PDA

View Full Version : 13E6 is gonna be friggin' brutal!



imported_DannyJ
06-06-2013, 01:24 AM
So I was look at the NCORP FY14 list that just came out and saw a lot of TSgt Out listed so I took a look at the real time A1 manning numbers for a few career fields... Almost all were WAAAAY over authorization for E6 (2T1, which is normally a chronic, is 216% of authorized for TSgt). Seeing as how they didn't promote a relatively large amount to Master this year (which I looked there too, over authorization, but about HALF of Tech), and nothing's been annonunced to push out certain ranks, I see promotion being brutally low. Anyone got the low down?

BRUWIN
06-06-2013, 02:16 AM
Doesn't matter how overmanned an AFSC is in a particular rank...they still promote the same percentage as every other AFSC. That's what drives NCO retraining...they fix the overages after promotion and move them to shortage AFSCs. Shortage AFSCs are the big loser because even though the AF doesn't fill their empty slots with more eligible from the shortage AFSC....they still promote for the most part the same percentage as everybody else despite more available slots.

imported_DannyJ
06-06-2013, 02:29 AM
Doesn't matter how overmanned an AFSC is in a particular rank...they still promote the same percentage as every other AFSC. That's what drives NCO retraining...they fix the overages after promotion and move them to shortage AFSCs. Shortage AFSCs are the big loser because even though the AF doesn't fill their empty slots with more eligible from the shortage AFSC....they still promote for the most part the same percentage as everybody else despite more available slots.

Let me make sure I'm getting this right... They don't even look at the amount of Airmen in a given rank/AFSC?

BRUWIN
06-06-2013, 02:37 AM
Let me make sure I'm getting this right... They don't even look at the amount of Airmen in a given rank/AFSC?

That's correct. They promote the same percentage across the board and then retrain the resulting overages. This is the main reason we have an NCO retraining program. Years and years ago they promoted only within AFSCs and many AFSCs like supply and cops were promotion stagnant and many were retiring at E-5.

If you look at last years promotion rates for each AFSC you will notice basically the same percentage rates across the board. Some critical AFSCs might have promoted slightly higher with an extra 2.0 percent additional promotions authorized but I really don't know if that is applies anymore.

RobotChicken
06-06-2013, 03:08 AM
Same in the NAVY 'Bruwin'!

CrustySMSgt
06-06-2013, 03:59 AM
Bru's right (as if there was a question lol)

But as indicated by the low rate to MSgt, the overall selection rate is likely to be much lower than what we've seen over the last decade.

Drackore
06-06-2013, 04:50 AM
This is definitely not going to be the year for promotion, and I'll bet next year's rates for E7 and E6 were as bad.

BRUWIN
06-06-2013, 12:50 PM
This is why it drives me nuts to hear people say that promotion in certain AFSCs is tougher than others. It's not (exception for First Sergeants). The percentages are the same for everybody. I've heard critical career fields like my own bitch that retrainees take their promotion slots. They don't. They promote the same percentage across the board and those that bitch had as much opportunity to get promoted as the retraineee coming in their career field. In fact...when my career field was cronic critical we were promoted at 2 percent higher and those with a career in my AFSC still didn't make it but still bitched.

The bottom line is this...don't go by your AFSCs manning at certain grades to determine the next cycles promotion opportunites. I was promoted to MSgt at 12 years in an AFSC that was woefully overmanned for E-7s. Just be prepared to retrain if you make it. For me they used lowest TIS to determine retraining priority and I fell at #2 for my command so I knew I was toast. However, these days I think they use TOS to determine retraining priority. Wish that was the criteria used in my case. I had only just PCS'd to Luke when I was selected to retrain, PCS'd to tech school for 7 months, then PCS'd again to Beale afterwards. 3 PCS moves in two years...something they only allow when it applies to retraining. Meanwhile...one MSgt I worked with was identified as hot for retraining had 14 years TOS and skated out of it because he had more TIS than me.

JD2780
06-06-2013, 12:52 PM
I'd like to tell the folks that complain about retrainees taking promotion slots to study harder and it won't be a problem.

Measure Man
06-06-2013, 03:41 PM
This is why it drives me nuts to hear people say that promotion in certain AFSCs is tougher than others.

A quick glance at cutoff scores would clearly illustrate that it is tougher to get promoted in some AFSCs than others. Usually it's a numbers thing...career fields with very high numbers of eligibles, tend to have lower cutoff scores.


It's not (exception for First Sergeants).

It's because of the board thing...First Sergeants get promoted at the same rate as every other AFSC...they only difference is they are judged by a board panel consisting of First Sergeants...who, like a lot of AFSCs, think they are special, and they don't think people without a lot of First Sergeant experience should get promoted.

It's not any harder to get promoted as a First Sergeant...it's only harder if you come in a a new shirt without a lot of shirt experience. But, it would be hard to get promoted in MX, if you cross-trained in without MX experience.

But, that it is is "harder to get promoted" as a shirt is largely a myth...the rate is the same. So for every new Shirt that finds it more difficult...there is some old shirt that made it easier.


The percentages are the same for everybody. I've heard critical career fields like my own bitch that retrainees take their promotion slots. They don't. They promote the same percentage across the board and those that bitch had as much opportunity to get promoted as the retraineee coming in their career field. In fact...when my career field was cronic critical we were promoted at 2 percent higher and those with a career in my AFSC still didn't make it but still bitched.

Yeah.


The bottom line is this...don't go by your AFSCs manning at certain grades to determine the next cycles promotion opportunites. I was promoted to MSgt at 12 years in an AFSC that was woefully overmanned for E-7s. Just be prepared to retrain if you make it. For me they used lowest TIS to determine retraining priority and I fell at #2 for my command so I knew I was toast.

Yeah, that concept always bothered me...let's take our "faster burners", i.e. our brightest folks, in theory, and make them change jobs.


However, these days I think they use TOS to determine retraining priority. Wish that was the criteria used in my case. I had only just PCS'd to Luke when I was selected to retrain, PCS'd to tech school for 7 months, then PCS'd again to Beale afterwards. 3 PCS moves in two years...something they only allow when it applies to retraining. Meanwhile...one MSgt I worked with was identified as hot for retraining had 14 years TOS and skated out of it because he had more TIS than me.

I can't claim credit for the change...though I do recall I submitted an input at some time.

BRUWIN
06-06-2013, 03:52 PM
A quick glance at cutoff scores would clearly illustrate that it is tougher to get promoted in some AFSCs than others. Usually it's a numbers thing...career fields with very high numbers of eligibles, tend to have lower cutoff scores.


But percentage-wise they have the same chance. I'll be honest....I think intel has a higher cutoff because they tend to get more and higher decoration points than maintenance or cops do and their EPRs are more favorable. Not saying that's right but that's what I've seen and since they only compete against their AFSC it all works out the same.

BRUWIN
06-06-2013, 04:06 PM
and let's face it, some AFSCs are laden with smarter folks than others, resulting in higher test score averages.

I found the troops in my new AFSC were generally smarter at covering up their fuck ups.

Measure Man
06-06-2013, 04:09 PM
But percentage-wise they have the same chance. I'll be honest....I think intel has a higher cutoff because they tend to get more and higher decoration points than maintenance or cops do and their EPRs are more favorable. Not saying that's right but that's what I've seen and since they only compete against their AFSC it all works out the same.

Yes, that could be another reason. Yes, everybody is the same percentage wise...except for the few AFSCs that get an extra boost.

...and let's face it, some AFSCs are laden with smarter folks than others, resulting in higher test score averages.

SomeRandomGuy
06-07-2013, 03:26 PM
"It is/was a lot harder when I made it" That statement right there is fact regardless of who said it. Kids these days have no idea how easy they have it. When I was a kid we walked 2 miles to school uphill both ways. Now, before you go and accuse me of lying I need to point out there was a valley in the middle. We walked down one side then up the other. On the way home we did the opposite. Uphill both ways, it did happen! Now get off my lawn!

Zxc
06-07-2013, 03:32 PM
Goodluck all; my friends that tested this year and didn't make it the year prior said that it felt a lot harder too.

DLawg84
06-07-2013, 03:35 PM
So I was look at the NCORP FY14 list that just came out and saw a lot of TSgt Out listed so I took a look at the real time A1 manning numbers for a few career fields... Almost all were WAAAAY over authorization for E6 (2T1, which is normally a chronic, is 216% of authorized for TSgt). Seeing as how they didn't promote a relatively large amount to Master this year (which I looked there too, over authorization, but about HALF of Tech), and nothing's been annonunced to push out certain ranks, I see promotion being brutally low. Anyone got the low down?

Yup!

This is why I'm preparing my official statement ahead of time and it will go something like, "Well, if only the cutoff had been within 10 pts of what it was last year I'd be a select"

Real talk... Our AF is becoming an increasingly competitive force at a rapid pace, and in order to make it the 20 folks are going to have to adapt to the resulting increase in standards/decrease in HYT

Good Luck to fellow 13E6 testers! 3 more weeks...

WeaponsTSGT
06-08-2013, 05:54 PM
Imagine making promotion harder while reducing HYT, controlling end year strength by something related to your job as opposed to how small your waist is.

CJSmith
06-08-2013, 09:09 PM
Hate to burst everyone's bubble but stats don't lie. E6 rates are going to plummet.

http://i.imgur.com/pkyeqgk.jpg

imported_KnuckleDragger
06-09-2013, 01:00 AM
If accurate, very interesting chart!

