MSCguy Posted November 8, 2014 Posted November 8, 2014 This Colonel gets it. Good read.https://www.wpafb.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123430954 That's what happens when you have an AF culture that emphasizes negatives over positives. It's okay to be mediocre with no PT fails, paperwork, etc. but if a high performer has one slip up it could be the end.
Prosuper Posted November 9, 2014 Posted November 9, 2014 This Colonel gets it. Good read.https://www.wpafb.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123430954 Gone from leadership to fortune 500 management, Airman screws up once and it shows up on a Wing PPT slide she gets the big blue weenie even though she is one of your top performers. Glad I'm retired, in the 80's the CC took care of you if made him money on the flightline, the working troops were the ones you wanted to be and they were the ones to get promoted to Senior and Chief, today those guys don't make it past Tech. CC's Might as well take their uniform off and wear a polo and slacks and tell you lies just like their civilian counter parts in the airlines. 1
Herk Driver Posted November 9, 2014 Posted November 9, 2014 ProSuper, I know you didn't specify but Sq/CCs many times get overruled on things such as decs etc when someone has a failed PT test or some other negative issue.
SurelySerious Posted November 9, 2014 Posted November 9, 2014 ProSuper, I know you didn't specify but Sq/CCs many times get overruled on things such as decs etc when someone has a failed PT test or some other negative issue. Which is equally as disturbing.
Herk Driver Posted November 9, 2014 Posted November 9, 2014 Which is equally as disturbing. I don't disagree, but Sq/CCs are not and have never been the approval authority for decs. I would assert that functionals have taken over the AF. Commanders are given all the responsibility and much of their authority has been taken away over the course of the last 5-10 or more years. That is really the biggest problem with the AF right now, as I see it. I certainly hope that the CSAF is working on some of this. There are some indicators that he is.
SurelySerious Posted November 9, 2014 Posted November 9, 2014 I don't disagree, but Sq/CCs are not and have never been the approval authority for decs. I would assert that functionals have taken over the AF. Commanders are given all the responsibility and much of their authority has been taken away over the course of the last 5-10 or more years. That is really the biggest problem with the AF right now, as I see it. I certainly hope that the CSAF is working on some of this. There are some indicators that he is. Good point; I guess that taking away Sq/CC judgement over the years is more what I was getting at.
Azimuth Posted November 9, 2014 Posted November 9, 2014 (edited) ProSuper, I know you didn't specify but Sq/CCs many times get overruled on things such as decs etc when someone has a failed PT test or some other negative issue. Depends. I got in trouble at my last assignment and was made an example of. I wasn't going to get a dec at all as a SNCO. The Sq/CC who handed me a LOR and UIF, and let me keep my MSgt stripe, wrote a push note to the OG saying I had recovered from something two years prior, I was human and was bound to make mistakes, and I was one of the best SNCO's in his Sq and while I wouldn't get an MSM, I did deserve a PCS medal of some kind. He is a leader, well known in the C-17 and KC-135 community. I get what you're saying, however in my experience most Sq/CC's wouldn't of done a push note like that because they just don't want to argue or get on the radar of their boss. I don't disagree, but Sq/CCs are not and have never been the approval authority for decs. I would assert that functionals have taken over the AF. Commanders are given all the responsibility and much of their authority has been taken away over the course of the last 5-10 or more years. That is really the biggest problem with the AF right now, as I see it. I certainly hope that the CSAF is working on some of this. There are some indicators that he is. But that's the problem. The OG/CC doesn't really know me, my Sq/CC does. He/she are the ones who go to bat for me. If I'm a Group/CC and I have a Sq/CC going to bat for one of their troops over a dec, and they don't do this all the time, I'll approve it because I'm trusting my Sq/CC's judgement. The AF is now filled with risk adverse managers who are too worried about upsetting their bosses and/or possibly derailing their career over sticking up for their troops. Edited November 9, 2014 by Azimuth
