I think my point was that both services got it wrong in almost opposite ways.
-
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
It's finally happening . . . Big Navy is canning the stack rank FITREP/Eval
- Thread starter nittany03
- Start date
Curious to know what? Other than a handful of guys within CNATRA to fill manning gaps and are allowed to extend into their MSR but have to waive any ability to take severance, what are you talking about - genuinely curious.
Can you please expand on this?
I know a bunch of VT guys who've been able to extend to their MSR but no one has mentioned having to waive the severance.
The 8 year contract putting guys on the boat, and depending on timing you'd have to do anywhere between 1-4 years on the boat to FOS out for severance. I don't know many guys who would be willing to do that for severance. I know I wasn't going to.
But other than getting lucky to pick up FTS or lat transfer, most dudes are going to the boat. There's not like a systematic program in place to dissuade people from serving their full commitment.
Of the folks in my command that have been allowed to extend to their MSR and end their time on active duty, they have told me they all had to agree to:
1. Accept a lower-than-competitive FITREP;
2. Sign a page 13 waiving their severance (seeing as they didn't FOS, they just went to their MSR and left the service);
3. Agree to not compete for LCDR (which I assume has to do with the service having their arms tied behind their backs and having to pay the severance in the case they were to 2x FOS).
What I'm saying is that making the boat unavoidable isn't to the Navy's benefit, which it thinks it is, which is why they extended the contract. In spite of being able to billet people to these jobs, they are wasting money on filling the same job 2-3 times per single set of orders due to resignations/FOS, not to mention having unmotivated people in the job that are just waiting for their separation date. I'm saying there has to be a better way. The 8 year contract has shown manifestly that the juice isn't worth the squeeze. If the "golden children" are leaving for FTS and comnavcivpac, then the Navy needs to reevaluate its retention goals. I accept that I may be way off base but I'm sharing what I saw on the front lines of dudes at MSR and retention.
And this seems like a perfect backhanded example of the Navy trying to get dudes to let them not pay their severance.
Was this some sort of a drug deal between PERS and front offices in the HTs? Because I simply haven't heard of this in the jet VTs, and lots of guys are getting extended without these caveats.
I would love to see it in writing (e-mail or otherwise) that they would accept non-competitive FITREPs. I think everyone understands what is likely to happen once someone says they're getting out, but for it to be written down, suggested, or directed by someone to a CO stinks to high heaven.
You don't get severance if you resign or submit a don't pick me letter, but I don't understand how PERS could enforce those conditions unless they're holding those PRD extensions hostage pending Letters of Intent or don't pick me letters being submitted. Besides, once you FOS it's very difficult for the Navy to PCS someone because they no longer meet retainability. They still can do it for a "career-enhancing" billet but in my experience they ask you if that's something you'd like to do.
I think those dudes to talk to a JAG. Something about this whole deal seems off.
That has always irked me. Call me old-fashioned, but I just feel like you should give the person the FITREP they deserve regardless of their intentions. I mean, shit, if they earned the #1 then give it to them and let them do with it what they please. Giving a person who would've been a #8 EP the #3 EP because he got pushed forward in the line doesn't really help the Navy in any way. Just makes someone look better than they really are.
Once again . . . what do we gain by ranking people in summary groups? What advantage does this give in communicating an officer's suitability for promotion to the board?
Why don't you precisely define what's wrong with it? In its most basic form, it allows a RS to easily and quantifiably compare a group of individuals. That's ultimately what a screen board is, right? We're managing a finite amount of opportunity based on a set of standardized subjective assessments.
One problem, ranking the current group only deals with the current group. In other words, the #1 O-3 EP in Jan 2013 may be the #4 EP in Jan 2015 but there's no way to effectively convey that to the board in the current system. So the 2013 #1 EP now looks much better than the 2015 #2 EP. If the goal is to have the very best people as our COs then why limit the viewfinder to such a small slice of time?
I really don't know how you could effectively qualify and quantify the above problem though.
Are you talking about the "silver bullet" program to extend one person past 12 months? Or people inside 11 just running out the clock? For the former, it's not fair to the careerists for a super senior LT in the squadron to inhabit the top of the FITREP pool for an extra 12 plus months.
I'd argue the people doing extracurricular work to separate at MSR aren't giving a many fucks about their shore tour high water paper or severance dollars. They just want to leave honorably at the end of their service obligations and not get stuck being jerked around by Millington.
And the guys trying to milk out every dollar out of Uncle Sugar are gonna take the bonus early, take the boat orders, and then cross their fingers they don't make DH.
!!!!!
The existing system is imperfect, but it works way more than it doesn't. It's also helpful at times like this to recall that FITREPS are not now, and weren't ever intended to be "report cards." They're a way for the CO to communicate to the board concerning future assignments and selection suitability.
Well stated.