NCOER integrity; others writing a 1/1 for themselves when they don't deserve it?

MSG Martinis Butler — Tue, 24 Dec 2013 08:32:44 -0500

The NCOER is the NCO's report card, that could make you or break you. Do you think it's fair for you to do your best and recieve anything other than a 1/1from your rater while other subpar NCO's consistently write their own 1/1 NCOER's? Does this frustrate you?

Response by SGT Nathan Huff made Dec 24 at 2013 8:44 AM

SGT Nathan Huff — Tue, 24 Dec 2013 08:44:50 -0500

I worked in S1 for years, I never saw a honest NCOER. Most NCOs wrote there own and lied on it. and the few who let there Seniors write it for them (as they should have) received horrid reviews. Few properly processed there NCOERS. Over all it was a joke at how much of a lie and how poorly they were written. We at S1 used to sit down and laugh about NCOERS (and OERS) because we knew the people and knew how much of a load of Doo Doo most of there NCOERS were.

Response by MSG Martinis Butler made Dec 24 at 2013 9:06 AM

MSG Martinis Butler — Tue, 24 Dec 2013 09:06:31 -0500

It's frustrating to me but like I always say you can fool some of the people some of the time but you won't be able to fool all of the people all of the time.

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 24 at 2013 9:52 AM

CSM Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 24 Dec 2013 09:52:14 -0500

Respectfully it's not my place to worry about what my peers reports cards are saying and although it can be frustrating to see someone whose a sub-par performer still get a 1/1 in time it will catch up to them. This year alone I have seen over 200 NCOERs, many of which I kicked back for not meeting quantifiable standards in the block they're marking excellence in. It's the reviewer and 1SG/CSM's responsibility to ensure integrity remains paramount!

Response by SGM Matthew Quick made Dec 24 at 2013 10:05 AM

SGM Matthew Quick — Tue, 24 Dec 2013 10:05:56 -0500

Never was a big fan of NCOs putting down others and over inflating their own performances.

Are you honestly doing "your best" in the eyes of your rater or just in your terms...there could be a difference?

Are these NCOs 'subpar' in your 'opinion' or in the eyes of their raters?

Just seems like this is a personal venting post.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 24 at 2013 10:20 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 24 Dec 2013 10:20:42 -0500

I do agree their is a lot of shadiness when it comes to our report cards from what I have seen. I have seldom seen the process done correctly (from quarterly counseling to writing the eval). I also have been in this situation but like SFC Gates, I also choose to (instead completing the eval myself) leave the ratings and S/R portion blank. While I understand this is incorrect and not the way the system was setup to work. I think it is beneficial for my direct input (as far as the bullet comments) to go on the eval.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 24 at 2013 10:52 AM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 24 Dec 2013 10:52:23 -0500

NCOERs, like any other rating or evaluation tool, are going to be subjective. We attempt to make it as objective as possible. As an NCO the best way to ensure that you get a fair and objective NCOER is to ensure that you get properly counseled. Laying out what constitutes "Excellence" in your rating versus "Success" and "Needs Improvement" is a great way to make all parties accountable to an objective rating. And although it may sound strange, it is our responsibility to communicate that to our rater and encourage the rating process.

In my career, I've had to write a majority, if not all, of my own NCOERs. That has helped me become extremely familiar with AR 623-3 and DA Pam 623-3, regulations that all NCOs should read and have available for referencing. Many NCOs, especially Senior NCOs are not comfortable with the counseling process and have difficulty in being honest with our subordinates.

My advice to junior leaders is to encourage the counseling process with your rating chain. Develop a relationship with your Senior Rater. Remember, we promote based on "Potential" so the Senior Rater is the most important person in your rating chain. For many NCOs, we focus on our relationship with the Rater and do not engage our Senior Raters enough. The Senior Rater addresses Promotion, Potential, Performance, and Professional Development! Promotion boards pay a lot of attention to the opinion of the Senior Rater.