discus Posted November 9, 2014 Posted November 9, 2014 (edited) Edit: Pointed out that it was a double post. I'll leave it up because this one contains the text. https://www.wpafb.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123430954 How did we lose this young Airman? by Col. Donald Grannan 88th Communications Group commander11/7/2014 - WRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE, Ohio -- She was an Airman Leadership School distinguished graduate, earned staff sergeant her first time testing, received all 5s on her Enlisted Performance Reports and took part in two deployments. Clearly she was a high-performing Airman. But, in her words, the Air Force had made it clear it didn't want her. Huh? I have proudly served our Air Force all of my adult life, so I truly didn't understand. Although I wasn't in her chain of command, I've known this young woman throughout her career. I tried to reflect on this from a professional, albeit admittedly biased, point of view. What would make this superstar believe we didn't care if she stayed or not? Was it a bad first impression? I remembered an incident as a new Airman at her first duty station. A senior NCO struck her car from behind in a minor fender-bender. Instead of admitting fault and moving on, he berated and intimidated this young Airman about the issue. Her first sergeant, who she went to for help, would not interject or discuss the issue with the senior NCO. I could have interjected as well, but I mistakenly believed it wasn't my place. It was. An Airman needed help, and no one gave it. Was it a lack of encouragement? After she earned staff sergeant her first time eligible, she saw the results online on the Air Force Web. Then ... nothing until the following Monday when the first sergeant stopped by to congratulate her and said the commander was "really busy." When she was a distinguished graduate from Airman Leadership School, it was a highlight in her career. But other than her immediate supervisor, no one from her squadron chain of command was present. I know, because I was there. Was it motivation? She was a veteran of two deployments, including one where she had a few days notice to support a humanitarian operation. By chance I saw her and another Airman at a connecting airport as I was returning from a temporary duty assignment. I saw their apprehension and anxiety and made sure they understood to take care of each other, trust their training and focus on the mission. But I wondered if their own leadership had talked to them like this. Did we at least send her out the door with a smile, to encourage others toward an Air Force career? No. Instead her superiors decided there would be no decoration for this outstanding Airman who achieved a lot in a short period of time and who was highly lauded by her supervisors. Why? Because she had once failed a physical fitness test, immediately re-took it, and passed. She had tried to 'wing it,' failed the run and learned a lesson. This young, healthy Airman, who weighs a buck-twenty-five, did not have a fitness or standards problem. She had a leadership problem. No one in her squadron leadership knew about or was present to witness her exceptional duty performance, her distinguished graduate accomplishment, her two deployments or early promotion. But they sure knew about the one time she stumbled. In the end we took an exceptional, highly motivated volunteer and did we mold her? No way. Did we encourage her? Not a chance. Did we create a new leader? No. We created someone who cares about our nation but is disillusioned and frustrated about what our Air Force finds important and unimportant. We lost an enormous opportunity, and we can't afford to repeat that mistake. Today, more than ever, as our ranks continue to decline, we must retain the best and most highly motivated Airmen. To do that, we have to lead them, be in the fight with them and focus on what's truly important and not become hyper-focused on marginal or anecdotal issues. How many more situations like this are out there? If you're in a leadership position, are you part of this problem? Do you know the people under you? Are you in the fight, witnessing their capabilities, encouraging and motivating them, or do you only know about them when they stumble? If you think command or leadership positions are just another assignment, you're part of the problem. Ask yourself, when was the last time a troop brought you a problem? If that's not happening, it's because they don't believe you can, or will, help them. So get busy proving to them they can count on you, and you'll be surprised how well you can count on them. Edited November 9, 2014 by discus
SurelySerious Posted November 9, 2014 Posted November 9, 2014 Link to.... Posted. This Colonel gets it. Good read.https://www.wpafb.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123430954
ThreeHoler Posted November 9, 2014 Posted November 9, 2014 I don't disagree, but Sq/CCs are not and have never been the approval authority for decs. I would assert that functionals have taken over the AF. Commanders are given all the responsibility and much of their authority has been taken away over the course of the last 5-10 or more years. That is really the biggest problem with the AF right now, as I see it. I certainly hope that the CSAF is working on some of this. There are some indicators that he is. According to the newest AFGM for the decs reg, Sq/CCs are the approval authority for the AFAM.
