PDA

View Full Version : Vectoring for E-8



Mcjohn1118
07-23-2013, 11:14 PM
OK, so does anyone have an AFI reference for vectoring for SMSgts? I know this program was approved back in 2010 under the Enlisted Force Development initiative? I am wondering if it's mandatory for all senior leaders? I was told recently that some other SMSgts at my base (same AFSC but at MAJCOM) were not vectored (is this even a word outside the AF?) but the squadron level SMSgts were.

Now, I am relatively new SMSgt so for those who might wonder what vectoring is, I know the basics. Your Commander with your Chief's and your assistance fill out a sheet that lists you qualifications, special experience identifiers etc. From what I understand, it helps functional mangers rack and stack the right person for the right jobs regardless of time on station. Normally (according to the AFI anyway), taking away vol or non-vol status, the member with the most time on station is the most eligible for a PCS. However with vectoring, if you have certain qualifications but less time on station than another person of the same rank/AFSC, your vector may trump AFI requirements for who should PCS first. The problem I have is what I stated above: if vectoring is not mandatory for ALL personnel, then the results are skewed. All commanders or MAJCOM functional managers have to do if they want to retain one person over another at the base is to not vector the person they want to keep. Kind of like a "Good-ole-Boy" system. Anyone have thoughts on this?

Mr. Happy
07-24-2013, 12:01 AM
Every time someone says "vector", God kills a puppy.

BRUWIN
07-24-2013, 12:37 AM
OK, so does anyone have an AFI reference for vectoring for SMSgts? I know this program was approved back in 2010 under the Enlisted Force Development initiative? I am wondering if it's mandatory for all senior leaders? I was told recently that some other SMSgts at my base (same AFSC but at MAJCOM) were not vectored (is this even a word outside the AF?) but the squadron level SMSgts were.

Now, I am relatively new SMSgt so for those who might wonder what vectoring is, I know the basics. Your Commander with your Chief's and your assistance fill out a sheet that lists you qualifications, special experience identifiers etc. From what I understand, it helps functional mangers rack and stack the right person for the right jobs regardless of time on station. Normally (according to the AFI anyway), taking away vol or non-vol status, the member with the most time on station is the most eligible for a PCS. However with vectoring, if you have certain qualifications but less time on station than another person of the same rank/AFSC, your vector may trump AFI requirements for who should PCS first. The problem I have is what I stated above: if vectoring is not mandatory for ALL personnel, then the results are skewed. All commanders or MAJCOM functional managers have to do if they want to retain one person over another at the base is to not vector the person they want to keep. Kind of like a "Good-ole-Boy" system. Anyone have thoughts on this?

I retired just over a year ago and things may have changed but I know TOS trumped everything in my AFSC. If you were there longest you PCS'd and if you didn't like it you dropped paperwork. As I was getting out "Vectoring" was something CMSAF Roy was trying to do but I haven't heard anybody really affected by it and I keep up with many of my old peers. Many have PCS'd due to the simple TOS rule.

Capt Alfredo
07-24-2013, 01:27 AM
The vectors aren't much better at the field-grade level, in my experience. I got vectored to some COCOMs that actually made sense, but did the assignment team send me there? No, they did not, even though it was what I wanted *AND* what the development team thought I should do.

CrustySMSgt
07-24-2013, 03:01 AM
We're one of the career fields doing it... it was opening up to more, but with the budget I think they've scaled back to it only being done for nuc-related AFSCs.

Sprad
07-24-2013, 03:21 AM
Sounds like a forced mentorship but can see how it could be abused. It can help those being groomed for the next stripe or to keep someone from getting the needed experience.

WeaponsTSGT
07-24-2013, 04:35 AM
We're one of the career fields doing it... it was opening up to more, but with the budget I think they've scaled back to it only being done for nuc-related AFSCs.

2W1's are also doing it, I received an email earlier this year about it. However I refuse to participate in such a dumb sounding program. Also I don't put much stock into what Chief Roy says he's going to do anymore, not after he said he was going to seriously evaluate the PT and EPR programs by July....looks like he only has a week left.

BRUWIN
07-24-2013, 05:02 AM
I don't put much stock into what Chief Roy says he's going to do anymore.

Nice to see our Weapons Troops are keep abreast of the fast paced changes within the AF. Good work.

CrustySMSgt
07-24-2013, 06:32 AM
2W1's are also doing it, I received an email earlier this year about it. However I refuse to participate in such a dumb sounding program. Also I don't put much stock into what Chief Roy says he's going to do anymore, not after he said he was going to seriously evaluate the PT and EPR programs by July....looks like he only has a week left.

I'm pretty sure none of your chiefs give a ____ if you want to participate. Those are the easiest records to do... "needs of the Air Force" and move on to the next one.

And Chief CODY said he was going to take a 6-month look at the programs in Feb, which if you use two hands to count the number of months, you'll that ends in August...



