PDA

View Full Version : Evals and awards



Stalwart
10-28-2013, 12:06 PM
I was contacted over the weekend by a former Sailor of mine. He needed help as he is now transferring from his command and had been tasked with writing his end of tour award (that whole concept I don't like, but I digress) and transfer eval. He and I traded a few emails and I think he has a good product that will capture his efforts and accomplishments.

I have had the opinion for a long time that NO ONE should write their own award or eval / FITREP. I have known some that agreed with me and some that disagreed. I have generally had a policy that 3rd Classes draft for E3 and below, Second Classes for Third Classes, First Classes for Second Classes, Chiefs for First Classes and I would write the first draft on my Chiefs

I understand that Sailors who stay in the Navy need to learn how to write awards and evals; but I have always felt that it was my job to recognize and evaluate the Sailors assigned to my Divisions or Departments -- they provide me the template and the eval input (brag sheet). I actually find a Chief or Officer who tells an E4 to draft his or her own eval to be the epitome of lazy leadership.

Greg
10-28-2013, 01:12 PM
I've seen this in the civilian world. I think its purpose is to self-identify strengths, and weaknesses.

Stalwart
10-28-2013, 01:27 PM
Which to an extent I can understand. Most of the mid-term counselings I have seen are done this way (Identify for me 3 of your strengths and 3 of your weaknesses). I just don't think the annual evaluation (IMO -- the single most important administrative thing I can do for a Sailor) is a time for counseling. Plus, I like the developmental process of getting an E4 to write for E3s, E5s for E4s ... kind of trying to enforce that they are in their way responsible for those junior to them.

Where I really got bent out of shape was as a DIVO on a DDG and my first eval cycle rolled around. My LCPO consolidated the evals she had the Sailors write on themselves, put them in folders and gave them to me. In part this is right on her shoulders as a lazy LCPO who didn't even see that the three E6 evals she gave me were all formated differently. If they had all been the same and wrong I would have been less frustrated, but it was evident she didn't even review them. Which made me curious what else she just signed for and didn't actually review (quite alot actually.)

Rusty Jones
10-28-2013, 01:33 PM
I've seen this in the civilian world. I think its purpose is to self-identify strengths, and weaknesses.

Kind of like when you're a teenager slaving over the deep fryer at McDonald's, your parents take your money and tell you that it's to "teach you responsibility" - when they've been blowing that money on beer cigarettes, instead of setting it aside to be used for you later.

Chief Bosun
10-28-2013, 01:34 PM
My case, I did have them start their evals. But then, I also used it as an opportunity to teach them how to write these items.

When it comes to awards recommendations, that was different. I would have the supervisor write it and then review it with them, if need be talking with the Sailor to see what they actually did.

The toughest I did was work on my Navy Comm recommendation and having to leave no "white space" in the write-up. I hated that one as I felt I simply did my job and saw no reason to get a decoration for it.

Stalwart
10-28-2013, 01:48 PM
My case, I did have them start their evals. But then, I also used it as an opportunity to teach them how to write these items.

When it comes to awards recommendations, that was different. I would have the supervisor write it and then review it with them, if need be talking with the Sailor to see what they actually did.

Why weren't you on my DDG?



The toughest I did was work on my Navy Comm recommendation and having to leave no "white space" in the write-up. I hated that one as I felt I simply did my job and saw no reason to get a decoration for it.

And I would have probably done the same thing you did, sit down with you ask you some specifics, draft it up and if I had any questions asked you to look at it with me. I have not yet had one of my LCPO's write up their own eval -- if anything I owe it to them to write it for them as pennance for keeping me out of trouble.

BURAWSKI
10-28-2013, 02:39 PM
Why weren't you on my DDG?




And I would have probably done the same thing you did, sit down with you ask you some specifics, draft it up and if I had any questions asked you to look at it with me. I have not yet had one of my LCPO's write up their own eval -- if anything I owe it to them to write it for them as pennance for keeping me out of trouble.