My advice to all leaders at all levels is to: 1) Become familiar and comfortable with the counseling process; 2) Strive for objectivity in the rating of your subordinates by identifying what constitutes Excellence, Success and Needs Improvement in your counseling sessions. NCOERs should not be a surprise to the rated Soldier; 3) Conduct counseling sessions as required and when needed; 4) Develop a relationship with the Senior Rater; 5) Encourage and engage your rating chain if they are not conducting counseling as directed by Army doctrine; 6) Perform your job to the best of your ability and make your contributions to the organization undeniable.

These steps should help you get a fair and objective NCOER.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 24 at 2013 11:05 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 24 Dec 2013 11:05:51 -0500

Overall I agree with your opinion SFC Butler, however (and unfortunately) I believe we (our senior leadership) allow this issue take place.

I can remember being in this situation a few years back where my rater left (PCS) without completing my eval. Now a little background in this situation, is that because I knew that he was leaving 2-3 months prior I took the initiative and did the leg work by completing the "shell" which was simply the front portion (based upon my previous eval, where he was also the rater) and my APFT/HT/WT data. I additionally gave him a word document that had each area on the back broken down and containing 4-6 bullet comments (based on the counselings) to include SR bullets as well each to use as a guide. He had this information for months and did nothing with it. I spoke to him repeatedly about this, where he told me he would get it done. Spoke to the SR and reviewer (who ironically had just completed his (my rater's) eval and award) without any resolution.

Response by CSM Mike Maynard made Dec 24 at 2013 7:05 PM

CSM Mike Maynard — Tue, 24 Dec 2013 19:05:56 -0500

The Senior NCO of the organization is responsible for ensuring fairness across the board. Now, I know that it's hard to ensure that there is equality across the force, but it is the Senior NCOs in the branch that should be mentoring the Bde/Bn CSMs to ensure we are all applying the same standards so that NCOERs can be objectively compared against each other.

Now, I do see a lot of NCOERs that the "ratings" are inflated, but when you read the bullets, the bullets aren't inflated. So, my job is to ensure that those two things match.

Now, as far as the board panel, it is very easy to tell who the 1/1s really are. Lot's of folks may be "rated" as a 1/1, but there bullets are far from it and it is very easy to tell who the true top performers are, regardless of the actual rating - it's all about the bullets.

And, it's not about the wordy, fluffy, long-word bullets - it is about communicating the impact in an efficient manner. Folks should spend more time learning how to write effectively.

Response by SGT Nathan Huff made Dec 25 at 2013 6:19 AM

SGT Nathan Huff — Wed, 25 Dec 2013 06:19:57 -0500

you are one of the few who are honest.

I refused to write my own NCOER. I forced my first line to write it for me. Some first lines honored me by the write up and others did not deserve the rank they had.

Response by SGT Nathan Huff made Dec 25 at 2013 6:30 AM

SGT Nathan Huff — Wed, 25 Dec 2013 06:30:17 -0500

Some one responded about MTOE/TOE positions listed on there NCOER that did not exist. I have seen the same thing, but that is not the Soldiers fault fully. My last command had many made up positions that Senior people made up so they could keep said NCO in the command for an extra body, vs allowing them to move to a location were they could actually fill a slot. So honestly it is the commands slot for allowing it to be over strength and a unit will Soldiers not authorized on the MTOE. Secondly it is the Soldiers fault for not catching that or at least asking.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 25 at 2013 7:10 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 25 Dec 2013 07:10:15 -0500

SFC Butler, IMO no, but then again I could be biased. I may have been doing my best and remaining in a comfortable, complacent position. Did I step out the box any, did I go above or beyond, did I challenge myself or my Soldiers?? Those are the things I could see preventing me from that 1/1. What I quantity/categorize as "my best", someone else could see as just meeting the standard.

Now when I see someone who hasn't put forth ANY effort to do anything... not teaching/ training/taking care of their Soldiers, not taking any add'l classes-personally or professionally, not making any attempt to grow and has a history of infractions get a 1/1, then "Houston, we have a problem."

Response by SPC Matthew Birkinbine made Dec 26 at 2013 9:36 PM

SPC Matthew Birkinbine — Thu, 26 Dec 2013 21:36:51 -0500

That would aggravate me, to the core, SFC. It would push me to strive for a tighter ship under my watch.

