Taking Care of Field Grade Officers on TDY...NOT!!!

[RTK]

It amazes me the kind of ire that my posting has produced

As for the "real world" jobs...the majority of my friends are pure civilians (always have been) and I have discussed for 26 years the treatment of military personnel versus the treatment they have given to their charges or have received themselves...they ALL got outstanding treatment...but then again, they all work for or have developed extremely successful businesses...if you are getting treated poorly in a civilian job, perhaps you are working for (or worked for) the wrong type of company...

the fact that there are many people who receive substandard care or live in substandard conditions in the Army is not an argument that everyone should suck it up...perhaps the culture should become a culture of taking care of as many people as possible instead of one that wears substandard treatment, equipment, and conditions as a source of pride

I hope you have tremendous pride that you can get the mission done regardless of what you are given...while that is admirable in most cases; in other cases it means not really getting the mission done, what it probably means is that you did something short of the mission...that significant shortfalls (not immediately apparent) most likely will arise down the line because you were not given appropriate resources...however, that is not your problem, you will have moved onto another job (after receiving your top block) and the long term problem is someone else's...another cultural weakness of the military (short term thinking)

I find it humorous that this posting was moved...why is the postiion I have taken "not worthy"...Generation Y (or whatever the vogue term for younger officers is) is not a perjorative term...just think what your senior officers thought about you...I bet we could save a ton of money if we didn't air condition our office buildings, allowed soldiers to live off base (even if they are married), and allow accompanied tours overseas...you guys really have it soft...I think you need to suck it up...

I think it's been explained why the post was moved earlier.

So are you a student? It just dawned on me that you've been a member for 2 months and still have yet to introduce yourself.

Since when do we do ILE at Ft Lee?Disregard: Googled my answer. It's becoming much clearer now.

ILE Curricula

ILE consists of two segments: a core course and an advanced FA qualification course. All majors, regardless of their branch or FA, study an identical core curriculum within ILE. When an officer graduates from the ILE core course, the Army awards him Military Education Level 4 and Joint Professional Military Education (JPME) Phase I credentials. [JPME is a two-phased system designed to qualify joint specialty officers. Phase I is taught as part of the curricula of the intermediate and senior service colleges in both resident and nonresident formats. Phase II is taught only in residence through the National Defense University.] Then, depending on his FA, the officer receives additional FA education, which, in effect, provides him with branch-qualifying educational credentials.

Operations Career Field ILE

All Operations Career Field (OPCF) majors attend ILE in residence at CGSC. OPCF officers are those who continue to serve in their basic branch and that branch is part of the Army Competitive Category (ACC). OPCF also includes officers in three FAs, regardless of their basic branch: Psychological Operations (FA 37), Civil Affairs (FA 38), and Multifunctional Logistics (FA 90).

The ACC excludes officers in the Chaplain Corps, Judge Advocate General’s Corps, and all Army Medical Department branches (Medical Corps, Dental Corps, Army Nurse Corps, Medical Service Corps, Medical Specialist Corps, and Veterinary Corps). So, with a few exceptions, these officers do not attend the CGSC in residence at Fort Leavenworth. These exceptions generally are limited to Medical Corps officers who will serve as division surgeons or Medical Service Corps officers who also are FA 90 officers (such as those serving in the medical companies of brigade support battalions).

Other-Than-OPCF ILE

All “other than OPCF” majors attend ILE core in-struction at what are known as “ILE course location sites” rather than at Fort Leavenworth. Course location sites currently exist at four places in the United States: Fort Belvoir, Virginia; Fort Lee, Virginia; Fort Gordon, Georgia; and the Navy Postgraduate School at Monterey, California. The Army selected these sites because they are located at or near large concentrations of other-than-OPCF officers who are serving or attending school.

Who are other-than-OPCF officers? They include officers in the—

• Medical Department (other than those having FA 90).
• Chaplain Corps.
• Judge Advocate General’s Corps.
• Operations Support Career Field (OSCF), includ-ing Foreign Area Officers (FA 48) and the Army Acquisition Corps (FA 51).
• Information Operations Career Field (IOCF), including Information Systems Engineering (FA 24), Information Operations (FA 30), Strategic Intelligence (FA 34), Space Operations (FA 40), Public Affairs (FA 46), Information Systems Management (FA 53), and Simulations Operations (FA 57) officers.

