PDA

View Full Version : Wing CC gets fired becuase of PT Test!



Brewhound
03-21-2013, 12:02 AM
Well I guess this means 0-6`s are out of the circle of trust now. I want to see some of those fat G.O`s start getting the boot now.

http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2013/03/air-force-colonel-relieved-for-failing-pt-032013w

:usa

Jamethon
03-21-2013, 12:05 AM
A colonel is not a General Officer.

Vrake
03-21-2013, 12:08 AM
And there it is... Any petty exuse to downsize the unpopular or unwanted. Bronze star on his record and all that training and they are going to boot him because of his waist size.

What was that thread about when the military became a coporation?

Capt Alfredo
03-21-2013, 12:09 AM
Gotta give the PTL some credit for the integrity to auto-fail the wing commander. It's still BS, but hate the game, not the player, etc.

Capt Alfredo
03-21-2013, 12:11 AM
He'd be busted and kicked out if enlisted.

I don't think anyone has ever been busted or kicked out for failing one PT test, do you? But that said, the consequences for an isolated PT failure are certainly more severe on average for the enlisted force.

Banned
03-21-2013, 12:14 AM
And there it is... Any petty exuse to downsize the unpopular or unwanted. Bronze star on his record and all that training and they are going to boot him because of his waist size.

What was that thread about when the military became a coporation?

I thought all officers and senior enlisted just bullshitted their way through height and weight/taping... who's coffee did this guy piss in?

Brewhound
03-21-2013, 12:14 AM
I don't think anyone has ever been busted or kicked out for failing one PT test, do you? But that said, the consequences for an isolated PT failure are certainly more severe on average for the enlisted force.

I think you would be wrong. I just had a guy recently that I walked to the gate. 17 years and got the boot. (Enlisted), but he did fail four times though.

akruse
03-21-2013, 12:16 AM
I think you would be wrong. I just had a guy recently that I walked to the gate. 17 years and got the boot. (Enlisted)

Bullshit. Filler

Brewhound
03-21-2013, 12:19 AM
Bullshit. Filler

Really? I smell a Troll

akruse
03-21-2013, 12:23 AM
Really? I smell a Troll

Me thinks you don't know what a troll is. You're telling me you kicked out a 17 year TIS Airman for one PT failure. BULLSHIT!

efmbman
03-21-2013, 12:28 AM
Interesting reactions here. I would think leaders in positions such as this COL was in would be held to at least the same standard as the rest of the USAF, if not higher. These leaders are supposed to be the standard-bearers, are they not?

Brewhound
03-21-2013, 12:36 AM
Me thinks you don't know what a troll is. You're telling me you kicked out a 17 year TIS Airman for one PT failure. BULLSHIT!

I kicked out no one out. I just witnessed the process. But hey you believe what you want pal. I am sure you are an authority. Oh but it was more than one failure(4). Sorry for not being more specific. Apologies....

akruse
03-21-2013, 12:38 AM
I kicked out no one out. I just witnessed the process. But hey you believe what you want pal. I am sure you are an authority.

So what are you saying now? I'll believe you if you say he had multiple failures over a period of time but one and done doesn't/can't happen.

Vrake
03-21-2013, 12:49 AM
High standards and all. Kicking a dude out for one? And people wonder why PT and petting kitties is more important then doing your actual job. Our side education trumps them both.

*** disclaimer I am Navy but we are running parallel paths here ***

El Kabong
03-21-2013, 12:55 AM
Gen. W.L. Creech said, "Leaders...above all, do not countenance selective enforcement of rules and standards. I know of no more ruinous path for commanders than selective enforcement of rules and standard. Excellent leaders have very high standards and they enforce them without fear or favors."

creech made us paint everything brown and had lee press-on hair.

bluecyclone1
03-21-2013, 12:56 AM
WOW....this cat was a ring knocker too!! Ring knockers are the military equivalent of "made men". I think Joe's on the right track. He certainly did piss in someone's coffee, the only question is whose pot did he piss in.

Robert F. Dorr
03-21-2013, 12:56 AM
And there it is... Any petty exuse to downsize the unpopular or unwanted. Bronze star on his record and all that training and they are going to boot him because of his waist size.

What was that thread about when the military became a coporation?

This may provide some satisfaction to those in the Air Force who perceive that staff sergeants and captains must meet a different standard than colonels and generals. But it's nuts. It's totally nuts. It qualifies as waste and abuse if not fraud. How much will it cost to replace this officer?

KellyinAvon
03-21-2013, 12:59 AM
I think big blue has officially gone off the deep end.

Vrake
03-21-2013, 01:01 AM
This may provide some satisfaction to those in the Air Force who perceive that staff sergeants and captains must meet a different standard than colonels and generals. But it's nuts. It's totally nuts. It qualifies as waste and abuse if not fraud. How much will it cost to replace this officer?

Kinda my point Mr Dorr but remember at the end of the day it saves money when we downsize :) No matter what it costs to bring someone else up to his level of experience in the cockpit and as a leader.

I do hope there is more to this story but I doubt it and stand by my first post as to ample evidence the way the whole military is going.

JD2780
03-21-2013, 01:21 AM
This may provide some satisfaction to those in the Air Force who perceive that staff sergeants and captains must meet a different standard than colonels and generals. But it's nuts. It's totally nuts. It qualifies as waste and abuse if not fraud. How much will it cost to replace this officer?

He shouldve thought of that before he got fat and lazy.

strataboomer
03-21-2013, 01:29 AM
Col Bush is an outstanding officer and leader! I hope that the circumstances are justified behind this. The AF will be putting someone that cares about people and inspires folks to go above and beyond out to pasture. How sad!

VFFTSGT
03-21-2013, 01:33 AM
And there it is... Any petty exuse to downsize the unpopular or unwanted. Bronze star on his record and all that training and they are going to boot him because of his waist size.

What was that thread about when the military became a coporation?

Yeap, all over a stupid PT test...must be cause he flew heavies not fighters.

Just think of the several thousands of dollars the Air Force will now spend to PCS someone early to replace him and pay to move him back to wherever. But we cannot afford TA.

Vrake
03-21-2013, 01:37 AM
Yeap, all over a stupid PT test...must be cause he flew heavies not fighters.

Just think of the several thousands of dollars the Air Force will now spend to PCS someone early to replace him and pay to move him back to wherever. But we cannot afford TA.

Get out of my mind Sir. See my other post for more costs.

LOL at the whole thing cept it will never get put straight no matter the costs.

Did I mention we are trying to save money here.

imported_Shove_your_stupid_meeting
03-21-2013, 01:39 AM
Yeap, all over a stupid PT test...must be cause he flew heavies not fighters.

Just think of the several thousands of dollars the Air Force will now spend to PCS someone early to replace him and pay to move him back to wherever. But we cannot afford TA.



Well we're short about $100M on TA for the rest of the FY, so a couple of Colonel's PCS expenses weren't really gonna save the day. :(

strataboomer
03-21-2013, 01:40 AM
Was outstanding, now worst ever, that's how PT works.
One less inch and he's outstanding again.

Truly sad.

VFFTSGT
03-21-2013, 01:48 AM
Well we're short about $100M on TA for the rest of the FY, so a couple of Colonel's PCS expenses weren't really gonna save the day. :(

Every dollar adds up. Stop buying a coke a day and you can pay a cell phone bill.

Just think about all the people that are getting out early under force management programs...PCS cost for them out and new people in cause the positions are not going away, just the people...that got to be replaced.

Not to mention separation pay for the screw ups that got DOS rollback.

Capt Alfredo
03-21-2013, 01:51 AM
Was outstanding, now worst ever, that's how PT works.
One less inch and he's outstanding again.

You nailed it.

Capt Alfredo
03-21-2013, 01:55 AM
Every dollar adds up. Stop buying a coke a day and you can pay a cell phone bill.

Just think about all the people that are getting out early under force management programs...PCS cost for them out and new people in cause the positions are not going away, just the people...that got to be replaced.

Not to mention separation pay for the screw ups that got DOS rollback.

I don't often agree with VFFTSGT, but I will admit these things add up. I've read a lot of posts here lately minimizing his pointing out of wasteful costs associated with non-mission essential spending, but drops in the bucket will, eventually, fill it up.

FLAPS
03-21-2013, 02:05 AM
You smell FLAPS???

Thanks asshole

strataboomer
03-21-2013, 02:08 AM
This pissed me off, cuz the violins play and people
Cry for the beloved colonel. When my 19 1/2 TSgt
Coworker failed, they tried to reduce rank and kick out,
No one gave two shits about him and they made him
Feel like shit. It's all a flaming pile of bullshit.

Wow....19.5 years and already a TSgt.

strataboomer
03-21-2013, 02:12 AM
Yes, not everyones a shitty fast burning worm.
Making ssgt at 8 and TSgt at 14+ was normal.
Give me a 19.5 TSgt over a 12 MSgt anyway.
He was MX by the way.


Wow...a 19.5 yr maintainer. Not helping your case.

tiredretiredE7
03-21-2013, 02:14 AM
Well I guess this means 0-6`s are out of the circle of trust now. I want to see some of those fat G.O`s start getting the boot now.

http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2013/03/air-force-colonel-relieved-for-failing-pt-032013w

:usa

Wing/CCs are also supposed to set the example for their subordinates to follow. This guy failed and will get to retire as an 0-6. The negative comments in these forums reflect the old mindset concerning the FA. I believe this is where Gen Welsh is going to start setting the example. I wonder how many fat E-9s are going to see the writing on the wall and retire. How is this going to impact squadron and group CCs? I do give a huge congrats to the PTL for having integrity.

strataboomer
03-21-2013, 02:16 AM
Yes, he was missile mx...on prp for 20 years.
Your condensation is telling. Please don't
Tell me your an officer...

No I am not an O

strataboomer
03-21-2013, 02:19 AM
Yes, he was missile mx...on prp for 20 years.
Your condensation is telling. Please don't
Tell me your an officer...

I think you meant Condescending.

JD2780
03-21-2013, 02:42 AM
No, I had word right, cuz its raining out yo azz

OH DAAAAAMN

RobotChicken
03-21-2013, 05:02 AM
No medal fo you
http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2013/03/airforce-pilot-error-predator-crash-afghanistan-032013w/
:cool:But think of ALL the civilians he 'saved' by 'heroically steering away from an terrorist breeding ground' and 'without regard of future promotions augur in a $5million RPA'! Damn I should have been an 'AF spin doc at the Pent-a-gone!!' :flame:behindsofa

imported_ManOSteel
03-21-2013, 05:09 AM
Wow. I'm a believer in being fit, healthy, and a role model. However, I recognize that it just makes sense that some people bring different things to the fight, especially in the Air Force. Some of the most innovative, intelligent, and inspiring people may not rock the PT test. I think the standards are wacked in that we don't necessarily need people in non-physical jobs to have perfect waist measurements or great run times. Why not let this guy suffer through the supervised remedial PT that everyone else does if they fail. If there is more to the story and he was a flawed leader, then tell the damn story. As it stands, it sure makes the AF look idiotic to take a senior leader with what appears to be strong credentials and fire him. I shudder to think of the financial cost as well as the loss in organizational/cultural experience of firing him. Commanders spend so many hours working, at great personal cost, that it does not surprise me that fitness was not the top of his accomplishments. Embarrassing to fail, yes...but not worthy of being fired. I would like to have seen him overcome this and model how to work through a failure like this. I bet it would have inspired a lot of folks to see the boss ramp up his PT. No one is perfect and failing a waist test is much much different than a moral failure. This firing is emblematic of a diseased organization. It sends a clear message that if you fall short in an area of your life that you can expect your leaders to crucify you rather than stand next to you and help you succeed. This in the context of trying to "teach" resiliency and encourage people to trust their "wingman" and the goodness of the Air Force. This dude put his life into the Air Force and gets the public humiliation of a shaft at the end. I'm not saying a PT failure should be ignored but it is absolutely not right to fire him over this. Not right. If there is more to the story, it should be told. If there is not, the American people need to wonder what happened to real leadership and common sense in the military.

RobotChicken
03-21-2013, 05:25 AM
Wow. I'm a believer in being fit, healthy, and a role model. However, I recognize that it just makes sense that some people bring different things to the fight, especially in the Air Force. Some of the most innovative, intelligent, and inspiring people may not rock the PT test. I think the standards are wacked in that we don't necessarily need people in non-physical jobs to have perfect waist measurements or great run times. Why not let this guy suffer through the supervised remedial PT that everyone else does if they fail. If there is more to the story and he was a flawed leader, then tell the damn story. As it stands, it sure makes the AF look idiotic to take a senior leader with what appears to be strong credentials and fire him. I shudder to think of the financial cost as well as the loss in organizational/cultural experience of firing him. Commanders spend so many hours working, at great personal cost, that it does not surprise me that fitness was not the top of his accomplishments. Embarrassing to fail, yes...but not worthy of being fired. I would like to have seen him overcome this and model how to work through a failure like this. I bet it would have inspired a lot of folks to see the boss ramp up his PT. No one is perfect and failing a waist test is much much different than a moral failure. This firing is emblematic of a diseased organization. It sends a clear message that if you fall short in an area of your life that you can expect your leaders to crucify you rather than stand next to you and help you succeed. This in the context of trying to "teach" resiliency and encourage people to trust their "wingman" and the goodness of the Air Force. This dude put his life into the Air Force and gets the public humiliation of a shaft at the end. I'm not saying a PT failure should be ignored but it is absolutely not right to fire him over this. Not right. If there is more to the story, it should be told. If there is not, the American people need to wonder what happened to real leadership and common sense in the military.
:spy It all started with the 'PC Marxism theory' the 'leaders' studied in school. :fear:frusty

CrustySMSgt
03-21-2013, 05:29 AM
High standards and all. Kicking a dude out for one? And people wonder why PT and petting kitties is more important then doing your actual job. Our side education trumps them both.

*** disclaimer I am Navy but we are running parallel paths here ***

He isn't being kicked out; he was relieved of command. If he follows through and retires, it was by his choice. (not that it's be a surprise... who'd want to hang out after this?)


It's all fun and games till it affects officers.

And theyll point to this when the cmsaf tosses
Out AC results, after it affected over 100 enlisted

Same situation occurred when they get rid of the altitude adjustment and then brought it back. If you tested and failed the day prior to coming back and would have been good to go under the revised standard, you were still screwed.


I think big blue has officially gone off the deep end.


Col Bush is an outstanding officer and leader! I hope that the circumstances are justified behind this. The AF will be putting someone that cares about people and inspires folks to go above and beyond out to pasture. How sad!

I'm all for bringing common sense to the weight of PT failures... but how many folks did Col Bush show the door for multiple PT fails? He was aware of the standards and the ramifications of failing, just like every other Airman. I've seen First Sergeants lose their diamonds for a signle PT fail and Chiefs fired for the same. Leadership comes with great responsibility and while I may not agree with the weight of the PT test and am not aware of the specifics of his eval (was he waived from other elements and got hooked by the AC value penalty?), there is a long list of enlisted people who have been held accountable for even a single failure. I'm sure there have been Os that have been quietly asked to retire or passed up for command, but this is the first time it has been public. No doubt you'll see a lot more "big boned" O6s in the gym!

tiredretiredE7
03-21-2013, 08:50 AM
No more fat e-9s now, they all cabbage eaters.

Do you mean "salad tossers"?

TVANSCOT
03-21-2013, 10:58 AM
Scapegoat.... poor guy... Generals had to prove they weren't just picking on those poor enlisted folks. Story remains the same however, another terrible loss for the USAF. Enlisted or Officer, years of experience and training gone because of a waist measurement.

Thanks Col. for your service, enjoy your retirement!

Dan-O
03-21-2013, 11:21 AM
I'm all for bringing common sense to the weight of PT failures... but how many folks did Col Bush show the door for multiple PT fails? He was aware of the standards and the ramifications of failing, just like every other Airman. I've seen First Sergeants lose their diamonds for a signle PT fail and Chiefs fired for the same. Leadership comes with great responsibility and while I may not agree with the weight of the PT test and am not aware of the specifics of his eval (was he waived from other elements and got hooked by the AC value penalty?), there is a long list of enlisted people who have been held accountable for even a single failure. I'm sure there have been Os that have been quietly asked to retire or passed up for command, but this is the first time it has been public. No doubt you'll see a lot more "big boned" O6s in the gym!