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Dec 27 at 2013 8:56 AM

SFC Michael Hasbun — Fri, 27 Dec 2013 08:56:11 -0500

Honestly, I think if NCOER's were done the way they should be, 70% of the Army should have 3's, Fully Capable, 20% would have 2's, and only 10% would have 1's, among the best. After all, if everyone is 1/1, among the best, then isn't that behavior now average?

Response by SGT Ben Keen made Dec 27 at 2013 10:41 AM

SGT Ben Keen — Fri, 27 Dec 2013 10:41:06 -0500

Personally, I really never went for a 1/1. I saw a 1/1 as meaning I have learned everything there is to know about my job and how to lead service members. And honestly, unless I was the Post-9/11 version of Audie Murphy, I do not think I would deserve a 1/1. I think a 2/1 or 1/2 is a great score. It shows that you did well while leaving room for development.

Response by SFC Charles W. Robinson made Dec 27 at 2013 11:17 AM

SFC Charles W. Robinson — Fri, 27 Dec 2013 11:17:56 -0500

I think the real problem
here is leadership that is too lazy to complete NCOER's on their subordinates
and tell them to just write their own. In my 26 years in the Army, I had
seen this over and over again with Soldiers, both enlisted and officers.
Luckily, I was blessed with excellent leaders that mentored me.

Response by SSG Jeffery Haynes made Dec 27 at 2013 11:33 AM

SSG Jeffery Haynes — Fri, 27 Dec 2013 11:33:21 -0500

It's all fine and dandy that we know "what's supposed to happen", but the reality is either that NCO is writing their own NCOER or their supervisor is playing favorites with the PT stud or the pretty skirt! I myself and a peer have been victims of this, where our Platoon Sergeant wrote our NCOERs with generic BS, all Success ratings, and a new female Soldier received all Excellence ratings, 1/1 Among the Best, and this was her first NCOER under this Platoon Sergeant. CSMs and other senior leaders are lazy when it comes to this subject and we continue to sweep it under the rug, hoping something will change, but it never does.

Response by SFC Joe Ping made Dec 27 at 2013 11:49 AM

SFC Joe Ping — Fri, 27 Dec 2013 11:49:13 -0500

It can be summed up in one WORD.. LAZINESS on the part of Senior NCOs and Officers.

Response by CSM Colin Patterson made Dec 27 at 2013 11:54 AM

CSM Colin Patterson — Fri, 27 Dec 2013 11:54:18 -0500

NCOER's should not be written by the NCO. However at times NCO's have to take their careers in their own hands and write their NCOER"s because either their leaders are lazy or do not know how to write an NCOER. The NCOER is an integral component of the promotion process. Which is the reason NCO's do everything within their power to ensure they get a great NCOER. The NCOER will remain a controversial topic because it is the clearest snapshot of a soldier's performance to members of a promotion board and soldiers who want to get promoted will do whatever they have to do to level the playing field of inflated NCOER's. Because some soldiers do receive inflated evaluations because of cronyism.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 27 at 2013 12:24 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 27 Dec 2013 12:24:14 -0500

My only issue with the NCOER
besides writing my own is how NCOs are rated. This has been brought up during
several NCOPDs that I have attended. If you have two NCOs we will use FT Bragg
and FT Campbell both are senior SSG 11Bs. These two NCOs are identical on their
ERB’s schools, pt, awards, duty positions etc. When it comes to the NCOER and
the possible promotion to SFC the rating system is flawed. How can we have an
honest rating of these two NCOs who are identical by two different leaders who see
different traits and attributes in the NCO? I have also had this discussion
with fellow NCOs across the Army that I have been assigned with as either peer,
senior or subordinate NCO. It just seems that there may be some “unfairness”
(new word) in the rating system.

Doing you best and say receiving a
2/2 or a 1/2 would I feel frustrated? Yes I have, do I sit back and think of
things that I may have could have done different? I do, it just sometimes falls
with the good ole boy system. I have been well above some other NCOs in my
Company and have been told this, yet since I rock the boat and speak out I did
not receive a 1/1 even though I was selected to SFC that year.