Venus
06-09-2013, 01:00 AM
I made Staff in 85 and sewed on Tech in 94 and had to almost score in the high 70's to have a shot for a Crew Chief, promotions were slow in the 90's, had a hydro troop score 98 on his SKT and missed Tech by 4 points, his PFE was 70. It was really bad for PFE only testers, like flight stewards had to score 120 to have a shot, so you had a crap load of Buck Sgt's and 15 year plus SSgt's.

RobotChicken
06-09-2013, 02:27 AM
When the tough gets going, the tough fly 'Space A' brown bagging it to Costa Rico!

UH1FE
06-09-2013, 02:36 AM
I feel your pain! My career field went from a 350 cutoff for MSgt to a 362 cutoff this year. Just going to have to study harder.

BOSS302
06-09-2013, 02:41 AM
Yup!

This is why I'm preparing my official statement ahead of time and it will go something like, "Well, if only the cutoff had been within 10 pts of what it was last year I'd be a select"

Real talk... Our AF is becoming an increasingly competitive force at a rapid pace, and in order to make it the 20 folks are going to have to adapt to the resulting increase in standards/decrease in HYT

Good Luck to fellow 13E6 testers! 3 more weeks...

I like the people who somehow manage to stratify their results when they don't make the cut for promotion. "Oh I was the #1 non-selectee." "Haha, I was probably the #4 or #5 non-selectee."

And don't forget the people who, when they do not make it, they humbly exclaim, "I wasn't ready for the promotion anyway. This is good, gives me another year to mature." Even though days before the results they were saying how much they had studied and how they were confident they "had it in the bag".

Zxc
06-09-2013, 03:24 AM
I like the people who somehow manage to stratify their results when they don't make the cut for promotion. "Oh I was the #1 non-selectee." "Haha, I was probably the #4 or #5 non-selectee."

And don't forget the people who, when they do not make it, they humbly exclaim, "I wasn't ready for the promotion anyway. This is good, gives me another year to mature." Even though days before the results they were saying how much they had studied and how they were confident they "had it in the bag".
People are best not really talking about their test prior to results coming out, and when they do simply being grateful if they make it and if not, just saying that they'll try again next time

Bware
06-12-2013, 12:18 PM
Still nothing can't wait; I hate office talk about promotion rates

imported_DannyJ
06-12-2013, 01:31 PM
Still nothing can't wait; I hate office talk about promotion rates

I wouldn't expect numbers until later this week or early next.

20+Years
06-12-2013, 07:22 PM
Still nothing can't wait; I hate office talk about promotion rates

I don't mind discussing promotion rates at all, for me, it always came down to did I study or not, and if so, how hard?

I only missed one stripe I honestly thought I had studied hard enough for. Missed by 2. something or other. Should have studied harder.

And just for clarification, I was the type that never cracked a book my first year up.

DLawg84
06-13-2013, 12:49 AM
I'm GUESSING a 16% af avg promo rate for 13E6 and 12-14 point cutoff jump from last year... Time will tell.

Bware
06-13-2013, 02:06 AM
16% is ok number to live with...

imported_DannyJ
06-13-2013, 05:02 PM
16% is ok number to live with...

I'm putting my money on or about 13.5% just by looking at past numbers and how they compare to MSgt.

Bware
06-13-2013, 11:27 PM
We will see next week..

WestCoastAR_Crewdog
06-15-2013, 10:40 AM
Do you guys think this is gonna affect 13E5 testing as well?

CrustySMSgt
06-15-2013, 11:22 AM
Do you guys think this is gonna affect 13E5 testing as well?

absolutely. Promotions trickle down, so lower promotion rates at higher grades leave fewer vacancies to fill, lowering promotion rates all the way down.

CJSmith
06-15-2013, 04:54 PM
I'm GUESSING a 16% af avg promo rate for 13E6 and 12-14 point cutoff jump from last year... Time will tell.


I'm putting my money on or about 13.5% just by looking at past numbers and how they compare to MSgt.

Anywhere between 10-15% is my guess.

Bumble78
06-17-2013, 02:23 PM
I am going to guess 15% +or- .5%

Bware
06-17-2013, 04:36 PM
It should come out Wednesday

DLawg84
06-17-2013, 10:35 PM
It should come out Wednesday

First one to post legit. AF avg stats on 13E6 results wins!!!

WillsPowers
06-17-2013, 10:48 PM
You're quite an office weenie, aren't you? Did you ever fly or work on aircraft in the operational Air Force or do you just infest an office? LOL!

imported_KnuckleDragger
06-18-2013, 12:59 AM
You're quite an office weenie, aren't you? Did you ever fly or work on aircraft in the operational Air Force or do you just infest an office? LOL!

Who is this directed to?

Bware
06-18-2013, 01:37 AM
It wasn't release today----damn

CrustySMSgt
06-18-2013, 03:47 AM
Who is this directed to?

http://tavorankose.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Do-not-feed-the-troll-03.jpg

pocketkings
06-18-2013, 08:05 AM
I like the people who somehow manage to stratify their results when they don't make the cut for promotion. "Oh I was the #1 non-selectee." "Haha, I was probably the #4 or #5 non-selectee."

And don't forget the people who, when they do not make it, they humbly exclaim, "I wasn't ready for the promotion anyway. This is good, gives me another year to mature." Even though days before the results they were saying how much they had studied and how they were confident they "had it in the bag".

Selects and non-selects are ranked within their career field and that strat is displayed when you view your scores on vMPF. People who strat their results are just stating the facts.

Totally agree with how attitudes change once people find out they didn't make it. I am always pissed when I get passed over. Only at myself of course.

af1234
06-19-2013, 03:33 PM
The worldwide statistics for cycle 13E6 are: number eligible: 37,608, number selected: 5,654, AF-wide selection rate: 15.03%.

Measure Man
06-19-2013, 04:36 PM
I was just crunching numbers. If last year was 22 percent and the cutoff was 321 across the board. If you take the 15 percent this year and subtract that from last year you get 7 percent. Add 7 percent (22.47 points) to 321 and the new cutoff if will be 343!

I missed Tech last year by 1.5 points, if I score the same and get 8 points time in grade/service. I will have 332 points. Which means I now missed Tech by even more than last year. I am a bit upset but it happened to everyone, we all are living in a very different USA and military...

While I think your mathematical reasoning is flawed...it just might work out that way.

CrustySMSgt
06-19-2013, 04:43 PM
The worldwide statistics for cycle 13E6 are: number eligible: 37,608, number selected: 5,654, AF-wide selection rate: 15.03%.

down from last year's 22.77% and 2011's 24.94%.

c130aviator
06-19-2013, 04:47 PM
I was just crunching numbers. If last year was 22 percent and the cutoff was 321 across the board. If you take the 15 percent this year and subtract that from last year you get 7 percent. Add 7 percent (22.47 points) to 321 and the new cutoff if will be 343!

I missed Tech last year by 1.5 points, if I score the same and get 8 points time in grade/service. I will have 332 points. Which means I now missed Tech by even more than last year. I am a bit upset but it happened to everyone, we all are living in a very different USA and military...

Measure Man
06-19-2013, 04:49 PM
I was just crunching numbers. If last year was 22 percent and the cutoff was 321 across the board. If you take the 15 percent this year and subtract that from last year you get 7 percent. Add 7 percent (22.47 points) to 321 and the new cutoff if will be 343!

I missed Tech last year by 1.5 points, if I score the same and get 8 points time in grade/service. I will have 332 points. Which means I now missed Tech by even more than last year. I am a bit upset but it happened to everyone, we all are living in a very different USA and military...

While I think your mathematical reasoning is flawed...it just might work out that way.

CrustySMSgt
06-19-2013, 04:55 PM
The worldwide statistics for cycle 13E6 are: number eligible: 37,608, number selected: 5,654, AF-wide selection rate: 15.03%.

down from last year's 22.77% and 2011's 24.94%.

CrustySMSgt
06-19-2013, 04:56 PM
I was just crunching numbers. If last year was 22 percent and the cutoff was 321 across the board. If you take the 15 percent this year and subtract that from last year you get 7 percent. Add 7 percent (22.47 points) to 321 and the new cutoff if will be 343!

I missed Tech last year by 1.5 points, if I score the same and get 8 points time in grade/service. I will have 332 points. Which means I now missed Tech by even more than last year. I am a bit upset but it happened to everyone, we all are living in a very different USA and military...

apples & oranges

KC-10 FE
06-19-2013, 05:18 PM
This is why it drives me nuts to hear people say that promotion in certain AFSCs is tougher than others. It's not (exception for First Sergeants). The percentages are the same for everybody. I've heard critical career fields like my own bitch that retrainees take their promotion slots. They don't. They promote the same percentage across the board and those that bitch had as much opportunity to get promoted as the retraineee coming in their career field. In fact...when my career field was cronic critical we were promoted at 2 percent higher and those with a career in my AFSC still didn't make it but still bitched.

The bottom line is this...don't go by your AFSCs manning at certain grades to determine the next cycles promotion opportunites. I was promoted to MSgt at 12 years in an AFSC that was woefully overmanned for E-7s. Just be prepared to retrain if you make it. For me they used lowest TIS to determine retraining priority and I fell at #2 for my command so I knew I was toast. However, these days I think they use TOS to determine retraining priority. Wish that was the criteria used in my case. I had only just PCS'd to Luke when I was selected to retrain, PCS'd to tech school for 7 months, then PCS'd again to Beale afterwards. 3 PCS moves in two years...something they only allow when it applies to retraining. Meanwhile...one MSgt I worked with was identified as hot for retraining had 14 years TOS and skated out of it because he had more TIS than me.

It is tougher to get promoted in different career fields, as cutoff scores vary by career field. I would have made E7 this cycle in my old career field, but missed it by nearly 30 points in my current one.