Nice to see our Weapons Troops are keep abreast of the fast paced changes within the AF. Good work.

Right

BOSS302
07-24-2013, 07:48 AM
Also I don't put much stock into what Chief Roy says he's going to do anymore, not after he said he was going to seriously evaluate the PT and EPR programs by July....looks like he only has a week left.

In other news, CSAF Gen. John Jumper has issued a new policy concerning sexual assault in the Air Force.

SECDEF McNamara has said that civilian furloughs will continue through the end of the year even as the punitive expedition against the Mexican terrorist Pancho Villa intensifies.

Today, SAC commander Curtis LeMay was unavailable for comment in regards to recent Soviet bomber flyovers above Cleveland, though sources within the Clinton administration point to the recent tensions surrounding the shooting of Rodney King by neighborhood watchman Timothy McVeigh in Sanford, FL, as a possible motive. The Clinton administration is seeking a review of the United States' Stand Your Ground Law in regards to nuclear weapons.

Critics have argued that any nuclear attack on Cleveland would be an improvement.

KellyinAvon
07-24-2013, 09:25 AM
In other news, CSAF Gen. John Jumper has issued a new policy concerning sexual assault in the Air Force.

SECDEF McNamara has said that civilian furloughs will continue through the end of the year even as the punitive expedition against the Mexican terrorist Pancho Villa intensifies.

Today, SAC commander Curtis LeMay was unavailable for comment in regards to recent Soviet bomber flyovers above Cleveland, though sources within the Clinton administration point to the recent tensions surrounding the shooting of Rodney King by neighborhood watchman Timothy McVeigh in Sanford, FL, as a possible motive. The Clinton administration is seeking a review of the United States' Stand Your Ground Law in regards to nuclear weapons.

Critics have argued that any nuclear attack on Cleveland would be an improvement.

You had me until Rodney King. He died of natural causes a while back, drowned while under the influence of alcohol and drugs.

Johnny Jumper was a Wing/CC at Nellis just the other day...

BOSS302
07-24-2013, 09:30 AM
You had me until Rodney King. He died of natural causes a while back, drowned while under the influence of alcohol and drugs.

Yes, you are right, thanks for pointing that out. My mistake. But everything else is accurate.

KellyinAvon
07-24-2013, 09:47 AM
Yes, you are right, thanks for pointing that out. My mistake. But everything else is accurate.

Why yes, according to his Facebook page Pancho Villa turned 135 this year. You look at his pictures and that guy hasn't aged a bit.

BOSS302
07-24-2013, 09:54 AM
Why yes, according to his Facebook page Pancho Villa turned 135 this year. You look at his pictures and that guy hasn't aged a bit.

I was coined by Gen. LeMay last year before I PCS'd from a SAC base to an Air Training Command base.

Mcjohn1118
07-24-2013, 10:08 AM
I'm pretty sure none of your chiefs give a ____ if you want to participate. Those are the easiest records to do... "needs of the Air Force" and move on to the next one.

Crusty, I don't have issues with the need of the AF. My issue lies in the process of vectoring. For example, at Base X, let's say there are four slots for E-8; two at the unit level and two at MAJCOM. However, this base has a surplus with six total assigned SMSgts. There may be 1-2 Seniors who've been at base X between 5-10 years; therefore their vector for special experience is slim to none. All they know as a senior leaders is Base X ways of doing things. Then you have Senior #3 and 4 who have vast experience due to special duties, PCS, etc. Now, according to the Assignments AFI, in bases with surpluses, the one with the most TOS is the most eligible for PCS. Ahhh, but not according to Functional Managers who look at vectors and say, "Well yeah, SMSgt #1 and 2 have been here for way too long, but they don't have the right experience, so you (AFPC) can have SMSgt 3 or 4 from this base even though SMSgt 1 and 2 have been on station longer."

And that is the flaw in vectoring. If you homestead, you don't get the experience so your vector reveals that. So when it's time for command leveling PCS you are rewarded for homesteading and lack of experience. While others may get screwed (Seniors 3 & 4) with a PCS based on the needs of the AF.

CrustySMSgt
07-24-2013, 11:15 AM
Crusty, I don't have issues with the need of the AF. My issue lies in the process of vectoring. For example, at Base X, let's say there are four slots for E-8; two at the unit level and two at MAJCOM. However, this base has a surplus with six total assigned SMSgts. There may be 1-2 Seniors who've been at base X between 5-10 years; therefore their vector for special experience is slim to none. All they know as a senior leaders is Base X ways of doing things. Then you have Senior #3 and 4 who have vast experience due to special duties, PCS, etc. Now, according to the Assignments AFI, in bases with surpluses, the one with the most TOS is the most eligible for PCS. Ahhh, but not according to Functional Managers who look at vectors and say, "Well yeah, SMSgt #1 and 2 have been here for way too long, but they don't have the right experience, so you (AFPC) can have SMSgt 3 or 4 from this base even though SMSgt 1 and 2 have been on station longer."

