Shoe Clerk Vol 3

[LJDRVR]

We already have these "bigger problems," that was the point of my previous post. It's the officers who have let this environment flourish and I'm not talking about line captains and passed-over majors. Or even squadron commanders for the most part...the rot happens at the top when senior managers empower E-9s and SMSgt Shirts to implement stupid ideas like having enlisted troops "ensuring discipline and compliance" among the whole force, including the officer corps.

IMHBAO if senior managers have problems with compliance in their units, they should get out there themselves and make it work rather than sending "sternly worded emails" or especially their crony SNCOs who have absolutely no place "correcting" officers in public in the disrespectful manner I'm sure we've all seen.

/rant off

Man, that's what I was afraid of. Part of me is so happy I'm not part of that mess but I sometimes wonder what sort of difference I could have made on a personal level had I remained on active duty. I'll tell you one thing, I'd be one NCO who wouldn't tolerate any such bullshit on the part of my peers. Mind your own damn business. Officers fly the airplanes, SNCO's take care of the enlisted force. Reflective belts? PT gear? Who gives damn?

Real leadership is not nitpicking queep. Non compliance with pseudo-OSHA crap doesn't have a thing to do with the military.

Edited December 11, 2011 by LJDRVR

[ak47]

Some choice E-8 wisdom from AF.mil:

I thought this name sounded familiar so I Googled, and, sure enough, he was at the zoo sometime in the 05-07 time frame as they moved to make BCT there more like BMT. He's 5-foot nothing and a hundred-nothing and about the angriest man I've ever met. And of course he didn't have a problem talking down to anyone. Only thing missing from his official photo is the neatly-trimmed and very in-regs mustache he used to wear.

[The Texan]

Officers fly the airplanes, SNCO's take care of the enlisted force. Reflective belts? PT gear? Who gives damn?

Real leadership is not nitpicking queep. Non compliance with pseudo-OSHA crap doesn't have a thing to do with the military.

Well said, LJ. I'm currently a CE Electrical NCO, heading to CSO schoolhouse soon. I've made it clear we take care of our business within our shop, don't care how other shops/career fields operate. The OSHA comment is funny because there are attempted jacks on us by people who aren't in our career field. Been reading and enjoying all these posts about shoe directed queep at the Deid and beyond. Thought ya'll would like another perspective since CE gets to deal with alot of it. My personal top 5 shoe story favorites in my 10yrs of humble service:

1) Emergency! July '10. Power failure. Transformer explosion. Shoe: running at me. "The a/c to the buildings are down!" Me: "Yeah, because of that loud-ass boom you just heard" gesturing to the still-smoking transformer behind me. Shoe: "We can't stay in the building if the temperature gets above 85F." Me: "Then why do I have to show up and work with my guys outside in 100F daily?" Blank stare. After the job was done I get lectured about how to make the 'customer' feel we care at all times. Customer. Last time I checked I wasn't in a company.

2) I was called down from a bucket truck by a chief. Not because of no hard hat, harness, etc. Because of no reflective belt. "Chief, the belt is not arc flash rated equipment." Don't think I would like a permanent disco belt graphed to my waist. <--Bonus: Our favorite SWA location.

3) Best base award people came through therefore had to paint all street light poles another shade of Commander Brown. Why? Shoe logic: Bucket truck + only guys that can reach traffic lights= only guys capable of painting lights. Screw using JLG lifts. Nevermind the bucket truck has to be retested if paint falls on the insulated boom.

4) Shoe: I need you to source $1500 worth of solar garden lights. Me: Ok, why? Shoe: The plywood Christmas cards squadrons put out in the center median aren't properly lit up (but ok enough for cars to drive). Yeah, huge failure. Lights have disappeared from inventory. Base gardens are now brighter.

5) My first base: Base commander conducts a no notice all call because an airman pulled a gun on somebody downtown. Exact words: "If you all want to act like a bunch of gangsters and point guns at people I'll send your asses to Iraq tomorrow!" ...because I'd never get tasked to go on my own.

