Jaded Posted March 15, 2015 Posted March 15, 2015 That doesn't sound like a thing that would happen. Nobody cares when an IDE select gets out of the air force. 2
Dupe Posted March 15, 2015 Posted March 15, 2015 Rumors going around that at least one MAJCOM/CC sent out a TMT tasker to vaious Wings demanding to know why so many IDE-selects were 7 day opting from IDE, as well as WIC grads 7 day opting in general. So perhaps there aren't as many people "fighting" to go as some might think. Shit hot people will do well anywhere. Some have come to believe they are not missing out on career, financial, or service opportunities by leaving. At the same time, they believe they will be missing out on family opportunities by staying in.
tac airlifter Posted March 15, 2015 Posted March 15, 2015 I see where you're going with this. And while I'm sure that some candidates have been selected for the primo IDE programs in previous years, I would also argue that it's highly unlikely. The stats over the past few years show that it's a low percentage of candidates who are selected for IDE. The percentage is exponentially lower for candidates who are selected for something other than ACSC. The reality is that it's a difficult sell to get a candidate to some place other than Maxwell when there are selects fighting for the same slot. -9- This is true but I don't understand it. Why are selects more competitive for the unconventional IDE programs while candidates almost always go to ACSC?
Herk Driver Posted March 15, 2015 Posted March 15, 2015 As you probably know, CSAF's policy of restricting IDE completion by correspondence by school selects was to specifically prevent wasting an officer's time by doing it twice (i.e. practice bleeding). While not explicitly stated, CSAF's intent of eliminating practice bleeding applies to all officers, regardless of whether they are a select or a candidate. A senior rater who uses a candidates completion of IDE by correspondence as a metric for 3849 stratification is clearly ignoring CSAF's intent on practice bleeding. -9- The re-write of the AFI, based on his policy, was very explicit with regards to SOS. However, not so explicit when it comes to ACSC or AWC. I can see plenty of SRs rationalizing their actions as you stated above, unless he is explicitly clear in the annual Wing CC meetings that he holds.
Herk Driver Posted March 15, 2015 Posted March 15, 2015 This is true but I don't understand it. Why are selects more competitive for the unconventional IDE programs while candidates almost always go to ACSC? There is a discussion about this and a plan to change/fix it. Not sure if it has been "approved" yet. Others that have seen the process, please chime in, but my understanding is that typically your selects rack and stack higher in the DT. When designating a guy to a particular school, typically the higher on the list you are the "better" the school you go to. Additionally, you'll see HPOs go to a school that may result in joint duty on the back end to get their JSO designation, etc. If already joint complete then you may see the HPOs go to an outside the AF school. YMMV.
Fifty-six & Two Posted March 15, 2015 Posted March 15, 2015 There is a discussion about this and a plan to change/fix it. Not sure if it has been "approved" yet. Others that have seen the process, please chime in, but my understanding is that typically your selects rack and stack higher in the DT. When designating a guy to a particular school, typically the higher on the list you are the "better" the school you go to. Additionally, you'll see HPOs go to a school that may result in joint duty on the back end to get their JSO designation, etc. If already joint complete then you may see the HPOs go to an outside the AF school. YMMV. The rack and stack will happen at the Central Selection Board this year, prior to the DTs getting the nominations. If selects have been sitting on their ass knowing they are going to school versus candidates that have been trying to prove they should get the opportunity, then selects may miss out on those "better" schools. DTs will still vector towards a school, but I'm not sure how much that will factor in when the rack and stack has already occurred.
olevelo Posted March 15, 2015 Posted March 15, 2015 This is true but I don't understand it. Why are selects more competitive for the unconventional IDE programs while candidates almost always go to ACSC? Because selects were awesome lieutenants who worked hard for DG at SOS, and were recognized as such as 8-9 captains on their O-4 board. So someone else said they were shit-hot, therefore they must still be shit-hot, so I'll go ahead and rank them highly and feel they're deserving of the opportunities to push them farther.
