PDA

View Full Version : Be Aware Your Duty Position Matters



youngsmsgt
08-15-2014, 08:42 AM
So with all of these EPR changes I think you all should be aware that your duty position will matter what rating you get. Imagine a base with 3 MSgt authorizations but 5 MSgts assigned. Whoever is in the MSgt position doing a MSgt job will earn the highest rating. Or imagine the beloved Sq Supt job all SNCOs covet because of the fancy seat right next to the CC but not on any manpower authorizations. Do you really think that guy will rated below the SNCO in his assigned career field billet? This new system has hypocrisy, good old boy club written all over it. While a 4 might not hurt you in this new system it definitely won't be as nice s the 5 your peer will get while sitting in a made up job. Or if you get stuck at a base that's overmanned with a rank how fair will it be for you? Things to consider folks.

sandsjames
08-15-2014, 10:19 AM
Yep...that's why every shop I've been in over the last 10 years has 3 people with made up duty titles just for that reason. The positions don't actually come with any responsibility, they just look pretty on an EPR. It's BS, and goes back to the unethical topic we were having before. Giving a title JUST to help on a EPR is, IMO, no different than cheating on a test.

Measure Man
08-15-2014, 01:48 PM
Or imagine the beloved Sq Supt job all SNCOs covet because of the fancy seat right next to the CC but not on any manpower authorizations.

This is about the third time I've seen you write this...and I'm sure it may be something specific to your career field if they are not, but in Maintenance Squadrons, the Superintendent is absolutely a funded and authorized position...as they are in most other squadrons I am aware of.

sandsjames
08-15-2014, 03:38 PM
This is about the third time I've seen you write this...and I'm sure it may be something specific to your career field if they are not, but in Maintenance Squadrons, the Superintendent is absolutely a funded and authorized position...as they are in most other squadrons I am aware of.

In CE, the Supers are pulled from the shops...as soon as they get a line number for Master, a position is usually found. I'm not sure how it goes with the funding and stuff, but I've never seen a CE SNCO PCS in for a Super slot...it's alway to the shop, then moved up to the head shed based on rank. And they take a manning slot from the shop.

Measure Man
08-15-2014, 04:07 PM
In CE, the Supers are pulled from the shops...as soon as they get a line number for Master, a position is usually found. I'm not sure how it goes with the funding and stuff, but I've never seen a CE SNCO PCS in for a Super slot...it's alway to the shop, then moved up to the head shed based on rank. And they take a manning slot from the shop.

I'm not sure if we're talking about the same thing.

The Squadron Superintendent in most squadrons is the Chief...funded and authorized. Some smaller squadrons, like an MOS might have a MSgt or SMSgt authorization for Superintendent.

In Maintenance, we also have Production Supervisors (Pro Supers)...which are also funded and authorized, but often augmented from the shops....but they are not Superintendents.

I agree with your original point though, that making up duty titles is an ethical thing...a few years ago, I tried to push something through my career field with all the other Chiefs to try to standardize our duty titles used and what they meant...didn't gain any traction, too many places were set up differently and had different missions. So, even though the little book is clear on what a Superintendent is supposed to mean, you still see it abused a lot...i.e. a flight level guy being called a Superintendent simply because there are 2 AFSCs in the flight, etc.

I don't know how big a problem it is, really...I think the accomplishments spell out more of what the guy actually does than the duty title though...board members, I'm sure, are pretty wise to wordplay in duty titles.

sandsjames
08-15-2014, 04:17 PM
I'm not sure if we're talking about the same thing.

The Squadron Superintendent in most squadrons is the Chief...funded and authorized. Some smaller squadrons, like an MOS might have a MSgt or SMSgt authorization for Superintendent.

In Maintenance, we also have Production Supervisors (Pro Supers)...which are also funded and authorized, but often augmented from the shops....but they are not Superintendents.

What I've generally seen in CE is as follows. We always have 2 Chiefs. The Fire Department and the rest of CE each have one. I imagine the CE one's title is probably "Superintendent", just never heard him referred to that way. Then we have an "Ops Chief" who is usually an E8 who oversees the Ops flight (Electrical/Power Pro/HVAC/Dirt Boys/Plumbers/Structures/etc.) Customer Service, Emergency Management, etc, all have their own flight chief. Then we have E7s with the Superintendent title. There's one for electrical and power pro, one for Structures and Dirt Boys, and one for Utilities (WFMS) and HVAC. Then, of course, each shop has an NCOIC. Pretty much everyone above shop level has an official duty title of Superintendent. So yes, each flight has a Superintendent who is taking up a shop level manning slot.