Pullinteeth
06-19-2013, 05:38 PM
absolutely. Promotions trickle down, so lower promotion rates at higher grades leave fewer vacancies to fill, lowering promotion rates all the way down.

You may think so but not necessarily. With Force Shaping, FTF, and current HYT rates, there are more ways than ever to open up slots without promoting anyone....

c130aviator
06-19-2013, 09:25 PM
While I think your mathematical reasoning is flawed...it just might work out that way.


down from last year's 22.77% and 2011's 24.94%.

Yeah I know guys, I am not banking on it but just really not getting my hopes up. I was the number 5 non-selectee last year; however, I dont think this year is going to be any better but in fact worse if I tested the same or even a little better.

imported_KnuckleDragger
06-19-2013, 10:15 PM
15.03% Ouch.

Looks like folks are gonna need this:

http://static.e-publishing.af.mil/production/1/af_a1/publication/afpam36-2241/afpam36-2241.pdf

Bware
06-19-2013, 11:53 PM
Yeah I know guys, I am not banking on it but just really not getting my hopes up. I was the number 5 non-selectee last year; however, I dont think this year is going to be any better but in fact worse if I tested the same or even a little better.


We kinda all say that, but we all hope we made it

wildman
06-20-2013, 02:23 AM
Well I see some things have not much changed in the past twenty plus years. Try missing Msgt by .05. I was so disgusted that when it came time to go to the NCO academy I declined. I put in my retirement application and declined to test for the next cycle. If I had of been selected I would have had over twenty years active duty and would have had to accept a active duty service commitment of another two years from the date I would have sown on the stripe had I have made it witch was no certainty. So I retired as a Tsgt. Good luck to ya all.

Always,
Wildman

tiredretiredE7
06-20-2013, 03:14 AM
Well I see some things have not much changed in the past twenty plus years. Try missing Msgt by .05. I was so disgusted that when it came time to go to the NCO academy I declined. I put in my retirement application and declined to test for the next cycle. If I had of been selected I would have had over twenty years active duty and would have had to accept a active duty service commitment of another two years from the date I would have sown on the stripe had I have made it witch was no certainty. So I retired as a Tsgt. Good luck to ya all.

Always,
Wildman

I knew two MSgts in 2004 who declined promotion to SMSgt so they could retire at 20.

CrustySMSgt
06-20-2013, 04:58 AM
:soapbox:

Perfect soap box moment. Gonna be a lot of average (on a good day) SSgts who get promoted on the 27th, and a lot of hard working younger SSgts who don't. All of them will have 5 EPRs. As promotion rates plummet, if we don't start correcting inflation, we'll continue to promote the average, allowing them to break through the HYT barriers that should result in them being shown the door, and have to look our hard chargers in the eye and tell them, "Sorry SSgt Shitsack got promoted and you didn't; better luck next year!"

Measure Man
06-20-2013, 05:36 AM
[QUOTE=CrustySMSgt;634513we don't start correcting inflation, we'll continue to promote the average, [/QUOTE]

You got it, Chief...EPR inflation is an AF problem that demands AF leadership attention.

At some point, "it's a supervisor issue" ain't gonna cut it.

The Cooler
06-20-2013, 06:32 AM
i'm not sure why the inflation issue is so complicated, i've heard this idea before and it makes sense. make EVERY thing you can be evaluated on in the AF / your job a criteria for a 5 EPR. anything below a 90 and you aren't eligible for a 5. how well people do their jobs on daily basis and paperwork for getting in trouble will separate 3's and 4's.

you want a 5. 90 or above on PT, 90 or above on cdc's for Airmen and NCO's for those who have 7 level cdc's, 90 or above on stan evals, etc, etc.

there you go, inflation solved.

CrustySMSgt
06-20-2013, 06:51 AM
i'm not sure why the inflation issue is so complicated, i've heard this idea before and it makes sense. make EVERY thing you can be evaluated on in the AF / your job a criteria for a 5 EPR. anything below a 90 and you aren't eligible for a 5. how well people do their jobs on daily basis and paperwork for getting in trouble will separate 3's and 4's.

you want a 5. 90 or above on PT, 90 or above on cdc's for Airmen and NCO's for those who have 7 level cdc's, 90 or above on stan evals, etc, etc.

there you go, inflation solved.

If only it were so easy (see block checking thread). I'm all for setting the bar high, but what if you've got someone who kicks ass on the job, is far & away your best leader in the shop, and knows how to DO their job better than anyone else, but gets an 89 on their PT test or CDCs.

And how do you account for those who are exempt from PT, not doing CDCs and don't get QCed?

If you leave people to chase metrics, you'll get people who play the game and focus on chasing numbers, not on doing a good job or leading.

The Cooler
06-20-2013, 07:00 AM
If only it were so easy (see block checking thread). I'm all for setting the bar high, but what if you've got someone who kicks ass on the job, is far & away your best leader in the shop, and knows how to DO their job better than anyone else, but gets an 89 on their PT test or CDCs.

And how do you account for those who are exempt from PT, not doing CDCs and don't get QCed?

If you leave people to chase metrics, you'll get people who play the game and focus on chasing numbers, not on doing a good job or leading.

i completely understand what you are saying.. but you have to have criteria. period. i didn't say it would be perfect but logically inflation can NOT be solved at the supervisor level. as long as big AF wants to push the issue of correcting inflation without any criteria then nothing will change. when Chief's come in and talk about lower levels fixing inflation it's ridiculous because it's a subjective request. all supervisors are different and rate appropriately/inappropriately. simply having criteria for consideration of a 5 will drastically reduce inflation because it would be highly unlikely for someone to get a 90 on multiple evaluations and not be pretty sharp. you're right, it creates other variables but it's still closer to a solution than anything i'm hearing from up top these days.

Juggs
06-20-2013, 11:57 AM
i completely understand what you are saying.. but you have to have criteria. period. i didn't say it would be perfect but logically inflation can NOT be solved at the supervisor level. as long as big AF wants to push the issue of correcting inflation without any criteria then nothing will change. when Chief's come in and talk about lower levels fixing inflation it's ridiculous because it's a subjective request. all supervisors are different and rate appropriately/inappropriately. simply having criteria for consideration of a 5 will drastically reduce inflation because it would be highly unlikely for someone to get a 90 on multiple evaluations and not be pretty sharp. you're right, it creates other variables but it's still closer to a solution than anything i'm hearing from up top these days.

Also you have SNCOs not allowing NCOs to supervise. Such as being told to not give some one an LOC for completely disregarding what the NCO told them. If the NCO gives the troop a standard to maintain a simple on at that, check out with me before leaving for the day. This is just the tip of the iceberg. Blatant insubordination. A SrA shouldn't e talking smack about NCOs in the job while wearing fishing line in his ear to keep the whole open. Another violation of guidance and an AFI. The AF is getting worse, being told you're being petty, and to give this shitty troop another chance although he has had multiple chances. If you want the NCOs to become leaders and act like NCOs then let them.

It doesn't matter how we rate troops, if we aren't allowed to rate them accordingly and do the proper amount of paper work to justify ratings the what does it matter. Pathetic spineless leaders. Oh and there is directive that you can't bring your troop outside and PT them as a corrective action. The AF is becoming less and less a military even with these dang warrior ethos and creeds that are a joke. In my AFSC we are allowed to PT a troop until we get tired depending on the severity of the infraction. I remember getting PT'd with a dive mask on while somebody has a hose running in my face. You think I was late for PT again? Forget about it (tribute to JG)

CrustySMSgt
06-20-2013, 12:13 PM
Since the NCO in question was using 36-2618 as part of her reference in the LOC she chose to do as the SNCO asked and be a good follower. She did however, give the shitsack SrA verbal counseling and documented that.

There is no such things a "documenting a verbal counseling." If you're refering to the chickenshit approach of writing a "desk drawer", MFR they aren't worth the paper their written on. You can't use them to justify a referal EPR, to bolster the case for further admin/NJP, or pretty much anything, because you haven't given the member a chance to rebut the comments. They are a complete waste of time and paper.

CrustySMSgt
06-20-2013, 12:20 PM
Also you have SNCOs not allowing NCOs to supervise. Such as being told to not give some one an LOC for completely disregarding what the NCO told them. If the NCO gives the troop a standard to maintain a simple on at that, check out with me before leaving for the day. This is just the tip of the iceberg. Blatant insubordination. A SrA shouldn't e talking smack about NCOs in the job while wearing fishing line in his ear to keep the whole open. Another violation of guidance and an AFI. The AF is getting worse, being told you're being petty, and to give this shitty troop another chance although he has had multiple chances. If you want the NCOs to become leaders and act like NCOs then let them.


It is rediculous for someone to direc a counseling not be documented. It is mearly a supervisor putting on paper that a troop was counseled, nothing more. If you've got a clueless SNCO telling you that you "can't write an LOC," you can always do additional feedbacks, which the regulation allows for. Just another way to put on paper (with RATINGS) where you feel the troop is at and what they've got to do to get better.

CrustySMSgt
06-20-2013, 12:21 PM
Not a the desk drawer crap, but we talked about xyz on this date and discussed changes. Both signed it and she put it in his folder. They also went ahead and got him his cjr without asking her any questions.

Sorry, if you "document a verbal counseling" and have the member sign it, you've just done a (likely improperly formatted) LOC.

You could always use the Record of Individual Counseling: http://static.e-publishing.af.mil/production/1/af_a1/form/af174/af174.xfd


If he's up for his CJR he's had an EPR or two... if he's really a problem child they should not have been 5s, which in most AFSCs, would prevent him from getting a CJR.




EDIT:
ForumAdmin, I know you're working it, but the issues with out of order and multiple posts is getting worse! This thread is completely jacked up.

