Promotion and PRF Information

[BitteEinBit]

**A BIT OF GOOD NEWS, HOWEVER**- the Air Force is STILL promoting to Lieutenant Colonel at an 85% clip per class year, and STILL promoting at a 50-55% clip to Colonel. Even if those rates slip by 5% each over the next couple of years, you will still have a significant number of O-5 and O-6 promotees that have NEVER been to school. Soooo...unlike in the past, when 35% of a given class year went to IDE and those made up a significant chunk of your future Colonels, now, you may have 25% or less going to IDE for 2001-2004, opening a wider promotion gap for non-attendees. Just food for thought.

This is good news, but tell me again how this fixes the "glut" of officers in the 16-20 years of service groups? The numbers of officers per year group for those already promoted to Major has been increasing since the 1997 year group...if you keep the promotion rates the same for increasing numbers of eligible offers, how do you expect the "glut" to decrease? You are actually adding to the "glut" every year the eligibles increase yet the promotion rate stays the same. Also, are these promotion rates based on actual O-4 and O-5 positions expecting to become available or are we just arbitrarily saying 85% is the magic number regardless of class size? Please help me understand this magic math our mapower professionals are using.

Edit: To remove thread Hijack...moved to appropriate thread.

Edited July 7, 2013 by BitteEinBit

[Liquid]

Liquid, is the Air Force better or worse today than when you entered it? Serious question.

Not sure what you mean. It was probably more fun being a Capt flying the line in the 90s than today. Training TDYs, few deployments (didn't do N/S Watch). Post 9/11, it all changed. Multiple command tours in Iraq and Afghanistan were much more rewarding than training.

Better off? Probably not. We failed to take advantage of the enormous amount of money given to us since 9/11. Now we are out of money with few new weapon systems to show for it. We pay contractors to fix and fly airplanes. What an embarrassment.

Our combat experience is high and we are very good at killing people, moving things, finding people and building bases. Probably not as good as we should be at the high end conflict. Grounding our force because we are out of money is about as bad as it gets. Future cuts will hurt more. 12 years of conflict has taken a toll and we are hurting in a lot of areas. Morale is low. Some people are fed up and bitter. I don't have the answers, I've been at the tactical level for most of my career. Looking forward to tackling these big challenges though. Somebody has to do it.

Edited to replace people with contractors for clarity

Edited July 8, 2013 by Liquid

[Slander]

Our combat experience is high and we are very good at killing people, moving things, finding people and building bases. Probably not as good as we should be at the high end conflict. Grounding our force because we are out of money is about as bad as it gets. Future cuts will hurt more. 12 years of conflict has taken a toll and we are hurting in a lot of areas. Morale is low. Some people are fed up and bitter. I don't have the answers, I've been at the tactical level for most of my career. Looking forward to tackling these big challenges though. Somebody has to do it.

Don't screw it up, please. The sport-bitching from the line pilots (ok, you too, Navs) aside, we're counting on you and your multi-star bros. Morale doesn't have to be low, there are low-hanging fruit options available to make it better (uniform reg idiocy, pretend online masters, sos practice bleeding...I'm looking at you).

Btw...where's that "vector" that Gen Welsh said was coming soon 5 months ago? I remember getting an email every month from him with his take on what's going on for a few months after he took over, since then I haven't heard anything from him other than watching him and the other service chiefs get dressed down by congress. Come back, lead us. We need you. Beside the other stuff I mentioned, I think morale will improve when we have senior leadership we can believe in and trust actually care about us (proven by actions, not words). I don't expect that I'll feel like the most important cog in the machine, but I shouldn't feel like an afterthought or just the 480/800 captain on some AFPC metric spreadsheet.

[Vetter]

Liquid, from reading your posts, I think you have good intentions. I just think you are so out of touch that you are more of the problem than the solution.

I know several well qualified pilots leaving a $100k+ AF flying job for $25k regional job in hopes of making it to a major one day. That says something. And it's not good.

Today's Air Force is your Air Force. Own it.

