PDA

View Full Version : Why the hatred towards officers?



Rooney
01-02-2010, 04:35 AM
Why is there all the hatred towards officers here?
I've read many posts, before finally registering, and the feeling I get is that the enlisted ranks tend to view officers as lazy, incompetent, spoiled ne'er-do-wells, who don't deserve to be saluted, while mighty enlisted guys do all the work.
AF Times message boards seem to be very anti-officer. Why?
Is there that much jealousy in the enlisted ranks? Is there really that much hatred towards officers amongst the sergeants and airmen?
Are enlisted guys smiling and saying "sir" to officer's faces, yet once the officer turns around, you shoot hateful glances? Why?
I know from the officer side, there is great respect for the NCO corps. I know that officers have great trust in airmen, that they know their jobs and will do them to the best of their ability.
So why do I get the feeling, from this website, that the feeling doesn't go both ways?
Or, is it just a small bunch of vocal, jealous and troublesome enlisted guys making their feelings known?

sigecaps
01-02-2010, 04:43 AM
I think the pay/status discrepancy bothers some more than they care to admit.

redd
01-02-2010, 04:43 AM
This should get interesting:)

BRUWIN
01-02-2010, 04:45 AM
I don't hate officers...they are a neccessary part of the military. I think some take advantage of the the positions they hold...it's been going on since the Civil War so I don't reckon it will change anytime soon.

takthekak
01-02-2010, 04:45 AM
Why is there all the hatred towards officers here?
I've read many posts, before finally registering, and the feeling I get is that the enlisted ranks tend to view officers as lazy, incompetent, spoiled ne'er-do-wells, who don't deserve to be saluted, while mighty enlisted guys do all the work.
AF Times message boards seem to be very anti-officer. Why?
Is there that much jealousy in the enlisted ranks? Is there really that much hatred towards officers amongst the sergeants and airmen?
Are enlisted guys smiling and saying "sir" to officer's faces, yet once the officer turns around, you shoot hateful glances? Why?
I know from the officer side, there is great respect for the NCO corps. I know that officers have great trust in airmen, that they know their jobs and will do them to the best of their ability.
So why do I get the feeling, from this website, that the feeling doesn't go both ways?
Or, is it just a small bunch of vocal, jealous and troublesome enlisted guys making their feelings known?

The wide pay disparity, not nessesarily based on level of authorities anymore, rather an antiquated system put in place many years ago, might have something to do with it. Seperate housing, clubs, etc, might have something do with it - equalling a state of seperate and unequal. Then there is the saluting of a LT and not being required to extend respect to a 30 year Chief, perhaps that might have something to do with it. To sum it up, the military is not an equal team, rather it is a tiered society of a privilaged few, thinking they control the whole game.

Silver Fox
01-02-2010, 04:50 AM
The wide pay disparity, not nessesarily based on level of authorities anymore, rather an antiquated system put in place many years ago, might have something to do with it. Seperate housing, clubs, etc, might have something do with it - equalling a state of seperate and unequal. Then there is the saluting of a LT and not being required to extend respect to a 30 year Chief, perhaps that might have something to do with it. To sum it up, the military is not an equal team, rather it is a tiered society of a privilaged few, thinking they control the whole game.


Not to mention American military culture encourages a gap between the two, making the officers looked like privileged elites and not leaders of men.

My friend in the Aussie Army said they drank with their officers. Hung out together. It created an image of "leader of men" and not "privileged elite". As long as you have a class system, the lower class is going to dislike the privileged, entitled, less hard working (in type of work done.... as in PHYSICAL work) upper class.

redd
01-02-2010, 04:56 AM
I can only say that I despise my 2lt. Condescending little prick... calling by my first name like we're buddies. Standing over my shoulder while I check my email. Taking MY shit off the printer and reading it even though it has my name on it... Man fuck him!


Okay I'm cool. Some officers are great. Some aren't. Not like its even possible at my pay grade to express my sincere disdain for those I can't stand. Sure is painful to salute some... but of course I do it anyway.

sigecaps
01-02-2010, 04:58 AM
I agree that the officer/enlisted distinction sets up a caste like system. However, I would also argue that we are a lot more egalitarian than civilians. Pay disparity between your highest O-10 and your lowest E-1, is about 12x. Pay disparity between your highest paid CEOs and their lowest paid employees can be anywhere from 10x - 10,000x.

JD2780
01-02-2010, 04:59 AM
Now I'll put it on the table, also Jack Daniels may have a say in how I present this. In my current assignement I'm not only an instrcutor, but also an equipment custodian, and a secondary VCO. The VCO decides that when he gets an email saying that mileagles are due, or that 1800s need to be done that I need to do them. Now on top me going TDY once a month for a week, and he doesnt go at all why is it my responsibility to make sure HIS program doesnt fail. When we get a new vehicle I have to swap out the antennas. The van is busted so I need to bring it to the dealership to get it fixed. I teach classes, run simulators and I go to the range. I keep track of the equipment account which is in disarray from the last custodian.

Now if he is the primary why am I doing his work for him?

I know not all officers are like that. I had an ALO that was amazing. He not only was concerned for our well being, but made sure we had time to do the training that my life depended on. He told the bosses my guys can sweep the drive way because they're training and wouldnt take no for an answer.

Like somebody said before. The military is not an equal system. That Chief knew he wouldnt get saluted, and that he would Salute the most infant of Lt's.

It does seem the AF caters to the officer though. I'll give it that.

OK so let the hate start getting slung at me.

takthekak
01-02-2010, 05:09 AM
Another thing could be the sheer difference in numbers of each:
officer 224,144
enlisted 1,174,563

so are 17% getting the job done, or are the 83%?

The only thing about some officers that bother me is when 0-1 through 0-3's
think they are superior and all knowing, when a lot of the time they should
be quite and listen to a few SNCO's with 100 combined years of knowledge
in the AF, instead of forming their opinions on 1-4 years of service, where
they have a promotion average above 95%.

sigecaps
01-02-2010, 05:10 AM
In my deployed unit. I like how Lts automatically get put in for MSMs and Capts automatically get put in for BSMs, but justifying anything above an achievement medal for SSgts must come with an exceptionally strong package. :rolleyes:

imported_KnuckleDragger
01-02-2010, 05:18 AM
Why is there all the hatred towards officers here?

>Because we have that same opinion in "real life."

I've read many posts, before finally registering, and the feeling I get is that the enlisted ranks tend to view officers as lazy, incompetent, spoiled ne'er-do-wells, who don't deserve to be saluted, while mighty enlisted guys do all the work.

>While we "talk" about not saluting...that's all it is...talk. On the other hand, there are plenty of Os that haven't returned a salute.

AF Times message boards seem to be very anti-officer. Why?

>There are more enlisted members here. We can say what we want without reprisal.

Is there that much jealousy in the enlisted ranks?

>Why do they teach you that we are always jealous. You are not special. Get over yourself.

Is there really that much hatred towards officers amongst the sergeants and airmen?

>Yes.

Are enlisted guys smiling and saying "sir" to officer's faces, yet once the officer turns around, you shoot hateful glances? Why?

>That's how the military works.

I know from the officer side, there is great respect for the NCO corps. I know that officers have great trust in airmen, that they know their jobs and will do them to the best of their ability.
So why do I get the feeling, from this website, that the feeling doesn't go both ways?

>You respect us because we've earned it. You also HAVE to trust us, unless you're going to do the dirty work yourself. I trust/respect many Os, but not because of their degree, pay, or brass.

Or, is it just a small bunch of vocal, jealous and troublesome enlisted guys making their feelings known?

>Yes, as well.

VFFSSGT
01-02-2010, 05:21 AM
I would say much of the resentment is due to Lt's. I have had more bad ones than good ones throughout my years. Bad meaning overbearing, control-freak, 'power' gone to their heads, elitism, lack of respect for experience and knowledge, etc.

As for actual commanders, the good seem to be the few, not the majority, once again... Commanders who care more about their power point slides than their people are a fail. When I have to do annual ancillary training 3-4 times a year to satisfy what the commander "wants" (emphasis on wants not intended to mean need or necessity) then their is a problem. Or those who preach an open door policy then take issue when someone utilizes that so called policy.

Then you have those who work for the commander either directly or indirectly and use the authority of the commander to get something done based on their own desires rather than the commander's or any real necessity. I would say that creates a perception of resentment towards officers too.

You also have those who cannot follow the rules themselves: ie group commander wearing a ranger rolled hat or a Major ducking and running during the national anthem and then giving to cold shoulder when reminded that the NA is playing. Just a couple examples.

Commanders mandating that an awards package must be submitted from every work center period. Guess what, there is not always someone truly deserving of an award.

Commanders who think they have to give a cliché pep talk at every function or event. Or talk about how great their Disney trip was during PT formation in 32 degree weather.

You also have the general mass leadership failures: ie ABU's, PT Gear, PT Program, Nuclear Assets, Tanker Failures, Reflective Belt Policies, or the creation of another great idea or program when they haven't fixed the last 100, etc.

Officers making an effort to walk around enlisted to keep from having to salute. Officers who get excessively compulsive about someone not saluting them by pure accident.

Just a few ideas...there are more.

Oh, and then you have those who want to give Airmen another chance when supervisors have already given them multiple chances and refuse to kick out those who should be kicked out.

Oh, and what exactly is it we are suppose to be jealous of? :rolleyes: Maybe we just want real quality leadership.... :eek:

ChicknIsGud
01-02-2010, 05:26 AM
I walked both roads...was enlisted for 12 years then commissioned. I worked maintenance as enlisted and did on occasion see that officers were afforded certain priviliges (like the time we were TDY and one of the Capts jumped up on the bar, lost his balance and broke probably around $200 worth of glasses when he fell and to my knowledge there were no consequences). I still remember that guys name...he was funny...not sure if he was funny enough to get us all kicked out of bar though.

Anyhow...as enlisted, I never had a real beef against officers, nor did I perceive that my peers and suprervisors did. I lurked about this site for a couple months before registering and beginning to post. From what I have seen on here, there are some who have some beef with things that have happened to them and in many cases, rightfully so. I don't particularly see an anti-officer bent on here, but that is my take.

takthekak
01-02-2010, 05:27 AM
In the U.S. military, fragging refers to the act of attacking a superior officer's
with a fragmentation grenade. The term originated in the Vietnam War
and was most commonly used to mean assassination of an unpopular officer
of one's own fighting unit, often by means of a fragmentation grenade, hence
the term. Although the term is derived from the grenade, the act was more
commonly committed with firearms during combat in Vietnam.

Fragging most often involved the murder of a commanding officer (C.O.) or
a senior noncommissioned officer perceived as unpopular, harsh, inept, or overzealous.
Many soldiers were not overly keen to go into harm's way, and preferred leaders with
a similar sense of self-preservation. If a C.O. was incompetent, fragging the officer
was considered a means to the end of self preservation for the men serving under him.
Fragging might also occur if a commander freely took on dangerous or suicidal missions,
especially if he was deemed to be seeking glory for himself.

The very idea of fragging served to warn junior officers to avoid the ire of their enlisted men
through recklessness, cowardice, or lack of leadership. Junior officers in turn could arrange
the murder of senior officers when finding them incompetent or wasting their men's lives
needlessly. Underground GI newspapers sometimes listed bounties offered by units for the
fragging of unpopular commanding officers.

Throughout the course of the Vietnam War, fragging was reportedly common. There are
documented cases of at least 230 American officers killed by their own troops, and as many
as 1,400 other officers' deaths could not be explained. Incidents of fragging have been
recorded as far back as the 18th century Battle of Blenheim.

redd
01-02-2010, 05:28 AM
As predicted, it got interesting... y'all keep posting, don't mind me;)

JD2780
01-02-2010, 05:30 AM
Entertaining, and I hope enlightening

takthekak
01-02-2010, 05:33 AM
I walked both roads...was enlisted for 12 years then commissioned. I worked maintenance as enlisted and did on occasion see that officers were afforded certain priviliges (like the time we were TDY and one of the Capts jumped up on the bar, lost his balance and broke probably around $200 worth of glasses when he fell and to my knowledge there were no consequences). I still remember that guys name...he was funny...not sure if he was funny enough to get us all kicked out of bar though.

Anyhow...as enlisted, I never had a real beef against officers, nor did I perceive that my peers and suprervisors did. I lurked about this site for a couple months before registering and beginning to post. From what I have seen on here, there are some who have some beef with things that have happened to them and in many cases, rightfully so. I don't particularly see an anti-officer bent on here, but that is my take.

After reading your post, it reminded me of the half breed, day walkers (no offense) of the prior enlisted officer. I can't think of 1 case of a prior enlisted officer, where he wasn't liked more than a regular officer. I can think of about 20-30 that I worked with/for and all were amazing and had a level head on their shoulders and backed it up with experience and proven knowledge.

imported_KnuckleDragger
01-02-2010, 05:33 AM
I might get promoted because of my hard work.

You will get promoted because of my hard work.

redd
01-02-2010, 05:38 AM
I'm sure its enlightening for The OP if for noone else...

Fragging you say.... so I guess hateful posts about officers ain't so bad.......

SailorDave
01-02-2010, 05:39 AM
I might get promoted because of my hard work.

You will get promoted because of my hard work.
Once you hit E7, that last line pretty much applies to anyone working below you.

JD2780
01-02-2010, 05:40 AM
I said enlightening because it seems as though I have lots of like minded thinkers.

redd
01-02-2010, 05:45 AM
I know! Ain't it great?

Demaskee
01-02-2010, 06:14 AM
I wouldn't say I have a hatred of officers in general. It is like anything else, individual personalities do more to influence me. However, officers have to remember that they are expected to be a cut above so whenever an officer screws up, everyone takes note that not only did someone screw up, but it was an officer as well. Resentment compounds when the punishment is lighter then one given to an enlisted member commiting a similar offense.

My specific beef with officers is in my current career field. We have a 1 deep CGO that is supposed to manage our flight. I say manage because my job is very technical and they do not go to any schooling for it, unlike EOD, PJs, or ATC. They are put in our flight as a career broadener. It is a stepping stone to make Major. They typically fill the billet for 1-2 years.

One would think they would be inclined to rely on the SNCOs of the flight to guide them and "broaden" them since that is what they are there for. Too often the CGO takes his/her 1-6 years of life experience as gospel. I've seen them cut out the legs of the SNCOs in front of subordinates, sleep with junior enlisted, show up late and leave early, get busted for being drunk on duty, etc...

My question to the post initiater is why do commanders protect their young officers over their SNCOs? A good commander would seek advice from his SNCOs on how his young officers are developing. (See We were soldiers for an example of this). Instead the SNCO is labeled a problem child and denied Senior rater endorsement, moved out of the flight, etc... I am an NCO not a SNCO btw, but I have seen this throughout my career and it worries me that I am going to be put in the that situation sooner or later.

DHarris75
01-02-2010, 06:39 AM
I will say I hold no ill will to officers in general. I have worked with many good ones and I have worked with many bad ones.

The diff between the two has been the two has been how they viewed enlisted. The good ones view enlisted as the workforce - the officer is here for the enlisted. The bad ones view the enlisted as here for the officers. I have overheard new Lts guilty of this more than any other rank. They are young, fresh out of college - with all the same zeal as other college kids. 22-23 years old ready to take the bull by the horns. They are taught that they are to be leaders...as officers, you will lead your enlisted men.

The bad ones come in wanting to make a name for themselves and see their enlisted troops as pawns to get it done. I got the job done...even though I had to work my guys 12 hours straight with 2 small breaks, I got it done. Even though my guys are ready to tear my head off....they'll get over it - I got the job done.

How many have heard an LT say something like "how many enlisted guys does it take to do XYZ"?

I have a great LT right now. He's young and he listens. He asks us questions - he has great ideas and he approaches us with the idea with words like "what do you think of doing this", "will this make more work or less work for you", "Is this stupid, or could it work?" I'd work for an LT like that anyday. He wants to know his role, which axles should he get wrapped around, and which ones to leave to us. A lot of LTs get wrapped around every axle and miss the forest for the trees.

Anyway - so I don't think, at least for me, it's a disdain for officers in general. They are a necessity. I think the seperation is necessary. I would like to see more seperation between SNCO and NCO (like the Aussies). But just like at every rank - there are good ones and bad ones.


Edit - and something that I was told as a SSgt and I've always told my troops - the more rank you have - the bigger the bulls eye is on your back. As an Amn or A1C, you are over noone and you see bulls eyes on backs above you. As you go up in rank, there are more and more people under you - some are going to hate you, some are going to like you. As a LT, you start with a bulls eye on your back by virtue of being an officer over enlisted troops.

After that, whether you have good or bad sq/grp/wing CCs are up to personal opinions...good ones and bad ones - your decisions affect a lot of people and your bulls eye is pretty darn big...lots of darts coming your way - better have some thick skin.

ChiefB
01-02-2010, 06:45 AM
Why is there all the hatred towards officers here?
I've read many posts, before finally registering, and the feeling I get is that the enlisted ranks tend to view officers as lazy, incompetent, spoiled ne'er-do-wells, who don't deserve to be saluted, while mighty enlisted guys do all the work.
AF Times message boards seem to be very anti-officer. Why?
Is there that much jealousy in the enlisted ranks? Is there really that much hatred towards officers amongst the sergeants and airmen?
Are enlisted guys smiling and saying "sir" to officer's faces, yet once the officer turns around, you shoot hateful glances? Why?
I know from the officer side, there is great respect for the NCO corps. I know that officers have great trust in airmen, that they know their jobs and will do them to the best of their ability.
So why do I get the feeling, from this website, that the feeling doesn't go both ways?
Or, is it just a small bunch of vocal, jealous and troublesome enlisted guys making their feelings known?

Why do officers, generally across the board have this interpretation of their men?

Lets see why.

Because of fraternization rules, in garrison, there is no "comaraderie" among the officers and men.

Because of "Chain of Command", in most shops, there is little contact between the officers and men, except in an official capacity.

NJ Punishment is doled out only by officers.

Because of fraternization rules, officers "Never" step into the quarters of an enlisted person and see their personal interactions with spouse and children, how they live, how they play. Vice versus is true for the enlisted. Officers never get to see the "human" side of their men.

Because of fraternization rules, Officers are not allowed in NCO clubs and NCOs aren't allowed in Officer clubs.. result...no social interaction.

Now, because of this "class/caste" system that has been set up, the human interaction of officers and enlisted is kept so low that stereotypes and myths become the source of knowledge of each other.

Hence the "enlisted hate officers", and the officers refer to their men as "enlisted swine" epithets evolve.

It's mostly about the "unknown" that both sides ponder, and then when they speak it is with little knowledge of the other.

Enlisteds tend to feel most officers think the enlisteds are "blue collar", BEER DRINKING, MOTORCYCLE RIDING, TATTOO WEARING, SHIFT WORKING, uneducated neanderthals and the enlisted look upon their officers as "white collar", priviledged, over educated, under trained, and think they are too sexy for their shirt.

There are many exceptions to what I say here, of course, But the general context is true.

Therefore, there are few and far between opportunities for officers and men to get to genuinely appreciate, respect and "know" each other.

Aircrews are a great exception... they have comraderie and Esprit among the officers and men because they interact on a more social level even while doing their job and observing military tradition/bearing.

They are more dependent on each other for support and even their lives. They even develop affection for each other. Something that very seldom ocurrs outside the aircrew environment in the AF.

Commissioned leaders have to cultivate respect and loyalty and affection through their actions from afar because the regular AF environment does not promote it from within.

Just remember, smart ass Lieutenants and past-over LCols with no real jobs are known to affect the negative view of the enlisted more than any and help to confirm many unfortunate sterotypes.

One last question: Of all your golfing, shooting, card playing, drinking, vacationing, dinner party, cocktail party, theater going buddies or friends.... how many are enlisted? I will get the same answer if asked of the enlisteds here..."how many are officers?"

Now tell me what opportunities the AF or other service gave you or gives you to get to know your men? Of all the schools you have been to or will ever go to...how many has the AF invited NCOs to to "clue you in" on how we really view officers and how much we want you to get to "know" us?

I hope, respectfully, that I have answered some of your concerns.

ChiefB

ChiefB
01-02-2010, 06:53 AM
I wouldn't say I have a hatred of officers in general. It is like anything else, individual personalities do more to influence me. However, officers have to remember that they are expected to be a cut above so whenever an officer screws up, everyone takes note that not only did someone screw up, but it was an officer as well. Resentment compounds when the punishment is lighter then one given to an enlisted member commiting a similar offense.

My specific beef with officers is in my current career field. We have a 1 deep CGO that is supposed to manage our flight. I say manage because my job is very technical and they do not go to any schooling for it, unlike EOD, PJs, or ATC. They are put in our flight as a career broadener. It is a stepping stone to make Major. They typically fill the billet for 1-2 years.

One would think they would be inclined to rely on the SNCOs of the flight to guide them and "broaden" them since that is what they are there for. Too often the CGO takes his/her 1-6 years of life experience as gospel. I've seen them cut out the legs of the SNCOs in front of subordinates, sleep with junior enlisted, show up late and leave early, get busted for being drunk on duty, etc...

My question to the post initiater is why do commanders protect their young officers over their SNCOs? A good commander would seek advice from his SNCOs on how his young officers are developing. (See We were soldiers for an example of this). Instead the SNCO is labeled a problem child and denied Senior rater endorsement, moved out of the flight, etc... I am an NCO not a SNCO btw, but I have seen this throughout my career and it worries me that I am going to be put in the that situation sooner or later.

Word!

ChiefB

Rooney
01-02-2010, 10:32 AM
Absoluetely fascinating.
There's so much here to talk and go over, where to begin?
I'll start with caste/pay issues: In claiming there is a caste system set up in the military, I believe this is partially untrue. Not so much in a caste system, like we know of, say from India or such. The military class system is unique, unique in the fact that just beause you start as an airman basic, does not mean you have to remain in the junior enlisted ranks. There are plenty of people who have risen to senior NCO levels or been commissioned and join the officer corps. BUT, unlike a traditional caste system, EVERY SINGLE PERSON in the military has the ability to become an officer. THERE IS NO REASON, other than personal that an enlisted member cannot become an officer. So, I debunk your "Caste System" theory. I will maintain there is a "Class System" in the military. But, it's not just between enlisted and officer. It's there between airmen and NCO's, it's there between airmen and officers, it's between NCO's and officers, it's between junior NCO's and senior NCO's and yes, believe it or not, it's between junior officers and senior officers. The same division you see between your Airman First Class and your Senior Master Sergeant is there between your 2LT and your Colonel. Pay goes right along with class system as well. I agree the pay disparity between an Airman Basic and a 2LT is a little too great, and between a Captain and a SMSgt is a little too great. But, higher pay requires higher responsibility. As a whole, discounting individual jobs and duties, a Captain has a greater responsibility than a SSgt has, therefore the Captain gets paid more. Not to mention the prerequisites involved, it takes more to become a Captain overall, than it does to become a SSgt. The fact that a 1LT makes as much or more than a MSgt, I believe is ridiculous, but many things can go in to that.
Individual duties, jobs and bases have a lot to do with things as well. I say this in regards to the social interaction between officers and enlisted. It's not like it was in the "old days" any longer. I haven't been to too many bases that still have separate Officer Clubs and Enlisted Clubs. These have either merged, or gone away all together. Separation still happens in Base Housing, but, there aren't separate facilities for enlisted and officers, there's no officer's gym, officer's mess or officer's dependant care. Even officer's wives groups have become spouse groups with enlisted spouses, who are very encourage to join. The line between officer and enlisted is blurring. Blurring quickly, almost to the point the only thing that separates is pay, rank and saluting. Enlisted members have done the most to blur that, no longer are enlisted members uneducated draftees. Most NCO's have at least a bachelor's degree, if not a two-year degree. Many have master's degree and more than a few have their doctorate's. Outstanding. In fact, I'd have to say our AF enlisted corps is more educated than most other countries officer's corps. Impressive.
This has gotten pretty long, so I'll just tackle the "commander's protect young officer's myth". Far from it. I've seen many LT's make mistakes, either with alcohol (the biggest one), financial or something else. Commanders do NOT let them off scott-free. Where an Airman First Class can make SSgt or TSgt with paperwork on them, a LT will not make Capt, let alone Maj if they have something derogatory against them. Almost no one's career will be unscathed after an alcohol incident, more so an officer's career. DUI? That Captain is gone. Now, the difference between enlisted and officer in this is: You won't know about the officer's reprimands. He may have LOR's on file, but enlisted member usually won't know about it. That would undermind his credibility (which is already undermined and to good reason) for the little while he has left in the military. Believe me, an officer screws up, he's going to pay.
Over and above everything I just said, aircrew are different. Like it or not, we're in the Air Force, and the primary mission of the Air Force is, without using fancy 4-star slogans, airpower. We're starting to lose that focus, but that's for another debate. However, the line between officer and enlisted is very, very thin with aircrew. We can save those observations, personal or general for another discussion.

This discussion is very fascinating, any time people can air their grievances and gripes, it can be a good thing. I hope many young officers, especially those just starting out can read posts like these to see the impact they have and how using all their resources (especially senior NCO's) can make them better officers. In turn, enlisted members can understand what officers have to deal with, that can make them better enlisted members as well.

Okie
01-02-2010, 11:32 AM
"Officers are your doctors & lawyers. Enlisted are like the trash man." This quote was uttered at a squadron spouse's meeting by the commander's wife. I'll give you 3 guesses what that did for squadron morale.

Respect is a two-way street. Don't tell your folks you care; show them you care. The vast majority of folks in the AF aren't stupid. They can tell when you have no integrity.


I can't think of 1 case of a prior enlisted officer, where he wasn't liked more than a regular officer. You've never met our former OSS/IN (prior enlisted). He was in it for himself, not very good at his job, couldn't pass the PT test, and helping out his troops was beneath him. (Several had some pretty heavy stuff going on.) The DO (non-prior enlisted flyer) was located in a separate building and was slow to find out about these problems. However, once he found out about them, he really took care of the people.

Fenton
01-02-2010, 11:36 AM
It's not hate, but resentment of the hypocritical double standard. A very different set of rules apply, for enlisted vs. officer. My experience has been primarily with Pilots, Maintenance officers & Direct Commission Officers.

1. Pilots, for the most part are elitist snobs who turn their nose up at the enlisted person. It really doesn't matter what the cost or effort, as long as their jet is ready in the morning. They make up the rules as they go along and know they are untouchable.

2. Direct Commission Officers: Belong to a completely different Air Force, have no military bearing or adherence to standards.

3.Maintenance officers: Not sure what the Academy or OTS are teaching, They seem un-willing and unable to make the hard decision. Seems their decision process is based on what they think the Commander will want to hear, not what's right.

sweep_the_leg
01-02-2010, 12:16 PM
[QUOTE=Fenton;319106]

1. Pilots, for the most part are elitist snobs who turn their nose up at the enlisted person. It really doesn't matter what the cost or effort, as long as their jet is ready in the morning. They make up the rules as they go along and know they are untouchable.

Even more specifically, fighter pilots...

ART
01-02-2010, 12:38 PM
I have seen this phenomenon bleed down to some of the top 3 ranks as well. Command Chiefs who think they are celebrities, acting like they are walking the red carpet when they grace you with their presence, first sergeants who think they have supervisory authority over flight chiefs and their people, etc..

As far as the O/E hate issue, I don't see it much. Yeah, occasionally you'll get the green butter bar who tries to assert his "authority", but a well developed SNCO knows how to nip them in the bud tactfully.

DHarris75
01-02-2010, 01:18 PM
I have seen this phenomenon bleed down to some of the top 3 ranks as well. Command Chiefs who think they are celebrities, acting like they are walking the red carpet when they grace you with their presence, first sergeants who think they have supervisory authority over flight chiefs and their people, etc..

As far as the O/E hate issue, I don't see it much. Yeah, occasionally you'll get the green butter bar who tries to assert his "authority", but a well developed SNCO knows how to nip them in the bud tactfully.

As was discussed in another thread - the "well developed SNCOs" are becoming more and more scarce. Now we get the rushed through the assembly line 12-13yr SNCOs that LTs and Capts don't treat as equals.

Shrike
01-02-2010, 01:46 PM
I've seen too many man-hours and money wasted because one officer in a senior position asked a question and those O's under him didn't have the balls to say "No, we can't do that, and this is why."

My O-3 boss and I spent almost three days last week drafting ESSSs and BBPs for a project that - although it didn't need any oversight whatsoever and was running smoothly as could possibly be - came to the attention of an O-7.

I've had O-4s and O-5s come to me about a high-level issue with O-10 visibility and ask me why we couldn't do what the general wants. When I reply "Because what the general wants is ILLEGAL", they said to me "Well, we can't tell the general 'No'". Yes, I had to tell a Major and a LtCol that a 4-star might want to know that if he continues with his plan, he might end up with massive fines, people arrested, and his face on 60 Minutes and not for a good reason.

You want to get jaded about Os? Go work in an HQ organization. The younger Os that do push back against bad decisions from weak or incompetent leaders are soon eaten alive or beaten down into submission.

The USAF does not want creative, outside-the-box-thinkers. We as an organization venerate Billy Mitchell. This is soooo sadly ironic because Billy Mitchell would not last one second in today's coporate USAF.

(These disjointed thoughts brought to you by a hungover man who's had no coffee.)

imported_Gigglendorf
01-02-2010, 02:34 PM
Why is there all the hatred towards officers here?

Well, for many it is the blatant disrespect paid to the enlisted man by officers on this site.

Read ANY of the threads about enlisted aviators, for example. Officers demand that the rules are what they are, and demean anyone who wants to discuss the reasons for the rules, or how the rules fail our current mission needs.

When someone treats you like dirt, you do not respect or admire them unless you are masochistic.

Then there is also the nature of the internet forum, in that it tends to be used to whine and complain. That general truth leads to lots of horror stories being shared with little in the way of positive stories to alter the perspective.

Beyond these two major items, though, is the more centrist behavior that many officers, especially young ones, tend to publicly display that they believe they are superior to the enlisted that surround them in more than just rank. I know it is not true in all career fields, but in my career field we have quite a few enlisted Airmen who enlisted in order to gain experience to go with the college degree they previously completed, because officers do not do the kind of work to gain the work experience the job market wants.

