Posted on Sep 26, 2020
What else can I do to reclassify into another MOS?
17.7K
26
20
2
2
0
I recently went to FAST CLASS and improved my score to an 85 AFQT, 121 GT, and line scores 115 & above. I am currently a 91B which I don't want to be anymore. On the Army in and out calls it shows they are looking for SGTs / E5. Retention told me a class seat would be two years out. My ETS is next November. So they told me either drop a packet MOS, or stay a 91B. When I look at the milper messages, there are plenty of MOS looking for E5, but retention gave me a list of MOS i can reclass to, and all of them are packet MOS. 17C sounds good, but if I don't meet one of their requirements, they told me I'd be disqualified from entering that MOS and would have to stay a 91B and become need of the Army. I don't want to take that risk. I wouldn't mind being a 31K either, love working with dogs. Can anyone enlighten me on what else is can do?
Posted in these groups: 
15C: Aviation All-Source Intelligence
17C: Cyber Operations Specialist
31K: Military Working Dog Handler
15C: Aviation All-Source Intelligence 17C: Cyber Operations Specialist 31K: Military Working Dog Handler
Posted 4 y ago
Responses: 7
2
2
0
I was a 91B who reclassed to 68V it’s an mos that only takes E5s and some E4s. It’s very difficult to promote in this field. Just be mindful on what you do pick because if you slow your career down you may run the risk of not picking up in time. Good luck and I hope you find something that interests you!
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
I would recommend that you continue to research your options for a new MOS that interests you before making any snap judgements. Determine what your cut off time is for reclass and stay on top of any updates. You really do not have to rush anything and I would give it time to get into an MOS that you really want. You gotta hustle for what you want and if the MOS you prefer doing doesn't pop up, you can look at staying 91B and seek a special assignment.
Don't entertain the thought of getting out without a proper plan because it is hectic right now in the civilian world. Going over to SOF support (Rangers, SF, 160th, CAG, etc.) can be rewarding for you if you have no problem being in a fast paced unit. Trust me, I was in the same exact situation you are in back in 2003. I wanted to reclass to UAV operator from 92A (I was done with that job), but it never came up, so I reup for Ft. Lewis. Less than a month later, the damn MOS was available and I missed it. Luckily, I made some calls to USASOC and got assigned to 2/1st SFG, which was a blast! So, as much as you dislike 91B, there are ways to get more out of the MOS depending on the assignment. Once again, you are in no rush right now and I would hold out for the MOS's on your list.
Don't entertain the thought of getting out without a proper plan because it is hectic right now in the civilian world. Going over to SOF support (Rangers, SF, 160th, CAG, etc.) can be rewarding for you if you have no problem being in a fast paced unit. Trust me, I was in the same exact situation you are in back in 2003. I wanted to reclass to UAV operator from 92A (I was done with that job), but it never came up, so I reup for Ft. Lewis. Less than a month later, the damn MOS was available and I missed it. Luckily, I made some calls to USASOC and got assigned to 2/1st SFG, which was a blast! So, as much as you dislike 91B, there are ways to get more out of the MOS depending on the assignment. Once again, you are in no rush right now and I would hold out for the MOS's on your list.
(2)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
SGT (Join to see) - Speak with your Retention NCO periodically for updates. It is in your best interests to not wait on them to reach out to you and you really need to be proactive on the reclass to determine when you would have to turn in a packet. Just make sure your focus is on the reclass right now and keep an open mind on 91B assignments if they land in your lap and look like good assignments. Good luck.
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
You can’t be a 17C because you have no experience. Application means you have to apply and the proponent accepts you. You can’t be a 31K because there are never class seats. You also can’t be a CMF15 or CMF68 (except 68V) because of your rank.
The Army reclass process runs off of Army strengths. If the Army has enough Soldiers in one job, it’s not going to reclass Soldiers into it.
Your ETS date is November 2021, which makes you an FY22 ETS. Your Career Counselor can lock you in for a balanced or under strength MOS that you qualify for that has a class seat. You do not have to go into application MOS. But the class seat you get may be a year or two away. Class seats are a limited resource. Check back often because new class seats get loaded constantly.