Homestar Posted March 15, 2015 Posted March 15, 2015 Rumors going around that at least one MAJCOM/CC sent out a TMT tasker to vaious Wings demanding to know why so many IDE-selects were 7 day opting from IDE, as well as WIC grads 7 day opting in general. lol, now we know it's serious!
Champ Kind Posted March 15, 2015 Posted March 15, 2015 The TMT tasker...next step of escalation on the AF's passive aggressive scale, preceded of course by the sternly-worded email. 2
Herk Driver Posted March 15, 2015 Posted March 15, 2015 The rack and stack will happen at the Central Selection Board this year, prior to the DTs getting the nominations. If selects have been sitting on their ass knowing they are going to school versus candidates that have been trying to prove they should get the opportunity, then selects may miss out on those "better" schools. DTs will still vector towards a school, but I'm not sure how much that will factor in when the rack and stack has already occurred. Agreed, but not what I am talking about. In the past the DT completes rack and stack and then sends the top folks to the other than Maxwell schools. There is a discussion about (post rack and stack) spreading some of the top folks out to AF schools and other than AF schools. Not sure how much traction it will get.
Champ Kind Posted March 15, 2015 Posted March 15, 2015 (edited) It makes sense. Dudes "good enough" for IDE should be good enough for any school, should they not? We are basically using IDE in-res as a discriminator for command and, eventually, promotion to O-6. If we are eventually going to stand them up in front of units as CCs and then potentially later in front of our joint partners as Colonels, why not arm them as best as possible with a school fitting of their talents/work ethic. Edited March 15, 2015 by Champ Kind 1
osulax05 Posted March 15, 2015 Posted March 15, 2015 It makes sense. Dudes "good enough" for IDE should be good enough for any school, should they not?. This is a pretty simplistic view IMHO. We all know not all schools are created equal. Someone who is going to school is viewed as in the top X% of their peers. Within that group there is still a difference in quality between #1 and #69+. The quality of school that someone gets picked for is obviously going to correlate to their ranking among their peers. Should the last candidate selected really be the one to represent the AF in the joint environment or with our allies? Or should a "better" (for lack of a better word) officer fill that role, someone who will likely spend more of their career operating in that environment?
Herk Driver Posted March 15, 2015 Posted March 15, 2015 This is a pretty simplistic view IMHO. We all know not all schools are created equal. Someone who is going to school is viewed as in the top X% of their peers. Within that group there is still a difference in quality between #1 and #69+. The quality of school that someone gets picked for is obviously going to correlate to their ranking among their peers. Should the last candidate selected really be the one to represent the AF in the joint environment or with our allies? Or should a "better" (for lack of a better word) officer fill that role, someone who will likely spend more of their career operating in that environment? That discussion is taking place. Do all the guys at the top of the rack and stack need to go to JAWS or ( name the school) or do we send some of them to ACSC/ AWC? Do we de-value the AF schools that much? Why? How do the other services view other schools (versus their own)? It's an interesting dynamic.
tac airlifter Posted March 15, 2015 Posted March 15, 2015 The quality of school that someone gets picked for is obviously going to correlate to their ranking among their peers. Should the last candidate selected really be the one to represent the AF in the joint environment or with our allies? Or should a "better" (for lack of a better word) officer fill that role, someone who will likely spend more of their career operating in that environment? This is also a simplistic view; every select or candidate who opts out instead of attending (once matched to a school) is replaced by an alternate. And alternates have already been ranked lower than folks designated as primary to attend, systematically creating a situation at odds with your logic.
Jaded Posted March 16, 2015 Posted March 16, 2015 Honest question: who opts out of school and stays on the military?
Karl Hungus Posted March 16, 2015 Posted March 16, 2015 Honest question: who opts out of school and stays on the military? Apparently you can't opt out and stay active duty. You can delay going to IDE in residence as a select, but eventually you have to go- hence the 7 day opt that drives a separation date. I'm guessing plenty of them continue in the ARC.
