FY-15 ADHSB

[EODDave]

For VFA pilots, the screen board is there in name only. If you made O4, then you are a DH or you get out. And on that subject, word on the street is that about half of the 1310 VFA types that screened for DH turned it down. VFA 1320's not so much. Looks like approx 50 percent screen rate. Of the 12 WSO VFA types that screened for DH, 2 said no thank you. Not sure how the rest of Naval Aviation is doing, but the VFA community is in a tail spin. Making some popcorn and watching the train wreck unfold in slow motion. Looks like the perfect storm has hit.

 

[Pap]

Not sure how the rest of Naval Aviation is doing, but the VFA community is in a tail spin. Making some popcorn and watching the train wreck unfold in slow motion.

The fact that anyone at big navy is surprised by these numbers proves just how detached the VFA front offices are from reality.

 

[Recovering LSO]

This makes work more cutthroat so more people hang around all day doing nothing hoping that looking busy will be mistaken for being productive which makes them miserable.

This is the CO's failure - if he's not clearly articulating what his evaluation metrics are and setting a tone/level of expectation for workdays. He's doing the first part of that during check-in interviews and periodic "how ya doing" counseling. The second part is accomplished by making sure his XO understands his expectations and sees that they are met.

The fact that anyone at big navy is surprised by these numbers proves just how detached the VFA front offices are from reality.

The guys who are dorking this away were in front offices years ago and now wear stars.

 

[Gatordev]

Another thought on retention: The ADHSB has made life even at the FNG level hyper competitive. Guys who were my DHs didn't know they were going to have a DHSB as JOs, so they enjoyed life a bit more. Now, as soon as you get to the squadron you know you need to do everything to get that EP and FRS/SWTI slot so you can at the very least set yourself up to screen. This makes work more cutthroat so more people hang around all day doing nothing hoping that looking busy will be mistaken for being productive which makes them miserable.

I'm not doubting that you had this experience, but to me, it seems to be what you make of it. DHSB or not, as a JO, I was concerned about doing my job well and flying. Getting more advanced quals, while loathsome at times, meant more flying. Ironically, even FCP meant more flying as the flight hour hits started to come. DHSB, EPs, the FRS...those weren't what I cared about.

While my particular experience was in large part due to timing (huge chunks of the squadron were gone while I was home), jumping on whatever jobs (and there were usually several to go around if you weren't a brand new guy) and actually caring about them made one successful. I really didn't care about EPs, and in fact I figured I'd be a mid pack guy due to some politics from my DH boss at one point (he and I weren't the best of friends, to say the least). I was lucky (again) and some folks took care of me, but they were willing to go to bat for me because I did my job (as did the several other JOs who were in the same boat, timing-wise).

To boil it down, what I found to be my personal keys to success (without giving a damn about EPs and the FRS) were:
-Timing.
-Doing my job (hopefully well)
-Taking care of my people (who would then take care of me).
-Being honest with the front office (but still being respectful, which can be a fine line).
-Timing.

Not surprisingly, I found these to be the key to my success as a DH, as well.

 

[lowflier03]

To boil it down, what I found to be my personal keys to success (without giving a damn about EPs and the FRS) were:
-Timing.
-Doing my job (hopefully well)
-Taking care of my people (who would then take care of me).
-Being honest with the front office (but still being respectful, which can be a fine line).
-Timing.

While that has been a valid path for some of us, I've noticed the opposite becoming more and more common. JO's have quickly realized that fitreps are based on timing and whether or not your DH or front office like you. They look at the guys who rolled in with them and almost immediately start to try and make themselves look better at the expense of others. This results in entirely too much backstabbing and game playing.

Even as an outsider or super JO I noticing these things, and the front offices I have respectfully engaged with over this behavior have brushed it off, or claimed they really knew what was going on and things would shake out correctly. Unfortunately by the time fitreps came out it was obvious they didn't, and more than once I've spoken to a CO after the fact while he lamented over how he wished he really would have listened and how it was his DH's fault, or the fault of someone else because he didnt realize at the time that he ended up screwing over some true rockstars because the pieces of shit played their game well.

However some of this could easily be solved by soliciting peer input for fitreps. In every single case, the JOPA has known precisely which of its members really deserved the EP's and which ones deserved the kiss of death for fucking over the rest.

 

[Gatordev]

That's a shame, but I understand what you're saying. I guess I always took the mindset that I could only control what I did, and if the Navy spit me out after my commitment, I'd move on to other things. Then again, I never thought I'd stick around for 20 anyway, so I understand I was coming from a different place.

Interesting about the peer input. When I left my DH tour, the brand new CO asked me who to look for as the next set of leaders. Assuming it was even listened to, it still would be a small input to the overall puzzle, but I thought it was an interesting question to ask.