It seems reasonable to me to ask for an input, or what I remember as being called a "brag sheet" which was a form to be submitted to the supervisor for consideration when drafting the performance appraisal. Unfortunately, I started seeing a lot of senior enlisted simply asking their juniors to "go ahead a write yourself up for an end of tour" or whatever which included having them write their own performance evaluation. I tried addressing that with individual supervisors, but it was like talking to a brick wall, not to mention that it would some how get turned around and look like I was the one with the problem (i.e, mind your own business, etc.). I started seeing too many in leadership positions that knew better doing this kind of crap, and it really got to me. Part of what is wrong today and a cause of why seniors wonder why their authority is diminished. A junior has a right to know exactly how their supervisor views their performance and not be asked "Well, how do you think you're doing?" That comes under the part of taking responsibility for your people and standing up for them when warranted and holding them accountable if they don't perform. It isn't hard to figure out when you see so many supervisors negating their duty and responsibilities to their subordinates. I pissed off a lot of people trying to do the right thing, but I don't regret it.

Stalwart
10-28-2013, 03:11 PM
Yeah, it just seems lazy. Fill out the input sheet (brag sheet) but the least your immediate supervisor can do is to capture your accomplishments put them on the form and spellcheck it.

I am not saying everyone should get an EP, but I am just kind of surprised at how (as BURAWSKI said) some people are willing to just hand off their responsibility to others.

Chief Bosun
10-28-2013, 03:46 PM
Why weren't you on my DDG?




And I would have probably done the same thing you did, sit down with you ask you some specifics, draft it up and if I had any questions asked you to look at it with me. I have not yet had one of my LCPO's write up their own eval -- if anything I owe it to them to write it for them as pennance for keeping me out of trouble.

We were probably different eras, geographic locations, etc. I've been retired for almost 7 years now. I went in during the bad old days of the Carter Administration and spent a good amount of time out of San Diego in the 1980's before going reserve. In fact, my old DDG is sitting under 800 feet of water off Hawai'i after doing time as a test ship after being decommissioned. I got a feeling if we had been at the same place at the same time we may have made a good team.

My take - the more they learned about how this stuff worked, the better prepared they were for the day they had to fill my boots.

Rusty Jones
10-28-2013, 04:48 PM
These days, Sailors might find that there's little to no point in writing their own EVALs anyway.

It doesn't matter if the chain of command remembered or forgot what the Sailor did during their evaluation period. The chain of command will have already made up its mind who is getting the EPs and MPs before they even look at anyone's write-ups.

This is why I scoffed at writing my own. At my first command, the OIC even had a policy that was only verbalized to E6 and above in meetings - that no E4 or below will leave the command with a NAM or FLOC. He never said it to our faces, but it eventually leaked and we found out. So when I was told by my LPO to write my own EOT award - knowing full well that it wouldn't result in anything worth advancement points - I took that as an insult to my intelligence, and I was ready to snap... I even told my LPO to her face that I knew about what the OIC said, and that I'm not writing shit (I wasn't mad at HER; she knew that). The realization of the fact that I was almost outta there is helped me keep my cool.

Stalwart
10-28-2013, 05:25 PM
It doesn't matter if the chain of command remembered or forgot what the Sailor did during their evaluation period. The chain of command will have already made up its mind who is getting the EPs and MPs before they even look at anyone's write-ups.

I don't know about EVERY command, but I have sat QRBs for every rank through CPO and have never seen where the EPs, MPs and Ps were predetermined. I could generally guess who was likely to fall out where, but always ended up with some surprises. At the same time, I have also seen a reporting senior swap a Sailor or two from #1 to #2 (Which is his or her perogative as the reporting senior, it is their signature on the eval -- not mine.)

4CECMC
10-28-2013, 06:04 PM
Up to Pay Grade E-4, nothing wrong with a Junior Officer, (0-4 and below), authoring a young Sailors' EVAL. At the E-5 and above level, very important that the CPO Mess has a huge part in this as this is when records are reviewed by boards. As a former Big Deck CMC, I would not route an EVAL unless it had the Departmental CPO's ink all over it, up to and including the LCPO, (normally a seasoned MCPO). The DH's also knew that I wouldn't route them so they too held their CPO Mess to task for producing a great product. Great training for a JO to write the junior Sailor evals, but who better than a well seasoned CPO to write for the E-5 and above.

4CECMC
10-28-2013, 06:06 PM
No good CO would swap the numbers on a ranking board conducted by a perfectly aligned CPO mess and chaired by a dialed in CMC,,,,,,,,

Stalwart
10-28-2013, 06:25 PM
Up to Pay Grade E-4, nothing wrong with a Junior Officer, (0-4 and below), authoring a young Sailors' EVAL. At the E-5 and above level, very important that the CPO Mess has a huge part in this as this is when records are reviewed by boards. As a former Big Deck CMC, I would not route an EVAL unless it had the Departmental CPO's ink all over it, up to and including the LCPO, (normally a seasoned MCPO). The DH's also knew that I wouldn't route them so they too held their CPO Mess to task for producing a great product. Great training for a JO to write the junior Sailor evals, but who better than a well seasoned CPO to write for the E-5 and above.

I don't disagree with you, but I did get my Petty officer's involved in drafting the evals of those junior to them. When I had a LCPO, unless he or she was on leave or TAD, I never looked at things that didn't have his or her initials on it. In part out of respect for the rank and the position, in part to keep me straight. I also agree, "who better to write an eval for a Petty Officer than a seasoned chief", my concern is that some people are just getting too lazy to write on eval on their subordinates. As I said, to me that is the single most important administrative duty I can do for the people I am supposed to be leading.


No good CO would swap the numbers on a ranking board conducted by a perfectly aligned CPO mess and chaired by a dialed in CMC,,,,,,,,

Not saying it was a great or even good thing, but that I did see it. I never saw where it was predetermined before the QRB who was getting ranked where, I have seen surprises where Sailors ended up lower than I would have expected (reputation exceeding substance) and Sailors who ended up higher than I would have expected (substance exceeded reputation.) Regardless, it certainly is the perogative of the reporting senior to say who his or her #1 is. At least when I did see it happen and Sailors were swapped, it was #1 and #2 and it wasn't like #42 was pulled was up in the rankings.

BURAWSKI
10-28-2013, 07:04 PM
Another thing that bothered me and which I saw a lot was the politicizing of the ranking process, which was not really what the intent of the process should have been. I mean, really, the idea should have focused on the most-deserving to be promoted, but I didn't seem to feel that was the case. The murder boards I saw on a submarine tender were complicated by the politicizing. Part of the problem was each department head had their own people to fight for, and then I saw where the CMC was functioning pretty much as a department head, instead of as a representative of the CPO Mess. That right there took the CPO's out of the process, because their inputs were not viewed as more creditable than any other department head who felt their Sailors should be ranked higher. It really was a confusing situation because ranking should not be a process where it is politicized. I've seen it where some of the more senior department heads had an intimidation factor on their side, which seemed to push their people ahead. Bottom line was it wasn't about performance at all. It was about ...... appearances and which department head won out. A lot of BS.

Stalwart
10-28-2013, 07:15 PM
... the idea should have focused on the most-deserving to be promoted ...

But what do I do when the person who (in my opinion) deserves to be promoted the most has not performed as well as someone else during that reporting period? I have seen a superstar performer over the course of years who based on a quirk here or there ending up in a particular reporting period not being as competitive as someone else

As far as the politicization of the QRB process, I haven't really seen it, but I have not been to every command and I know it has to happen. DH's etc. need to stick up for their Sailors, and I have more than once said that "MY #1 Sailor may not be THE #1 Sailor in the command." It may be hard to distinguish being so close to the issue (which is exactly as you said -- where the CMC get's involved.)

As far as the intimidation, the easiest way to handle that for me has been to disagree without being disagreeable. I can vehemently disagree with a senior (call them sir or ma'am etc) even one I am friendly with but stand my ground, generally I have grown to have more respect for people who were willing to tell me what they thought, regardless of what I thought.

BURAWSKI
10-28-2013, 07:28 PM
Well, yes I should have clarified that last comment in that what I meant was by the most-deserving to be promoted be considered based on their performance and accomplishments to the command mission during that particular reporting period. Sadly those factors are not always the priority.

garhkal
10-28-2013, 09:36 PM
It seems reasonable to me to ask for an input, or what I remember as being called a "brag sheet" which was a form to be submitted to the supervisor for consideration when drafting the performance appraisal. Unfortunately, I started seeing a lot of senior enlisted simply asking their juniors to "go ahead a write yourself up for an end of tour" or whatever which included having them write their own performance evaluation. I tried addressing that with individual supervisors, but it was like talking to a brick wall, not to mention that it would some how get turned around and look like I was the one with the problem (i.e, mind your own business, etc.). I started seeing too many in leadership positions that knew better doing this kind of crap, and it really got to me. Part of what is wrong today and a cause of why seniors wonder why their authority is diminished. A junior has a right to know exactly how their supervisor views their performance and not be asked "Well, how do you think you're doing?" That comes under the part of taking responsibility for your people and standing up for them when warranted and holding them accountable if they don't perform. It isn't hard to figure out when you see so many supervisors negating their duty and responsibilities to their subordinates. I pissed off a lot of people trying to do the right thing, but I don't regret it.

I too started seeing "End of tours and Evals" getting delegated to the troop him/herself to write, but the times i did often those who DID submit themselves eventually saw NOTHING for what they wrote used in the "Final product" so got Disenhearted with it and felt "Why bother"..



This is why I scoffed at writing my own. At my first command, the OIC even had a policy that was only verbalized to E6 and above in meetings - that no E4 or below will leave the command with a NAM or FLOC. He never said it to our faces, but it eventually leaked and we found out. So when I was told by my LPO to write my own EOT award - knowing full well that it wouldn't result in anything worth advancement points - I took that as an insult to my intelligence, and I was ready to snap... I even told my LPO to her face that I knew about what the OIC said, and that I'm not writing shit (I wasn't mad at HER; she knew that). The realization of the fact that I was almost outta there is helped me keep my cool.

I too have been places where it was an "Unspoken rule" that E4 and below at MOST got FLOC's or FLOAs, E-4 and 5 got NAMs or FLOCs, E6s got NAMs (and rarely NCMs), E7-9 got NCMs, and any officer got NCMs or NSMs. Irked me off to no end.

Absinthe Anecdote
10-28-2013, 10:13 PM
In the Air Force intel-world, I've noticed that good supervisors always kept either a notebook or a spreadsheet on what type of projects their people were working on. If you are running almost any kind of section you are going to be asked for metrics of some kind eventually, why not keep a running tally on what your shop is producing in the first place?

I would usually get the junior folks involved in keeping spreadsheets like that updated because it saved a lot of time scrambling to answer predictable questions from the CCs later on. It only made sense to make those spreadsheets have the names of the personnel who accomplished each task in their and it was a great resource for writing evals and awards later on.

4CECMC
10-29-2013, 05:37 AM
Burawski - good notes, but I always got the ranking board results after the DH's conducted their ranking board (briefed to me by the Chairman of that particular ranking board). It was I who then presented the "final" ranking to the CO. Rarely did I have to make changes after going thorough CPO, JO, (usually formed a JO ranking board for their own training purpose), DH board. Process works as long as the CMC, XO and CO are communicating well before hand. The crème always rose to the top and politics/personality were always left in the mess decks.

Chief Bosun
10-29-2013, 11:14 AM
These days, Sailors might find that there's little to no point in writing their own EVALs anyway.

It doesn't matter if the chain of command remembered or forgot what the Sailor did during their evaluation period. The chain of command will have already made up its mind who is getting the EPs and MPs before they even look at anyone's write-ups.

