Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14

Thread: Meet the Admiral Who Leads from a Wheelchair

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Senior Member SeaLawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Here, There, and Everywhere
    Posts
    140
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)

    Meet the Admiral Who Leads from a Wheelchair

    https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-...-a-wheelchair/

    While I applaud Rear Adm. Kyle Cozad for his triumph, I see this as yet another Navy double-standard.

    Had this happened to a CMC or other average Joe enlisted person, they'd be medically separated and deemed unfit for duty.

    What is Rear Adm. Kyle Cozad's PRT criteria that deems him physically fit by Navy fitness standards?

    I'm not trying to attack the Rear Admiral; however, I firmly believe this unduly dictates a bi-standard precedent by the Navy.

  2. #2
    Administrator Mjölnir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    2,964
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by SeaLawyer View Post
    https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-...-a-wheelchair/

    While I applaud Rear Adm. Kyle Cozad for his triumph, I see this as yet another Navy double-standard.

    Had this happened to a CMC or other average Joe enlisted person, they'd be medically separated and deemed unfit for duty.

    What is Rear Adm. Kyle Cozad's PRT criteria that deems him physically fit by Navy fitness standards?

    I'm not trying to attack the Rear Admiral; however, I firmly believe this unduly dictates a bi-standard precedent by the Navy.
    The RADM definately got a few waivers; the article has photos of an E5 in a wheelchair as well. I don't think the waivers were simply because he is an O8.
    The most important six inches on the battlefield ... is between your ears.

  3. #3
    Senior Member SeaLawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Here, There, and Everywhere
    Posts
    140
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Well I'll be damned! "It takes a big man to admit when he's wrong. I, on the other hand, am not a very large man."

  4. #4
    Senior Member LogDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Somewhere, Ca
    Posts
    804
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Yes, it appears there is a double standard at work here. I've read in the AF Times and The Stars and Stripes, many years ago, about military members who lost a leg or arm but were allowed to remain on active duty in a non-deployable status. Usually, they've been in a program training others to do the job they used to do.

    As for the Rear Admiral, is he the only person who can do his job? If so then it's a judgement call by the Chief of Naval Operations as whether to retain or separate him. However, the military has been increasing emphasis on its members being able to deploy and separating those who are in prolonged undeployable status so the Rear Admiral should also be considered for separation or in his case retirement.

  5. #5
    Administrator Mjölnir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    2,964
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by LogDog View Post
    Yes, it appears there is a double standard at work here. I've read in the AF Times and The Stars and Stripes, many years ago, about military members who lost a leg or arm but were allowed to remain on active duty in a non-deployable status. Usually, they've been in a program training others to do the job they used to do.

    As for the Rear Admiral, is he the only person who can do his job? If so then it's a judgement call by the Chief of Naval Operations as whether to retain or separate him. However, the military has been increasing emphasis on its members being able to deploy and separating those who are in prolonged undeployable status so the Rear Admiral should also be considered for separation or in his case retirement.
    I don't know that 'double standard' is exactly correct. There are enlisted service members who have been retained who were in wheelchairs. I know a USMC MSgt who as a SSgt lost a leg, he walks, but must use a cane. He still takes the PFT and completes the 3 mile run under the max time (he no longer gets a 1st Class score) he will joke that pull ups are easier since he has to pull less weight. Granted, most of the ones I know about (half dozen plus the Admiral in the story) are combat related injuries. The DoD recently took a stance on non-deployability and these exceptions run counter to that but there are examples of exceptions in both the officer and enlisted ranks.

    If I had to guess, this is / will now be his last tour, he is in a non-operational job and flag officers don't grow on trees and the USN has a shortage of them based on other issues ... letting him stay there for a bit isn't really 'costing' the USN much. The process of him getting out / retiring would be a while anyway ... and to nominate, confirm and get a replacement in place (out of the normal promotion cycle) would take close to 12 months ... no harm no foul.
    The most important six inches on the battlefield ... is between your ears.

  6. #6
    Administrator Mjölnir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    2,964
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by LogDog View Post
    Yes, it appears there is a double standard at work here. I've read in the AF Times and The Stars and Stripes, many years ago, about military members who lost a leg or arm but were allowed to remain on active duty in a non-deployable status. Usually, they've been in a program training others to do the job they used to do.