In this kind of social setting, ANY displayed attitude of superiority will breed disdain. Most of my attempts to help people adjust to being in uniform involves getting junior enlisted to remember the social interaction requirements that are inherent in the military hierarchy. Respecting the position and respecting the person filling it have never been the same thing, but it seems more and more of the young people joining the USAF think that they are.

takthekak
01-02-2010, 03:12 PM
Absoluetely fascinating.
There's so much here to talk and go over, where to begin?
I'll start with caste/pay issues: In claiming there is a caste system set up in the military, I believe this is partially untrue. Not so much in a caste system, like we know of, say from India or such. The military class system is unique, unique in the fact that just beause you start as an airman basic, does not mean you have to remain in the junior enlisted ranks. There are plenty of people who have risen to senior NCO levels or been commissioned and join the officer corps. BUT, unlike a traditional caste system, EVERY SINGLE PERSON in the military has the ability to become an officer. THERE IS NO REASON, other than personal that an enlisted member cannot become an officer. So, I debunk your "Caste System" theory. I will maintain there is a "Class System" in the military. But, it's not just between enlisted and officer. It's there between airmen and NCO's, it's there between airmen and officers, it's between NCO's and officers, it's between junior NCO's and senior NCO's and yes, believe it or not, it's between junior officers and senior officers. The same division you see between your Airman First Class and your Senior Master Sergeant is there between your 2LT and your Colonel. Pay goes right along with class system as well. I agree the pay disparity between an Airman Basic and a 2LT is a little too great, and between a Captain and a SMSgt is a little too great. But, higher pay requires higher responsibility. As a whole, discounting individual jobs and duties, a Captain has a greater responsibility than a SSgt has, therefore the Captain gets paid more. Not to mention the prerequisites involved, it takes more to become a Captain overall, than it does to become a SSgt. The fact that a 1LT makes as much or more than a MSgt, I believe is ridiculous, but many things can go in to that.
Individual duties, jobs and bases have a lot to do with things as well. I say this in regards to the social interaction between officers and enlisted. It's not like it was in the "old days" any longer. I haven't been to too many bases that still have separate Officer Clubs and Enlisted Clubs. These have either merged, or gone away all together. Separation still happens in Base Housing, but, there aren't separate facilities for enlisted and officers, there's no officer's gym, officer's mess or officer's dependant care. Even officer's wives groups have become spouse groups with enlisted spouses, who are very encourage to join. The line between officer and enlisted is blurring. Blurring quickly, almost to the point the only thing that separates is pay, rank and saluting. Enlisted members have done the most to blur that, no longer are enlisted members uneducated draftees. Most NCO's have at least a bachelor's degree, if not a two-year degree. Many have master's degree and more than a few have their doctorate's. Outstanding. In fact, I'd have to say our AF enlisted corps is more educated than most other countries officer's corps. Impressive.
This has gotten pretty long, so I'll just tackle the "commander's protect young officer's myth". Far from it. I've seen many LT's make mistakes, either with alcohol (the biggest one), financial or something else. Commanders do NOT let them off scott-free. Where an Airman First Class can make SSgt or TSgt with paperwork on them, a LT will not make Capt, let alone Maj if they have something derogatory against them. Almost no one's career will be unscathed after an alcohol incident, more so an officer's career. DUI? That Captain is gone. Now, the difference between enlisted and officer in this is: You won't know about the officer's reprimands. He may have LOR's on file, but enlisted member usually won't know about it. That would undermind his credibility (which is already undermined and to good reason) for the little while he has left in the military. Believe me, an officer screws up, he's going to pay.
Over and above everything I just said, aircrew are different. Like it or not, we're in the Air Force, and the primary mission of the Air Force is, without using fancy 4-star slogans, airpower. We're starting to lose that focus, but that's for another debate. However, the line between officer and enlisted is very, very thin with aircrew. We can save those observations, personal or general for another discussion.

This discussion is very fascinating, any time people can air their grievances and gripes, it can be a good thing. I hope many young officers, especially those just starting out can read posts like these to see the impact they have and how using all their resources (especially senior NCO's) can make them better officers. In turn, enlisted members can understand what officers have to deal with, that can make them better enlisted members as well.

Some good points, but some generalities. I have seen many officers with paperwork who kept going
up in rank. Perhaps the old good old boy network, or purging records, but I had a Sq CC who said he
got an article 15 as a LT for leaving classified out, he was a Lt Col and shooting for Colonel when I PCSed.
A couple years ago a Lt on our base got a DUI in town, where they do not transfer it back to base, well he is now a Capt. Which brings me to another question, what stringent requirements are there to make 1st Lt and Capt? Over the last few years, I have seen many officer billets get "converted" to SNCO billets, but
guess what, the pay doesn't follow that. Lastly, when we enlisted get our 4 year or PhDs, what does that do for us?

Capt Alfredo
01-02-2010, 03:22 PM
In my deployed unit. I like how Lts automatically get put in for MSMs and Capts automatically get put in for BSMs, but justifying anything above an achievement medal for SSgts must come with an exceptionally strong package. :rolleyes:

Apparently I did my Iraq tour with the Army for the wrong org! All the Capts I knew (and NCOs, too) got ARCOM/JCOMs, and the airmen either got a COMM or an achievement. Where is this MSM and BSM?

takthekak
01-02-2010, 03:32 PM
Apparently I did my Iraq tour with the Army for the wrong org! All the Capts I knew (and NCOs, too) got ARCOM/JCOMs, and the airmen either got a COMM or an achievement. Where is this MSM and BSM?

I had to sit through the reading of an MSM for a 1 Lt I worked with who was back from a 6 month deployment...Many factors I am sure, like who the recommendation is from and if it's an 0-6 or General, you can bet that will go through...

Capt Alfredo
01-02-2010, 03:43 PM
Well, for many it is the blatant disrespect paid to the enlisted man by officers on this site.

I can only think of one person who disrespects enlisted people on a regular basis, and that's smarg. That guy's probably not even an officer.

Have I run across douchbag officers in my 19+ years in, both on the E and O side? Yes. There are several who made disparaging comments about enlisted. They were roundly disliked and subtly disrespected.

Likewise, there are plenty of enlisted haters who rained hate down on officers, but couldn't have carried the lieutenant's jock strap.

However, the vast majority of the officers I've known respect the contributions, skills, and know-how of their people and recognize that without them they would be sunk.
The majority of the enlisted people I've known respect the political crap officers have to put up with and also respect the officers' efforts at being the shit-shield that they need in order to get their jobs done. The complainers and haters on both sides are thankfully the minority.

The pay gap is another issue. I don't think there are too many officers out there who would disagree with the idea that the gap is too large. A lieutenant should not make as much as a MSgt. The answer is to raise the MSgt's pay, not throw spears at the Lt. As the old saying goes, hate the game, not the player.

afwxdude
01-02-2010, 03:52 PM
As was discussed in another thread - the "well developed SNCOs" are becoming more and more scarce. Now we get the rushed through the assembly line 12-13yr SNCOs that LTs and Capts don't treat as equals.

Define "a well developed SNCO". Just wearing the rank means you've met all the requirements our service has set to be one. Not totally disagreeing with you but I think your describing a systemic failure on the part of our AF to properly train SNCOs to do their job as leaders. Today's PME is a joke and mentorship is more of less non-existent amongst SNCOs.

As a SNCO I don't want Capt's or LTs to treat me as their "equal", I want them to provide some f'ing leadership. Problem with officers in the AF today is that we have way too many of them in jobs that carry no "real" responsibility and they end up filling jobs that could easily be handled by an NCO. If the job/skill doesn't require skills learned in college we realistically don't need an O filling it. A few weeks of OTS doesn't teach any "real" leadership skills anyway.

Michaep
01-02-2010, 04:16 PM
Why is there all the hatred towards officers here?
I've read many posts, before finally registering, and the feeling I get is that the enlisted ranks tend to view officers as lazy, incompetent, spoiled ne'er-do-wells, who don't deserve to be saluted, while mighty enlisted guys do all the work.
AF Times message boards seem to be very anti-officer. Why?
Is there that much jealousy in the enlisted ranks? Is there really that much hatred towards officers amongst the sergeants and airmen?
Are enlisted guys smiling and saying "sir" to officer's faces, yet once the officer turns around, you shoot hateful glances? Why?
I know from the officer side, there is great respect for the NCO corps. I know that officers have great trust in airmen, that they know their jobs and will do them to the best of their ability.
So why do I get the feeling, from this website, that the feeling doesn't go both ways?
Or, is it just a small bunch of vocal, jealous and troublesome enlisted guys making their feelings known?

-new commanders like to come in and fix sh*t thats not broken

-commanders usually dont care about their troops on a personal level

-commanders arent in touch with the enlisted ranks, they dont know what its like, theyve never been there

-stuff that looks good on paper, SUCKS in real life

I once questioned why Officers get paid so much more and get much nicer housing and much more respect and the answer I got was that Officers are held to a higher standard and an incident that can get an enlisted person a court martial can give an Officer the punishment of death.

Officers are NOWHERE close to the Generals who made REAL life and death decisions and plotted attacks out on a map way back when

Decisions are now made weeks/months/years in advance....defense contract deals....political BS....etc....

So because you flew a jet, does that supposedly give you the experience needed to run an entire base? The experience to become a 4 Star?

How about the fact that a 20 year E-7 veteran who put up with 2 decades of sh*t running downhill from the top.....get paid the same (close enough) as a Capt?

How about snotty nosed butter bars who think they "earned" a salute from a 30 year Chief?

Officers get schooled by the enlisted folks when they start out and then turn around and backstab the enlisted crews that taught them EVERYTHING they know now

The End :)

ScarlettGTO
01-02-2010, 06:49 PM
I think it comes down to the seperation between the E's and O's

I have a close long time friend of mine who decided to go Army O instead of an AF O. I was curious as to why he chose to be an Army O instead of an AF O so I asked him.

He said "Well I don't want to fly a desk, I can't fly a plane, but I can be out in the field and be with my people"

I myself have not spent much time with the Army but I think their is a greater area of trust and respect from the E's to O's in Army. Could you picture and AF Cop CC out in the shit with his troops....I couldn't, they leave it up to the Army for the most part. (yes I am aware they are the experts in it and that is what they train for and do)

I only know of one Cop O and he lost his life this past September. He would have been an outstanding Security Forces CC. He was WITH/NEXT to his people at every possible moment and they actually loved and respected him as a man and as a leader

My ill feelings are mostly towards most Cop O's. I am sure if I was in another job I would have ill feelings towards the O's in that job.

takthekak
01-02-2010, 09:06 PM
Here's a good link for historical information concerning pay:

http://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR755/MR755.chap9.pdf

Here's a little sample verbiage: REGULAR MILITARY COMPENSATION
Until very late in the 19th century, enlisted men were treated as a
commodity that could be bought in the market at a fixed low wage

ramprat
01-02-2010, 09:31 PM
NCOs about 70% worthless.
Officers about 80% worthless.
My experience .

JD2780
01-02-2010, 09:33 PM
True enough.

AirMan1979
01-02-2010, 09:57 PM
I think part of the problem is one of the military’s own making. With all of the educational programs available and the promotion of these programs, the academic disparity between officer and enlisted has become smaller than ever before. The latest stats show that over 70% of the enlisted force has at least some credit towards a degree and over 5% actually have Bachelor’s degrees (AF demographics 10/2009). The technical training required to maintain much of this high tech equipment is becoming more and more academically challenging regardless of having a degree. I have more education (MBA) than my commander but I’m too old to be an officer. The age thing is a completely separate issue that I won’t cover in this post.
Historically, the difference between officer and enlisted was based on ones place in society, wealth, contacts, or more recently, education. As the enlisted force becomes more educated they see less of a reason for the wide gulf between enlisted and officer.

JD2780
01-02-2010, 10:04 PM
Once again a very enlightening response.

ScarlettGTO
01-03-2010, 12:48 AM
NCOs about 70% worthless.
Officers about 80% worthless.
My experience .

Well if that is the case why aren't we paying the airmen O-10 pay.....

redd
01-03-2010, 12:55 AM
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^_

Please!?!? :)

ScarlettGTO
01-03-2010, 12:57 AM
I really wish there was an icon that expressed an extreme amount of sarcasm. I would have used it on my last post....hmmm

redd
01-03-2010, 01:04 AM
Well as a SrA, I say give me money. I wonder what it would feel like to have a check like that.

I'd buy a helicopter. And maybe those BCBG heels....

redd
01-03-2010, 01:14 AM
I apologize for going completely off topic folks.


Today was my first day sans cigarettes and I think I'm losing my mind. Please disregard all posts for the next few weeks.

That is all. :)

ScarlettGTO
01-03-2010, 01:36 AM
Well as a SrA, I say give me money. I wonder what it would feel like to have a check like that.

I'd buy a helicopter. And maybe those BCBG heels....

A helicopter and heels...hopefully you can pull off both. Good luck with the cigs as well!

redd
01-03-2010, 01:46 AM
Thanks...

If I'm successful I'll go buy the heels I want. Think ill have to wait on the helicopter.

redd
01-03-2010, 01:48 AM
Thanks...

If I'm successful I'll go buy the heels I want. Think ill have to wait on the helicopter.


Oh well back to the topic

ChiefB
01-03-2010, 05:24 AM
I apologize for going completely off topic folks.


Today was my first day sans cigarettes and I think I'm losing my mind. Please disregard all posts for the next few weeks.

That is all. :)

I'll give you a week of truth and two months of lies.http://www.militarytimes.com/forum/images/icons/icon12.gif

ChiefB

ChiefB
01-03-2010, 05:26 AM
Thanks...

If I'm successful I'll go buy the heels I want. Think ill have to wait on the helicopter.


Oh well back to the topic

Dupe post disregarded....

You are in bad shape...already!:D

ChiefB

Orion
01-03-2010, 04:01 PM
It's not hate, but resentment of the hypocritical double standard. A very different set of rules apply, for enlisted vs. officer. My experience has been primarily with Pilots, Maintenance officers & Direct Commission Officers.

1. Pilots, for the most part are elitist snobs who turn their nose up at the enlisted person. It really doesn't matter what the cost or effort, as long as their jet is ready in the morning. They make up the rules as they go along and know they are untouchable.

2. Direct Commission Officers: Belong to a completely different Air Force, have no military bearing or adherence to standards.

3.Maintenance officers: Not sure what the Academy or OTS are teaching, They seem un-willing and unable to make the hard decision. Seems their decision process is based on what they think the Commander will want to hear, not what's right.

Could this be Minot, Cannon, Nellis, Kadena or Eglin before the 33rd shut down? Sounds very familiar....

MACHINE666
01-03-2010, 07:49 PM
I've seen too many man-hours and money wasted because one officer in a senior position asked a question and those O's under him didn't have the balls to say "No, we can't do that, and this is why."

My O-3 boss and I spent almost three days last week drafting ESSSs and BBPs for a project that - although it didn't need any oversight whatsoever and was running smoothly as could possibly be - came to the attention of an O-7.

I've had O-4s and O-5s come to me about a high-level issue with O-10 visibility and ask me why we couldn't do what the general wants. When I reply "Because what the general wants is ILLEGAL", they said to me "Well, we can't tell the general 'No'". Yes, I had to tell a Major and a LtCol that a 4-star might want to know that if he continues with his plan, he might end up with massive fines, people arrested, and his face on 60 Minutes and not for a good reason.

You want to get jaded about Os? Go work in an HQ organization. The younger Os that do push back against bad decisions from weak or incompetent leaders are soon eaten alive or beaten down into submission.

The USAF does not want creative, outside-the-box-thinkers. We as an organization venerate Billy Mitchell. This is soooo sadly ironic because Billy Mitchell would not last one second in today's coporate USAF.

(These disjointed thoughts brought to you by a hungover man who's had no coffee.)

And Shrike rocks out again!!

:D :D :D :D :D

2010 should be the Year of the Shrike, complete with his wisdom and life experiences!

I'm going to go on a tangent here which is coming outta left field, so bear with me on this one.....most of you won't 'get it' and that's cool......

The only officers who get under my skin are the nurses, and that stems from my former days as an EMT. Often times if I needed something, I could go straight to the doc whom I worked for, for an answer and it was settled on the spot. Many of them would just sit there at their nurses station and answer phone calls all day, and if someone needed a blood pressure check or their scrotum scubbed for a vasectomy, it was always the med tech doing it. Nurses have perhaps a little more training and are authorized to push certain medications, but get an ICU nurse in the back of an ambulance and she's clueless, yet she will bark out orders all the same. At least with the doc I worked for, he could stay in the back of an ambulance and know what the hell to do on the fly, worst case scenario, and the patient wasn't afraid more for his life once we got our hands on him.

And while the decision is purely political nowadays, nurses do not make good clinic commanders, plain and simple. They have little to no exposure to the overall Air Force flying mission, and have no experience with the flying and maintenance population as a whole, when compared to the role that a flight surgeon and his med tech play. They haven't pulled clinical rotations or E.R. shifts the same way a doctor has, nor have they been required to render patient care to the same extent that a physician (or even a P.A.) has been held accountable to, so to be in charge of dictating patient care policy and advising the medical staff on their overall roles and responsibilities, I'm just not buying it. It's like having a Rent-a-Cop run the New York Precinct as Chief of Police. While I know the Air Force views nurses as being 'leadership material' since they're officers, I roll my eyes every time I drive by the clinic and see a nurse who's in charge of things. The DBMS position needs to remain with a board licensed physician or a flight surgeon as it always has.

If none of that made sense, don't worry about it......

OEFOIFCOMBATVET
01-03-2010, 08:23 PM
The enlisted sentiment towards officers have been felt since the beginning of the military. If the internet was around in 1810, the posts will be the same. As I was always told by my platoon sergeant. If you discontent about your leadership; then do something about it and get promoted. Or simply get your degree and get commissioned. Why complain when you can simply fix the person in the mirror. Everybody has faults in the military even the Generals and Command Sergeant Majors.

takthekak
01-03-2010, 08:26 PM
And Shrike rocks out again!!

