Vetter Posted January 15, 2012 Posted January 15, 2012 Why does a Group/CC or Wing/CC need 2 execs + a secretary + a deputy/vice? Our Squadron can't hardly function with people having upward of 4 additional duties, yet they still take people out of the Squadron to fill these roles. I am just wondering.
C17Driver Posted January 15, 2012 Posted January 15, 2012 Because the dude that got pulled to fill that exec duty probably wants fly at some point (assuming he or she is a flyer). I've been a group exec and worked on a wing staff... You think the squadron gets a lot of BS taskers... You should see the shit that comes down from numbered AF and MAJCOM's. If you only have one dude working the exec job, that dude doesn't get to fly (at least not at the AMC base I was at). We had multiple execs so that someone could get out of the office.
Majestik Møøse Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 The more people you have working for you the more shit you can get done for your boss. An O-6 can pull more people than an O-5 and on up the line. Flyers are generally better at stuff (to include satisfying bullshit taskers) so they are most in-demand. As long as the bullshit keeps increasing like it has been, the Exec roster at all levels will get bigger.
youngpj Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 (edited) The more people you have working for you the more shit you can get done for your boss. An O-6 can pull more people than an O-5 and on up the line. Flyers are generally better at stuff (to include satisfying bullshit taskers) so they are most in-demand. As long as the bullshit keeps increasing like it has been, the Exec roster at all levels will get bigger. Flyers are generally better at stuff, to include BS taskers? C'mon man. Edited January 16, 2012 by youngpj
guineapigfury Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 Flyers are generally better at stuff, to include BS taskers? C'mon man. This is true. The level of talent you will see in an average flying squadron far exceeds what you will see just about anywhere else in the military. The skills required for flying tend to translate well to success on the ground. Situational awareness, self-discipline, ability to correctly prioritize in the midst of a chaotic situation and so on. 2
Majestik Møøse Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 Flyers are generally better at stuff, to include BS taskers? C'mon man. I can't tell if you're serious or not. If so, please explain.
Murph Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 This is true. The level of talent you will see in an average flying squadron far exceeds what you will see just about anywhere else in the military. The skills required for flying tend to translate well to success on the ground. Situational awareness, self-discipline, ability to correctly prioritize in the midst of a chaotic situation and so on. I know what you're getting at. Just keep in mind the Air Force isn't all flyers and "pencil pushers". I've worked with STOs who'd crush the notion that "flyers" are, on average, better than non-flyers. At any rate, C-17DRIVER is right. That one guy working the office is going to have a hard time flying for currency, let alone proficiency. Hook the guy up so he can keep his credibility in the airplane.
Day Man Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 I've worked with STOs who'd crush the notion that "flyers" are, on average, better than non-flyers. STOs are a minority in the AF dude.
Karl Hungus Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 I know what you're getting at. Just keep in mind the Air Force isn't all flyers and "pencil pushers". I've worked with STOs who'd crush the notion that "flyers" are, on average, better than non-flyers. At any rate, C-17DRIVER is right. That one guy working the office is going to have a hard time flying for currency, let alone proficiency. Hook the guy up so he can keep his credibility in the airplane. Or better yet, eliminate the bullshit taskers, eliminate the exec jobs, and let people focus on the job for which they were so expensively trained. Which we know will never happen in this sinking ship of an organization. 2
Fud Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 I know what you're getting at. Just keep in mind the Air Force isn't all flyers and "pencil pushers". I've worked with STOs who'd crush the notion that "flyers" are, on average, better than non-flyers. I don't think this is what he was getting at at all, just saying that the competitive mindset can be a positive thing in the exec environment. I worked as a group exec and hated the wing exec with a passion. However, we were able to get a lot of work done despite his douchebaggery. I wish I had another exec or an exec assistant, but my group wouldn't do that.
Beaver Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 I don't think this is what he was getting at at all, just saying that the competitive mindset can be a positive thing in the exec environment. I worked as a group exec and hated the wing exec with a passion. However, we were able to get a lot of work done despite his douchebaggery. I wish I had another exec or an exec assistant, but my group wouldn't do that. A group exec assistant. The AF has come off the fucking rails.
Slander Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 There is a group commander at a remote air base in Korea who has 3 execs on a rotating weekly schedule.
nsplayr Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 My sq/cc has probably 6 people who are execs who all rotate in and work when they can in between deployments, TDYs, leave, mobility BS requirements, and oh yea, flying once in a while. With no secretary they're always drowning in crazy work, so I never begrudge the need for execs so long as the bullsh*t level remains pegged at max. I've worked with STOs who'd crush the notion that "flyers" are, on average, better than non-flyers. That experience would not discount the original premise. My guess is that all STOs are also well above average when thinking about the entire officer corps, and their extremely small numbers don't really push the bell curve one way or another.
Guest CAVEMAN Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 Or better yet, eliminate the bullshit taskers, eliminate the exec jobs, and let people focus on the job for which they were so expensively trained. Which we know will never happen in this sinking ship of an organization. Truth of the matter is that sh!t does not work that way. There are several taskers that come down the chain that can't be avoided. Some of these items are action memos from SECDEF with 100% compliance at a set date, so who the hell is a Wing CC to set it aside. And OSD is answering to Congress on a myriad of issues and the action that is being taken. That is Congress' way of maintaining "accountability". Accountability has come to mean more work for me to prove to you that I am doing my job.