    As for the Rear Admiral, is he the only person who can do his job? If so then it's a judgement call by the Chief of Naval Operations as whether to retain or separate him. However, the military has been increasing emphasis on its members being able to deploy and separating those who are in prolonged undeployable status so the Rear Admiral should also be considered for separation or in his case retirement.
    I don't know that 'double standard' is exactly correct. There are enlisted service members who have been retained who were in wheelchairs. I know a USMC MSgt who as a SSgt lost a leg, he walks, but must use a cane. He still takes the PFT and completes the 3 mile run under the max time (he no longer gets a 1st Class score) he will joke that pull ups are easier since he has to pull less weight. Granted, most of the ones I know about (half dozen plus the Admiral in the story) are combat related injuries. The DoD recently took a stance on non-deployability and these exceptions run counter to that but there are examples of exceptions in both the officer and enlisted ranks.

    If I had to guess, this is / will now be his last tour, he is in a non-operational job and flag officers don't grow on trees and the USN has a shortage of them based on other issues ... letting him stay there for a bit isn't really 'costing' the USN much. The process of him getting out / retiring would be a while anyway ... and to nominate, confirm and get a replacement in place (out of the normal promotion cycle) would take close to 12 months ... no harm no foul.
    The most important six inches on the battlefield ... is between your ears.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Columbus, ohio
    Posts
    3,326
    Mentioned
    29 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by SeaLawyer View Post
    https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-...-a-wheelchair/

    While I applaud Rear Adm. Kyle Cozad for his triumph, I see this as yet another Navy double-standard.

    Had this happened to a CMC or other average Joe enlisted person, they'd be medically separated and deemed unfit for duty.

    What is Rear Adm. Kyle Cozad's PRT criteria that deems him physically fit by Navy fitness standards?

    I'm not trying to attack the Rear Admiral; however, I firmly believe this unduly dictates a bi-standard precedent by the Navy.
    It certainly does seem like a double standard..

    Quote Originally Posted by LogDog View Post
    As for the Rear Admiral, is he the only person who can do his job? If so then it's a judgement call by the Chief of Naval Operations as whether to retain or separate him.
    Even when i was in, it was common practice to NEVER be the only person who could do job X.. CROSS train, CROSS train, CROSS train... That got drilled into us at a low pay grade, so HOW can it be different for an O8 to be the 'only person'? OR is that yet another of those double standards?

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    128
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Lots of debate over whether or not this is a double standard. I think it comes down to perception. Remember the saying, "perception is reality"? The vast majority of those serving are probably already convinced that the Admiral is still serving due to his rank, while thousands of other service members continue to get their 'pink slips' for much less debilitating conditions. The Navy (or Admiral) should address this issue, or do the right thing by sending the Admiral out the door.

  9. #9
    Senior Member SeaLawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Here, There, and Everywhere
    Posts
    140
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    While I readily admit: Most enlisted jobs can't be performed from a wheelchair, I do believe the same opportunity should be offered to others in similar circumstances. I've seen many a good Sailor turned away just for body fat that ran circles around their peers. Meanwhile, we have 0-5s and above that can barely fit in their uniforms let alone run (if they even do it) a PRT. A double-standard indeed.

  10. #10
    Senior Member LogDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Somewhere, Ca
    Posts
    804
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by FLAPS View Post
    Lots of debate over whether or not this is a double standard. I think it comes down to perception. Remember the saying, "perception is reality"? The vast majority of those serving are probably already convinced that the Admiral is still serving due to his rank, while thousands of other service members continue to get their 'pink slips' for much less debilitating conditions. The Navy (or Admiral) should address this issue, or do the right thing by sending the Admiral out the door.
    When I was in the AF, we had a saying "One rule for the enlisted and one rule for the officers." This seems to uphold that saying and it might just be my perception but having seen people separated for being overweight or not meeting body fat standards (even thought they could ace PT tests) but this does seem to be an exception because of his rank.

    I remember enlisted being counseled because of their appearance in uniform because they were, to put it not too politely, fat and put on the Fat Boy Program and mandatory PT program. However, the officers who were busting the seams of their uniforms had nothing done to them. I dated a TSgt, back in the 80s, who was in admin and she got fed up withthe double standard. Her squadron commander was put people on the Fat Boy Program because they were overweight but he wasn't on it although he exceeded the weight standards. She managed the Fat Boy Program for the squadron and finally got fed up and went to the Group Commander and showed him who was on the program and asked why the squadron commander wasn't. It took awhile but the squadron commander was put on the program but that would never have happened if she hadn't mad a fuss about it. Until she forced the issue, it was one rule for the enlisted and one rule for the officers.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •