groups.