PDA

View Full Version : Reclama



youngsmsgt
02-14-2014, 01:25 AM
Has anyone ever heard of a reclama being approved because the unit cannot afford to lose the person? Unit is claiming mission would suffer if they let the SNCO deploy. Said unit is 100% manned. They have had their issues but hey craters of crappy management shouldn't justify them not sending someone down range to do their job during their AEF band.

grimreaper
02-14-2014, 02:30 AM
Has anyone ever heard of a reclama being approved because the unit cannot afford to lose the person? Unit is claiming mission would suffer if they let the SNCO deploy. Said unit is 100% manned. They have had their issues but hey craters of crappy management shouldn't justify them not sending someone down range to do their job during their AEF band.

Nope. Good luck with that excuse, especially being at 100% manning. Nobody is irreplaceable. I've seen several Commanders deploy and the person being left in charge of the entire unit had never been in the seat before and wasn't a strong leader to begin with. We survived.

wxjumper
02-14-2014, 04:43 AM
Has anyone ever heard of a reclama being approved because the unit cannot afford to lose the person? Unit is claiming mission would suffer if they let the SNCO deploy. Said unit is 100% manned. They have had their issues but hey craters of crappy management shouldn't justify them not sending someone down range to do their job during their AEF band.I've seen it before, but a lot of Commanders won't do it. Submitting a reclamma puts a lot of scrutiny from the higher levels on their unit and some Commanders don't have the stomach for it, even if it is detrimental to their unit.

gumbo31
02-14-2014, 11:43 AM
I was a UDM for two years.

The purpose of the military is to fight wars and everybody is replaceable.

I think there is a DAV (Deployment Availability Code) for severe mission impact. However, that DAV code requires a lot of justification, has to be approved prior to the member being tasked and can't be forever. During my two years as a UDM at the Group level I never saw a reclma get approved for severe mission impact. . We deployed squadrons Supes, DO's and Squadron Commanders. It's next man up in the military.

Chief_KO
02-14-2014, 12:00 PM
What would happen if said SNCO got hit by a bus tomorrow...would the unit fold?
No. No one person in any unit, anywhere is "mission essential."
If that SNCO is the only person in the unit that "knows X" or "can do X", then he/she is failing as an NCO/SNCO for not training anyone else.

SgtS
02-14-2014, 12:57 PM
I was also a UDM at Grp level for many years in a previous unit. CAN you RECLAMA someone for those reasons? Technically yes.

Had a young overzealous commander determined to fight for a person tapped to go. However, in order to approve the RECLAMA (the code you would use for it essentially says "yes we have the manning to support your tasking, but no we don't want to play") it must be approved by the MAJCOM Vice. Once the Lt. Col. realized they would be asking the Three-star for approval to say "No", they stopped pushing the issue and the individual deployed.

Gonzo432
02-14-2014, 02:34 PM
I remember a unit (that I won't name unless someone asks) was notorious for not going through the RECLAMA process, they just wouldn't do anything. Saw them do it twice: once for a Stan-Eval C-130 type at the Deid; once for my boss's replacement at the Kabul JOC.

BRUWIN
02-14-2014, 02:44 PM
What would happen if said SNCO got hit by a bus tomorrow...would the unit fold?
No. No one person in any unit, anywhere is "mission essential."
If that SNCO is the only person in the unit that "knows X" or "can do X", then he/she is failing as an NCO/SNCO for not training anyone else.

LOL...I can't believe a CC would even submit a reclama stating this. That's like saying "we are all freakin clueless in my unit except for this guy so he can't go." The reclama is a waste, they will shoot that down at the Command Hq before it ever gets to the AEF Center.

BOSS302
02-14-2014, 03:24 PM
LOL...I can't believe a CC would even submit a reclama stating this. That's like saying "we are all freakin clueless in my unit except for this guy so he can't go." The reclama is a waste, they will shoot that down at the Command Hq before it ever gets to the AEF Center.

Didn't you tell a story about your infamous female CC who wouldn't let a group of guys deploy? You stepped in to help them deploy & you ended up in her office being "yelled at" continuously?

BRUWIN
02-14-2014, 05:19 PM
Didn't you tell a story about your infamous female CC who wouldn't let a group of guys deploy? You stepped in to help them deploy & you ended up in her office being "yelled at" continuously?