And also, the board is back to holding posts with links for moderator approval... :juggle

Juggs
06-20-2013, 12:24 PM
It is rediculous for someone to direc a counseling not be documented. It is mearly a supervisor putting on paper that a troop was counseled, nothing more. If you've got a clueless SNCO telling you that you "can't write an LOC," you can always do additional feedbacks, which the regulation allows for. Just another way to put on paper (with RATINGS) where you feel the troop is at and what they've got to do to get better.

Since the NCO in question was using 36-2618 as part of her reference in the LOC she chose to do as the SNCO asked and be a good follower. She did however, give the shitsack SrA verbal counseling and documented that.

CrustySMSgt
06-20-2013, 12:27 PM
Since the NCO in question was using 36-2618 as part of her reference in the LOC she chose to do as the SNCO asked and be a good follower. She did however, give the shitsack SrA verbal counseling and documented that.

There is no such things a "documenting a verbal counseling." If you're refering to the chickenshit approach of writing a "desk drawer", MFR they aren't worth the paper their written on. You can't use them to justify a referal EPR, to bolster the case for further admin/NJP, or pretty much anything, because you haven't given the member a chance to rebut the comments. They are a complete waste of time and paper.

Juggs
06-20-2013, 12:29 PM
There is no such things a "documenting a verbal counseling." If you're refering to the chickenshit approach of writing a "desk drawer", MFR they aren't worth the paper their written on. You can't use them to justify a referal EPR, to bolster the case for further admin/NJP, or pretty much anything, because you haven't given the member a chance to rebut the comments. They are a complete waste of time and paper.

Not a the desk drawer crap, but we talked about xyz on this date and discussed changes. Both signed it and she put it in his folder. They also went ahead and got him his cjr without asking her any questions.

CrustySMSgt
06-20-2013, 01:01 PM
Not a the desk drawer crap, but we talked about xyz on this date and discussed changes. Both signed it and she put it in his folder. They also went ahead and got him his cjr without asking her any questions.

You can also use the good ol' Record of Individual Counseling!

http://static.e-publishing.af.mil/production/1/af_a1/form/af174/af174.xfd

20+Years
06-20-2013, 02:10 PM
There was a time a while back when I was a TSgt, I was trying to tell a group of Amn that worked for me to study hard while the high promotion rates held. I told them one day the rates would fall dramatically, leaving a bunch of the high promotion rate SSgts sitting at thier rank for quite a while. They figured the high rates were "just the way the AF is now".

My true wonder is if SSgt rates will finally fall back to where they used to be. Oh, and lower promo rates with the new HYT....ouch.

CrustySMSgt
06-20-2013, 02:14 PM
There was a time a while back when I was a TSgt, I was trying to tell a group of Amn that worked for me to study hard while the high promotion rates held. I told them one day the rates would fall dramatically, leaving a bunch of the high promotion rate SSgts sitting at thier rank for quite a while. They figured the high rates were "just the way the AF is now".

My true wonder is if SSgt rates will finally fall back to where they used to be. Oh, and lower promo rates with the new HYT....ouch.

The lower promotion rate benefits those pushing HYT, as the cutoff should be driven higher, making their "gimmie" points worth more. As you said, the youngsters better hit the books hard to get in the mix. I'll resist the urge to throw in EPR points again lol

20+Years
06-20-2013, 02:52 PM
Oh, most important... GOOD LUCK TO ALL YOU WHO ARE UP!:banana:

20+Years
06-20-2013, 03:02 PM
Thats true... lower rates will make TIG/TIS more important again.

A question for you Crusty: Since SMSgt, and CMSgt are designated at 2 and 1%, do you see thier rates dropping? Since we really aren't facing some great end-strength reduction, I am hoping those rates will stay mostly stable. What ya think?

CrustySMSgt
06-20-2013, 03:33 PM
Thats true... lower rates will make TIG/TIS more important again.

A question for you Crusty: Since SMSgt, and CMSgt are designated at 2 and 1%, do you see thier rates dropping? Since we really aren't facing some great end-strength reduction, I am hoping those rates will stay mostly stable. What ya think?


it is really hard to predict... but I'd say with the economy what it is it would seem like more people are hanging out closer to HYT (but not trying or have the records to get promoted), which theoretically drives the number of eligibles up. This could drive the percentage down, as the pool of eligibles is larger. But if a bunch of people all decided to get out and weren't backfilled from the previous cycle, the pool of eligibles is smaller, so the selection rate is higher.


11E9 22.13
10E9 22.04
09E9 20.87
08E9 21.53
07E9 16.80
06E9 16.85
05E9 22.83

Highest rate ever was 1982 - 42%!
Lowest rate ever was the first year WAPS, 1971 - 6.42% (with a couple 9%s in 93/94)

12E8 13.78
11E8 10.29
10E8 9.24
09E8 10.97
08E8 8.91
07E8 8.77
06E8 8.63
05E8 9.19

Highest: early 80s it was 24% for a couple years.
Lowest: 1995 it was 4.62%

Comparing the 2 percentages doesn't reveal a trend that directly ties the promotion rates from one year to the next.

DLawg84
06-20-2013, 04:12 PM
Q: In which operation did the Air Force utilize tactics nick named "shock and awe" and when did this occur?

A: Operation slim force in 2013 between 23May - ?

CJSmith
06-20-2013, 04:18 PM
Highest rate ever was 1982 - 42%!
Lowest rate ever was the first year WAPS, 1971 - 6.42% (with a couple 9%s in 93/94)

Wasn't WAPS held twice a year through the late 70's?

EDIT: WAPS was held twice a year for SSgt through MSgt but not for SMSgt and CMSgt.

fufu
06-20-2013, 05:50 PM
i'm not sure why the inflation issue is so complicated, i've heard this idea before and it makes sense. make EVERY thing you can be evaluated on in the AF / your job a criteria for a 5 EPR. anything below a 90 and you aren't eligible for a 5. how well people do their jobs on daily basis and paperwork for getting in trouble will separate 3's and 4's.

you want a 5. 90 or above on PT, 90 or above on cdc's for Airmen and NCO's for those who have 7 level cdc's, 90 or above on stan evals, etc, etc.

there you go, inflation solved.

I'm glad your not in charge....this idea has numerous flaws. The simple answer is their is no simple answer. Quotas don't work w/out all EPRs closing at the same time which is a nightmare for everyone. Rack and stacking at the Sq level doesn't work. Overall it is an AF leadership issue, but it is also a supervisor issue.

I could be better at enforcing the standards, but without the backing of "leadership" I'm viewed as the bad guy not the individual who is fing up.

c130aviator
06-20-2013, 06:17 PM
Thats true... lower rates will make TIG/TIS more important again.


The same could be said for studying harder.

Chief_KO
06-20-2013, 06:35 PM
Q: In which operation did the Air Force utilize tactics nick named "shock and awe" and when did this occur?

A: Operation slim force in 2013 between 23May - ?

Tread carefully, you don't want test compromise

Chief_KO
06-20-2013, 06:52 PM
Wasn't WAPS held twice a year through the late 70's?

EDIT: WAPS was held twice a year for SSgt through MSgt but not for SMSgt and CMSgt.

A&B cycles through the mid-late 80's due to the high number of Airmen eligible for promotion. I can't remember when they stopped. If you tested in the A cycle, your score (with the added TIS/TIG) carried over to the B cycle. Of course if you tested B cycle, you would have to test again A cycle next year.
I tested A for SSgt in 1984, missed it. Missed the B cycle carry over (picked up AFCM & TIS/TIG points) by .04. If I had made it I would have been an E4 Buck Sgt for a day and 36 month TIS SSgt.

Measure Man
06-20-2013, 07:23 PM
A&B cycles through the mid-late 80's due to the high number of Airmen eligible for promotion. I can't remember when they stopped. If you tested in the A cycle, your score (with the added TIS/TIG) carried over to the B cycle. Of course if you tested B cycle, you would have to test again A cycle next year.
I tested A for SSgt in 1984, missed it. Missed the B cycle carry over (picked up AFCM & TIS/TIG points) by .04. If I had made it I would have been an E4 Buck Sgt for a day and 36 month TIS SSgt.

I missed it on my A cycle, 1987/88...due to a change in test references, I retested on the B cycle and made it.

Wore Buck Sgt for 11 months...sewed on SSgt at just under 5 years TIS.

Chief_KO
06-20-2013, 07:34 PM
Wore Buck Sgt for 11 months...sewed on SSgt at just under 5 years TIS.

I sewed on SSgt at 50 months TIS...was crosstraining at the time I sewed on. As a SSgt I got to move into my own dorm room at Keesler.

The Cooler
06-21-2013, 12:18 AM
I'm glad your not in charge....this idea has numerous flaws. The simple answer is their is no simple answer. Quotas don't work w/out all EPRs closing at the same time which is a nightmare for everyone. Rack and stacking at the Sq level doesn't work. Overall it is an AF leadership issue, but it is also a supervisor issue.

I could be better at enforcing the standards, but without the backing of "leadership" I'm viewed as the bad guy not the individual who is fing up.

no offense, but in other words you don't have a proposal. that's the issue. and some of the Chief's who know the numbers could chime in here. what's the percentage of 5 EPR's that get pushed up in any given unit? 75-85%? maybe even higher? so by those numbers, all of those people are truly among the best. got it. look i'm just trying to figure out a solution and i'm saying without set standards for eligibility for a 5 EPR nothing will change. that's just the way it is.. look it won't effect me personally one way or the other. IMO everything will self correct anyway. promotion selection percentages will go way down and the system will reward people who test the best. in any given situation the strongest will find a way to survive regardless of circumstance and some will slip through the cracks. it's everyone in the middle who will suffer.