PREACH IT!

Chief_KO
03-21-2013, 12:07 PM
There are quite a few NAF/CC's out there that were big time USAFA "athaletes"...Their base visits always include a big PT event so the 2-Star can quickly judge the "effectiveness, efficiency, morale, & readiness" of a wing by what is seen at PT. No doubt this Colonel did not impress the "star quarterback" so he was benched.

Perhaps this is the public affairs fiasco needed to right the PT ship and bring some common sense back into the process. It took Gen Billy Mitchell's sacrifice to prove airpower was a mission, perhaps Col Bush's sacrifice will bring us back around to that focus.

Pueblo
03-21-2013, 12:17 PM
I don't think anyone has ever been busted or kicked out for failing one PT test, do you? But that said, the consequences for an isolated PT failure are certainly more severe on average for the enlisted force.

Huh? The worst that happens for an isolated failure is an LOC (that goes in the shredder) and referral EPR. In most squadrons, the latter only follows if they're dumb enough to test right before the end of their rating period. And the way I've seen it is officers get treated the same as enlisted.

Pueblo
03-21-2013, 12:21 PM
I don't mind having a fitness standard, and I won't be shedding any tears for Col Bush, but the waist measurement is arbitrary.

technomage1
03-21-2013, 12:39 PM
With all due respect to Col Bush, I think we can look at his picture and say he does not present a professional appearance while in uniform. I don't agree with the waist measurement part of the test since it does not take into account height or build, but in this case the net snared the right fish. He's overweight, and not by a small portion.

PT failure should have consequences. There is no doubt about that. However, I do not believe that an officer should be relieved of command after 1 failure. That's just madness. Officers are human. Officers have bad days. The consequences of one bad day at the track should not be so dire for anyone, enlisted or officer.

If he's failed more than once, then the removal would be in order. All this does is send the signal that anyone is on the chopping block for a single mistake - if that mistake is PT. DUIs, sexual assault, etc those you can just get on with your career after a minor hiccup.

We lost a 19 year TSgt thus year due to PT. He'd failed 5 times in 3 years. No progress on his weight whatsoever (he was obese, no other way to put it). It was a sad situation but a fair bust. He'd been given loads of opportunities.

Capt Alfredo
03-21-2013, 12:46 PM
Huh? The worst that happens for an isolated failure is an LOC (that goes in the shredder) and referral EPR. In most squadrons, the latter only follows if they're dumb enough to test right before the end of their rating period. And the way I've seen it is officers get treated the same as enlisted.

I guess what I'm saying is that the enlisted performance report usually reflects, by way of a mark-down, a PT failure during the rating period. This can have second-order effects such as the denial of an end-of-tour decoration, reduced eligibility for special duty assignments, etc. The officer performance report does not have boxes to check, therefore there is no associated markdown. As long as he has a passing score at close-out, there is no negative repercussion, typically. Col Grand Forks would appear to be an exception to that. I've known officers to fail PT tests and none of them have been placed into mando PT, none of them have gotten LOCs; in essence, nothing happens. They're told to pass the retest, and if they do, all is good. On the enlisted side, I've never seen that to be the case. Many more layers of bureaucracy might have something to do with it.

Capt Alfredo
03-21-2013, 12:53 PM
I don't mind having a fitness standard, and I won't be shedding any tears for Col Bush, but the waist measurement is arbitrary.

That's what I'm saying. It's not an objective measurement. In my experience and from what I've heard anecdotally, the measurement isn't even performed correctly most of the time. What if you have inflammation of the gut that day? You're bloated? What if your tester is too inexperienced or stubborn to realize he's not supposed to measure over the hipbone, but above it? What if it's noon instead of 8am? All of those things affect the measurement, but you can't tell me that needing to take a shit indicates you're suddenly a health risk. Under the rules of the AC standard, 1/4" can mean the difference between a star performer and a complete shitbag. Let's take the AC out of the PT test and move it, or something like it (weigh-in, bod pod, whatever) to the PHA and keep it about health.

CrustySMSgt
03-21-2013, 01:01 PM
PT failure should have consequences. There is no doubt about that. However, I do not believe that an officer should be relieved of command after 1 failure. That's just madness. Officers are human. Officers have bad days. The consequences of one bad day at the track should not be so dire for anyone, enlisted or officer.

If he's failed more than once, then the removal would be in order. All this does is send the signal that anyone is on the chopping block for a single mistake - if that mistake is PT. DUIs, sexual assault, etc those you can just get on with your career after a minor hiccup.


He's not "just an officer." He is a wing commander. I would expect the same thing if he was in any command position. Failure to meet standards as a commander is inexcusable.

Shrike
03-21-2013, 01:04 PM
Meanwhile, anyone know how Major General David Eidsaune's career is going? To refresh those with short memories he got a DUI in Las Vegas about three years ago, blowing over twice the legal limit on a breathalyzer. For his punishment...well, who knows? The only thing that came out of the PA's pie hole was that the AFMC CC took "appropriate action". Six weeks after the DUI he got a new job which was not a step down the ladder. Click here for the story from Air Force Times. (http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2010/04/airforce_dui_general_042610w/)

So to recap: engage in an irresponsible and illegal activity that could result in the deaths of innocent people: get off pretty much Scot free. Fail to hit the gym after indulging in too many pizza and wing dinners and bust a/c by 1": f&cking piece of shit, your career is over.

The USAF's priorities are so far out of whack that it's going to take the second coming of a Curtis LeMay to get it back on track. Oh wait, nevermind. Looks like LeMay was probably a fatass worthless piece of shit, too.

http://www.nebraskastudies.org/0900/media/0901_012101.jpg

imported_Renazance
03-21-2013, 01:07 PM
He's not "just an officer." He is a wing commander. I would expect the same thing if he was in any command position. Failure to meet standards as a commander is inexcusable.

So do you honestly think that failing the AC should have the same consequences as failing an NSI or ORI?

technomage1
03-21-2013, 01:15 PM
He's not "just an officer." He is a wing commander. I would expect the same thing if he was in any command position. Failure to meet standards as a commander is inexcusable.

Only in PT. Name me another one who has been relived of command for failing to follow any other standard.

And I still think 1 failure should not be enough. We're all human, some days we feel bad or our allergies kick in, etc. now, 2 failures equals a trend and that would be a fair bust. But not 1.

I had to test last week. Was supposed to test on Thursday, woke up feeling absolutely awful. Wanted to test but just couldn't risk it. Tested the next day, scored above a 90. One day probably meant the difference between failure and an excellent. It happens.

Capt Alfredo
03-21-2013, 01:28 PM
He's not "just an officer." He is a wing commander. I would expect the same thing if he was in any command position. Failure to meet standards as a commander is inexcusable.

By that standard (no pun), Gen Schwartz should have been fired for that crazy hairdo he was rocking :cool:

And let's not even get started on all of the uniform standards that get violated by the upper brass on a regular basis.

Pullinteeth
03-21-2013, 01:37 PM
So what are you saying now? I'll believe you if you say he had multiple failures over a period of time but one and done doesn't/can't happen.

Well, I don't think that is EXACTLY true... If there were no other "quality force indicators" then yeah, wouldn't happen. But...if someone got in trouble for something else, was on a control roster...etc....etc...etc... They could theoretically get the boot for one FTF failure.


I guess what I'm saying is that the enlisted performance report usually reflects, by way of a mark-down, a PT failure during the rating period. This can have second-order effects such as the denial of an end-of-tour decoration, reduced eligibility for special duty assignments, etc. The officer performance report does not have boxes to check, therefore there is no associated markdown. As long as he has a passing score at close-out, there is no negative repercussion, typically. Col Grand Forks would appear to be an exception to that. I've known officers to fail PT tests and none of them have been placed into mando PT, none of them have gotten LOCs; in essence, nothing happens. They're told to pass the retest, and if they do, all is good. On the enlisted side, I've never seen that to be the case. Many more layers of bureaucracy might have something to do with it.

But it isn't SUPPOSED to...just because some raters can't read doesn't make it right. If you failed 3x during the rating period but passed the one right before the EPR closed out=meets standard....

technomage1
03-21-2013, 01:39 PM
By that standard (no pun), Gen Schwartz should have been fired for that crazy hairdo he was rocking :cool:

And let's not even get started on all of the uniform standards that get violated by the upper brass on a regular basis.

That wasn't crazy, he was just a Romulan spy. I thought everyone knew that.

technomage1
03-21-2013, 01:48 PM
That's what I'm saying. It's not an objective measurement. In my experience and from what I've heard anecdotally, the measurement isn't even performed correctly most of the time. What if you have inflammation of the gut that day? You're bloated? What if your tester is too inexperienced or stubborn to realize he's not supposed to measure over the hipbone, but above it? What if it's noon instead of 8am? All of those things affect the measurement, but you can't tell me that needing to take a shit indicates you're suddenly a health risk. Under the rules of the AC standard, 1/4" can mean the difference between a star performer and a complete shitbag. Let's take the AC out of the PT test and move it, or something like it (weigh-in, bod pod, whatever) to the PHA and keep it about health.

Agree 100%. I've lost 20 lbs but my tape went up 1.5" the last time I tested. I still passed but I seem to get measured in a different spot each time. There's no consistency.

ConfusedAirman
03-21-2013, 01:54 PM
The waist measurement is not just to identify how fit you actually are. The waist measurement provides an objective score for how "LEAN AND FIT" you "APPEAR" to be. And the AF wants you to maintain a "LEAN AND FIT APPEARANCE". (AFI 1-1)

Stang5150
03-21-2013, 01:56 PM
If every other standard weighted the same as the PT on evaluations, then one day an airman comes in with hair touching his ear, then he is automatic referral. If we want to start nitpicking standards, and I have seen many comments that state that if we enforce one standard, then we enforce all standards, then why the hell not? Would it even be feasible? Come on, use some fracking common sense here. All the "holier than thou" attitudes some folks puke out of their pie holes will gets you about as much sympathy from me as what you'll find in the dictionary between shit and syphilis.

ConfusedAirman
03-21-2013, 01:56 PM
Agree 100%. I've lost 20 lbs but my tape went up 1.5" the last time I tested. I still passed but I seem to get measured in a different spot each time. There's no consistency.

I know a guy who lost 3 inches from his waist but ended up gaining 2 inches of dick visibility.

Pullinteeth
03-21-2013, 02:07 PM
Ok, am I the only one that read this;

“Colonel Bush has also served as Presidential Advance Agent for Air Force One, Aide de Camp to the Commander, U.S. Joint Forces Command, Commander, 384th Air Refueling Squadron, Commander, 908th Expeditionary Air Refueling Squadron, and Commander, 733d Air Mobility Squadron,” the biography says.

and secretly hoped he did that sometime between say 2001 and 2009? '89-'93 would have been too early in his career... But alas, it was only an additional duty and it was from '97-'99....

CrustySMSgt
03-21-2013, 02:08 PM
If every other standard weighted the same as the PT on evaluations, then one day an airman comes in with hair touching his ear, then he is automatic referral. If we want to start nitpicking standards, and I have seen many comments that state that if we enforce one standard, then we enforce all standards, then why the hell not? Would it even be feasible? Come on, use some fracking common sense here. All the "holier than thou" attitudes some folks puke out of their pie holes will gets you about as much sympathy from me as what you'll find in the dictionary between shit and syphilis.

If you KNEW coming in with your hair touching your ears would have those consequences, would you take the chance of letting it get close? As I've said, I don't agree with the impact the waist measurement has or the importance placed on PT... but as it stands now, the ramifications of failing are well known.

imported_CLSE
03-21-2013, 02:43 PM
That's what I'm saying. It's not an objective measurement. In my experience and from what I've heard anecdotally, the measurement isn't even performed correctly most of the time. What if you have inflammation of the gut that day? You're bloated? What if your tester is too inexperienced or stubborn to realize he's not supposed to measure over the hipbone, but above it? What if it's noon instead of 8am? All of those things affect the measurement, but you can't tell me that needing to take a shit indicates you're suddenly a health risk. Under the rules of the AC standard, 1/4" can mean the difference between a star performer and a complete shitbag. Let's take the AC out of the PT test and move it, or something like it (weigh-in, bod pod, whatever) to the PHA and keep it about health.


By recently established medical standards, an Asian with a 35" AC is considered to be obese. Doctors were saying years ago that the 41" cut point for Caucasians was too high for Asians and the cut-points used by medical practitioners has finally been updated to reflect that.

The AF claims that the standards are based on the latest science, but by AF standards, that Asian with the 35" AC would get the full 20 points and the Air Force still claims that AC is not affected by race.

TSgt"M"
03-21-2013, 03:05 PM
Wow....19.5 years and already a TSgt.

Yes, I retired a TSgt, and you have shown yourself as an elitest asshole.

sandsjames
03-21-2013, 03:31 PM
I'm surprised to see people defending this officer. Not something I'd expect on this board. I think the fact that we aren't all celebrating his removal from position shoes how stupid the whole thing is. If we remotely thought it was fair we'd all be throwing dirt on his grave.

Happy to say 97 to go.

imported_Shove_your_stupid_meeting
03-21-2013, 03:37 PM
I'm surprised to see people defending this officer. Not something I'd expect on this board. I think the fact that we aren't all celebrating his removal from position shows how stupid the whole thing is. If we remotely thought it was fair we'd all be throwing dirt on his grave.

Happy to say 97 to go.


Pretty much.

CrustySMSgt
03-21-2013, 03:44 PM
I'm surprised to see people defending this officer. Not something I'd expect on this board. I think the fact that we aren't all celebrating his removal from position shoes how stupid the whole thing is. If we remotely thought it was fair we'd all be throwing dirt on his grave.

Happy to say 97 to go.

It is quite the turn around from last week's discussion of the good ol' boy network taking care of the Aviano IG.

imported_Shove_your_stupid_meeting
03-21-2013, 03:44 PM
I don't often agree with VFFTSGT, but I will admit these things add up. I've read a lot of posts here lately minimizing his pointing out of wasteful costs associated with non-mission essential spending, but drops in the bucket will, eventually, fill it up.


Well sure, but if you want to really attack these fiscal problems, then really attack them.We want to attack easy targets, all while demanding 100% TA is reinstated as if that's perfectly reasonable. Perhaps we need to get real about how good we've had it? Perhaps when we do have TA again, we need to be honest about this expense and go back to the days of 75% coverage? Maybe 75% is too high? Why is TA off limits to some, but the civilians next to me are free to go screw themselves for 22 days? Flying hours anyone? Why wouldn't we worry about them before TA? What are we here for again?

technomage1
03-21-2013, 04:11 PM
I'm surprised to see people defending this officer. Not something I'd expect on this board. I think the fact that we aren't all celebrating his removal from position shoes how stupid the whole thing is. If we remotely thought it was fair we'd all be throwing dirt on his grave.

Happy to say 97 to go.

I think you have to be consistent. Even at the most PT happy of units, I've never seen an enlisted "fired" from their position due to 1 PT failure. I'm not saying it's never happened, only that I've never seen it. And I wouldn't support it if it did (or has) happened at any level. Multiple failures, sure, absolutely. But one? That's too high a price to pay.

Crap, your unit can fail a UCI or ORI and this wouldn't have happened for senior enlisted or Os. You pretty much need to lose a nuke over the US to be fired. Or fail PT once.

imported_chipotleboy
03-21-2013, 04:23 PM
I don't think anyone has ever been busted or kicked out for failing one PT test, do you? But that said, the consequences for an isolated PT failure are certainly more severe on average for the enlisted force.

I'd be curious to see if he gets the standard Legion of Merit at his retirement.

imported_chipotleboy
03-21-2013, 04:38 PM
Meanwhile, anyone know how Major General David Eidsaune's career is going? To refresh those with short memories he got a DUI in Las Vegas about three years ago, blowing over twice the legal limit on a breathalyzer. For his punishment...well, who knows? The only thing that came out of the PA's pie hole was that the AFMC CC took "appropriate action". Six weeks after the DUI he got a new job which was not a step down the ladder. Click here for the story from Air Force Times. (http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2010/04/airforce_dui_general_042610w/)

So to recap: engage in an irresponsible and illegal activity that could result in the deaths of innocent people: get off pretty much Scot free. Fail to hit the gym after indulging in too many pizza and wing dinners and bust a/c by 1": f&cking piece of shit, your career is over.