Anybody want to help me write a book on this stuff? "The Book of Queep" Like the Chuck Norris book of facts. So insane it can't be true, or can it?

[nsplayr]

Man, that's what I was afraid of. Part of me is so happy I'm not part of that mess but I sometimes wonder what sort of difference I could have made on a personal level had I remained on active duty. I'll tell you one thing, I'd be one NCO who wouldn't tolerate any such bullshit on the part of my peers. Mind your own damn business. Officers fly the airplanes, SNCO's take care of the enlisted force. Reflective belts? PT gear? Who gives damn?

Real leadership is not nitpicking queep. Non compliance with pseudo-OSHA crap doesn't have a thing to do with the military.

Amen. Your kind is sorely needed/missed.

[Disco_Nav963]

What's the AFI on that situation out of curiosity?

Same one SurelySerious mentioned.

[LJDRVR]

Amen. Your kind is sorely needed/missed.

Thanks Brother. I can't take credit for it. I was raised by TSgt's with Compton gang tatoos and Chiefs who chained smoked and had contracted every venereal disease known to medicine in SE Asia. It was an awesome education. Come fly with me at United someday - we'll have fun.

[TheGuardGuy]

I thought this name sounded familiar so I Googled, and, sure enough, he was at the zoo sometime in the 05-07 time frame as they moved to make BCT there more like BMT. He's 5-foot nothing and a hundred-nothing and about the angriest man I've ever met. And of course he didn't have a problem talking down to anyone. Only thing missing from his official photo is the neatly-trimmed and very in-regs mustache he used to wear.

FIFY

image hosting jpg

[arg]

You might want to back off. Dude has four, count em, four Commendation medals.

[Breckey]

And not one deployment medal.

[Stitch]

And not one deployment medal.

Shoe standard. Meanwhile over in the Maintenance Complex some poor (now divorced) crew chief/weapons loader is deploying for the 7,000th time. After just getting back from his 3rd Korea short tour in 8 years. Been there, seen it happen...

[Festivius]

I know this website is an escape valve for all kinds of pissing and moaning, but do you really want to start posting people’s pictures and cranking up bitchy personal attacks? The basic theme of the last few posts seems to be “E’s shouldn’t be correcting O’s,” so how about the (apparent) O’s show some GD personal leadership? If you have a problem with this dude, call him. Hiding behind the anonymity of some BS website is a bitch move.

RANT OFF

[Guest]

I know this website is an escape valve for all kinds of pissing and moaning, but do you really want to start posting people’s pictures and cranking up bitchy personal attacks? The basic theme of the last few posts seems to be “E’s shouldn’t be correcting O’s,” so how about the (apparent) O’s show some GD personal leadership? If you have a problem with this dude, call him. Hiding behind the anonymity of some BS website is a bitch move.

RANT OFF

You have a point. However, calling guys a bitch for something like this might mean you're out of touch with the resounding frustration people are having with the lack of mission focus.

SMSgt Coleman didn't just talk to the media, he used the media to talk. About displaying leadership through correcting uniform violations...

"I then remind them of Air Force Instruction 36-2618, the Enlisted Force Structure, that states, "Airman should correct personnel who violate military standards.""

He is stretching the context of "violation of military standards" to the utmost limit when he implies this sentence really means enlisted folks are obligated to sprint around the base correcting uniform violations, officers included.

He's out of touch and out of context. He is the mouthpiece of a lack of mission focus that starts at the top. Some people remember him for being a douchebag because he probably is a douchebag.

Everyone here has examples of fantastic NCOs who showed amazing SA and seemed to be able to deftly handle even the most fucked up situations and always got the desired effect of the boss' orders. They didn't act like this cat.

He presented himself to the world and he's taking shit for it on the internet. No one is going to do a double douchbag move and call him as you suggest.

just sayin'...