 

[Pags]

This is the CO's failure - if he's not clearly articulating what his evaluation metrics are and setting a tone/level of expectation for workdays. He's doing the first part of that during check-in interviews and periodic "how ya doing" counseling. The second part is accomplished by making sure his XO understands his expectations and sees that they are met.

I agree that this is something that depends on the CO to set the tone with the XO and DHs. I've seen it both ways. I've been in squadrons where the aboves was executed and I've been in squadrons where the above was given lip service but the reality was different.

I'm not doubting that you had this experience, but to me, it seems to be what you make of it. DHSB or not, as a JO, I was concerned about doing my job well and flying. Getting more advanced quals, while loathsome at times, meant more flying. Ironically, even FCP meant more flying as the flight hour hits started to come. DHSB, EPs, the FRS...those weren't what I cared about.

While my particular experience was in large part due to timing (huge chunks of the squadron were gone while I was home), jumping on whatever jobs (and there were usually several to go around if you weren't a brand new guy) and actually caring about them made one successful. I really didn't care about EPs, and in fact I figured I'd be a mid pack guy due to some politics from my DH boss at one point (he and I weren't the best of friends, to say the least). I was lucky (again) and some folks took care of me, but they were willing to go to bat for me because I did my job (as did the several other JOs who were in the same boat, timing-wise).

And guys are still able to their own thing and make it their own. But it's also well known, as lowflier03 has pointed out, that it's at their own peril. When I was the acting AO in my fleet tour I had a few nuggets who worked BS jobs (PAO, ARO, etc) for me. They were good kids and wanted to impress, but if they weren't flying, which was often, they all sat in the office all day on their computers doing lord knows what for 9-10hrs a day. I would often encourage them to get away from the computer and go study, work on their syllabus, walk the shops, or go stare at a computer at home, but I couldn't convince them and I'd always find them back at their desks trying to look busy. And the funny thing was that no how much they were at work, their syllabus briefs were still done at the last minute and of fleet average quality. And from what I garned from talking to three sets of JOs from the SAR Dets on the boat, things had only gotten more competitive. Hours were less. Quals were harder to come by and only given to a select few. The need to stand out in large competitive groups drove a lot of JO competition. Lots of HACs were disenchanted with the community. Guys who wanted to vertrep were pissed that they only got to fly tactics flights. Guys who wanted to be super-tactical were upset that getting quals was hard and training resources were hard to come by.

 

[Gatordev]

It would be interesting to hear if the same thing is happening on the HSM side. Not because I'm discounting what you guys are saying, but HSC has had some definite growing pains the last few years, and I'm curious if a community that has (for the most part) kept it's continuing mission for decades may be less stabby.

I had plenty of reasons I quit the first time, and they stemmed from my first JO tour, but if I had experienced what you guys are describing, I'd probably be wearing a baby-blue uniform getting mad rescues now instead of staying Navy.

 

[nittany03]

However some of this could easily be solved by soliciting peer input for fitreps. In every single case, the JOPA has known precisely which of its members really deserved the EP's and which ones deserved the kiss of death for fucking over the rest.

Well, while we're rewriting BUPERSINST 1610.10, here's something else. Why do we have to stack rank people anyway? No JOPA is alike. Most squadrons on every flightline are more or less average. Yet some happen to get a critical mass of rockstars and hit it out of the park for a year and a half until things change. Others collect chuckleheads, turn into a flying circus, and end up firing off HAZREPs or SIRs at the cyclic rate. We all know which squadrons in our airwing and/or community fit those descriptions. So why do we give equal weight to the #1EP player out of the Keystone Kops squadron and the one from the squadron which torched ARP and sent half its guys to the RAG? Is it not likely (though not guaranteed, of course) that the hypothetical crap squadron's number 1 JO might very well be a pack MP player in a better ready room?

As an example, don't the Marines set it so that the CO has the discretion to rank each of his Marines as he thinks they rank in the entire Corps, rather than arbitrarily stack ranking people?

Edit: Another analogy now that I'm a dirty Reservist looking for civilian employment: Jack Welch brought our mando distribution system to the corporate world and mandated that GE cut the bottom 10 percent on every eval cycle in their company. A lot of companies adopted it, including Microsoft. It's been blamed for a "lost decade" in Redmond, because supposedly rockstars would refuse to work with other rockstars. Why? Only one of them could get their ticket punched, and the other would get screwed. So mediocrity reigned as the best talent never got to work together. Oh, and the backstabbing and politics in the company were notorious at that time, because as has been mentioned, people climbed over each other for the golden ticket, so as not to get canned. And thus you get Windows 8. FWIW, I'm under the impression that most of corporate America has canned the idea because it didn't work.