Eidsaune retired. Reassignment from the A3 to the A9 job is a step down. He went from a promotable job to a non promotable job. Show me anybody who got promoted to three stars from a MAJCOM A9 job. In fact, show me anybody who is a two-star in an A9 billet. He was parked until he retired.

Shrike
03-21-2013, 04:52 PM
I'm surprised to see people defending this officer. Not something I'd expect on this board. I think the fact that we aren't all celebrating his removal from position shoes how stupid the whole thing is. If we remotely thought it was fair we'd all be throwing dirt on his grave.Bingo. I know nothing about this guy. He could be the most insufferable cockhole on the planet as far as I know. But it's just plain stupid.


Happy to say 97 to go.
:biggrin It'll go by fast.

Shrike
03-21-2013, 04:58 PM
Eidsaune retired. Reassignment from the A3 to the A9 job is a step down. He went from a promotable job to a non promotable job. Show me anybody who got promoted to three stars from a MAJCOM A9 job. In fact, show me anybody who is a two-star in an A9 billet. He was parked until he retired.
So what you're saying is...he got off Scot free after his DUI. He didn't get fired. He didn't get demoted. He's making $120K in pension as a retired O-8.

The point I was making is who did the USAF decide to hammer? The guy who could have killed people through his reckless and grossly irresponsible actions? Or the guy who failed to meet a minor and arbitrary standard?

VFFTSGT
03-21-2013, 05:17 PM
Well sure, but if you want to really attack these fiscal problems, then really attack them.We want to attack easy targets, all while demanding 100% TA is reinstated as if that's perfectly reasonable. Perhaps we need to get real about how good we've had it? Perhaps when we do have TA again, we need to be honest about this expense and go back to the days of 75% coverage? Maybe 75% is too high? Why is TA off limits to some, but the civilians next to me are free to go screw themselves for 22 days? Flying hours anyone? Why wouldn't we worry about them before TA? What are we here for again?

Wrong. At least fore me; I never said reinstate TA.

I said I don't disagree with cutting it because we do have the GI Bill. BUT there are 83,925 other more frivolous and wasteful spending practices that should have been cut first.

If we are going to keep it, TA should go back to 75%...I said this a couple years ago too; this is not the first time we talked about it on here. The fact that a few people will have to spend a few dollars on education will keep its usage down.

And the thing about both is they are retention tools; retention is at an all time high. So much so, we are kicking out screw ups and paying them severance.

Shrike
03-21-2013, 05:54 PM
http://www.intelihealth.com/IH/ihtIH/EMIHC254/333/20833/369294.html?d=dmtICNNews

"The exercise policy also may save the service people and money. The Air Force annually loses 400-600 people who are too out-of-shape to stay in. It also estimates it spends $24 million on medical costs and $4.2 million on lost duty days directly attributable to excess weight."I wonder how much money and duty days are lost on people with sports-related injuries. I rarely saw my couch-potato co-workers hobbling around on crutches. Yet they had to pick up the slack for the guys that blew out their knees playing ball at the gym.

wmx013
03-21-2013, 06:05 PM
I'm surprised to see people defending this officer. Not something I'd expect on this board. I think the fact that we aren't all celebrating his removal from position shoes how stupid the whole thing is. If we remotely thought it was fair we'd all be throwing dirt on his grave.

Happy to say 97 to go.

I think it's because we're conflicted between our dislike of the PT program and the satisfaction of seeing an higher-ranking O (and an Academy guy at that!) held accountable for something. I know I am.

imported_chipotleboy
03-21-2013, 06:15 PM
So what you're saying is...he got off Scot free after his DUI. He didn't get fired. He didn't get demoted. He's making $120K in pension as a retired O-8.

The point I was making is who did the USAF decide to hammer? The guy who could have killed people through his reckless and grossly irresponsible actions? Or the guy who failed to meet a minor and arbitrary standard?

I agree the guy should have been publicly humiliated to set an example. I disagree with the assertion by Air Force Times and others on this forum that his transfer from A-3 to A-9 was somehow reassignment to a better job. Let's compare:

A-3: Oversee flying operations at two test wings and an engineering development center

vs

A-9: Token military guy in charge of a bunch of mathematicians running computer-based modelling and simulation studies

I just don't see how this was some sort of "reward". He was clearly being parked until they could retire him.

Shrike
03-21-2013, 06:19 PM
I agree the guy should have been publicly humiliated to set an example. I disagree with the assertion by Air Force Times and others on this forum that his transfer from A-3 to A-9 was somehow reassignment to a better job. Let's compare:

A-3: Oversee flying operations at two test wings and an engineering development center

vs

A-9: Token military guy in charge of a bunch of mathematicians running computer-based modelling and simulation studies

I just don't see how this was some sort of "reward". He was clearly being parked until they could retire him.
I never said it was a "reward". All I said was he got off Scot free.

imported_chipotleboy
03-21-2013, 06:26 PM
I never said it was a "reward". All I said was he got off Scot free.

I wasn't criticizing you. I regret if you took it that way. I was criticizing the reporting. But hey, they have to sell newspapers.

sandsjames
03-21-2013, 06:27 PM
I never said it was a "reward". All I said was he got off Scot free.

I wonder if he was made to stand up in front of the Sq/Gp, like an enlisted would be, to give a safety briefing and explain the impact of the decisions he made. I'm sure he was. I'm sure he was treated the same as everyone else. At least as harshly as an O-6 with a fat stomach.

Shrike
03-21-2013, 06:43 PM
I wonder if he was made to stand up in front of the Sq/Gp, like an enlisted would be, to give a safety briefing and explain the impact of the decisions he made. I'm sure he was. I'm sure he was treated the same as everyone else. At least as harshly as an O-6 with a fat stomach.

Well the USAF obviously believes that generals driving drunk is okay. Super-size your fries, though, and the terrorists have already won.

:biggrin

Shrike
03-21-2013, 06:47 PM
I wasn't criticizing you. I regret if you took it that way. I was criticizing the reporting. But hey, they have to sell newspapers.

Not a problem, man; no offense taken.

http://www.merchandisingplaza.com/images/products/30266/img2.jpg

sandsjames
03-21-2013, 07:00 PM
Well the USAF obviously believes that generals driving drunk is okay. Super-size your fries, though, and the terrorists have already won.

:biggrin

If I can't trust you to eat 9 servings of fruits/vegetables a day, how can I trust you to repair that aircraft?

Pullinteeth
03-21-2013, 07:28 PM
I just don't see how this was some sort of "reward". He was clearly being parked until they could retire him.

You don't? Tell me, what do you think would have happened to a retirement eligible MSgt that got a DUI? Do you think he/she would;

a) Get a new assignment and be allowed to stay in for another year and a half
b) Be forced to retire the following month
c) Get demoted and forced to retire

Shrike
03-21-2013, 07:38 PM
it is NOT okay!

http://www.airforcetimes.com/community/opinion/air-force-robert-f-dorr-punishment-more-serious-than-it-appears-020711w/
Yeah, but no one reads anything by that guy anyway. ;)

MACHINE666
03-21-2013, 07:39 PM
I hope that colonel takes a dump in his coffee pot and calls it a day ~ !

:D :D :D :D :D

Pullinteeth
03-21-2013, 07:48 PM
it is NOT okay!

http://www.airforcetimes.com/community/opinion/air-force-robert-f-dorr-punishment-more-serious-than-it-appears-020711w/

Oh but what Mr. Dorr completely ignores is the fact they some of these LoAs or quite frankly free passes that officers are given are for things that would get an Airman booted-first mistake or not... Disagreeing, fine whatever. DUI? And get to stay another year (almost two)?


http://www.vandenberg.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123043560

General Jumper specifically addressed the issue of just passing a test. In another of his "Sight Pictures" he said, "I want to make it very clear that my focus is not on passing a fitness test once a year.

Right cause most people have to pass it TWICE a year... ;-)

imported_chipotleboy
03-21-2013, 07:59 PM
You don't? Tell me, what do you think would have happened to a retirement eligible MSgt that got a DUI? Do you think he/she would;

a) Get a new assignment and be allowed to stay in for another year and a half
b) Be forced to retire the following month
c) Get demoted and forced to retire

I agree that Eidsaune should have lost a star under a retirement grade determination action by SECAF. My point was that the immediate reassignment action from A-3 to A-9 was hardly the cushy reassignment action portrayed by the AF Times and was a huge step down in responsibility. But they probably should have reassigned him as "Special Assistant to the AFMC Vice Commander" like they did when they fired the AFRL Commander. Everybody knows that as code for "waiting to retire".

In any case, once somebody makes themselves non-promotable while in a promotable billet, it's typical practice to reassign them to a nonpromotable job ASAP so someone who still has a chance at promotion can have the opportunity.

Sergeant eNYgma
03-21-2013, 08:13 PM
Meanwhile, anyone know how Major General David Eidsaune's career is going? To refresh those with short memories he got a DUI in Las Vegas about three years ago, blowing over twice the legal limit on a breathalyzer. For his punishment...well, who knows? The only thing that came out of the PA's pie hole was that the AFMC CC took "appropriate action". Six weeks after the DUI he got a new job which was not a step down the ladder. Click here for the story from Air Force Times. (http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2010/04/airforce_dui_general_042610w/)

So to recap: engage in an irresponsible and illegal activity that could result in the deaths of innocent people: get off pretty much Scot free. Fail to hit the gym after indulging in too many pizza and wing dinners and bust a/c by 1": f&cking piece of shit, your career is over.

The USAF's priorities are so far out of whack that it's going to take the second coming of a Curtis LeMay to get it back on track. Oh wait, nevermind. Looks like LeMay was probably a fatass worthless piece of shit, too.

http://www.nebraskastudies.org/0900/media/0901_012101.jpg

I havent forgotten...he spoke here and I was voluntold to go with the First Sergeant sometime before he PCS'd and committed the act of dumbassery out west.

Pullinteeth
03-21-2013, 08:15 PM
I agree that Eidsaune should have lost a star under a retirement grade determination action by SECAF. My point was that the immediate reassignment action from A-3 to A-9 was hardly the cushy reassignment action portrayed by the AF Times and was a huge step down in responsibility. But they probably should have reassigned him as "Special Assistant to the AFMC Vice Commander" like they did when they fired the AFRL Commander. Everybody knows that as code for "waiting to retire".

In any case, once somebody makes themselves non-promotable while in a promotable billet, it's typical practice to reassign them to a nonpromotable job ASAP so someone who still has a chance at promotion can have the opportunity.

You are a bit confused because he was arrested in Feb and moved to his new job in July. That non-withstanding-wheels of justice and all, my point is that he was allowed to stay on for nearly two years after his D-wobbly. When was the last time you saw an Enlisted member get a D-Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeee! and get to stay in for another two years to pad THEIR retirement? Sure an E, likely would have lost a stripe but I'm not even hating on him too bad for that-there is a CHANCE (however slight) that an E would have gotten to keep their stripe and retire. What would NOT have happened was that extra two years (ok 1 year and 10 months). THAT is what I am throwing down the BS flag on.

imported_chipotleboy
03-21-2013, 08:32 PM
You are a bit confused because he was arrested in Feb and moved to his new job in July. That non-withstanding-wheels of justice and all, my point is that he was allowed to stay on for nearly two years after his D-wobbly. When was the last time you saw an Enlisted member get a D-Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeee! and get to stay in for another two years to pad THEIR retirement? Sure an E, likely would have lost a stripe but I'm not even hating on him too bad for that-there is a CHANCE (however slight) that an E would have gotten to keep their stripe and retire. What would NOT have happened was that extra two years (ok 1 year and 10 months). THAT is what I am throwing down the BS flag on.

I agree.

Now, on to the next scandal.

VOLZZZMAN
03-21-2013, 08:36 PM
But he is great leader, let's keep him!

http://media.liveauctiongroup.net/i/9646/10499937_2.jpg?v=8CE70FE16933990

Pullinteeth
03-21-2013, 08:36 PM
I agree.

Now, on to the next scandal.

One tubby tubby.....Two tubby tubby...

Seriously though, this guy-granted he only has silver chickens-but do you think he will lose any rank before he retires? I'm betting not....

Shrike
03-21-2013, 08:44 PM
One tubby tubby.....Two tubby tubby...

Seriously though, this guy-granted he only has silver chickens-but do you think he will lose any rank before he retires? I'm betting not....

I will be very surprised if he does.

Capt Alfredo
03-21-2013, 09:37 PM
I'd be curious to see if he gets the standard Legion of Merit at his retirement.

I don't know, man. We had a Lt Col get no retirement dec because he failed his last PT test. 24 years of service out the window. It's the principle.

Capt Alfredo
03-21-2013, 09:41 PM
I will be very surprised if he does.

Pretty sure you can't demote an officer for failing a PT test or even a handful of tests.

Capt Alfredo
03-21-2013, 09:42 PM
Horseshit, last dec based on career, not last pt test.
Dumbass leaders.

That was the way they rolled in that organization. They did it to a 24-year MSgt, too, so I guess at least the O's weren't given special treatment. I thought both decisions were crap.

technomage1
03-21-2013, 09:49 PM
That was the way they rolled in that organization. They did it to a 24-year MSgt, too, so I guess at least the O's weren't given special treatment. I thought decisions were crap.

I'm still brain freezing on the only way CCs get fired are losing nuclear weapons over CONUS and PT failure.

Steve-OK
03-21-2013, 10:24 PM
Yeap, all over a stupid PT test...must be cause he flew heavies not fighters.

Just think of the several thousands of dollars the Air Force will now spend to PCS someone early to replace him and pay to move him back to wherever. But we cannot afford TA.

I get it....heavies!

imported_KnuckleDragger
03-21-2013, 10:54 PM
I worked in the 319th AGS many moons ago.

There was a mission back then...not just PT:(

Capt Alfredo
03-21-2013, 11:00 PM
Sarcasm right?

No, I honestly don't think it can be done.

PT GOD
03-21-2013, 11:29 PM
yo, fist of all, great leaders be leading by examples, dis be the same mans who has to be makings decesions on kickings peoples out for failings pt, you can'ts be having the same persons who be makings that call be a pt failer themselves yo. i swear yo, sometimes I think i be da smartest person here yo

Capt Alfredo
03-21-2013, 11:44 PM
I don't recall
The punishment
Matrix involving
O vs E in the AFI.

Pretty sure it takes a lot more to reduce an officer in rank than it does to bust down most enlisted ranks. Can't be done via NJP for Officers, based on what I remember reading. So I don't think we'll be seeing a Court Martial for a failed PT test, since it's not a crime.

technomage1
03-21-2013, 11:57 PM
Losing a nuke = PT failure....

Possibly wiping out a small American city = having a waist too big....

Absolute failure = a few too many Big Macs....

technomage1
03-22-2013, 12:13 AM
It only makes sense to everyone if it involves enlisted.

Introduce this BS to Os and shit follows.

Oh, everyone knew it was stupid when it was only Es. There just isn't a damn thing we can do about it.

technomage1
03-22-2013, 12:19 AM
Why are all commanders and command chiefs carrying this Eslaughter out?
Ive heard none complain or do anything to change it, rather its
Gotten worse and more restrictive.

It's like we're all lemmings headed for a cliff of stupidity.

Robert F. Dorr
03-22-2013, 12:55 AM
Meanwhile, anyone know how Major General David Eidsaune's career is going? To refresh those with short memories he got a DUI in Las Vegas about three years ago, blowing over twice the legal limit on a breathalyzer. For his punishment...well, who knows? The only thing that came out of the PA's pie hole was that the AFMC CC took "appropriate action". Six weeks after the DUI he got a new job which was not a step down the ladder. Click here for the story from Air Force Times. (http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2010/04/airforce_dui_general_042610w/)

So to recap: engage in an irresponsible and illegal activity that could result in the deaths of innocent people: get off pretty much Scot free. Fail to hit the gym after indulging in too many pizza and wing dinners and bust a/c by 1": f&cking piece of shit, your career is over.