HeloDude Posted March 16, 2015 Posted March 16, 2015 Apparently you can't opt out and stay active duty. You can delay going to IDE in residence as a select, but eventually you have to go- hence the 7 day opt that drives a separation date. I'm guessing plenty of them continue in the ARC. I'm pretty sure selects have to fill out a 3849 and still 'request' school. That being the case, I imagine they can select that they do not wish to compete for any specific chool and accept the prejudice associated with it...this way they're not turning down an assignment per se.
badgerPilot Posted March 17, 2015 Posted March 17, 2015 It happens...I did it for family reasons. Luckily my senior rater had a whole person sight picture and I avoided the North Pole WX station. The positive was an alternate was able to go!
Dupe Posted March 17, 2015 Posted March 17, 2015 (edited) I'm pretty sure selects have to fill out a 3849 and still 'request' school. That being the case, I imagine they can select that they do not wish to compete for any specific chool and accept the prejudice associated with it...this way they're not turning down an assignment per se. I've seen selects chuck in a 3849 while trying to land a honey AGR job. AGR job comes through, declining school becomes a 7-day option. Edited March 17, 2015 by Dupe
HeloDude Posted March 17, 2015 Posted March 17, 2015 I've seen selects chuck in a 3849 while trying to land a honey AGR job. AGR job comes through, declining school becomes a 7-day option. Valid...but they till technically 'requested' to go to school with the 3849. They just turned down an assignment (just so happened to be school) and that is what drove the separation. They could have just as easily not applied for school and dropped normal seperation papers if they didn't like the result/next assignment. Either way, the result is the same: A guy wanted out when his time was up, so he got out. If this surprises senior leaders...then good.
discus Posted March 17, 2015 Posted March 17, 2015 Anyone know of the ramifications of marking the box "I am not interested in school right now" on your 3849? I just did that because I'm currently on a 365, and a prior at the 19 year mark. Not ready to commit to another three years just this second. I put that down as my reason as well.
HossHarris Posted March 17, 2015 Posted March 17, 2015 After the 3849s close out and the wg/cc is done, you can see his comments and recommendation. Just reopen your "view only" 3849 in afpc secure. 1
Champ Kind Posted March 17, 2015 Posted March 17, 2015 I don't have the PSDM in front of me but I thought I remembered seeing that this year SRs were to rack/stack all selects and 20% of candidates.
Fifty-six & Two Posted March 17, 2015 Posted March 17, 2015 I don't have the PSDM in front of me but I thought I remembered seeing that this year SRs were to rack/stack all selects and 20% of candidates. May nominate no more than 20% of IDE and 25% of their SDE candidates. They MUST nominate 100% of their selects who meet time on station requirements.
WeTheSheeple Posted March 18, 2015 Posted March 18, 2015 This is correct. There is very little public information about this new board, but expect it to run like a promotion board or DT rack-and-stack. If so, they score each record on 6-10 pt scale at .5 increments to determine rack-and-stack for IDE/SDE. The margins are slim. Last year, all 11Fs IDE slots were selected by 11Fs. This year, there may be no 11Fs on the board that scores your records. If run like a promotion board, expect equal parts ops and support O-6s. IDE Selects have been ID'd as the top 16% (in '14) to 19% (in '11) of their YrGrp. Whether it was the DFC/BS in combat, working as Group Exec, or coordinating the Xmas Party, the designation came out of a deliberate and pretty transparent promotion board process (even though most of us disagree with the weight given to certain non-operational activities). Many people will defer to the promotion board's evaluation. The IDE board is a repeat of the promotion board with 1-3 years for Selects to fall off or Candidates to move up; recent experience is on top and probably the most relevant (ADO/deployed DETCO experience, etc). Sr Raters must nom all Selects, but they can rank Candidates above Selects (though unlikely). I would expect the Sr Rater input to have a much stronger impact on the board than Select/non-Select. Not all Selects will want to spend 18mos getting a Masters or learning Japanese to do ACSC in Tokyo, and DTs may want you closer to home for SAASS, Wing Safety, or DO. I expect a smaller % of O-3s picked up for IDE than most years, but a higher % of Selects going to non-ACSC programs
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now