• 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

Why are you Leaving?

samguitar

Flying a desk.
pilot
I've been away for a few weeks and had the pleasure of reading this entire thread in one sitting. So, I'm going to threadjack it back to the original topic and post my sanitized resignation letter below, which has already been received by PERS. I'm an O-4 in a dissociated sea tour, selected for OP DH and turned it down. Until a few months ago, I thought I was staying in. While on the boat away from my family, I realized what the next decade would look like for both family and career and made a rapid, about-face decision to go civilian and SELRES. Some snippets from the letter:

"...we do not play to win; we play to avoid losing."

"The one-size-fits-all, golden path sacrifices quality for breadth in a misguided attempt to prepare every line officer for command. "

"The necessary changes would be an uphill battle that would include amending or repealing the Defense Officer Personnel Management Act."


"Give Commanding Officers discretion to interview and hire officers who apply to work for them."
 

Attachments

  • Reason for Submission of Resignation Request_sanitized.pdf
    176.6 KB · Views: 149

Renegade One

Well-Known Member
None
"Give Commanding Officers discretion to interview and hire officers who apply to work for them."
Sam: I just wanted to comment on this part only. Unless much has changed, officers don't apply to work for anyone…they execute orders. Is there some 'Sea Daddy" stuff going on sub rosa? I'm sure there is. Similarly, on the 3 separate occasions when I had the opportunity to command something, no one ever came in for an "interview". Nor did I expect it.
Let's ratchet it down to "squadron life"…easier for most to understand, I think. I had a VF squadron. I had the right to "absolutely reject" someone, I think (never pulled that trigger…), but frankly I didn't know any of the CAT Is or CAT IIs, and kinda sorta took what I was dealt by the FRS. There were times of "feast"…when I got a whole crop of really fine motivated JOs…or at least a mix of those and fully "trainable" JOs.
I do recall one phone call from the FRS CO one day asking for my "preferences" for the new "draft". I had just received some of the first F-14Bs on the west coast, and I think the FRS was trying to help. I think I was due to pick up 3…a mix of pilots and RIOs…but I had about 6 months until deployment. I told "Mutha": "Look, sir, you've dealt me a pretty sweet hand in the last 6 months. I think it's probably my turn to take on whoever you think is qualified to fly this aircraft. If you graduate them from 124...we'll do the rest." And we did.
It's not who you get…it's what you do with the individuals. And no…they won't all make DH, CO or CNO.
 

CommodoreMid

Whateva! I do what I want!
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
Just a fucking LT here, but especially in aviation given MSR you fundamentally can't allow every CO to hire all of their officers. Why? Because every fleet squadron has JOs who leave for shore duty who are dirt bags. Because of MSR they have to go SOMEWHERE. If no CO wants them because they suck, where do they go, even if they've technically met the wickets to stay in aviation (level 300 ACTC quailed, etc)?.

I also agree the sea daddy thing could come into play in a horrible way. The AF does the hiring thing with CCs directly picking their DOs and apparently nepotism and "ducks picking ducks" (which we complain about rampantly here, for good reason) is rampant. CO direct hiring, in my opinion, would only worsen that. I think that what needs to happen is that big aviation (or Navy, or community, or something) needs to make a definite decision on what commands are allowed/required to hired their people. In VP, for example, the only place that has that formally established is VP-30. In my neck of the woods it used to be that the command and the JOs were allowed vetting rights on people coming in (I know because the people who are now my peers told me they specifically vetted me), but because of P-8 instructor manning issues at VP-30 they are basically being forced to take almost everyone who is basically instructor qualified in P-8 to go there for shore duty. As a result we don't get to pick our people and we're potentially getting individuals we would not want otherwise. Moral of the story, I would love for aviation to say, hey, FRS, weapons schools, wing weapons tactics units, NSAWC, and forward staffs get to pick their people (or something, insert commands here to make it work by community and formalize it) to make sure we get the right people in those billets. The hiring process wouldn't work overall for every single command because there would be people who wouldn't get "hired" and because of MSR they have to get "hired" somewhere. Big Navy and Big Naval Aviation would have to formally say what they prioritize as commands who get to hire then.