The USAF's priorities are so far out of whack that it's going to take the second coming of a Curtis LeMay to get it back on track. Oh wait, nevermind. Looks like LeMay was probably a fatass worthless piece of shit, too.

http://www.nebraskastudies.org/0900/media/0901_012101.jpg

Actually, LeMay was a lot more complicated and caring than he is given credit for. It would be easy to tell you where you could read some stuff about LeMay that you haven't read elsewhere but then everybody would jump all over me again. The widely held conception of LeMay's personality is only partly right.

technomage1
03-22-2013, 01:00 AM
Why are all commanders and command chiefs carrying this Eslaughter out?
Ive heard none complain or do anything to change it, rather its
Gotten worse and more restrictive.

You know, the more I think about it the more I wonder if Col Bush didn't participate in the "ESlaughter". In which case the firing would be justified as a closure of the circle of stupidity. And karma.

I have no idea if he did or didn't participate, mind. And the firing of anyone for 1 PT failure, as I've noted, is dumb.

imported_chipotleboy
03-22-2013, 01:30 AM
Pretty sure you can't demote an officer for failing a PT test or even a handful of tests.

Demotion can only happen to officers upon retirement by SECAF doing a retirement grade determination. They basically investigate your record to see the last grade with "satisfactory performance" and use that as the determined retirement grade. So a few years back, a 2-star screwed up, they determined the screw-up had also happened while he was also a one-star, so he was retired as a Colonel.

AKNate
03-22-2013, 02:10 AM
I wonder if he was made to stand up in front of the Sq/Gp, like an enlisted would be, to give a safety briefing and explain the impact of the decisions he made.

Dont think you can make anyone do that anymore. Considered hazing, or at least that is what we were told.

CrustySMSgt
03-22-2013, 07:03 AM
I think you have to be consistent. Even at the most PT happy of units, I've never seen an enlisted "fired" from their position due to 1 PT failure. I'm not saying it's never happened, only that I've never seen it. And I wouldn't support it if it did (or has) happened at any level. Multiple failures, sure, absolutely. But one? That's too high a price to pay.

Crap, your unit can fail a UCI or ORI and this wouldn't have happened for senior enlisted or Os. You pretty much need to lose a nuke over the US to be fired. Or fail PT once.

I see both sides and agree failing PT equaling tanking an ORI/NSO doesn't make sense... BUT those given the responsibility of being a commander accept the fact that they'll be held to a higher standard. By failing his PT test, his credibility is shot everytime he gets up at a CC call and tells people they've got to be fit, meet standards, follow the rules; all the audience sees is the gut that put him over the mark.


I worked briefly with a TSgt, he had retirement orders, got a DUI, immediately removed from position, busted to SSgt and
retired as such. Of course he also had all the other bells and whistles; loss of base driving priv, referral epr, no dec, etc.

There's always a chance I'm wrong, but when you retire, you do so at the highest grade held, so his ID card still says TSgt retired. Only way this would be a major factor is if he was under the final pay retirement. OK, had to check the dates; final pay was for those who entered before Sep 1980, so maybe this guy was in that boat?

Mcjohn1118
03-22-2013, 09:55 AM
I know the instruction states in effect that the consequences of failing PT are not punitive. And technically, when CCs give Article 15s and remove stripes from the E's, it's not punitive, but administrative. But, holy sh&^, getting fired? While not under any punitive articles of the UCMJ, this seem pretty freakin' punitive.

Robert F. Dorr
03-22-2013, 10:21 AM
You're a commander. You have a commander under you. He's done nothing wrong except exceed the waist requirement. You can:

-- ignore his waist because he's doing his job. This will convince enlisted members that there's a double standard.

-- relieve the commander for not meeting the waist requirement. A big loss in terms of replacing someone who spent a career being trained for command.

What do you do?

I've made a request to talk to the guy who made that decision. We'll see whether I get the chance.

CrustySMSgt
03-22-2013, 11:34 AM
You're a commander. You have a commander under you. He's done nothing wrong except exceed the waist requirement. You can:

-- ignore his waist because he's doing his job. This will convince enlisted members that there's a double standard.

-- relieve the commander for not meeting the waist requirement. A big loss in terms of replacing someone who spent a career being trained for command.

What do you do?

I've made a request to talk to the guy who made that decision. We'll see whether I get the chance.

As has been pointed out, there is a 3rd option and that is to acknowledge the failure and not do anything until he re-tests. wouldn't be a double standard, because for most, the first failure doesn't get you anything but a referal EPR/OPR is timed wrong. But I guess that does lead to the next question... should a commander be in command with a referal OPR?

While it would be embarassing for the commander, this could easily have been turned into a teaching moment for all. If he accepted his failure and got his boss to agree, he could have remained in command, publically acknowledged his failure, and then demonstrated how to overcome a failure. I could see that if he was waived and was still under 39", or even barely busted at 39.5". Now if he came in at 40"+, it would be much harder to sell.

Will be interesting to see if you get a response. Good luck!

Shrike
03-22-2013, 01:17 PM
Actually, LeMay was a lot more complicated and caring than he is given credit for. It would be easy to tell you where you could read some stuff about LeMay that you haven't read elsewhere but then everybody would jump all over me again. The widely held conception of LeMay's personality is only partly right.

I knew you'd chime in on this one. :biggrin I used LeMay as an example for exactly two reasons: he got shit done and he was at times a bit on the chunky side.

imported_chipotleboy
03-22-2013, 01:50 PM
You're a commander. You have a commander under you. He's done nothing wrong except exceed the waist requirement. You can:

-- ignore his waist because he's doing his job. This will convince enlisted members that there's a double standard.

-- relieve the commander for not meeting the waist requirement. A big loss in terms of replacing someone who spent a career being trained for command.

What do you do?

I've made a request to talk to the guy who made that decision. We'll see whether I get the chance.

Back in the 90s when we had the random weigh-in, my group CC fired a squadron CC for busting the weight limit. I was in the room with the two of them and the section commander during the firing because I was the group exec. It was a very uncomfortable meeting. The squadron DO was delighted over the development because he was immediately elevated to Sq/CC in time for his O-6 board. Sort of like the Klingon Empire when you think of it.

Robert F. Dorr
03-22-2013, 02:04 PM
As has been pointed out, there is a 3rd option and that is to acknowledge the failure and not do anything until he re-tests. wouldn't be a double standard, because for most, the first failure doesn't get you anything but a referal EPR/OPR is timed wrong. But I guess that does lead to the next question... should a commander be in command with a referal OPR?

While it would be embarassing for the commander, this could easily have been turned into a teaching moment for all. If he accepted his failure and got his boss to agree, he could have remained in command, publically acknowledged his failure, and then demonstrated how to overcome a failure. I could see that if he was waived and was still under 39", or even barely busted at 39.5". Now if he came in at 40"+, it would be much harder to sell.

Will be interesting to see if you get a response. Good luck!

You make some very good points which will be very helpful if I am able to do an interview about this.

Shrike
03-22-2013, 02:07 PM
As has been pointed out, there is a 3rd option and that is to acknowledge the failure and not do anything until he re-tests. wouldn't be a double standard, because for most, the first failure doesn't get you anything but a referal EPR/OPR is timed wrong. But I guess that does lead to the next question... should a commander be in command with a referal OPR?

While it would be embarassing for the commander, this could easily have been turned into a teaching moment for all. If he accepted his failure and got his boss to agree, he could have remained in command, publically acknowledged his failure, and then demonstrated how to overcome a failure. I could see that if he was waived and was still under 39", or even barely busted at 39.5". Now if he came in at 40"+, it would be much harder to sell.

Will be interesting to see if you get a response. Good luck!
I think that would be a great thing to see. The problem is that meanwhile there are enlisted folks under him getting referral EPRs for the same thing the CC did. And that referral has long-term consequences.

SENDBILLMONEY
03-22-2013, 02:11 PM
As has been pointed out, there is a 3rd option and that is to acknowledge the failure and not do anything until he re-tests. wouldn't be a double standard, because for most, the first failure doesn't get you anything but a referal EPR/OPR is timed wrong. But I guess that does lead to the next question... should a commander be in command with a referal OPR?

While it would be embarassing for the commander, this could easily have been turned into a teaching moment for all. If he accepted his failure and got his boss to agree, he could have remained in command, publically acknowledged his failure, and then demonstrated how to overcome a failure. I could see that if he was waived and was still under 39", or even barely busted at 39.5". Now if he came in at 40"+, it would be much harder to sell.

Will be interesting to see if you get a response. Good luck!

I respectfully disagree. How do he and his subordinate commanders maintain good order and discipline if he remains in command of people held to a standard he failed to meet?

If he busts tape and remains in command, it makes a mockery of any fitness-related administrative actions imposed on those under his command. Any decision he makes in that realm would be viewed with skepticism.

How does he discharge, demote, or sign off on a career-ending performance report on someone who failed to meet the same standard he failed to meet? It says "this standard we both failed to meet is so important that I'm taking harsher action against you than I had taken against me." How do his subordinate commanders look their people in the eye and say "this standard is important" when their boss hasn't met it?

How does he disapprove fitness program adverse actions on appeal in deserving cases? It would say to some that he's excessively lenient on fitness issues because he busted tape.

The teachable moment is the one that happened. The Air Force has a standard for its personnel. A commander was relieved for failing to meet it. That tells people under the 2-star who relieved him that fitness is serious business and no one is bulletproof.

technomage1
03-22-2013, 04:34 PM
You're a commander. You have a commander under you. He's done nothing wrong except exceed the waist requirement. You can:

-- ignore his waist because he's doing his job. This will convince enlisted members that there's a double standard.

-- relieve the commander for not meeting the waist requirement. A big loss in terms of replacing someone who spent a career being trained for command.

What do you do?

I've made a request to talk to the guy who made that decision. We'll see whether I get the chance.

If you get the chance ask him what he'd do if one of his CCs was 15 minutes late to work. Or his trousers became unbloused. Or he forgot to initial a document properly. Are those firing offenses too? What makes PT so darn special that it equates to losing a nuclear weapon over CONUS in terms of punishment? And you're punished worse for that than a DUI?

Every time I think this PT nonsense has finally gone too far and surely, surely it will not get any worse - it goes and gets worse.

JD2780
03-22-2013, 06:30 PM
Seems pretty stand up to me. To bad.

Pullinteeth
03-22-2013, 06:38 PM
This seems to be a very interesting development.

(Click Below)
http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2013/03/air-force-pt-colonel-bush-fair-just-new-032213

Here is his final statement made:
“I think the airmen need to know it doesn’t matter whether you have one stripe [or] you’ve got bars, stars, leaves or eagles; you are accountable to meet the Air Force standards,” he said."

I thought there was a certian amount of irony in this statement;

“I’m always confident that I can pass situps, pushups and run; I never had a problem with that, but I’ve been a big guy all my life,” Bush said. “I’m not a string bean, but I think I’m prepared to do what my Air Force and nation ask me to do — however, in this particular situation, I did not meet the standard, and so I have to step down as the commander.”

JD2780
03-22-2013, 06:48 PM
I am no grammar police, but I believe you're looking for the word "too."

Yup, typing off of my ipad with a new keyboard. I've been screwing up words all day. Although, that one is one of my many screw ups without the keyboard excuse.

Stalwart
03-22-2013, 07:19 PM
Below segment from the PT AFI shows how it holds O and E to a different set of punishments, as evident in the parenthesis.

Most of those differences deal with promotion which are different for enlisted service members and officers. Officer promotions are controlled under Title 10 and the legal authority to both promote and reduce is not at the local commander level. Title 10 Section 815 actually specifically states what an officer exercising Non Judicial Punishment authority can do to officers and enlisted personnel.

So, it is different, but not because of an Air Force (or Army, Navy or Marine Corps) rule, it is different because of public law.

Stalwart
03-22-2013, 08:08 PM
Very well spoken Sir, allow me to rephrase. The PT AFI conforms to public law in its different spanks for different ranks appliance.

In this case it looks like the first time failure of the PT measurement and the subsequent relief of command will (effectively) end the career of a officer. If he was a midgrade officer it might not have the same career ending impact since he would not be relieved of command.

I was NJP’d and reduced twice when I was enlisted and recovered pretty effectively from that. Had I been an officer at the time I would not have been able to have been reduced, but would have never been promoted or retained for further service. Having been on both sides of the fence and experienced NJP as a junior Marine, I do feel it is absolutely possible for an enlisted service member to recover from administrative action – it is much more difficult for an officer.

JD2780
03-22-2013, 08:19 PM
In this case it looks like the first time failure of the PT measurement and the subsequent relief of command will (effectively) end the career of a officer. If he was a midgrade officer it might not have the same career ending impact since he would not be relieved of command.

I was NJP’d and reduced twice when I was enlisted and recovered pretty effectively from that. Had I been an officer at the time I would not have been able to have been reduced, but would have never been promoted or retained for further service. Having been on both sides of the fence and experienced NJP as a junior Marine, I do feel it is absolutely possible for an enlisted service member to recover from administrative action – it is much more difficult for an officer.

With that said, the earlier you receive your NJP, the better your chances of recovery.

Stalwart
03-22-2013, 08:34 PM
With that said, the earlier you receive your NJP, the better your chances of recovery.

Completely agree.

If you get it early enough you can recover. If you get it late enough usually people say "he has done enough time, let him retire". If you are in between it can be (depending on the situation) very difficult -- but not impossible.

JD2780
03-22-2013, 08:39 PM
Completely agree.

If you get it early enough you can recover. If you get it late enough usually people say "he has done enough time, let him retire". If you are in between it can be (depending on the situation) very difficult -- but not impossible.

Exactly, E-5/6 can recover with the proper dedication and drive. However, if he pouts and acts like the victim than hes never going to make it. Oh well. I just made a practice of not getting them.

strataboomer
03-23-2013, 02:50 AM
Yes, I retired a TSgt, and you have shown yourself as an elitest asshole.



Not at all an elitest....just someone who studied his ass off. I have seen many senior TSgt's...in fact I worked for one and he PCS'd and then I moved to the same base. He soon worked for me....a great individual but a NCO that had reached his fullest potential at the rank of TSgt.

CrustySMSgt
03-23-2013, 04:39 AM
I respectfully disagree. How do he and his subordinate commanders maintain good order and discipline if he remains in command of people held to a standard he failed to meet?

If he busts tape and remains in command, it makes a mockery of any fitness-related administrative actions imposed on those under his command. Any decision he makes in that realm would be viewed with skepticism.

How does he discharge, demote, or sign off on a career-ending performance report on someone who failed to meet the same standard he failed to meet? It says "this standard we both failed to meet is so important that I'm taking harsher action against you than I had taken against me." How do his subordinate commanders look their people in the eye and say "this standard is important" when their boss hasn't met it?

How does he disapprove fitness program adverse actions on appeal in deserving cases? It would say to some that he's excessively lenient on fitness issues because he busted tape.

The teachable moment is the one that happened. The Air Force has a standard for its personnel. A commander was relieved for failing to meet it. That tells people under the 2-star who relieved him that fitness is serious business and no one is bulletproof.

If you read the entire thread, you'll see I agree with you comletely. My post was merely pointing out another alternative to RFD's two options. Didn't mean I agree that is what should have been done. :)


If you get the chance ask him what he'd do if one of his CCs was 15 minutes late to work. Or his trousers became unbloused. Or he forgot to initial a document properly. Are those firing offenses too? What makes PT so darn special that it equates to losing a nuclear weapon over CONUS in terms of punishment? And you're punished worse for that than a DUI?

Every time I think this PT nonsense has finally gone too far and surely, surely it will not get any worse - it goes and gets worse.

I have no doubt if a Wg/CC got a DUI the result would be the same. Again, we're talking about a commander, not a junior officer. The bar is higher, as it should be.

efmbman
03-23-2013, 01:17 PM
You're a commander. You have a commander under you. He's done nothing wrong except exceed the waist requirement. You can:

-- ignore his waist because he's doing his job. This will convince enlisted members that there's a double standard.

-- relieve the commander for not meeting the waist requirement. A big loss in terms of replacing someone who spent a career being trained for command.