 

[Pags]

Well, while we're rewriting BUPERSINST 1610.10, here's something else. Why do we have to stack rank people anyway? No JOPA is alike. Most squadrons on every flightline are more or less average. Yet some happen to get a critical mass of rockstars and hit it out of the park for a year and a half until things change. Others collect chuckleheads, turn into a flying circus, and end up firing off HAZREPs or SIRs at the cyclic rate. We all know which squadrons in our airwing and/or community fit those descriptions. So why do we give equal weight to the #1EP player out of the Keystone Kops squadron and the one from the squadron which torched ARP and sent half its guys to the RAG? Is it not likely (though not guaranteed, of course) that the hypothetical crap squadron's number 1 JO might very well be a pack MP player in a better ready room?

As an example, don't the Marines set it so that the CO has the discretion to rank each of his Marines as he thinks they rank in the entire Corps, rather than arbitrarily stack ranking people?

Edit: Another analogy now that I'm a dirty Reservist looking for civilian employment: Jack Welch brought our mando distribution system to the corporate world and mandated that GE cut the bottom 10 percent on every eval cycle in their company. A lot of companies adopted it, including Microsoft. It's been blamed for a "lost decade" in Redmond, because supposedly rockstars would refuse to work with other rockstars. Why? Only one of them could get their ticket punched, and the other would get screwed. So mediocrity reigned as the best talent never got to work together. Oh, and the backstabbing and politics in the company were notorious at that time, because as has been mentioned, people climbed over each other for the golden ticket, so as not to get canned. And thus you get Windows 8. FWIW, I'm under the impression that most of corporate America has canned the idea because it didn't work.

If what the AirO on my ship told me is correct, the USMC system uses a "christmas tree" distribution model whereby lots of people are expected to be in the middle and few at the top. There's also no need for a CO to designate anyone as the star and an entire reporting group could leave without a star because as you said they're trying to get COs to extrapolate across the entire Corps, not just their squadron.

 

[flynsail]

Well, while we're rewriting BUPERSINST 1610.10, here's something else. Why do we have to stack rank people anyway? No JOPA is alike. Most squadrons on every flightline are more or less average. Yet some happen to get a critical mass of rockstars and hit it out of the park for a year and a half until things change. Others collect chuckleheads, turn into a flying circus, and end up firing off HAZREPs or SIRs at the cyclic rate. We all know which squadrons in our airwing and/or community fit those descriptions. So why do we give equal weight to the #1EP player out of the Keystone Kops squadron and the one from the squadron which torched ARP and sent half its guys to the RAG? Is it not likely (though not guaranteed, of course) that the hypothetical crap squadron's number 1 JO might very well be a pack MP player in a better ready room?

As an example, don't the Marines set it so that the CO has the discretion to rank each of his Marines as he thinks they rank in the entire Corps, rather than arbitrarily stack ranking people?

You bring up a very good point. An EP guy from one squadron could be a MP at another squadron. I have always heard about quality spread as FNGs are assigned to their first tour. What is this based off of? Does the FRS provide input on Cat I's, and predict their career potential? Is it based off NSS? If true, detailers get something to work with. However, it would not be a true measure of future success. Probably giving the Navy too much credit with quality spread with the first fleet assignment. Not talking about quality spread of DHs, though, as that does happen.

I am sure the guys in BUPERS are aware that an EP guy may not always be an MP guy, and vice versa. It is the system we have, and have to deal with. During an interview/radio show (VADM Moran and CDR Snodgrass) linked on this website, the host did bring up FITREPS. IIRC, VADM Moran said it is not the best system, but there is no plan to change it.

Without knowing all the details, it sounds like the MC and AF have similar eval systems. The CO may give zero EPs or all EPs. You are not ranked against peers, but against a standard. This has its own faults as well. It could be mitigated by each community manager providing COs on what is valued as an EP, MP, and P. The rest is up to the experience and discretion of the CO. It would reduce the managing of the FITREP 500 and/or congo line.

 

[CommodoreMid]

Concur with the CAT I thing meaning jack in terms of JO squadron performance. My experience is just anecdotal, but I'm guessing everyone has similar stories. The number one person in my CAT I class didn't make instructor (and I'm pretty sure didn't even make MC), whereas I and 3 other dudes in my class, all of us in the bottom half of the class, are now WTIs.

 

[Hozer]

^^^which means you'll be fired for a liberty incident.


Sorry, Meredith. Too easy.

 

[AUtiger]

Do not all communities let the squadrons choose their JOs? Seems like every time we need a JO the Skipper provides input of who we want to BUPERS after the JOPA gets a say. Seems to work out alright.

 

[lowflier03]

Do not all communities let the squadrons choose their JOs? Seems like every time we need a JO the Skipper provides input of who we want to BUPERS after the JOPA gets a say. Seems to work out alright.

Ha ha ha. Nice one. What happens when everyone is requesting the rock stars and all that is available are the bottom feeders?

The closest HSC had was the FDNF squadrons who used to have a minimum performance requirement for new pilots coming from the FRS. That was due to there not being any sims overseas. Unfortunately as the FDNF squadrons grew, the FRS couldn't support only sending top performers to them, and the sea wall COs started to complain, so the requirement went away.