I don’t remember doing any night (12 years ago). And the day was much less involved than at TBS. It was mostly just shooting an azimuth and walking across a field.
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
How not to conduct a command investigation
- Thread starter nittany03
- Start date
I don't remember that much about it, but I do remember we were in the beautiful forests surrounding Camp Upsher. I think I still have a laminated map I used for it in a box from 3 moves ago.
I don't think that article addresses anything I am talking about. "Promotions" are the problem I'm talking about, but the problem isn't people not making the cut to O-4 as the article might make you believe......that shit is easy as fogging a mirror in my community (I mean they picked yours truly after all).......the problem is that the wrong people have, are, and will always be promoted to positions of senior leadership.
Is that because - like Richard Gere at AOCS - they “got nowhere else to go,” so they stay in and tolerate the bureaucracy long enough to become the CO/XO?
Care to elaborate? PM if preferred.
I believe he's commenting on a rather complex situation which we would be hard pressed to put a finger on exactly what the cause(s) might be, however....I think there's a couple of primary issues at play: One, ducks pick ducks. And, two, a lot of smart people get out for better opportunities which can sometimes leave the remainder behind.
There's certainly good leadership out there, but I suspect we've all had our share of inadequate and counter-productive leadership. When you say your Skipper's callsign in a room of O-5s and they grumble and sigh and ask you what it's like working for said person, it's fairly eye opening as a young JO. It's also awkward as shit because as much as you'd like to tell it how it really is, some things need only be said among JOPA.
What really sucks is when you work for multiple O-6 1110s and discover they give more shits about you than their 1310 peers. Not a blanket statement at all, but something I've noticed where I'm working.
+1
This presumes that only the smartest are getting out. I don’t think we have data that supports that. Put another way, I think some of those getting out are our most talented officers. Others are middle of the pack.
It’s a fallacy to think that only the above average people are leaving, while the below average remain.
D
Deleted member 24525
Guest
He didn’t say ONLY the smartest, he said a LOT of the smart ones.
I’d say there’s a lot of smart people. But the guys who get out are tired of the bullshit rat race, back stabbing, politicking, cronyism, meritless golden boy system etc.
The ones who stay are either adept at that maneuvering and promote, or just accept that they aren’t and have fun and retire as O-4s and O-5s.
That's fair. I'd like to think somebody in Millington has a sweet excel spreadsheet with amazing graphs showing how many EP pilots are leaving vs MP and then comparing and contrasting that against all sorts of interesting tidbits like Tactical Quals, Instructor Quals, Flight School Grades, College Major, PRT results, etc, etc. But...let's be real.
I didn't catch the PERS brief at NHA this year, but I'm interested to see if there's a video of it somewhere. Last year this was basically their brief...
VAQ might have some problems...
And then afterwards all of JOPA is like...
Hahah, okay I'll stop, I'll stop. I'm here all week!
---edit---
Well, I went and found the 2018 brief...I wasn't too far off, haha. For those interested:
Video: https://www.facebook.com/navalhelicopterassn/videos/vl.870881273271019/2142559232451151/?type=1
PPT: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1_fcnkq9EKQoR1J8NRHL_s2_QMSCW9Ahe
Other NHA Briefs/Links: https://www.navalhelicopterassn.org/symposium-2018-briefs
Last edited:
^Likely story
The initial NCIS investigation into Fat Leonard was shut down by an Admiral (the Admiral was named in the Case agents closing notes), and it wouldn’t be surprising if the one or two follow-on investigations before the current one were shit down by a Flag level leadership as well given how much effort has been put into sweeping things under the rug.
This is probably tracked by PERS, but to be honest, it assumes that the FITREP system is accurately ranking people. I'm sure there are a lot of people that get accurate rankings; but there are also a lot who don't because they don't want to stay in or play the "golden path" game. Anecdotally, I've watched a fair number of middle of the pack performers get high ranking EPs simply because they aspire to have a career, while some rock stars get MPs for wanting to do something else. The Navy won't get accurate metrics on their officer attrition until CO's stop asking what an individual wants to do with their career before assigning the rankings...
I understand what you're saying, and this may be a semantic issue, but the FITREP system has nothing to do with "accurately ranking people." That is 100% up to the RS to determine. Since the FITREP system limits EPs, the RS has to manage a finite amount of opportunity, etc, etc. You know the drill.
I personally did not alter my EP/MP distribution based on desired follow-on tours to non-due course billets, but I definitely would have for someone who was getting out. I don't think many people would find that unreasonable. I also had to actively manage/adjust PRDs of my JOs and DHs (to include a 10 month extension for a DH) so that everyone who deserved a competitive EP got one.
Granted, not an ideal system, but it's the one we've got. This is all going to change when the new FITREP/Eval system hits the fleet in a couple years - sit tight.
You're absolutely right regarding the RS - it is not the fault of the EP/MP/P system that this problem exists. It should (and does) sit solely on the shoulders of the RS; I should have been clearer. However, what you said in your second point is the crux of the problem. And please, don't interpret this as me not agreeing with your sentiment. But if the Navy wants accurate metrics regarding the quality of people staying vs. going, then the RS should be reporting based SOLELY on the individual's performance. Manipulation, no matter how fair/reasonable/justifiable due to career considerations, skews the metrics. Because of the manipulation, the Navy thinks they are retaining an EP caliber sailor and losing an MP caliber sailor (or 1EP/2EP, same same) when they really aren't. This feeds the misconception that "we are retaining the best" and that everyone who gets an EP is well suited for their next assignment. Sure, maybe the RS puts verbiage in the FITREP that alludes to problems or issues with the individual, but that type of sub-rosa, subjective, often misunderstood addition only furthers the frustrations with the process. Truth in reporting, both for the benefit of the individual and the service, shouldn't be something that is undermined because someone aspires to stay in the Navy longer than their peer.
Valid in terms of analysis of who is retained, but I'm not sure I agree that an officer's decision to pursue a due course path should not enter into the calculus when distributing a ranking.
Regardless of any individual's career decisions, the institution strives to provide enough qualified candidates to control grade milestones to provide the desired selectivity. Reporting based solely on current performance, which ignores the individual's potential or willingness to perform at the next milestone, does not equitably distribute that limited opportunity. It carries the risk of leaving otherwise qualified officers on the cutting room floor, while those with the EPs separate or pursue non-command career paths. Does the current system leave otherwise EP performers on that cutting room floor? Sure, but they weren't interested in DH or command anyway, right?
I think it's helpful for people to stop thinking of their FITREPs as a report card or performance evaluation, because that's not what it is. Its only purpose is for a RS to communicate to selection boards on an individual's fitness and suitability to perform at the next milestone. Nothing more, nothing less.
Regardless of any individual's career decisions, the institution strives to provide enough qualified candidates to control grade milestones to provide the desired selectivity. Reporting based solely on current performance, which ignores the individual's potential or willingness to perform at the next milestone, does not equitably distribute that limited opportunity. It carries the risk of leaving otherwise qualified officers on the cutting room floor, while those with the EPs separate or pursue non-command career paths. Does the current system leave otherwise EP performers on that cutting room floor? Sure, but they weren't interested in DH or command anyway, right?
I think it's helpful for people to stop thinking of their FITREPs as a report card or performance evaluation, because that's not what it is. Its only purpose is for a RS to communicate to selection boards on an individual's fitness and suitability to perform at the next milestone. Nothing more, nothing less.