:D :D :D :D :D

2010 should be the Year of the Shrike, complete with his wisdom and life experiences!

I'm going to go on a tangent here which is coming outta left field, so bear with me on this one.....most of you won't 'get it' and that's cool......

The only officers who get under my skin are the nurses, and that stems from my former days as an EMT. Often times if I needed something, I could go straight to the doc whom I worked for, for an answer and it was settled on the spot. Many of them would just sit there at their nurses station and answer phone calls all day, and if someone needed a blood pressure check or their scrotum scubbed for a vasectomy, it was always the med tech doing it. Nurses have perhaps a little more training and are authorized to push certain medications, but get an ICU nurse in the back of an ambulance and she's clueless, yet she will bark out orders all the same. At least with the doc I worked for, he could stay in the back of an ambulance and know what the hell to do on the fly, worst case scenario, and the patient wasn't afraid more for his life once we got our hands on him.

And while the decision is purely political nowadays, nurses do not make good clinic commanders, plain and simple. They have little to no exposure to the overall Air Force flying mission, and have no experience with the flying and maintenance population as a whole, when compared to the role that a flight surgeon and his med tech play. They haven't pulled clinical rotations or E.R. shifts the same way a doctor has, nor have they been required to render patient care to the same extent that a physician (or even a P.A.) has been held accountable to, so to be in charge of dictating patient care policy and advising the medical staff on their overall roles and responsibilities, I'm just not buying it. It's like having a Rent-a-Cop run the New York Precinct as Chief of Police. While I know the Air Force views nurses as being 'leadership material' since they're officers, I roll my eyes every time I drive by the clinic and see a nurse who's in charge of things. The DBMS position needs to remain with a board licensed physician or a flight surgeon as it always has.

If none of that made sense, don't worry about it......

Nurses and Doctors? Everyone knows the Med Group has always been the most unmilitary of them all, the closest to civilain "do what they want" organization in the whole military. I am surprised they evern wear
a military uniform.

MACHINE666
01-03-2010, 08:31 PM
Believe me Tak, because of that 'non-military' perception, the Med Group usually goes above and beyond during exercises to show they 'know' their stuff in front of the inspectors....which is why few of the dumb kills (if any) come from the clinic. ;)

Michaep
01-03-2010, 11:36 PM
Well as a SrA, I say give me money. I wonder what it would feel like to have a check like that.

I'd buy a helicopter. And maybe those BCBG heels....

im assuming youre a female, since youre requesting to buy heels

anyway, a female SrA, wearing heels, flying a helicopter...hot...even though enlisted dont fly in the AF

female pilots in general are hot

imported_WeatherGyrl
01-04-2010, 12:31 AM
I can't say I feel one way or another toward officers in general, I have know good and bad ones, however I can say that all the really dumb decisions (like uniform changes, the all important PT and accompanying wear of the PT uniform guidelines, the big 4 star summit that appeared to produce nothing but Blues Monday, etc) that come from AF "leadership"... well they're officers. And really, don't give me "big picture" stuff, because whether my pants are bloused or tucked have absolutely nothing to do with mission or anything else. 'Nuff said :D

ramprat
01-04-2010, 02:16 AM
I think part of the problem is one of the military’s own making. With all of the educational programs available and the promotion of these programs, the academic disparity between officer and enlisted has become smaller than ever before. The latest stats show that over 70% of the enlisted force has at least some credit towards a degree and over 5% actually have Bachelor’s degrees (AF demographics 10/2009). The technical training required to maintain much of this high tech equipment is becoming more and more academically challenging regardless of having a degree. I have more education (MBA) than my commander but I’m too old to be an officer. The age thing is a completely separate issue that I won’t cover in this post.
Historically, the difference between officer and enlisted was based on ones place in society, wealth, contacts, or more recently, education. As the enlisted force becomes more educated they see less of a reason for the wide gulf between enlisted and officer.Great Post ,,,in fact the DUKE of Wellington's family thought he was too unfit for a position in the clergy and too dumb to be in business
SO they purchased him a commision..

ramprat
01-04-2010, 02:25 AM
The enlisted sentiment towards officers have been felt since the beginning of the military. If the internet was around in 1810, the posts will be the same. As I was always told by my platoon sergeant. If you discontent about your leadership; then do something about it and get promoted. Or simply get your degree and get commissioned. Why complain when you can simply fix the person in the mirror. Everybody has faults in the military even the Generals and Command Sergeant Majors.
Well said ,,as i used to tell the mid level NCOs moaning about a lot of time in grade the same thing
with harsher words of course and i never had any greif for their short comings .

Soundhound
01-04-2010, 04:18 AM
I really don't have much against officers at all. well i really haven't met a fighter pilot i've liked. I feel for the most part that prior enlisted make better officers. They are more well rounded due to their prior experience, but you are alway going to have to work with people you don't like enlisted civilian, or officer. I think there has always been, and always will be a certain level of distain and animosity towards anyone in a position of authority above another, through all levels of our rank structure. Be it because of envy, mistrust, lack of training and experience, bad decision making, or whatever. But mostly I think that , and this is about the officer tier in general, but I think there is a perception held by the officer tier that rank responsibility and authority equate to class superiority.

Case and point. I had a Capt at my last base tell me a story about her husband (both where prior enlisted) But when husband first put on his butter bar there was some sort of officers call luncheon held by the Wing CC. Everyone gets their trays and plates and goes through the buffet line drops their food plates at their tables, and puts the trays back in te buffet line, and goes to their tables and eats. Her husband takes his seat with his food plate on top of his carring tray and proceeds to eat. After the luncheon is done the Wing CC calls him over and proceeds to lay into him about how he understands that he is prior enlisted, but he is an officer now and his enlisted like behavior is to be considered beneath him.This is a carrying tray people. Is this the attitude that is actually promoted thoughtout the officer tier?

This perception is antagonized even more by the current pay schedule as well. When you have a freash out of the box LT making as much or more or as a Msgt and barking orders like a general. Or Capt making mor then a Chief this ruffles the feathers every-time. Society is made up of classes, and ours unfortunately puts an emphasis on monetary barriers to separate the classes. So until the pay gaps an ds are fixed between the ranks and we get rid of our fighter piolts then we will always have this.

DWWSWWD
01-04-2010, 05:37 AM
I spent almost 9 years in a selectively manned unit and had the privelege of working with some of the greatest NCOs and officers that I've ever met. This is also where I grew up, so to speak and formed my impressions of how officers conduct themselves. When I popped out into big blue, there was a large disparity between the officers I worked for and those that I had become accustomed to working for. I finally settled on being content with an officer, particularly the CC, simply meeting the standards he asks me to enforce. Currently, we're not even close. The CC fails to appreciate that his failure to lead by example is breaking down the morale and the good order and discipline of the unit. He could appreciate it, but the personal cost to him would be too great. He shows up no earlier than 0915 each day, for instance. He's overweight but crams down ho-hos all day long in front of the guys, for another instance. I could go on. It's troubling. I get paid enough. I don't have too much of an issue with the pay gap, but I absolutely expect an officer to understand why he gets paid more. That leading men is the lion's share of the reason and that leading by example is the most tangible indicator of your leadership ability.

Okie
01-04-2010, 08:45 AM
Believe me Tak, because of that 'non-military' perception, the Med Group usually goes above and beyond during exercises to show they 'know' their stuff in front of the inspectors....which is why few of the dumb kills (if any) come from the clinic. ;)

Perhaps not, but that didn't stop them from dropping the "head" end of a litter with me in it.

fufu
01-04-2010, 11:01 AM
I try to avoid any officers at all costs. SOME pretend they really give a shit about you and your life, when the reality is they could care less.....I'm okay with that. Just be who you are. If you pretend to care about my life and don't....that makes you an asshole. If you are honest and don't pretend you care...you are still an asshole, but at least I can respect you for being straight with me.

Like others, I've met good Os and bad Os. I've even met some good pilots....:eek: Of course, I've never been around fighter pilots, so take that at face value.

The educational gap between the Es and Os is closing....and fast. There are enlisted folks who are more educated than some Os.

I'm not exposed to many officers.... I speak to the group CC about once a year. Otherwise, I never see them....not many working midshift...lol

Rooney
01-04-2010, 11:26 AM
I try to avoid any officers at all costs. SOME pretend they really give a shit about you and your life, when the reality is they could care less.....I'm okay with that. Just be who you are. If you pretend to care about my life and don't....that makes you an asshole. If you are honest and don't pretend you care...you are still an asshole, but at least I can respect you for being straight with me.

Like others, I've met good Os and bad Os. I've even met some good pilots....:eek: Of course, I've never been around fighter pilots, so take that at face value.

The educational gap between the Es and Os is closing....and fast. There are enlisted folks who are more educated than some Os.

I'm not exposed to many officers.... I speak to the group CC about once a year. Otherwise, I never see them....not many working midshift...lol

I see your point and respect your honesty. I will conceed the point that some officers will ask how you're doing and won't really care or listen to what your saying. I know that enlisted members will pick up on that, you don't have to be a psychologist to see when an enlisted member can see through your crap.

But, not all officers are like that. Some really do care, some really want to know. It may be self-serving for them, maybe they can help you out with something, that in turn, helps them out. Some really want to know, because that's how they grew up, how they were brought up. Some really want to know, but are distracted or minds are elsewhere. BUT, that's not an officer thing, it's a human nature thing. Remember, no matter what you think of him, that officer is also human, and thus has human failings.

You are very correct in the education gap closing between officers and enlisted members.

VFFSSGT
01-04-2010, 12:55 PM
Additional answer to OP:

Because you feel the need to continue to have formation for PT when it is 20 degrees outside for "accountability." ...like we cannot handle that on our own; what do you think we do on days we don't have PT at all?

NFCstang
01-04-2010, 01:23 PM
In my deployed unit. I like how Lts automatically get put in for MSMs and Capts automatically get put in for BSMs, but justifying anything above an achievement medal for SSgts must come with an exceptionally strong package. :rolleyes:

Apparently I did my Iraq tour with the Army for the wrong org! All the Capts I knew (and NCOs, too) got ARCOM/JCOMs, and the airmen either got a COMM or an achievement. Where is this MSM and BSM?

You and me both. 2 AEF rotations in Iraq (as an O3) and one 9month Joint tour (as an O4) and I was flat out told as the O3 that even though the job I did warrented a MSM, I was only going to get a AFCM. During the Joint tour, unless you were an O5 or above you were getting a JSAM/JCOM vs. a DMSM.



I've had O-4s and O-5s come to me about a high-level issue with O-10 visibility and ask me why we couldn't do what the general wants. When I reply "Because what the general wants is ILLEGAL", they said to me "Well, we can't tell the general 'No'". Yes, I had to tell a Major and a LtCol that a 4-star might want to know that if he continues with his plan, he might end up with massive fines, people arrested, and his face on 60 Minutes and not for a good reason.

You want to get jaded about Os? Go work in an HQ organization. The younger Os that do push back against bad decisions from weak or incompetent leaders are soon eaten alive or beaten down into submission.

You sure were didn't work together in ACC? Welcome to my daily head smashing.



Case and point. I had a Capt at my last base tell me a story about her husband (both where prior enlisted) But when husband first put on his butter bar there was some sort of officers call luncheon held by the Wing CC. Everyone gets their trays and plates and goes through the buffet line drops their food plates at their tables, and puts the trays back in te buffet line, and goes to their tables and eats. Her husband takes his seat with his food plate on top of his carring tray and proceeds to eat. After the luncheon is done the Wing CC calls him over and proceeds to lay into him about how he understands that he is prior enlisted, but he is an officer now and his enlisted like behavior is to be considered beneath him.This is a carrying tray people. Is this the attitude that is actually promoted thoughtout the officer tier?.


That Wing CC was a dipshit.

Shrike
01-04-2010, 03:08 PM
You sure were didn't work together in ACC? Welcome to my daily head smashing.

I always hated watching the good officers get their idealism smashed by the cold, hard reality of their leadership's actions. I sometimes see my Lts/Capt's come back to the office from seeing the big boss looking like hell. Sometimes they'll vent a little (as a grizzled old SNCO, I think they feel safe venting to me; I know they'd never do it to any other 'E' in the office). I always tell them to remember feeling like this so that when they become the O-5 or O-6, they're not turning around and pulling the same sh#t with their junior officers. I know that some have taken that to heart. I know others that have moved up the food chain and decided that if they want to make O-6, the only way to do it is to become a huge anal cavity.

NFCstang
01-04-2010, 03:37 PM
I always hated watching the good officers get their idealism smashed by the cold, hard reality of their leadership's actions. I sometimes see my Lts/Capt's come back to the office from seeing the big boss looking like hell. Sometimes they'll vent a little (as a grizzled old SNCO, I think they feel safe venting to me; I know they'd never do it to any other 'E' in the office). I always tell them to remember feeling like this so that when they become the O-5 or O-6, they're not turning around and pulling the same sh#t with their junior officers. I know that some have taken that to heart. I know others that have moved up the food chain and decided that if they want to make O-6, the only way to do it is to become a huge anal cavity.

Very well put.

When I did my 9month Joint tour in Iraq, my boss was an Army O5 and his boss was an Army O6, neither of which had personnel/services/casualty experience.

If I tell you that you can't notify the dead soldiers family until after the official Army notification, don't scream and bitch that I'm trying to usurp your authority....I'm trying to keep you from stepping in a pile of dog shit.

Thank god I had a about to retire E6 (made E7 but decided to retire rather then pin on) who was good enough like you to be a sounding board for situations like you stated.

If I didn't have him, I would have probably stabbed someone in the face with an ax

ChiefB
01-05-2010, 02:55 AM
You and me both. 2 AEF rotations in Iraq (as an O3) and one 9month Joint tour (as an O4) and I was flat out told as the O3 that even though the job I did warrented a MSM, I was only going to get a AFCM. During the Joint tour, unless you were an O5 or above you were getting a JSAM/JCOM vs. a DMSM.


You sure were didn't work together in ACC? Welcome to my daily head smashing.





That Wing CC was a dipshit.


Ah yes, "Dipshit", harkens me back to the past millenium.:tongue:

Shades of Bootcamp, Batman!

ChiefB

Gunner007
01-05-2010, 03:02 PM
Personally, i like most of the O's in my unit more than i like the E's. I give 2 shits about the pay and entitlements differences, the simple fact is, they earned it and i didnt! Everyone has a sense of entitlement today, if you want to be treated like an officer, apply for OTS and go be one. I dont begrudge them their higher pay and bennies, good for them.

I address my O's by rank or rank and LAST name, the fact i am personable with them in a private environment doesnt deminish the fact he is an O and i am an E. Even if we are shooting the shit in my office or his i still address him properly. I dont hang out with them off duty although i did once get invited, well the whole crew did, to attend a BBQ at our pilots house before we deployed and i did attend and refused to call him by his first name which is probably why i was never invited back, and thats fine with me although i do respect and like the guy a lot to this day. I had the chance to finish a BA which i didnt, my choice, i had OTS as an option like everyone else and i chose not to apply, my choice, i was offered blue to green WO to fly helos and i opted not to, my choice. I have no hard feelings towards what an officer has earned.

Now a certain CC i have known is the reason i dislike some O's. THey usually understand NCO's are the backbone and experience base in the AF. What peeves me is when you have EVERY technical expert in the unit being discounted and told to shut up and color because the way it needs to be done doesnt match the way the CC wants something done. I have had a CC actually become disgusted with me (i shiite you not) because he wanted to buy something for the unit that another unit was using. When i pointed out that the item was illegal, not on the table of allowance and not approved by the USAF he got seriously pissed at me. From that poing on nothing i did was good enough, the guy wouldnt even acknowlege me when walking past me, basically treated me like shit for trying to keep him out of trouble.

