PDA

View Full Version : Seen It Coming, Now It's Here. Thoughts?



BOSS302
07-31-2014, 10:34 AM
Fellow Airmen,



Two months ago we sent you a note to introduce the Airman Comprehensive Assessment. It was the first of many steps we'll take as we purposefully evolve our enlisted evaluation system to ensure job performance is the most important factor when we evaluate and identify Airmen for promotion. You may have heard us discuss the steps we’re taking in public forums; we both understand you want—and deserve—greater details. This letter highlights where we are heading beginning in August 2014 and continuing through early 2016.



First, we are completely overhauling the current Enlisted Performance Reports. It's no secret we've struggled with the current evaluations where inflation limits our ability to effectively differentiate performance. The new reports will include a section for promotion recommendations that will help us get after inflation through forced distribution and stratification restrictions. The forced distribution will limit the number of top promotion recommendations unit commanders are authorized to give to promotion eligible junior enlisted Airmen. For SNCOs, senior raters will be limited on the number of EPR stratifications given to promotion eligible MSgts and SMSgts.



We’re also introducing a performance report designed specifically for CMSgts that we’ll implement and utilize during this year’s Command Chiefs Screening Board process. For now, the EPR will be a test form and not a permanent part of a Chief’s record, but we intend to fully implement it over the next year.



To make these changes work, we will make several modifications to the EPR process. Starting this November, we will use static, or fixed, annual close out dates for each rank tied to RegAF promotion eligibility cut-off dates. The static dates will enable the implementation of the forced distribution and stratification policy and result in better performance-based evaluations.



To further emphasize performance as the primary factor in promotions, over the next several years, we’ll gradually draw down the time-in-grade and time-in-service points awarded in the Weighted Airman Promotion System with the goal of removing them completely. We'll do the necessary analysis every year to ensure there aren't any unintended consequences of the reduction. If there are, we'll adjust. In addition, beginning with the 2015 promotion cycles for SSgt, TSgt and MSgt promotions, we’ll give points for a maximum of the last three EPRs instead of five to emphasize recent performance.



Lastly, starting next year, promotion to MSgt will be through a two-phased process that blends WAPS with a board similar to the evaluation boards already in place for promotion to SMSgt and CMSgt. The process will enable us to assess leadership, sustained performance, and future potential, and will align promotion to MSgt more with the process for our other two senior NCO grades.



The changes we’re making are comprehensive and significantly update our enlisted evaluations and promotions system. We have one goal in mind here: focus on performance. We believe these are purposeful steps in that direction. As always, we’ll need your continued commitment as we move forward.

Chief_KO
07-31-2014, 01:08 PM
Well for all those who have been complaining about EPRs, the ol saying "Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it" comes to mind.

Seriously, the alignment of c/o to PECD is a huge step in the right direction. I think that move should have been done (with the same forms, etc.) about 15 years ago when inflation started to become uncontrollable.

It's going to be a big change (obviously) that will probably cause a pretty good amount of concern (bitching). Hopefully those Chiefs still in uniform have all the details and are ready to answer their Airmen's questions.

DannyJ
07-31-2014, 01:42 PM
I'm pleased with the direction, but still a bit disappointed on the level of detail being given here. I'll be testing for MSgt this coming Spring, and this leaves a lot of pending questions that, dependant on answer, have significant impact on how I, among many others, will work towards that.

Is SKT still going to be included in the WAPS portion?
What is the "blend" of WAPS and board?
Are TIG and TIS being drawn down at all this testing cycle?

Good start, but as all to obvious of late, the clarification portion of this will be the moneymaker. Waiting to see how late in the game we get before that clairification piece is worked out.

CJSmith
07-31-2014, 01:53 PM
I'm pleased with the direction, but still a bit disappointed on the level of detail being given here. I'll be testing for MSgt this coming Spring, and this leaves a lot of pending questions that, dependant on answer, have significant impact on how I, among many others, will work towards that.

Is SKT still going to be included in the WAPS portion?
What is the "blend" of WAPS and board?
Are TIG and TIS being drawn down at all this testing cycle?

Good start, but as all to obvious of late, the clarification portion of this will be the moneymaker. Waiting to see how late in the game we get before that clairification piece is worked out.

If it were me in your shoes, I would continue studying SKT/PFE as we have in years past. I'd rather be armed and ready than unprepared.

CJSmith
07-31-2014, 02:23 PM
There's also a Public Affairs Guidance that will be posted to af.mil very soon. Our Command CMSgt just pushed it to us. EPR points are raised to 250 points and "Force Distribution" promotion quotas will be spread among all AFSC's under a CC's watch, not by AFSC. Lots more of info in there.

sandsjames
07-31-2014, 02:38 PM
I'm pleased with the direction, but still a bit disappointed on the level of detail being given here. I'll be testing for MSgt this coming Spring, and this leaves a lot of pending questions that, dependant on answer, have significant impact on how I, among many others, will work towards that.

Is SKT still going to be included in the WAPS portion?
What is the "blend" of WAPS and board?
Are TIG and TIS being drawn down at all this testing cycle?

Good start, but as all to obvious of late, the clarification portion of this will be the moneymaker. Waiting to see how late in the game we get before that clairification piece is worked out.From what I understand, the WAPS test will still be the same. Then, they will take the top 60% of the scores (no TIG/TIS included) and those top 60% will go to the board.

Zxc
07-31-2014, 02:40 PM
I like most of it but my biggest concern is the cross-AFSC quotas. For promotion we're compared against others in our AFSC, but for our biggest promotion factor we're compared against everyone. Whether its right or not, if its anything like awards you'll see certain AFSCs regularly coming out on top.