[NKAWTG]

Removing candidates from the IDE process is going to have very bad second and third order effects on the moral and motivation of a majority of the officer force. At one point, your O-4 promotion list and your IDE select list were separated in time because of how depressed people were at getting promoted, but missing out on school. Removing the carrot from 85% of your officer force is sending one hell of a message. If we do this, leaders need to be upfront with people. What you do in years 3 to 9 set your ceiling on how far you can progress in the AF.

I know Big Blue has a problem with SDE candidates coasting. Decisions like this will only make this more prevalent and extend down into your IDE ranks. By slotting us all in our places at the 8 year mark, you remove an important incentive in bettering ourselves and the organizations we work for. The appeals to the core values and "bloom where you're planted" speeches are going to ring hollow when you remove merit from equation after your Major's board. Right now, all of the mentoring and force development is focused around the 15% select, or on how to achieve that 5% candidate slot. Throw the other 85% a bone here, and lay out what we can and can't do.

And yes, I understand the counter argument. Not everyone is going to be CSAF. 15% go to IDE, and 85% promote to O-5 and there will be opportunities for everyone. But what kinda of dynamic are you asking for when you run the two track system in earnest. You are removing an incentive to not clock watch to 20 years. What positive outcome is trying to be achieved here?

[Liquid]

There have always been pilots who leave for the airlines. Not sure it says anything other than not everyone wants to make a career out of it. Not sure there is any way to make everyone happy. What am I so out of touch about? Promotion rates, AAD/PME, the upcoming mass exodus, retention? Seriously, what are senior leaders missing on their high horses with their aristocratic beliefs?

[herkbum]

Not sure what you mean. It was probably more fun being a Capt flying the line in the 90s than today. Training TDYs, few deployments (didn't do N/S Watch). Post 9/11, it all changed. Multiple command tours in Iraq and Afghanistan were much more rewarding than training.

Better off? Probably not. We failed to take advantage of the enormous amount of money given to us since 9/11. Now we are out of money with few new weapon systems to show for it. We pay people to fix and fly airplanes. What an embarrassment.

Our combat experience is high and we are very good at killing people, moving things, finding people and building bases. Probably not as good as we should be at the high end conflict. Grounding our force because we are out of money is about as bad as it gets. Future cuts will hurt more. 12 years of conflict has taken a toll and we are hurting in a lot of areas. Morale is low. Some people are fed up and bitter. I don't have the answers, I've been at the tactical level for most of my career. Looking forward to tackling these big challenges though. Somebody has to do it.

Thank you. I believe you provided the background guys have been waiting on. Helps me understand your perspective and experience.

[BitteEinBit]

Not everyone is going to be CSAF. 15% go to IDE, and 85% promote to O-5 and there will be opportunities for everyone. But what kinda of dynamic are you asking for when you run the two track system in earnest. You are removing an incentive to not clock watch to 20 years. What positive outcome is trying to be achieved here?

First of all, I don't believe for a second that the Lt Col promotion opportunity will remain at 85% over the next few years...but that is a great carrot to put out there for those O-6 hopefulls to stay competetive. Pay attention to the wording Liquid used...

While reducing IDE slots saves money, it slightly fixes the playing field to allow more non-res IDE graduates to compete well on those future promotion boards that will have reduced promotion opportunities. It makes they guy who may have been in the bottom 20% of IDE selects have to rely more on actual job performance and less on a guaranteed IDE slot because they worked for a 3-button.

I actually like the idea....especially since we currently make the determination of who goes to IDE in-res at the Capt level...up to 4 years before a "select" actually goes to school. Have we really seen REAL future leadership potential at that point or are we just sayin "this guy finished his Masters as a Lt..he'll be a great leader!" Maybe we should change the way we "look" at IDE candidates all together so that we consider their last few OPRs as an actual FGO prior to an IDE class start date instead of making a "legally binding" decision while the candidate is still a Capt, that essentially guarantees an O-5 promotion as long as they graduate (except for that 1 or 2 AAD/In-Res grad who seems to be non-selected for promotion every year...weird).

[Fifty-six & Two]

Have we really seen REAL future leadership potential at that point or are we just sayin "this guy finished his Masters as a Lt..he'll be a great leader!" Maybe we should change the way we "look" at IDE candidates all together so that we consider their last few OPRs as an actual FGO prior to an IDE class start date instead of making a "legally binding" decision while the candidate is still a Capt, that essentially guarantees an O-5 promotion as long as they graduate (except for that 1 or 2 AAD/In-Res grad who seems to be non-selected for promotion every year...weird).

