Promotion and PRF Information

[Liquid]

Butt-posting on the Baseops App?

That or BQ Zip's mom hacked my iPhone while I was in the bathroom.

Name one successful company on the civilian side who let expertise go just because they aren't management material, and I'll show you a company getting ready to fail....

There are plenty of industries that prefer young, cheap labor. Hooters waitresses, NFL Cheerleaders, show business, hostesses, interns, the girls that hold the round numbers at MMA matches, the fry machine guy at McD's, lifeguards, etc. Cheap labor, adequate supply of entry level applicants, no need to pay more for the same job tasks done with experience (employees tend to expect more pay for the same job done for a long time), experience doesn't really make you better, the older you get the less effective you are, etc. Sometimes experienced, more expensive people performing jobs that are usually done with a younger, cheaper force may need to be moved along if they aren't able to move up. Not true for aviators, or most officers, but applicable on the civilian side.

[Skitzo]

That or BQ Zip's mom hacked my iPhone while I was in the bathroom.

Post of the year... burn on BQ ZIP!!!

[Dupe]

That or BQ Zip's mom hacked my iPhone while I was in the bathroom.

There are plenty of industries that prefer young, cheap labor. Hooters waitresses, NFL Cheerleaders, show business, hostesses, interns, the girls that hold the round numbers at MMA matches, the fry machine guy at McD's, lifeguards, etc. Cheap labor, adequate supply of entry level applicants, no need to pay more for the same job tasks done with experience (employees tend to expect more pay for the same job done for a long time), experience doesn't really make you better, the older you get the less effective you are, etc. Sometimes experienced, more expensive people performing jobs that are usually done with a younger, cheaper force may need to be moved along if they aren't able to move up. Not true for aviators, or most officers, but applicable on the civilian side.

This is true for a labor market. In a knowledge market, decidedly not the case. Akamai or Amazon are still very much keeping the network engineers and cyber security experts who don't want to move up to management. It seems like the AF regards aviators as somewhere in the middle (i.e. further experience is valuable, but becoming a deep career-long expert is not).

[BitteEinBit]

There are plenty of industries that prefer young, cheap labor. Hooters waitresses, NFL Cheerleaders, show business, hostesses, interns, the girls that hold the round numbers at MMA matches, the fry machine guy at McD's, lifeguards, etc. Cheap labor, adequate supply of entry level applicants, no need to pay more for the same job tasks done with experience (employees tend to expect more pay for the same job done for a long time), experience doesn't really make you better, the older you get the less effective you are, etc. Sometimes experienced, more expensive people performing jobs that are usually done with a younger, cheaper force may need to be moved along if they aren't able to move up. Not true for aviators, or most officers, but applicable on the civilian side.

Touche! Ok, you got me. You just had to ruin my argument by bringing hot chicks into the mix...my weakness! Hooters probably won't be failing any time soon. That is a good thing with Hooter girls though, as I get older, they stay the same age!!

Now, if I could just convince US Airways to do the same with their aging talent pool, I may make the switch to the airlines. Looks like I'll just have to stick to the young Air Force Flight Nursing Corps instead....when is graduation again?!

[sqwatch]

My last two O-6 Commanders (both non-rated) were VERY proud of the fact that they have sat on promotion boards and have participated in MLRs, but when I showed them pictures of an F-22, F-16, C-5 and C-17 they both got every one of them wrong when I asked them what they were.

Trying to imagine a commander that has a bullsh1t threshold high enough to let rusty trap him in a corner with a VID quiz.

[Rusty Pipes]

Trying to imagine a commander that has a bullsh1t threshold high enough to let rusty trap him in a corner with a VID quiz.

ImageUploadedByTapatalk1398952069.865206.jpg

I was actually the one trapped in the corner when he asked me to translate all the flyer PRFs because he didn't understand what they meant... he was doing the rack and stack recommendations for the Staff Agency for the SES who also did not speak aviation in a very non-flyer organization. Luckily I never had to put my own PRF there because flyers didn't do well.

Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!

[panchbarnes]

Can someone confirm if the 2006 YG O-4 board is going to be March of 2015? That's the word on the street...

Thanks.

[Whitman]

Can someone confirm if the 2006 YG O-4 board is going to be March of 2015? That's the word on the street...

Thanks.

Isn't 2005 YG's board in December 2014? Seems like March would be too fast for another one.

[Guest ThatGuy]

Isn't 2005 YG's board in December 2014? Seems like March would be too fast for another one.

Affirmative.

Edited May 3, 2014 by slick999

[Cell Dweller]

Can someone confirm if the 2006 YG O-4 board is going to be March of 2015? That's the word on the street...

Thanks.

Um, as mentioned previously, the 2005 year group's board is in Dec. The results will be released around March. Odds are the schedule for the 06 board will be released somewhere in there.

[panchbarnes]

Isn't 2005 YG's board in December 2014? Seems like March would be too fast for another one.

