Question for officers who have been in the fleet for a while

[fc2spyguy]

There is a debate here amongst several people here at the NROTC unit with regards to pt and the role that it plays for the officers.

Several people think that it is all about setting the example on a weekly basis and that an officer should be seen as a person that conducts pt on a regular basis, and continually out performs the people they are leading in this department.

I personally feel that the Navy has set standards that are tested on a regular basis. I don't think that an officer needs to be seen, by his division or those junior to him, conducting pt for the sole purpose that they see him. I think that as long as an officer meets the standards set by the Navy, and any goals that they set for themself is good enough.

So, my questions go along these lines.

1. In a fitrep that you have received outside of a training command, to what degree did your prt performance affect it?

2. What are your thoughts on where an officer should fall in the prt from sat to outstanding?

3. How much has the Navy changed with respect to pt since you've been in, and where do you see it going?

Note: If you agree with someone, instead of not posting, please just say that you agree with said person. I'm just trying to see if my beliefs are in the ballpark with the rest of the Navy, or if I'm way the heck out in right field.

 

[Hursel110]

Great question, I want to see what everyone has to say on this also.

 

[feddoc]

So, my questions go along these lines.

1. In a fitrep that you have received outside of a training command, to what degree did your prt performance affect it?


2. What are your thoughts on where an officer should fall in the prt from sat to outstanding?



3. How much has the Navy changed with respect to pt since you've been in, and where do you see it going?

1. Never seen the PRT influence a FITREP unless the officer fails.


2. Officers should perfroma at least SAT.


3. Joined in 74...(19, not 18).....Since then the focus of having a PRT has been on improving the overall health of Sailors. A good goal for sure since overall health increase = saving taxpayers money, increases readiness, etc.

However, overall health is not limited by how well (or not) a person performs on a fitness test. As an example, I have had two people who worked for me who did good on the PRT; one guy even got outstanding (swam like a fish). Blood analysis, including EKG, indicated they were healthy. Their job performance was good, better than most. But, they failed the PRT because of body fat and eventually were forced to leave the Navy because the current PRT rules focused only on body fat % and performance parameters. I am not a fan of the PRT program...but, it is getting better.


As far as where it is going....I haven't a clue

 

[BigIron]

So, my questions go along these lines.

1. In a fitrep that you have received outside of a training command, to what degree did your prt performance affect it? None, unless there is a failure. If there is enough room on your fitrep for a breakout bullet for PRT, then you are probably not employed enough in your job.

2. What are your thoughts on where an officer should fall in the prt from sat to outstanding? Ideally, everyone should be an outstanding, but since it doesn't affect question #1 above, and the only thing on your fitrep says P/WS or Pass, within standards, then good low is as passing as outstanding.

3. How much has the Navy changed with respect to pt since you've been in, and where do you see it going? The PRT instruction has become more stringent administratively as far as guidelines for separating personnel for PRT failures. Some commands mandate group PT (hard to do when running 3 shifts), and others mandate PT on your own time. Being physically fit is just one aspect of the military. It makes life more difficult if you're not fit, but you are also expected to be tactically proficient, good at your ground job, and also have a family life as well. It is very easy in the training command or API, OCS, etc. to concentrate on fitness. In the fleet, there are a lot of competing demands and a limited amount of hours in the day.

Officers should be fit and pass the PRT well. If a fat officer or chief has to counsel a sailor who is out of body fat standards, or who has failed the PRT, it is the pot calling the kettle black.

 

[Thisguy]

What the hell, I'll throw my hat in the pool.

I don't think that an officer needs to be seen, by his division or those junior to him, conducting pt for the sole purpose that they see him. I think that as long as an officer meets the standards set by the Navy, and any goals that they set for themself is good enough.

Concur with above, although if your command has mandatory PT in the mornings (like our squadron did), it's a sh!tty thing to do to not show up knowing that you won't be punished (unless you've got a legit reason, like crew rest).

1. In a fitrep that you have received outside of a training command, to what degree did your prt performance affect it? None. If you have to write your fitrep scores in the summary block as a bullet/achievement, you suck, and need to do your job.