Another time i had an OIC who was a dumbass, straight up. I was recently put in his office which i was told failed its last inspection miserably. I took charge of the shop and in about 3 weeks time had everything set up and running smoothly. In the process the O kept trying to punk my E's for shit details and i kept going to him and telling him i needed them to square away the office and processes and he needed to check with me before sending them off on errands. He saw this as a threat to his authoritay. Needless to say as i was leaving for deployment the inspection team returned and the shop was lauded for its processes and improvements. However the spineless little shiite went to the CC/DO while i was gone and not able to defend myself and had me basically fired and moved from the shop to another one because he said he couldnt work with me and doubted my ability. LOL He led a shop that failed a big inspection, they put a new NCOIC and SSgt in the office and passed the inspection with flying colors but the NCOIC is the one who is suspect? A few weeks later the SSgt who made Tech and took over the office was fired for the same reason and moved to another shop.

So my loathing for O's is specific to a few. However my loathing for the thought process that would allow an O to shit can two highly respected NCO's in a unit who's office just passed an major inspection is overwhelming! THey allow an O to run amok and because he is an O they would take his word over 1 or more highly decorated & experienced NCO's? That to me is insanity!

ramprat
01-05-2010, 04:01 PM
It's not hate, but resentment of the hypocritical double standard. A very different set of rules apply, for enlisted vs. officer. My experience has been primarily with Pilots, Maintenance officers & Direct Commission Officers.

1. Pilots, for the most part are elitist snobs who turn their nose up at the enlisted person. It really doesn't matter what the cost or effort, as long as their jet is ready in the morning. They make up the rules as they go along and know they are untouchable.

2. Direct Commission Officers: Belong to a completely different Air Force, have no military bearing or adherence to standards.

3.Maintenance officers: Not sure what the Academy or OTS are teaching, They seem un-willing and unable to make the hard decision. Seems their decision process is based on what they think the Commander will want to hear, not what's right.
BRAVO for number 3.. Maint officers used to be a sqdn flying officer or a dnif ex pilot ,,That changed
forgot exactly when (mid 50s ? ) They filled the maint slots with "clerks "or officers that got fired laterally to maint as a penal colony punishment ,,others real good bad ,ugly mix ..Asked for a decision they (99%0,
would say ,,"ill get back to you chief" and disappear for the day and you had to get the missions
launched so you hung your ass out to dry,,if something screwed up..

FLAPS
01-05-2010, 05:43 PM
BRAVO for number 3.. Maint officers used to be a sqdn flying officer or a dnif ex pilot ,,That changed
forgot exactly when (mid 50s ? ) They filled the maint slots with "clerks "or officers that got fired laterally to maint as a penal colony punishment ,,others real good bad ,ugly mix ..Asked for a decision they (99%0,
would say ,,"ill get back to you chief" and disappear for the day and you had to get the missions
launched so you hung your ass out to dry,,if something screwed up..

This is silly... I've been a mx officer for 9 years (mx for 22) and in our MXG we have a great team of professionals, both enlisted and officer.

Sure, there are asshole mx officers, just like there are asshole enlisted personnel...but it all comes down to personality and competence. Bashing either enlisted or officers as entire groups is just flat out immaturity brought on by what I think are a handful of disgruntled people who typically don't enjoy their jobs. These types of people tend to have negative attitudes, regardless of what position or job you give them.

ramprat
01-06-2010, 05:29 AM
FLAPS ..Your 2nd par first line was exactly what i was talking about.
One of my previous posts i said that 80% of officers wasnt worth a shit
and 70% of nco's about the same.. ( based on my experience)
Its whatever youre used to when comparisons are made
In SAC (16 yrs ) the average life of a crappy maint officer was six weeks
to six months.His methods were reflected in the units behavior,,where every
thing was measured to the minute...
By the way the current people in combat command dont seem to be UP TO STANDARD
do they !
There are no bad units just bad officers and nco's .. (Col Hackworth )

FLAPS
01-06-2010, 12:28 PM
There are no bad units just bad officers and nco's .. (Col Hackworth )

You are absolutely correct! Our Airmen at all bases are equally outstanding. What separates a good unit from a shitty one is definitely a leadership issue. Effective leaders provide the folks what they need to do their jobs...training, resources (tools and TOs) and a realistic work schedule that won't drive them and their family into the ground. After providing all of that, plus clear expectations, then a good leader will hold their people accountable for their actions. This means no firewall 5s for average performers, or disregard for safety and quality standards. In other words, doing the "right" thing sometimes means hurting feelings. Too many leaders fail miserably in this area!

ramprat
01-07-2010, 01:29 AM
You are absolutely correct! Our Airmen at all bases are equally outstanding. What separates a good unit from a shitty one is definitely a leadership issue. Effective leaders provide the folks what they need to do their jobs...training, resources (tools and TOs) and a realistic work schedule that won't drive them and their family into the ground. After providing all of that, plus clear expectations, then a good leader will hold their people accountable for their actions. This means no firewall 5s for average performers, or disregard for safety and quality standards. In other words, doing the "right" thing sometimes means hurting feelings. Too many leaders fail miserably in this area!
Great post Flaps have enjoyed reading your posts,,alll of them as 99% i wholly agree.

mel44
01-07-2010, 01:43 AM
hummm well officers first of all they leave their dirty underware in the bathroom floor like the maid is just gonna come along and pick them up. They are always the first to go last to leave. They never know where there beanie is at or which boots they wore last. They forget to take their patches out of their pockets and end up in the dryer screen. They have to be at every event dragging thier unwilling wife along to smile drink at least one beer and act ya know "army" . Thier phone goes off non stop at which the wife is dragged out of bed at all hours to all female oriented problems or mental health which totals at least 80% of the calls. They never have time to eat so they are forever cranky. They never realize the military can function without them even on leave - pretty much officers sux

Silver Fox
01-07-2010, 01:47 AM
Additional answer to OP:

Because you feel the need to continue to have formation for PT when it is 20 degrees outside for "accountability." ...like we cannot handle that on our own; what do you think we do on days we don't have PT at all?

Still seeing plenty of jelly belly airmen, I think I can safely say, "Anything but PT."

Silver Fox
01-07-2010, 01:49 AM
Apparently I did my Iraq tour with the Army for the wrong org! All the Capts I knew (and NCOs, too) got ARCOM/JCOMs, and the airmen either got a COMM or an achievement. Where is this MSM and BSM?

Should've been on mine.... E-8's and above got BSMs.


E-7's were 50/50 BSMs/COMs

NCOs COMS
Airman Achievements....

Oh, and that's 60% of the Airmen....

I got one, but I knew plenty of deserving airmen that didn't.

tirekicker
01-07-2010, 03:09 AM
(These disjointed thoughts brought to you by a hungover man who's had no coffee.)

:D :D Can I borrow this for my signature block? I love it :D :D

Drackore
01-07-2010, 05:36 AM
Why the hatred?

Ancillary training
Additional duties
PT standards
Uniform changes
Stupid creeds

Enough said.

FLAPS
01-07-2010, 10:53 AM
Why the hatred?

Ancillary training
Additional duties
PT standards
Uniform changes
Stupid creeds

Enough said.

Damn....then I should hate myself because I agree with your whole list. Only one issue-- just about everything on your list was enacted based on ENLISTED evaluation boards and ENLISTED recommendations.

technomage1
01-07-2010, 11:17 AM
I don't hate officers - well, at least not because they're officers. There are some individuals that I don't care for, based on their actions, but that crosses all ranks.

If anything I feel sorry for most officers. Most of the ones I work with are engineers - who went through all that schooling to not be able to do any of it, just admin stuff. That stuff is important, I'm not saying it's not, but it's not what they went to school for and I've heard more than once how much they miss it.

imported_BRAVO10000
01-07-2010, 11:25 AM
Damn....then I should hate myself because I agree with your whole list. Only one issue-- just about everything on your list was enacted based on ENLISTED evaluation boards and ENLISTED recommendations.

Any data to back that up, or is that an assertion? Last I checked, enlisted don't sign AF policy.

Drackore
01-07-2010, 12:24 PM
Any data to back that up, or is that an assertion? Last I checked, enlisted don't sign AF policy.

Let's not forget to add that these evals and recommendations are directed by whom?

Who usually selects the enlisted to make these "recommendations"? Who do they usually pick?

If you agree with my whole list, then let's figure out a way to change it.

That's the thing. I don't like to bitch and whine about things without having a solution. I have lots of solutions, but the "powers that be" are too high up and too far away to listen, or...brace yourself...give a shit.

Shrike
01-07-2010, 01:02 PM
:D :D Can I borrow this for my signature block? I love it :D :D

Have at it.

NFCstang
01-07-2010, 01:05 PM
In honor of you all and because I'm an officer and I must lead by example, I'm going to hate myself for 1 hr daily between 0845-0945.

Thank you and have a pleasant tomorrow

Gunner007
01-07-2010, 03:29 PM
I see some folks peeved because they dont like some of the shit filtering down from above and they figure since O's are overall in charge then they are the evil A holes responsible.

I wont say it aint possible but judging from the SNCO leadership or lack thereof i see in my unit and the creep of it across my community and even in the MX AFSC's as i talk to my buddies in MX, lets ponder something.

Maybe all the CBT's, diso belts, blues mondays... maybe all that shit is so pervasive simply because we no longer have soldiers in the rank of Command Chief across the AF? Maybe, just maybe, there are more politician E-9's & SNCO's in general than there are Soldiers doing whats best for their men? Is it possible an O somewhere empowers his NCO's to manage a training program and some NCO decided CBT XYZ would look good on their EPR and pushed it to their chief who likewise thought it would look good on his paperwork who then pushed it to the OIC who simply implemented the idea the "backbone" of the AF brought to him?

You see i have worked with more officers willing to empower me to run my shops and manage my programs than i ever have my fellow E's. O's have always been more likely to let me run my shop and push what i request up the chain for action. So if the idea is run through my SNCO to my officer and he just asks to implement what i request, how is it the O's fault if my idea is shit? SHouldnt another "resident expert" namely my SNCO have noticed if an idea was shit and killed in upon arrival?

People here are always so quick to blame the O's for everything thats screwed up but then will tout how E's are the backbone of the AF. I will admit for a while sometime ago i thought the same way. However the more i see my own SNCO bending people over just for the sake of what might or could happen or be thought about something the more i realize, its not the O's screwing things up. Yeah they bear our ire because their name is at the top of the chain but if we NCO's are the backbone and shit is screwed up, then its we NCO screwing it up and its our SNCO's sitting idly by allowing it to happen.

We have more politician looking to make friends & get promoted than we do soldiers eager to help their brothers and win a war or get a mission accomplished! We have a bad habit of taking the DB NCO's and hiding them in MOC or attached jobs and allowing them to get promoted without really having the common sense to do their primary jobs and then we are suprised when the morons are put in charge and screw things up. Yeah its easier to sit and blame the O's and like any rank, there are some DB's deserving of our ire but to place all the blame for the way the AF is going on the O's is in my meager opinion complete crap!

Silver Fox
01-08-2010, 12:03 AM
I see some folks peeved because they dont like some of the shit filtering down from above and they figure since O's are overall in charge then they are the evil A holes responsible.

I wont say it aint possible but judging from the SNCO leadership or lack thereof i see in my unit and the creep of it across my community and even in the MX AFSC's as i talk to my buddies in MX, lets ponder something.

Maybe all the CBT's, diso belts, blues mondays... maybe all that shit is so pervasive simply because we no longer have soldiers in the rank of Command Chief across the AF? Maybe, just maybe, there are more politician E-9's & SNCO's in general than there are Soldiers doing whats best for their men? Is it possible an O somewhere empowers his NCO's to manage a training program and some NCO decided CBT XYZ would look good on their EPR and pushed it to their chief who likewise thought it would look good on his paperwork who then pushed it to the OIC who simply implemented the idea the "backbone" of the AF brought to him?

You see i have worked with more officers willing to empower me to run my shops and manage my programs than i ever have my fellow E's. O's have always been more likely to let me run my shop and push what i request up the chain for action. So if the idea is run through my SNCO to my officer and he just asks to implement what i request, how is it the O's fault if my idea is shit? SHouldnt another "resident expert" namely my SNCO have noticed if an idea was shit and killed in upon arrival?

People here are always so quick to blame the O's for everything thats screwed up but then will tout how E's are the backbone of the AF. I will admit for a while sometime ago i thought the same way. However the more i see my own SNCO bending people over just for the sake of what might or could happen or be thought about something the more i realize, its not the O's screwing things up. Yeah they bear our ire because their name is at the top of the chain but if we NCO's are the backbone and shit is screwed up, then its we NCO screwing it up and its our SNCO's sitting idly by allowing it to happen.

We have more politician looking to make friends & get promoted than we do soldiers eager to help their brothers and win a war or get a mission accomplished! We have a bad habit of taking the DB NCO's and hiding them in MOC or attached jobs and allowing them to get promoted without really having the common sense to do their primary jobs and then we are suprised when the morons are put in charge and screw things up. Yeah its easier to sit and blame the O's and like any rank, there are some DB's deserving of our ire but to place all the blame for the way the AF is going on the O's is in my meager opinion complete crap!


I could kiss you, Sergeant.

My terminal leave was a prime example. My commander didn't give a SHIT that I had over 3 mos of terminal, my Chief thought it would make him look bad some how, so he tried every angle to get me not to take it. My commander didn't even know he was doing it, until after I'd already haggled my way into getting all of my leave.

imported_Verilith
01-08-2010, 12:12 AM
I see some folks peeved because they dont like some of the shit filtering down from above and they figure since O's are overall in charge then they are the evil A holes responsible.

I wont say it aint possible but judging from the SNCO leadership or lack thereof i see in my unit and the creep of it across my community and even in the MX AFSC's as i talk to my buddies in MX, lets ponder something.

Maybe all the CBT's, diso belts, blues mondays... maybe all that shit is so pervasive simply because we no longer have soldiers in the rank of Command Chief across the AF? Maybe, just maybe, there are more politician E-9's & SNCO's in general than there are Soldiers doing whats best for their men? Is it possible an O somewhere empowers his NCO's to manage a training program and some NCO decided CBT XYZ would look good on their EPR and pushed it to their chief who likewise thought it would look good on his paperwork who then pushed it to the OIC who simply implemented the idea the "backbone" of the AF brought to him?

You see i have worked with more officers willing to empower me to run my shops and manage my programs than i ever have my fellow E's. O's have always been more likely to let me run my shop and push what i request up the chain for action. So if the idea is run through my SNCO to my officer and he just asks to implement what i request, how is it the O's fault if my idea is shit? SHouldnt another "resident expert" namely my SNCO have noticed if an idea was shit and killed in upon arrival?

People here are always so quick to blame the O's for everything thats screwed up but then will tout how E's are the backbone of the AF. I will admit for a while sometime ago i thought the same way. However the more i see my own SNCO bending people over just for the sake of what might or could happen or be thought about something the more i realize, its not the O's screwing things up. Yeah they bear our ire because their name is at the top of the chain but if we NCO's are the backbone and shit is screwed up, then its we NCO screwing it up and its our SNCO's sitting idly by allowing it to happen.

We have more politician looking to make friends & get promoted than we do soldiers eager to help their brothers and win a war or get a mission accomplished! We have a bad habit of taking the DB NCO's and hiding them in MOC or attached jobs and allowing them to get promoted without really having the common sense to do their primary jobs and then we are suprised when the morons are put in charge and screw things up. Yeah its easier to sit and blame the O's and like any rank, there are some DB's deserving of our ire but to place all the blame for the way the AF is going on the O's is in my meager opinion complete crap!

I think you touched on an aspect some of us haven't considered, and after reading your post I agree. We don't seem to have as much top cover as we used to, and a lot of us forget that top cover goes both ways; it shields us from a lot of the shit rolling down hill, but at the same time shields those at the top from shit we roll back up hill.