However, you are better off staying in your current MOS. You’re almost a SSG, you’ll head off to your broadening assignment shortly and be picking up SFC a few years down the road. Most likely the next MOS you pick will have slower promotions than your current one.
The Army reclass process runs off of Army strengths. If the Army has enough Soldiers in one job, it’s not going to reclass Soldiers into it.
Your ETS date is November 2021, which makes you an FY22 ETS. Your Career Counselor can lock you in for a balanced or under strength MOS that you qualify for that has a class seat. You do not have to go into application MOS. But the class seat you get may be a year or two away. Class seats are a limited resource. Check back often because new class seats get loaded constantly.
However, you are better off staying in your current MOS. You’re almost a SSG, you’ll head off to your broadening assignment shortly and be picking up SFC a few years down the road. Most likely the next MOS you pick will have slower promotions than your current one.
(2)
(0)
SFC Kelly Fuerhoff
SSG (Join to see) - I won't speak to what's going on with cyber now. I was at Cyber Command when it stood up (actually when it was still JFCC-NW) and they were begging for people there. They actually asked us 35Fs if we wanted to reclass to cyber. None of us did. I'm sure it's evolved since 2010.
However I do know how S2 works - and security clearances are changing. Especially TS clearances. They are not handing out TS clearances anymore - in fact they are auditing TS clearances to see who has one and still needs one. They're changing MTOE for what positions get a TS. Some people are going to actually be losing a TS that have had one for years and likely don't need it.
I also know that no S2 in the right state of mind is going to process a TS for someone "just because" and DOD CAF is not going to even start the investigation if there's no justification for it. For example - if someone is reclassing to a MOS that requires a TS/SCI, that will get processed and an investigation started and they can go to that MOS class with an open investigation and apply for interim SCI. But if there's no justification, even if it gets past S2 to security divisions, the security division isn't going to process it right now especially with the audit. Nor will an SSO process an interim SCI without proper justification. The only way one who is reclassing to 17C can get a TS/SCI is after they have been approved to reclass. They have to actually have a seat in training to get approved for TS. Otherwise, they just have to have a Secret to apply to reclass.
And even if someone has an open T5 or T5R or even a closed one doesn't mean they'll get approved for an interim SCI. I've seen interim SCIs denied because CAF said they found disqualifying information but that doesn't mean final adjudication will be denied.
If you're going to tell people to "stay in their lane' you should do the same when it comes to security clearances and PERSEC. You really are way off base in what you said about S2. When you reclassed it may have been easier to get a TS/SCI or start one - but it's not that easy as of the last year. Not at all.
However I do know how S2 works - and security clearances are changing. Especially TS clearances. They are not handing out TS clearances anymore - in fact they are auditing TS clearances to see who has one and still needs one. They're changing MTOE for what positions get a TS. Some people are going to actually be losing a TS that have had one for years and likely don't need it.
I also know that no S2 in the right state of mind is going to process a TS for someone "just because" and DOD CAF is not going to even start the investigation if there's no justification for it. For example - if someone is reclassing to a MOS that requires a TS/SCI, that will get processed and an investigation started and they can go to that MOS class with an open investigation and apply for interim SCI. But if there's no justification, even if it gets past S2 to security divisions, the security division isn't going to process it right now especially with the audit. Nor will an SSO process an interim SCI without proper justification. The only way one who is reclassing to 17C can get a TS/SCI is after they have been approved to reclass. They have to actually have a seat in training to get approved for TS. Otherwise, they just have to have a Secret to apply to reclass.
And even if someone has an open T5 or T5R or even a closed one doesn't mean they'll get approved for an interim SCI. I've seen interim SCIs denied because CAF said they found disqualifying information but that doesn't mean final adjudication will be denied.
If you're going to tell people to "stay in their lane' you should do the same when it comes to security clearances and PERSEC. You really are way off base in what you said about S2. When you reclassed it may have been easier to get a TS/SCI or start one - but it's not that easy as of the last year. Not at all.