Zxc
06-21-2013, 03:04 AM
It's a tough problem... The form is fine and the people can't take it upon themselves to accurately and honestly rate. However, we're so entrenched in our ways from the top down that I think we'd need a massive overhaul in the system to get it back on track, and I agree that all reports closing out at one time would be a good start. We teach our ALS classes how it's supposed to work and a good majority of those NCOs rate accurately on their first troops, only to get those ratings tweaked when they're unable to provide justification to SNCOs/Chief on why someone is a four, when in reality we should need justification for our fives.

Chief_KO
06-21-2013, 12:10 PM
I said it before and I'll say it again. Simple fix to the EPR "Kabuki Dance":
1. Make all EPRs close out on their next rank's respective PECD (promotion eligibility cutoff date).
Having all the SSgt EPRs hit the desk at the same time will greatly reduce inflation. Very easy to determine which guy/gal is a 5, 4, 3.
The sheer admin load itself will greatly reduce EPR bullet edits. Will also greatly reduce EPR bullet sharing.
2. Eliminate CRO EPRs. Everyone gets 1 EPR a year.
Stops units from "helping Johnny" by generating a new EPR.
Phase it in over a period of 3 years or so...
Problem(s) solved...next

20+Years
06-21-2013, 12:57 PM
Chief,

I am not just trying to disagree with you, but I see a huge issue there I don't like. By your proposed method, that would also put every EPR at the Sq lvl at the same time. What will happen? A strat process. Supervisors opinion out the window, the golden boy/girl in the limelight will get the 5. I still say, the EPR needs to become go/no-go. Are they ready for promotion and increased responsibility or not? If not, no test that cycle.

CrustySMSgt
06-21-2013, 01:51 PM
Chief,

I am not just trying to disagree with you, but I see a huge issue there I don't like. By your proposed method, that would also put every EPR at the Sq lvl at the same time. What will happen? A strat process. Supervisors opinion out the window, the golden boy/girl in the limelight will get the 5. I still say, the EPR needs to become go/no-go. Are they ready for promotion and increased responsibility or not? If not, no test that cycle.

And who makes the go/no-go call? The commander. So now you've taken a suggestion which would stratify individuals and force them in to a rating box and given the commander the power to keep them from even competing. They end up being a 4 they can still get promoted; the CC determines them to not be ready for promotion (which is still subjective) and they've got nothing.

In another discussion on my career fields Facebook page, where someone suggested we just use the OPR format of do not promote, promote, and definitely promote. Initially I said that is a horrible idea, because we're not officers... but as I talked through it while typing, I can see how we could make it work.

For officers a DNP is their referral, so not many get them. Less than 10% get a DP and it puts them in the mix for below the zone. The remainder all get promotes. Comparing that to the EPR, right now 85% of people get 5s. Can't find the stats to back it up, but I'd put 4s at around 10-12%. That leaves about 3-5% with 3 & below (usually with NJP or worse). So what we have now is not far off the OPR stats. One thing that might be a good compromise is to, as Chief KO said, line up closeouts on PECDs. Then take the average promotion rate to the next grade over the last 5 years and use that to determine who gets DPs. The DNPs will be much easier to sort out, and that leaves us with the remainder all in the same boat with a P. What it does do is make the rating curve a bathtub instead of a /. Right now we punish star performers by lumping all the average (and below average) in with them. This force a cut to be made separating those earning the top rating and putting everyone else on the same footing.

sandsjames
06-21-2013, 02:10 PM
I said it before and I'll say it again. Simple fix to the EPR "Kabuki Dance":
1. Make all EPRs close out on their next rank's respective PECD (promotion eligibility cutoff date).
Having all the SSgt EPRs hit the desk at the same time will greatly reduce inflation. Very easy to determine which guy/gal is a 5, 4, 3.
The sheer admin load itself will greatly reduce EPR bullet edits. Will also greatly reduce EPR bullet sharing.
2. Eliminate CRO EPRs. Everyone gets 1 EPR a year.
Stops units from "helping Johnny" by generating a new EPR.
Phase it in over a period of 3 years or so...
Problem(s) solved...next

Problem not solved. This would cause even MORE BS in the EPR. Since the supervisor knows that every EPR is going to be compared to another, the fluff is going to be even more out of hand then it already is. Again, the same problem as with 1206s, it's not about content, it's about style.

Also, the rack and stack you describe is against the entire idea of the EPR. I am to be rated against my peers, in my career field. I'm a 3E working in a squadron with a bunch of 3C and 1Ns. Are you suggesting that my rating is determined by their ratings?

20+Years
06-21-2013, 02:42 PM
And who makes the go/no-go call? The commander. So now you've taken a suggestion which would stratify individuals and force them in to a rating box and given the commander the power to keep them from even competing. They end up being a 4 they can still get promoted; the CC determines them to not be ready for promotion (which is still subjective) and they've got nothing.

In another discussion on my career fields Facebook page, where someone suggested we just use the OPR format of do not promote, promote, and definitely promote. Initially I said that is a horrible idea, because we're not officers... but as I talked through it while typing, I can see how we could make it work.

For officers a DNP is their referral, so not many get them. Less than 10% get a DP and it puts them in the mix for below the zone. The remainder all get promotes. Comparing that to the EPR, right now 85% of people get 5s. Can't find the stats to back it up, but I'd put 4s at around 10-12%. That leaves about 3-5% with 3 & below (usually with NJP or worse). So what we have now is not far off the OPR stats. One thing that might be a good compromise is to, as Chief KO said, line up closeouts on PECDs. Then take the average promotion rate to the next grade over the last 5 years and use that to determine who gets DPs. The DNPs will be much easier to sort out, and that leaves us with the remainder all in the same boat with a P. What it does do is make the rating curve a bathtub instead of a /. Right now we punish star performers by lumping all the average (and below average) in with them. This force a cut to be made separating those earning the top rating and putting everyone else on the same footing.


Ok, Crusty, put down the caffinated drink and slowly back away. You just said how go/no-go is a terrible idea and then backed one with go/no-go and def promote? Same pond, different leech.

RetC141BFCC
06-21-2013, 04:30 PM
no offense, but in other words you don't have a proposal. that's the issue. and some of the Chief's who know the numbers could chime in here. what's the percentage of 5 EPR's that get pushed up in any given unit? 75-85%? maybe even higher? so by those numbers, all of those people are truly among the best. got it. look i'm just trying to figure out a solution and i'm saying without set standards for eligibility for a 5 EPR nothing will change. that's just the way it is.. look it won't effect me personally one way or the other. IMO everything will self correct anyway. promotion selection percentages will go way down and the system will reward people who test the best. in any given situation the strongest will find a way to survive regardless of circumstance and some will slip through the cracks. it's everyone in the middle who will suffer.

Ok this is coming from a ROF (that’s retired old folk) I love to see the AF go back to the old APR system with a scale of 1 thru 9. I am speaking from experience. I was a great wrench but an off duty F**K UP. My supervisor an old TSgt chewed my ass out and gives me a 7 APR. Told me if I continued to screw up he help me get another job at either McDonalds or Burger King. This did not kill me for promotion still made SSgt at 5 ½ years. That was the average in 1984. This slowed me down and made me think. He was allowed to be a NCO

imported_KnuckleDragger
06-22-2013, 02:05 AM
Just curious. How does the promotion system work in todays Air Force? The EPR thing has me totally confused also how do they work? I was assistant NCOIC OER/APR section at Lowry AFB in the mid 1970's. Oh yes that was the days of Consolidated Base personnel Office also.

Always,
Wildman

Are you related to RFD?

imported_KnuckleDragger
06-22-2013, 02:06 AM
Just curious. How does the promotion system work in todays Air Force? The EPR thing has me totally confused also how do they work? I was assistant NCOIC OER/APR section at Lowry AFB in the mid 1970's. Oh yes that was the days of Consolidated Base personnel Office also.

Always,
Wildman

Double post is Double post

wildman
06-22-2013, 02:16 AM
Just curious. How does the promotion system work in todays Air Force? The EPR thing has me totally confused also how do they work? I was assistant NCOIC OER/APR section at Lowry AFB in the mid 1970's. Oh yes that was the days of Consolidated Base personnel Office also.

Always,
Wildman

wildman
06-22-2013, 02:20 AM
Are you related to RFD?

Nope.

Always,
Wildman

BRUWIN
06-22-2013, 03:58 AM
It is tougher to get promoted in different career fields, as cutoff scores vary by career field. I would have made E7 this cycle in my old career field, but missed it by nearly 30 points in my current one.

Cross trainees are a different story. I missed SMSgt by 21 points in my old career field...something like 90 points in my new one. I didn't even have an EPR in my new career field when the board looked at my records. They were hardly going to make me an E-8. There are also other variables for cross trainees....like the great medal give away in some career fields compared to others. Try entering the SO career field where all career SOs are maxed out for medal points and the poor SSgt cop recently cross trained has 1 AFAM...and he's a highly decorated cop at that.

However, for the most part those that have been in one career field for their entire time in have just as much chance to make rank as others in every other career field.

KC-10 FE
06-22-2013, 04:46 AM
Cross trainees are a different story. I missed SMSgt by 21 points in my old career field...something like 90 points in my new one. I didn't even have an EPR in my new career field when the board looked at my records. They were hardly going to make me an E-8. There are also other variables for cross trainees....like the great medal give away in some career fields compared to others. Try entering the SO career field where all career SOs are maxed out for medal points and the poor SSgt cop recently cross trained has 1 AFAM...and he's a highly decorated cop at that.

However, for the most part those that have been in one career field for their entire time in have just as much chance to make rank as others in every other career field.

Know exactly what you mean. When I cross trained to FE I only had 4 points that I brought with me from mx, 3 of which was from my com that I got from leaving my prior squadron by retraining. Picked up 6 more points from a couple air medals while I was deployed last. However 10 points is nothing when I am going up against guys who are maxed out at 25.

I imagine I will pick up another 3 points from another com when I PCS to Travis at the end of the year, but 13 is still only about half of what the guys who I am competing against have.

Tough to get promoted when your cutoff is 350+.

CrustySMSgt
06-22-2013, 05:42 AM
Ok, Crusty, put down the caffinated drink and slowly back away. You just said how go/no-go is a terrible idea and then backed one with go/no-go and def promote? Same pond, different leech.

Might want to have a little caffine and re-read, because that's not what I said at all. The DNPs would be those who currently have referral EPRs. The DP would actually recognize outstanding performance and leave everyone in the middle to fend for themself.

Chief_KO
06-22-2013, 12:37 PM
WRT to my idea (all EPRs closing out on their respective promotion PECD): The playing field is level...each Airmen knows when their EPR is due, supervision knows too...no last minute/short notices/no CROs, no gaming the system. Who was your best SSgt? Easy to answer when all are measured over the exact same time period. It also becomes vital that each Airman "owns" their career and provides inputs (data) for their report.

Scenario: Shop has 20 SSgts, all EPRS c/o on Dec 31 (lets' back it up to Nov 31 to account for holidays, processing time etc.) Two TSgts, each write on 10 SSgts each, with MSgt shop chief. Each TSgt can honestly and easily assess and rate the performance of their 10 SSgts...some will receive a firewall 5, some will receive an overall 5, some will receive a 4, some will receive a 3.
MSgt shop chief endorses each EPR, he too can assess and rate...typically seeing those 20 SSgts the same as their supv. Bullets accurately record what each did (no copy/paste bullets)...not all 20 SSgts "led" the same action, (one led, some may have assisted...some may have actually just turned wrenches) etc. Some of the "3s" may only have a single line in some sections...if all the SSgt did for education & training was complete his 7-lvl upgrade on schedule, write the bullet, mark "meets standards" and move on.
Flight Chief, Sq Supt, First Sergeant, Commander will see a true report of their folks. Due to the sheer volume of reports, there will not be the time to polish each and every bullet (why polish a "meets standards").
White space will return...if all the SSgt did was minimal part of the JOB, bullet will read accordingly: - Performed xxx preventive maintenance inspections--sustained system readiness

The "rack & stack" is completed at the right level (shop/flight). If a Sq Supt or CC thinks "Johnny" is the $hit because he's the booster club president, volleyball coach, lay reader, etc. yep that bullet is there...but nothing else (especially JOB) to support a higher rating.

There would be some exceptions to this plan...probably the biggest is when someone PCSs. Perhaps the answer would be "majority of the rating period". Since the rating period would be 1 Dec - 31 Nov for SSgts...the unit "owning" the SSgt for the majority of that period would be the one to write the EPR. Ex: SSgt PCS's April: gaining unit writes (c/o 31 Nov), SSgt PCS's in August: losing unit writes (c/o date departed).

I think this would be the easiest solution to EPR inflation...probably the only other option would be a quota system...but how could you do that if EPRs c/o at different dates? "Sorry, SSgt Jones we've already given out our quota of 5s for this year"

CrustySMSgt
06-22-2013, 03:28 PM
Due to the sheer volume of reports, there will not be the time to polish each and every bullet (why polish a "meets standards").
White space will return...if all the SSgt did was minimal part of the JOB, bullet will read accordingly: - Performed xxx preventive maintenance inspections--sustained system readiness

Agreed! In previous discussion the idea was brought up of only needing 3-4 bullets for a 3-4 (to capture highlights throughout a career) and then adding 3-4 more for a 5. Natual laziness is gonna weed out some of the pushes for 5s, because that means more work. If they've got the bullets to back it up, it makes it easier to justify the rating!

wildman
06-22-2013, 05:20 PM
Boy have things changed. Now this may not be the thread and if not go ahead and move it. Here is a little story that happened while I was at Lowry AFB and working in the OER/APR section of the CBPO. Back then all APR's for MSgt being considered for SMsgt had to be into the CBPO and a copy forwarded to AFMPC before the start of the promotion board. The APR was written by the immediate supervisor and endorsed by his supervisor two more endorsements were allowed and one by an 0-6 or above was mandatory for MSgt and above. Now I had an individual who worked at then Buckley AB and his supervisor was not at that location, the report was late getting in and I was getting pressure from AFMPC to get it in to the promotion board. I sent a barn burner message to the supervisor and was told the report had been forwarded for the final endorsement. I sent another message asking for that location and then sent another barn burner saying I need the report into us immediately. The next day a courier arrived with the report, I damn near had a hart attack when I saw the final endorsement and it read James E. Carter Commander In Chief.

Always,
Wildman

BURAWSKI
06-22-2013, 07:34 PM
Boy have things changed. Now this may not be the thread and if not go ahead and move it. Here is a little story that happened while I was at Lowry AFB and working in the OER/APR section of the CBPO. Back then all APR's for MSgt being considered for SMsgt had to be into the CBPO and a copy forwarded to AFMPC before the start of the promotion board. The APR was written by the immediate supervisor and endorsed by his supervisor two more endorsements were allowed and one by an 0-6 or above was mandatory for MSgt and above. Now I had an individual who worked at then Buckley AB and his supervisor was not at that location, the report was late getting in and I was getting pressure from AFMPC to get it in to the promotion board. I sent a barn burner message to the supervisor and was told the report had been forwarded for the final endorsement. I sent another message asking for that location and then sent another barn burner saying I need the report into us immediately. The next day a courier arrived with the report, I damn near had a hart attack when I saw the final endorsement and it read James E. Carter Commander In Chief.

Always,
Wildman

I'd be curious as to whether or not he got promoted.

Capt Alfredo
06-22-2013, 07:45 PM
Brutal is needing 110 on skt and 110 on pfe to get promoted in early 90's.

If your thinking...you can't get 110 on a 100 pt test, you'd be right, hence brutal.

That's how my first two tests for SSgt went in around 94/95. Ended up making it in 97 and pinning on in 98.

wildman
06-23-2013, 01:14 AM
I'd be curious as to whether or not he got promoted.

I believe he went on to become a CMSgt. He was one of a few individuals who worked on very secret listening devices. Remember this was the cold war days.

Always,
Wildman

Chief_KO
06-25-2013, 12:05 PM
Agreed! In previous discussion the idea was brought up of only needing 3-4 bullets for a 3-4 (to capture highlights throughout a career) and then adding 3-4 more for a 5. Natual laziness is gonna weed out some of the pushes for 5s, because that means more work. If they've got the bullets to back it up, it makes it easier to justify the rating!

Been retired almost a year now, so things are starting to leave the memory banks....But, doesn't the 910/911 state number of bullets maximum not that each block needs be be filled completely? I do recall seeing one EPR that only had a single bullet in one of the two bullet blocks. It was an overall 3 and most of the other bullets only filled half or 3/4 the space.

CrustySMSgt
06-25-2013, 12:11 PM
Been retired almost a year now, so things are starting to leave the memory banks....But, doesn't the 910/911 state number of bullets maximum not that each block needs be be filled completely? I do recall seeing one EPR that only had a single bullet in one of the two bullet blocks. It was an overall 3 and most of the other bullets only filled half or 3/4 the space.

I've seen one or two over the years that didn't make much of an effort to fill in lines. While I've heard folks (jokingly or otherwise) say why bother using all the lines, I've never seen anyone actually do it.

20+Years
06-25-2013, 12:25 PM
Might want to have a little caffine and re-read, because that's not what I said at all. The DNPs would be those who currently have referral EPRs. The DP would actually recognize outstanding performance and leave everyone in the middle to fend for themself.

Thats what I said you said. DNP = nogo, Fend for themselves = go, DP = the third category I did not discuss in a go/no-go situation. Quit being so crusty Crusty.

DLawg84
06-25-2013, 03:32 PM
Not even gonna hide it... 48 hours out marks the beginning of my anxiety period where the information could have potentially been handed down to CCs/senior raters.

How are you guys feeling?

I know the politically correct answer is that you will wait and see and that you can't change anything now so it isn't worth worrying about, but I'm calling bs on that... The WAPS process from the time we begin studying until the day we are notified is nerve racking! Especially in the final days and hours leading up to results, because you never know when someone might come surprise you with the good news... or pass on you leaving that empty feeling and realization that you will have to wait until next year to try again.

Good Luck to all those eligible!

Bware
06-25-2013, 04:06 PM
Not even gonna hide it... 48 hours out marks the beginning of my anxiety period where the information could have potentially been handed down to CCs/senior raters.

How are you guys feeling?

I know the politically correct answer is that you will wait and see and that you can't change anything now so it isn't worth worrying about, but I'm calling bs on that... The WAPS process from the time we begin studying until the day we are notified is nerve racking! Especially in the final days and hours leading up to results, because you never know when someone might come surprise you with the good news... or pass on you leaving that empty feeling and realization that you will have to wait until next year to try again.

Good Luck to all those eligible!

You freaking correct...It sucks that somebody else knows my fate (bad or good). But I'm braising myself

CJSmith
06-25-2013, 04:46 PM
Not even gonna hide it... 48 hours out marks the beginning of my anxiety period where the information could have potentially been handed down to CCs/senior raters.

How are you guys feeling?

