Posted on Oct 6, 2015
CPT Company Commander
39.6K
149
95
19
19
0
20a3cc32
A long time ago when I first came into the Army as a young PFC you were required to attend PLDC, or Primary Leadership Development Course, before you could pin on your stripes. Even those of us that were promoted on a waiver while deployed had to attend within a certain timeframe or we would lose our stripes.

I was a fan of this system. I believe that institutional instruction was an asset to professional development. But when the Army moved to the Warrior Leaders Course only being a requirement to attain the promotable status as a SGT we lost ground in professional development. Over time you would have less and less institutionally trained NCOs developing other NCOs. I have found that the SSD's try to make up for this but I rarely find that anyone take these serious. They are more of a check the blocks than the gates to being an NCO.

For those that have been in long enough do believe this affected the NCO corps? Did the Army NCO Corps maintain their professionalism without going to the school house to be an NCO?
Edited 9 y ago
Avatar feed
Responses: 41
SSG Stryker Systems Maintainer
18
18
0
Fortunately for me I came up thru the old days. Yes, LT, I believe the NCO core is somewhat compromised. The core is filled with cut-throat NCO & NCOER bullet chasers. Mentorship is gone, Soldiers promoted to fast and they do not understand what it takes and mean to be a NCO. NCOES has nothing to do with except WLC being cut to two weeks. I don't think NCOES makes you a professional, it's the leaders grooming, teaching, coaching & mentoring Soldiers, which is no longer the case.
(18)
Comment
(0)
CPT Company Commander
CPT (Join to see)
9 y
I do think there should be an emphasis on NCOES as a means to prepare those who are ready to be an NCO and prevent those that are not. Mentorship is something that is spoken but is not understood. I have some good NCOs that know what it means but I have seen many that agree with you on it and do nothing to actually mentor.
(1)
Reply
(0)
SGT Christina Wilder
SGT Christina Wilder
9 y
Perfectly stated. Agreed.
(0)
Reply
(0)
SSG Orders Action Officer
SSG (Join to see)
9 y
You hit the nail on the head with your last sentence.
(0)
Reply
(0)
SSG Infantryman
SSG (Join to see)
6 y
Amen
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
CSM Michael J. Uhlig
14
14
0
To be plain & simple about it, this was a short cut CPT (Join to see), to do away with the requirement. I am pleased the requirement has returned and would like to see the SQT/SDT return as well. The SSD's are fine and dandy but they are often an exercise in using "CRTL F". A lack of challenges makes Johnny a Lazy Boy.
(14)
Comment
(0)
SSG John Gillespie
SSG John Gillespie
9 y
That he was. I've had other good 1SGs over the years (not many, sadly) but he was the best. Fair, practical, and an absolutely professional NCO.
(1)
Reply
(0)
SSG Infantryman
SSG (Join to see)
6 y
CPT (Join to see) yes and ssd before you can go
(0)
Reply
(0)
SSG Infantryman
SSG (Join to see)
6 y
If you didn't get at least 80 percent on your SQT you didn't get promoted in some of the units I served in.
Yearly CCT testing was good also.
(0)
Reply
(0)
SSG Infantryman
SSG (Join to see)
6 y
SGM Steve Wettstein NOW it BLC to get your 5 and ALC to get your 6.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL
7
7
0
CPT (Join to see) great subject I think it is required. When I came in I took the SQT and PLDC was mandatory 30 days. Even before that you had School of Standard if you were required to go. It was about hands on and not so much automated as it is nowadays for the next rank. I was under the 1000 point system, in my opinion should come back, with the SQT. Schools should be longer and more MOS specific for current operations.
(7)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close