Promotion and PRF Information

[BeefBears]

On 12/3/2020 at 7:06 AM, pawnman said:

They don't.  If they did, we wouldn't lose a bunch of pilots every time a 365 came down.  

Maybe it's gotten better, but a few years ago my DO got a 365 with about a week's worth of notice because 10 other people opted to get out of the Air Force instead of taking it.  

It may not get you out of 365s but I know a lucky few that were released and selected for special programs where the ADSC became a factor in releasability. According to the A1 our field is quite undermanned and getting released for anything outside flying the line is a real pain.

I doubt they would fess up here but I would be interested to hear from anyone that worked assignments. 

[MechGov]

For a flying-only track It would be nice to see the AF actually open opportunities to flyers with >10 years TAFCS time. Kinda ironic to be told as a captain that you’re too old to meet a board for consideration, for ADSC reasons.

[Jetpilot]

O-5 promo lists have been approved by the senate as of yesterday 14 Dec.

[celtic020]

12 minutes ago, Jetpilot said:

O-5 promo lists have been approved by the senate as of yesterday 14 Dec.

Affirm.  Wearing my O-5 rank today.  Now let's get this pay raise flowing...

[BKANO]

anyone that was a non-select on the last O5 board do that briefing with AFPC? 

[CaptainMorgan]

anyone that was a non-select on the last O5 board do that briefing with AFPC? 

Yes, did mine in October or November. They compare your records to the bottom 10 above the cut line. Biggest takeaway was having Definitely Promote on your push line if you don’t have the box checked. Strats, of course, matter. I didn’t have any FGO awards, but he said that was offset by the CGO awards I had. SDE push lines on OPRs help. Jobs above the Wing level help. Basically all things that it’s probably too late to improve on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BeefBears]

https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/2499406/all-services-including-department-of-the-air-force-to-furnish-adverse-informati/

Seems like the one-mistake air force just got a little more one-mistakier.  It even retroactively includes all paperwork and inquiries/investigations back to 2012. 

[FLEA]

5 hours ago, BeefBears said:

https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/2499406/all-services-including-department-of-the-air-force-to-furnish-adverse-informati/

Seems like the one-mistake air force just got a little more one-mistakier.  It even retroactively includes all paperwork and inquiries/investigations back to 2012. 

So it seems like the big change is that LOCs and LOAs will now need to generate a UIF or find some other mechanism to ensure they get to the board. I don't think people that make these decisions recognize the full fallout though. There was already a hesitation to give officers discipline except in the most extreme of circumstances. This is just going to amplify that. 

[jrizzell]

https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/2499406/all-services-including-department-of-the-air-force-to-furnish-adverse-informati/
Seems like the one-mistake air force just got a little more one-mistakier.  It even retroactively includes all paperwork and inquiries/investigations back to 2012. 

“We’re not a one mistake Air Force”

2021: “Hold my beer”

What a troubling force shaping decision this is...


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[pawnman]

5 hours ago, FLEA said:

So it seems like the big change is that LOCs and LOAs will now need to generate a UIF or find some other mechanism to ensure they get to the board. I don't think people that make these decisions recognize the full fallout though. There was already a hesitation to give officers discipline except in the most extreme of circumstances. This is just going to amplify that. 

Curious how they plan to square this decision with the "need for diversity" they keep pushing, given the IG report that shows minorities are more likely to be punished than white dudes.

[Skitzo]

https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/2499406/all-services-including-department-of-the-air-force-to-furnish-adverse-informati/
Seems like the one-mistake air force just got a little more one-mistakier.  It even retroactively includes all paperwork and inquiries/investigations back to 2012. 

The Air Force IG has record of all adverse actions on officers?

[FLEA]

Side Bar: IDE comments aren't visible until Monday but at work today we noticed if you are a definitely attend, that will reflect in the top lines of the masked ODP. 

[14N Guy]

So I got my PRF back for the upcoming O-5 board.

Keep in mind that I am a 4x APZ, but I got the following on my push line:

#1/2 Eligible, #5/24 O-4's, Def Promote

I also got a DP

I checked last years stats and APZ, w/IDE complete, and a DP was 15/15 selected (for my board).

But, it would be really on-brand for me to be the first ever (under the new board process) APZ w/DP to not get promoted. So that is what I am expecting. But, who knows.

[FLEA]

2 minutes ago, 14N Guy said:

So I got my PRF back for the upcoming O-5 board.

Keep in mind that I am a 4x APZ, but I got the following on my push line:

#1/2 Eligible, #5/24 O-4's, Def Promote

I also got a DP

I checked last years stats and APZ, w/IDE complete, and a DP was 15/15 selected (for my board).

But, it would be really on-brand for me to be the first ever (under the new board process) APZ w/DP to not get promoted. So that is what I am expecting. But, who knows.

Congrats man. Still a good sign. I'll hope the best for you. 

 

[jrizzell]

So I got my PRF back for the upcoming O-5 board.
Keep in mind that I am a 4x APZ, but I got the following on my push line:
#1/2 Eligible, #5/24 O-4's, Def Promote
I also got a DP
I checked last years stats and APZ, w/IDE complete, and a DP was 15/15 selected (for my board).
But, it would be really on-brand for me to be the first ever (under the new board process) APZ w/DP to not get promoted. So that is what I am expecting. But, who knows.

If you have a DP checked PRF, with good push line, you’re in a strong position to be promoted. Good luck


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[MCO]

If you’re a major about to hit the Lt Col board in student status right now, you should have gotten your results from the student MLR this week.

[BeefBears]

3 hours ago, Tiger said:

I think just FGO’s and above.  From what I’ve seen the current AFI mandates those folks’ adverse actions are sent to the IG.
 