I believe what we are actually saying is, "This guy applied himself for FIVE WHOLE WEEKS in order to get SOS DG!"

[Champ Kind]

I follow your logic, but I think you are giving the AF too much credit.

[AnimalMother]

Not sure what you mean. It was probably more fun being a Capt flying the line in the 90s than today. Training TDYs, few deployments (didn't do N/S Watch). Post 9/11, it all changed. Multiple command tours in Iraq and Afghanistan were much more rewarding than training.

Better off? Probably not. We failed to take advantage of the enormous amount of money given to us since 9/11. Now we are out of money with few new weapon systems to show for it. We pay people to fix and fly airplanes. What an embarrassment.

Our combat experience is high and we are very good at killing people, moving things, finding people and building bases. Probably not as good as we should be at the high end conflict. Grounding our force because we are out of money is about as bad as it gets. Future cuts will hurt more. 12 years of conflict has taken a toll and we are hurting in a lot of areas. Morale is low. Some people are fed up and bitter. I don't have the answers, I've been at the tactical level for most of my career. Looking forward to tackling these big challenges though. Somebody has to do it.

Yup.

Vetter, solid question. Liquid, solid answer, thanks for the honesty. Acknowledging that we have some challenges ahead is the first step to solving them. I'm seriously tired of hearing that the Air Force shits roses, cuz it just ain't true. Where do we go from here? I dunno, but maybe once we get past all the mudslinging we can actually figure out the most sensible path forward--maybe. I seriously hope that you can bring some common sense into the mix, because I haven't seen a lot of it lately. Believe it or not, this forum offers great insight into the status of the operational force, despite its propensity for bellicosity. I hope you are able to filter it and generate some solid input for the special Ed kids up on the hill, just saying.

[Danny Noonin]

Seriously, what are senior leaders missing on their high horses with their aristocratic beliefs?

They are missing WHY dudes are disgruntled.

I've been around a long time, as you have. There have certainly been boom and bust cycles for morale. This one is far different than what I think can fairly be called the last down cycle for pilots in the mid to late 90s.

Young pups hear jack/shit about mission focus anymore. The mission is what motivates them. It's why they are here. But they hardly hear a peep about it from their leadership. That's the number one reason. Act like what they dedicate themselves to is worth your attention.

All they hear about from the cake eaters is stuff like you yourself (and guys like old major chang) has said--get you masters or you clearly don't care. There are no bad assignments. You should get down on your knees every day and thank mother air force for all she has given you. Service before self after all.

These fuckers have known nothing but war. They have never, ever known any semblance of stability or predicability in their whole careers. They weren't around in the good old days where we had fun. When we were captains, our career paths were stable, our deployments predictable, our promotion process was rational, there was no such thing as a 179 or God forbid a 365 other than a few remotes to Korea. We didn't face down UAV assignments. We didn't face constant rumors (and realities) of a RIF. There was a mission focus. Leaders seemingly cared that their CGOs were good in the jet. That's all that mattered to my early commanders. It's how they stratted CGOs for the most part. I swear to God I never heard a single word from a leader about a masters degree until I was a major. Not one word. Now guys are dirtbags if they haven't started one as a lieutenant. Education is king, the only problem is that no one seems to care what you study, how we'll you do or what diploma mill you go to. After all, it makes great "thinkers" yet no one seems to be allowed to think for themselves. It's party line or you're a troublemaker. See problems? Don't point them out and offer solutions. That's whining. Dudes are tired of that bullshit.

So what are the "aristocrats" missing?

1) acknowledge that young pups in the AF have been run ragged. I mean really acknowledge that, not just a token half-hearted comment here or there.

2) acknowledge that there are bad deals and lose the "suck it up" and "service before self" lectures. No one respects that bullshit. You can't polish a turd.

3) Masters degree does not equal dedication or leadership potential. Stop saying that it does. Masters is required. Got it. But when it goes beyond being a yes/no at the board to being used for strats and jobs, then it's out of fucking control. The AF has absolutely lost its mind in this regard. Job performance and leadership potential should be king. They are not.