DannyJ
07-31-2014, 02:52 PM
I like most of it but my biggest concern is the cross-AFSC quotas. For promotion we're compared against others in our AFSC, but for our biggest promotion factor we're compared against everyone. Whether its right or not, if its anything like awards you'll see certain AFSCs regularly coming out on top.

I'm concerned on this point too. How can a REMF Airman EVER compare to PJ/TACP etc? Here's an example: supply guy in a STS squadron, responsible for outfitting the SOF guys, going up against guys he's working to support. Doesn't pass the logic test to me. If they were serious about this, it should be strating folks by AFSC by base level. Even that is far from perfect, but better than rating apples against oranges.

Zxc
07-31-2014, 02:58 PM
I'm concerned on this point too. How can a REMF Airman EVER compare to PJ/TACP etc? Here's an example: supply guy in a STS squadron, responsible for outfitting the SOF guys, going up against guys he's working to support. Doesn't pass the logic test to me. If they were serious about this, it should be strating folks by AFSC by base level. Even that is far from perfect, but better than rating apples against oranges.


I think every squadron can point to the sections that bring in the most awards--for CE its Fire and EOD. Heck look at the 12OAY thru its history and you'll regularly see a lot of the same AFSCs. I feel bad for support personnel attached to certain units--imagine being the personnelist competing for promotion points against special forces.

Measure Man
07-31-2014, 03:42 PM
I think for the most part these are good changes.

The major hesitation for me would be the elimination of TIG/TIS points...but will see how that works out. I think TIG/TIS was a good mechanism to help to average person get promoted eventually...tht person is going to have a tough time getting promoted ever, under this new thing. Testing his 7th time, he'll be no better off than testing 1st time. I think you'll see the fast burners burning even faster (promote first time, every time) under this. So, you may end up with a lot more real young MSgts supervising 40 year old SSgts. Not necessarily a huge problem...but, we might see some frustration out of those older folks who can't quite get over the hump.

I get the concern over the cross-AFSC rack and stack...will have to see how it plays out also...I think over the course of a career things will work out for those folks who do an assignment at an "elite" unit...unless they spend their whole career there, it will just be a data point that is part of a larger picture and pretty easy to put in perspective of the unit they work in

Measure Man
07-31-2014, 04:05 PM
I'm concerned on this point too. How can a REMF Airman EVER compare to PJ/TACP etc? Here's an example: supply guy in a STS squadron, responsible for outfitting the SOF guys, going up against guys he's working to support. Doesn't pass the logic test to me. If they were serious about this, it should be strating folks by AFSC by base level. Even that is far from perfect, but better than rating apples against oranges.

Perhaps a better question would be...why should a supply guy promote over a PJ/TACP?

Maybe the problem isn't in rating across AFSCs, it is promoting within them that is the problem.

Filterbing
07-31-2014, 04:14 PM
I think every squadron can point to the sections that bring in the most awards--for CE its Fire and EOD. Heck look at the 12OAY thru its history and you'll regularly see a lot of the same AFSCs. I feel bad for support personnel attached to certain units--imagine being the personnelist competing for promotion points against special forces.


That's not really too big of an issue, The supply guys are going to test against supply guys. It might suck to get a 4 EPR while in one unit, when that same EPR would be a 5 in another. You have that already with quarter awards. For example if a had my last job's bullets where I am now I would be slaying my current squadron.

WILDJOKER5
07-31-2014, 04:28 PM
I am so happy to be planning to get out after my enlistment is up.

WILDJOKER5
07-31-2014, 04:37 PM
There are so many variables to all of this, its pretty disgusting. You are in and want a 5, get ready to give up your family or dont plan to have one. Be ready to be going for a masters degree. One thing I have heard from my command chief was all the EPRs being written at the same month for the same ranks, so PCSing in the middle of the year means you can have a lot of EPRs with half information on it while being balanced against the quotas. So really, those who don't PCS should have the best EPRs. People wont just be volunteering for stuff, they will need to be coming up with new volunteer efforts and leading them so they can have a bullet under par with their rank. That means no one will be at work either.

youngsmsgt
07-31-2014, 05:28 PM
I say this will be an even more jacked up system. Young people still getting screwed because the CC wants to get the old guy a stripe. Non manpower billet positions like Squadron Superintendent going to the oldest TIG SNCO or the good old boy that's been in the unit the longest. Therefore they get the coveted #1 strat even though we're not manned to fill the slot. So how do strat someone for performance based work when they're in a non-funded position?

How about we truly change and stop letting E-7s be Shirts. Only E-8s that are nominated by SQ/CCs. Leave the young MSgts in their career fields to learn how to be SNCOs before letting them sit at the big kids table. This won't happen though because we push the new MSgt to be a Shirt because that's the best opportunity they have at making E-8.

CJSmith
07-31-2014, 05:47 PM
I say this will be an even more jacked up system. Young people still getting screwed because the CC wants to get the old guy a stripe. Non manpower billet positions like Squadron Superintendent going to the oldest TIG SNCO or the good old boy that's been in the unit the longest. Therefore they get the coveted #1 strat even though we're not manned to fill the slot. So how do strat someone for performance based work when they're in a non-funded position?

How about we truly change and stop letting E-7s be Shirts. Only E-8s that are nominated by SQ/CCs. Leave the young MSgts in their career fields to learn how to be SNCOs before letting them sit at the big kids table. This won't happen though because we push the new MSgt to be a Shirt because that's the best opportunity they have at making E-8.

