Profiles
Medical
Retention
No it is isn't, as I think it is geared towards helping with the downsizing element currently in place.
It is also political in the way some of the ratings and documentation is done for future possible claims against the government.
Your comment about future claims is spot on. Could you elaborate on the political aspect? As with any system of its kind, it will have some level of frivolous claims, but it isn't as though Service comes without the physical and mental tolls on the SMs.
Sir,
While I was injured from some combat related injuries during the 90s, I was attached to BAMC BDE and worked in the PAO office dealing with congressional's and other "claims" towards the hospital and other entities within GPRMC. Lets just say I saw plenty of paperwork that reflected the disparaging differences in rank and positions for injured SMs within the system. It may have changed or been caught up over the years, but I still saw many of the same deep differences of documentation for injured Soldiers from OIF and OEF, when I began my retirement physical process a few years back, quite a bit of paperwork has disappeared from my medical records within a year of my retirement. I had copies and originals when I went to my physical and subsequent VA part II and was asked where I had gotten the paperwork I had, and told them I was smart enough to have copies long ago to include some original documents and supplied my maintained records with copies, the personnel involved were slightly tongue tied when I also provided certified copies of missing documents as well.
During many deployments over the years, my medical records were lost 4 times, and had to be reconstructed from scratch, I had smartly made copies numerous times over the years and maintained originals of injuries and LOD investigations for the rebuilding processes, so I have seen and felt the 1st hand political issues.
And the MEB/PEB is being utilized for the downsizing process, I live near an installation and have a great deal of contacts within the medical facility there and have on numerous occasions had discussions on this topic and have been informed directly from the personnel that are part of the process that any type of profile is being looked at for processing now even P2s, and even personnel that came in with medical waivers are being looked at as well, so it may not be a weapon of choice, but it is being used as a weapon of usage.
I say this with much trepidation.
When a Soldier can no longer do his duties effectively in Uniform, if the call of duty continues to resound, civil service should be considered. Either through Training or Maintenance of our Fighting Force.
An interesting point, all Soldiers are trained in elements of argument; therefore, qualified to be civil leaders (Politics).
With a Service-member who has become injured (permanent profile) we know what we are getting. When "Building a new Soldier," we are taking a risk in an uncertain asset. There are transaction costs on both sides there, but I cannot answer the question in the coldly numeric way that you do. I think it must be a matter of discretion, with an array of factors: what MOS; how much TIS; what other skills; ability to transfer to a new MOS; responsibilities of the grade? Remember, sometimes senior Soldiers get injured too, and their costs can be massive; training a new Private is cheap compared to the cost of caring for an old Soldier who continues in the Service. We are numbers (everyone is replaceable), but we are also more. A leader who values quantity over quality may be better termed a manager.
I'm also dubious of the proposition that all Soldiers are trained in argument. In what way? A quick perusal of RallyPoint shows many instances of fallacious or faulty reasoning. In fact, I think the average military experience teaches one to be confrontational and stubborn which are the antitheses of reason.
I do think we are better cut out for civil service than are pure civilians. Not because we are better Citizens or arguers, but because of experience in and dedication to public service. None of that means anything without a willingness to learn about the political landscape (legal, historical, bureaucratic, etc.).
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google