So in an ordinary CE squadron, you've got at least 8 official "Super" titles in squadrons that could have as few as 80 people (not counting Fire Department or EOD).

Drackore
08-15-2014, 04:19 PM
I am renaming myself MSgt4ever because I have no intention on playing any more games to get promoted. I'm coasting to 20...maybe 23. If I get promoted - awesome. Will I bust my back trying? Nope. I'm done trying to figure this AF out.

I am now in a job where I don't even lead troops. My chances under this new system are nil to none.

hustonj
08-15-2014, 04:52 PM
The little brown book contains authorized titles by rank and responsibility. People always seem amazed to hear that.

The number of organizations that follow this guidance is pitiful.

Towards the end of my active duty career, I got stuck in a large unit. That can seriously kill your chances for promotion. The reality that I wasn't the only MSgt stuck there and that I wasn't the RANKING MSgt stuck there meant that I almost immediately ran out of alterante duty positions where I could show growth of responsibility (honestly, so did the guy who was stuck in front of me in that line).

We had a funded SMSgt Superintendant. We had ONE Flight Chief (MSgt) spot for the career field. We had (at various times) between 3 and 5 Section Chief (MSgt) positions. I reached a Section Chief seat while still a TSgt without a line number (in 2004). Basically I sat there, having the USAF cancel every assignment I managed to get, until I retired in 2010. The unit moved me around as much as they could, but everything was lateral or down, there were no UP options.

Being outranked and not having the opportunity to demonstrate growth of responsibility in your EPRs has been killing careers already. Don't think this adjusted process is introducing that kind of situation.

DWWSWWD
08-15-2014, 07:53 PM
Young SMSgt is showing his youth. Duty TITLES do not matter. When I was a young SMSgt or so, I was on a crusade to obliterate made up titles thinking folks were getting screwed. I was hard over on the titles authorized in the brown book. I came to see that they really don't matter. Content matters.

Now for someone in Huston's position where there are more MSgts than sexy jobs to do, that is a tough situation and some folks will get shuffled to the bottom if they don't look out of the box for leadership opportunities.

sandsjames
08-15-2014, 08:20 PM
Young SMSgt is showing his youth. Duty TITLES do not matter. When I was a young SMSgt or so, I was on a crusade to obliterate made up titles thinking folks were getting screwed. I was hard over on the titles authorized in the brown book. I came to see that they really don't matter. Content matters.

Now for someone in Huston's position where there are more MSgts than sexy jobs to do, that is a tough situation and some folks will get shuffled to the bottom if they don't look out of the box for leadership opportunities.

Exactly. To expect a position to be created for you to succeed seems pretty entitled. If you can't progress without someone else handing you a title then you probably don't need to be in that next position.

youngsmsgt
08-16-2014, 06:55 AM
At the end of the day the Duty Title matters. Content is most important but without the title you don't get a seat at the table. For the unit with 20 MSgts and only 2 seats at the table the guy with the sexy title is where they start with the opportunities. While you can bust your butt all day long as that 15th MSgt on the totem pole you're not going to get a fair shake until you have the TIG. By the way it's possible because I was the MSgt that made SMSgt without the fancy titles but guess what I also had a bunch of other things going in my favor.

If a unit is overmanned with any specific rank that hard working TSgt or MSgt will be screwed because they don't have the sexy title. With the current system you could at least still get a firewall 5 without being in a top position. With this new system why would you give your low guy a top score. You wouldn't, he has to do his time at the bottom or show his value before he gets that top rating. At that point he's just been slowed down for up to 3 years all because of timimg.

What's even worse is they will be screwed not because of their technical expertise but simply because of things outside of their control. The current assignment system is not changing to align units with the correct manpower. So if you're at Base X that's overmanned TSgts what are the chances of the low guy getting a 5 no matter how good they are? But if you're at Base Y that's undermanned TSgts and you're a young up and comer what's the chances of you getting that 5? As some other poster elluded to in a large org you're screwed. In a unit undermanned you could thrive even though your peer in a larger unit is better than you. In a org As an institution we look out for the old guy because that's just what we do. This new system doesn't fix that and your crusades at this or that base doesn't fix it. This new system will only make it worse.

sandsjames
08-16-2014, 10:47 AM
At the end of the day the Duty Title matters. Content is most important but without the title you don't get a seat at the table. For the unit with 20 MSgts and only 2 seats at the table the guy with the sexy title is where they start with the opportunities. While you can bust your butt all day long as that 15th MSgt on the totem pole you're not going to get a fair shake until you have the TIG. By the way it's possible because I was the MSgt that made SMSgt without the fancy titles but guess what I also had a bunch of other things going in my favor.