So until they figure a standardized
rating system that has one NCO that can view and see the potential in all of us
we must always strive for our best even though it is not good enough sometimes.

Response by SSG Ralph Watkins made Dec 27 at 2013 2:38 PM

SSG Ralph Watkins — Fri, 27 Dec 2013 14:38:33 -0500

I worked for the federal govt as well & our yearly evaluations were completed by ourselves. We didn't have a supervisor who was present while we worked. They had no idea what we did. That is called management, not leadership. In the Army it used to be completed by our first line supervisor & then discussed with the rated NCO before a final signature. If supervisors are not with the troops in their daily duties, it is failure of leadership just like others have written here. Just think of the up & coming scum of the earth NCO who could write whatever they want on their eval & get away with it. They are at fault for being that way & trying to pass them selves off as great but the oversight of a proper leader should be there to prevent this.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 27 at 2013 7:07 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 27 Dec 2013 19:07:04 -0500

We'll this is my 2 cents. Our raters are suppose to do our counseling, initial and 1/4 to tell you what you did great and what and how to improve on your job so you can do your job better and earn a great NCOER. But that shouldn't be the reason you should want to do a better job. It's to make sure your Battle is not carrying you and doing their job as well. I can't tell you when the last time I have sat down with my rater and done some real one on one. But like a comment stated,there are favorites and ones who have their head so far up the back side of leaders they could tell you what they ate when they fart. It has more to do what you say to stroke the ego of certain people than the truth. When peers are bragging about their NCOER and you know the only reason is because they hang out and get drunk with the leaders. What happen to "it's not personal, its business". A NCOER has almost lost its value. Just saying.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 28 at 2013 9:04 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 28 Dec 2013 09:04:11 -0500

What Also should be mentioned is the fact that different units have different standards for NCOER's some units state that if you had any issues ie you get hurt and bust tape during recovery you cannot receive 1-1. Or my favorite you and your rater don't agree on everything yet this subpar NCO whom is chummy with your rater receives the coveted 1-1 while you do not! when you clearly out performed him/her during the rater period minus the social activities section which is there but not there!

Response by SGT(P) Jason Gaudry made Dec 28 at 2013 10:28 AM

SGT(P) Jason Gaudry — Sat, 28 Dec 2013 10:28:10 -0500

It is fair to receive what is earned and a 1/1 is the best and is actually used more than it should be. A NCO writing their own NCOER is not fair, although it is usually to make up for poor leadership/substandard supervisors because it HAS to be done. Those leaders/supervisors not being held accountable for properly counseling, rating and mentoring the NCO frustrates me.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 28 at 2013 4:29 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 28 Dec 2013 16:29:54 -0500

All of the above makes sense...and why I check, double, and triple check facts and my own notes. Since before basic, I have always trusted one Soldier....myself.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 28 at 2013 4:38 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 28 Dec 2013 16:38:50 -0500

I have only ever had an issue with writing my own report or award. Apart from that I only care that it is accurate. I think that this boils down to leaders not being checked up the chain to ensure that they are doing the right things. I have been chewed out for a legitimate mistake on a -8-1 when inside I am rolling my eyes because if you check my packet my PSG doesn't have one for me. I have heard the argument that if I haven't been counseled that it is my fault which may partially be true, but you cannot blame the soldier to be counseled more that the counselor.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 29 at 2013 9:08 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 29 Dec 2013 09:08:16 -0500