Even better, eliminate the shirt position. SNCOs in the unit should be working for their folks and with the way information is shared nowadays, we can push resources to our folks faster. We don't need a shirt to stand up at CC call or walk around the building to tell us about the happenings at the A&FRC. My 2-cents.

Measure Man
07-31-2014, 05:59 PM
Even better, eliminate the shirt position. SNCOs in the unit should be working for their folks and with the way information is shared nowadays, we can push resources to our folks faster. We don't need a shirt to stand up at CC call or walk around the building to tell us about the happenings at the A&FRC. My 2-cents.

+1 First Sergeants are overrated.

WILDJOKER5
07-31-2014, 06:24 PM
+1 First Sergeants are overrated.

Then whos going to bail the Airmen out of jail after the DUIs?

Measure Man
07-31-2014, 06:27 PM
Then whos going to bail the Airmen out of jail after the DUIs?

Are you asking seriously or facetiously?

Spouse, friend, parent, supervisor...

Who bails out a civilian?

WILDJOKER5
07-31-2014, 06:39 PM
Are you asking seriously or facetiously?

Spouse, friend, parent, supervisor...

Who bails out a civilian?

No, I wasnt.

AF-1Sgt
07-31-2014, 08:45 PM
Even better, eliminate the shirt position. SNCOs in the unit should be working for their folks and with the way information is shared nowadays, we can push resources to our folks faster. We don't need a shirt to stand up at CC call or walk around the building to tell us about the happenings at the A&FRC. My 2-cents.

IF supervisors of all levels would be willing to put in the work to take care of their troops, then yes, there would not be a need for Shirts, BUT that does not happen. I lost count of the number of supervisors who came snivling into my office about a problem child that they wanted kick out yet they had nothing documented on them becasue they didnt want to be the bad guy or were afraid of the conflict. I mentored them on how to do the paperwork and how to do it correctly, sent them on their way and monitored both them and their problem children.
I spent most of my time walking the halls talking to people, finding out about them and their families. Getting them to open up and really talk to me, so when they had a problem, they knew they could come to me for help. Which I was always happy to provide. In my opinion, I was doing my job when nobody stood up when I entered a room or when I passed by their desk, bench, work station, whatever becasue I was around so often, I was seen almost as a coworker. SFS hated me when I tried to do this, so i stopped, but still got them to relax when they saw me driving up to their post.

As a retired First Sergeant, people were and still are my business.

Measure Man
07-31-2014, 09:07 PM
IF supervisors of all levels would be willing to put in the work to take care of their troops, then yes, there would not be a need for Shirts, BUT that does not happen.

Not buying it...supervisors are just as willing as First Sergeants. Heck, we even non-vol'd First Sergeants a feew years ago...they were just ordinary MSgts and did just fine as 1stSgts as well.


I lost count of the number of supervisors who came snivling into my office about a problem child that they wanted kick out yet they had nothing documented on them becasue they didnt want to be the bad guy or were afraid of the conflict. I mentored them on how to do the paperwork and how to do it correctly, sent them on their way and monitored both them and their problem children.

This is nothing that every SNCO hasn't had to do now and then.


I spent most of my time walking the halls talking to people, finding out about them and their families. Getting them to open up and really talk to me, so when they had a problem, they knew they could come to me for help.

Must've been nice not to have a mission to worry about.


Which I was always happy to provide. In my opinion, I was doing my job when nobody stood up when I entered a room or when I passed by their desk, bench, work station, whatever becasue I was around so often, I was seen almost as a coworker. SFS hated me when I tried to do this, so i stopped, but still got them to relax when they saw me driving up to their post.

As a retired First Sergeant, people were and still are my business.

I have no doubt that many First Sergeants are awesome individuals and wonderful, caring people. Separate the people from the position...there is nothing a First Sergeant does that supervisors or shop chiefs aren't willing and capable fo doing...and probably should be doing.

As a shop chief and flight chief, my people knew me and I knew them also...because I was there every day.

I still think the position has outlived its usefulness...the only reason it is "necessary" is because the AF has institutionalized it to the point where, unless you are a chief or a diamond many of the orgs on base won't talk to you about your people. "You have to go through the first sergeant"...bunch of BS, I never wore a diamond, but even had to mentor a shirt or two in my day, as well.

Many of the shirts I've seen spent the bulk of their days at meetings...First Sergeants Council, Top 3, Club Advisory, Sq Top 4...off to a panel at NCOPE...blah, blah, blah...yes, just like everyone else, there are good shirts and bad shirts and shirts in between...no better, no worse. They are no better at helping Airmen with problems than anyone else.

Zxc
07-31-2014, 09:53 PM
That's not really too big of an issue, The supply guys are going to test against supply guys. It might suck to get a 4 EPR while in one unit, when that same EPR would be a 5 in another. You have that already with quarter awards. For example if a had my last job's bullets where I am now I would be slaying my current squadron.


That's exactly the issue to me though.

- You compete against others in your AFSC for promotion
- You compete against others outside of your AFSC for promotion points

The two don't mesh. You'd literally get an edge up on promotion against your peers by NOT being in an "elite" unit

AF-1Sgt
07-31-2014, 09:56 PM
You seem to have missed the point. Supervisors are not doing their job and taking care of their people, so it falls to the Shirt.

Just like you point out there are good supervisors and bad ones...just like Shirts, but becasue so many jobs have been eliminated and pushed down to the individual Airman level, there is even less time to properly mentor young troops as supervisors are supposed to do. How will eliminating the Shirt help this?