But this is part of the military. TIG is supposed to have it's advantages. It's pretty much the only way that seniority plays into things in the military, and it should. Is someone with more TIG better? Not necessarily...but this goes for every single rank, not just SNCOs. It's no different that the advantages/disadvantages associated with being at a small base with a low ops tempo compared to a large base with a fast ops tempo.

I think this is one of the biggest issues related to people making rank so fast over the last 10 years. I'm sure if you think back you will remember a day when almost every single shop had a MSgt at NCOIC level of the shop. The change to make all E7s in "superintendent" positions is fairly recent. This has resulted in TSgts being required to do the Course 15 when there's no need. And it's not going to get any better. With MSgt boards happening, not only are positions going to be created for E7s but you're going to start seeing it happen for E6s as well. The top is going to become more flooded than it already is. Not by rank, but by position. And this is going to lead to 5 and 6 year SSgts running shops. The snowball effect is going to hit everyone and the mission will suffer...but as long as everyone has a cool duty title so they can be competitive, I guess it's ok.

technomage1
08-16-2014, 11:47 AM
The snowball effect is going to hit everyone and the mission will suffer...but as long as everyone has a cool duty title so they can be competitive, I guess it's ok.

You actually think the mission matters? What a quaint, old fashioned notion.

Seriously, this whole thing is a bad idea. 2 more years.

Measure Man
08-16-2014, 05:22 PM
At the end of the day the Duty Title matters. Content is most important but without the title you don't get a seat at the table. For the unit with 20 MSgts and only 2 seats at the table the guy with the sexy title is where they start with the opportunities. While you can bust your butt all day long as that 15th MSgt on the totem pole you're not going to get a fair shake until you have the TIG. By the way it's possible because I was the MSgt that made SMSgt without the fancy titles but guess what I also had a bunch of other things going in my favor.

If a unit is overmanned with any specific rank that hard working TSgt or MSgt will be screwed because they don't have the sexy title. With the current system you could at least still get a firewall 5 without being in a top position. With this new system why would you give your low guy a top score. You wouldn't, he has to do his time at the bottom or show his value before he gets that top rating. At that point he's just been slowed down for up to 3 years all because of timimg.

What's even worse is they will be screwed not because of their technical expertise but simply because of things outside of their control. The current assignment system is not changing to align units with the correct manpower. So if you're at Base X that's overmanned TSgts what are the chances of the low guy getting a 5 no matter how good they are? But if you're at Base Y that's undermanned TSgts and you're a young up and comer what's the chances of you getting that 5? As some other poster elluded to in a large org you're screwed. In a unit undermanned you could thrive even though your peer in a larger unit is better than you. In a org As an institution we look out for the old guy because that's just what we do. This new system doesn't fix that and your crusades at this or that base doesn't fix it. This new system will only make it worse.

I think you are overworrying about this.

First, once I did become a Sq. Chief...it amazed me how many of the SNCOs eliminated themselves by either not completing CCAF or Course 14 (or whatever it is now), or some other issue they'd had...by the time you get through the list of people that eliminate themselves, there are only a few that are really competing for the top spots/marks...just cuz a guy is a pro super, doesn't mean he has all his ducks in the line.

Everything will be okay.

fufu
08-18-2014, 03:39 PM
I am renaming myself MSgt4ever because I have no intention on playing any more games to get promoted. I'm coasting to 20...maybe 23. If I get promoted - awesome. Will I bust my back trying? Nope. I'm done trying to figure this AF out.

I am now in a job where I don't even lead troops. My chances under this new system are nil to none.

One up you! I'm going to change my name to Master Sergeant....cause I need 172 this year to have a chance!

Seriously...There is a guy on my base that LEGALLY changed his first name to Sergeant. Douche.

fufu
08-18-2014, 03:47 PM
I think duty title matters to some degree.

- Flight chief vs assistant flight chief

Thats going to make a differnce. But, i don't think Flight Chief vs Flight Superintendent means anything.

Now, when applying for a job outside the AF, I think your duty title plays a role. Having "QA Superintendent" or "QA inspector" is going to help you get IN THE DOOR of certian jobs.

sandsjames
08-18-2014, 05:07 PM
I think duty title matters to some degree.