4). acknowledge that these dudes face an uncertain future with regards to promotion, assignments and RIFs unlike we ever did and it stresses them out and wears at their morale. Don't even dare compare it to uncertainties you had in your early career. You and I both know that it's not even close.

I'm tired of typing now. But that's a start.

[Vetter]

Well said. More to come.

[Cap-10]

They are missing WHY dudes are disgruntled.

I've been around a long time, as you have. There have certainly been boom and bust cycles for morale. This one is far different than what I think can fairly be called the last down cycle for pilots in the mid to late 90s.

Young pups hear jack/shit about mission focus anymore. The mission is what motivates them. It's why they are here. But they hardly hear a peep about it from their leadership. That's the number one reason. Act like what they dedicate themselves to is worth your attention.

All they hear about from the cake eaters is stuff like you yourself (and guys like old major chang) has said--get you masters or you clearly don't care. There are no bad assignments. You should get down on your knees every day and thank mother air force for all she has given you. Service before self after all.

These fuckers have known nothing but war. They have never, ever known any semblance of stability or predicability in their whole careers. They weren't around in the good old days where we had fun. When we were captains, our career paths were stable, our deployments predictable, our promotion process was rational, there was no such thing as a 179 or God forbid a 365 other than a few remotes to Korea. We didn't face down UAV assignments. We didn't face constant rumors (and realities) of a RIF. There was a mission focus. Leaders seemingly cared that their CGOs were good in the jet. That's all that mattered to my early commanders. It's how they stratted CGOs for the most part. I swear to God I never heard a single word from a leader about a masters degree until I was a major. Not one word. Now guys are dirtbags if they haven't started one as a lieutenant. Education is king, the only problem is that no one seems to care what you study, how we'll you do or what diploma mill you go to. After all, it makes great "thinkers" yet no one seems to be allowed to think for themselves. It's party line or you're a troublemaker. See problems? Don't point them out and offer solutions. That's whining. Dudes are tired of that bullshit.

So what are the "aristocrats" missing?

1) acknowledge that young pups in the AF have been run ragged. I mean really acknowledge that, not just a token half-hearted comment here or there.

2) acknowledge that there are bad deals and lose the "suck it up" and "service before self" lectures. No one respects that bullshit. You can't polish a turd.

3) Masters degree does not equal dedication or leadership potential. Stop saying that it does. Masters is required. Got it. But when it goes beyond being a yes/no at the board to being used for strats and jobs, then it's out of fucking control. The AF has absolutely lost its mind in this regard. Job performance and leadership potential should be king. They are not.

4). acknowledge that these dudes face an uncertain future with regards to promotion, assignments and RIFs unlike we ever did and it stresses them out and wears at their morale. Don't even dare compare it to uncertainties you had in your early career. You and I both know that it's not even close.

I'm tired of typing now. But that's a start.

Mother-fucking SHACK!

Cheers,

Cap-10

[TnkrToad]

I don't have the current red line, blue line charts or supporting data, not in my wheelhouse. I can get them and will post if they aren't FOUO. They usually are. AFPC and HAF A1 prefer to officially publish force management policy after it has been approved rather than while it is being developed.

Not sure why Red Line/Blue Line would or should be FOUO . . . I can understand why the Air Force's internal deliberative processes (What do the numbers mean? What policy should we pursue as a result? How to do we "sell" this to internal and external audiences?) might be FOUO--folks don't need to see all the sausage-making in progress. There's no logical reason to withhold the raw data, though--it's not deliberation or policy, just fact.

When you do get a chance to look over the Red Line/Blue Line (even if you can't post it), I'd be curious to get your inputs as to:

- Why special treatment for 11Fs only, when the 11S & 11H communities' respective manning numbers are worse?

- Is there any validity to GC's assertion that we've got a "glut" of 16-20 year group guys . . . how could there be, when those year groups represent the "pilot bathtub" created by previous senior leaders?

- Why is Big Blue senior leadership so dismissive when concerns are raised about 11M manning, which is already going in the crapper?

-- To keep this on the Promotion topic, where do you think you're going to get your future MAF leadership?