Zxc
07-31-2014, 09:59 PM
Good first sergeants are worth their weight in gold, but more and more I'm meeting ones that use it as a promotion stepping stone. With it being a near-guaranteed method for pushing to SMSgt and beyond, we're attracting a lot of candidates that are in it for the wrong reasons.

AF-1Sgt
07-31-2014, 10:01 PM
Must've been nice not to have a mission to worry about.

I had a mission. Taking care of my people and becasue I was proactive, got out and talked with everyone I prevented little problems from becoming a big problem. It always made sense to me to spend 15 minutes fixing a small problem rather than 2 hours dealing with a bigger one.

Big AF loves to talk about being proactive, but it was management by peeing on fires. You see on fire, pee on it them move to the next. Works in the short term, but not so well long term. That's why I spent lots of hours up front establishing myself, my style and how I did business so that I had room to breath later on. It almost always worked, even with 350 SFS and FP in the desert.

Zxc
07-31-2014, 10:05 PM
Perhaps a better question would be...why should a supply guy promote over a PJ/TACP?

Maybe the problem isn't in rating across AFSCs, it is promoting within them that is the problem.

We promote within AFSCs to hit the number of NCOs/SNCOs those specific AFSCs need. It wouldn't make sense to put supply guys against PJ/TACP because they can't fill each others' positions. Some AFSCs already require more SNCOs than others and that is reflected in their promotion rates and cut-off scores. In CE for example, you can look at our Operations Managers (Customer Service) where there are very few SCNOs to go around since they're rarely used in a standard CE unit. None of the 3E6 NCOs down the hall have ever even met a 3E6 SNCO.

AF-1Sgt
07-31-2014, 10:06 PM
Good first sergeants are worth their weight in gold, but more and more I'm meeting ones that use it as a promotion stepping stone. With it being a near-guaranteed method for pushing to SMSgt and beyond, we're attracting a lot of candidates that are in it for the wrong reasons.

Because they have such a hard time filling the slots becasue it is such a difficult job, they needed to offer some form of incentive. I never had any plans to go back to my career field regardless of promotion potential. Much happier being a retired MSgt Shirt than a retired SMSgt maintainer.

Measure Man
07-31-2014, 10:12 PM
We promote within AFSCs to hit the number of NCOs/SNCOs those specific AFSCs need. It wouldn't make sense to put supply guys against PJ/TACP because they can't fill each others' positions. Some AFSCs already require more SNCOs than others and that is reflected in their promotion rates and cut-off scores. In CE for example, you can look at our Operations Managers (Customer Service) where there are very few SCNOs to go around since they're rarely used in a standard CE unit. None of the 3E6 NCOs down the hall have ever even met a 3E6 SNCO.

Unfortunately, that's not how promotions work.

Yes, the AF promotes within the AFSC..but the numbers promoted are not based on vacancies within the AFSC, they are based on vacancies AF-wide across all AFSCs.

I don't know about 3E6...but the promotion percentage in each AFSC is basically the same, regardless of whether there is a need in that particular AFSC or not. There are slight variations, just based on the number of eligible... For example, if the promotion rate is 25% and AFSC A has 8 people, 2 get promoted...AFSC B has 6 people, 25% is 1.5, they can't promote half a person, so they also get 2...makeing their actual selection percentage 33%...but it has nothing to do with that AFSC having more or less vacancies.

Measure Man
07-31-2014, 10:15 PM
Good SNCOs are worth their weight in gold, .

There ya go...fixed it.

youngsmsgt
08-01-2014, 09:10 AM
You seem to have missed the point. Supervisors are not doing their job and taking care of their people, so it falls to the Shirt.


Just like you point out there are good supervisors and bad ones...just like Shirts, but becasue so many jobs have been eliminated and pushed down to the individual Airman level, there is even less time to properly mentor young troops as supervisors are supposed to do. How will eliminating the Shirt help this?

Get over yourself. First Sergeants are not the answer to supervisors not being SNCOs. People, programs and money is every SNCOs responsibility. Some do each well, some do cetain ones well. If a supervisor isn't doing their job as a SNCO why aren't they being mentored or reprimanded? Because, you would be out of a job where you feel above those SNCOs.

Eliminating a Shirt puts you back in your career field where you belong. Bottomline, having that diamond makes a lot of Shirts feel special compared to that Flight Chief or Superintendent. No different than having a Command Chief right next to the Wing CC he know feels above every Chief when in reality they are equals with different roles. If the enlisted voice was so important to CCs fund these Sq Supt billets so the mentoring can start early in their careers.

BENDER56
08-01-2014, 02:16 PM
Then whos going to bail the Airmen out of jail after the DUIs?

Ha. Good one.

I was a 1st Sgt for 12 years and had more than a few troops get arrested. Never once bailed out any of them -- any 1st Sgt who would do that is a fool. I'm not going to become potentially financially liable for one of my troops -- especially one who has demonstrated whatever poor judgment got him arrested in the first place. Sometimes I might take a drive down to the jail to talk to them and see if they need me to do anything for them, but usually I'd get assurance from the jail officials that they were okay and I'd make the necessary squadron notifications by phone. I'd at least make a trip to see him on the next duty day. Once he or someone else posted his bail, I'd pick him up and give him a ride back to his place and brief him about the upcoming drama his life was about to comprise.

One time I had a guy arrested in Smithfield, NC and some official there told me that because I was the troop's 1st Sgt, he'd release him on his own recognizance if I came to pick him up. That was the first and only time that ever happened. So I called up the troop's supervisor (it was about 0300), explained the situation, and told him we were going to take a ride together from Goldsboro to Smithfield. For some reason, he wasn't keen on it but I convinced him it was in everyone's best interests if he came along. Or maybe I just felt more dickish than usual -- I can't remember.