Just like any large business it strives to give guidelines on how it wants it's work force to be mentored and evaluated. There are things that I very rarely see done that we should all still be doing as leaders/ managers. Integration counseling to show every Soldier what they need to do to set themselves up for success in the new unit and/ or position. Those items should be completed before the Initial counseling. The Initial counseling should have not only the unit standards, job description, what goals the Soldier should have in the rated time period but also what it takes for an excellent bullet in each category. At minimum quarterly counselings should be done for all NCOs. Nothing says you cannot still mentor monthly. Those should go over how the NCO is performing. If the NCO needs to improve on something, it should be pointed out then. If at least quarterly counsels are not conducted on the rated Soldier, it should reflect on the raters NCOER that they failed at leading their Soldiers. Too many times, I have seen quarterly counseling dates that there are no supporting documents for. Bullets that there are no supporting documents for. Duties listed that were on appointment orders but never conducted. We focus on making sure that E-4 and below have monthly counselings and promotion counselings, but then fall very short once they make SGT and above. Then turn around and say that they do not know their jobs and/ or not willing to do their jobs. Leading and mentoring starts from the top and goes down. You cannot say that the current NCOER system does not work if you are not using it the way it should be. Our jobs as leaders and mentors are to have the best force and grow it even better. If you have 5 NCOs and they all are going way beyond what is asked of them should not all of them deserve 1/1 and 5 Es if that is what they earned. On the opposite side if you have a very bad group then it should reflect, with at least quarterly counselings showing that they failed to improve. If there is nothing reflected on the Rater's NCOER on how the rate/counsel, then yes there is no accountability for an over inflated system.

We all focus on you need to step outside of the box and do more. I would rather see 1 job being performed above standard then 10 jobs barely meeting the standard.

If you only look 1 foot in front of you, you will not see you are about to run off a cliff.

If you do not learn from the past lessons then you will repeat them if the future.

You cannot build a castle if you just build and never maintain what you have already put in place.

Response by SFC Randy Purham made Dec 29 at 2013 12:49 PM

SFC Randy Purham — Sun, 29 Dec 2013 12:49:20 -0500

Yes SFC Butler, it does frustrate me. All the while that they are writing their own and getting promoted and/or getting preferential treatment I call them out on their "walk on water" performance when they can't conduct a simple task in that respective grade. At some point in time, we need to start shelling-out NCOs and Officers that conduct this kind of behavior and walk around like they are King/Queen Cotton, when they know good-in-hell well, they are not what they wrote on paper. Just my 2 cents. We can improve a little. Even if you had a stellar performance during that rating period, I think one should have a little modesty and downplay their reports, so it doesn't appear to be so inflated.

Response by SFC Gary Fox made Dec 29 at 2013 12:50 PM

SFC Gary Fox — Sun, 29 Dec 2013 12:50:51 -0500

NCOERs was an issue in every unit I was in. Too many Raters were too damn lazy to conduct quarterly counseling. When it came time to write the NCOER, these Raters had no idea what that NCO had accomplished during the rating period.

While I served as a 1SG, I required the Quarterly Counseling Statements to be included with the NCOER. I gave classes to NCOs on how and why quarterly counseling was an integral part of the NCOER and mentoring those they were rating.

Response by CSM Colin Patterson made Dec 30 at 2013 12:36 PM

CSM Colin Patterson — Mon, 30 Dec 2013 12:36:23 -0500

The entire evaluation system need to be revamped. SMA Chandler stated that the decision to go from wearing Berets with the ACU to patrol caps was based on feedback he received from soldiers on his listening tour. I think that evaluations is a more important topic than the headgear was and that he should embark on a listening tour to gain feedback on how we can improve, the evaluation and promotion system because it affects the entire force while the Beret issue did not impact the entire force.<div><br></div>

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 3 at 2014 3:50 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 03 Apr 2014 15:50:32 -0400

This is just " a way not the way " When building the NCOER, as I've noticed, a lot of personal do not keep up with the 2166-8-1; so yes NCOs as well as officers start a script and should pass it off to the rater to be worded; then to the Senior Rater for remarks which the Rater is probably going to start. After the remarks are complete the blocks should be checked and the first SGM/CSM in the chain should look to see if anything major has been missed (GOMR or accolades)and also that the NCO was rated IAW their performance. Should a judgment or comparison be placed on the NCO to base off their local peers, or should it state simply what the NCO accomplished for the organzation?