- Flight chief vs assistant flight chief

Thats going to make a differnce. But, i don't think Flight Chief vs Flight Superintendent means anything.

Now, when applying for a job outside the AF, I think your duty title plays a role. Having "QA Superintendent" or "QA inspector" is going to help you get IN THE DOOR of certian jobs.

Applying for a job outside the AF they really don't give a shit what your duty title was. All they care about are your skills. Unless by "outside the AF" you mean "in the AF as a civilian".

sandsjames
08-18-2014, 05:07 PM
Duty position is one thing, its another to PCS into a squadron with 3 back to back to back SRE'd EPRs and then be the new guy...with a squadron CC that only believes one MSgt should get SRE..and get set back 10 years by one guy....counting the years till retirement

10 years? Really?

Niirs
08-19-2014, 05:32 AM
A duty title definately will be one factor among many; how do you not give your only 5 to the SNCO OTY (and yes, as much as the new guidance says performing your job is what its all about - winning awards will still be importand, and you don't win many awards just being good at your primary job)? How about the only SNCO who deployed, or the whoever leadership feels is most promotable, or the SNCO who always brings in treats to the Supt? It's not always the SNCO with the best duty title who will get the 5, but it will definately help - along with a lot of other things.

Shove_your_stupid_meeting
08-19-2014, 03:36 PM
I am renaming myself MSgt4ever because I have no intention on playing any more games to get promoted. I'm coasting to 20...maybe 23. If I get promoted - awesome. Will I bust my back trying? Nope. I'm done trying to figure this AF out.

I am now in a job where I don't even lead troops. My chances under this new system are nil to none.


Kinda sorta in the same boat here.

I feel like we're even further promoting a "me first" culture. To some extent, I think we've already had it, but this just reinforces that attitude. I feel like I should be far less inclined to help out my peers because my peers are my competition now more than ever. If I don't look out for number one, I may very well regret it in the long run when I see my buddy, the one I'm telling how to do everything, being rewarded while there may be no recognition for all the hard work it took to get my peer to where he/she needed to be. That's a terrible mentality to have, and that's no way to operate in a professional environment, yet I'd be shocked if it doesn't become a reality. To some extent, it already happens.

It appears I'll finish my career in another special duty gig, being the only 'E' yet again, and I'm glad at this point. I feel like these changes could inadvertently be counterproductive to mission success, and it's already bad enough in the shops you have the workers vs. the full-time volunteers vs. paycheck collectors. I'm not saying everything will grind to a halt, I just suspect that the b.s. factor is going to increase yet again and like others, I have no desire to even deal with that. While the basic concept of finally rating folks accurately is nice, the side effects are something that would concern me greatly at the unit level. Luckily for me, I'm going to be all about learning and networking the next few years, because now it's about getting that contractor/civilian gig way more than it is that next stripe.

BENDER56
08-19-2014, 08:32 PM
Kinda sorta in the same boat here.

I feel like we're even further promoting a "me first" culture. To some extent, I think we've already had it, but this just reinforces that attitude. I feel like I should be far less inclined to help out my peers because my peers are my competition now more than ever. If I don't look out for number one, I may very well regret it in the long run when I see my buddy, the one I'm telling how to do everything, being rewarded while there may be no recognition for all the hard work it took to get my peer to where he/she needed to be. That's a terrible mentality to have, and that's no way to operate in a professional environment, yet I'd be shocked if it doesn't become a reality. To some extent, it already happens.

It appears I'll finish my career in another special duty gig, being the only 'E' yet again, and I'm glad at this point. I feel like these changes could inadvertently be counterproductive to mission success, and it's already bad enough in the shops you have the workers vs. the full-time volunteers vs. paycheck collectors. I'm not saying everything will grind to a halt, I just suspect that the b.s. factor is going to increase yet again and like others, I have no desire to even deal with that. While the basic concept of finally rating folks accurately is nice, the side effects are something that would concern me greatly at the unit level. Luckily for me, I'm going to be all about learning and networking the next few years, because now it's about getting that contractor/civilian gig way more than it is that next stripe.

I did my last 12-1/2 years as a MSgt -- 12 of them as a 1st Sgt. Would I like it if I was drawing E-7/E-8 retired pay? Sure. But the satisfaction and fulfillment I got from that job made those last 12 years pretty good ones. No regrets here.