In addition to your points, I think something else we as E's don't usually consider when we form generalized opinions about our O's is that all it takes is one bad O somewhere high on the food chain to give us a bad impression of most of the O's in the chain altogether. For instance, if a Group or Wing CC puts out a totally unreasonable expectation on their people and refuses to sway on the decision, then those more junior O's are the ones that are required to enforce that expectation. In turn, you've got Lt Scapegoat running around chastising you and your supervision for not producing enough units, rather than Col DB who implemented the policy to begin with. Lt Scapegoat may not agree with the policy, but he's required to enforce it as part of his duties; this in turn gives the impression to most of us that all O's enforcing that policy are DB's. Most SNCOs will say that they know better and that they know where the policies ultimately originate, but that's because you as SNCOs attend the meetings and get the email traffic when these things are discussed. Most JNCOs and below don't have the opportunity to see where the direction comes from, so as far as they are concerned all O's that enforce such and such policy are A holes. Just my opinion.

takthekak
01-08-2010, 01:35 AM
Can anymore name the top officers or chief leaders in the AF in the last 15 years that blazed the trail
and helped the AF as a whole? I can honestly think of NO ONE!

Soundhound
01-08-2010, 03:11 AM
Can anymore name the top officers or chief leaders in the AF in the last 15 years that blazed the trail
and helped the AF as a whole? I can honestly think of NO ONE!


UMMMM.....

Rooney
01-08-2010, 03:42 AM
I think you touched on an aspect some of us haven't considered, and after reading your post I agree. We don't seem to have as much top cover as we used to, and a lot of us forget that top cover goes both ways; it shields us from a lot of the shit rolling down hill, but at the same time shields those at the top from shit we roll back up hill.

In addition to your points, I think something else we as E's don't usually consider when we form generalized opinions about our O's is that all it takes is one bad O somewhere high on the food chain to give us a bad impression of most of the O's in the chain altogether. For instance, if a Group or Wing CC puts out a totally unreasonable expectation on their people and refuses to sway on the decision, then those more junior O's are the ones that are required to enforce that expectation. In turn, you've got Lt Scapegoat running around chastising you and your supervision for not producing enough units, rather than Col DB who implemented the policy to begin with. Lt Scapegoat may not agree with the policy, but he's required to enforce it as part of his duties; this in turn gives the impression to most of us that all O's enforcing that policy are DB's. Most SNCOs will say that they know better and that they know where the policies ultimately originate, but that's because you as SNCOs attend the meetings and get the email traffic when these things are discussed. Most JNCOs and below don't have the opportunity to see where the direction comes from, so as far as they are concerned all O's that enforce such and such policy are A holes. Just my opinion.

Totally spot on.
Ding, ding, ding and we now have a winner, this post pretty much sums it up.

ChiefB
01-08-2010, 11:34 AM
Ok, there's 100 posts. What I've read since the beginning is some think the Officers are ok. Some think they are not.

That about it?:D

ChiefB

Shrike
01-08-2010, 11:44 AM
Why the hatred towards officers? Because they have small hands and smell of cabbage.

Gunner007
01-08-2010, 01:46 PM
I think you touched on an aspect some of us haven't considered, and after reading your post I agree. We don't seem to have as much top cover as we used to, and a lot of us forget that top cover goes both ways; it shields us from a lot of the shit rolling down hill, but at the same time shields those at the top from shit we roll back up hill.

In addition to your points, I think something else we as E's don't usually consider when we form generalized opinions about our O's is that all it takes is one bad O somewhere high on the food chain to give us a bad impression of most of the O's in the chain altogether. For instance, if a Group or Wing CC puts out a totally unreasonable expectation on their people and refuses to sway on the decision, then those more junior O's are the ones that are required to enforce that expectation. In turn, you've got Lt Scapegoat running around chastising you and your supervision for not producing enough units, rather than Col DB who implemented the policy to begin with. Lt Scapegoat may not agree with the policy, but he's required to enforce it as part of his duties; this in turn gives the impression to most of us that all O's enforcing that policy are DB's. Most SNCOs will say that they know better and that they know where the policies ultimately originate, but that's because you as SNCOs attend the meetings and get the email traffic when these things are discussed. Most JNCOs and below don't have the opportunity to see where the direction comes from, so as far as they are concerned all O's that enforce such and such policy are A holes. Just my opinion.

Your pointing exactly back to where i was coming from. So what if a DB CC is in charge. OUR SNCO's could in concert convince most of them to reverse course if they used their collective numbers to persuade. One guy saying it sucks is maybe meaningless to said DB but 100 people saying collectively its wrong goes much farther. The problem is we have so many politicians in the SNCO rank worried to make waves because it may affect their next promotion or assignment that they wont take that voice to said CC.

Maybe the CC your referencing isnt a DB maybe he is just ill informed. I mean do you know every aspect of your units jobs? Do you know every single aspect of every procedure that occurs in your bldg/unit? No we dont but if you were put in charge you would be responsible for the operation of it. So you would at some point have to make a policy to address an issue. Thats when your SNCO experts should chime in and provide you the info you need to make a decision. If you insist on making a bad decision EVERY SNCO who will be affected by your decision be it a unit, group, wing... All of them in concert should address the issue with you and let you know that its wrong/ill informed. Anyone who would then ignore the collective experience of all those SNCOs would then in fact be a DB and probably unfit to command. THose SNCOs who know the decision is prejudicial to good order and discipline should then all collectively lodge an IG complaint to show the O is unfit to command.

SNCOs dont allow actions to be committed by their subordinates that go against the good order and discipline so why would they then allow the same actions to occur simply because the person out ranks them? If its wrong its wrong. We always hear from them how integrity is paramount, yet in issues they should be applying integrity too they simply sit idly by and say suck it up. Seems like politicians behavior to me!

imported_Verilith
01-08-2010, 09:40 PM
Your pointing exactly back to where i was coming from. So what if a DB CC is in charge. OUR SNCO's could in concert convince most of them to reverse course if they used their collective numbers to persuade. One guy saying it sucks is maybe meaningless to said DB but 100 people saying collectively its wrong goes much farther. The problem is we have so many politicians in the SNCO rank worried to make waves because it may affect their next promotion or assignment that they wont take that voice to said CC.

Maybe the CC your referencing isnt a DB maybe he is just ill informed. I mean do you know every aspect of your units jobs? Do you know every single aspect of every procedure that occurs in your bldg/unit? No we dont but if you were put in charge you would be responsible for the operation of it. So you would at some point have to make a policy to address an issue. Thats when your SNCO experts should chime in and provide you the info you need to make a decision. If you insist on making a bad decision EVERY SNCO who will be affected by your decision be it a unit, group, wing... All of them in concert should address the issue with you and let you know that its wrong/ill informed. Anyone who would then ignore the collective experience of all those SNCOs would then in fact be a DB and probably unfit to command. THose SNCOs who know the decision is prejudicial to good order and discipline should then all collectively lodge an IG complaint to show the O is unfit to command.

SNCOs dont allow actions to be committed by their subordinates that go against the good order and discipline so why would they then allow the same actions to occur simply because the person out ranks them? If its wrong its wrong. We always hear from them how integrity is paramount, yet in issues they should be applying integrity too they simply sit idly by and say suck it up. Seems like politicians behavior to me!

We all know there are a fair amount of SNCOs out there that are politicians gunning for that next promotion. But let's not lie to ourselves here; there are individuals of all ranks doing the same thing, from the bottom of the ranks to the top, O and E alike. It's not just our SNCOs. As a matter of fact, I see this far more with JNCOs than I do with SNCOs, so a lot of us probably need to look inward and reflect on our methods a bit. I know I have, and I have drastically changed my leadership style. But this isn't the point of the thread, so I'll move on.

I see where you're coming from and agree that in certain situations this should be the course of action taken. However, I've noticed that time and again the Chiefs and LTs in my flight go to the Group and explain their take on the policy/decision to the Col. Sometimes the decision is rescinded, but more often than not, those Chiefs/Lts return to the Flight and explain the Col's rationale to the leaders in the production meeting. While they may not see eye to eye with The Man, ultimately so long as his decision doesn't affect the health/welfare of the troops, they are required to shut up and color. As I said, the reasoning is usually explained in the following production meetings, and should then trickle down to the JNCOs and Airmen so that we all are on the same page and understand the reasoning behind the Col's decision. Somewhere in the chain of communication there is often a disconnect, and as far as the Airmen and a lot of JNCOs are concerned, everyone in the Flight is a DB(Os and Es alike) because of such and such decision/policy.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think every little decision should be briefed to everyone and their brother. I do however feel that decisions affecting quality of life such as extended shifts, loss of days off, ect should come with a reasoning behind it. If everyone knew that we're losing our days off and working extended shifts because all the aircraft on the line are NMC, I think people would be more willing to put forth 100%. If these Airmen are told that they're working extended shifts without days off because that's just the way it is, there's no way in hell they're going to give the mission 100%, and they're going to resent their leadership(again, Os and Es alike).

Silver Fox
01-10-2010, 07:15 PM
Why the hatred towards officers? Because they have small hands and smell of cabbage.

That's carneys... o.... o wait.....

NFCstang
01-11-2010, 12:09 PM
Why the hatred towards officers? Because they have small hands and smell of cabbage.

Wait...I can palm a basketball....:D

Shrike
01-11-2010, 12:36 PM
Wait...I can palm a basketball....:D

It's that a euphemism? "Where's NFCstang?" "He grabbed a Maxim and headed to the latrine saying he was gonna palm the basketball."

ChiefB
01-12-2010, 12:36 AM
Why the hatred towards officers? Because they have small hands and smell of cabbage.

Yeah, but just tiny officers of Korean descent? :confused:

ChiefB

Okie
01-12-2010, 12:22 PM
ChiefB,

It's an Austin Powers reference from the first movie. Austin is scared of carnies b/c they have small hands and smell of cabbage. :)

ChiefB
01-12-2010, 09:20 PM
ChiefB,

It's an Austin Powers reference from the first movie. Austin is scared of carnies b/c they have small hands and smell of cabbage. :)

Ooooh! Alles is klar, now! Thanks. Here I thought it was a midget/korean/kimchee thang. :cool:

ChiefB

Shrike
01-13-2010, 12:10 PM
Ooooh! Alles is klar, now! Thanks. Here I thought it was a midget/korean/kimchee thang. :cool:

ChiefB

Now there's a little insight into ChiefB's psyche!

:D

fufu
01-13-2010, 12:21 PM
My main issue with the Os is their lack of punctuality. Why can't ANY commanders call start on time?

Don't tell me that whatever the O is doing that causes them to be 10-15 minutes late is more important than what an entire squadron/group/wing COULD be doing.

Michaep
01-13-2010, 06:44 PM
My main issue with the Os is their lack of punctuality. Why can't ANY commanders call start on time?

Don't tell me that whatever the O is doing that causes them to be 10-15 minutes late is more important than what an entire squadron/group/wing COULD be doing.

No, theyre always on time....the problem lies with the.....

15 min early for the Officers
+
15 min early for the SNCO's
+
15 min early for the NCO's
+
15 min early for the Airman

The Airman arrive an hour early.....everyone arrives an extra 30 min early on top of the Wing King arriving

1.5 hours of sheer productivity right there going out the window

bb stacker
01-13-2010, 06:50 PM
and thats time i still get paid for...suckers. not like they ever have anything important to say anyway.

Michaep
01-13-2010, 07:09 PM
and thats time i still get paid for...suckers. not like they ever have anything important to say anyway.

psst........we get paid salary wages.....not hourly......they ARE wasting our time

bb stacker
01-13-2010, 07:25 PM
thats right, so no matter how much or how little i do i still make the same. so i could care less if they want me to stand around and listen to their self important drivel.

ChiefB
01-13-2010, 10:35 PM
Now there's a little insight into ChiefB's psyche!

:D

and..... that would be ...? Shrikester:confused:

ChiefB

edoc118
01-13-2010, 10:47 PM
and..... that would be ...? Shrikester:confused:

ChiefB

Well, if you're Republican, you're probably racist. If you're a Democrat, it was a simple misunderstanding :o

ChiefB
01-13-2010, 10:59 PM
Well, if you're Republican, you're probably racist. If you're a Democrat, it was a simple misunderstanding :o

Har... and if I'm an Independent? or Socialist?... or Communist? or Korean? or a midget? or Black? or white? or tall and extremely handsome, confident, big hands and rich?

Please be clear.:confused: I am not Harry Reid.:) or Trent Lott.;)

ChiefB

Pueblo
01-15-2010, 07:09 AM
Any data to back that up, or is that an assertion? Last I checked, enlisted don't sign AF policy.

Behind every uniform board, every installation nuance, every baseless subjective charge of "unprofessionalism", every GI party is a Chief Master Sergeant. Your average Wg/CC has been a true leader well below 10 combined years before entering that position. So yes, they do sign policy, but they defer to what's called a "Command Chief" who more than likely is looking out for "unprofessional" fleeces, bumper stickers, etc. And the average enlisted person *doesn't* encounter future Wg/CC's when they are Lts, Capts, or Majs. So the people responsible (flyers) are insulated from the enlisted community and they take it out on support/MX officers who are, in truth, in the same boat as enlisted people when it comes to navigating through bullshit. Damn, I hate this retarded, miserable, crabs in a pot Air Force.

wanderingstar
02-18-2010, 06:06 AM
1. Pilots, for the most part are elitist snobs who turn their nose up at the enlisted person. It really doesn't matter what the cost or effort, as long as their jet is ready in the morning. They make up the rules as they go along and know they are untouchable.

Even more specifically, fighter pilots...

wow, i've been lurking and reading a lot of threads, and i have to say this one shocked me the most. i never realized there was so much resentment on the enlisted part. it's really odd to me to read 10+ pages of complaints/bashing. i'm perhaps wrong, but most seem to be from mx nco's. i just thought i'd add something as an airman, who is obviously outranked by both nco and officers, so i feel like i have a fresher view as far as superiorty goes. reading about the criticism is weird to me. i can honestly say as an airman who works with fighter pilots 5 days a week, my whole shift, i have met 2 i do not like (one i have to deal with daily >.<, and the other a full bird). that's out of dozens. maybe i have a skewed perception since i get to know them personally and vice versa, but i have never really felt mistreated or even really talked down to. i've actually, to be completely honest, had more of an issue with senior nco's. most of them, to me, come off very pissy and rude, and as if whatever they are in need of is the utmost important task, ever. i don't know, i guess i've just been in a completely different environment than most, and i do sort of wish i worked with more enlisted because sometimes i feel in the dark about general opinions/etc. i'm just saying, i guess there are two completely different sides that some of you mx people are seeing. i'm used to seeing them pretty upbeat and amused. i can say i've had more officers bother to learn and remember details about me (i.e. first name, birthday, hometown, etc.) than i've had most nco's and senior nco's.

and, no,this is not just my squadron. the other 10-15 or so airmen with my job in the other squadrons on base feel the same. and at other bases, the people from my graduating tech school class, who i keep in touch with every so often, also do as well. i suppose they just show a different face once they're out of the sq. i just wanted to post and defend them, because again this thread really surprised me. i'm going to ask my brother. he's worked mx 18 years. again maybe i'm just oblivious if these opinions really represent enlisted view overall.

still, i'd wager your average officer is no cockier than your average smsgt or newly promoted ssgt power tripping. I'M JUST SAYING. i absolutely do not believe for a second the officers are that much more arrogant to enlisted in general in comparison to how the upper enlisted are to the lower tier.

JD2780
02-18-2010, 12:55 PM
As a TACP I deal with pilots, navs and wso's daily. Now they are all in three categories. The ones I tolerate, the ones i appreciate and the ones that i cant stand. They come to our units and try to run it like a fighter squadron. The ones I appreciate come to our units and say, hey I'm only here for 3 yrs. This is your careerfield tell me how I can improve it. The ones I cant stand show up angry about being out of their airframe, and just crap on our units. Come in and start pushing thier opinions and wants down on us regardless of what we have to say. The ones I tolerate show up and dont do a damn thing.

Now I'll say this. I've only ran into a few I cant stand and a few I really appreciate, but most of which i can just tolerate.

As for the post above, regardless of what we all say, you've had a different experience. Dont let our bitching skew your opinion. Because your opinion is exactly that. yours.

imported_oih82w8
02-18-2010, 02:14 PM
The ones I cant stand show up angry about being out of their airframe, and just crap on our units. Come in and start pushing thier opinions and wants down on us regardless of what we have to say. The ones I tolerate show up and dont do a damn thing.