Response by SGT Kristin Wiley made Dec 19 at 2014 4:01 PM

SGT Kristin Wiley — Fri, 19 Dec 2014 16:01:49 -0500

It frustrates me when I am doing the job of an O4 with good performance. I write my own NCOERs, because my first line supervisor is incapable, and I'm getting rated a 2/1. I know many of my peers who wouldn't even be capable of performing my duties and they get 1/1s. The system is broken, I don't mind getting rated 2/1 because I know my performance has dropped with my health. If my unit cared at all about my health they would know and understand this, instead I just get to suffer in silence. If I ever need my NCOERs, I hope the review board looks at my bullets instead of my ratings.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 2 at 2015 1:58 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 02 Jan 2015 01:58:39 -0500

If everything objective, from intial counseling thru entire process of NCO being rated providing exact quantitative evidence to raters who may or may not have made time to track all of rate(d) NCOs work, than the NCOer should speak for itself. It is extremely rare, in my opinion, to find raters who do everything for NCO being rater. It is the WRONG answer for an NCO to completely write their own NCOer with 1/1s and just have rater sign off on it. That is my opinion. An NCOer is a lot more than simply a list of accomplishments completed during the work year. It should be an honest glimpse on a humanitarian level of what that particular Soldier has the capacity to do in the future as well... With all due respect, SFC, these are my heartfelt opinions..

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 18 at 2015 8:29 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 18 May 2015 08:29:18 -0400

Evaluations, just like Awards, are a rough subject. The system is not necessary broken, but it is most assuredly corrupt, since there are some senior NCOs that only look at "well, I like this guy, and he gets 300+ on his PT test."

However, like CSM Private RallyPoint Member said, you shouldn't worry about what everyone else is getting, but yourself. Allow the Senior Leadership worry about integrity, and when you get up to that level, you can start fighting that battle on your front. Karma will kick them in the butt when their time comes.

Response by COL Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 21 at 2015 7:27 AM

COL Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 21 Aug 2015 07:27:56 -0400

There is a system in place. Raters must do proper counseling (good, bad or indifferent). Rated NCOs should also keep a journal to record their key contributions to the organization.

Response by SGT Kristin Wiley made Aug 21 at 2015 8:27 AM

SGT Kristin Wiley — Fri, 21 Aug 2015 08:27:39 -0400

Yes, it frustrates me, but there's not much we can do about it. It's completely dependent on the types of leaders the command has.

Response by Sgt Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 21 at 2015 8:44 AM

Sgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 21 Aug 2015 08:44:25 -0400

It's part of the business of the military now. The subpar NCOs who get those good "scores" just know how to play the game. Nowadays, most higher ups care about who kissed their ass the most and who was always professional. They don't care about how good you are at your job heart as much as before. A great NCO will always stand up for their juniors and help them out anyway they can, maybe sometimes will have moments of not so professionalism but to stand up for what is right. They should also know their place but not afraid to assert themselves if need be. There just isn't really much that can be charged with the services now. We are way too politically correct sometimes and our assertiveness is lacking from what it used to be

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 21 at 2015 8:46 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 21 Aug 2015 08:46:22 -0400

Here is what I have learned and let me know if I am wrong say as a senior rater you have 3 NCOs that a all platoon sgt. You give them all a 1 1 among the best, followed by promote now. They are all fighting for the same position. What is it that separates them. Those blocks that say among the best fully capable followed by the bullets promote now or promote ahead of peers. Say one of those Plt Sgt scores a 300 on PT test and the other two are scoring 240 250. They all went to collage managed troops but the only thing that separates is one detail. It's my opnion that the one that went above and beyond on his pt should get among the best promote now. The other two should get fully capable promote ahead of peers. Some type of guide ve needs to be put in place in the AR 623-3 that dictates this. The same thing if you jave 2 1 soldiers. You could have one that is among the best. Saying he is better then his peers.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 21 at 2015 9:13 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 21 Aug 2015 09:13:39 -0400

It does frustrate me, but it seems as though the good old boy system is alive and well.. I am not part of that system, so I get what I really earned, right?

Response by SFC Terry Logsdon made Dec 18 at 2015 3:08 AM

SFC Terry Logsdon — Fri, 18 Dec 2015 03:08:07 -0500

i wasin the army from 1970-1992 and the NCOER was always inflated and iam sure it is even more inflated now.