That's what I thought so too. But apparently certain people are asked to write their PRFs now for the O-4 board next March.

Has AFPC ever compressed the timeline between O-4 boards for any reason?

[backseatdriver]

That's what I thought so too. But apparently certain people are asked to write their PRFs now for the O-4 board next March.

What? Who the eff is talking about PRFs a YEAR out from a (supposed) board?!

Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!

[panchbarnes]

What? Who the eff is talking about PRFs a YEAR out from a (supposed) board?!

Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!

I've heard that a couple of times recently at the squadron level.

I think it's strange as well, but that's the guidance that's been given.

Edited May 3, 2014 by PanchBarnes

[Herk Driver]

Has AFPC ever compressed the timeline between O-4 boards for any reason?

Yes, in order to drive the pin-on time down to below 10 years.

Edit to add: there have been 2 O-4 boards in the same calendar year before.

Edited May 3, 2014 by Herk Driver

[MSCguy]

Hunch regarding that '06 majors board: it could be early in the year to avoid conflicting with a RIF. Just ask your nearest '05 about the BS involved with doing RRFs and PRFs at the same time.

[zach braff]

Sounds silly if they'd throw the '06 majors board only 4 months after the '05 board. The whole point of canceling the '05 board was to cut down the wait time between selection and pin on. A March board would throw the captains right back into 18-24 month pin on waits.

My hunch is that it's just a rumor and the '06 board will happen in Fall 2015. But the Air Force has done sillier things so who knows...

zb

[BFM this]

18 months sure would have been nice...

Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!

[Dupe]

Just ask your nearest '05 about the BS involved with doing RRFs and PRFs at the same time.

Same was true for '03ers... and probably a few '8X years when we did RIFs in the early-mid '90s.

[Herk Driver]

Each of the DTs that met this summer were only allowed to submit one candidate for IDE. The rest of the reduced number of "seats" were for selects. The results of the DEDB, which assigns the school selects (and one candidate) from each DT to specific schools should be released sometime in November.

AFPC and HAF A1 have briefed that it will most likely be the same for DTs 2014 and maybe 2015. MAJCOMs and HAF have discussed how bad this is for our force development and is recommending we fund more school slots so we can still send non-selects. It will be difficult with BCA cuts.

I haven't seen official policy on this, but it was what our DT did this summer and what I have discussed with AFPC and A1. Hopefully we will get it worked out before next summer so commanders can nominate a reasonable number of quality non-selects.

I am sure Liquid has seen it...I got a look today...Guidance is out to DTs that attempts to fix the reduced number of seats for candidates. Also, specific guidance about AADs and correspondence PME for selects and selection criteria for certain post-school jobs.

I have not seen anything that addresses this at the Wing/CC level (i.e. PRF level), but the DT part of the guidance is out and should start to make a difference. Haven't looked far enough to see what can and cannot be posted as it is multiple pages.

[backseatdriver]

I heard this year (from a Wg/CCE) that the primary list would be 20% candidates, 80% selects - anyone heard the same? If so it's at least a step in the right direction away from "1 candidate per DT" like last year.

Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!

[Muscle2002]

I heard this year (from a Wg/CCE) that the primary list would be 20% candidates, 80% selects - anyone heard the same? If so it's at least a step in the right direction away from "1 candidate per DT" like last year.

Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!

Are they increasing the number of seats to make this happen?

[Herk Driver]

I think the guidance says that 80% IDE and 70% SDE selects minimum. This ensures that you don't push selects to the last look by loading up candidates into classes. It also (in theory) ensures that you don't end up with only 1 candidate per DT. (at least in the long run). Maybe I read it wrong...I will re-read it tomorrow.

Another change is that USAF will not expect officers to have AADs for promotion until the O-6 board. DTs are directed to not consider AADs when identifying Sq/CCs or DE unless AADs are a pre-req for the program.

Nothing yet on promotion boards, but this is a step in the right direction.

[olevelo]

Does anyone know if you're a last look candidate, eligible for credit, but not nominated by your SR, does your package (sts) go to the board at all? The psdm this year limited candidate nominations to 25%, where in the past it was just a suggested limit.

[ThreeHoler]

Another change is that USAF will not expect officers to have AADs for promotion until the O-6 board. DTs are directed to not consider AADs when identifying Sq/CCs or DE unless AADs are a pre-req for the program.

Nothing yet on promotion boards, but this is a step in the right direction.

Right direction, yes. Too late though, considering that 3849s were already signed before it came out and Wg/CCs are still ranking based on AAD completion date.

[Nineline]

Hunch regarding that '06 majors board: it could be early in the year to avoid conflicting with a RIF. Just ask your nearest '05 about the BS involved with doing RRFs and PRFs at the same time.

Or you could ask any '01 dude whose in an overage AFSC.. they'll be pushing their O-5 PRF's forward this fall at about the same time as the RIF board is deciding their fate.

-9-