--- Almost all the "fat" year groups for heavy guys are ones that haven't reached the ends of their SUPT ADSCs . . . how many do you think are going to stick around & try for O-6 and higher when 1) They've gotten crushed their whole careers TDY & deployment-wise, 2) Airlines are hiring in droves the year they reach bonus eligibility, and 3) Even if they do stick it out 'til 20 the airlines are still hiring like gangbusters? Kinda hard to be selective when the number of O-6 billets you need to fill equals the number of folks meeting the O-6 board in a given year.

[Liquid]

They are missing WHY dudes are disgruntled.

I've been around a long time, as you have. There have certainly been boom and bust cycles for morale. This one is far different than what I think can fairly be called the last down cycle for pilots in the mid to late 90s.

Young pups hear jack/shit about mission focus anymore. The mission is what motivates them. It's why they are here. But they hardly hear a peep about it from their leadership. That's the number one reason. Act like what they dedicate themselves to is worth your attention.

All they hear about from the cake eaters is stuff like you yourself (and guys like old major chang) has said--get you masters or you clearly don't care. There are no bad assignments. You should get down on your knees every day and thank mother air force for all she has given you. Service before self after all.

These ######ers have known nothing but war. They have never, ever known any semblance of stability or predicability in their whole careers. They weren't around in the good old days where we had fun. When we were captains, our career paths were stable, our deployments predictable, our promotion process was rational, there was no such thing as a 179 or God forbid a 365 other than a few remotes to Korea. We didn't face down UAV assignments. We didn't face constant rumors (and realities) of a RIF. There was a mission focus. Leaders seemingly cared that their CGOs were good in the jet. That's all that mattered to my early commanders. It's how they stratted CGOs for the most part. I swear to God I never heard a single word from a leader about a masters degree until I was a major. Not one word. Now guys are dirtbags if they haven't started one as a lieutenant. Education is king, the only problem is that no one seems to care what you study, how we'll you do or what diploma mill you go to. After all, it makes great "thinkers" yet no one seems to be allowed to think for themselves. It's party line or you're a troublemaker. See problems? Don't point them out and offer solutions. That's whining. Dudes are tired of that bullshit.

So what are the "aristocrats" missing?

1) acknowledge that young pups in the AF have been run ragged. I mean really acknowledge that, not just a token half-hearted comment here or there.

2) acknowledge that there are bad deals and lose the "suck it up" and "service before self" lectures. No one respects that bullshit. You can't polish a turd.

3) Masters degree does not equal dedication or leadership potential. Stop saying that it does. Masters is required. Got it. But when it goes beyond being a yes/no at the board to being used for strats and jobs, then it's out of ######ing control. The AF has absolutely lost its mind in this regard. Job performance and leadership potential should be king. They are not.

4). acknowledge that these dudes face an uncertain future with regards to promotion, assignments and RIFs unlike we ever did and it stresses them out and wears at their morale. Don't even dare compare it to uncertainties you had in your early career. You and I both know that it's not even close.

I'm tired of typing now. But that's a start.

Ok, good stuff here. I respect your perspective. Let me take a shot at a retort.

Dudes in my year group were leaving in '98 after our 8 year UPT commitments were up. No much bitterness or frustration, most were looking for a better life in the airlines. I stayed partly because so many were leaving, but mostly because I really enjoyed flying for the AF. Morale was high with my crowd, but most got out anyway. All good Americans, no hard feelings from anyone when they separated, it was their choice and they served their commitment. So when I say separate if you don't like the AF, I'm not threatening people or looking down from my high horse. I'm suggesting that you shouldn't be miserable in your job and the AF career isn't for everyone. I have very good AF friends who are in the reserves, flying for airlines and running businesses.

A GO taught me what you talk about for the first two minutes is your priorty. If you don't lead every meeting, discussion, talk, etc with the mission, you are wrong. I engrained that and have lived it since. Mission is the most important thing, above people, morale and money. If you are good, you can get the mission done, get morale high and take care of your people. But I have made mission focused decisions that ruined careers, cost marriages and hurt feelings. Telling someone they don't have what it takes to fly combat missions or command combat squadrons is tough, but necessary sometimes. It is too bad you don't hear more about mission focus from your leaders. I hear it and say it all the time.