This is why I scoffed at writing my own. At my first command, the OIC even had a policy that was only verbalized to E6 and above in meetings - that no E4 or below will leave the command with a NAM or FLOC. He never said it to our faces, but it eventually leaked and we found out. So when I was told by my LPO to write my own EOT award - knowing full well that it wouldn't result in anything worth advancement points - I took that as an insult to my intelligence, and I was ready to snap... I even told my LPO to her face that I knew about what the OIC said, and that I'm not writing shit (I wasn't mad at HER; she knew that). The realization of the fact that I was almost outta there is helped me keep my cool.

I was at one where the CO told the ranking board in advance who the EP's would be, followed by an order to make the eval match the recommendation. That told me the CO was working with a closed mind in that case, and there was no use in fighting the battle. Orders are orders.

Most places, though, the Chiefs got to do their job, read the evals, do the rankings, and submit their recommendations to the CO. Now, if the CO disagreed and said this person should have it instead of that one, well, again, orders are orders.

But then, and everyone has their opinion here, the recommendation is not necessarily the most important thing if you go to a board - the write-up is as that gives them the clearest picture of a Sailor's performance. There are cases where an EP did not get the promotion and the MP did based on the write-ups.

Rusty Jones
10-29-2013, 01:10 PM
I was at one where the CO told the ranking board in advance who the EP's would be, followed by an order to make the eval match the recommendation. That told me the CO was working with a closed mind in that case, and there was no use in fighting the battle. Orders are orders.

Most places, though, the Chiefs got to do their job, read the evals, do the rankings, and submit their recommendations to the CO. Now, if the CO disagreed and said this person should have it instead of that one, well, again, orders are orders.

But then, and everyone has their opinion here, the recommendation is not necessarily the most important thing if you go to a board - the write-up is as that gives them the clearest picture of a Sailor's performance. There are cases where an EP did not get the promotion and the MP did based on the write-ups.

Was the MP normally in a faster advancing rating than the EP?

If not, this sounds like a case of a CO only worried about who's getting the EP, and didn't pay attention to the write-ups to support that EP. Normally, after the Sailors are ranked, both the trait marks and the write up are adjusted to reflect the ranking. I've seen, time and again, people who've done things that really were a big deal... get those things edited out of their write up, so that someone else could get ranked ahead of them.

Stalwart
10-29-2013, 02:54 PM
I was at one where the CO told the ranking board in advance who the EP's would be, followed by an order to make the eval match the recommendation. That told me the CO was working with a closed mind in that case, and there was no use in fighting the battle. Orders are orders.

I have never seen that, just hearing it makes me shake my head. I do believe (have been a reporting senior so far) that it is the prerogative of the RS who puts his/her name & signature on the eval or FITREP to say in what order they want people ranked (similar to my job on the Hill – it isn’t my name on the door and stationary, the constituents didn’t vote me into office.) THAT SAID, I have yet to move people around and when I have seen it I have only seen the #1 and #2 change positions.

Coming in with a list of who the EP’s will be before the QRB … again … I shake my head; especially since as I said: I have seen people I thought would have ranked high not do as well as I would have thought and been surprised at what someone a bit less ‘visible’ actually accomplished.

4CECMC
10-29-2013, 03:21 PM
P.S. Awards, much like evals, are performance based and not pay grade based. Good example "might" be the surface and sub surface CO's for a tomahawk shoot, or a SUPPO sitting at the rear for a SEAL TEAM being awarded Bronze Stars while many "boots on ground" warriors received only a V device on their NAM/NCM.... Think about what it took in WWII and Viet Nam to earn a Bronze Star and we give them to O-5's and 0-6's for a TLAM shoot or ordering socks?

Stalwart
10-29-2013, 03:58 PM
Think about what it took in WWII and Viet Nam to earn a Bronze Star and we give them to O-5's and 0-6's for a TLAM shoot or ordering socks?