[General Condition]

I know this website is an escape valve for all kinds of pissing and moaning, but do you really want to start posting people’s pictures and cranking up bitchy personal attacks? The basic theme of the last few posts seems to be “E’s shouldn’t be correcting O’s,” so how about the (apparent) O’s show some GD personal leadership? If you have a problem with this dude, call him. Hiding behind the anonymity of some BS website is a bitch move. RANT OFF

You can't "call" dudes like this. They turn on the "reflective belts are mandatory" and nothing gets through their thick skull. Or, they go whine and bitch to the first O-6 in their chain, and before you know it, they're threatening you.

Is it chickenshit to call someone out anonymously on a forum? Yes. But what about telling your E's to go forth and correct ANYONE? The common theme here is that this is all due to lack of leadership on the part of the O-6's and above. The folks on here are just using an "alternative" means to "call" someone.

It looks to me like he's making up for four years of being stuffed into lockers in high school. Douches like this always make me wonder: do they treat their family like this, or are they a totally different person when they cross the threshold of their home? Either way, you're a douche if you treat your family like that and you're a douche if you change who you are. I seem to remember a certain organization preaching to me about integrity. Funny how the most vocal ones often have the least integrity.

[Festivius]

-Fair comments. I get it that there is a lot of frustration regarding various kinds of qweep, and I certainly have my own bitches, gripes, and moans about the state of the AF. This particular topic doesn’t really bug me, but I get it that it may bug others and they want to use the web to vent. That being said, I really do have a problem with the faceless personal attacks we sometimes stoop to on-line. You want to attack ideas? Great! Attacking people, on the other hand…

-BTW, I’m not blind to the irony that exactly one post ago I called something “a bitch move.” That was probably over the top.

-More specifically, I have problem when an (apparent) officer does this to a E on-line. I have no clue who this dude is, and for all I know he’s the best NCO in the history of the AF. Or maybe the worst. Again, I have no clue. But I think this sort of thing not only demeans him personally, but cheapens the trust and respect required between O’s and E’s. Am I full of crap? Maybe, but I don’t think so.

[stract]

here's one for you...our group shirt just kicked back an EPR because the rater marked "clearly exceeds standards" on the military bearing section, because he (the shirt) saw two previous PT failures in this guy's fitness history. Oh BTW, this guy achieved an Excellent on his most recent PT test (in the rating period) after working his ass off. Fuck you shirt, it's not for you to decide, it's for his rater.

[Toro]

here's one for you...our group shirt just kicked back an EPR because the rater marked "clearly exceeds standards" on the military bearing section, because he (the shirt) saw two previous PT failures in this guy's fitness history. Oh BTW, this guy achieved an Excellent on his most recent PT test (in the rating period) after working his ass off. Fuck you shirt, it's not for you to decide, it's for his rater.

Kind of vague - were his failures on his most recent two PT tests? Even if so, the only thing I would argue with that statement is that it should have gone under physical fitness and not military bearing. If those failures happened outside of the last 2-3 EPRs, then your shirt might be out of line, but otherwise he is enforcing the exact standards that we (and mostly the enlisted troops) keep bitching about. Somebody who gets an excellent on his most recent PT test does not necessarily "clearly exceed standards" if he has failed (more than one) prior test.

Unless there are extenuating circumstances, I say good on the Shirt for not allowing the standard firewall 5 to go through. And yes, if he is in the EPR review chain, that absolutely is his job.

[Muscle2002]

Kind of vague - were his failures on his most recent two PT tests? Even if so, the only thing I would argue with that statement is that it should have gone under physical fitness and not military bearing. If those failures happened outside of the last 2-3 EPRs, then your shirt might be out of line, but otherwise he is enforcing the exact standards that we (and mostly the enlisted troops) keep bitching about. Somebody who gets an excellent on his most recent PT test does not necessarily "clearly exceed standards" if he has failed (more than one) prior test.

Unless there are extenuating circumstances, I say good on the Shirt for not allowing the standard firewall 5 to go through. And yes, if he is in the EPR review chain, that absolutely is his job.