(2)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
SFC (Join to see) - First of all, you are correct on the AEA codes. I just looked through some old ERBs and it looks like we had code 6's for two periods of 11 months each leading up to unit moves, and the remainder of the time it was only the fence status that kept people from PCS'ing. Thank you for catching that.
That being said, I stand by my position that dissuading an intelligent, motivated, and career minded soldier from even considering dropping a packet does net harm to the branch and to the Army as a whole. I'd take a single bright SM who plans to go to twenty over a dozen 25 series who just want to jump ship for a civ job at the first opportunity. It's not as though sending a packet could harm this soldier's career anyway, so I fail to see how stating outright that he "can't be a 17C" is helpful. Now as others have stated prospective TS applications are no longer an option, so I stand corrected on that point, but the main thrust of my comment still stands: the Army is made weaker by telling high intellect soldiers that they're better off staying in a job where they're clearly dissatisfied than to spend the 45 minutes completing an application for a job where both they and the Army would be better served.
That being said, I stand by my position that dissuading an intelligent, motivated, and career minded soldier from even considering dropping a packet does net harm to the branch and to the Army as a whole. I'd take a single bright SM who plans to go to twenty over a dozen 25 series who just want to jump ship for a civ job at the first opportunity. It's not as though sending a packet could harm this soldier's career anyway, so I fail to see how stating outright that he "can't be a 17C" is helpful. Now as others have stated prospective TS applications are no longer an option, so I stand corrected on that point, but the main thrust of my comment still stands: the Army is made weaker by telling high intellect soldiers that they're better off staying in a job where they're clearly dissatisfied than to spend the 45 minutes completing an application for a job where both they and the Army would be better served.
(0)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
MAJ Javier Rivera - Sir, I am indeed concerned with the accomplishment of my mission and the welfare of my soldiers, both of which are served by calling out bad advice to a junior NCO. While you are correct in your assessment that compared to half a decade ago 17C can afford to be picky, they don't have the opportunity of selecting from the cream of the crop if an application is not sent. 17 CMF may be mature in relative terms, sir, but in reviewing the most recent posture sheet I can tell you that from SGT up to MSG we aren't even close to hitting our strength numbers. We are far from what we need to be, and if every infantry bde career counselor is telling his smartest Joes to not even try, we'll never get there.
(0)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
SSG (Join to see) you may be willing to take a single bright Soldier over a dozen CMF 25 but you are not the MOS proponent and you don't get to make that decision. As a Career Counselor my job is to give actual career advice, not blow sell them rainbows and unicorns. If the multiple E4s with Computer Science degrees and 125 GT scores didn't get accepted, why would I recommend an NCO with no IT experience waste their time with trying? It's not "45 minutes" to fill out a packet. It's a resume, a letter of recommendation from your commander, any certs you have, and other things. An average packet is about 20 pages long.
My job, and your job, as an NCO is to speak with candor to Soldiers. Sometimes that means giving an honest analysis of their chances. Few things hurt a Soldier worse than chasing a bad lead when they're in a short time suspense. In the time this Soldier is chasing down putting his packet together he may miss a class for another MOS that won't come around for another year or two, or his branch may place him on assignment, or he might be levied for Drill/Recruiter/Instructor broadening assignment. Bad information and false hopes injure Soldiers because then they feel like they got screwed over by the Army when those leads don't pan out.
You owe it to Soldiers to give them advice based on facts, not feelings. You also owe it to them to base your advice on real information with verified sources and current policy, not just what it was back when you did whatever you did..
My job, and your job, as an NCO is to speak with candor to Soldiers. Sometimes that means giving an honest analysis of their chances. Few things hurt a Soldier worse than chasing a bad lead when they're in a short time suspense. In the time this Soldier is chasing down putting his packet together he may miss a class for another MOS that won't come around for another year or two, or his branch may place him on assignment, or he might be levied for Drill/Recruiter/Instructor broadening assignment. Bad information and false hopes injure Soldiers because then they feel like they got screwed over by the Army when those leads don't pan out.
You owe it to Soldiers to give them advice based on facts, not feelings. You also owe it to them to base your advice on real information with verified sources and current policy, not just what it was back when you did whatever you did..
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google