Why are you Leaving?

[Uncle Fester]

I certainly agree that not everyone can stay in for 20, but there are plenty of militaries that successfully maintain 'non-command' tracks for officers (the French Navy comes to mind), which allows them to keep a cadre of experienced guys around even if they're not climbing a ladder. Insomuch as we do that at all, the guys disappear into OP-T or FTS and don't keep their experience in their home community.

The Navy is way too focused on selecting dudes to be admirals. That's what our fitrep and promotion system is optimized for, to the detriment of everything else. Not everyone can or should get a flag, no, but our current system of "if you're not going to be an admiral, hit the bricks" is obviously not so great. There's a million reasons a good guy can wind up FOSing. Likewise we all know tactically sound guys and good sticks who may be great instructors or tactical thinkers but probably shouldn't be in command.

My point is that the Navy kind of makes its own problems by insisting on a rigid career progression "right billets" and career gates....there's no reason to do it that way, other than that's how we do it. It's losing experience and expertise in the name of having a "who colors inside the lines the best" contest. I'll give you a for-instance: I know several guys who did the OPEVAL for the E-2D...why not send them to the FIT or the RAG and help do the fleet transitions? Cuz that'd be back-to-back shore duty and that's just not done, old boy.

 

[wink]

I certainly agree that not everyone can stay in for 20, but there are plenty of militaries that successfully maintain 'non-command' tracks for officers (the French Navy comes to mind), which allows them to keep a cadre of experienced guys around even if they're not climbing a ladder. Insomuch as we do that at all, the guys disappear into OP-T or FTS and don't keep their experience in their home community.

The Navy is way too focused on selecting dudes to be admirals. That's what our fitrep and promotion system is optimized for, to the detriment of everything else. Not everyone can or should get a flag, no, but our current system of "if you're not going to be an admiral, hit the bricks" is obviously not so great. There's a million reasons a good guy can wind up FOSing. Likewise we all know tactically sound guys and good sticks who may be great instructors or tactical thinkers but probably shouldn't be in command.

My point is that the Navy kind of makes its own problems by insisting on a rigid career progression "right billets" and career gates....there's no reason to do it that way, other than that's how we do it. It's losing experience and expertise in the name of having a "who colors inside the lines the best" contest. I'll give you a for-instance: I know several guys who did the OPEVAL for the E-2D...why not send them to the FIT or the RAG and help do the fleet transitions? Cuz that'd be back-to-back shore duty and that's just not done, old boy.

Agree. But we are wanting a different Navy. They have made feeble efforts before at establishing the non command path at least twice before, but it always fails for one reason or another. A totally committed revolutionary change in the Navy would be required. No one that is in a billet for 3 years is going to develop, propose, promote and implement such a wide ranging change in business. Not the time, nor the courage.

 

[Uncle Fester]

There are some ways to skin this cat without a wholesale revolution. First that comes to mind echoes a discussion from another thread: find new ways to use the Reserves. There already plenty of full-time guys assigned to reserve flying units, and more selres who are effectively full-timers, though with that comes the gamesmanship of money and orders. So why not formalize the process, do something akin to the ANG with their full-timers and ARTs?

Say you've got a LT finishing up an instructor tour at the FRS, doesn't particularly want to be a Shooter or a DH, but has his Level IV or V, a bunch of hours in the plane and a generally solid reputation. Give him the option of going (call it FTS or something else) where he's assigned to a SAU or RESRON on four-year full-time orders, with the option of re-upping the orders on the other side (with the CO's concurrence) or going to another SAU/RESRON/weps school on another set of four-years, and the understanding that he'll top out at O-4. He could also have the option in staying in the unit as a SELRES, especially useful for guys who want to work supporting civvie jobs as sim instructors or what have you.

This wouldn't be an automatic thing...it could be something akin to FTS with a selection board and would require a good record...but the difference that's it's not a 'career track' like FTS is now.

Changes would have to be made for this model to work, but they're mostly in terms of money and billets. It's not a new career track or specialty. I know the inevitable protest will be "but how will they have the chance to compete for command?" and that's kind of the point.

 

[azguy]

My point is that the Navy kind of makes its own problems by insisting on a rigid career progression "right billets" and career gates....there's no reason to do it that way, other than that's how we do it. It's losing experience and expertise in the name of having a "who colors inside the lines the best" contest. I'll give you a for-instance: I know several guys who did the OPEVAL for the E-2D...why not send them to the FIT or the RAG and help do the fleet transitions? Cuz that'd be back-to-back shore duty and that's just not done, old boy.

Yeah, this discussion is a constant theme on SailorBob. The Royal Navy, for example, doesn't have up/out. If you find a job or field you love as a LT, you can stay in it for your entire career, at sea and ashore, with the understanding that you will remain a LT. The N1/PERS folks probably can rattle off a dozen reasons that this is a terrible idea, but as wink points out, it's not in their interest to do it.