Fud Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 Truth of the matter is that sh!t does not work that way. There are several taskers that come down the chain that can't be avoided. Some of these items are action memos from SECDEF with 100% compliance at a set date, so who the hell is a Wing CC to set it aside. And OSD is answering to Congress on a myriad of issues and the action that is being taken. That is Congress' way of maintaining "accountability". Accountability has come to mean more work for me to prove to you that I am doing my job. 2 on this, but these taskers at my old base are few and far between (10 a month max). I heard from my old commander that taskings started late on a Friday night by the CAGs at the NAF/MAJCOM/AF level. When a General officer at the top of these chains simply wonders about something, it gets turned into a tasker.
JeepGuyC17 Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 My sq/cc has probably 6 people who are execs who all rotate in and work when they can in between deployments, TDYs, leave, mobility BS requirements, and oh yea, flying once in a while. With no secretary they're always drowning in crazy work, so I never begrudge the need for execs so long as the bullsh*t level remains pegged at max. Exactly. Having been a Sq exec (not by choice), I can say that with the constant busy-work, if I had been the only squadron exec I would literally never have had the chance to take leave, fly locals, go on trips, upgrade, etc. If you leave the desk unmanned and an OPR goes late or a tasker falls through the cracks, the Boss ends up catching shit from above.
Vetter Posted January 16, 2012 Author Posted January 16, 2012 It's a fucking waste of assets and talent. I know of guys who have Master's from MIT/Harvard/Yale who are relegated to proof reading OPRs/EPRs/Decs and throwing together the weekly staff meetings. What a waste! We are truly fucked. 1
polcat Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 There is no doubt the waste of talent that is an exec. There are much more important things that person can be doing. We had 4 rotating execs in our squadron, with me as the only pilot in the command section. Even when it was my week to sit the desk, I'd still fly at least one day because we are so undermanned in the pilot section (~47%). By having more than one exec, the pain gets spread around and one person doesn't get stuck with all the bs in that job. Unfortunately, now that I've moved to another job and one of the other execs is at the WIC, we are down to two. And guess what, one them is getting ready for a deployment. I hope they can find someone else to help out. Oh, and this is a job we are all supposed to want as its good for our careers - what a joke.
BQZip01 Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 Why does a Group/CC or Wing/CC need 2 execs + a secretary + a deputy/vice? Our Squadron can't hardly function with people having upward of 4 additional duties, yet they still take people out of the Squadron to fill these roles. I am just wondering. It depends on the Group/Wing. In my first Exec gig, I was the only Exec at the Wing level and we didn't have a secretary (granted, we were deployed and I was just there to help the Wing Commander with paperwork/presentations). In my second assignment, I was one of four Group Execs (the other 3 had flying duties in their squadron, so they more or less rotated in/out). We had two deputy OGs and a secretary. But we were the largest ops group in the Air Force too (10 flying squadrons w/14 different airframes). Given the varying needs of for knowledge within the leadership.structure, 2 deputies was essential. That said, they made a VERY good call by bringing in a Comm Guy so that at least one more flyer could get back to their squadron and fly. It's a job where it has very little to do with flying and junior officers don't need that experience, they need to fly. The job gives you a perspective you wouldn't otherwise get, but it is an exercise in "drowning in paperwork". Sounds like Polcat has a good perspective on it too.
BQZip01 Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 2 on this, but these taskers at my old base are few and far between (10 a month max). I heard from my old commander that taskings started late on a Friday night by the CAGs at the NAF/MAJCOM/AF level. When a General officer at the top of these chains simply wonders about something, it gets turned into a tasker. A huge "2" on that one, but let me guess: the remaining 2/3rds of the taskers you got were for obscure awards which no one applied for? The Exec is a bullshit screen for you guys on the line and tries to prevent a bunch of pointless crap from hitting the you guys. In order to minimize the stuff sq bros had to do, we would often just ask if there were any names the Sq's wanted to submit for awards and only then ask for packages. That way we'd get back 10 "no" replies pretty quickly and send a "no" back from the group a week in advance of the deadline. Most of the rest of it is just like Fud said (and here's an example), General Numbnutz made an offhand comment wondering if anyone is having problems with process XYZ, so the MAJCOM Exec sent out a request for info and wants an answer in 2 weeks. The NAF execs get this and, because they want a few days to compile the results, put the due date 10 days from now. The Wing Execs get it and back up their suspense date to 5 days from now. So the Group Execs get it and ,realizing this it is currently 4 PM on the Thursday before a 4-day weekend, and put the due date on the day you get back from your extended weekend. The Squadron Execs see this and say they need some time to compile results so they put the due date...uh...hmmm...well, I guess it's overdue when they arrive back from their weekend...<clicks send>. And that's how a General's musings become an overdue tasker. 2
Guest Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 Are there pilot execs in fighter squadrons, too?
brabus Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 How is it the AF can't at least provide a secretary at the SQ level to do all this shit? Oh wait nevermind, plasma TVs and new furniture...my bad.
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