Sounds like "Seagull Manager": A manager who flies in, makes a lot of noise, craps on everything, and then leaves.

They are everywhere, and not just the "zeroes".

imported_WRA342
02-18-2010, 02:27 PM
It's not hate, but resentment of the hypocritical double standard. A very different set of rules apply, for enlisted vs. officer. My experience has been primarily with Pilots, Maintenance officers & Direct Commission Officers.

1. Pilots, for the most part are elitist snobs who turn their nose up at the enlisted person. It really doesn't matter what the cost or effort, as long as their jet is ready in the morning. They make up the rules as they go along and know they are untouchable.

2. Direct Commission Officers: Belong to a completely different Air Force, have no military bearing or adherence to standards.

3.Maintenance officers: Not sure what the Academy or OTS are teaching, They seem un-willing and unable to make the hard decision. Seems their decision process is based on what they think the Commander will want to hear, not what's right.

This sums it up fairly well.

chucksnee
02-18-2010, 02:28 PM
http://www.military.com/news/article/officers-absence-faulted-in-fatal-ambush.html

ChiefB
02-19-2010, 04:42 AM
wow, I've been lurking and reading a lot of threads, and i have to say this one shocked me the most. i never realized there was so much resentment on the enlisted part. it's really odd to me to read 10+ pages of complaints/bashing. I'm perhaps wrong, but most seem to be from mx nco's. i just thought i'd add something as an airman, who is obviously outranked by both nco and officers, so i feel like i have a fresher view as far as superiorty goes. reading about the criticism is weird to me. i can honestly say as an airman who works with fighter pilots 5 days a week, my whole shift, i have met 2 i do not like (one i have to deal with daily >.<, and the other a full bird). that's out of dozens. maybe i have a skewed perception since i get to know them personally and vice versa, but i have never really felt mistreated or even really talked down to. i've actually, to be completely honest, had more of an issue with senior nco's. most of them, to me, come off very pissy and rude, and as if whatever they are in need of is the utmost important task, ever. i don't know, i guess i've just been in a completely different environment than most, and i do sort of wish i worked with more enlisted because sometimes i feel in the dark about general opinions/etc. i'm just saying, i guess there are two completely different sides that some of you mx people are seeing. i'm used to seeing them pretty upbeat and amused. i can say i've had more officers bother to learn and remember details about me (i.e. first name, birthday, hometown, etc.) than i've had most nco's and senior nco's.

and, no,this is not just my squadron. the other 10-15 or so airmen with my job in the other squadrons on base feel the same. and at other bases, the people from my graduating tech school class, who i keep in touch with every so often, also do as well. i suppose they just show a different face once they're out of the sq. i just wanted to post and defend them, because again this thread really surprised me. i'm going to ask my brother. he's worked mx 18 years. again maybe i'm just oblivious if these opinions really represent enlisted view overall.

still, i'd wager your average officer is no cockier than your average smsgt or newly promoted ssgt power tripping. I'M JUST SAYING. i absolutely do not believe for a second the officers are that much more arrogant to enlisted in general in comparison to how the upper enlisted are to the lower tier.

Hey, WS...have a cool one... It's been the American enlisted man's prerogative for 234 years to bitch and moan about their officers and SNCOs.

What you read here is a continuance of that old, and beloved ritual..... 'cept here they are "incognito" and among generally tolerant defenders and therefore tend to be more vociferous in their comments..

Just chalk this experience up to "rantin' & ravin'.

They/we don't represent the enlisted view overall.... but we are close.:D

ChiefB

imported_INGUARD
02-19-2010, 07:49 AM
Its always easy to criticize. Walk in someone's shoes first before you talk about something.

I remember dogging the squad leader and platoon sergeant's position and always sharp shooting. Until I experienced those positions myself then it made me see things with different eyes.

Same as an officer.

imported_wrmdispatcher
02-19-2010, 10:07 AM
Somewhere someone said its been a perogative for 234 years to complain....that's true. Some of you are quite unhappy about everything, that's unfortunate. I spent 23 years and some change on AD and I met the dregs of the universe and people I would follow anywhere anytime. It still added up to a reasonable career with lots of interesting work and good times along with some bad times.

Is it lots of unhappy people or everyone on the post likes to carp about everything?

imported_BRAVO10000
02-19-2010, 10:33 AM
Somewhere someone said its been a perogative for 234 years to complain....that's true. Some of you are quite unhappy about everything, that's unfortunate. I spent 23 years and some change on AD and I met the dregs of the universe and people I would follow anywhere anytime. It still added up to a reasonable career with lots of interesting work and good times along with some bad times.

Is it lots of unhappy people or everyone on the post likes to carp about everything?


I think that, as it allows the opportunity to blow off steam, the forums tend to attract a lot of people that are looking to complain. Sure, there are some that never have anything positive to say...

BigT2002
02-19-2010, 01:34 PM
I'm with JD on this one. As a 1C3, I've had the pleasure and displeasure of working under O-5's directly. You have the ones, who are simply there for their own political gain in the wing leadership. Visability with the Wing King and most pull Director of Staff duty to boot. They know nothing of our career field and could give two shits about what we actually are responsible for. We become their executive assistants with DoS taskings that their own admin people cannot accomplish since we are 24 hour ops. Then you have the officers who are merely there to get a Top Secret clearance. They can still fly (since its been mandated that a rated flyer be OIC) all they want and basically do whatever they need to while they wait for their TS. Soon as they get it, a miracle occurs and they have PCS Orders to some place else that required the TS. The last are the ones who actually give a damn about being in Command of people and take charge when someone oversteps their boundaries when it comes to our job. So far, I've only worked with 2 out of the 8 I've had in 7 years who fell into that last category.

So while its not hatred, its more or less "act like you make a bigger paycheck than me" and put forth an effort to leave something better than when you left it.

imported_Ranter
02-20-2010, 11:43 AM
I've worked with some very good American's who were Commissioned Officers. The best have always been prior Enlisted that had a knowledge of what needed to be done and why. They had more time to mature and knew what regulations were and what they mean...they had a grasp of common sense. Their personnel skills were always superior to the college kids that become Officers. Those that become officers without being prior enlisted usually are a little less mature and still in the party life mindframe. They are the ones you don't really see too much of and when you do you wish you were somewhere's else. Back in the day those young officers were controlled by the Senior Enlisted that reminded them what regulations need to be complied with and kind of controlled those new young officers.

With the military getting axed and axed those Senior Enlisted that kept the officers at bay were removed and what was left was MSgt's and below. Those MSgt's don't control the officers and remind them of laws and regulations that have to be complied with and turn into 'Yes men'. They don't have the rank to do what used to be done. So the Force got alot of young officers calling shots and making things happen that don't comply with regulations and laws...because the check and balance was removed.

But the civilians.....well no those check and balances were removed with NSPS. The NSPS civilians have to be 'Yes men' as well because the officer controls their immediate pay and can easily cut their pay or fire them. So there goes that check and balance.

To what we have today...with the Minot Fiasco..now the Kirtland Fiasco...and all the other fiasco's happening you don't hear about. Because the actual people who ensured the Air Force accomplished it's mission and complied with Rules and Regulations were removed. The loose cannon officers have free roam and look where it's taken the Force.

Now there is NO check and balance against those officers to make sure the Air Force is complying with Rules and Regulations.

Whatever you do...if you see FRAUD in the Air Force..do NOT inform OSI. I had the Officer over me come after me and personally attack ME for reporting it to OSI. Well I ain't going to work for no crook and I read the Air Force regulations....Officers can not block an OSI investigation, especially retaliate against a Civil Service worker for reporting FRAUD to OSI. So I thought about it real quick and decided....the Air Force is just too corrupt. So I resigned right then and there.

There are some very good officers in our Air Force...and there are some real crooks violating Air Force and Federal Law. Problem is there no longer are any checks and balances over the officers and they today can do whatever they want. Nobody is there to hold them accountable and when they violate the law there is nothing anyone can do about it.

That's why I believe the only answer is to abolish the Air Force and put the Air Wings back under the Army.

When an Air Force Officer tries to block an OSI investigation you report and come after you....the regulation says OSI is supposed to put that Officers name on the Secretary of Defense's desk. I bet you Secretary Gate's hasn't gotten that letter this month. He needs to wake the military up and put the Air Wings back under the Army.

2430 MHz
02-21-2010, 08:51 PM
Officers are just "neat-o"....I only aspire to have such a sense of entitlement :D

......Perhaps one day, maybe a Command Chief will matter attending a BMT Graduation just as much as a Colonel attending the same event, with the same number of years put in service....yet one had a MUCH higher quality of life compared with the other...not to meantion a few hundred thousand dollars difference in pay

...Enlisted folks dont need money, remember?

Js1971
02-22-2010, 06:26 PM
Where would the Enlisted be without Officers?

Shrike
02-22-2010, 06:33 PM
Where would the Enlisted be without Officers?

At a booster club meeting so they can get stratified by the Wing King, an E-10.

THE SHADOW
02-23-2010, 06:42 AM
Where would the Enlisted be without Officers?

Let me state this as a former enlisted who was selected by the AF to be commisioned via ROTC scholarship.

"Where would the officer's be without the enlisted?" My answer "Lost!"

If it hadn't been for SMSgt James Moore and Captain James Green pushing me to strive to do my best in my off duty education. If my buddies weren't there helping me I would have never made it through those long shifts and night/weekend classes.

They help cover a shift when I had a lab or needed extra time to study, They were all there when I got my sheep skin and gold bars

When serving as an officer I always knew when I was hearing the truth or just the whine. In other words just listen and take no action because my enlisted experience told me to just sit tight.

Now that I'm retired I miss the AF, the guys and gals, it's an important time, a fun time, with all the tools and techniques you have to do your job it must be fun.

I would give my left nut to be involve with Special Ops or UAV programs, what a hoot!

There are good and bad in each arena. Find the ones that earn your respect and keep the faith with them.

JD2780
02-27-2010, 11:02 PM
Where would the officer corps be with out the enlisted force. The same place the enlisted force would be with out the officers. Lost.

imported_WRA342
02-27-2010, 11:39 PM
It's not hate, but resentment of the hypocritical double standard. A very different set of rules apply, for enlisted vs. officer. My experience has been primarily with Pilots, Maintenance officers & Direct Commission Officers.

1. Pilots, for the most part are elitist snobs who turn their nose up at the enlisted person. It really doesn't matter what the cost or effort, as long as their jet is ready in the morning. They make up the rules as they go along and know they are untouchable.

2. Direct Commission Officers: Belong to a completely different Air Force, have no military bearing or adherence to standards.

3.Maintenance officers: Not sure what the Academy or OTS are teaching, They seem un-willing and unable to make the hard decision. Seems their decision process is based on what they think the Commander will want to hear, not what's right.

This sums it up fairly well.

imported_MSGDay
02-28-2010, 03:12 PM
I get the inference that many people complain about the difference between officers and enlisted because they don't know or understand the history that brought it about.

As far back as history tells us, there was a difference between the class that led and those that followed. It was a matter of birth - and common sense. The wealthier were better educated and often trained from birth to lead others into battle. The rest of the community were farmers or others and became called up when the time was right - they only needed to carry spears or be fodder for the war machine.

As civilizations advanced, many changes were made but the officer ranks still came from the more affluent and educated side of society. The Romans may have been the first to come up with professional foot soldiers. They enlisted with the promise of citizenship and land when they retired.

For centuries, the military divisions were infantry and calvary, then artillery. [Yeah Romans, Greeks and others had a form of artillery with their siege engines].

In most armies, men of position bought their ranks and positions. A lieutenant obviously paid less while a colonel paid a lot more - to include equipping and paying the officers and enlisted in his command. He, in turn, would receive pay from the ruler he served. This existed, as far as I know, up until the American civil war. [maybe afterwards]

Again, holding an officer's rank depended upon status and EDUCATION. The Brits had/have Sandhurst where it was once a matter of social status to enter. We created West Point, Annapolis and others to give EVERY American a chance to reach officer ranks - although social position paid a heavy role for a very long time.

So, that's where the difference came from. It was a matter of officers being full-time planners and strategists while enlisted basically served only in times of war.

Others complain about contractors. Well, they're nothing new in military history. Non-military have always been around armies and navies and were often called camp followers. They were the ones to provide food and supplies - and "other" amenities. I don't know exactly when it happened, probably during Roman or Napoleanic times, quartermasters became an integral part of armies, probably commisars too.

Yes, I served 23 years in the US Army and I served under some bad officers - and far more good ones. I had my small job while they were burdened with the "big picture" - both political and tactical. I always heard derogatory remakrs about "ring knockers" but most had busted their butts to get through academies to learn how to set examples and lead. Yes, I had a couple of good "mustangs" and several a**holes.

IMHO, the bottom line is this - if you want to lead and set an example, bust your butt and get the education necessary. If you're doing a good job and want to advance, apply for OCS or get out, use your GI Bill and go through ROTC. You even have a chance for warrant.

In others words, SHUT UP THE GRIPING and make the effort to go beyond your little cubbyhole in the military!!!
:rolleyes:

wanderingstar
04-16-2010, 01:13 AM
Its always easy to criticize. Walk in someone's shoes first before you talk about something.

I remember dogging the squad leader and platoon sergeant's position and always sharp shooting. Until I experienced those positions myself then it made me see things with different eyes.

Same as an officer.
,
i agree it has to do with "walking in the other person's shoes". i don't think many people in this thread complaining about the officers, particularly the pilots, really understand that they are basically there to fly their mission. that's the goal. they spend HOURS preparing for them, and then if they maybe encounter a problem with maintenance on the jets, of course they are going to be frustrated. it is an interference with the mission. i think it's fair. of course there are limitations, but just think....sometimes if it may seem they are "grumpy" or what not to you, it 95% of a chance does not have ANYTHING to do with you, unless you're screwing up big time. i don't know, i just feel like many enlisted people, particularly maintenance, want to B,W & M about them with no real ground for it. your job is to fix the aircraft.....get it done and there shouldn't be any problems. and, yes, i realize maintenance has it tough and it's a complicated process that needs attentiveness and precision (i'm doing a wing immersion training where we visit all of the groups for a week, to learn what everyone else does......"walk in their shoes", heh!), but at the same time you have to take personal accountability for some of your shop's potential failures and the like. again, i work with fighter pilots everyday, it's all my job entails of, and i'm well taken care of and treated. they do not hate enlisted. they do not hate any jobs like maintenance. they recognize that they need them. i think once their out of their personal offices and [fighter] squadrons they sort of put on their "game faces" and maybe that's why they seem so serious and intimidating to some of you all. i just hate how they're treated like bad guys. throughout my immersion training this week, i'm with other enlisted of basically every rank SMSgt and below from every group, and while we all are understanding each other's jobs a whole lot better, and gaining respect for everyone from medical to ce to ops, i've noticed there still seems to be a disconnect with feelings on the pilots. i've already had to chime in a couple of times and defend them. it's just a pet peeve i guess!

Salty Old Dog
04-19-2010, 03:05 PM
Perhaps the biggest problem that the Air Force faces, in the enlisted/officer relationship, is that the USAF enlisted folks are oftentimes just as well educated as thier officer corps. For whatever reason, they choose not to go the path of becoming an officer themselves, and that's to be respected. But when you've got some "wet behind the ears" butterbar with an attitude, and you realize you're just as well educated as well as more experienced, it's not too easy sometimes to hold your tongue and remember not to say sir spelled C-U-R.... :rolleyes:

Being prior navy, as well as a nuke field qualified enlisted technician, I used to tell the young ensigns and LT's that would train under me that if they were smart, they'd learn to keep their eyes and ears open, and their mouths shut, unless they had an intelligent question to ask. Those that listened to that advice usually turned out to be good officers. Those that didn't, didn't command much respect, from either the enlisted or their fellow officers.