I agree, requiring AAD at Maj board is bad policy and a misprioritization of time. I told CSAF and my MAJCOM CC exactly that. Hopefully it will change. The reality now is, the board uses it to discriminate in the grey zone, so commanders want good dudes to get it done and get promoted. Most Capts that didn't have it done got promoted. My number one Capt and #1 DP did not have it done and was a select on the board. The 10% of the pilots that didn't get promoted were the bottom ten percent. A few outliers may be below the line that should be above, but the board and senior raters and commanders do a decent job of identifying the xx percent that can't be promoted (by law numbers wise). Obviously there are commanders and raters that value the wrong things, but I haven't seen it. If they do they should change. Let them know what you think. I always have.

Bitching in public (at work, not on forums) is toxic and hurts the mission. It is usually full of disloyalty and selfishness. Sometimes you get constructive criticism, but most of the time it is toxic. There are bad assignments and bad deals, but corrosive behavior and attitudes don't always make it better. Sometimes people need to be told to shut the f*ck up and get the mission done. Not always, the carrot works better than the stick, but sometimes it is appropriate. For instance, ###### all of the assholes that denigrate RPA crews, their mission and the value of their mission. The shit RPAs catch is mean spirited, wrong and hurts our mission. Knock it off.

Not sure how a wing commander or GO does a better job acknowledging how ragged our force is. We know it, but don't say it enough I guess. We just finished a four day weekend (for most, but not all). We (I) try to give a much down time as possible, since time is very valuable these days. I haven't done a single wing run or mandatory PT, ever. A waste of time. I cancelled all meetings on my first day of three commands. I hold people accountable for missed suspenses, but don't dwell on metrics.

You should get a masters degree to be a Lt Col. Should, not must. It would be nice if it was a valuable degree. PME at every level should be mandatory, period. I was a select at both levels, and didn't do correspondence either time, against the advice of my bosses. It worked out fine.

Uncertainty is more frequent now, but we are also at war and in the midst of a financial crisis that threatens our national security. Risk is high, good people die and this shit is hard. We are out of money and tough choices need to be made. I would cut the Thunderbirds, all bands and advertising before PME slots.

Commanders and wing level support does the family stuff. HQ does the management stuff. Not sure what Joe 1234 went off on. Big Blue makes big management decisions. Some good, some bad, all well intentioned.

Job performance and leadership are king in my world and in my experiences down range, and with other senior leaders. It blows that it isn't true everywhere, it should be. I made several points earlier, that the bottom ten percent aren't great performers, regardless of the boxes they don't check. My observation, not naive enough to say it is true everywhere.

Bad assignments, give me a break. People complain about wherever they are sent. During my first assignment overseas, half my squadron bitched about the cost of living, language and culture and couldn't wait to go back to conus. They are called orders, not suggestions. Go where the AF needs you and spare us all the drama. If you wanted to live in a certain area, wtf did you join the AF? Make the best of every assignment and don't be a part of the negative bullshit that dogs bases.

Three of your four observations about how senior leaders don't get it is that we don't acknowledge things. Acknowledged. You can do better than that, but it was a good start.

My opinions only. Several whiskeys down, watching tv and talking to the kids, so bear with the bad grammar and choppy wording. I don't write AF policy but I get to lead talented men and women who accomplish great things. And I'll be around for a while, so fire away, I'm listening.

And I'd kick anyone's ass who suggested I get on my knees. Just saying.

[ThreeHoler]

That is the best post I've seen you write. More please, because I'm at a point where I'm pretty jaded by some O-6s that will not 'hire' anyone who doesn't have an AAD regardless of job performance.

I enjoy both flying and desk work. I am self motivated, but leadership valuing the wrong things in my part of the world is very demoralizing.

[Azimuth]

How are senior leaders going to fix the cultural identity problem that has plagued the USAF for years? It seems that some senior leaders at all levels are more concerned with hands in pockets, reflective belts, what days to wear flight suits, and waist size instead of the mission of their base and leading their subordinates.

[discus]

This thread just became useful again.

