Printable View
I read in Army Times that the Army was making NCO promotions harder, requireing more points and pre-reqs' as well as making ANOC and BNOC harder. While this sounds just fine with me, without dismantleing "up or out" this will only end up costing us young leaders and training quality as NCO's focus on careers and not unit training. Anybody else have some insights on this?
Reed
You mean tougher than the last several years of relaxed requirements?
I remember when an E-4 had to go to PLDC (now I guess it is the "warrior leader's course"?) in order to be eligible for E-5. That was relaxed. Then BNCOC completion was not necessary for E-6 - only PLDC. Ditto the shifting of requirements for ANCOC. Was this temporary? Or was this an enduring policy that continued after I ETS'd? If that is the standard from which promotions are being made "tougher" then it sounds like we're just going back to the previous standards.
At the time, those changes made sense. Some units were deployed and some were't, creating the potential for "haves" among the non-deployers and "have-nots" among the deployers, which would have been ass backwards. Now that we're all on an even field again, I think it worth reconsidering (not that we should necessarily conclude that the old ways were right).
I just hope that the debate does not lose sight of the checklist, due to too much focus on individual checkblocks. The point of these NCOES excursions is to provide a professional education. What the courses teach is far more important than where they fall on a Soldier's timeline as he moves up in rank.
I hope that they also make Ranger School tougher, seeing as how I went through the last hard class nearly 10 years ago. They let people wear boots now. Unbelievable.
I have a somewhat different view on the subject of NCOES. Having been to PLDC, BNCOC and ANCOC I can honestly say that all three amounted to little more than several weeks of my life that I will never have back. In eighteen years of active federal service I have never heard anyone talk about the great things that they learned in PLDC, BNCOC or ANCOC, nor I have I ever been able to tell who has not yet been to an NCOES schools because of some gaps in their knowledge. The NCOES has been little more than a check the block requirement at least since October of '94 when I went to PLDC. I can't imagine that it was radically better before that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Schmedlap
SFC W
I don't think that we disagree at all, though I probably should have clarified by pointing out that I don't think they are teaching what they should. My point was simply that we should be more concerned about what the courses teach, rather than at what point an individual must attend them. Your comment reinforces my belief that we've made the mistake of focusing on the latter.Quote:
Originally Posted by Uboat509
The point of the courses is to impart a professional education, but the courses often do not accomplish that. Ignoring that and focusing on when an individual must attend accomplishes little to nothing. I won't say that it is quite analogous to rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, but it is certainly analogous to rearranging the deck chairs on a ship that has run aground and is stuck in the mud.
It wasn't. PLDC at the 7th Army NCO Academy at Bad Tolz was useless for an 11B2P when I went in the '80s. If I learned anything of value I don't remember it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Uboat509
I do remember polishing a wide black strip called The Autobahn that ran down the center of the barracks hallway and marching to chow carrying a goofy looking little stuffed troll called Al.
Things of great value for a young fire team leader.
At least the Bavarian Alps were nice to look at and I had some good beer in the Munich train station.
And it wasn't anything at all difficult even at Benning in the early 80s. I guess the only thing PLDC did for me was get me into some good night courses and well on my way to a BAS before making E-7. So, I hauled Alpha to SFC and received a ton of witty paragraphs and absurd bullets on my NCOERs :wry:Quote:
Originally Posted by Rifleman
It doesn't need to be tough(er), but it could stand to have some functional purpose.
and a couple of the establishments in Bad Tolz serve a passable white JaggersnitzelQuote:
Originally Posted by Rifleman
I know we have had this discusion before, but how do you escape the checklist methos of promotion with-out falling into the "likable" or "buddy" system of promotion?
Reed
Nothing wrong with some requirements from some central authority. I think the issue that we all have with the system is that the NCOES hoops that must be jumped through are not very valuable and perhaps not a worthwhile allocation of resources for TRADOC (or whatever they fall under) or for the individuals who attend.Quote:
Originally Posted by reed11b
I think we have to look at other countries. The perspective/opinion of the unit leadership is essential in getting promoted in the Canadian Forces, from what I have seen.
If we want the US Army to be a professional army, we have to start trusting leaders to do what is right with promotions (among other things). If we don't promote enough to fill the slots, because we actually elevated our standards, then our school systems will have to improve to create a better product that meets those standards. Sure, it will be harder to get promoted while in some units, but it will probably balance out.
Tankersteve
Both in official and unofficial ways. Officially, PERs - annual evaluations written by a superior and reviewed by his superior - are compiled and the scores for the past 3 years considered.Quote:
Originally Posted by tankersteve
Unofficially, the "who you know and who knows of you" matters as well - the Armoured and Infantry Corps have a Regimental system and the other Branches are small enough to be considered as the same. This "canalizes" progression within Regiments (for instance, promotions and appointments in the Infantry are generally - I say this with a caveat - split equally between the 3 Regiments) In these Regiments, Colonels and their Regimental Sergeants Major have considerable say in who goes where and most are likely to personally know of a subordinates performance and personality to some degree.
It's even more pronounced in the Armoured Corps, where soldiers entire careers revolve around a single battalion Regiment.
A system with its strengths and drawbacks to say the least - a lesson in social dynamics for any observer.
IMHO several things need revamping.
First as said above PLDC or WLC now, BNOC and ANOC needs revamping to actually teach someting of value. I heard a rumor that since so many people were failing land nav they were going to quit teaching it or at least make it a self correcting course ie if you fail the land nav you still pass the course in WLC.
The NCOER system should be done away with or changed to be its original intent. As it stands now a bad NCOER can kill any future promotions and your military carear is over. I have NEVER met an NCO or Officer that was perfect. The NCOER and OER's should reflect the true evaluation of the NCO or Officer. How else are they to learn? If they are not going to be honest on the NCOER then what is the point except for some petty NCO evaluater being able to make his subornates dance on a rope at his whim and distract from their true job. The current checkbox system does just that. If an NCO is weak in a certin area his eval should be able to show that without repurcussions to the NCO. He/she may be an exellant NCO but need work in a couple of areas. IMHO the NCOER should NOT be a part of the promotion packet, just a yes or no from the NCO's next chain of command in do they recommend them for promotion.
Last. No system is going to be perfect but the current system we have has degraded over the years to make the NCO's worry more about getting theior ticket's punched than being a true leader.