And that is the flaw in vectoring. If you homestead, you don't get the experience so your vector reveals that. So when it's time for command leveling PCS you are rewarded for homesteading and lack of experience. While others may get screwed (Seniors 3 & 4) with a PCS based on the needs of the AF.

Vectoring starts with MSgts, which is intended to give everyone (who's demonstrated leadership and potential) well rounded experience to serve in positions that shouldn't just be picking a name out of a hat. We have 6 vectors we use (plus "needs of AF). If we take a (M)Sgt who's never had NC2 experience, we can put them somewhere to give them that experience before they make SMSgt or Chief. If they get to Chief and have never worked in those type of functions, it limits their ability to serve as functionals over those units. It'll take tome time to see the results, so I agree with you that early on, those who haven't been given these broadening opportunities are limited in what we can do with them.

We've hurt a few folks feelings by knokcing them down a few pegs... they've been made to think they're important, having served in MAJCOMs for many years, but never led at the unit level. So they are vectored to be a unit-level superintendent, so they know how to LEAD, not just manage from on high, without the perspective of being at the unit level. If you've spent your last 10 years at a HQ, you have no idea what the demands and challenges at the unit level are; being out of touch to this level is often why there is so much conflict between HQ policy and execution at the unit level, because the HQ folks have no relevant experience, so it is easy for them to levy unrealistic requirements.

As with most things, it'll take time for the benefits to kick in, but I believe it will be a positive thing, giving us SMSgts and CMSgts who've searved in all aspects of an AFSC and were developed at each level to be able to serve their folks in the field, because they've been there.

KellyinAvon
07-24-2013, 11:20 AM
I was coined by Gen. LeMay last year before I PCS'd from a SAC base to an Air Training Command base.

Did he take the cigar out of his mouth at any point during the coining?

BOSS302
07-24-2013, 12:58 PM
Did he take the cigar out of his mouth at any point during the coining?

No; he said he had switched from cigars to electronic cigarettes. He also has a 28" waist and believes that PT scores and bake sales are the true measure of an airman's worth. Finally, he said the B-52 was "gross" and that the B-1 was the greatest bomber to ever take to the skies.

"Peace Through Risk-Management and Situational Awareness" was his slogan in SAC.

KellyinAvon
07-24-2013, 01:44 PM
No; he said he had switched from cigars to electronic cigarettes. He also has a 28" waist and believes that PT scores and bake sales are the true measure of an airman's worth. Finally, he said the B-52 was "gross" and that the B-1 was the greatest bomber to ever take to the skies.

"Peace Through Risk-Management and Situational Awareness" was his slogan in SAC.
Are you sure that wasn't Nortiss LeSchwartz??

20+Years
07-24-2013, 04:31 PM
Vectoring seems yet another step of the good ole boy system. Grooming certain people to be the triple threat of the career field more or less. If you have no one backing you, you lose. There are only so many MAJCOM/school house/cdc writer positions to go around. If we want our top 2 ranks to have experience in every area, you better make friends early in your career.

Of course, its a great idea to get well rounded leaders... I just never see things work out the way they were intended.

WeaponsTSGT
07-24-2013, 06:08 PM
Yeah yeah look at the dumb weapons guy typing the wrong name, shut up.

CrustySMSgt
07-24-2013, 06:28 PM
Vectoring seems yet another step of the good ole boy system. Grooming certain people to be the triple threat of the career field more or less. If you have no one backing you, you lose. There are only so many MAJCOM/school house/cdc writer positions to go around. If we want our top 2 ranks to have experience in every area, you better make friends early in your career.

Of course, its a great idea to get well rounded leaders... I just never see things work out the way they were intended.

Easier said than done... Can only speak to how we have done it (we've done the MSgts 3 times and the SMSgts twice); there are 6 MFMs and the CFM in the room, with an AFPC rep for oversight. Everyone makes their own recommendations and then the group discusses. Just because you've got one Chief on your side doesn't mean you've got a golden ticket.

Not sure it works in all career fields, but the main push behind doing this was because of the big nuclear enterprise push, so for AFSCs that can jump in and out of the nuc world it makes sense to try and either expose folks to it as early as we can, or once it is too late, keep them out of it. Under the old system, we all know your name gets pulled out of a hat based on facts on paper, not individual ability or experience, so we were ending up with SMSgts or even Chiefs over nuc units who had zero nuc experience. Now we can push (M)Sgts in that direction as they become SNCOs, under a SMSgt, so they can get the experience before it is too late. Drastically increases the pool of bodies available!

Capt Alfredo
07-24-2013, 06:51 PM
Do officers vector? Seems to be an officer term.
I remember we inbriefed a mx grp 0-6 CC,
I thought it odd when he mentioned he had
Never worked with nuke missiles...and then
http://www.shreveporttimes.com/article/20121106/NEWS10/121106037/Commander-Global-Strike-missile-support-unit-fired

Post #4