What do you do?

Here's the answer:


...in this particular situation, I did not meet the standard, and so I have to step down as the commander.”[/I]

Simple. No drama. I always thought the military was a great career because so much guess-work is removed by regulations. As long as one can read at an 8th grade level, success will usually occur.

He did not meet the standard. Discipline and standards are far more important the loss of one person for administrative reasons.

I remember when I reported as a newly pinned NCO to my first assignment to Germany. The duty roster was totally messed up and was run by using email notifications. Soldiers were not reporting at the precribed times, they were not in the proper uniform, and they were not briefed on their responsibilities. The fact that email was used to notify troops of duty assignments and changes was unacceptable. What if a troop just decided not to check email? What if the email was not working? I asked the First Sergeant (1SG) what was going on since 8 of my soldiers were included on this duty roster. He told me that is how he ran the duty roster and if I thought I could do better I was welcome to it.

It took me about 20 minutes to un-screw it. Why? The regulation describes how to make a duty roster and I followed it. In fact, at the time (~AUG 2000) the Army reg for duty rosters was about 3 pages long. One of those pages was a sample form. Too easy. The duty was created and posted for all to see. Soldiers were required to check the duty roster daily for changes. It was their responsiblity to do so and they knew it. More importantly, they did it. Failure to report dropped off to zero. Soldiers were informed and appreciated the attention that I gave to this important mission.

My point is that everyone has an opinion on how things should be decided and often those opinions conflict with doctrine and regulation. We are all free to have opinions, but when it comes down to being a uniformed professional, opinions that contradict doctrine and regulations are not good for the military. They lead to confusing information and example for the newer and younger troops that expect to look at their leaders to see what right looks like. When the junior troops take the example of the leader and do the wrong thing, these same leaders will write them up and punish them. And then we wonder why there is so much apathy and discontent in the ranks. It is a self-fullfilling prophesy.

Quixotic
03-23-2013, 03:24 PM
Something about this story doesn't add up...

Was this guy drunk on the Kool-aid and decided to fall on his sword...?

Or is there some dirty laundry out there and this is how he leaves and everyone saves face...?

Something is not adding up here.

Chief_KO
03-23-2013, 03:36 PM
IMO he was destined for a star. Looking into the future he saw what that would be like and did not like that future. He may have always had an issue with his waist (based upon the articles I have read), and he failed this test by 2 inches. He probably had great empathy towards any Airmen he had to discipline for PT failures (especially waist) and probably had a personal opinion regarding that test component that differs from the AFI.

Let me add a disclaimer now: If there is ANYONE who seriously and honestly agrees with EVERY SINGLE part of any AFI or other guidance, please step forward and introduce yourself. But as we all know, disagreeing with policy does not excuse anyone from enforcing the policy until such policy is changed.

Back to point: IMO he knew he was going to fail, probably even told his commander and the wing vice to prep them. He fell on his sword for personal/family reasons and to bring public scrutiny to the current testing system. History have shown us a few examples of that level of sacrifice...Gen Billy Mitchell & Gen Ronald Fogleman to cite two of my favorite examples.

I hope there is no dirty laundry out there on the Colonel, I would like to think he did this with the best of intentions for all.

technomage1
03-24-2013, 05:11 AM
If you read the entire thread, you'll see I agree with you comletely. My post was merely pointing out another alternative to RFD's two options. Didn't mean I agree that is what should have been done. :)



I have no doubt if a Wg/CC got a DUI the result would be the same. Again, we're talking about a commander, not a junior officer. The bar is higher, as it should be.

Not for this guy. http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2010/04/airforce_dui_general_042610w/

CrustySMSgt
03-24-2013, 03:42 PM
Not for this guy. Www.airforcetimes.com/news/2010/04/airforce_dui_general_042610w/

How are his results any different? His career is over. He was redirected from a job that would have probably gotten him another star to a dead end job. The Col could have stayed in and done 5 more years as an O6, though he would have never been given a command again. The Col is the one who decided to retire.

JD2780
03-24-2013, 07:07 PM
How are his results any different? His career is over. He was redirected from a job that would have probably gotten him another star to a dead end job. The Col could have stayed in and done 5 more years as an O6, though he would have never been given a command again. The Col is the one who decided to retire.

The Gen didnt have the respect for the uniform. He should've been reduced one pay grade and retired. I lived in vegas during this and he could've killed my family.

Robert F. Dorr
03-26-2013, 01:05 AM
Not for this guy. Www.airforcetimes.com/news/2010/04/airforce_dui_general_042610w/

Does anyone believe this was too severe? In other developed countries, when you get busted for drinking and driving you go directly into the slammer. That's why they have almost no problem of traffic deaths and injuries caused by alcohol. This wasn't severe. This was lenient.

technomage1
03-26-2013, 01:11 AM
Does anyone believe this was too severe? In other developed countries, when you get busted for drinking and driving you go directly into the slammer. That's why they have almost no problem of traffic deaths and injuries caused by alcohol. This wasn't severe. This was lenient.

Oh, I 100% agree. Didn't mean to imply otherwise. But he wasn't removed from command for it, he was allowed to continue with a planned move. Contrast that to the PT failure. Now, one ate a few too many whoppers and one downed way too many drinks. The first may only kill himself with his diet one day. The other, could have killed others when he drove. They are not the same, the DUI was much worse, yet in the end the punishment was more lenient. And that's nuts to me.

Robert F. Dorr
03-26-2013, 01:51 AM
Oh, I 100% agree. Didn't mean to imply otherwise. But he wasn't removed from command for it, he was allowed to continue with a planned move. Contrast that to the PT failure. Now, one ate a few too many whoppers and one downed way too many drinks. The first may only kill himself with his diet one day. The other, could have killed others when he drove. They are not the same, the DUI was much worse, yet in the end the punishment was more lenient. And that's nuts to me.

We've chosen to allow drinking and driving offenses to occur, just as we chose to allow people to text while driving. Ever since I got a car in which I sit fairly high up, relative to everyone else, I've been able to look down at other drivers. It's terrifying to see them texting while moving along. It truly scares the daylights out of me. But it happens because we allow it.

The issue of the colonel with the waist is a little more difficult to sort out.

grimreaper
03-26-2013, 01:59 AM
We've chosen to allow drinking and driving offenses to occur, just as we chose to allow people to text while driving. Ever since I got a car in which I sit fairly high up, relative to everyone else, I've been able to look down at other drivers. It's terrifying to see them texting while moving along. It truly scares the daylights out of me. But it happens because we allow it.

The issue of the colonel with the waist is a little more difficult to sort out.

Don't worry Bob...I'm sure texting while driving will soon be illegal in every state as well (as it should be). The problem is that it's much harder to prove.

PT GOD
03-26-2013, 02:39 AM
The issue of the colonel with the waist is a little more difficult to sort out.

aints nothing difficults to sort out about its in my oponions. if you got a big waistes and let's face it anybody over 39 inches is morbidly obese, that means you aints even trying for the whole year, dats mean, you have been failings in your responsibilites all year to stay physically fit, to me, that's worse than a one times dui, way worse

Barberakb
03-26-2013, 05:37 AM
Ok, am I the only one that is tired of the PT demi god. At first it was funny but now...

Robert F. Dorr
03-26-2013, 08:13 AM
Still trying to grasp the weight-measurement thing. It's nuts. Why not ditch both PT and performance ratings and simply evaluate someone on whether he or she is doing the job?

technomage1
03-26-2013, 09:37 AM
Still trying to grasp the weight-measurement thing. It's nuts. Why not ditch both PT and performance ratings and simply evaluate someone on whether he or she is doing the job?

You'll get no argument from me on the stupidity of the waist measurement. I lost 20 lbs but gained an 1.5" last time I was taped. It's not consistent. It depends solely on who tapes you.

Performance ratings are supposed to evaluate how we'll someone is doing a job, at least I thought they were. How are they different to you? What would you suggest instead?

RobotChicken
03-26-2013, 11:22 PM
:clock I suppose everyone should 'shoot'; Guys I mean for a 37" to be 'SAFE' Side (pun intended) to pass. Then put their health in jeopardy for 30 days by starving yourselves down to that 'magical' number; I know..create a health risk to be AF Healthy, but working with 'less for less' in 10+hrs a day plus after hours (didn't we ALL Volunteer for military service?) volunteering,told,bake sales(haven't figured..'pun'..that one out)and studies for advancement,who the heck has time to work out? What ever happened to 'leisure time'? WAIT!! They sent you 'TDY' to make up for that in 'BFE'! :dance 'Meanwhile activities at the O'club this evening include.....' :cheer2

Robert F. Dorr
03-27-2013, 12:42 AM
You'll get no argument from me on the stupidity of the waist measurement. I lost 20 lbs but gained an 1.5" last time I was taped. It's not consistent. It depends solely on who tapes you.

Performance ratings are supposed to evaluate how we'll someone is doing a job, at least I thought they were. How are they different to you? What would you suggest instead?

What would I suggest instead of performance ratings? Nothing. If there were a broad range of performance variables within the Air Force, they might be of some use. But the Air Force has very few superstars or serious laggards. Most people are doing a pretty good job. Any performance reporting system is going to be subjective and inequitable. Here is what the Air Force needs to know about an active duty member:

1. Are you in good health?

2. Are you doing a good job?

3. Should you be promoted?

So let's develop a new form about the size of a 3x5" index card with the answers to these three "yes" or "no" questions. As for deciding whom to promote, if force structure needs permit, promote everybody at the same time. If not, use some criterion other than fitness or performance.

Robert F. Dorr
03-27-2013, 12:51 AM
aints nothing difficults to sort out about its in my oponions. if you got a big waistes and let's face it anybody over 39 inches is morbidly obese, that means you aints even trying for the whole year, dats mean, you have been failings in your responsibilites all year to stay physically fit, to me, that's worse than a one times dui, way worse

If you look down and see your stomach instead of your toes, is that a bad thing?

RobotChicken
03-27-2013, 12:56 AM
If you look down and see your stomach instead of your toes, is that a bad thing?
:biggrin As long as it is YOUR tool shed Mr.Dorr!!:faint

CrustySMSgt
03-27-2013, 11:08 AM
What would I suggest instead of performance ratings? Nothing. If there were a broad range of performance variables within the Air Force, they might be of some use. But the Air Force has very few superstars or serious laggards. Most people are doing a pretty good job. Any performance reporting system is going to be subjective and inequitable. Here is what the Air Force needs to know about an active duty member:

1. Are you in good health?

2. Are you doing a good job?

3. Should you be promoted?

So let's develop a new form about the size of a 3x5" index card with the answers to these three "yes" or "no" questions. As for deciding whom to promote, if force structure needs permit, promote everybody at the same time. If not, use some criterion other than fitness or performance.

Even your questions are subjective... "good" can mean a lot of things.

And why would you reward people doing a "good" job over those going a GREAT job?

thread_cop
03-27-2013, 02:48 PM
Even your questions are subjective... "good" can mean a lot of things.

And why would you reward people doing a "good" job over those going a GREAT job?

Problem is I may think my guy IS doing a great job but you feel he's only doing a good job. If there is a "set" standard for what's good and what's great, what's the point of having me be a supervisor or rate my troop at all? The problem is that two different people will NEVER have the same definition of "great".

If we, as supervisors, are supposed to rate based on standards of our leadership, then why rate at all? Why not just let me write the bullets and then have the "leaders" rate. It's too much of a contradiction to be a valid rating system.

It's impossible for two different supervisors to rate two different troops exactly the same way. So who's to say the "good" job guy is getting promoted over the "great" job guy if I feel my guy (the guy you only think is good) is "great"? There is NO way to be objective.

SomeRandomGuy
03-27-2013, 03:05 PM
Problem is I may think my guy IS doing a great job but you feel he's only doing a good job. If there is a "set" standard for what's good and what's great, what's the point of having me be a supervisor or rate my troop at all? The problem is that two different people will NEVER have the same definition of "great".

If we, as supervisors, are supposed to rate based on standards of our leadership, then why rate at all? Why not just let me write the bullets and then have the "leaders" rate. It's too much of a contradiction to be a valid rating system.

It's impossible for two different supervisors to rate two different troops exactly the same way. So who's to say the "good" job guy is getting promoted over the "great" job guy if I feel my guy (the guy you only think is good) is "great"? There is NO way to be objective.

This is why I say make a set hard standard (even if it is career field specific) and rate everybody based on it. I can only speak for Finance but here is how it could work in finance. Say a person works in customer service. The standard would be for that person to process an average of 30 documents or customer inquiries per day. If they meet that standard they are doing their job. If not then they are not. The supervisor would still play a role in evaluating the quality of work done and whether it should count towards the metric. This is how I always rated my people anyways which to me says it could work if adopted across the board. I would simply tell my troops what specific numbers they had to meet for a 5. They really could not complain if they didnt get the EPR they wanted. I could always show them theirs peers were meeting those standards and they were not so they would get a lower rating which ended up being 3 or 4.

thread_cop
03-27-2013, 03:13 PM
This is why I say make a set hard standard (even if it is career field specific) and rate everybody based on it. I can only speak for Finance but here is how it could work in finance. Say a person works in customer service. The standard would be for that person to process an average of 30 documents or customer inquiries per day. If they meet that standard they are doing their job. If not then they are not. The supervisor would still play a role in evaluating the quality of work done and whether it should count towards the metric. This is how I always rated my people anyways which to me says it could work if adopted across the board. I would simply tell my troops what specific numbers they had to meet for a 5. They really could not complain if they didnt get the EPR they wanted. I could always show them theirs peers were meeting those standards and they were not so they would get a lower rating which ended up being 3 or 4.

So the standard would have to be a base to base standard then, right? I mean, what if you were a finance guy that was at a base, or site, that didn't have the opportunity to process 30 documents? Then you've got a guy at a base with 10,000 people and they are pushing out 50 or 60. So we then run into the problem again of each office/shop needing to set their own standards.

Or, for instance, my shop. I can be at a base where we maintain 20 generators or a base where we maintain 150 generators. The base with 20 might have 8-10 people in the shop which means I have 2 people who take care of all the generators and 6-8 who are on other equipment. There is no way for each person to be rated by the same job standard. It's not possible.

Pullinteeth
03-27-2013, 03:33 PM
In this case it looks like the first time failure of the PT measurement and the subsequent relief of command will (effectively) end the career of a officer. If he was a midgrade officer it might not have the same career ending impact since he would not be relieved of command.

I was NJP’d and reduced twice when I was enlisted and recovered pretty effectively from that. Had I been an officer at the time I would not have been able to have been reduced, but would have never been promoted or retained for further service. Having been on both sides of the fence and experienced NJP as a junior Marine, I do feel it is absolutely possible for an enlisted service member to recover from administrative action – it is much more difficult for an officer.

That may have been true a decade ago but in today's AF, NJP=quick ticket out the door.

technomage1
03-27-2013, 04:16 PM
Even your questions are subjective... "good" can mean a lot of things.

And why would you reward people doing a "good" job over those going a GREAT job?

You beat me to it. What motivation is there to do a "great" job under the proposed system?

Not that the current system motivates me much. I'm capable of a lot more that I do at work. But why should I bust my butt when others who @ss kiss, spend days out from work doing volunteer stuff, and generally put themselves before service get ahead? I used to do a lot more, but years of being unnoticed because my work wasn't "visible" - even though it was important - gets to you.

One of the main reasons I will likely leave at 20 is at least in the civilian sector I'll be judged and compensated on my work and not my trouser size, BBQ organizing skills, or "self improvement".

Stalwart
03-27-2013, 06:05 PM
That may have been true a decade ago but in today's AF, NJP=quick ticket out the door.

Which is too bad. I saw Marines NJP'd for being 10 minutes late to a formation, improper uniform wear or for rust on their weapon. One of mine was for assault consummated by battery (bar fight) and the other was for insubordinate language to a senior officer.

NJP is supposed to be an administrative procedure for correcting minor infractions, short of the stigma of court martial. I still see Sailors recover, it is not always easy, but if a mentality has developed that NJP is a unrecoverable negative mark on a record, then it is now carrying the stigma of court martial; which means that the correction those minor discrepancies is now being completed in a non-regulated or defined manner ... or not done at all.

imported_CLSE
04-02-2013, 10:24 PM
Even your questions are subjective... "good" can mean a lot of things.