With that being said, how about this one, which actually fits into the topic of the thread. I'm in the 2005 year group. I would venture to say (some may disagree) that we are one of the most shit on Line Officers year groups out there. After going through multiple RIF's, both rated and non rated, now we are in some sort of fucked up holding pattern for our Majors board. We were told it would be announced sometime this fall...OK I get that. It would be nice, however to hear something from on high saying what they are thinking of doing now. Rumors are starting to run rampant like "They are combining the '05 and '06 year groups", or "promotion rates for the '05 year group will be way down" or even "You guys are looking at an extra year as Captains" (just to name a few). Guess what, I could accept any of this. The needs of the AF ebb and flow, but some sort of information from above the wing level would be nice. Hell, I went flying with my OG the other day and he just said "Ohhhhhhh, you are in '05? I'm sorry, I just don't have any answers for you".

Whoever pointed out earlier that if there was ever a time for leadership, it is now, and we need to hear from SOMEONE some information about what is going on in our force other than "Don't be Rape'in". I love my job, and I love the Air Force even for all it's flaws. All I'm asking for is a heads up to grab some lube before it fucks me in the ass.

I think a little bit of information would go a long way...

Edited July 8, 2013 by discus

[Liquid]

How are senior leaders going to fix the cultural identity problem that has plagued the USAF for years? It seems that some senior leaders at all levels are more concerned with hands in pockets, reflective belts, what days to wear flight suits, and waist size instead of the mission of their base and leading their subordinates.

No they aren't. Ignore the stupid shit and focus on the important things. Someone gives you a hard time for hands in your pockets and not wearing a reflective belt and you care enough about it to actually write about it later? Here is some guidance, don't give a shit about the stupid shit.

What cultural identity crisis are you talking about? Do you think our joint force doesn't appreciate airpower or that our enemies don't fear the sky?

[Jaded]

After flying in the latter part of OIF and in OND I would argue that no, the joint force doesn't even know what we do. It's our own fault though; the AOC did nothing to enable airpower as long as the JTAR request slide was green.

[Recut]

Two things from Liquid's long post:

1. We are at war/mission first

2. People see only the negative of their current assignment

For #1, I know I get heated because this point appears to be forgotten. I've made maj, checked the boxes, etc yet I see leadership at all levels more worried about careerism than said war/mission

For #2, Shack. Since I was enlisted as a 17 yr old, this holds true. For whatever reason, in my experience, people embrace the negative. I did not. I've loved everwhere I've been. HUGE disclaimer: I am not talking about taking someone out of a cockpit who loves to serve this great country as a flyer and telling them to like it. I'm only agreeing that there is a tendency to obscure positives about assignments with negatives. I have not been pulled outta the flying gig so there is no personal connotation here

[BitteEinBit]

Liquid, there are at least 3 solid posts on this thread that addresses what many have been complaining about for YEARS...the system that rewards selfishness and lack of mission focus. When I say "selfishness" I'm talking about that toxic attitude I see spreading around that puts self-serving box checking above the mission. It has become a necessity in this organization if you want to continue serving. The Air Force not only encourages it, but rewards it...and it discriminates against those who put mission first and check the boxes when they have the time...even if it is before their board. "You didn't finish it soon enough..you must be a dirtbag," the Air Force says. Yes, my former SQ/CC hinted that now boards look at WHEN you finished your AAD not just that you finished it. Really? Please tell me that is not true. The Air Force doesn't see less mission focus and more box checking as selfish...they see it as "This guy cares about the Air Force because he is motivated to finish a Masters as a 2Lt"

Yes, even people who successfully navigate the system are complaining about misplaced priorities...not just the bitter passed over officers. That should worry you because those toxic attitudes will be with us for a while. Just take note of how the tone in this thread changes when you seem to be actually listening to the "bitching" on this thread instead of saying "suck it up." The disconnect I see with the "leadership" at levels above the Wing is that they don't (and really can't) have the pulse of what is happening at the tactical level...they have to just rely on input and metrics from those levels that don't always tell the whole story. Just how many staffers representing the tactical level do you think are really going to tell leadership that their policies are perceieved as misguided and are creating toxic attitudes? Not many.