My question is since this is apparently retroactive to almost 10 years ago, is the AF IG now going to go digging for paperwork that was never put in someone’s’ selection folder in the first place?  That could really hurt some people when their LOC’s/A’s/R’s from their Captain or even LT time pop up and now they’re a major/lt col with a permanent black mark.  It also sounds like this new policy gets rid of the provision that adverse info would stick in the OSR for only one ITZ promotion period.

The retroactive part is my big issue. The Air Force changed the rules of the game after the fact.  I also like how the head shoe clerk said that it wasn't a one mistake air force because... he said so. 

Does every lieutenant that has an LOC for... dumb lieutenant things... have a UIF now?  Does it count if the paperwork was removed?  The article even mentions adding inquiries to the board where no command discipline occurred.  I can think of a dozen good dudes that will get thrown under the bus by this. 

[jazzdude]

The retroactive part is my big issue. The Air Force changed the rules of the game after the fact. 

Congress changed the rules/law. The AF is just complying with the law.

Congress is probably fed up with embarrassments in the senior ranks, and thinks making adverse information available to boards will fix that. Funny thing is, most of those wayward senior leaders likely never had any formal documentation on poor behavior at any point in their careers, so it's moot.

[FLEA]

21 minutes ago, BeefBears said:

The retroactive part is my big issue. The Air Force changed the rules of the game after the fact.  I also like how the head shoe clerk said that it wasn't a one mistake air force because... he said so. 

Does every lieutenant that has an LOC for... dumb lieutenant things... have a UIF now?  Does it count if the paperwork was removed?  The article even mentions adding inquiries to the board where no command discipline occurred.  I can think of a dozen good dudes that will get thrown under the bus by this. 

If the LOC/LOA isn't in your PIF anymore, my hunch is, its gone for good. 

 

Other things you said though are spot on. Just because Gen Kelly says its not a 1 mistake AF doesn't make it so. And the second and third order effects of this law were clearly not thought through.  

Edited February 11, 2021 by FLEA

[BeefBears]

4 minutes ago, jazzdude said:

 

Congress changed the rules/law. The AF is just complying with the law.

Congress is probably fed up with embarrassments in the senior ranks, and thinks making adverse information available to boards will fix that. Funny thing is, most of those wayward senior leaders likely never had any formal documentation on poor behavior at any point in their careers, so it's moot.

 

Honestly, we could use a few more senior leaders that bounced back from issues early on rather than the risk adverse ones we get. 

[Bigred]

The senior guys I trust the most are those guys that have made mistakes and pressed through it to get where they are today. I dare say they are better leaders overall because they had so much more to overcome to succeed as compared to a golden child.

Edited February 13, 2021 by Bigred
Spelling

[jazzdude]

That’s exactly what I’m wondering.  I read the DoDI mentioned in the article and it says it only applies to O-4 boards and above, or to O-3 boards if there was “significant media attention” - whatever the hell that means - so maybe only guys getting ready to meet FGO boards are under the gun?  Also it said said the retroactive thing only applies to “select” adverse actions, not sure what that means.
Either way I agree with the sentiment, this is ridiculous and congress is equally to blame for passing such a law. 

So what's your solution for differentiating a one time mistake and a pattern of bad behavior?

The idea of putting a UIF after a certain amount of time assumes the person has been rehabilitated. But it also means if they are a repeat offender, their may not be any documentation that establishes that pattern, so they may slide by. It also assumes that bad behavior is captured on the performance report, which only send to happen if the behavior is egregious enough to drive a referral report.

Our evaluation system is pretty poor as well- unless you have the secret decoder ring, it's very hard to distinguish between people outside of strats, which recently were reigned in due to way to many soft strats making it difficult to actually distinguish people. The army at least does above/below/center of mass to clearly state where that person falls. That also has some shortcomings (quotas for the rater, which can hurt in a unit that is above average)

Basically, Congress is saying that it doesn't trust DoD's ability to vet it's own promotions, so they are adding requirements they think will happen. And remember, our officer promotions starting at O-4 are approved by the Senate, though generally they don't get involved, though they could, especially if something drives "excessive media attention."

[CaptainMorgan]

I think this is just going to result in “MFRs documenting verbal counseling” becoming the new “desk LOC.”  If a guy screws up, and doesn’t get his act together, the CC can make the decision to write it up officially at that point. 

Edited February 12, 2021 by CaptainMorgan
Censored language

[jazzdude]

Does Bass getting roasted all over YouTube count?  Or the rules don’t apply to her I guess.  

NCOs don't get vetted by the Senate, and it's not like she can get promoted any further without commissioning, so it's a moot point in this case. So yeah, that rule doesn't apply to her.

That being said, it's our job as officers to lead and discipline our enlisted (and ourselves). I'm sure someone in the CSAF's office (or at least PA) has had a talk with her, and if not, well, I'd be disappointed. And if we don't handle the situation, Congress could decide to weigh in if it garners too much negative press. Which it hasn't, and likely won't.

That's not to say her comments weren't wrong (they are), but there likely won't be a public admonishment. People cry about this being a one mistake AF, and then complain when leadership decides not to crucify people for a mistake. So long as the CSAF has confidence in her, she'll stay right where she is.

[BKANO]

On 2/1/2021 at 11:41 PM, CaptainMorgan said:

Yes, did mine in October or November. They compare your records to the bottom 10 above the cut line. Biggest takeaway was having Definitely Promote on your push line if you don’t have the box checked. Strats, of course, matter. I didn’t have any FGO awards, but he said that was offset by the CGO awards I had. SDE push lines on OPRs help. Jobs above the Wing level help. Basically all things that it’s probably too late to improve on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

how you looking for this upcoming board? PRFs should be back by now with the members. Did your chances improve?