I agree for the most part on what you stated. Having worked a similar issue as an eval monitor (read queep monster), it seems that unless the Shirt owns one of the signature blocks on the EPR, his/her opinion is only that, an opinion. It's good that the Shirt apparently tried to prevent an overly inflated EPR from being processed, however, in the perfect world, the Shirt would go to the rater/additional rater to voice his/her concern and not send it back through the eval review workflow. I assume that the latter is what happened as it sounds like the OP was somewhat surprised.

Edited December 15, 2011 by Muscle2002

[dream big]

I thought this name sounded familiar so I Googled, and, sure enough, he was at the zoo sometime in the 05-07 time frame as they moved to make BCT there more like BMT. He's 5-foot nothing and a hundred-nothing and about the angriest man I've ever met. And of course he didn't have a problem talking down to anyone. Only thing missing from his official photo is the neatly-trimmed and very in-regs mustache he used to wear.

Dude I thought I recognized the name! I remember during our basic he tried calling out an 0-4 AOC type in front of us. Needless to say, the 0-4 won that battle. That was leadership 101.

[Guest]

Am I full of crap?

Yes?

[Guest Hueypilot812]

here's one for you...our group shirt just kicked back an EPR because the rater marked "clearly exceeds standards" on the military bearing section, because he (the shirt) saw two previous PT failures in this guy's fitness history. Oh BTW, this guy achieved an Excellent on his most recent PT test (in the rating period) after working his ass off. you shirt, it's not for you to decide, it's for his rater.

Had our Flight Safety NCO win an annual award (FSNCO of the year for the MAJCOM)...participated in numerous community events (tornado rescue/clean up, etc). He's done a TON of stuff in the office to improve the program. He's made a lot of progress on his CCAF degree. Went from a high 70s to high 90s on his PFT in the past 6 months. Started teaching tobacco cessation classes...I could go on. Anyway, my boss and I recommended him for a STEP promotion. The wing command chief shot it down, saying he doesn't have CCAF complete...and we're trying to promote him to Tech.

My question to my boss...why the hell is the chief making the call? Why can't the wing commander make that call?

Next example...here in the AOR, we submitted someone for a medal. The chief out here shot it down and said he won't approve it because a couple years ago this individual failed the PFT. Despite the fact the past year or two this individual has consistently scored in the 80s and 90s (last test was mid-90s)...and the rest of their record is exemplary. But because they screwed up 2-3 years ago and failed, they can't get a medal.

You know what I think that says to our airmen? it. Don't try anymore. No reason to improve or get better because if you failed once, you're ed and you'll never get another pat on the back. Doesn't matter that this medal would have acknowledged your stellar performance over the past half a year...you screwed up many moons ago so it's all for nil. Not to mention...why can't the officers in our leadership chain say "sorry chief, but I'm giving this person a medal...it's deserved".

I wish I could raise more of an issue about this, but it seems everyone else (O-5s, O-6s and O-7s) seem to just roll over and say "well the CMSgt said no". So I realize a junior FGO like me is standing at the base of a cliff with no rope...so vent and bitch on baseops.net it is!

[Festivius]

...why can't the officers in our leadership chain say "sorry chief, but I'm giving this person a medal...it's deserved".

"I wish I could raise more of an issue about this, but it seems everyone else (O-5s, O-6s and O-7s) seem to just roll over and say "well the CMSgt said no". So I realize a junior FGO like me is standing at the base of a cliff with no rope...so vent and bitch on baseops.net it is!"

This is an annoyance, but to be honest, I’ve written tons of EPRs, OPRs, and decs and I’ve never had one “denied” by a Shirt/Supt/Chief. I’ve certainly had those folks “not support” my assessment, but that was always a recommendation, not direction (and giving recommendations was their job, so I can’t fault them for that). Some of those recommendations where persuasive enough that my boss agreed with them, but still, it’s not like I didn’t have my chance to voice my position. Even if the senior E’s opinion is crap, it’s just an opinion, and if it truly is crap, it isn’t hard to present a more persuasive argument. No one can tell you what to sign and no one can stop you from making your best recommendation to your boss. Do wrong decisions get made? Sure, but you always have the right to move your concerns to your commander. Inevitably, you’ll win some and you’ll lose some.