Now, SF apprehensions are a different matter. 1st Sgts have an obligation to go to the cop shop and sign for the release of our troops. Although the cops who called me in Pensacola to get my troop who they apprehended at Hurlburt made me wonder about the limits of that policy. I mean, if a guy is stationed at Hickam and he goes home to Wichita Falls on leave and gets apprehended on Sheppard, is his 1st Sgt from Hawaii expected to book a flight to Texas to sign for his troop? Right.

Does the AF need 1st Sgts? Maybe. Maybe not. Right now they exist and I'd like to think the good ones still provide some value that might not be there if the position didn't exist. But, like lots of other things we think are inviolable, if the 1st Sgt position disappeared today, the AF would still function and in five or ten years few people would even know the difference.

Chief_KO
08-01-2014, 09:22 PM
Bender is exactly right, only a fool would obligate themselves financially by bailing out someone. That was taught hour 1 day 1 of the FS symposium MSgt_KO attended way back when. Signing the "human hand receipt" to get out of SF apprehension is different.

SSgt_KO learned that one from personal experience when I called my first sergeant to bail me out. The Chief (we had a CMSgt First Sergeant) asked if I had bail money or credit card and gave me the number to a bail bondsman, then told me to report 0700 on Monday morning with my supervisor. Oh, BTW this was my initial meeting with my supv (he was deployed when I arrived and just returned). Not exactly the best way to meet your new boss...

Hoo-huh???
08-02-2014, 05:37 PM
Unfortunately, that's not how promotions work.

Yes, the AF promotes within the AFSC..but the numbers promoted are not based on vacancies within the AFSC, they are based on vacancies AF-wide across all AFSCs.

I don't know about 3E6...but the promotion percentage in each AFSC is basically the same, regardless of whether there is a need in that particular AFSC or not. There are slight variations, just based on the number of eligible... For example, if the promotion rate is 25% and AFSC A has 8 people, 2 get promoted...AFSC B has 6 people, 25% is 1.5, they can't promote half a person, so they also get 2...makeing their actual selection percentage 33%...but it has nothing to do with that AFSC having more or less vacancies.

Uh, you may want to double check what you're saying on the promotion percentages being about the same. Last year many AFSCs received a targeted higher promotion rate to E8. One of these was 1st sgts with a 15 to 20% rate I believe. Avionics was around 8% & Aerospace Propulsion was just under 3%. These are three I remember seeing in the stats...

hustonj
08-03-2014, 10:11 PM
Uh, you may want to double check what you're saying on the promotion percentages being about the same. Last year many AFSCs received a targeted higher promotion rate to E8. One of these was 1st sgts with a 15 to 20% rate I believe. Avionics was around 8% & Aerospace Propulsion was just under 3%. These are three I remember seeing in the stats...

I hate saying this, but . . .. Measure Man's more right than you are.

The USAF sets a single promotion percentage for the entire service, and then it provides a bonus to specific fields (normally chronically undermanned fields) by slightly reducing the rates for everybody else.

But the USAF DOES set one rate, identifies career fields with RETENTION problems (not manning problems at specific grades), and adjusts ALL the rates in the USAF to be the slightly increased rate or the slightly decreased rate.

Hoo-huh???
08-04-2014, 12:06 PM
I hate saying this, but . . .. Measure Man's more right than you are.

The USAF sets a single promotion percentage for the entire service, and then it provides a bonus to specific fields (normally chronically undermanned fields) by slightly reducing the rates for everybody else.

But the USAF DOES set one rate, identifies career fields with RETENTION problems (not manning problems at specific grades), and adjusts ALL the rates in the USAF to be the slightly increased rate or the slightly decreased rate.

Really? If so, then please explain the stats below for 14E8 promtions? Do you actually believe that the targeted rates were applied without any bias involved or with your rational? 8F000 is the 1st AFSC. IMO we do not need that many 1st Sgts.

AFSC / #tested / #promoted / %promoted
2A0X0 / 84 / 3 / 3.57
2A3X0 / 682 / 45 / 6.60
2A5X0 / 886 / 103 / 11.63
2A6X0 / 431 / 13 / 3.02
2A6X1 / 303 / 8 / 2.64
2A6X2 / 243 / 7 / 2.88
2A7X0 / 194 / 13 / 6.70
8F000 / 735 / 110 / 14.97

WILDJOKER5
08-04-2014, 12:10 PM
Ha. Good one.

I was a 1st Sgt for 12 years and had more than a few troops get arrested. Never once bailed out any of them -- ....
Ive never been to jail or had people go through the system, so my terminology was probably off.

hustonj
08-04-2014, 12:27 PM
Really? If so, then please explain the stats below for 14E8 promtions? Do you actually believe that the targeted rates were applied without any bias involved or with your rational? 8F000 is the 1st AFSC. IMO we do not need that many 1st Sgts.

AFSC / #tested / #promoted / %promoted
2A0X0 / 84 / 3 / 3.57
2A3X0 / 682 / 45 / 6.60
2A5X0 / 886 / 103 / 11.63
2A6X0 / 431 / 13 / 3.02
2A6X1 / 303 / 8 / 2.64
2A6X2 / 243 / 7 / 2.88
2A7X0 / 194 / 13 / 6.70
8F000 / 735 / 110 / 14.97

Go read the AFIs that detail the specifics of the program. They tell you what Measure Man and I did. You are getting caught up in the rounding errors Measure Man talked about combined with the ONLY directed variance between career fields.

