Posted on Jul 2, 2015
Is the semi-centralized promotion system hurting quality NCOs when it comes to promotion?
24.4K
11
23
3
3
0
The current semi-centralized promotion system (specifically concerning SSGs) authorizes 280 points towards military education. This is broken down into NCOES, Resident Military Training, and Computer Based Training. If you have ever been one of the most capable NCOs in your MOS at your unit, chances are you were the last to attend training. At least that has been my experience, and the experience of many NCOs I know. These quality NCOs 'hold down the fort' so others can attend training. This puts quality NCOs at a distinct disadvantage when it comes to promotion, because 280 points is a big chunk out of the total 800.
The most recent revisions to the promotion system has ALC worth between 90 and 112 promotion points. NCOs who have had the opportunity to attend ALC will almost always sit higher on the promotion list due to be allowed this opportunity. I am of the opinion that an NCO who maxes out multiple sections that required personal time and commitment to complete has more motivation and dedication towards being a quality leader than those who have simply been afforded the opportunity to attend a school. The experience gained on a deployment is many times more beneficial than NCOES, yet 30-months of being deployed (combat) is only allocated a maximum of 60 points. TDY assignments don't even hold value, but similar to deployments require a commitment that allows less time for military education.
Should the point system be modified to accommodate soldiers who have been unable to attend these courses through no fault of their own? Should points be allocated differently? If yes, how? Is the current system hurting quality NCOs?
The Army has many unique missions and well the promotion system may work well for 90% of units, it could be hurting the other 10%. With the downsizing that is occurring, we need to learn to do more with less, does the current system enable us to promote the best quality NCOs that are going to help shape the force for the future?
***THIS HAS BEEN MODIFIED SO THE RESPONSES FOCUS ON THE OVERALL TOPIC AND NOT MY INDIVIDUAL SITUATION****
The most recent revisions to the promotion system has ALC worth between 90 and 112 promotion points. NCOs who have had the opportunity to attend ALC will almost always sit higher on the promotion list due to be allowed this opportunity. I am of the opinion that an NCO who maxes out multiple sections that required personal time and commitment to complete has more motivation and dedication towards being a quality leader than those who have simply been afforded the opportunity to attend a school. The experience gained on a deployment is many times more beneficial than NCOES, yet 30-months of being deployed (combat) is only allocated a maximum of 60 points. TDY assignments don't even hold value, but similar to deployments require a commitment that allows less time for military education.
Should the point system be modified to accommodate soldiers who have been unable to attend these courses through no fault of their own? Should points be allocated differently? If yes, how? Is the current system hurting quality NCOs?
The Army has many unique missions and well the promotion system may work well for 90% of units, it could be hurting the other 10%. With the downsizing that is occurring, we need to learn to do more with less, does the current system enable us to promote the best quality NCOs that are going to help shape the force for the future?
***THIS HAS BEEN MODIFIED SO THE RESPONSES FOCUS ON THE OVERALL TOPIC AND NOT MY INDIVIDUAL SITUATION****
Promotion Points
Promotions
NCOES
Military Education
Leadership
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 8
My favorite is all of the required military education/training we are to do, yet no points are authorized for some of that training
(2)
(0)
MSG (Join to see)
SSG Ryan Rodney - Sorry, I didn't mean all training that is required. I obviously was not clear. Certainly my error. One example I can think of, is that of WLC. I had attended WLC after my packet for SGT was submitted and recommended, so obviously I couldn't use the points for that packet, yet, I was not able to utilize those WLC points for my SSG packet.
(0)
(0)
SGT Kristin Wiley
SSG Ryan Rodney Back to your first point, if this training is required then why assign points to it? (ref. WLC/ALC/SLC)
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
I feel people need to be promoted on their leadership skills as well as MOS knowledge. Yes you will need to be in a specific grade for x amount of months but then the above should be looked at instead of physical aspects.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Some branches are different, but within the past year, attendance for NCOES is now decided by HRC through an OML they dictates to units. Commanders can defer attendance for specific Soldiers, usually frowned upon unless it is medically related, but units can't request to send so and so to NCOES schools now, they are told who to send. I do not know if this is branch specific though.
(1)
(0)
SGT Kristin Wiley
That's interesting to know. Since I'm one of two Army NCOs in my MOS, the last time I talked to branch they said they wouldn't send me anywhere because it would put my unit at under 50% manpower. Yes, I've tried reasoning with them and that ridiculous policy.
(0)
(0)
MSG (Join to see)
Yes, mission always comes first, but it saddens me that there are leaders who stop developing their Soldiers instead of finding ways to accomplish the mission while developing Soldiers simultaneously. Combat or other missions aside - understood - but the show must go on... A good Command would find a way to continue the show for a few months while you improve yourself and potentially learn something to bring back and improve the unit.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google