-
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
Big changes to officer recruiting
- Thread starter exNavyOffRec
- Start date
Quantity, not quality, baby.
You keep writing 'em, and I'll keep never reading them due to my lack of the ASO Secret Decoder Pin.
exNavyOffRec
Well-Known Member
I understand what you are saying, but the only thing this is going to do is increase the volume not really give people a chance with low GPA's to get picked up as we HAVE to submit anyone that meets the PA to board since currently NRD CO's are afraid to do field reject boards. CNRC has already put out multiple emails saying "don't submit low quality candidates, do field reject boards".
I wonder though if they will bring into effect what they had talked about where a person has to be within a range of the competitive profile? That would fix the problem.
So...if not CNRC, who set in motion this policy change? And if it was CNRC that both told you that your goals would be set and met in terms of raw numbers and at the same time gave the above guidance, then they are complete dumbasses--even by military standards.
phrogpilot73
Well-Known Member
A good ASO screens all the HAZREPS and selects important ones to brief to the squadron. Like the time I briefed the Presidential TFR penetration HAZREP.
I'm a little confused about the potential outcome of this change. I only see two possibilities...are either of these the situation?
Hypothetical situation: Assuming 100 available slots, first 100 applications are taken. Based on the new system, 30 of those applications counted toward the recruiting goal even though they might've been trashed before. So now:
Hypothetical situation: Assuming 100 available slots, first 100 applications are taken. Based on the new system, 30 of those applications counted toward the recruiting goal even though they might've been trashed before. So now:
- The Navy commissions 30 people who might not have been the top choice (they just got there first), or
- The Navy has to adjust board dates to compensate for replacing those 30 people the next time around after they root them out further along in the process
exNavyOffRec
Well-Known Member
The way the goals were going to be met was set by CNRC, and they give the NRD CO's the authority to field reject, but the NRD CO's in general don't want that responsibility, so CNRC will keep sending out emails saying "why the low quality kits" and they will keep getting them, if CNRC would say "you WILL do field reject boards on people that are less than XXXX" to make sure you are sending up someone you want to then maybe things would get better. I have seen many kits submitted that had no business being submitted but an OR was trying to show they were doing work.
exNavyOffRec
Well-Known Member
They may count for the recruiters goal, but that doesn't mean the board will pick them, it isn't first come first serve. CNRC missed one designator goal last year because the board didn't like what they were given.
I have seen a board for Pilot where they picked 75% of the applications and another where they picked 25% and an email that followed up saying, why did the NRD's send us crap to pick from (not exact words from email)
So essentially, it means the numbers for the next board would be increased due to the deficit caused by "crapplications" that get rejected later in the process rather than by the NRDs. In other words—unnecessary waste of everybody's time.
exNavyOffRec
Well-Known Member
yes, and I wouldn't say rejected by the NRD, but in the past we would say "you have a 2.5 GPA odds of you getting picked up are slim to none, and you have to do most of the work" these guys wouldn't come back, now that guy would be one more person towards the OR making his goal and there are OR's that would say "sure go for it"
Wouldn't a better system make HAZREPS available to anyone (aviation-types), at any time, without having to have to go through an ASO to get them?
It's not lost on me that you just called yourself a good ASO.
I asked RADM Pindle (head of the Safety Center) this at NHA. Long story short is it would be a better system, but we're kinda locked into WAMHRS which does not really distinguish between HAZREPs and SIRs. Even ASOs looking to get HAZREPs from other communities are SOL unless you know about them already or spend your day randomly searching for applicable stuff.
Harrier Dude
Living the dream
There are dedicated groups of folks that want to get information out there, but right now it's not easy at best. ASOs can, in their spare time, either try to look up safety reports in WAMHRS or they can contact their analysts and ask for help. Which I'm sure the analysts will be happy to give in between safety assessments, NATOPS conferences, mishap assist requests and the myriad other jobs they hold down.
The good news is the information is there and it's being put out (giggity!) but the information systems to access it are jealously guarded and not especially easy to use even when you have access. So we end up doing what we can now, with emailing applicable HAZREPs that ASOs happen to come across to the ready room or, in the case of the students, having a HAZREP binder/board with useful things.
There's a larger argument to be made here about whether or not we really have that whole "special trust and confidence" thing, but I digress...
The good news is the information is there and it's being put out (giggity!) but the information systems to access it are jealously guarded and not especially easy to use even when you have access. So we end up doing what we can now, with emailing applicable HAZREPs that ASOs happen to come across to the ready room or, in the case of the students, having a HAZREP binder/board with useful things.
There's a larger argument to be made here about whether or not we really have that whole "special trust and confidence" thing, but I digress...