Yes...her exact words at one point were "i told you before that they aren't deploying and you need to shut up about it." LOL...they deployed.

Absinthe Anecdote
02-14-2014, 05:51 PM
Fort Meade was notorious for reclamas getting approved because of the split Administrative and Operational control that some of the squadrons are under.

You'd have duty sections at NSA claiming they couldn't release people and the squadrons couldn't do much about it.

Consequently, you had people getting hit with short notice deployments when they should have had months notice.

Reclamas are bullshit for the most part, shops cope with the loss of people all the time, no one is indispensable.

technomage1
02-14-2014, 06:37 PM
The only valid excuse for not deploying are unforeseable and temporary medical issues. Broken leg die to auto accident, for example. Otherwise STFU and deploy. If you don't, that tasking doesn't disappear, some other poor slob gets hit again to go when it was really not their turn.

Units claiming they can't deploy the person because they are indispensable, are, as others have noted, highlighting their failure to properly manage their personnel.

Now, I could see a possible reclama for an already undermanned shop that lost others due to medical needs or other taskings for day to day ops, such as what should be a 7 person section but is only manned to 5 and has 2 out already on taskings or medical. Oh, wait no, that's my shop. And I'm going downrange anyway....(true story)

BRUWIN
02-14-2014, 07:50 PM
The only valid excuse for not deploying are unforeseable and temporary medical issues. Broken leg die to auto accident, for example. Otherwise STFU and deploy. If you don't, that tasking doesn't disappear, some other poor slob gets hit again to go when it was really not their turn.

Units claiming they can't deploy the person because they are indispensable, are, as others have noted, highlighting their failure to properly manage their personnel.

Now, I could see a possible reclama for an already undermanned shop that lost others due to medical needs or other taskings for day to day ops, such as what should be a 7 person section but is only manned to 5 and has 2 out already on taskings or medical. Oh, wait no, that's my shop. And I'm going downrange anyway....(true story)

If it was someone in MPF or finance I could understand it...but no other career fields should be trying to reclama.

SomeRandomGuy
02-14-2014, 07:58 PM
If it was someone in MPF or finance I could understand it...but no other career fields should be trying to reclama.

Very true. It is a well known fact that at most bases finance and personnel only have maybe one person that actually knows what they are doing. Reclamas for Finance and MPF should be auto-approved.

LogDog
02-14-2014, 08:21 PM
What would happen if said SNCO got hit by a bus tomorrow...would the unit fold?
No. No one person in any unit, anywhere is "mission essential."
If that SNCO is the only person in the unit that "knows X" or "can do X", then he/she is failing as an NCO/SNCO for not training anyone else.
Exactly. If the SNCO is so important then there is no justification for sending that person TDY, granting leave, or PCSing. Any decent SNCO would have trained the next person in the chain to takeover for them if they weren't there. Most shops, once they're staffed, organized and running correctly, are self-operating meaning the SNCO doesn't need to get their hands in the weeds of the day-to-day business.

I didn't get many TDYs or deployments in my career until I put on MSgt and SMSgt. I deployed to the Balkans for four months and the sections under me didn't fall apart because the people knew their jobs and the TSgts there ensured everything went well. When I went TDY to the SNCO Academy for 30-some days, to a week long First Sergeant's "Mini" course, and to Randolph AFB for 30 days to do a major re-write of our SKT test the next person in the chain filled-in without any problems and this was all in a six-month period.

So if your SNCO can't deploy because the unit will fold then chances are that SNCO hasn't done their job right unless their job is to get out of deploying which may be the case.

LogDog
02-14-2014, 08:25 PM
If it was someone in MPF or finance I could understand it...but no other career fields should be trying to reclama.
I can see your point. If they deployed then they'd have to cut down the number of hours they slept on the job and that would impair their off-duty life.

BRUWIN
02-14-2014, 08:28 PM
If I am totally truthful I will admit my unit's usually fell apart whenever I deployed. It's not because I didn't train people...it's just they just couldn't be expected to perform at my level. It's really wasn't their fault. Nobody could keep a unit clicking together at a high level pace like I could...it was just a talent I was born with. I was usually shocked they didn't reclama my deployment taskings...it was like my CC's had a death wish or something.

LogDog
02-14-2014, 08:30 PM
If I am totally truthful I will admit my unit's usually fell apart whenever I deployed. It's not because I didn't train people...it's just they just couldn't be expected to perform at my level. It's really wasn't their fault. Nobody could keep a unit together like I could...it was just a talent I was born with.
It must have been your mastery of Burrito Breakfasts and BBQs that held them together. Or it could be you didn't want to leave because you'd miss the party they would throw the day after you got on the plane. http://smileys.on-my-web.com/repository/Laughing/lol-008.gif

BRUWIN
02-14-2014, 08:44 PM
The only valid excuse for not deploying are unforeseable and temporary medical issues. Broken leg die to auto accident, for example. Otherwise STFU and deploy. If you don't, that tasking doesn't disappear, some other poor slob gets hit again to go when it was really not their turn.

Units claiming they can't deploy the person because they are indispensable, are, as others have noted, highlighting their failure to properly manage their personnel.

Now, I could see a possible reclama for an already undermanned shop that lost others due to medical needs or other taskings for day to day ops, such as what should be a 7 person section but is only manned to 5 and has 2 out already on taskings or medical. Oh, wait no, that's my shop. And I'm going downrange anyway....(true story)

I think people who shoot themselves...or have people shoot them...so they don't have to deploy should be deployment exempt for that upcoming bucket. If you don't want to deploy so bad that you arrange to have yourself shot than it deserves a deployment exemption. They would just be exempt for that upcoming bucket though. If they want to miss the next one then they need to shoot themselves again but it would have to be with a higher caliber weapon than the one they used first time. With that rule in mind...It would probably a good idea to start out with a .22 for the first bucket in case you need to shoot yourself the next 3-4 buckets. That would be my rules if I was deployment manager anyways. Other might have a different spin on it.

ConfusedAirman
02-14-2014, 08:49 PM
The idea is unofficially known as "break the base". IAW AFI 10-403,

3.10. Shortfall and Reclama Procedures.
3.10.1. Air Force active duty, AFRC, ANG, MAJCOMs, wings, groups, and units will make every effort to meet all taskings.

3.10.1.1. Generally, relief will only be sought when a wing or tasked unit does not possess sufficient or qualified personnel to support a tasking or the tasking is impossible to meet or will shut down critical elements of the home station mission, as determined by the wing commander or equivalent.

imported_Shove_your_stupid_meeting
02-14-2014, 10:20 PM
Has anyone ever heard of a reclama being approved because the unit cannot afford to lose the person? Unit is claiming mission would suffer if they let the SNCO deploy. Said unit is 100% manned. They have had their issues but hey craters of crappy management shouldn't justify them not sending someone down range to do their job during their AEF band.


I was a UDM at a unit that pulled it off multiple times. On the E side, if you were an E-6 or below, you could pretty much forget about it. Some E-7s weren't hands off, but at least half appeared to be. I worked there while one Chief wasn't hands off, but his replacement with the strong personality and hot opinions was not going to deploy anywhere.

On the Officer side of things, they put in reclamas for every O-4 and above while I was on the job. Captains and LTs were pretty much told to suck it.

I assumed reclamas were way difficult to pull off before I was a UDM there for a while. Turned out I was wrong.

It was all pretty laughable, but that's just the way they rolled back then.

technomage1
02-14-2014, 10:54 PM
If it was someone in MPF or finance I could understand it...but no other career fields should be trying to reclama.

That's a trick, there are no people left in finance or MPF as it is. They've all been amalgamated into a call center/website.

youngsmsgt
02-15-2014, 12:21 AM
Sadly said SNCO is new to the unit. In the process of fixing a broken flight. They want to go but they have a hot headed Captain America Flight CC. Thus the SNCO is beating his head 60 days out going this is stupid let me go. Oh well another reason the AF is a joke.

VCO
02-22-2014, 02:41 AM
Sadly said SNCO is new to the unit. In the process of fixing a broken flight. They want to go but they have a hot headed Captain America Flight CC. Thus the SNCO is beating his head 60 days out going this is stupid let me go. Oh well another reason the AF is a joke.

This bothers me considering you claim to be one of the top 2% of the enlisted force. I seriously hope you aren't in a supervisory position.