And why would you reward people doing a "good" job over those going a GREAT job?

Because they were recruited and trained to do "the job", not "a GREAT job".

If a guy is competent at his job, i.e., he makes sure that he knows how to do his job, knows the pertinent regs, etc, makes sure that he does the job right the first time and trains his subordinates to do the same, then he's doing exactly what he's supposed to be doing.

Marking him down in relation to somebody who just takes more interest in the job, participates in glee club or gets a 90 on his PT test is just BS.

efmbman
04-02-2013, 10:34 PM
Because they were recruited and trained to do "the job", not "a GREAT job".

The reward for doing the job is covered with the LES. Recognition in the form of awards/decoration, liberty, etc should be limited to those that exceed the standard. Meeting the standard is what keeps you employed, or it should be.

CrustySMSgt
04-03-2013, 07:13 AM
Which is too bad. I saw Marines NJP'd for being 10 minutes late to a formation, improper uniform wear or for rust on their weapon. One of mine was for assault consummated by battery (bar fight) and the other was for insubordinate language to a senior officer.

NJP is supposed to be an administrative procedure for correcting minor infractions, short of the stigma of court martial. I still see Sailors recover, it is not always easy, but if a mentality has developed that NJP is a unrecoverable negative mark on a record, then it is now carrying the stigma of court martial; which means that the correction those minor discrepancies is now being completed in a non-regulated or defined manner ... or not done at all.

It definitely sucks and defeats the rehabilitative intent of NJP... BUT when you start cutting people, it is an easy discriminator. If you've got to get rid of the guy who's got no marks against him or the guy who does, it's a no-brainer.


You beat me to it. What motivation is there to do a "great" job under the proposed system?

Not that the current system motivates me much. I'm capable of a lot more that I do at work. But why should I bust my butt when others who @ss kiss, spend days out from work doing volunteer stuff, and generally put themselves before service get ahead? I used to do a lot more, but years of being unnoticed because my work wasn't "visible" - even though it was important - gets to you.

Well said! But people just want to focus on the average guy "getting screwed."


Because they were recruited and trained to do "the job", not "a GREAT job".

If a guy is competent at his job, i.e., he makes sure that he knows how to do his job, knows the pertinent regs, etc, makes sure that he does the job right the first time and trains his subordinates to do the same, then he's doing exactly what he's supposed to be doing.

Marking him down in relation to somebody who just takes more interest in the job, participates in glee club or gets a 90 on his PT test is just BS.

There's the problem... When you look at a 5 as average and "mark down from there, what incentive is there to go above average if there is no where to "mark up" from a 5? I certainly don't think we can wake up tomorrow and everyone will agree a 3 is average, but technomage1 hot the nail on the head... currently there is ZERO incentive for anyone to bust their ass, because the best rating they can get equates to "average."

Pullinteeth
04-03-2013, 02:08 PM
It definitely sucks and defeats the rehabilitative intent of NJP... BUT when you start cutting people, it is an easy discriminator. If you've got to get rid of the guy who's got no marks against him or the guy who does, it's a no-brainer.

Ahhh but in that way, NJP is just as unfair as an EPR because what one Commander would give NJP for, another Commander may let slide with an LOC/LOA/LOR...so one gets the boot and another gets to stay....

raider8169
04-04-2013, 01:47 AM
Im think this was all a set up. The guy wanted to retire and used this as a stepping stone. His CC saw this as an opportunity to be seen as a hard ass and one who enforces the standards. In the end both get what they want and by the way the CC was owning up to it made it appear as if it was staged.

Banned
04-04-2013, 02:17 AM
Which is too bad. I saw Marines NJP'd for being 10 minutes late to a formation, improper uniform wear or for rust on their weapon. One of mine was for assault consummated by battery (bar fight) and the other was for insubordinate language to a senior officer.

NJP is supposed to be an administrative procedure for correcting minor infractions, short of the stigma of court martial. I still see Sailors recover, it is not always easy, but if a mentality has developed that NJP is a unrecoverable negative mark on a record, then it is now carrying the stigma of court martial; which means that the correction those minor discrepancies is now being completed in a non-regulated or defined manner ... or not done at all.

I really think its dependent on the times, and the manning requirements. I know a couple formers Marines from the 80s who say even then it could be really tough to reenlist with an NJP on your record - for what a second-hand story is worth.


Im think this was all a set up. The guy wanted to retire and used this as a steping stone. His CC saw this as an opertunity to be seen as a hard ass and one who enforces the statndards. In the end both get what they want and by the way the CC was owning up to it made it appear as if it was staged.

There's got to be easier ways out than public humiliation. And this on his record is going to make life difficult in the future... he's going to have to explain in every job interview for the rest of his life how this happened.

raider8169
04-04-2013, 04:20 AM
There's got to be easier ways out than public humiliation. And this on his record is going to make life difficult in the future... he's going to have to explain in every job interview for the rest of his life how this happened.

The guy is retiring as an O6, I wouldnt be too sure that he cares about applying for a job or that the interviewer would care that he was let go because his was a little round.

RobotChicken
04-04-2013, 04:33 AM
With his physical stature? Probably make him CEO.

imported_SergeantJack
04-04-2013, 06:34 PM
I'm torn on this thread. On one hand, I hate the PT program with every fiber of my being and despise how it victimizes people. On the other hand, this particular victim was a field grade officer and a commander, which means that he is part of the system that has victimized others.

Head asplode.

CrustySMSgt
04-05-2013, 06:21 AM
Im think this was all a set up. The guy wanted to retire and used this as a stepping stone. His CC saw this as an opportunity to be seen as a hard ass and one who enforces the standards. In the end both get what they want and by the way the CC was owning up to it made it appear as if it was staged.

He volunteered to retire, which means he was retirement eligible. If he wanted to quit, all he had to do was hit the button.



There's got to be easier ways out than public humiliation. And this on his record is going to make life difficult in the future... he's going to have to explain in every job interview for the rest of his life how this happened.

Guessing this won't be on his record, unless it was horrible timing on his part and he backed his test up to his OPR closeout. Even then, you're not requred to provide your EPRs/OPRs to prospective employers, so it shouldn't be an issue. And if it was... all he's got to do is show them his list of leadership accomplishments and experience, show them a story that showed he got fired because his waist was too big, and ask his prospective employed which is more important to them.

WeaponsTSGT
04-05-2013, 07:00 PM
Not at all an elitest....just someone who studied his ass off. I have seen many senior TSgt's...in fact I worked for one and he PCS'd and then I moved to the same base. He soon worked for me....a great individual but a NCO that had reached his fullest potential at the rank of TSgt.

You are an elitist. I sewed on MSgt at just under 17 years, and will not make SMSgt because it is a choice that I'm making, it's about priorities, and I'm not willing to give up my life/lifestyle to make a rank that won't matter in 3 years. Does that mean I've reached my potential? No it doesn't, it means I'm not taking a dick and balls in my mouth or climbing on the backs of others for a few more dollars in my paycheck. To say that you were promoted and that another had reached full potential is pure elitism just by the statement itself. You are what is wrong with the AF, and I've worked with so many others that have this same outlook, and look forward to putting this ever changing service (for the worst) behind me.

strataboomer
04-06-2013, 04:01 AM
You are an elitist. I sewed on MSgt at just under 17 years, and will not make SMSgt because it is a choice that I'm making, it's about priorities, and I'm not willing to give up my life/lifestyle to make a rank that won't matter in 3 years. Does that mean I've reached my potential? No it doesn't, it means I'm not taking a dick and balls in my mouth or climbing on the backs of others for a few more dollars in my paycheck. To say that you were promoted and that another had reached full potential is pure elitism just by the statement itself. You are what is wrong with the AF, and I've worked with so many others that have this same outlook, and look forward to putting this ever changing service (for the worst) behind me.

Thanks for your service.

CrustySMSgt
04-06-2013, 11:51 AM
You are an elitist. I sewed on MSgt at just under 17 years, and will not make SMSgt because it is a choice that I'm making, it's about priorities, and I'm not willing to give up my life/lifestyle to make a rank that won't matter in 3 years. Does that mean I've reached my potential? No it doesn't, it means I'm not taking a dick and balls in my mouth or climbing on the backs of others for a few more dollars in my paycheck. To say that you were promoted and that another had reached full potential is pure elitism just by the statement itself. You are what is wrong with the AF, and I've worked with so many others that have this same outlook, and look forward to putting this ever changing service (for the worst) behind me.

I'll refrain from name calling... someone's got to take the high road here. Your accusations on what it takes to get promoted is just as stereotypical as his "elitist" comment. If you were unable to demonstrate effective leadership and garner promotion without taking such actions, then the blame lies with you, not the system. Do the wrong people get promoted, of course they do, but there are also plenty who get promoted for the right reasons.

tiredretiredE7
04-06-2013, 03:15 PM
I'll refrain from name calling... someone's got to take the high road here. Your accusations on what it takes to get promoted is just as stereotypical as his "elitist" comment. If you were unable to demonstrate effective leadership and garner promotion without taking such actions, then the blame lies with you, not the system. Do the wrong people get promoted, of course they do, but there are also plenty who get promoted for the right reasons.

Crusty,

You call WPNSTSGT comments as stereotypical but the big picture is 3% get promoted to SMSgt. So if the 97% had the same opinion, would WPNSTSGT comments be stereotypical or FACT? Even if 50% of the 97% agreed with WPNSTSGT then there is a problem. I did know some great SMSgts and Chiefs over my career but the great ones were about 3%; the other SMSgts and Chiefs (97%), should not have been promoted past SSgt. I am with WPNSTSGT on his comment. DWWSD is one of the great Chiefs I wish I could have known during my career. Who knows, maybe WPNSTSGT and were the only two people in the entire AF who worked for substandard SMSgts and Chiefs.

DWWSWWD
04-06-2013, 04:04 PM
Does that mean I've reached my potential? No it doesn't, it means I'm not taking a dick and balls in my mouth or climbing on the backs of others for a few more dollars in my paycheck.

Ah, the old dick and balls promotion trick. Damn, I didn't think anyone elso knew about that.

WeaponsTSGT
04-06-2013, 05:03 PM
I'll refrain from name calling... someone's got to take the high road here. Your accusations on what it takes to get promoted is just as stereotypical as his "elitist" comment. If you were unable to demonstrate effective leadership and garner promotion without taking such actions, then the blame lies with you, not the system. Do the wrong people get promoted, of course they do, but there are also plenty who get promoted for the right reasons.

Okay so yeah dick/balls was a bit of an exaggeration, now it's time for you to also concede. Either you are blind as to what it takes or you are ashamed of what you actually had to do to make it. I see you used the phrase "demonstrate effective leadership" a phrase that is not descript enough to insure that people know what you are talking about, the use of such gray phrases is the reason that everyone outside the circle assumes that there is actually gargling of testicles. The blame does lie with the promotee, I never said it didn't, but don't for one second fill these up and comers heads with notions that they'll be promoted solely on their ability to promote, just as this won't be the deciding factor as to if they'll keep their job. Again you said "right" reason to get promoted, please tell us what the right reason is, and include all factors that one must do to get promoted to senior. Just so you know, heading the local special olympics when one doesn't want to do it, or taking a Math class that one doesn't want to do is not showing leadership, that is taking it in the mouth, and this MUST be done to get promoted. Also doing something that you know isn't the best decision for your people and you do it to be a team player because everyone else outside your work area sees it differently is stepping on their backs. Please you tell me you didn't do these things to get promoted and I'll call you a liar.

Deploy Me Please
04-06-2013, 06:21 PM
I have to agree with you, weapons. I did have a dick/balls moment. I took a speech CLEP and applied for my CCAF. All of my other base and community stuff was either stuff I wanted to do (Boy Scouts, Church related)...or stuff I had to do (Honor Guard). At least I didn't have to head up any bake sales or car washes.

JD2780
04-07-2013, 01:07 AM
The AF doesn't have leaders. It has managers. Not leadership but managership

JD2780
04-07-2013, 02:11 AM
:hat Google 'leadership'....can't post it here...would 'kill' MT compete web site. lol

Leaders are like eagles. We dont have them here. We have folks in leadership roles, but not leaders.

Deploy Me Please
04-07-2013, 03:38 AM
Management is easier to measure, teach and do. Leadership is very personality & situation dependent. Both are important. Great leaders are very rare and will likely get lost or disillusioned in a fiscally constrained and structured environment. Especially without leaders throughout the chain working the system to develop & promote them.

CrustySMSgt
04-07-2013, 08:26 AM
I have to agree with you, weapons. I did have a dick/balls moment. I took a speech CLEP and applied for my CCAF. All of my other base and community stuff was either stuff I wanted to do (Boy Scouts, Church related)...or stuff I had to do (Honor Guard). At least I didn't have to head up any bake sales or car washes.


Okay so yeah dick/balls was a bit of an exaggeration, now it's time for you to also concede. Either you are blind as to what it takes or you are ashamed of what you actually had to do to make it. I see you used the phrase "demonstrate effective leadership" a phrase that is not descript enough to insure that people know what you are talking about, the use of such gray phrases is the reason that everyone outside the circle assumes that there is actually gargling of testicles. The blame does lie with the promotee, I never said it didn't, but don't for one second fill these up and comers heads with notions that they'll be promoted solely on their ability to promote, just as this won't be the deciding factor as to if they'll keep their job. Again you said "right" reason to get promoted, please tell us what the right reason is, and include all factors that one must do to get promoted to senior. Just so you know, heading the local special olympics when one doesn't want to do it, or taking a Math class that one doesn't want to do is not showing leadership, that is taking it in the mouth, and this MUST be done to get promoted. Also doing something that you know isn't the best decision for your people and you do it to be a team player because everyone else outside your work area sees it differently is stepping on their backs. Please you tell me you didn't do these things to get promoted and I'll call you a liar.

A) I could give a #$%^&* what you call me... you are a guy sitting behind a keyboard who has your own opinions and experiences and doesn't know a thing about me, so call me what you will, I promise I won't be crying myself to sleep at night because a random stranger on the internet called me a lair.

B ) If you call improving yourself and meeting established standards "dick & balls moments" then nothing I say is going to change your opinion. Hate to burst your bubble, but getting promoted on the outside comes with the same requirements to get training, meet timelines, and demonstrate leadership. Not many companies who are going to promote you in to their mid-level management (not sure what the right term would equate to SMSgt/CMSgt in the civilian world, so that was my shot in the dark) without expecting you to stand out from the crowd.

C) I sat on a SMSgt promotion board. I looked at 1,200-ish MSgt records (~12,000 EPRs). Looking across an entire functional area it becomes easy to see who's in it for themselves, who tried to shoot their wad in a single year to get promoted, and who has a record of sustained superior performance that makes them stand out.

I won't bother to answer your "Again you said "right" reason to get promoted, please tell us what the right reason is, and include all factors that one must do to get promoted to senior" comment, because if you cared, there are 100 threads on the topic.. but to me it sounds like you've got all the answers.

efmbman
04-07-2013, 12:53 PM
C) I sat on a SMSgt promotion board. I looked at 1,200-ish MSgt records (~12,000 EPRs). Looking across an entire functional area it becomes easy to see who's in it for themselves, who tried to shoot their wad in a single year to get promoted, and who has a record of sustained superior performance that makes them stand out.

In the Army, we would get annual briefings from our senior NCOs regarding what was seen at the promotion boards, and your statement sums it up well. Most people forget (or choose to ignore) that the board members see a lot more than just the last year of performance. I remember most of my Command Sergeants Major said the same exact phrase: "sustained superior performance". Another CSM was much more candid by saying, "Just like with sex, we can tell who is faking it."

CrustySMSgt
04-07-2013, 01:52 PM
In the Army, we would get annual briefings from our senior NCOs regarding what was seen at the promotion boards, and your statement sums it up well. Most people forget (or choose to ignore) that the board members see a lot more than just the last year of performance. I remember most of my Command Sergeants Major said the same exact phrase: "sustained superior performance". Another CSM was much more candid by saying, "Just like with sex, we can tell who is faking it."