A lot more 'meritorious' Bronze Star Medals are awarded than those for actual heroism, especially compared to WWII. Essentially a Bronze Star without a V is a Meritorious Service Medal while in a combat zone. Some examples that raise my eyebrows:

-B-2 crew chiefs in Missiouri that got them during Kosovo
-The finance NCO who got one for her tour in Afghanistan
-The Navy O5 who got one for his tour in Bahrain during OIF (never left Bahrain)

The equivelant non-combat award (MSM) is what generally is awarded to the CO or CMC of a ship. I am not saying those people didn't work hard, and they should get recongnition for working hard. But a Bronze Star? And are they achieving the same level of performance with the same level of responsibility as some who commands a warship?

JoeMorgue
10-29-2013, 10:15 PM
These days, Sailors might find that there's little to no point in writing their own EVALs anyway.

It doesn't matter if the chain of command remembered or forgot what the Sailor did during their evaluation period. The chain of command will have already made up its mind who is getting the EPs and MPs before they even look at anyone's write-ups.

I won't say EP/MP and/or rankings are determined, but I will agree that every eval I've ever written for myself bore absolutely no resembles to whatever eval I finally got back.

Rusty Jones
10-30-2013, 11:23 AM
I won't say EP/MP and/or rankings are determined, but I will agree that every eval I've ever written for myself bore absolutely no resembles to whatever eval I finally got back.

I've actually sat on two ranking boards myself, and watched this happen.

The first time was when I was Second Class, TAD to a shore command. The command I was at actually had Second Class boards for ranking E4 and below. I saw what they were doing (i.e., ranking Sailors before looking at the EVAL drafts); I chalked it up to my peer being less mature than I was (arrogant, yes; but I didn't know what else to think). I decided that I wouldn't sit on anymore Second Class ranking boards after that. Even for my own guys, I didn't see the need - based on what I saw, I knew which guys that worked for me were going to get the EPs, who would get the MPs, and who were going to get the P's - and that whatever rankings that the Second Classes came out with would get thrown out the window when the First Classes did the rankings.

I PCSed to a shore command after that; made First Class, then returned to sea duty... sat on a First Class ranking board. They were doing the same damned thing. I got out of the Navy not too long after that; but using the same reasoning as when I was a Second Class, I wouldn't have sat on anymore board. Even if it made me look bad as a First Class (I wasn't gunning for Chief; I was actually content as a First Class and had every intention of retiring as one before I decided to separate).

I suspected that ranking boards were doing this before I even sat on my first... but I didn't want to believe it. Of course, my suspicions were confirmed when I saw it for myself.

4CECMC
10-30-2013, 11:53 AM
Content on being a First Class.......?????

Rusty Jones
10-30-2013, 12:12 PM
Content on being a First Class.......?????

Uh... yeah?

This didn't mean that I intended to kick back and ride out the rest of the 20. It simply meant that I wasn't going to do things like... back to back sea duty, recruiting, pushing boots, getting out of rate quals, engaging in the "politicking," taking on a buttload of collateral duties, coaching Pee Wee football, etc to make Chief.

Had I stayed and made it, great. But... I've seen far too many people do all kinds of crap to make Chief... burning themselves out, and even estranging themselves from their families... and they STILL retire as a First Class. If I can retire as a First Class without having to do all of that, then you bet your ass that's what I'd rather do.

And for those who've done all that, and were actually able to make Chief? If they felt it was worth it, good for them. To me, it wouldn't be.

Stalwart
10-30-2013, 12:28 PM
The first Division I was a DivO for had a lot of 'terminal' First Classes. Sailors who for one reason or another were very unlikely to be selected for Chief. Most knew it and had accepted it. At the same time, our Department LCPO did explain it to me that the Navy does need those 'terminal' first classes too, since (especially in my community) once selected for Chief and 'burdened' with the additional responsibilities of leadership it gets increasingly hard to maintain the technical proficiency in our field. Some really regretted not having made Chief, some seemed to be 'content' with doing what they really liked doing without having to be a leader.

I have seen a lot of people going through the things Rusty Jones was describing (car washes, fundraisers etc.) to enhance their chances of selection who did make it, and some who didn't. I have also seen Sailors who did nothing but their job / rating, be an LPO ... do it well and make it.