Institutional Support Career Field (ISCF), including Human Resource Management (FA 43); Comptroller (FA 45); Academy Professor, U.S. Military Academy (FA 47); Operations Research and Systems Analysis (FA 49); Force Management (FA 50); Nuclear Research and Operations (FA 52); and Strategic Plans and Policy (FA 59) officers.

It is apparent that other-than-OPCF officers are less involved in the direct, operational combat actions of the Army on the battlefield. They are more likely to be involved in aspects of supporting the Army from within a theater of operations, from the strategic base in the Continental United States (CONUS), or from power-projection platforms between the theater and CONUS.

However, it is quite possible to find other-than-OPCF officers working within divisions, corps, Army component commands, various joint organizations within a theater of operations (such as a joint task force or joint force land component command), or on the staffs of any of the various combatant commands, such as the U.S. Central Command, U.S. European Command, U.S. Southern Command, U.S. Northern Command, U.S. Pacific Command, U.S. Joint Forces Command, U.S. Special Operations Command, or U.S. Transportation Command.

Wth the exception of FA 48, this should make it even clearer why this was pulled out of the trigger puller forum. I heard they don't have the course in the fall, because the students would starve to death with all the leaves on the ground.

[cj.kirkpatrick]

While I didn't originally include a shortage of funding for rental vans in my list, I think it still ranks pretty close to the bottom of all the problems the Army faces.

I'm proud of the Army's "suck it up" and "mission accomplishment" mentality. It feels good to know I'm a part of an organization that, across all it's levels, never quits and finds no challenge overwhelming. Frankly, I'm a little ashamed you're detracting from it.

Feel free to join your civilian friends, perhaps we'll redirect your salary to purchasing more vans.

[Bill Moore]

Sledge142 your points are valid, I reason you drew so much heat is the way they were presented. I have 30 years (and I'm still kicking) in the Army, most of them in tough muddy boots assignments. I have been very fortunate to have been brought up by some great leaders (both NCO and Officer) over the years. Of course that is the nature of Special Forces and Airborne units.

The priorities in military leadership are mission, your men, then yourself. Whenever you are required to suck it up because the mission requires it, then it is expected of you. However if you're in a leadership role, your role is to limit the items your men have to suck up. Sometimes saying suck it up is a leadership failure to improve conditions for their men. These leader's priorities are mission, themselves, then their men. When you are required to suck it up, leaders will explain why and inspire their men to do so.

While issues about money for rental vans are trival compared to having adequate time on the range, having the right body armor down range, having money to get guys to school, etc., it is still an issue that impacts retention of mid to senior grade NCOs and Officers. It is another proverbial straw on the camel's back. Soldiers are as important as equipment, and strong consideration should be taken before cutting funds for professional development, PTSD recovery, family counselling, etc. The issue isn't necessarily the van, but that the service doesn't provide a viable alternative such as a barracks, BOQ, dining facility that is open during the weekend, etc. If the service provides the necessities (in priority, gym, food, gym, billets, etc.) and you desire to go out on the town, then the rental car is on you or your unit, but if they don't provide the necessities and severely limit rental cars then there may be an issue. You just need to present it as problem, discussion and recommendation, instead of a complaint.

[marct]

And this blog will be an excellent teaching tool

I agree, and steer a number of my students here as well.

...don't be afraid though, I always let my students make up their own mind about what is right and wrong...all I will do ask them questions concerning aspects of the various points made in the pages of the blog...they may think I am a buffoon (as many of you will probably agree)...

Afraid? Of what - anonymous troll attacks? Nah, I'm not worried about that .

Sledge142 your points are valid, I reason you drew so much heat is the way they were presented.

Bill, you are spot on! Sledge, speaking as one teacher to another, use this thread as an example of cross-cultural miscommunication.

Marc