I'll have to remember that line! While they've kinda cracked down on how much detail you can actually give about your experience on the board, there are plenty of places this brief is given. I've briefed proffesional development events, Top IIIs, and have even given this brief here at my deployed location 4 times. For those that want the infomration, it is out there.

JD2780
04-07-2013, 02:04 PM
Management is easier to measure, teach and do. Leadership is very personality & situation dependent. Both are important. Great leaders are very rare and will likely get lost or disillusioned in a fiscally constrained and structured environment. Especially without leaders throughout the chain working the system to develop & promote them.

When we had giant budgets we had shitty leaders.

Chief_KO
04-07-2013, 02:08 PM
Exactly right Crusty, the information is out there for those that want to listen. Funny to continue to hear the "outrage" over the
"unfairness" of the 43-year old WAPS program. And, the information is getting out to more and more people more and more earlier. I remember when you did not receive your first PFE manual till you became a TIG eligible E4, now of course EVERYBODY (even the O's and civ's) have access. We have strayed way off topic...

Deploy Me Please
04-07-2013, 02:42 PM
B ) If you call improving yourself and meeting established standards "dick & balls moments" then nothing I say is going to change your opinion.

Ha....that was a tongue in cheek comment, crusty. It was an easy, and stupid thing to put off for so long on "principle". So what if I have an Associates and Bachelors that apply more to my job...the AF requires a CCAF. I sure taught the AF a lesson by not doing it for so long...they could have had me as a SMSgt years ago. Suckas.

Deploy Me Please
04-07-2013, 03:10 PM
When we had giant budgets we had shitty leaders.
Yea...we haven't had any real leaders since the good old TQM days. I am still holding out hope for Gen Welsh.

WeaponsTSGT
04-07-2013, 05:52 PM
Exactly right Crusty, the information is out there for those that want to listen. Funny to continue to hear the "outrage" over the
"unfairness" of the 43-year old WAPS program. And, the information is getting out to more and more people more and more earlier. I remember when you did not receive your first PFE manual till you became a TIG eligible E4, now of course EVERYBODY (even the O's and civ's) have access. We have strayed way off topic...

Nobody said it was unfair, I said I was not going to change my priorities in order to do it, I've already completed my CCAF, actually two of them since I was also a recruiter and have had them from 9 years. It's funny how all this is apparent to everyone expect those that have made SMSgt/CMSgt, again of course those people aren't going to admit that they folded even though they previously thought different, before it became about them. I also don't need someone to preach to me about how it is on the outside world, I joined the AF with two kids, a wife, two car payments, and a mortgage. I lived that life and look forward to it once again. You have blinders on if you think civilian employers require the same of their employees because they don't. You are neither required to continue education or volunteer your off time to build a house for a homeless family I couldn't care less about. Keep regurgitating that garbage about bettering yourself, not one person is better for having taken a Science CLEP, and it sure as hell doesn't make you a leader. I guess the AF is doomed to continue on this path until we have people that are willing to represent what they think is right for the AF and their subordinates. Do you think that what you thought as a front line supervisor in now somehow wrong because you were told that by existing senior NCO's? The crusty NCO's are the reason we are doing so much with so few, they are the yes men who said "Yes sir we can accomplish that", and then did so by knowingly cutting corners so they could get promoted. It's the same mentality that keeps elected leaders in Washington even after they didn't do what was in the best interest of their constituents right in front of our faces. I would stay around if the pieces were in place for change, but they are not, so I will not stay

MACHINE666
04-07-2013, 09:21 PM
I think it's high time someone gave a damn during their PT test, pulled their shorts down, and left a Dirty Holstrom on the UHM when they're doing their push-ups or something.

"Fail ME on my PT test for being half an inch over on my waist measurement, will yah?!?"

:D :D :D :D :D

CrustySMSgt
04-08-2013, 06:18 AM
Nobody said it was unfair, I said I was not going to change my priorities in order to do it, I've already completed my CCAF, actually two of them since I was also a recruiter and have had them from 9 years. It's funny how all this is apparent to everyone expect those that have made SMSgt/CMSgt, again of course those people aren't going to admit that they folded even though they previously thought different, before it became about them. I also don't need someone to preach to me about how it is on the outside world, I joined the AF with two kids, a wife, two car payments, and a mortgage. I lived that life and look forward to it once again. You have blinders on if you think civilian employers require the same of their employees because they don't. You are neither required to continue education or volunteer your off time to build a house for a homeless family I couldn't care less about. Keep regurgitating that garbage about bettering yourself, not one person is better for having taken a Science CLEP, and it sure as hell doesn't make you a leader. I guess the AF is doomed to continue on this path until we have people that are willing to represent what they think is right for the AF and their subordinates. Do you think that what you thought as a front line supervisor in now somehow wrong because you were told that by existing senior NCO's? The crusty NCO's are the reason we are doing so much with so few, they are the yes men who said "Yes sir we can accomplish that", and then did so by knowingly cutting corners so they could get promoted. It's the same mentality that keeps elected leaders in Washington even after they didn't do what was in the best interest of their constituents right in front of our faces. I would stay around if the pieces were in place for change, but they are not, so I will not stay

Glad you've got all the answers... good luck to ya!

I can't begin to count how many PMs I get asking for advice on issues folks are dealing with locally and have no one there to go through. I also frequently get emails from troops who have stayed in contact with me, so again, I'm not going to lose any sleep over what a stranger on the internet thinks of me...

Tak
04-08-2013, 06:42 AM
Glad you've got all the answers... good luck to ya!

I can't begin to count how many PMs I get asking for advice on issues folks are dealing with locally and have no one there to go through. I also frequently get emails from troops who have stayed in contact with me, so again, I'm not going to lose any sleep over what a stranger on the internet thinks of me...

Bullshit...i've caused you many a sleepless night with my vulgar yet witty comments.

http://www.greenewave.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Sleepless-Nights.jpg

WeaponsTSGT
04-08-2013, 05:54 PM
Glad you've got all the answers... good luck to ya!

I can't begin to count how many PMs I get asking for advice on issues folks are dealing with locally and have no one there to go through. I also frequently get emails from troops who have stayed in contact with me, so again, I'm not going to lose any sleep over what a stranger on the internet thinks of me...

There goes that self promoting elitism again, "Look at me, there are no SNCO's at other bases for people to go to", let me guess the advice they wanted was how to get promoted, too many people are concerned about promotion. This was never directed at you, but since you took offense to it I'm guessing it hit a nerve. You have lost sight of where you came from if you think I'm wrong, you ask the SSgt/TSgt running the shift or the AMN getting his hands dirty what the problem is, and then look at what issues senior leadership is working, if it's not the issues that JR NCO's and AMN are having then that's a big problem. The AF teaches leadership from the prospective that you are herding sheep or cow's and that if you use your tools that you've been given they will follow. I'm tired of seeing the younger guys treated like idiots, you have to be part of that group that you've been put in charge of. The problem as I see it is that very few will say when something is broken, because those that are currently in charge of these promotions, and writing EPR's will not rate/promote somebody that does this. If it's broke say it's broke and let's fix it. I work in an integrated unit with Reservists(ARTS) and their processes and relationships with coworkers is so much better then the active side.

CrustySMSgt
04-09-2013, 06:03 AM
There goes that self promoting elitism again, "Look at me, there are no SNCO's at other bases for people to go to", let me guess the advice they wanted was how to get promoted, too many people are concerned about promotion. This was never directed at you, but since you took offense to it I'm guessing it hit a nerve. You have lost sight of where you came from if you think I'm wrong, you ask the SSgt/TSgt running the shift or the AMN getting his hands dirty what the problem is, and then look at what issues senior leadership is working, if it's not the issues that JR NCO's and AMN are having then that's a big problem. The AF teaches leadership from the prospective that you are herding sheep or cow's and that if you use your tools that you've been given they will follow. I'm tired of seeing the younger guys treated like idiots, you have to be part of that group that you've been put in charge of. The problem as I see it is that very few will say when something is broken, because those that are currently in charge of these promotions, and writing EPR's will not rate/promote somebody that does this. If it's broke say it's broke and let's fix it. I work in an integrated unit with Reservists(ARTS) and their processes and relationships with coworkers is so much better then the active side.

All right... I'll refrain from my refraining from name calling... Since you know so much about me, I'll tell you what I know about you: You're obviously just another bitter guy who's been passed up for promotion and blame the world for your shortcomings. Everyone that gets promoted is an ass-kissing sellout and you're not gonna sell your soul to get promoted... heard that :cry enough time to spot your type in the crowd. Unless you've got my password and have been reading my PMs, you don't have a fucking clue what advice people ask me for... you know what they say about ASSuming. Talking to people like you is like :frusty because nothing I say is going to change how you think or feel. Enjoy the rest of your miserable life spent bitching about what you could have achieved if only you'd have sold your soul... I'm out.

sandsjames
04-09-2013, 03:30 PM
Enjoy the rest of your miserable life spent bitching about what you could have achieved if only you'd have sold your soul... I'm out.

It's this kind of statement that is really annoying. I'm retiring as a TSgt. I achieved plenty. I achieved a 20 year honorable career in the U.S. military. To me, becoming a SNCO isn't really an achievement as much as it is an inevitability of playing the game. I don't think any less of those who do it as that is what the military is looking for to fill those positions. I just don't believe that a SNCO has "achieved" anything more than anyone else. I don't have any regrets. If I was forced to do it all over again, I wouldn't change a thing. I still wouldn't play the game. I would still retire at 20 as a TSgt. I would still have contempt for the processes of the Air Force. And I would still have "achieved" an honorable career.

Don't get me wrong, there is much I have enjoyed and really appreciate. What I'll take from my career is the one or two true friends I've made and the retirement check/benefits. I'm sure I've helped several troops/peers, but that isn't something I ever think about. I don't ponder whether I've been a good mentor or not. It's actually never crossed my mind.

The Air Force has been a good job (nothing more), with excellent benefits, for 20 years. Now I will move on to a new life and never look back or think I could have done more.

CrustySMSgt
04-09-2013, 03:44 PM
It's this kind of statement that is really annoying. I'm retiring as a TSgt. I achieved plenty. I achieved a 20 year honorable career in the U.S. military. To me, becoming a SNCO isn't really an achievement as much as it is an inevitability of playing the game. I don't think any less of those who do it as that is what the military is looking for to fill those positions. I just don't believe that a SNCO has "achieved" anything more than anyone else. I don't have any regrets. If I was forced to do it all over again, I wouldn't change a thing. I still wouldn't play the game. I would still retire at 20 as a TSgt. I would still have contempt for the processes of the Air Force. And I would still have "achieved" an honorable career.

Don't get me wrong, there is much I have enjoyed and really appreciate. What I'll take from my career is the one or two true friends I've made and the retirement check/benefits. I'm sure I've helped several troops/peers, but that isn't something I ever think about. I don't ponder whether I've been a good mentor or not. It's actually never crossed my mind.

The Air Force has been a good job (nothing more), with excellent benefits, for 20 years. Now I will move on to a new life and never look back or think I could have done more.

Certainly not talking to you!! It is all about attitude! If you're happy with where you're at, that's great! THe individual I was talking to obviously isn't and chooses to lump everyone who HAS gotten promoted into the same type... as well as telling me personally what I know, what I've done, and what I did to get there. THAT is what I have a problem with. My comment was pointed directly at one individual, who is obviously miserable now and will inevitably remain so for the rest of his life... all the while bitter at those who "stepped on his back" to get where they are.

sandsjames
04-09-2013, 03:52 PM
Certainly not talking to you!! It is all about attitude! If you're happy with where you're at, that's great! THe individual I was talking to obviously isn't and chooses to lump everyone who HAS gotten promoted into the same type... as well as telling me personally what I know, what I've done, and what I did to get there. THAT is what I have a problem with. My comment was pointed directly at one individual, who is obviously miserable now and will inevitably remain so for the rest of his life... all the while bitter at those who "stepped on his back" to get where they are.

I realize it wasn't directed at me. I just wish you could see his point of view, even if you disagree with it.

I equate the way SNCOs are viewed to the way American tourists are viewed. I've been in London and see the obese American family with the U.S. flag t-shirts walking around be loud and annoying. Instantly this gives me a poor view of Americans. What I don't see are the other 99% of American tourists who are acting like adults and being considerate of everyone else around them. The only SNCOs we notice are the ones who have kissed ass all the way to the top and make our lives miserable. Who we need to step up are the rest of the SNCOs who are doing the job for the right reasons, who we know have our backs, and who are willing to make the well being of the airmen below them more important than their next stripe. Unfortunately, most of those SNCOs just blend in to the background and allow the asshats to project the stereotype you are being mixed in with.

CrustySMSgt
04-09-2013, 04:14 PM
I realize it wasn't directed at me. I just wish you could see his point of view, even if you disagree with it.

I equate the way SNCOs are viewed to the way American tourists are viewed. I've been in London and see the obese American family with the U.S. flag t-shirts walking around be loud and annoying. Instantly this gives me a poor view of Americans. What I don't see are the other 99% of American tourists who are acting like adults and being considerate of everyone else around them. The only SNCOs we notice are the ones who have kissed ass all the way to the top and make our lives miserable. Who we need to step up are the rest of the SNCOs who are doing the job for the right reasons, who we know have our backs, and who are willing to make the well being of the airmen below them more important than their next stripe. Unfortunately, most of those SNCOs just blend in to the background and allow the asshats to project the stereotype you are being mixed in with.

Can't know how you feel, but I can imagine how annoying it would be to get lumped in to the stereotypical view people see.

No doubt the asshats presence overwhelms everyone else who just quietly does a good job. Not sure when folks like that start being that way. I just boarded a couple catagories of our career field's AF-level awards, one Airman catagory and one NCO. I've boarded all ranges of functional, STEP, OTM/Q/Y packages from unit to AF level, culminated with sitting on the SMSgt promotion board. Looking at that many different groups of packages, the same thing always happens, it becomes apparent who's just doing their job and who's doing more. I'm not just talking about the burger burn ninjas (though looking at involvement, if everyone who volunteered for meals on wheels and habitat for humanity actually did all the packages said, there wouldn't be a hungry or homeless person in the US! And the bullets range from those who read a book to an elementary school or run large events like a base airshow, private org, community org... ) but on the job you have people who show up to work, "run a checklist," "send a report," or "coordinate something." And then you have those in the same grade who are running shops, managing programs, and being given a great deal of responsibility compared to their peers. So when does that turn into them being self-serving, ass kissing, and stepping on the back of people to make themselves stand out to get promoted? All a board sees is what is on paper, but even with that, I think you can still pick some of them out of the crowd.

Anyway, I'm just rambling and we're WAY off topic... lol

imported_UncommonSense
04-09-2013, 04:25 PM
Glad you've got all the answers... good luck to ya!

I can't begin to count how many PMs I get asking for advice on issues folks are dealing with locally and have no one there to go through. I also frequently get emails from troops who have stayed in contact with me, so again, I'm not going to lose any sleep over what a stranger on the internet thinks of me...

Couldn't this be construed as an example of the rant that weapons is going on about? If there is an abundance of good SNCOs in the AF, why are so many people messaging you for help because there is no one to help locally? If their chain is unwilling or can't help, wouldn' this be demonstrating a lack of effective leadership and yet somehow they got promoted?

SomeRandomGuy
04-09-2013, 04:58 PM
Couldn't this be construed as an example of the rant that weapons is going on about? If there is an abundance of good SNCOs in the AF, why are so many people messaging you for help because there is no one to help locally? If their chain is unwilling or can't help, wouldn' this be demonstrating a lack of effective leadership and yet somehow they got promoted?

It also could be possible that the people messaging for help are going outside of their chain because they do not like the answer they are getting. Anytime a person gets in trouble ADC recommends asking for character references from people in the past. It is pretty common for these people to get one side of the story and write a refernce. Just my thoughts that if someone calls you to tell you about how they are getting screwed you are only going to get their side of the story.

sandsjames
04-09-2013, 04:59 PM
Can't know how you feel, but I can imagine how annoying it would be to get lumped in to the stereotypical view people see.