On the Officer side I have seen the same thing. A 'terminal' LCDR, who knew based on the types of assignments he took that he would never make CDR. He made desicions based on what he thought was best for his family (married the college sweethart and the family had lived in the same house for 17 years, gone to the same schools etc.)

4CECMC
10-30-2013, 12:45 PM
Nothing wrong with being pay grade terminal, especially as it applies to this specific thread. It was those who were comfortable with being terminal by choice, that made if very simple to "float up" those in a peer group that aspired for increased roles and responsibility. I never pushed boots, pursued off duty education, recruited, etc... but did quite well for myself and more importantly, my Sailors. Very easy to separate those who were doing extra curricular "stuff" simply for an eval bullet, verses those who were having a true impact on the Sailors and the mission. Actually spawns another discussion about CPO 365 and requiring all E-6's to participate - even those that wanted to retire as an E-6. But being just a "recruit" in this forum, I cannot start a new thread and can only chime in on those that are already started.

JoeMorgue
10-30-2013, 01:30 PM
This didn't mean that I intended to kick back and ride out the rest of the 20. It simply meant that I wasn't going to do things like... back to back sea duty, recruiting, pushing boots, getting out of rate quals, engaging in the "politicking," taking on a buttload of collateral duties, coaching Pee Wee football, etc to make Chief.

This. A thousand times this.

I will not let myself become one of those First Classes that can't wipe their butt without running it through the "Is this gonna help me make Chief?" filter. I'm not screw my command, the mission, or my fellow sailors over because I'm more concerned with getting all the "Checks in the box."

I'm the guy holding down the shop, maintaining the equipment, taking care of junior sailors, and keeping an eye on the mission while the bulk of my fellow 1sts are out doing yet another bake sell or organizing Spanish Lesbian Midget Heritage Month and getting face time with the Chief's Mess.

If that means I'm not "Chief Material" so be it. I can live with that.

Rusty Jones
10-30-2013, 01:54 PM
Exactly. I really think that the Navy needs to overhaul the system. I'm a firm believer that one should do their job well, and the advancement should follow. But the system has First Classes working it the other way around - worrying about making Chief first, THEN doing their jobs.

garhkal
10-30-2013, 07:59 PM
Uh... yeah?

This didn't mean that I intended to kick back and ride out the rest of the 20. It simply meant that I wasn't going to do things like... back to back sea duty, recruiting, pushing boots, getting out of rate quals, engaging in the "politicking," taking on a buttload of collateral duties, coaching Pee Wee football, etc to make Chief.

Had I stayed and made it, great. But... I've seen far too many people do all kinds of crap to make Chief... burning themselves out, and even estranging themselves from their families... and they STILL retire as a First Class. If I can retire as a First Class without having to do all of that, then you bet your ass that's what I'd rather do.

And for those who've done all that, and were actually able to make Chief? If they felt it was worth it, good for them. To me, it wouldn't be.

That's what got me into my "content to retire as a first class too. I saw 3 of my compadres all burn themselves out trying to make chief, and 2 were Not even hitting board elegibility when taking the tests.

BURAWSKI
10-30-2013, 09:59 PM
That's what got me into my "content to retire as a first class too. I saw 3 of my compadres all burn themselves out trying to make chief, and 2 were Not even hitting board elegibility when taking the tests.

It's understandable to have that thought process. From my perspective as well, I saw most of the senior enlisted advance not by what they did in their job, but what they excelled at outside of their job, including collateral duties, other out of rate qualifications, etc. The only communities I didn't see a lot of that happening in was the Nuclear Power Program and the Submarine Communities.

garhkal
10-31-2013, 03:04 AM
Exactly.. Not only did they have to be great at their work, but also everything else/

BURAWSKI
10-31-2013, 03:14 AM
Well, actually in a lot of cases I saw were those who were not so great at their work because they were so busy working on their other agenda of getting promoted, and as a result their main job responsibilities got neglected, although covered up fairly well I might add.