...a few more points from Liquid's post:

I agree that mission is a high priority. If you take care of your people, they will take care of the mission. That is why it is important for our "leadership" to connect with its people. If there is a toxic attitude out there and "leadership" hasn't addressed it, there is a problem with leadership. Attitdue is a reflection of leadership. The mission will always get done, even with the toxic attitudes...now get rid of the toxic attitudes by engaging your people and addressing their issues, and just watch how more efficient the mission gets done. THAT is leadership. No sentence from any "leader" should start with "well, the metrics say..." it should be "well, my people are saying...."

- Yes, the Wings do the family stuff while HQ does the management stuff...the problem is you have a bunch of Wings that want to be at the management level so they tell you everything is ok. Again, do you really think ANY WG/CC is going to say the morale at his/her wing is broken?!?! Maybe they don't know because those at the SQ are trying to get to the WG, so they don't tell their bosses either...and so on, and so on. You're right, we don't say it enough. it is time to call a spade a spade. If I have to do it in an internet forum to get anyone to listen, I will. Morale is broken, and I don't see anything in the near future attempting to fix it. But I can tell you that MONEY is not the answer.

- "Uncertainty is more frequent now" is an understatement. We have been taking "additional cuts" since 2008 and every year the (former) CSAF and SECAF say, "Ok, this is the last of the cuts" and then the next year we take more cuts. It gives the appearance that our manpower bubbas don't know that they hell they are doing. Cutting AFSCs in one place then having crossflow boards to fill those same AFSCs they now identify as "critically manned" just appears like a mismanagement problem. How are these types of programs getting briefed? "Sir, we just cut a bunch of experienced 14Ns this week to save you money. Next week we plan to have an involuntary crossflow board to fill 14Ns billets which are now critically manned." We are "fat" on 11Ms and staffers are saying we don't need them to stay, yet you don't want to let any of them voluntarily separate to get your numbers back to normal? Seriously, how does that make sense to anyone? I know, I don't have the big picture. Perhaps the Pentago actually does forcast an exodus...they just don't want to say anything because then they'll have to offer money TODAY to get people to stay. My advice, listen to the people (not the metrics) about why people are thinking about leaving...address them.

- I agree, any assignment is what you make of it. What makes an assignment a "bad" assignment is really individual experience. I've worked with people who thought Spangdahlem was a bad assignment. I can't imagine they ever left the base. Every assignment is what you make of it. If mission focus is really what we want, then you'll go where the AF needs you. The problem is that too many of those tactical level "get er done" kind of guys who DO go where the Air Force "needs" them a lot of time get told "Oh, you spent too much of your time at the tactical level...you're not leadership material." The year before I took my current assignment we weren't releasing anyone to staff unless you were a school graduate because the Air Force "needed" pilots in the squadrons. Do you want to know the feedback I got before my PRF? "You don't have any staff experience." How can I not shake my head at that?!? I know we preach "needs of the AF" and that would be great if we really meant it, but if your DT vector reads "needs of the AF," that is not a good thing...be honest.

Edited July 8, 2013 by BitteEinBit

[Gravedigger]

"Leadership is solving problems. The day soldiers stop bringing you their problems is the day you have stopped leading them. They have either lost confidence in your ability to help, or concluded that you do not care. Either case is a failure of leadership." - Colin Powell

[Champ Kind]

My number one Capt and #1 DP did not have it done and was a select on the board. The 10% of the pilots that didn't get promoted were the bottom ten percent.

You should get a masters degree to be a Lt Col. Should, not must. It would be nice if it was a valuable degree. PME at every level should be mandatory, period. I was a select at both levels, and didn't do correspondence either time, against the advice of my bosses. It worked out fine.

You do realize that senior raters saying this does not help, don't you?

In doing so, you are only:

1) Saying "I didn't do it, and it worked out fine for me." This is invalid, as your reality coming up is no longer the reality faced by the current crop of CGOs.

2) Giving false hope to those who are working their tails off that a very small group of people (definitely in the minority) had things work out well for them.

3) Pissing people off who "played the game" by getting PME and AAD done only to find out that it really wasn't "required" because so-and-so went to PME in-res or got promotion/got a school slot without it. WTF? Consistency. Is it "pay to play" or not?

Thanks for your perspective.