No doubt the asshats presence overwhelms everyone else who just quietly does a good job. Not sure when folks like that start being that way. I just boarded a couple catagories of our career field's AF-level awards, one Airman catagory and one NCO. I've boarded all ranges of functional, STEP, OTM/Q/Y packages from unit to AF level, culminated with sitting on the SMSgt promotion board. Looking at that many different groups of packages, the same thing always happens, it becomes apparent who's just doing their job and who's doing more. I'm not just talking about the burger burn ninjas (though looking at involvement, if everyone who volunteered for meals on wheels and habitat for humanity actually did all the packages said, there wouldn't be a hungry or homeless person in the US! And the bullets range from those who read a book to an elementary school or run large events like a base airshow, private org, community org... ) but on the job you have people who show up to work, "run a checklist," "send a report," or "coordinate something." And then you have those in the same grade who are running shops, managing programs, and being given a great deal of responsibility compared to their peers. So when does that turn into them being self-serving, ass kissing, and stepping on the back of people to make themselves stand out to get promoted? All a board sees is what is on paper, but even with that, I think you can still pick some of them out of the crowd.

Anyway, I'm just rambling and we're WAY off topic... lol

It is off topic, but a good discussion about the awards packages. I don't think that any of those descriptions warrant an award. They all look like descriptions of the job. That's what I hate about awards. You take two people. One person is going to have more responsibilities and tasks assigned than the other, especially in different career fields. Does the nature of the job warrant the award? Here's an example:

I'm in CE. The Fire Department is also in CE. By the nature of their job (responding to in flight emergencies, putting a fire out at Burger King, etc) their package immediately looks better than mine, even if I've done tasks that are above and beyond my job description. I can save as much money getting my generators running properly and providing as close to 100% mission capabilities as possible by doing some above and beyond voodoo stuff. This will never look the same as impressive as Joe Schmoe who hops on the fire truck and follows the aircraft down the runway because he's saving a life and a multi-million dollar aircraft, even though he didn't really do something.

So if the job stuff can't be trusted to show who's actually doing a "better" job, then that only leaves the other two BS categories. That means that, in order to win the awards, people are going to have to do the "asskissing" stuff that is being discussed. The system leads itself into criticism.

Tak
04-09-2013, 05:40 PM
my two cents...

you dont have to sell soul or play game to make msgt, simply test.

now smsgt and chief, thats when the circus begins and the clowns come out.

Tak
04-09-2013, 05:45 PM
if people are expecting a peasant comment from king crusty, keep waiting.

when people stand up upon your entry, your thought process shuts down.

CrustySMSgt
04-10-2013, 04:54 AM
Couldn't this be construed as an example of the rant that weapons is going on about? If there is an abundance of good SNCOs in the AF, why are so many people messaging you for help because there is no one to help locally? If their chain is unwilling or can't help, wouldn' this be demonstrating a lack of effective leadership and yet somehow they got promoted?

I guess when you put it that way, I can see that lol


It also could be possible that the people messaging for help are going outside of their chain because they do not like the answer they are getting. Anytime a person gets in trouble ADC recommends asking for character references from people in the past. It is pretty common for these people to get one side of the story and write a refernce. Just my thoughts that if someone calls you to tell you about how they are getting screwed you are only going to get their side of the story.

I do always be sure and mention just that... there is always three sides to every story, so I don't ever assume I'm getting all the perspectives from the individual.


It is off topic, but a good discussion about the awards packages. I don't think that any of those descriptions warrant an award. They all look like descriptions of the job. That's what I hate about awards. You take two people. One person is going to have more responsibilities and tasks assigned than the other, especially in different career fields. Does the nature of the job warrant the award? Here's an example:

I'm in CE. The Fire Department is also in CE. By the nature of their job (responding to in flight emergencies, putting a fire out at Burger King, etc) their package immediately looks better than mine, even if I've done tasks that are above and beyond my job description. I can save as much money getting my generators running properly and providing as close to 100% mission capabilities as possible by doing some above and beyond voodoo stuff. This will never look the same as impressive as Joe Schmoe who hops on the fire truck and follows the aircraft down the runway because he's saving a life and a multi-million dollar aircraft, even though he didn't really do something.

So if the job stuff can't be trusted to show who's actually doing a "better" job, then that only leaves the other two BS categories. That means that, in order to win the awards, people are going to have to do the "asskissing" stuff that is being discussed. The system leads itself into criticism.

No argument from me! I don't buy in to the, "just because you have a 'cooler' job, you go to the head of the line" mentality. If you're a fire fighter, your job is to fight fires (which luckily most never really get to do). If you're a PJ, your job is to save lives. If you're a crew chief, you fix planes. If you're a "force support" troop, your job is to flip eggs, hand out lodging keys, and all that. It is what you do with in your world that makes a difference. When I score packages, 90% of the bullets get my mean score, because you're right, most people are just doing their job. And if a bullet tells me what they are "supposed to be doing" not what they've done, it gets zero points. Same with decorations. If your citation reads like a job description, it gets kicked back.

AJBIGJ
04-10-2013, 06:21 AM
Not being an NCO/SNCO nor being USAF, anything I have to offer on the current subject at hand is extremely limited and certainly speculative. But I have noticed in general it is often the @$$holes that speak the loudest in the room under most circumstances. Sometimes, just the simple act of being the loudest voice in the room is often recognized as "leadership" among those who evaluate such things, especially when the statements made by the individual are not necessarily way off base to the cultural way of thinking. These are the people who rise to the pack the quickest, because they also know how to gain the maximum amount of credit that can be attributed for the accomplishments of the "team" they happen to be leading at the time.

In any service, my impression is that the SNCOs that are truly appreciated and truly of exceptional quality manage to be very accomplished and manage to be so very much absent individual personal recognition. They tend not be as outspoken as their counterparts but what they do offer tends to be significantly more meaningful. I think the key difference between them and their peers is they place more value towards the responsibilities of the rank and very little towards the privileges of it. They are also the lesser noticed because, let's face it, people are more likely to talk about someone in a negative light for doing significantly negative things than they are to talk about the people for positive things. If we look at the people who you lead, who tends to get the lion's share of attention? Is it the ones who always show up on time, put in the good effort, and are generally a useful part of the team? Or is it the troublemakers? The ones who show up late, sloppy, and hungover and do nothing you ask them right the first time? In most cases, whatever we'd like to be the case, more of our attention tends to get devoted to the latter than the former. That same kind of situation seems to apply for the advanced ranks as well for some reason.

So how do they even get ahead if their individual actions aren't designed to gain personal notice? My guess is that they've had a few like-minded mentors supervising them along the way who went to extra trouble of watching their backs and helping them break out competitively among all the inflated blowhards in the impersonal pile of career performance evaluations being brought in front of a selection board. As the desirably personal qualities are somewhat rare to begin with having them working for like-minded individuals who support their personal success is likely much rarer still.

I'll ask Crusty's feedback if I'm way off base in my analysis or somewhat close to the mark because he's living in it personally. I think the reason most see the negative examples of those senior of positions is simply because they also tend to stand out the most and taking on that style of personality also seems to be the path of least resistance in getting there.

CrustySMSgt
04-10-2013, 08:04 AM
Not being an NCO/SNCO nor being USAF, anything I have to offer on the current subject at hand is extremely limited and certainly speculative. But I have noticed in general it is often the @$$holes that speak the loudest in the room under most circumstances. Sometimes, just the simple act of being the loudest voice in the room is often recognized as "leadership" among those who evaluate such things, especially when the statements made by the individual are not necessarily way off base to the cultural way of thinking. These are the people who rise to the pack the quickest, because they also know how to gain the maximum amount of credit that can be attributed for the accomplishments of the "team" they happen to be leading at the time.

In any service, my impression is that the SNCOs that are truly appreciated and truly of exceptional quality manage to be very accomplished and manage to be so very much absent individual personal recognition. They tend not be as outspoken as their counterparts but what they do offer tends to be significantly more meaningful. I think the key difference between them and their peers is they place more value towards the responsibilities of the rank and very little towards the privileges of it. They are also the lesser noticed because, let's face it, people are more likely to talk about someone in a negative light for doing significantly negative things than they are to talk about the people for positive things. If we look at the people who you lead, who tends to get the lion's share of attention? Is it the ones who always show up on time, put in the good effort, and are generally a useful part of the team? Or is it the troublemakers? The ones who show up late, sloppy, and hungover and do nothing you ask them right the first time? In most cases, whatever we'd like to be the case, more of our attention tends to get devoted to the latter than the former. That same kind of situation seems to apply for the advanced ranks as well for some reason.

So how do they even get ahead if their individual actions aren't designed to gain personal notice? My guess is that they've had a few like-minded mentors supervising them along the way who went to extra trouble of watching their backs and helping them break out competitively among all the inflated blowhards in the impersonal pile of career performance evaluations being brought in front of a selection board. As the desirably personal qualities are somewhat rare to begin with having them working for like-minded individuals who support their personal success is likely much rarer still.

I'll ask Crusty's feedback if I'm way off base in my analysis or somewhat close to the mark because he's living in it personally. I think the reason most see the negative examples of those senior of positions is simply because they also tend to stand out the most and taking on that style of personality also seems to be the path of least resistance in getting there.

Sounds like you've pretty much got it right. I will add one thing... I'm certainly not one to endorse folks who run around patting themselves on the back, BUT with the number of lazy supervisors out there, I have to on occasion recommend folks look out for themselves and push for awards, IF they've really earned them. As was pointed out, there is unfortunately too many bad SNCOs out there who don't bother to take care of their troops, leaving their sharp troops behind even average troops who's supervisors take the time to write packages on them. And there is no doubt the writing skill of whoever is putting together the package/EPR can make a HUGE difference...

But as with everything, there are those that take it too far and have no problem stepping on everyone else to push their personal agenda. In person, that guy/gal usually self-identify pretty quickly; a little harder to catch in a package, which is why a good deal of those folks make the cut on promotion boards.

sandsjames
04-10-2013, 04:03 PM
No argument from me! I don't buy in to the, "just because you have a 'cooler' job, you go to the head of the line" mentality. If you're a fire fighter, your job is to fight fires (which luckily most never really get to do). If you're a PJ, your job is to save lives. If you're a crew chief, you fix planes. If you're a "force support" troop, your job is to flip eggs, hand out lodging keys, and all that. It is what you do with in your world that makes a difference. When I score packages, 90% of the bullets get my mean score, because you're right, most people are just doing their job. And if a bullet tells me what they are "supposed to be doing" not what they've done, it gets zero points. Same with decorations. If your citation reads like a job description, it gets kicked back.

And what this leads to is the majority of the winners coming from the scores of the education and volunteering bullets. This is what leads to the perception that the job is not as important as all the extra stuff. I know that if I do my job to the utmost of my ability I will never get the recognition of someone who plays crossing guard or CLEPs basic mathematics. Lucky for me, I don't need the recognition but there are many people with goals beyond mine who are told time and time again that they'll never get promoted beyond E7 without these awards. This is what leads to the bullshit being more important than the job. It's a vicious cycle.

WeaponsTSGT
04-10-2013, 05:35 PM
First off let me say I'm not trying to fight with anyone there are just things that spin me up, the base I'm at now has the worst of the worst, the reason is because I work a new airframe and they brought all the asshat's into one place to work. Now as far as packages go, this is my experience and it might be different in your AFSC/base. Out quarterly winners are picked at the beginning of the quarter and then instructed on what they need to do to win the quarterly, for example feed the homeless. We have 2 sets of quarterlies, green suit/blue suit. Green suit is work only bullets and if they are selected at the start of the quarter they are given all the tasks that will look good on said package.

This is the poor leadership I write about, this is not the intent of the awards program, I love my job and many of my coworkers but everyone knows what they say about a rotten apple, especially when that rotten apple is the biggest one in the bunch, hell half the bullets are bullshit anyway and very few can actually be proven. All that SNCO cares about is putting XX amount of award winners on his/hers package. I was floored when my counter part asked me which quarterly package I wanted to write on MYSELF because he was going to write the other one on HIMSELF. I want no part of this self serving that IS required to get promoted, to say awards aren't taken into consideration for promotion packages in not factual. I have filled every block that it takes to get promoted but will not partake in these other self serving activities that is so rampant with other MSgt's.

As far as the job not being as important as extra curricular this is very apparent at the AB-TSgt level. The one thing that won't get you thrown out of the AF is job performance, or at least it's the last thing.

sandsjames
04-10-2013, 06:17 PM
First off let me say I'm not trying to fight with anyone there are just things that spin me up, the base I'm at now has the worst of the worst, the reason is because I work a new airframe and they brought all the asshat's into one place to work. Now as far as packages go, this is my experience and it might be different in your AFSC/base. Out quarterly winners are picked at the beginning of the quarter and then instructed on what they need to do to win the quarterly, for example feed the homeless. We have 2 sets of quarterlies, green suit/blue suit. Green suit is work only bullets and if they are selected at the start of the quarter they are given all the tasks that will look good on said package.

This is the poor leadership I write about, this is not the intent of the awards program, I love my job and many of my coworkers but everyone knows what they say about a rotten apple, especially when that rotten apple is the biggest one in the bunch, hell half the bullets are bullshit anyway and very few can actually be proven. All that SNCO cares about is putting XX amount of award winners on his/hers package. I was floored when my counter part asked me which quarterly package I wanted to write on MYSELF because he was going to write the other one on HIMSELF. I want no part of this self serving that IS required to get promoted, to say awards aren't taken into consideration for promotion packages in not factual. I have filled every block that it takes to get promoted but will not partake in these other self serving activities that is so rampant with other MSgt's.

As far as the job not being as important as extra curricular this is very apparent at the AB-TSgt level. The one thing that won't get you thrown out of the AF is job performance, or at least it's the last thing.

Everything you've said is 100% the truth. Anyone who tries to argue this is simply wrong and living in a dream world.

imported_UncommonSense
04-10-2013, 06:32 PM
First off let me say I'm not trying to fight with anyone there are just things that spin me up, the base I'm at now has the worst of the worst, the reason is because I work a new airframe and they brought all the asshat's into one place to work. Now as far as packages go, this is my experience and it might be different in your AFSC/base. Out quarterly winners are picked at the beginning of the quarter and then instructed on what they need to do to win the quarterly, for example feed the homeless. We have 2 sets of quarterlies, green suit/blue suit. Green suit is work only bullets and if they are selected at the start of the quarter they are given all the tasks that will look good on said package.

This is the poor leadership I write about, this is not the intent of the awards program, I love my job and many of my coworkers but everyone knows what they say about a rotten apple, especially when that rotten apple is the biggest one in the bunch, hell half the bullets are bullshit anyway and very few can actually be proven. All that SNCO cares about is putting XX amount of award winners on his/hers package. I was floored when my counter part asked me which quarterly package I wanted to write on MYSELF because he was going to write the other one on HIMSELF. I want no part of this self serving that IS required to get promoted, to say awards aren't taken into consideration for promotion packages in not factual. I have filled every block that it takes to get promoted but will not partake in these other self serving activities that is so rampant with other MSgt's.

As far as the job not being as important as extra curricular this is very apparent at the AB-TSgt level. The one thing that won't get you thrown out of the AF is job performance, or at least it's the last thing.

It's called "grooming your airmen" and it's total BS. You don't choose who's going up for an award at the beginning of the award period. The true winners will stand out as time goes on. But then again, I'm required to have a quarterly award package to the squadron a month before the quarter closes out. Because of this, this conversation always occurs...

Me: There's still a month left in the quarter.
Them: But the squadron board is judging packages (giggity) in 3 days.
Me: But what if my Amn/NCO accomplishes some pretty cool shit in the next 30 days?
Them: We will put it on the package before the group board convenes.
Me: And if my guy/girl didn't win the squadron but could have because these 2 bullets would have kicked some major ass?
Them: Groom them for next quarter.
Me: Grrrrrr. Fine, I'll just add those 2 unused bullets to the next package.
Them: You can't. It didn't happen next quarter.
Me: Exactly!!! If I can't use it this quarter, and I can't use it next quarter, how am I supposed to fortune-tell who will be worthy of an award next quarter.
Them: Groom them.
Me: Head explodes and I go home and pour beer down my now exposed throat hole.