January 2014. Those include the following: Soldiers cannot use TA until after
successful completing their first year in the Army after graduation from AIT.
They are restricted to 16SHs/year and Soldiers cannot use TA for a second,
higher-level degree until completion of 10 years’ time in service.<br></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">Soldiers will continue to receive $250/SH and current policy limits
Soldiers to 130 SHs for completion of a bachelor's degree and 39 SHs for a master’s
degree. Soldiers cannot be funded for a second equivalent degree, i.e., no
second bachelor's or master's degree. All courses must be part of an approved
degree plan. TA cannot be used for first professional degrees, e.g., PhD,MD,
JD. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">In addition to DA adverse action flags, the Army will continue the policy to
not allow TA for Soldiers who are flagged for APFT/Height/Weight.<o:p></o:p></p>
At 16Shs/yr it will take a hair under 4 years to complete a 2 year degree. Civilian education is a requirement to get promoted and I feel this will stem personnel from pushing themselves to succeed. Much of my time while not deployed is woefully mismanaged, and I have more than ample free time to complete 12Hrs/Semester, with no issues at all.
I agree with the flagged Soldiers not being able to use TA. Once they meet the standard, the Army would go back to picking up the bill.
The only part I disagree with is the 16 SH/yr cap. I have no labs in my degree plan so my class are 3SH each. I will only be able to complete 5 classes/year under the new plan. The old plan was $4500 or 6 x 3SH classes.
If we lose one class per year and the other 5 are still 100% covered, it's a loss I would definitely concede to.
Just my 2 cents.
SGT Birkinbine, If a person meets the standard then they aren't flagged. If a person has an "exorbitant amount of muscle" then they need to meet the minimum standard set. If you struggle with a weight issue then take the steps needed to overcome that struggle, see a nutritionist, learn good eating habits. If you struggle with running, take steps to improve. If we relax one standard to accommodate Soldiers who fail to meet it, then we must relax all standards. Is this good for the good order and discipline of the Soldier? For the Unit? For the Army? No, it is not. Standards are in place to give Soldiers a goal to reach for and Leaders a guide to fair and equitable treatment of the men and women in their charge. To lower the standard would not help anyone or any unit in maintaining readiness. If you struggle to meet the standard, then you must work harder to achieve it not ask that it be lowered. Such a request would imply a lack of initiative, a lack of motivation, and quite frankly, a lack of self-respect. There are indeed individuals that have legitimate medical reasons for being unable to meet or exceed. I understand this, as does every other Leader in the military. However, there is no excuse, in my opinion, for a Soldier who is healthy, fit, and fully capable of meeting a standard, not to do so. So the bottom line is: until they change and whether we like or not, these are the standards set. As Soldiers, it is our job to meet them, as Leaders, it is our job to enforce them and support the chain of command and the Army in their decisions. Simply SFC Day’s opinion mind, but, I believe that opinion is in keeping with Army standards.
One of the major differences here I think, is that you see being allowed to attend classes and improve your self intellectually as a privilege someone has to earn. I see it as a guarded right that should be afforded to all citizens ESPECIALLY those who have volunteered to defend their country.
I get your argument about standards I really do. I am not saying that everyone should be allowed to have their schooling paid for if they are not making standards, what I was trying to say (and apparently failed) is that there are too many variables case to case to make an across the board regulation. Not everyone who is fat is lazy. Not everyone who can't make their push up scores is not trying.
I believe that this decision should be left to the immediate supervisor and the commanding officer who have a far better understanding of the type of character the person in question has. That's all.
I'm also very aware of all the opportunities out there for education. I am also aware weather people want to admit it or not, that the quality of the majority of online schools is not to snuff, and even ones that are, are still viewed as substandard by a lot of employers, but that is an entirely different conversation.
I also didn't say you needed your command approval to attend class on your own dime, I said you needed your command SUPPORT. There is a very big difference. Without your supervisor and command support it is incredibly difficult to do many things successfully on your own time.
I really do get what you are saying. I just think the decision should be made by an individuals commander, not by an Army or Military wide regulation. Why do you think that is a bad thing?