[WABoom]

Had our Flight Safety NCO win an annual award (FSNCO of the year for the MAJCOM)...participated in numerous community events (tornado rescue/clean up, etc). He's done a TON of stuff in the office to improve the program. He's made a lot of progress on his CCAF degree. Went from a high 70s to high 90s on his PFT in the past 6 months. Started teaching tobacco cessation classes...I could go on. Anyway, my boss and I recommended him for a STEP promotion. The wing command chief shot it down, saying he doesn't have CCAF complete...and we're trying to promote him to Tech.

To be honest, I think this one is a good call. I don't believe that Enlisted folks need to have a Bachelors for promotion, but CCAF in my mind is a no brainer since it is AFSC related. A TSgt should have a CCAF degree complete. Still awesome that he was put in for a STEP though.

[Guest one]

How hard is it to finish your CCAF? It is one semester in college which is 100% paid for by the Air Force. It is not even as hard as getting a real associates degree which takes two years. If you can't finish your CCAF and you get STEP promoted it doesn't send a very good message to the junior AMN about the importance of getting an education. The best thing you could do is tell the individual that we can put you up for a STEP promotion if you finish your CCAF. I guarantee you there is a NCO somewhere in the same Wing that has done just as much as your NCO but also has their CCAF.

This has nothing to do with your situation but I have seen some real shitty NCOs get STEP promoted because they never wanted to study for a F#####ing promotion test. At the same time a Stellar NCO with Master's degree and four deployments get shitted on because they only tested once. Instead of a STEP promotion they should call it a pity stripe.

Edited December 23, 2011 by one

[BitteEinBit]

Kind of vague - were his failures on his most recent two PT tests? Even if so, the only thing I would argue with that statement is that it should have gone under physical fitness and not military bearing. If those failures happened outside of the last 2-3 EPRs, then your shirt might be out of line, but otherwise he is enforcing the exact standards that we (and mostly the enlisted troops) keep bitching about. Somebody who gets an excellent on his most recent PT test does not necessarily "clearly exceed standards" if he has failed (more than one) prior test.

Unless there are extenuating circumstances, I say good on the Shirt for not allowing the standard firewall 5 to go through. And yes, if he is in the EPR review chain, that absolutely is his job.

For the record, I am against over inflating OPR/EPRs with fodder, but if someone exceeds the standards for whatever area they are being evaluated during a particular reporting period, why can't the evaluator state "clearly exceeds standards?" Like Toro said, the story is a little vague so I don't know when the PT test failures happened, but an EPR/OPR is supposed to evaluate a member's performance for a specific reporting period. Previous PT test failures outside of the reporting period in question are irrelevant and the individual was probably already penalized for those failures with either a downgrade if the member failed but had a passing PT test score at close out or a "does not meet standards" if they had a failing PT score at closeout. Either way, PT test failures cannot be documented on performance reports unless the failure is current at the time of close out.

All that being said, putting "clearly exceeds standards" on a performance report for just getting a 90 or above on a PT test is a little inflated. If the individual failed a PT test and then scored 100% during the same reporting period, it would be wrong to put "clearly exceeds standards" on the EPR and the shirt was spot on. My point is that penalizing someone (twice) for previous test failures outside the reporting period is wrong (if that was the case here).

[jrobe]

How about-- 75 PT score is the standard---or average.

so playing devil's advocate a 75.1, mathematically, clearly exceeds the standards.

The problem with over inflated OPR/EPRs is that your sister Sq will continue to do this and get promoted…or the other Grp/Wg..base… and your troops may not as a result. So this will continue to be a self-licking ice-cream cone. That is until they change the system again and start to be honest again, at least for a short while.