I know the politically correct answer is that you will wait and see and that you can't change anything now so it isn't worth worrying about, but I'm calling bs on that... The WAPS process from the time we begin studying until the day we are notified is nerve racking! Especially in the final days and hours leading up to results, because you never know when someone might come surprise you with the good news... or pass on you leaving that empty feeling and realization that you will have to wait until next year to try again.

Good Luck to all those eligible!


You freaking correct...It sucks that somebody else knows my fate (bad or good). But I'm braising myself

Part of the wait is for leadership to vet selects for any discriminating factors like last minute DUI's, 15's, other trouble, etc. They also use it to produce certificates and stripes with line numbers in them. It's usually rare to find cc's dishing out the good news immediately after they find out. Most times its a day before the official release.

DLawg84
06-25-2013, 05:45 PM
Part of the wait is for leadership to vet selects for any discriminating factors like last minute DUI's, 15's, other trouble, etc. They also use it to produce certificates and stripes with line numbers in them. It's usually rare to find cc's dishing out the good news immediately after they find out. Most times its a day before the official release.

While I appreciate your logical response please understand that I am the equivalent of a 10 year old on christmas eve who cannot sleep because he wants to find out if santa (commander) brought him presants (good news) or coal (bad news)... There is no reasoning with me at this point hah!

mikezulu1
06-25-2013, 05:57 PM
Good thing I made it last year....good luck everyone who tested.


6/25/2013 - JOINT BASE SAN ANTONIO-RANDOLPH, Texas -- More than 5,000 staff sergeants have been selected for promotion to technical sergeant, Air Force officials said today. The 5,654 selected represent 15.03 percent of the 37,608 eligible.

The list of selectees will be released to the public on Thursday, June 27 at 8 a.m.

The average score for those selected was 340.17. Selectees' average time in grade is 5.52 years and time in service is 10.78. Their average enlisted performance report score is 132.58 and the average decoration score is 5.97. Selectee average promotion fitness examination score is 72.63 and the average specialty knowledge test score is 63.40.

Those selected for technical sergeant will be promoted according to their promotion sequence number beginning in August. Selections are tentative until the data verification process is complete, which is no later than 10 days after the promotion release date. Personnel officials will notify Airmen, via military personnel sections, if their selection is in question.

To see the promotion list Thursday, go to the myPers website at https://mypers.af.mil, select "Search All Components" from the drop down menu and enter "enlisted promotions" in the search window. Airmen will also be able to access their score notices on the virtual MPF, accessible via the secure applications page and the Air Force Portal.

For more information about personnel issues, visit the myPers website at https://mypers.af.mil.


http://www.afpc.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=1233537

mikezulu1
06-25-2013, 06:11 PM
Good luck to those that tested.

6/25/2013 - JOINT BASE SAN ANTONIO-RANDOLPH, Texas -- More than 5,000 staff sergeants have been selected for promotion to technical sergeant, Air Force officials said today. The 5,654 selected represent 15.03 percent of the 37,608 eligible.

The list of selectees will be released to the public on Thursday, June 27 at 8 a.m.

The average score for those selected was 340.17. Selectees' average time in grade is 5.52 years and time in service is 10.78. Their average enlisted performance report score is 132.58 and the average decoration score is 5.97. Selectee average promotion fitness examination score is 72.63 and the average specialty knowledge test score is 63.40.

Those selected for technical sergeant will be promoted according to their promotion sequence number beginning in August. Selections are tentative until the data verification process is complete, which is no later than 10 days after the promotion release date. Personnel officials will notify Airmen, via military personnel sections, if their selection is in question.

To see the promotion list Thursday, go to the myPers website at https://mypers.af.mil, select "Search All Components" from the drop down menu and enter "enlisted promotions" in the search window. Airmen will also be able to access their score notices on the virtual MPF, accessible via the secure applications page and the Air Force Portal.

For more information about personnel issues, visit the myPers website at https://mypers.af.mil.


http://www.afpc.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123353786

ske4za
06-25-2013, 11:04 PM
I tested PDG only this year, but I don't have high hopes...


Epr avg 132.58 out of 135...
Guess no one implemented CMSAF Roys epr inflation fix.

This is an average over 5,654 people.

Those that were "truly among the best" in their EPRs are the ones being promoted. Those who aren't are not ready for promotion.

ske4za
06-25-2013, 11:04 PM
I tested PDG only this year, but I don't have high hopes...


Epr avg 132.58 out of 135...
Guess no one implemented CMSAF Roys epr inflation fix.

This is an average over 5,654 people.

Those that were "truly among the best" in their EPRs are the ones being promoted. Those who aren't are not ready for promotion.

Bware
06-25-2013, 11:06 PM
340 is pretty high. That actually is crazy....the crazy thing is; when or how is your commander going to notify you or other... That shit sucks

rich182x
06-25-2013, 11:13 PM
From my calculations, I believe the cutoff is going to be about 329 for XX000. I wish the best of luck to everyone! I have already prayed multiple times.

imported_DannyJ
06-26-2013, 02:47 AM
Good luck to those that tested.

6/25/2013 - JOINT BASE SAN ANTONIO-RANDOLPH, Texas -- More than 5,000 staff sergeants have been selected for promotion to technical sergeant, Air Force officials said today. The 5,654 selected represent 15.03 percent of the 37,608 eligible.

The list of selectees will be released to the public on Thursday, June 27 at 8 a.m.

The average score for those selected was 340.17. Selectees' average time in grade is 5.52 years and time in service is 10.78. Their average enlisted performance report score is 132.58 and the average decoration score is 5.97. Selectee average promotion fitness examination score is 72.63 and the average specialty knowledge test score is 63.40.

Those selected for technical sergeant will be promoted according to their promotion sequence number beginning in August. Selections are tentative until the data verification process is complete, which is no later than 10 days after the promotion release date. Personnel officials will notify Airmen, via military personnel sections, if their selection is in question.

To see the promotion list Thursday, go to the myPers website at https://mypers.af.mil, select "Search All Components" from the drop down menu and enter "enlisted promotions" in the search window. Airmen will also be able to access their score notices on the virtual MPF, accessible via the secure applications page and the Air Force Portal.

For more information about personnel issues, visit the myPers website at https://mypers.af.mil.


http://www.afpc.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123353786

Meh meh meh. This is about my TIS when I'll put on TSgt on the 1st. Meh meh meh, I'm drunk. Jim Bean is my friend.

RobotChicken
06-26-2013, 03:32 AM
:party"Let me be the first to tell you;"Well Done" And congrats, wish I could help 'Tack it on' for you!" LOL!! 'RC'.:banana::yourock:

CrustySMSgt
06-26-2013, 05:38 AM
Not even gonna hide it... 48 hours out marks the beginning of my anxiety period where the information could have potentially been handed down to CCs/senior raters.

How are you guys feeling?

I know the politically correct answer is that you will wait and see and that you can't change anything now so it isn't worth worrying about, but I'm calling bs on that... The WAPS process from the time we begin studying until the day we are notified is nerve racking! Especially in the final days and hours leading up to results, because you never know when someone might come surprise you with the good news... or pass on you leaving that empty feeling and realization that you will have to wait until next year to try again.

Good Luck to all those eligible!

If you were to find out 48 hours prior you'd feel the same way 48 hours prior to that. lol

I have the list; no I won't tell you anything!

The locking down of the list was just another example of us shooting ourselves in the foot. When the list was sent out weeks prior, folks would get a call from their buddy instead of their chain of command. Or the really bad examples of someone thinking they knew something or getting bad info and telling someone else, only to find out they really didn't make it. But don't worry, it is getting looser and looser every year, so before too long we'll be right back to where we were.

rich182x
06-26-2013, 08:04 PM
Good thing I made it last year....good luck everyone who tested.


6/25/2013 - JOINT BASE SAN ANTONIO-RANDOLPH, Texas -- More than 5,000 staff sergeants have been selected for promotion to technical sergeant, Air Force officials said today. The 5,654 selected represent 15.03 percent of the 37,608 eligible.

The list of selectees will be released to the public on Thursday, June 27 at 8 a.m.

The average score for those selected was 340.17. Selectees' average time in grade is 5.52 years and time in service is 10.78. Their average enlisted performance report score is 132.58 and the average decoration score is 5.97. Selectee average promotion fitness examination score is 72.63 and the average specialty knowledge test score is 63.40.

Those selected for technical sergeant will be promoted according to their promotion sequence number beginning in August. Selections are tentative until the data verification process is complete, which is no later than 10 days after the promotion release date. Personnel officials will notify Airmen, via military personnel sections, if their selection is in question.

To see the promotion list Thursday, go to the myPers website at https://mypers.af.mil, select "Search All Components" from the drop down menu and enter "enlisted promotions" in the search window. Airmen will also be able to access their score notices on the virtual MPF, accessible via the secure applications page and the Air Force Portal.

For more information about personnel issues, visit the myPers website at https://mypers.af.mil.


http://www.afpc.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=1233537

Has anyone found out yet? I heard the early release is only for MSgt and above nowadays...

Jamethon
06-27-2013, 12:39 AM
From my calculations, I believe the cutoff is going to be about 329 for XX000. I wish the best of luck to everyone! I have already prayed multiple times.

Do you have a crystal ball?

Jamethon
06-27-2013, 12:52 AM
If you were to find out 48 hours prior you'd feel the same way 48 hours prior to that. lol

I have the list; no I won't tell you anything!

The locking down of the list was just another example of us shooting ourselves in the foot. When the list was sent out weeks prior, folks would get a call from their buddy instead of their chain of command. Or the really bad examples of someone thinking they knew something or getting bad info and telling someone else, only to find out they really didn't make it. But don't worry, it is getting looser and looser every year, so before too long we'll be right back to where we were.

