1
1
0
There is a recent Washington Times article on the difficulty of getting new recruits, with 71% of inquiries being disqualified due to drugs, tattoos, or obesity. One solution for physical fitness was to create a pre-conditioning program, but what do you think about changing the way we look at fitness? Instead of using height/weight, what about having a performance-based fitness test? How important is what they look like compared to what they can do?
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/feb/16/army-reserve-candidates-tattoos-obesity-prescripti/
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/feb/16/army-reserve-candidates-tattoos-obesity-prescripti/
Posted in these groups: 
Recruiting
Fitness
Recruiting Fitness
Posted 10 y ago
Responses: 7
1
1
0
One minimum PFT standard for all regardless of age or gender. As far as the HT/WT, I am not sure to be honest. To say that appearance does not matter would be ignoring that perception matters. In reality your military appearance matters. Now if we are talking about heavy weight lifters etc. that's different but if you are obviously overweight and it is very apparent in uniform then that will reflect poorly on you and on all of us when you are seen in public. Now your physical ability is more important but your appearance does have an impact. it can be a negative impact or a positive one, that's just the reality
(1)
(0)
1SG (Join to see)
Perception does matter....A Soldier who is not slim and trim in his uniform sets a negative example for the majority of our lazy, overweight and fat ass America. I am not disagreeing with appearence does have an impact. It does. However, I used to use the impact of my larger, over the tape/body fat standard Soldiers who were scoring 280-300 on APFT; out ruck march the slim and trim positive appearing Soldiers; and out-Soldier his army-standard meeting peers when in the field; The same Soldier who was .5 percent over his max body fat, but sent to the promotion board anyway and when the CSM asked, I told him he was over his max body fat, but come hell or high water, he would appear before the board and pass and told him why. CSM said, no problem. This same Soldier who by Army- standard should have been barred from reenlistment...went on to be come a CSM and retired just 4 yrs ago! I wonder how many 1SGs and CSMs would do that today? I think ( know) of some, but they are definitely in the minority! Unfortunately, that also is reality. Leaders that follow the written regulation to the letter are not necessarily leaders, they become managers in leadership positions.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
I have no problems with reducing the height and weight standards or eliminating them all together, but I think we need to raise the physical fitness standards. Not necessarily the entrance standards for PT, but after basic and AIT all soldiers should be able to pass a higher standard APFT. I have seen a lot of soldiers getting lax with PT requirements, and I know from a female perspective the minimums are fairly low (excluding sit-ups). Despite the fact that I'm against a new APFT for the chaos that will ensue following this change, a new APFT that can more appropriately measure physical fitness would be ideal. We all know the height/weight standards are all jacked up. I went to a chriopractor to help adjust my spine after jumping so I could get the extra 5lbs for an extra inch of height, all so I could put on 5 more lbs of muscle in the gym.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
As the story says height and weight are just one factor disqualifying candidates from military service. I believe the height and weight standards need to be overhauled based on the fact that society has changed as well as eating habits and drinks. I weigh 220 and a personal trainer did not believe me she was no way are you that heavy and I was like yes and no I am not a muscle head. We all know muscle is heavy so we must take that into account as well. But again fitness is just one factor of the DQs.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google