 

[Spekkio]

I got the impression that the Royal Navy's officer corps is more specialized in general, i.e. if you are a cheng you will never command a ship because now your expertise is engineering. There are pluses and minuses to that system vs. America's approach to having officers be well-rounded, and I'm not sure if we should throw out the baby with the bathwater there. Besides, officers getting assigned to a tour knowing that they are pigeonholed into a particular track relatively early in their careers that they didn't want could adversely affect retention, too.

I'm not entirely sure that there are a whole lot of officers who would be content with staying terminal O-3s. I think that what people really want is a way to have career and promotion opportunities outside of the golden path.

 

[Uncle Fester]

It's mostly a terrible idea because "it'll kill your career". That's what all the reasoning behind our promotion model boils down to - give the most dudes shot at command/majcom/flag. If they don't want that shot, they should go away. Things which defeat that model aren't acceptable. Why'd Flying LDO and then Flying Warrant go away? Because they were taking up billets (AOPS, etc) that the 'career' guys needed in the squadron for ticket-punching (or so I've been told). Why can't a guy do back-to-back shore duty? Or back-to-back squadron tours, for that matter. I'm sure there are some wierdos out there who'd be happy to roll to another squadron and keep flying instead of going to shore. Because then we have apples and oranges in the Tank, and we want apples and apples.

I'd say it's pretty clear that it's burnout that's driving guys out of the Fleet. Big Navy's response seems to be a shrug and attitude that the guys who are leaving are clearly non-hackers and we don't need them anyway. But whether those guys should be COs/Flags/etc or not, the Navy still invests a ton of money in training and qualifying them, and just from a cost-benefit aspect, it's worth our while to try to find as many ways as possible to get a return on that investment. Treating officers as disposable because they don't want to be a skipper - or maybe even just that they can't stay on our entirely self-imposed track for their own reasons right at that moment - seems self-defeating to me.

I've always said that the Navy demands a lot - that's part of the job, that's never changed - and when what you have to give is no longer worth what you get in return, it's time to go.

 

[azguy]

II think that what people really want is a way to have career and promotion opportunities outside of the golden path.

You can't have it both ways. The O-5/O-6 billets are going to be reserved for the careerists. Just ask a Specialty Career Path member - they were all told they could make O-5+...no dice.

The up-shot is that they do get to specialize and spend the rest of their career doing something they like. I fully support this -- and I think there are some number of people that want to rotate between DDG OPS and SWOS instructor for the rest of their career as an O-4...Or FRS instructor and squadron DH. Doesn't have to be a ton of people, but it's a tool to retain some quality guys that are good at their jobs that the Navy would otherwise lose to civ world or some rando staff job.

 

[lowflier03]

I certainly agree that not everyone can stay in for 20, but there are plenty of militaries that successfully maintain 'non-command' tracks for officers (the French Navy comes to mind), which allows them to keep a cadre of experienced guys around even if they're not climbing a ladder. Insomuch as we do that at all, the guys disappear into OP-T or FTS and don't keep their experience in their home community.

The Navy is way too focused on selecting dudes to be admirals. That's what our fitrep and promotion system is optimized for, to the detriment of everything else. Not everyone can or should get a flag, no, but our current system of "if you're not going to be an admiral, hit the bricks" is obviously not so great. There's a million reasons a good guy can wind up FOSing. Likewise we all know tactically sound guys and good sticks who may be great instructors or tactical thinkers but probably shouldn't be in command.

My point is that the Navy kind of makes its own problems by insisting on a rigid career progression "right billets" and career gates....there's no reason to do it that way, other than that's how we do it. It's losing experience and expertise in the name of having a "who colors inside the lines the best" contest. I'll give you a for-instance: I know several guys who did the OPEVAL for the E-2D...why not send them to the FIT or the RAG and help do the fleet transitions? Cuz that'd be back-to-back shore duty and that's just not done, old boy.

Concur, and also don't forget the the other side of this system is just as bad for morale and innovation. Arbitrarily, managing promotion from a detached, central, bureaucratic organization who decides that at precisely x years you are eligible for promotion assumes that everyone is ready for that promotion at exactly x years. What about those who learn fast, have a particular aptitude, or have some revolutionary new ideas. Unfortunately we do nothing to support or encourage those people. Instead they are forced into the same cookie cutter career model as the mouth breathers.

Or what about some enterprising JO who has some innovative way to deal with problem x in Naval Aviation. He would be a great guy to have working at the NAVAIR desk. Unfortunately that isn't "career enhancing" so the detailer will instead force him into the "golden path" jobs. So now if he really wants to get that NAVAIR or whatever job, he has to game his FITREP/performance so that he's off the golden path, but still has good enough papers to stay in and get picked up for the other job. Oh and lets not forget that when he gets there, if he's only a LT his ideas count for shit. But give it 2 more years and since he's suddenly in the gate for O-4 according to Pers, now his ideas may get some traction. What makes his ideas and solutions any less valid as a LT, than as a LCDR or CDR?