Come on!!

rich182x
06-27-2013, 01:49 AM
No sir, just mathematical equations based on historical trends.

c130aviator
06-27-2013, 02:35 AM
I was just crunching numbers. If last year was 22 percent and the cutoff was 321 across the board. If you take the 15 percent this year and subtract that from last year you get 7 percent. Add 7 percent (22.47 points) to 321 and the new cutoff if will be 343!

I missed Tech last year by 1.5 points, if I score the same and get 8 points time in grade/service. I will have 332 points. Which means I now missed Tech by even more than last year. I am a bit upset but it happened to everyone, we all are living in a very different USA and military...


While I think your mathematical reasoning is flawed...it just might work out that way.


apples & oranges

Just wanted to say told you so... that is all. Got this from my former commguys website.

"The average score for those selected was 340.17. Selectees' average time in grade is 5.52 years and time in service is 10.78. Their average enlisted performance report score is 132.58 and the average decoration score is 5.97. Selectee average promotion fitness examination score is 72.63 and the average specialty knowledge test score is 63.40."




...

Measure Man
06-27-2013, 03:07 AM
Just wanted to say told you so... that is all. Got this from my former commguys website.

"The average score for those selected was 340.17. Selectees' average time in grade is 5.52 years and time in service is 10.78. Their average enlisted performance report score is 132.58 and the average decoration score is 5.97. Selectee average promotion fitness examination score is 72.63 and the average specialty knowledge test score is 63.40."


...

Average score of selected is not the same as cutoff (lowest score of selected).

Nevertheless, I actually thought you'd be close, as I said, but not because of the math logic you used.

CrustySMSgt
06-27-2013, 03:40 AM
Just wanted to say told you so... that is all. Got this from my former commguys website.

"The average score for those selected was 340.17. Selectees' average time in grade is 5.52 years and time in service is 10.78. Their average enlisted performance report score is 132.58 and the average decoration score is 5.97. Selectee average promotion fitness examination score is 72.63 and the average specialty knowledge test score is 63.40."

...

All you did was continue to confirm you don't have a clue what you're talking about. The AVERAGE score means the CUTOFF is much LOWER than 340.17, which is already 3 points LOWER than you "equated" it would be. :loser:

c130aviator
06-27-2013, 03:42 AM
LOL, whatever.

Jamethon
06-27-2013, 03:46 AM
All you did was continue to confirm you don't have a clue what you're talking about. The AVERAGE score means the CUTOFF is much LOWER than 340.17, which is already 3 points LOWER than you "equated" it would be. :loser:

Just for comparison:

In 2012 the 00XXXX AFSC for retrainees, the cut off score was 316. The Average score for those promoted was 330.

There isn't ever a magic number that they pick for a cut off score. They pick the top, however many, people and cut it off after so many people. THAT is how they get a cut off score. People always forget that you are playing against the field, not the house.

CJSmith
06-27-2013, 04:57 AM
Just for comparison:

In 2012 the 00XXXX AFSC for retrainees, the cut off score was 316. The Average score for those promoted was 330.

There isn't ever a magic number that they pick for a cut off score. They pick the top, however many, people and cut it off after so many people. THAT is how they get a cut off score. People always forget that you are playing against the field, not the house.

To repeat what you said so the not so smart folks can understand.

If only 1000 are eligible and only 10% were promoted, the top 100 people will get promoted. The 100th person's total score is what sets the cutoff (after they are sorted from highest to lowest scores). Anybody below obviously doesn't get promoted and everybody above does. Tie also goes to the winner. So if the 100th and 101st person have the exact same total score, the 101st person gets promoted as well.

COURTCORA
06-27-2013, 07:54 AM
Is the list going to be on any public websites for us to view at 8am? And what time zone will it be up?

CrustySMSgt
06-27-2013, 08:08 AM
Is the list going to be on any public websites for us to view at 8am? And what time zone will it be up?

0800 Central/1300Z

https://gum-crm.csd.disa.mil/app/landing

www.my.af.mil

CrustySMSgt
06-27-2013, 08:25 AM
Is the list going to be on any public websites for us to view at 8am? And what time zone will it be up?

0800 central/1300z

https://gum-crm.csd.disa.mil/app/landing

www.my.af.mil

ForumAdmin, still having posts refered to moderator for having links issues. :peep

COURTCORA
06-27-2013, 08:30 AM
I was asking about PUBLIC websites...you know, for us wives who are currently away (due to deployment) from our husbands and have no other way to find out right away???

CrustySMSgt
06-27-2013, 09:01 AM
I was asking about PUBLIC websites...you know, for us wives who are currently away (due to deployment) from our husbands and have no other way to find out right away???

I'm feeling forgiving, so I'll continue to assist you, despite your passive aggressive tone.

My appologies, the link I posted was the secure site because I was logged on. If you click the unsecure link, there should be a public link to view the whole list.


http://mypers.af.mil/

()SgtPaskie
06-27-2013, 11:23 AM
I hear that Google.com is nice this time of year......hint hint hint.....

I'm feeling forgiving, so I'll continue to assist you, despite your passive aggressive tone.

My appologies, the link I posted was the secure site because I was logged on. If you click the unsecure link, there should be a public link to view the whole list.

http://mypers.af.mil/

imported_Sgt HULK
06-27-2013, 11:49 AM
I was asking about PUBLIC websites...you know, for us wives who are currently away (due to deployment) from our husbands and have no other way to find out right away???

Interesting i've been deployed supporting the Army and had no issues obtaining access to USAF sites. Are you perhaps deployed to a location that uses smoke signaals and tin cans with strings attached?

imported_UncommonSense
06-27-2013, 12:00 PM
Interesting i've been deployed supporting the Army and had no issues obtaining access to USAF sites. Are you perhaps deployed to a location that uses smoke signaals and tin cans with strings attached?

She's a spouse married to someone who is deployed. Reading comprehension is key when you join the officer side of the house, buddy.

imported_Sgt HULK
06-27-2013, 12:23 PM
She's a spouse married to someone who is deployed. Reading comprehension is key when you join the officer side of the house, buddy.

"for us wives who are currently away (due to deployment) from our husbands a"

this indicates the wives who are away due to deployment from husbands

CrustySMSgt
06-27-2013, 12:24 PM
She's a spouse married to someone who is deployed. Reading comprehension is key when you join the officer side of the house, buddy.


"for us wives who are currently away (due to deployment) from our husbands a"

this indicates the wives who are away due to deployment from husbands

I initially reacted to your post the same way as UncommonSense, but then I read it again and came to the same conclusion as you.

imported_Sgt HULK
06-27-2013, 12:27 PM
It could be determined either way, but the wording by the spouse is poor at best. Oh well neither here nor there

Juggs
06-27-2013, 12:45 PM
It could be determined either way, but the wording by the spouse is poor at best. Oh well neither here nor there

Then where the heck is it???

imported_Sgt HULK
06-27-2013, 12:49 PM
Its at Aaron Hernandez house :D

ubermetroid
06-27-2013, 12:50 PM
I love how mypers is down.

I guess SSgts know how to use the internet. :-)

Juggs
06-27-2013, 12:50 PM
Its at Aaron Hernandez house :D

Maybe I'll ask the MSP to look for it while they're in there.

imported_UncommonSense
06-27-2013, 12:53 PM
"for us wives who are currently away (due to deployment) from our husbands a"

this indicates the wives who are away due to deployment from husbands

I'm tracking you but I put it in context. Made no sense someone deloyed wouldn't have access to our secure sites

CrustySMSgt
06-27-2013, 01:01 PM
I'm tracking you but I put it in context. Made no sense someone deloyed wouldn't have access to our secure sites

While there aren't many, there are some places. That's why they send the list to the AOR PERSCOs, so they can be sure and push notifications to folks who might not be able to find out.

rich182x
06-27-2013, 07:19 PM
So I found out today the last 5 EPR's is not the rule of thumb for calculating the EPR score. Sadly, I lost 9 points on this critical miscalculation. Even though I score a 75 on the PDG only test I did not make it. Next year will be better.

DLawg84
06-27-2013, 09:50 PM
Got it!

Chief_KO
06-27-2013, 09:57 PM
So I found out today the last 5 EPR's is not the rule of thumb for calculating the EPR score. Sadly, I lost 9 points on this critical miscalculation. Even though I score a 75 on the PDG only test I did not make it. Next year will be better.

Hopefully you don't use that WAPS calculator Excel spreadsheet either...

Sage advice from someone who took 5 tries to make TSgt and 5 tries to make MSgt: NEVER study or test to make a PFE/SKT target based upon what you think the cutoff will be...ALWAYS study and test to make a 100 on each test.

Table 15.4 Rule 6 from the new PDG:
EPRS: 135 points. Multiply each EPR rating that closed out within 5 years immediately preceding the PECD, not to exceed 10 reports, by the time-weighted factor for that specific report. The time-weighted factor begins with 50 for the most recent report and decreases in increments of five (50-45-40-35-30-25-20-15-10-5) for each report on file. Multiply that product by the EPR conversion factor of 27. Repeat this step for each report. After calculating each report, add the total value of each report for a sum. Divide
that sum by the sum of the time-weighted factors added together for the promotion performance factor
(126.60). (notes 1 and 3)
Example: EPR string (most recent to oldest): 5B-4B-5B-5B-5B-4B
5 x 50 = 250 x 27 = 6,750
4 x 45 = 180 x 27 = 4,860
5 x 40 = 200 x 27 = 5,400
5 x 35 = 175 x 27 = 4,725
5 x 30 = 150 x 27 = 4,050
4 x 25 = 100 x 27 = 2,700
____ ______
225 28,485 28,485 / 225 = 126.60