Additionally, the benefit of publicizing that process is that it would eliminate a lot of the smoke and mirrors detailing that happens. If you apply for a FRS/wing/staff billet and get rejected, you know why. It's not a secret then. Also, allow for the application process to be separate from your current chain of command. In many cases JOs are prevented from submitting FRS nomination packages because a front office doesn't like them. That's BS. Anyone should be able to put their name in the hat. A front office should definitely have their say if they believe someone shouldn't go somewhere and express that to the other command, but they shouldn't have the right to prevent someone from applying for a billet period.
 

nittany03

Recovering NFO. Herder of Programmers.
pilot
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
In just a short time in the private sector, hiring is not a panacea; it's just as fucked up there as in the military, just in a different way. I just took a resume writing class. The goal is to trickfuck the Applicant Tracking System so that a 22-year-old HR recruiter will actually find your resume after doing a keyword search, and then cluelessly try to match your skillset with a position that they cluelessly wrote based on the description they quasi-understood from a hiring manager, who will then get 4-5 percent of resumes to actually look at, even though they're the first one qualified to decide whether you can do the job or not.

The alternative is to actually know someone who can get you the job, which everyone around here is decrying as "the good old boy network." Don't get me wrong, I think that the assignment system on the active duty side is fucked, but the grass over here needs some Scotts, too. See my user title and take that for what it's worth.
 

BigRed389

Registered User
None
In just a short time in the private sector, hiring is not a panacea; it's just as fucked up there as in the military, just in a different way. I just took a resume writing class. The goal is to trickfuck the Applicant Tracking System so that a 22-year-old HR recruiter will actually find your resume after doing a keyword search, and then cluelessly try to match your skillset with a position that they cluelessly wrote based on the description they quasi-understood from a hiring manager, who will then get 4-5 percent of resumes to actually look at, even though they're the first one qualified to decide whether you can do the job or not.

The alternative is to actually know someone who can get you the job, which everyone around here is decrying as "the good old boy network." Don't get me wrong, I think that the assignment system on the active duty side is fucked, but the grass over here needs some Scotts, too. See my user title and take that for what it's worth.

If I'm not mistaken, the AEDO community already pretty much operates on a "apply/interview for your job" model.

That said, it may not make sense for an operational unit, which needs to be standardized to function (a Divo is a Divo, DH is a DH, etc). For those jobs, Navy already has a "hiring manager" in the sense that we've got means of tracking qualifications/schools/etc to know if someone is in fact qualified to do a job or not.
It's really only when you go outside of "career track" jobs that things really seem to break down. Then you get a very vague, poorly written description of the billet you might be interested in. And of course, you can show up at a command only to find out you're actually doing something rather different from what was written on your orders.

Guess my point is, the military should be able to do a better job than civilian HR. Our community managers and detailers are people who've BTDT and still have active ties to their parent communities. So they should be capable of doing a better rough cut to fit skillsets to billets.
 

samguitar

Flying a desk.
pilot
All fair criticisms.

I'm talking about a whole different way of doing business, which would certainly introduce new problems, but also open up possibilities for improvement that are currently difficult to imagine. It's kind of like if you pitched capitalism to a group of old people who had only ever lived under socialism. They might tell you how a free market won't work, because of all the people that will be left on the street homeless and hungry if the government doesn't provide for them. Meanwhile, you're trying to describe how the invisible hand of a free market enables innovation and ownership in a way that makes the society rich. Not saying any of you are socialists - that's just an analogy.

I should've written more clearly that the free market hiring thing wouldn't be for first tour assignments. In my letter, I talk about marrying promotions (to O-4 and above) to being hired into a billet which requires that rank. Using a free market system as the primary, not sole, means of assigning officers (as the letter says) would have 2nd, 3rd, and 4th order back effects on career path choices and introduce a new degree of freedom to go along with the increased accountability of a lengthier command tour (the letter again.)

But as you described, Renegade: officers "execute orders." The problem is we are more dependent than we need to be on using the force of orders to assign folks jobs. As a CO, did you find it was most effective to begin a project by barking out imperatives or by first attempting to build some consensus around your vision? Good leaders harness the power of voluntary choice to the max extent practical before resorting to raw authority, which will always be necessary at some point. Voluntary motivation really separates elite military performers such as SEAL's, aviators, etc. from the rest. Let's use as much of it as we can in the detailing process before we pull the old hammer out of the toolbox.

CO's would behave differently, because (1) they would arrive at that point via more diverse career paths, and (2) they would be in their billets longer. That in turn would mean (a) fewer CO's overall, more selectivity, better quality, and (b) they would have to run less of an 15 month sprint and more of a 3-6 year marathon and think more strategically about the long-term health of their units.

As for "ducks choose ducks," can the situation get much worse than it already is? Given the choice and the competition, CO's would probably build a team with some diversity of experience and go with their gut on leadership ability. A lot of new behaviors would emerge.

