Posted on Dec 31, 2023
Army must "increase" fitness standards, but can use gender-specific scores
2.47K
17
11
3
3
0
Fitness
Training
Posted 11 mo ago
Responses: 4
2
2
0
NO, NO, NO...... IF the Army is all about opening all MOS to both genders then there needs to be ONE standard, the highest of the two, and everyone should meet it.
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
I have long advocated for a gender AND age neutral PT test with standards determined by 5 digit MOS. Quite simply, the physical expectations for a 11B1O, a 11B50, a 88M1O and a 92G3O are all different. Yes, there should be a basic minimum across the board. But I am far more worried about the max lift for an artilleryman or tanker who has to move heavy rounds than an infantryman. But I am more worried about SUSTAINED weight carry for an I factory than the others. And for cooks, I ain't worried about none of it, aside from basic fitness. Same for intel analysts. Or CSMs, regardless of branch.
Anyone holding a specific job should have the same fitness standard, regardless of age or sex. Either you can do the job or you can't.
Anyone holding a specific job should have the same fitness standard, regardless of age or sex. Either you can do the job or you can't.
(1)
(0)
MAJ Dale E. Wilson, Ph.D.
When I was commander of HHC, 2-34th AR, my cooks (including the E-6s and E-7s) would drop out of our morning runs and sneak in the back of the DFAC and hide out. I told my XO to lead the next run and the 1st Sgt. and I stayed well back and followed the cooks into the DFAC.
Once inside, I informed them I wanted them in my office immediately after lunch. They had recently given us the Summarized Art. 15 as a means to punish without creating a permanent black mark on a soldier's record.
That afternoon I informed the four E-6s and one E-7 that I was giving them Summarized Art. 15s and they would need to move into the barracks for two weeks beginning Sunday and they would be pulling extra duty throughout the period. I also advised them they had the right to appeal the punishment to the battalion CO. Only one did, the E-7. He came back that afternoon with his tail between his legs. . . .
Once inside, I informed them I wanted them in my office immediately after lunch. They had recently given us the Summarized Art. 15 as a means to punish without creating a permanent black mark on a soldier's record.
That afternoon I informed the four E-6s and one E-7 that I was giving them Summarized Art. 15s and they would need to move into the barracks for two weeks beginning Sunday and they would be pulling extra duty throughout the period. I also advised them they had the right to appeal the punishment to the battalion CO. Only one did, the E-7. He came back that afternoon with his tail between his legs. . . .
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google