Probably good advice for any young officer to remember.

imported_BRAVO10000
04-20-2010, 10:51 AM
,
i agree it has to do with "walking in the other person's shoes". i don't think many people in this thread complaining about the officers, particularly the pilots, really understand that they are basically there to fly their mission. that's the goal. they spend HOURS preparing for them, and then if they maybe encounter a problem with maintenance on the jets, of course they are going to be frustrated. it is an interference with the mission. i think it's fair. of course there are limitations, but just think....sometimes if it may seem they are "grumpy" or what not to you, it 95% of a chance does not have ANYTHING to do with you, unless you're screwing up big time. i don't know, i just feel like many enlisted people, particularly maintenance, want to B,W & M about them with no real ground for it. your job is to fix the aircraft.....get it done and there shouldn't be any problems. and, yes, i realize maintenance has it tough and it's a complicated process that needs attentiveness and precision (i'm doing a wing immersion training where we visit all of the groups for a week, to learn what everyone else does......"walk in their shoes", heh!), but at the same time you have to take personal accountability for some of your shop's potential failures and the like. again, i work with fighter pilots everyday, it's all my job entails of, and i'm well taken care of and treated. they do not hate enlisted. they do not hate any jobs like maintenance. they recognize that they need them. i think once their out of their personal offices and [fighter] squadrons they sort of put on their "game faces" and maybe that's why they seem so serious and intimidating to some of you all. i just hate how they're treated like bad guys. throughout my immersion training this week, i'm with other enlisted of basically every rank SMSgt and below from every group, and while we all are understanding each other's jobs a whole lot better, and gaining respect for everyone from medical to ce to ops, i've noticed there still seems to be a disconnect with feelings on the pilots. i've already had to chime in a couple of times and defend them. it's just a pet peeve i guess!

:: singing :: "Kum-bay-ah, M'Lord...."

OK, with all of this well received - it does NOT grant license to treat your fellow man with contempt or act like an arrogant vinegar/water cleansing solution...especially that fellow man that is ensuring that you are safe from mechanical failure. I bet these same elitists would not rush, say, their DENTIST.

Defend them if you must, but their general reputation is basically accurate and well deserved. I don't think your singular anomalous experience will dispel that notion...

RobotChicken
05-19-2013, 03:57 AM
:closed_2 Put 'em all on a B-17 or sub....were everyone's LIFE depends on each other...POWER POINT this up yours 'PC YES PEOPLE'....:mad2

OtisRNeedleman
05-19-2013, 04:28 AM
Some questions, please. Of all those complaining about officers, how many looked into becoming an officer? Did you put in an OTS packet? Did you try for ROTC off active duty? Did you apply to go to the Academy? Did you try for Bootstrap? Did you go to ROTC in college and then decided to enlist instead? Just curious.

RobotChicken
05-19-2013, 05:45 AM
:tape Officers days are over, Obama has seen too that. :closed_2

SgtS
05-19-2013, 09:28 AM
You want to get jaded about Os? Go work in an HQ organization. The younger Os that do push back against bad decisions from weak or incompetent leaders are soon eaten alive or beaten down into submission.



I would also say go work in the Defense Attache System. Absolutely the WORST assignment of my career. Spent the entire time working for Senior FGOs (from all services) who were overly entitled and abusive of their positions and authority. Hated every second of it and spent it in misery.

Hate to contribute to thread resurrection, but since it was already revived ... what the hell?

KellyinAvon
05-19-2013, 11:44 AM
The man, the myth, the legend...ChiefB

I give you a hard time for your necro/zombie posting, but this one gets thumbs-up. ChiefB earned the "voice of reason" title with these kind of posts.

FLAPS, USAF (ret)
05-19-2013, 12:34 PM
I got selected for bootstrap in '98, choose to stay enlisted, didn't want
to compromise my integrity for money. Personal choice.

Decided getting a commission would put me in a better position to have more positive influence on the AF and those who serve (enlisted). Realized I could stay in longer if I chose to. Prior-E officers can serve 40 years. Decided I was tired of living paycheck to paycheck and wanted more money (yeah, I'm guilty). Decided I wanted a lifetime of higher retirement checks. Yes, E-9s with 30 years make more in retirement than Majors over 22, but you have to get promoted to Chief AND stay in 30 years to make that happen.

Yep...I'm scum. Never worked a day in my life. Spoon fed, right?

JD2780
05-19-2013, 01:02 PM
Decided getting a commission would put me in a better position to have more positive influence on the AF and those who serve (enlisted). Realized I could stay in longer if I chose to. Prior-E officers can serve 40 years. Decided I was tired of living paycheck to paycheck and wanted more money (yeah, I'm guilty). Decided I wanted a lifetime of higher retirement checks. Yes, E-9s with 30 years make more in retirement than Majors over 22, but you have to get promoted to Chief AND stay in 30 years to make that happen.

Yep...I'm scum. Never worked a day in my life. Spoon fed, right?

Ain't nothing wrong with wanting more.

wxjumper
05-19-2013, 04:46 PM
I got selected for bootstrap in '98, choose to stay enlisted, didn't want
to compromise my integrity for money. Personal choice.Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight

wxjumper
05-19-2013, 05:04 PM
It's on my epr slick Willy.

Because everything on EPR/OPRs are true.

Capt Alfredo
05-19-2013, 06:57 PM
Because everything on EPR/OPRs are true.

I don't disbelieve that Tak was selected for Bootstrap. What I don't believe is that somehow a person loses his integrity and credibility the day he pins on an officer rank.

wxjumper
05-19-2013, 08:20 PM
I don't disbelieve that Tak was selected for Bootstrap. What I don't believe is that somehow a person loses his integrity and credibility the day he pins on an officer rank.
ohh, neither do I. What I do disbelieve is that he turned it down due to some noble crusade for integrity. There was another reason. Marriage, family, he got in trouble, etc. But he didn't go through the arduous application process for Bootstrap just so he can turn it down in the end and say "I shall not accept this honor bestowed upon me because thoust will not compromise my integrity for gold!" :lol

Tak
05-19-2013, 08:29 PM
ohh, neither do I. What I do disbelieve is that he turned it down due to some noble crusade for integrity. There was another reason. Marriage, family, he got in trouble, etc. But he didn't go through the arduous application process for Bootstrap just so he can turn it down in the end and say "I shall not accept this honor bestowed upon me because thoust will not compromise my integrity for gold!" :lol

Actually it was just that. My dad was pushing me to do it. I was married, first baby on way.
I loved working in graphic arts, I loved the enlisted life...I loved that we were in the same
Shitty boat at shitty minot. I could of went for it, finished the last credits and got salutes,
But instead I said no, soon after took the special duty job to Norad/ usspacecom for
Next 3 1/2 year's, where I picked up ssgt at 7 yr mark, pretty common back then.
Nco meant the world to me, much more then officer would have.
Seriously, can you imagine tak as an officer!

Tak
05-19-2013, 08:51 PM
Maybe you would have liked it. I liked being an NCO, but if nothing else, I put up with way less minutiae as a officer. I can certainly affect the lives of those in my surroundings more now than I could as a staff sergeant. Presumably for good. Of course, that can be used for evil, too, which is probably why guys like you hate officers.

This from someone who's not running a shop full of enlisted...

Capt Alfredo
05-19-2013, 08:57 PM
Actually it was just that. My dad was pushing me to do it. I was married, first baby on way.
I loved working in graphic arts, I loved the enlisted life...I loved that we were in the same
Shitty boat at shitty minot. I could of went for it, finished the last credits and got salutes,
But instead I said no, soon after took the special duty job to Norad/ usspacecom for
Next 3 1/2 year's, where I picked up ssgt at 7 yr mark, pretty common back then.
Nco meant the world to me, much more then officer would have.
Seriously, can you imagine tak as an officer!

Maybe you would have liked it. I liked being an NCO, but if nothing else, I put up with way less minutiae as a officer. I can certainly affect the lives of those in my surroundings more now than I could as a staff sergeant. Presumably for good. Of course, that can be used for evil, too, which is probably why guys like you hate officers.

RobotChicken
05-20-2013, 03:50 AM
:spy It is Not because we HATE OFFICERS.....we just DESPISE A$$CLOWNS!!! :puke

RobotChicken
05-20-2013, 03:56 AM
:spy 'NAWWWWWWWWWWWwwwwwww, that now takes...'un-common sense'.:deadhorse



!!

Tak
05-20-2013, 04:00 AM
:spy It is Not because we HATE OFFICERS.....we just DESPISE A$$CLOWNS!!! :puke

Maybe its because they put the office in officer.

wxjumper
06-22-2013, 11:46 PM
That must be the new TAK ID. Steve, don't let post #151 throw you off or anything.

wxjumper
06-22-2013, 11:46 PM
No problems mate. I saw where you said "There was another reason. Marriage, family, he got in trouble, etc."

But, I had just been married year before, had baby on the way and was not in trouble.

Regards,
Steveohh, so you are still claiming it was all part of your noble crusade. Yeah, we believe you.

wxjumper
06-22-2013, 11:46 PM
No problems mate. I saw where you said "There was another reason. Marriage, family, he got in trouble, etc."

But, I had just been married year before, had baby on the way and was not in trouble.

Regards,
Steveohh, so you are still claiming it was all part of your noble crusade. Yeah, we believe you.

wxjumper
06-22-2013, 11:59 PM
No problems mate. I saw where you said "There was another reason. Marriage, family, he got in trouble, etc."

But, I had just been married year before, had baby on the way and was not in trouble.

Regards,
Steveohh, so you are still claiming it was part of some noble crusade. Yeah, we believe you.

RobotChicken
06-23-2013, 12:06 AM
"OMG!! They just spilled their drinks all over your clean 'DECK' over that statement;'He said WHAT' about US?'?"

E4RUMOR
06-23-2013, 12:14 AM
Maybe because they forget where they came from. Or at least they give off that impression.

I worked on a Command Deck of a Major General for one year as a Driver / Administrative Assistant for the Deputy Commander (a Colonel) and the Sergeant Major. My job entailed maintaining two vehicles, cleaning their offices, managing their calendars, planning their travel to conferences, making hotel reservations, plane reservations, doing their Travel Orders and Travel Claims upon their return, answering Invitations to Retirements, Change of Commands, or other Ceremonies, making coffee every morning, setting up the video teleconference room for the General's Teleconference every Tuesday, etc.,

It was a thankless job. For a year, I worked around the rank of Major and above, or GS-12 and above. Most were retired or active duty Colonels.

Marines have a saying... "Leave a place better than the way you found it." Somewhere along the way, Officers seem to have forget that. Or they develop this sense of entitlement. Everytime they left the video teleconference, I would find fingernail clippings on the floor, coffee stains on the table, none of the chairs were pushed back in, and cups left under chairs rather than thrown in the trashcan by the door on their way out.

Furthermore, what is so special about the officers we get today? Unless they are coming from an Academy or were prior enlisted? And some of those don't even equate to anything good.

We have Enlisted Service-members who are more proactive in this generation that are persuing off-duty education and earning their degrees or already have degrees from colleges that are more presitgious than where some of our Officers come from. In other words, the enlisted guys are probably better educated. AND they have more experience in the military.

Someone pointed out that back in the day officers came from the wealthy class of society, so there was a better education and definitely a gap between officers and enlisted. That mindset doesn't apply today. Pretty much anyone can go to college these days with government aide... And many of the officers we see coming in now hail from the same backgrounds and class as their enlisted subordinates.

Here's an idea: Stop pulling Officer candidates straight out of college with no military experience and start drawing our Officer Corps from enlisted who have the same / better education and far more military experience. Just an idea (a little facetious)

RobotChicken
06-23-2013, 12:18 AM
"OMG!! They just spilled their drinks all over your clean 'DECK' over that statement;'He said 'WHAT' about US?'?"

wxjumper
06-23-2013, 12:34 AM
No problems mate. I saw where you said "There was another reason. Marriage, family, he got in trouble, etc."

But, I had just been married year before, had baby on the way and was not in trouble.

Regards,
SteveI see both marriage and family in your response. Looks like those factors kept you from going, not because this bullshit that you were too proud to be an Officer or whatever this bullshit you keep going on about. As far as you not getting in some type of trouble, I guess we'll just have to take the word for it of somebody who continuously gets banned from this forum. :lol

wxjumper
06-23-2013, 12:49 AM
:lol you call that disparaging your family? Really? You must be really desperate to play that card. Any how, you can ignore me all you want, just realize that nobody here believes your "I chose not to become an officer for the sake of integrity" bullshit.

wildman
06-23-2013, 01:41 AM
It was the cocky arrogant attitude that made me just barely do the minimum required in regards to some of them. Now I also must say there were some who I would have followed gladly into hell, but sadly not enough of this type. Butter bars were the worst who thought they were hot shit. Again some were smart enough to realize they were the new kids on the block but again sadly not enough of this type.

Always,
Wildman

TSgt"M"
06-23-2013, 06:36 PM
Most of the officers I worked for were decent human beings. That said, the assbag officers I work for could and some did make life miserable. I had chopper pilot major, perform a reenlistment for me, at the end he immediately saluted me...caught me totally off guard. He was a true exception, and a good friend to this day.

Capt Alfredo
06-23-2013, 09:07 PM
Looking at that last EPR, I think the guy meant $0.09 per copy, not $0.9, which would be 90 cents. I don't think going from $4.xx to $.90 is 4000% or whatever. /pedantic officer

Stalwart
06-24-2013, 01:40 PM
How common are officers with prior enlisted experience in the Air Force?

I can offer that prior enlisted officers come with all degrees of attitudes and capabilities: Some are very capable with a good head on their shoulders, and some are downright knuckleheads ... and the vast majority fall somewhere in between those two extremes.

I have never really worked with larger groups of USAF officers. I was enlisted in the Marine Corps, where it is not uncommon. Am now an officer in the Navy where it is less common overall than in the USMC, but very common in my occupational field.

wxjumper
06-24-2013, 02:08 PM
wxjumper - Please remain on topic, there is no need to provoke others into arguments about unrelated topics. I am not singling you out but there are those of you taking the efforts of others for granted, and continuing to incite people. A relatively few of you continue to disregard the peace we are trying to maintain.
GodFather is using the ignore list frequently and often. RobotChicken is taking an extended refrain from the "A$$clownery."
Joe Bonham has toned down his rhetoric, but not his views. Even our wily, but lovable, wildman is staying on topic - just to name a few of the many respectful players we have here.

We all have to meet in the middle.

And once again, I am off-topic, so that is all. Your attention and efforts are appreciated.
No problem. This would have never been an issue if GodFather (TAK) did not recycle a topic that died off over a month ago. But to each their own I guess.

Brewhound
06-24-2013, 04:25 PM
I think all the hatred stems from the fact that all they have to do is fill the blocks and not get in trouble. They really never have to produce hard results by leading...at least not in the AF.

Pullinteeth
06-24-2013, 04:33 PM
How common are officers with prior enlisted experience in the Air Force?


According to AF.OTS.com, about 20% of all AF officers are PS enlisted...

http://www.airforceots.com/portal/modules.php?name=News&file=print&sid=71

OtisRNeedleman
06-24-2013, 06:11 PM
I think all the hatred stems from the fact that all they have to do is fill the blocks and not get in trouble. They really never have to produce hard results by leading...at least not in the AF.

I don't agree as far as producing results. Sometimes you have to produce hard results even though you have nobody reporting to you. You have to use your people skills to influence others, negotiate with others, and ensure things are done. Sometimes you cannot lead the way you need to due to constraints from upper echelons. Nevertheless, you still need to produce. Believe it's even more difficult to lead now than when I was on active duty; believe today's AF is far more of a risk-averse, one-mistake-and-you're-toast organization.

Juggs
06-24-2013, 06:33 PM
I don't agree as far as producing results. Sometimes you have to produce hard results even though you have nobody reporting to you. You have to use your people skills to influence others, negotiate with others, and ensure things are done. Sometimes you cannot lead the way you need to due to constraints from upper echelons. Nevertheless, you still need to produce. Believe it's even more difficult to lead now than when I was on active duty; believe today's AF is far more of a risk-averse, one-mistake-and-you're-toast organization.

That and the O's and SNCOs are taking responsibility away from jr NCOs. It's not all O's and SNCOs, just the ones that bitch about NCOs not taking responsibility yet not letting the NCO be a leader.