Absinthe Anecdote
02-22-2014, 03:37 AM
Sadly said SNCO is new to the unit. In the process of fixing a broken flight. They want to go but they have a hot headed Captain America Flight CC. Thus the SNCO is beating his head 60 days out going this is stupid let me go. Oh well another reason the AF is a joke.

How about fixing your broken-assed-prose, before you start talking shit about your hot headed Captain America.

sandsjames
02-22-2014, 01:27 PM
This bothers me considering you claim to be one of the top 2% of the enlisted force. I seriously hope you aren't in a supervisory position.

If only there was a way to ensure this type of person didn't end up in that sort of position.

Absinthe Anecdote
02-22-2014, 01:51 PM
If only there was a way to ensure this type of person didn't end up in that sort of position.

Ultimately there isn't, because knuckle heads will always slip through. That is why it is better to focus on developing your own skills to prepare yourself for that inevitable bad boss.

Of course you could just be a whiny crybaby and moan about the system being bad. That seems to be a popular option amongst people who struggle with the PT test.

I even know one guy who was scheduled for a PT test a month before his terminal leave started an he pitched a big fit and was threatening to go to the IG.

He could have just taken the test, but he preferred the drama that his crying and pouting created.

sandsjames
02-22-2014, 02:40 PM
Ultimately there isn't, because knuckle heads will always slip through. That is why it is better to focus on developing your own skills to prepare yourself for that inevitable bad boss.

Of course you could just be a whiny crybaby and moan about the system being bad. That seems to be a popular option amongst people who struggle with the PT test.

I even know one guy who was scheduled for a PT test a month before his terminal leave started an he pitched a big fit and was threatening to go to the IG.

He could have just taken the test, but he preferred the drama that his crying and pouting created.

What's your deal with the PT test?

Oh, and if you are within 45 days of terminal, you are not required to take the test. Actually, the AFI was changed to state that you WILL not take the test, as of 1 Jan 2013. Though leadership loves to make threats, even though they know they are going against AFIs. The IG would be the right move in that situation. What else should you do when you are given an illegal order?

If command can't be expected to follow the regs then who can? If people don't keep them in check they will continue to abuse their power.

wxjumper
02-22-2014, 03:02 PM
What's your deal with the PT test?


I discovered in a conversation with him a while ago that he loves the PT test because he is a small petite male and therefore scores high on it. He likes to defend it as a true test in ones fitness, job performance, and ability to lead. He rejects the notion that the PT test is really not a fitness test at all, but a "who looks good in uniform" test.

sandsjames
02-22-2014, 03:07 PM
I discovered in a conversation with him a while ago that he loves the PT test because he is a small petite male and therefore scores high on it. He likes to defend it as a true test in ones fitness, job performance, and ability to lead. He rejects the notion that the PT test is really not a fitness test at all, but a "who looks good in uniform" test.

I was just curious because no part of the conversation, or entire thread, had anything to do with the PT test.

Absinthe Anecdote
02-22-2014, 04:27 PM
I was just curious because no part of the conversation, or entire thread, had anything to do with the PT test.

The linkage is those who complain about the Air Force being bad, usually start with complaining about PT.

It is usually the same crowd who cries that the Air Force picks poor leaders, when in reality, incompetent leaders are just a fact of life. No system will ever be perfect and filter out every bad apple.

You have two choices, deal with it (good) or complain (bad).

In addition, 95 percent of those trying to get a reclama pushed through the system have a below 90 score on their PT tests.

Score low on a PT test, complain how horrible the Air Force is, and try to dodge deployments. It is a vicious cycle that must be broken.

Absinthe Anecdote
02-22-2014, 04:33 PM
I discovered in a conversation with him a while ago that he loves the PT test because he is a small petite male and therefore scores high on it. He likes to defend it as a true test in ones fitness, job performance, and ability to lead. He rejects the notion that the PT test is really not a fitness test at all, but a "who looks good in uniform" test.

What's wrong with looking good in uniform? We do have dress and appearance standards.

Everybody knows that the closer your waist is to 40 inches, the worse you look. The bigger your waist is, the less reliable you'll be on a deployment.

sandsjames
02-22-2014, 04:46 PM
The linkage is those who complain about the Air Force being bad, usually start with complaining about PT.

