Posted on Jan 8, 2024
Would anyone be willing to conduct a virtual interview with me in order to get the remaining two LORs from an O-5 or higher for OCS?
19.2K
38
11
12
12
0
Good morning, all. I know this is a longshot, but I'm willing to take this chance. I am currently applying for OCS and collecting letters of recommendation from officers that I have known or worked with in the past. At the moment, I have the minimum requirement of three, but would like to expand to a maximum of six. I currently have a CW4, CW5, CPT, and MAJ. I would like two field grade officers as well. Would anyone be willing to conduct a virtual interview with me in order to get the remaining two.
Posted in these groups: OCS 90A: Multifunctional Logistician 15A: Aviation Officer Commission 12A: Engineer Officer
Posted 12 mo ago
Responses: 5
Posted 12 mo ago
Probably already considered, but have you reached out through the chain to see if your BC is available?
(9)
Comment
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
12 mo
Yep, don't over complicate it. Lots of these review boards are looking for the boxes to be checked and then they move on to the next packet. Leverage your CPT to reach out to his BC.
(4)
Reply
(0)
LTC Jason Mackay
12 mo
Agree, your current chain of command would be the strongest message to stand.
(3)
Reply
(0)
Edited 11 mo ago
Posted 12 mo ago
I don't imagine you'll get anyone to do so outside your unit. Nearly every field grade officer that has mentored me has relayed the important lesson of never attaching my name to someone I didn't know personally/professionally. There are too many variables unaccounted for otherwise, and not only is it a risk, but among senior officers it's considered poor or immature judgement to endorses someone with little, to no relation to them.
I actually remember the most recent time that this lesson was refreshed for me:
I had an NCO facing separation because of criminal charges. I was in the brigade commander's office for the reading, along with the company chain of command. We brought in the NCO and they pled their case, appealing to their good character. They brought in a senior NCO who vouched for them. This senior NCO had been deployed for a while and was just getting back, but they were familiar with this NCO having worked with them in the past. They explained to the brigade commander that even though they did not understand the exact details of the NCO's current situation and why they were facing separation, that they believed in them and supported them because of their character.
Once this senior NCO left the room the brigade commander turned to us and offered their thoughts. They said that the senior NCO's testimony was undermined by their admittance of not really knowing the situation. When it comes to certain types of recommendations, attaching your name to someone is about as sacred as it gets in the Army. It carries enormous weight, and the commander seriously doubted whether the senior NCO understood this or not. The commander was not convincied and it seemed that they disregarded the seriousness of the offense. The commander cautioned us in the room to never jump to endorsements of others, but to ensure those we support earn our trust and that we display a thorough understading of who and what we are endorsing. This is what makes endorsements meaningful, and they believed this is how we make the Army better.
In the end, the NCO was separated and that senior NCO was given increased challenges over the next few years. They worked they crap out of them. They did end up becoming an even better NCO as I continued to work with him.
I actually remember the most recent time that this lesson was refreshed for me:
I had an NCO facing separation because of criminal charges. I was in the brigade commander's office for the reading, along with the company chain of command. We brought in the NCO and they pled their case, appealing to their good character. They brought in a senior NCO who vouched for them. This senior NCO had been deployed for a while and was just getting back, but they were familiar with this NCO having worked with them in the past. They explained to the brigade commander that even though they did not understand the exact details of the NCO's current situation and why they were facing separation, that they believed in them and supported them because of their character.
Once this senior NCO left the room the brigade commander turned to us and offered their thoughts. They said that the senior NCO's testimony was undermined by their admittance of not really knowing the situation. When it comes to certain types of recommendations, attaching your name to someone is about as sacred as it gets in the Army. It carries enormous weight, and the commander seriously doubted whether the senior NCO understood this or not. The commander was not convincied and it seemed that they disregarded the seriousness of the offense. The commander cautioned us in the room to never jump to endorsements of others, but to ensure those we support earn our trust and that we display a thorough understading of who and what we are endorsing. This is what makes endorsements meaningful, and they believed this is how we make the Army better.
In the end, the NCO was separated and that senior NCO was given increased challenges over the next few years. They worked they crap out of them. They did end up becoming an even better NCO as I continued to work with him.
(4)
Comment
(0)
Posted 11 mo ago
Good luck young warrior! Way to think outside the box. Most SSG’s have limited access to LTC’s and above.
(2)
Comment
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
11 mo
I appreciate the encouragement Top! Unfortunately, due to me being AGR I'm not able to apply unless I refrad. I've decided to go Flight Warrant instead.
(1)
Reply
(0)
Read This Next