2. What are your thoughts on where an officer should fall in the prt from sat to outstanding? Quite frankly, as long as you pass, you're good. However, certain communities like SEAL, EOD, and the Seabees take PT a little more seriously than the rest of the Navy, so I'd say for those, it's pretty important to set the example with an outstanding.

3. How much has the Navy changed with respect to pt since you've been in, and where do you see it going?
Not salty enough to answer this question.

 

[uno]

As a former army guy PT was real big in the eyes of the grunts. It basically came down to perception vs reality. I think your subordinates can see you in a better light if you were somewhat of a PT stud. If not a stud at least be a SAT on the PT test. I think it is very, VERY hard for someone to lead troops in ANY service if they aren't in shape; being good in all facets of military life is the perception of what a good officer is. Right or wrong I think that is what it is. But then again I could be in the minority.

DD

 

[fc2spyguy]

I guess one other question that I have is: has a prt score affected an eval that you have ever given to one of your enlisted Sailors?

One of my points in speaking with the people is that twice my prt has been an input on my eval. The first one was a training command eval, and the second one I had been on the ship for 3 months, too long not to give an eval, and not long enough to really make much of an impact considering I was cranking for all of that time as well.

Also, thanks for the replies so far.

Edit: Thisguy, I concur with any mandated group pt. If the higher ups deem it necessary to have mando group pt there should be a legitimate reason for you not to be there.

On that note: Has anyone ever seen a mando group pt increase the morale or commradarie(sp?) of a unit? People always list this as a reason for group pt, but I have yet to see it work in practice. The only enjoyable pt sessions I've ever been at are the once in a while ultimate frisbee games, not only a good time, but good pt as well imo.

 

[Hursel110]

Good stuff so far guys. This is tracking prety closely with my previous experience (four years on a destroyer). Of course, it's the exact opposite of what we hear every day from our MOI/AMOI. Although they're Marines, so it's not too surprising coming from them

 

[Thisguy]

I guess one other question that I have is: has a prt score affected an eval that you have ever given to one of your enlisted Sailors?

No...in a squadron's Material control and QA, I was concerned with what kind of job my sailors did, not what their PT scores were.

 

[fc2spyguy]

Uno, I have no doubt that's the case in the Army. However, I think there is a distinct difference between the branches and their attitudes towards pt. I am sure there are many arguments to either side if it's good or bad, but I'm mainly concerned about the Navy side of things.

 

[A4sForever]

3. How much has the Navy changed with respect to pt since you've been in, and where do you see it going?

How much has "it" changed ???

Well, for starters, we weren't afraid of a little second hand smoke while doin' laps .... back-in-the-day

 

[Gatordev]

I guess one other question that I have is: has a prt score affected an eval that you have ever given to one of your enlisted Sailors?

Unfortunately, yes. I've had to hold up advancement and a transfer because of it, all for an awesome worker and good guy. Of course, both my chief and I were leading the target, so we worked w/ him to get him "ready" in time to transfer.

 

[Harrier Dude]

Good stuff so far guys. This is tracking prety closely with my previous experience (four years on a destroyer). Of course, it's the exact opposite of what we hear every day from our MOI/AMOI. Although they're Marines, so it's not too surprising coming from them

If you're at all concerned with how the Marine Corps sees this, it's different than what you've read above. The Marine Corps values your PFT score much more than the navy. A little too much, if you ask me. If you don't have at least a 1st class, you're pretty well screwed as an officer. Preferably a "high 1st class". This is even a concern for promotion to LtCol. It gets briefed.

I'm all for setting the example and staying fit, for many reasons, but it's beyond me why doing pull-ups should be a major discriminating factor in what I look for in a good Squadron Commander. It's probably a tie-breaker type item, but it matters.

 

[Birdman]

It also seemed like it meant alot more in the application proccess. Guys with slightly lower GPA's or lower ASTB scores but who had awesome PFT scores got slots.

 

[Hursel110]

Understood. I'm mainly trying to seperate what does and does not apply to us (navy types). Obviously they are speaking from a Marine perspective. While they have the best intentions, sometimes it becomes obvious that they don't have much experience on the Navy side of things.