It is usually the same crowd who cries that the Air Force picks poor leaders, when in reality, incompetent leaders are just a fact of life. No system will ever be perfect and filter out every bad apple.

You have two choices, deal with it (good) or complain (bad).

In addition, 95 percent of those trying to get a reclama pushed through the system have a below 90 score on their PT tests.

Score low on a PT test, complain how horrible the Air Force is, and try to dodge deployments. It is a vicious cycle that must be broken.

I can't believe I long for the days of the logic of Joe Bonham's arguments.

You're doing very well trolling, though.

jshiver15
02-22-2014, 06:57 PM
The linkage is those who complain about the Air Force being bad, usually start with complaining about PT.

It is usually the same crowd who cries that the Air Force picks poor leaders, when in reality, incompetent leaders are just a fact of life. No system will ever be perfect and filter out every bad apple.

You have two choices, deal with it (good) or complain (bad).

In addition, 95 percent of those trying to get a reclama pushed through the system have a below 90 score on their PT tests.

Score low on a PT test, complain how horrible the Air Force is, and try to dodge deployments. It is a vicious cycle that must be broken.

That's all . . and I mean all of it . . terrible logic.

For one, from my experience, those who struggle the most on the PT test want to deploy. It's an opportunity for them to have 6 months to "prove" themselves. I would know, I was one of them.

And I never blamed my poor PT tests on "poor leadership". In fact, I don't know that I've ever even related the two.

jshiver15
02-22-2014, 06:59 PM
What's wrong with looking good in uniform? We do have dress and appearance standards.

Everybody knows that the closer your waist is to 40 inches, the worse you look. The bigger your waist is, the less reliable you'll be on a deployment.


No. No. No. NO. NO.

Because you have guys who measure at 36" who look awful in uniforms. Everywhere. That is such a bullshit frame of mind that it's nearly laughable. Give me a 6'3" with a 39" waist and I'll give you someone who looks good in ABUs and blues. Give me a 5'8" with a 36" waist and likely they'll look like shit.

BOSS302
02-22-2014, 07:03 PM
No. No. No. NO. NO.

Because you have guys who measure at 36" who look awful in uniforms. Everywhere. That is such a bullshit frame of mind that it's nearly laughable. Give me a 6'3" with a 39" waist and I'll give you someone who looks good in ABUs and blues. Give me a 5'8" with a 36" waist and likely they'll look like shit.


http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-IkO1wEF_-hI/TxWVhz79YqI/AAAAAAAAAP8/A3WwdjSOFrg/s1600/fish-hook-in-mouth.jpg

jshiver15
02-22-2014, 07:12 PM
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-IkO1wEF_-hI/TxWVhz79YqI/AAAAAAAAAP8/A3WwdjSOFrg/s1600/fish-hook-in-mouth.jpg

I've realized for quite a while he was trolling, but I've heard that exact logic before in my own shop. It baffles me that people actually think that.

Absinthe Anecdote
02-22-2014, 07:23 PM
No. No. No. NO. NO.

Because you have guys who measure at 36" who look awful in uniforms. Everywhere. That is such a bullshit frame of mind that it's nearly laughable. Give me a 6'3" with a 39" waist and I'll give you someone who looks good in ABUs and blues. Give me a 5'8" with a 36" waist and likely they'll look like shit.

A 36 inch waist is tubby no matter how tall you are.

A 6'3" person who has a 39 inch waist is just a tall fat boy.

Absinthe Anecdote
02-22-2014, 07:44 PM
Being tall is no free pass to have a fat belly.

This guy is 6'3" and has a 39" waist. Are you gonna claim he looks good in blues?http://heartstrong.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/fat-football-player.jpg

jshiver15
02-22-2014, 07:49 PM
A 36 inch waist is tubby no matter how tall you are.

A 6'3" person who has a 39 inch waist is just a tall fat boy.

http://shawnbyfield.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/consuelafromfamilyguy.jpg%3Fw%3D263%26h%3D300

jshiver15
02-22-2014, 07:50 PM
Being tall is no free pass to have a fat belly.

This guy is 6'3" and has a 39" waist. Are you gonna claim he looks good in blues?http://heartstrong.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/fat-football-player.jpg

Considering he doesn't have a 39" waist, I'd say "keep trying".