You can't see the forest for the trees. Step back and look at the forest.

Read the AFI. Learn form the source, don't depend on your own interpretation of observations or the statements of others over the internet.

Chief_KO
08-04-2014, 01:25 PM
Let's see. Do all those 2A's feed into the same 9-level AFSC, 2A9xx? As a 2E2x1 our SMSgt positions rolled 2-3 2E AFSCs into 2E900. So perhaps the overall promotion to the 2A9xx was on track with the SMSgt promotion rate. Some of those MSgts could have tested, but board scores were so bad (again if all those feed into the same 2A9xx they all met the same board). There could have been some scored as NFQ (not fully qualified) by the board.

Measure Man
08-04-2014, 03:14 PM
Uh, you may want to double check what you're saying on the promotion percentages being about the same. Last year many AFSCs received a targeted higher promotion rate to E8. One of these was 1st sgts with a 15 to 20% rate I believe. Avionics was around 8% & Aerospace Propulsion was just under 3%. These are three I remember seeing in the stats...

What I'm saying is the promotion percentage is based on AF wide vacancies not Afsc. Yes, I am aware that certain AFSCs get an extra percentage...as an incentive. Again it is not based on vacancies in the AFSC.

DannyJ
08-04-2014, 07:18 PM
Way to thread-jack everyone. Damn.

Anyone else read through this?

https://www.my.af.mil/gcss-af/USAF/ep/contentView.do?contentType=EDITORIAL&contentId=cE3494DD04778A9E801478C5F96FF04AE&channelPageId=s6925EC1356510FB5E044080020E329A9

AF-1Sgt
08-04-2014, 10:00 PM
Get over yourself. First Sergeants are not the answer to supervisors not being SNCOs. People, programs and money is every SNCOs responsibility. Some do each well, some do cetain ones well. If a supervisor isn't doing their job as a SNCO why aren't they being mentored or reprimanded? Because, you would be out of a job where you feel above those SNCOs.

Eliminating a Shirt puts you back in your career field where you belong. Bottomline, having that diamond makes a lot of Shirts feel special compared to that Flight Chief or Superintendent. No different than having a Command Chief right next to the Wing CC he know feels above every Chief when in reality they are equals with different roles. If the enlisted voice was so important to CCs fund these Sq Supt billets so the mentoring can start early in their careers.

I am in no way saying Shirts are the end all be all cure. I am saying that for every good supervisor there is a bad one. For each person who cares about their troops, there is a slacker that doesn't care. This is the way it is and the way it has been. You can't fix it becasue it's part of human nature and that can't be regulated or disciplines or catch phrased out. Not being fatalistic, just a realist. Show me ONE career field that has NEVER had such problems.

Eliminating Shirts will cause the same sorts of issues that have always happened when a career field is eliminated or mostly automated (Finance, Outbound assignments, TMO, etc.) All those eliminations have made the AF run so much smoother.

fufu
08-04-2014, 10:32 PM
There are so many variables to all of this, its pretty disgusting. You are in and want a 5, get ready to give up your family or dont plan to have one. Be ready to be going for a masters degree. One thing I have heard from my command chief was all the EPRs being written at the same month for the same ranks, so PCSing in the middle of the year means you can have a lot of EPRs with half information on it while being balanced against the quotas. So really, those who don't PCS should have the best EPRs. People wont just be volunteering for stuff, they will need to be coming up with new volunteer efforts and leading them so they can have a bullet under par with their rank. That means no one will be at work either.

I agree. This system will reduce inflation but create an even bigger network of the "Good old boy" club. How many NCOs/Airman working directly for a CC will get the favorable ratings over an Airman working midshift that the CC has never seen?

This will be worse.

Doing away with TIS/TIG is a mistake. Fast burners, aka the golden boy/girl, will be promoted an increased rate. 28 year olds will be supervising 38 year olds b/c the 28yr old was the president of the 5/6 club..not b/c they know the job better.

I hate the new feedback form. It doesn't allow the supervisor to layout specific expectations that aren't generalized. I can't wait to see if I'll actually get a feedback, haven't since 2007, but if the new feedback is supposed to accompany the EPR....???....

Stalwart
08-04-2014, 11:21 PM
I am saying that for every good supervisor there is a bad one. For each person who cares about their troops, there is a slacker that doesn't care.

I think there are more 'good apples' than bad, the bad ones just tend to take more time & effort to either deal with, overcome or mitigate.



28 year olds will be supervising 38 year olds b/c the 28yr old was the president of the 5/6 club..not b/c they know the job better.

The Navy has a similar issue. At the same time, I won't say that it is absolute that more time on the job means someone is instantly more knowledgable or better at the job. In general yes, experience is important. I have also seen a fair number of people who for whatever reason 'stalled' at a certain point and after observing them they seemed to be stuck in the 'way we used to do it' vice 'the way it is now' which (dependant on the job -- especially technical ones) can be a huge detriment to actually being good at what you do.

giggawatt
08-05-2014, 08:18 AM
I don't like taking TIG/TIS out of WAPS but perhaps they should just make it have less weight. Your years of service and experience in your current grade should count for somethihng.

Stalwart
08-05-2014, 09:12 AM
I don't like taking TIG/TIS out of WAPS but perhaps they should just make it have less weight. Your years of service and experience in your current grade should count for somethihng.

I don't honestly know how much of a factor TIG/TIS is in the Air Force system.

And while I don't disagree and think that TIG/TIG should be a factor, I will admit I put more weight on how well someone actually does something vice just how long they have done it.

hustonj
08-05-2014, 07:25 PM
TIG and TIS are a pretty small part of the overall WAPS score, but they account for a great portion of the score variance.