We stifle innovation, ideas, and real performance at every opportunity.

 

[Gatordev]

Agree. But we are wanting a different Navy. They have made feeble efforts before at establishing the non career path at least twice before, but it always fails for one reason or another. A totally committed revolutionary change in the Navy would be required. No one that is in a billet for 3 years is going to develop, propose, promote and implement such a wide ranging change in business. Not the time, nor the courage.

Interestingly, FTS allowed for (but was not exclusively) the system that Fester describes. Maintain quals while acknowledging there aren't any more promotions in your future. Ironically, someone was around long enough to develop, propose, promote and impleement a change, and now FTS is yet another "you have to move up, or at least out of the way" tier of the Navy, while also managing to greatly reduce command opportunity in certain communities. A nice double-whammy there.

 

[Uncle Fester]

Interestingly, FTS allowed for (but was not exclusively) the system that Fester describes. Maintain quals while acknowledging there aren't any more promotions in your future. Ironically, someone was around long enough to develop, propose, promote and impleement a change, and now FTS is yet another "you have to move up, or at least out of the way" tier of the Navy, while also managing to greatly reduce command opportunity in certain communities. A nice double-whammy there.

Yep. It seems like there'd be a way to keep "FTS" as exactly literally that - Full Time Support - while reviving the "TAR" term for the other guys now doing literally that - Training and Administration of Reserves. One's a way to keep guys in the cockpit and get value there (tactics, training, post-mx checks...sort of like the FWOs in the Army do) but who aren't getting promoted and are cool with that - O-4 over 15 is still pretty good money. The other is a parallel 'career' track who specializes in care and feeding of Reservists, and has the potential to keep getting promoted and get command of something one day. Maybe merge this with the OP-T track?

I think it's workable. The resistance would come because the Navy gets twitchy if you can't draw one of those career path block diagrams culminating in command of something.

And one thing to remember...this thing pretty much happens already. If a SELRES can establish himself in a flying billet, keep it funded, and avoid getting promoted, he can more or less work there full-time as long as the command has money. Difference between that and what I'm talking about is nothing's for sure, he gets paid Reservist money instead of AD money (big diff in BAH, benefits, etc), doesn't get an AD retirement at 20, and it's a constant shell game of managing your AT, ADT, ATFPs, etc. And if you get promoted you're probably out of work. Makes more sense to formalize and regularize it.

 

[BOMBSonHAWKEYES]

For the folks just joining or about to join the ranks of Naval Aviation - I wouldn't be discouraged by all of the banter that you read or hear about from guys in their 30s and 40s. Being a JO in the fleet is the greatest job anyone can get, so don't let this discussion change the way you go about your life. I think the issues of the slightly older crowd that you've been privy to stem from the fact that as we transition from our fleet JO tours, things just aren't as good as they used to be.

 

[wink]

Interestingly, FTS allowed for (but was not exclusively) the system that Fester describes. Maintain quals while acknowledging there aren't any more promotions in your future. Ironically, someone was around long enough to develop, propose, promote and impleement a change, and now FTS is yet another "you have to move up, or at least out of the way" tier of the Navy, while also managing to greatly reduce command opportunity in certain communities. A nice double-whammy there.

Career recruiter was/is like that. Don't know if they still do it. Usually a guy plucked from SELRES to serve on 3-4 year orders with an option to take addition orders doing the same thing. Usually it was at the same NRD. I saw a guy make O-4 doing that.

 

[Recovering LSO]

innovation.

revolutionary

enterprising

innovative

double word score?

traction

innovation

definitely triple word score this time...

real performance

BINGO!!!!!

Dude, put these thoughts and energy to paper and then get in touch with AskSkipper, Greenie Board, or CDR Salamander...

 

[squorch2]

Echoing what RLSO said (and was going to say it if he hadn't already). Believe it or not, people *are* listening...

 

[pourts]

For the folks just joining or about to join the ranks of Naval Aviation - I wouldn't be discouraged by all of the banter that you read or hear about from guys in their 30s and 40s. Being a JO in the fleet is the greatest job anyone can get, so don't let this discussion change the way you go about your life. I think the issues of the slightly older crowd that you've been privy to stem from the fact that as we transition from our fleet JO tours, things just aren't as good as they used to be.

I wouldn't be discouraged, but I would pay attention to it. It would be stupid only to consider the "good times" and rosy stories from that family friend who was a naval aviator from 1985-2005, for instance.

Those who commission now are entering the long war during a budgetary trough. I didn't live through the 70's, but this time period has some similarities to the Carter years-- except that the US economy is decent. The military is having an identity crisis, and doesn't know if it wants to be a warfighting entity or a vehicle for cultural change/ whipping boy. Our military bureaucracy is built on an industrial age paradigm, yet we have information age technology that seems to be utilized solely to micromanage at the lowest level. Right now we basically have the worst attributes of past and modern technology. It will take a while and lots of growing pains before things get better.