Of course there would have to be some sort of "safety net" which ultimately assigns bodies to billets that aren't filled through the hiring process. And the MSR is an obligation on the part of the member toward the service, not the other way around. No reason the Navy can't let someone go before MSR if they're no good.
 

exNavyOffRec

Well-Known Member
The goal is to trickfuck the Applicant Tracking System so that a 22-year-old HR recruiter will actually find your resume after doing a keyword search,

Many major companies have gone away from keyword searches for the specific reason that people had found ways to beat the keyword search, so far every fellow corporate recruiter I have talked to at the Fortune 100 level companies no longer do that.
 

Mos

Well-Known Member
None
I've been away for a few weeks and had the pleasure of reading this entire thread in one sitting. So, I'm going to threadjack it back to the original topic and post my sanitized resignation letter below, which has already been received by PERS. I'm an O-4 in a dissociated sea tour, selected for OP DH and turned it down. Until a few months ago, I thought I was staying in. While on the boat away from my family, I realized what the next decade would look like for both family and career and made a rapid, about-face decision to go civilian and SELRES. Some snippets from the letter:

"...we do not play to win; we play to avoid losing."

"The one-size-fits-all, golden path sacrifices quality for breadth in a misguided attempt to prepare every line officer for command. "

"The necessary changes would be an uphill battle that would include amending or repealing the Defense Officer Personnel Management Act."


"Give Commanding Officers discretion to interview and hire officers who apply to work for them."

I'm keeping my options open for the time being, but if I end up leaving after my current commitment in a few years, I think I might plagiarize most of your letter.
 

Recovering LSO

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

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

Whew.... This thread/post took some digging, but I found it...

I was reading Greenie Board's post today and thought it was relevant to a few of the comments that were made around here a few months ago.

Now, if I could remember birthdays and anniversaries with the same level of accuracy....
 

nittany03

Recovering NFO. Herder of Programmers.
pilot
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
Many major companies have gone away from keyword searches for the specific reason that people had found ways to beat the keyword search, so far every fellow corporate recruiter I have talked to at the Fortune 100 level companies no longer do that.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304821304577436172660988042

Older article, but some of what I've been taught lately by people who make their money placing people is still how to trickfuck these types of automated systems. Whether they use keywords or more complex algorithms, I'm thoroughly convinced that the civilian sector is just as hosed as the military, just in a different way. Note the experience of the HR employee applying for his own job and being rejected by the ATS.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but I'd be interested in hearing who uses any other strategies, and if so, what they are. I hope someone is being smarter than this article describes. At any rate, hiring your own people for military jobs is not necessarily a panacea. Not saying it's not better than what we do now, but it will have its own separate flaws.
 

Uncle Fester

Robot Pimp
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
Regarding skippers having discretion to hire their people, I can see the pros/cons of doing it both ways. Where I've seen it really become a detriment to mission is in commands that take guys from all over (VX, VT, etc) and it becomes a matter of 'coded' billets. Warring mafia families have a better sprit of cooperation than detailers haggling over billets. I've seen skippers who needed a specific set of qualifications and were told no, take what the billet's coded for.

The federal civilian hiring system swings back and forth, between centralized (because of nepotism, favoritism, or the aforementioned 'ducks hiring ducks' and it gets out of hand) and decentralized (because the people in DC don't really understand the job requirements). Regarding the latter, I interviewed with CBP to fly in their P-3AEWs, and one of their guys told me about an E-2 guy being turned down by DHS because he didn't put down that he knew how to use a UHF radio.

I think skippers being able to pick and choose their people is a good concept, but might create as many or more problems than it solves.
 

Zanklin

Oh the per diem you'll make...
pilot
A nice suggestion, but does nothing to address the fundamental underlying problems. Of course, I'm also one to say that income and property taxes should be abolished, the IRS dismantled, and move to a consumption based tax system. There you go. There's your tax free income for all deployed personnel.

I think they call them Warrant Officers and LDO's. Oh wait, you mean for the URL community? Haven't you heard...if you don't want to command, then URL isn't for you.

Statistically speaking, command isn't for you either.... :)
 

RHINOWSO

"Yeah, we are going to need to see that one again"
None
Why did I leave AD?

I always say it was a million paper cuts... but the highlights include (1) all the skippers in the Airwing getting micromanaged - they were at best glorified DHs (2) deployments upping from 6-10 months, plus the fun of surge time (3) Naval Aviation not valuing or growing tactical prowess, just tactical retards who punch the tickets and can't fight their way out of a wet paper bag.
 
Top