Evaluations: 135 points possible - NORMAL promotee variance is less than 10 points.
Knowledge Testing: 2 tests of 100 points each, or 1 test doubled to 200 points - NORMAL promotee variance within a single caree field is like 40 points total.
Decorations: 25 points possible - Normal promotee variance is negligble within a given career field and rank
TIS: 40 (25) points possible - 2 points per year up to E-7, 1 point per year afterwards - variance is fairly small, call it 6 points
TIG: 60 points possible - 6 per year - Call normal variance here about 18 points, just to exaggereate it.

So, out of the existing 460 points possible through E-7, the normal variance within a set of peers is around 74 points, roughly 1/3 of which are TIG and TIS.

For E-8 & E-9 promotions, there are 345 points possible from the above (reduced TIS points, 1 test only - not doubled) and another 450 possible from the board score (ranges from 270 to 450 possible, with the majority falling between 315 and 405 - sorta) for 795 points posible with normal variation of 141 points (more than 2/3s of which are from the board score and roughly 20% of which are frmo TIG and TIS).

So, TIG and TIS DO matter under the current system, but they are not the horibbly overwhelming advantage that most Airmen think they are.

What I've read about the new system says that they are increasing the points for appraisals AND that they will be using quotas to increase the variance in evalaution scores at the same time they begin reducing the contribution of TIG and TIS, so the varainces involved are going to do a double whammy at reducing how much TIS & TIG actually matter in the promotions.

sandsjames
08-05-2014, 09:06 PM
TIG and TIS are a pretty small part of the overall WAPS score, but they account for a great portion of the score variance.

Evaluations: 135 points possible - NORMAL promotee variance is less than 10 points.
Knowledge Testing: 2 tests of 100 points each, or 1 test doubled to 200 points - NORMAL promotee variance within a single caree field is like 40 points total.
Decorations: 25 points possible - Normal promotee variance is negligble within a given career field and rank
TIS: 40 (25) points possible - 2 points per year up to E-7, 1 point per year afterwards - variance is fairly small, call it 6 points
TIG: 60 points possible - 6 per year - Call normal variance here about 18 points, just to exaggereate it.

So, out of the existing 460 points possible through E-7, the normal variance within a set of peers is around 74 points, roughly 1/3 of which are TIG and TIS.

For E-8 & E-9 promotions, there are 345 points possible from the above (reduced TIS points, 1 test only - not doubled) and another 450 possible from the board score (ranges from 270 to 450 possible, with the majority falling between 315 and 405 - sorta) for 795 points posible with normal variation of 141 points (more than 2/3s of which are from the board score and roughly 20% of which are frmo TIG and TIS).

So, TIG and TIS DO matter under the current system, but they are not the horibbly overwhelming advantage that most Airmen think they are.

What I've read about the new system says that they are increasing the points for appraisals AND that they will be using quotas to increase the variance in evalaution scores at the same time they begin reducing the contribution of TIG and TIS, so the varainces involved are going to do a double whammy at reducing how much TIS & TIG actually matter in the promotions.

25 points is HUGE...to say otherwise is crazy. However, I do think it should play a part of promotion. Maybe not as much as it does but to some level. There's no substitute for experience. Not even so much the job experience, but the experience dealing with leadership, coworkers, etc.

technomage1
08-06-2014, 01:36 PM
Copied from another thread I answered before I saw this one...

Here's the thing I've never liked about quotas...they don't encourage teamwork. It's already bad enough in the SNCO corps as it is, it's basically a crab pot with anyone who tries to crawl out of the pot (get promoted) being dragged down by the others who want to be promoted. Now, with all ranks being sorted and quotas on the top- it's everyone for themselves. It's going to be even more vicious and backstabbing. And that's not what a military organization needs. We're supposed to be able to trust our wingmen with our lives...but can you do that when you know he backstabbed you to get a higher rating? Or even if you suspect it?

My personal opinion is that suggested quotas are fine...but one must always keep in mind that an entire shop may be a 1 or they may be a 5 as well. Or they may all be deserving of an EOT medal or they may all not. Life happens that way sometimes, and the system needs to be able to flex if it needs to.

As far as the recent announcement, I do like using the last three EPRs vs the last five. Why should a mistake haunt you for five years? I am not a fan of eliminating TIS and TIG. Not everyone can test well, not everyone gets fair evaluations, and the TIS and TIG help balance the system a bit.

Static EPR dates are going to be an absolute nightmare to manage. I already have to have my EPR in 3 months prior to it being due. If the system has to process all my grade's EPRs at the same time, I may be putting in an EPR 6 months prior! And I don't think I'm exagerating much here. Also, during the implementation phase care needs to be taken so that people don't have too "short" or "long" EPRs. For example, if the new MSgt EPR closeout is Feb (to tie into the testing schedule), a MSgt with a current closeout date in Jun is either going to have an EPR with 4 months of data or an EPR with 16 months of data. One isn't fair to him, the other isn't fair to the others in the grade he's competing with. Unless you just don't count the work he did from Feb to Jun.

So fair to say I have my grave concerns.

sandsjames
08-06-2014, 01:46 PM
My personal opinion is that suggested quotas are fine...but one must always keep in mind that an entire shop may be a 1 or they may be a 5 as well. Or they may all be deserving of an EOT medal or they may all not. Life happens that way sometimes, and the system needs to be able to flex if it needs to.



Exactly...to assume that you can't have 5 people in 1 shop equally as good or bad is idiotic. It's also the best way, as you said, to create resentment and distrust between coworkers.