Herk Driver Posted November 9, 2014 Posted November 9, 2014 According to the newest AFGM for the decs reg, Sq/CCs are the approval authority for the AFAM. Thanks for that info. I am not in that mix right now so I haven't kept up with that guidance. That sounds like a good first step in the right direction.
Helo Kitty Posted November 10, 2014 Posted November 10, 2014 Thanks for that info. I am not in that mix right now so I haven't kept up with that guidance. That sounds like a good first step in the right direction. FWIW, it also aligns us with our Army bros who give AAM authority to Battalion CC's (Lt Cols).
panchbarnes Posted December 8, 2014 Posted December 8, 2014 Wow... This is just plain sad. Wrong study guides sent for Course 15 https://www.airforcetimes.com/story/military/2014/12/08/wrong-study-guides-sent-course/20082973/ Students had been told to use the online materials, but then, because of the system error, received the hard-copy books in the mail — leading to the tech sergeant's confusion. However, Geidner said, the center does not plan to reverse the test scores or give airmen who failed because of this particular issue a pass. "I see the fact that there is some culpability on our part because the system generated a package to a student, but there's also culpability on the student's part as well," Geidner said in a Dec. 3 interview with Air Force Times. "We would have to call somebody 'good' who did not pass a test, or did not study the appropriate material and take the appropriate test when they were notified of the proper materials, so ... we'd be asking ourselves to pass somebody who didn't pass the course — that's something that we wouldn't do."
Dupe Posted December 9, 2014 Posted December 9, 2014 Wow... This is just plain sad. Wrong study guides sent for Course 15 https://www.airforcetimes.com/story/military/2014/12/08/wrong-study-guides-sent-course/20082973/ Wait a tick.... we're making NCOs and SNCOs go to school before going to school? I didn't know that... Why not just fix that the same way we did for SOS and those who are IDE/SDE selects? 1
Azimuth Posted December 9, 2014 Posted December 9, 2014 The new Course 14 is 3,000 poorly worded and confusing slides, with no module reviews, and a 37-question test. Then they wonder why the failure rate is reported to be around 50-60%.
StoleIt Posted December 9, 2014 Posted December 9, 2014 Wow... This is just plain sad. Wrong study guides sent for Course 15 https://www.airforcetimes.com/story/military/2014/12/08/wrong-study-guides-sent-course/20082973/ 2
WABoom Posted December 10, 2014 Posted December 10, 2014 (edited) If I get picked to attend the SNCOA in residence I will also have to complete the corrspondence piece as well(newer version). So in all I may have to complete the same PME level 3 times! UFB Edited January 14, 2015 by WABoom
HossHarris Posted December 11, 2014 Posted December 11, 2014 And if you don't do the correspondence piece? It's only as retarded as you allow it (by playing along) to be.
BB Stacker Posted December 11, 2014 Posted December 11, 2014 And if you don't do the correspondence piece? It's only as retarded as you allow it (by playing along) to be. New concept for SNCO PME is that the correspondence piece (Course 14) is complimentary, not redundant, with the in residence piece (SNCOA). So in theory there should be minimal overlap between the two courses because SNCOA should be building on Course 14, not regurgitating the same stuff. I can't speak to the reality, but that's the theory. Because of this there's a requirement to have Course 14 done prior to attending SNCOA in residence, since in theory with the new construct you won't be fully qualified to attend SNCOA without having (the new) Course 14 complete.
Seriously Posted December 11, 2014 Posted December 11, 2014 Didn't it use to be that officers were the ones that came up with the bullshit and SNCOs were the crusty old dudes who knew exactly how to cut through the bullshit and get the job done? wtf happened? 1
Lord Ratner Posted December 11, 2014 Posted December 11, 2014 A bunch of Chiefs became E-9s. More like a bunch of Colonels became O-6s. 1
Marco Posted December 11, 2014 Posted December 11, 2014 A bunch of Chiefs thinking they are Colonels.....
sky_king Posted December 13, 2014 Posted December 13, 2014 Wow... This is just plain sad. Wrong study guides sent for Course 15 https://www.airforcetimes.com/story/military/2014/12/08/wrong-study-guides-sent-course/20082973/ Of course they aren't cutting slack. That would imply that someone admitted they were wrong. 1
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