Filterbing
08-06-2014, 03:01 PM
[QUOTE=hustonj;345770]TIG and TIS are a pretty small part of the overall WAPS score, but they account for a great portion of the score variance.

Evaluations: 135 points possible - NORMAL promotee variance is less than 10 points.
Knowledge Testing: 2 tests of 100 points each, or 1 test doubled to 200 points - NORMAL promotee variance within a single caree field is like 40 points total.
Decorations: 25 points possible - Normal promotee variance is negligble within a given career field and rank
TIS: 40 (25) points possible - 2 points per year up to E-7, 1 point per year afterwards - variance is fairly small, call it 6 points
TIG: 60 points possible - 6 per year - Call normal variance here about 18 points, just to exaggereate it.


I have seen this exact scenario play out. We had two TSgt's, the older with a 6 year TIS and a 1 year TIG (18 pts)advantage. Younger guy was an awesome test taker. Easily cleared the 18pts diff and got promoted over the older guy (bad test taker). The younger guy sewed on and was reliant on the older TSgt for day to day what should I do here type questions. In my mind these TIG/TIS pts matter and should almost be worth more.

Airborne
08-09-2014, 04:30 PM
Ok, this is picking up tons of steam and has been spoken about by the CMSAF (which is what I would consider comging from A1). But it still has rumor mill stink all over it. When is it starting, how will it be implemented, have all possible permutations of tomfoolery been talked about? How, when, who exactly are MSgt boards being implemented? Im tired of "it's coming". Wake me up when we get there.

Filterbing
08-13-2014, 02:36 PM
New guidance just received.


Wanted to push the latest information on evaluations. While we don't have
the "official" AFPC implementation guidance just yet, our MPS team attended
a webinar last Friday, & we wanted to share notes that came out of the
webinar;

- SNCO stratification restrictions:
- Top 10 percent of E7s
- Top 20 percent of E8s
- MSgt evaluation board (two phase process)
- Composite score determines eligibility for board
- Top 60% (composite score) will meet the eval board
- EPR static closeout dates (see attached for specific dates)
- Elimination of CRO reports

Additionally, AFMC units using EMS were distributed message below cut line,
but wanted to make sure leaders are also aware that your Eval monitors will
be migrating eval documents to a new server.

ubermetroid
08-13-2014, 06:28 PM
New guidance just received.


Wanted to push the latest information on evaluations. While we don't have
the "official" AFPC implementation guidance just yet, our MPS team attended
a webinar last Friday, & we wanted to share notes that came out of the
webinar;

- SNCO stratification restrictions:
- Top 10 percent of E7s
- Top 20 percent of E8s
- MSgt evaluation board (two phase process)
- Composite score determines eligibility for board
- Top 60% (composite score) will meet the eval board
- EPR static closeout dates (see attached for specific dates)
- Elimination of CRO reports

Additionally, AFMC units using EMS were distributed message below cut line,
but wanted to make sure leaders are also aware that your Eval monitors will
be migrating eval documents to a new server.

Do we have the % #s for E6s?

DannyJ
08-13-2014, 07:00 PM
Do we have the % #s for E6s?

All will be strated at the unit level, not SRE like with MSgt and above.

ubermetroid
08-14-2014, 05:12 PM
All will be strated at the unit level, not SRE like with MSgt and above.

Does that mean rating from best to worse? Or will 5% of unit level E6s get the bets rating?

ffdan
08-14-2014, 05:52 PM
Only those unit level E6s that are promotion eligible for the upcoming cycle will have to worry about the forced distribution rates...whatever they may end up being. All other E6s will simply receive their annual report but they will not be stratified.

sandsjames
08-14-2014, 06:33 PM
Only those unit level E6s that are promotion eligible for the upcoming cycle will have to worry about the forced distribution rates...whatever they may end up being. All other E6s will simply receive their annual report but they will not be stratified.

So hopefully that means that there will be no more promotion statement for those who aren't eligible. Always loved the "Promote Now!" or even "Ready for Promotion" for the guy who can't test for another 2 years.

Zxc
08-18-2014, 10:29 PM
"You are receiving this message to let you know that beginning 15 Aug 2014, the Air Force will implement a single close out date (called a “static close out date” or SCOD) of 30 November each year for all RegAF technical sergeant enlisted performance reports. This means, if you are wearing technical sergeant chevrons on 30 Nov 2014, you will receive an evaluation that closes out on 30 Nov 2014. If you have already received an EPR this year that closed out before 15 Aug 2014, you will receive another EPR closing out on 30 Nov. If you have an EPR due between 15 Aug and 30 Nov, the close out date will be adjusted to 30 Nov. Finally, effective with this change, RegAF TSgts will no longer receive change of reporting official (CRO) EPRs. All TSgts will receive one EPR each year, with a close out date of 30 Nov.
Bottom line: All TSgts will receive an EPR closing out on 30 Nov 2014. Allowing close out of all reports for a particular grade at the same time helps raters ensure an equal playing field and supports the ultimate goal of having better performance-based evaluations.
These are the first of several initiatives from the Enlisted Evaluation System and Enlisted Promotion System changes announced by the Air Force Chief of Staff and Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force on 31 Jul 2014. These scheduled initiatives will be phased in over the next 18 to 30 months, depending on your component (18 months for RegAF and 30 months for Air Reserve Component Airmen).
Please share this message with your rater to ensure your supervisory chain is also aware of this information.
For more information please visit myPers.
"


Hmm, not really looking forward to back-to-back 5-1/2 mo EPRs