Promotion and PRF Information

[BashiChuni]

i enjoy duck posts that are insightful, thoughtful, and smart. keep posting.

if being forced to make O-4 is the worst that happens to you then you're a very blessed man.

perspective i guess.

anyways cheers to you bro i wish you nothing but the best.

 

break break back on topic...will this 100% to major policy start to chip away at the mindless number of award packages the collective "we" has to accomplish? 15 line, 30 line, etc etc etc...so and so of the qtr/year blah blah blah?

Edited September 15, 2017 by BashiChuni

[MooseAg03]

 
break break back on topic...will this 100% to major policy start to chip away at the mindless number of award packages the collective "we" has to accomplish? 15 line, 30 line, etc etc etc...so and so of the qtr/year blah blah blah?

I doubt it, how else will the chosen 3-4 guys in each wing be identified for school? It may eliminate excess work for those who were submitting an award or 2 to make sure they didn't wind up in the bottom 5% at their Major's board. I can say there's a few things I wouldn't have bothered with if O-4 had been 100%.

[17D_guy]

2 hours ago, BashiChuni said:

break break back on topic...will this 100% to major policy start to chip away at the mindless number of award packages the collective "we" has to accomplish? 15 line, 30 line, etc etc etc...so and so of the qtr/year blah blah blah?

Negative.  This is pushed from higher, with bad word-of-mouth if a unit/wing isn't putting in for these BS awards.  I can say when I've been in positions to deal with these, everything we can "neg respond" on, we did.  That was a pitiful number though.

[Duck]

I actually think this is a great idea for pilots. In fact I would argue for it to be 100% to Lt Col and even promote separately and at a faster rate than the rest of the AF. The rollout was completely botched, yet again by Big Blue.

The problem that I see is two fold. First, this is being portrayed as a knee jerk reaction with very little planning for thought behind it. No where do I see this is going to be permanent, which means it will be business as usual for all the queep that goes into normal promotions. This is simply a backdoor stoploss for O-3s. I am wondering if a lot of guys wrote the board last time requesting to be passed over  hence the surprisingly low O-3 pilots selected for O-4.

 

[Homestar]

28 minutes ago, Duck said:

This is simply a backdoor stoploss for O-3s.

 

Huh?

[HU&W]

9 hours ago, DUNBAR said:

I think we're really missing the most noteworthy part of that AFPC news release.  Specifically, there is actually a duty title called "Chief of Workforce Development for the Air Force Talent Management Innovation Cell." 

I wonder if there's a Deputy Chief as well.

I wonder if their office symbol is AFPC/COWDFTAFTMIC

[bennynova]

It's just AFPC/COW

[Duck]

2 hours ago, Homestar said:

Huh?

I'm thinking this is a way to keep pilots from requesting to be passed over. That's what my Commander thinks. Too many people wrote letters.

[Homestar]

Just now, Duck said:

I'm thinking this is a way to keep pilots from requesting to be passed over. That's what my Commander thinks. Too many people wrote letters.

Is that common? I mean, you're the only person I've heard of that has written a do not promote me letter.

[Duck]

3 minutes ago, Homestar said:

Is that common? I mean, you're the only person I've heard of that has written a do not promote me letter.

I've had a ton of people PM me telling me they were thinking of doing the same thing. Most of the guys I know APZ write letters to make sure they don't get promoted 1 Above. Bottom line, who knows? Probably more than we think.

[Lord Ratner]

I've had a ton of people PM me telling me they were thinking of doing the same thing. Most of the guys I know APZ write letters to make sure they don't get promoted 1 Above. Bottom line, who knows? Probably more than we think.

I don't think that many write letters. That said, I'm guessing after offering blanket continuation to the critical AFSCs, they saw how many people are refusing continuation and realized there was a leak they could plug.

[Pork Barrel]

3 hours ago, Duck said:

I'm thinking this is a way to keep pilots from requesting to be passed over. That's what my Commander thinks. Too many people wrote letters.

We'll call it the Duck Effect. You thought you could out smart the system by asking not to be promoted but the AF needs 11Ms to fly and fill everything 11F/Bs can't be released. This gets you and others to 12 and if necessary with a strategic PCS to 14. At that point the AF can evaluate the force and conveniently at O-5. Some (not you) will choose to stay, or try to stay, possibly get passed over once (or twice) if we need to cull, and continuation to 20 to smooth things out. That gives the AF four or five opportunities to manage the force. The unfortunate reality is that unless everyone pulls a Duck, that O-5 decision point is going to be painful for people who should have left at O-4, are at 14-16 of 20, past the point of changing their retirement, and aren't continued.

[xaarman]

56 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

3 hours ago, Duck said:

they saw how many people are refusing continuation and realized there was a leak they could plug.

I believe it's this... this is my category and I've had a ton of questions if this affects me. Nope, separation orders in hand, couldn't be happier. 

 I wonder if I could change my declination of continuation with AFPC... then meet an APZ board and be promoted. Oh, no thanks. 

[dream big]

17 hours ago, DUNBAR said:

I think we're really missing the most noteworthy part of that AFPC news release.  Specifically, there is actually a duty title called "Chief of Workforce Development for the Air Force Talent Management Innovation Cell." 

I wonder if there's a Deputy Chief as well.

Dude, we found out where to cut the staffs!!

[bennynova]

What does this do for the lt Col boards in the future?

Same number will be promoted as historically has been, meaning lower promotion percentage?

 

increased or equal percentage will be promoted?

 

[brickhistory]

1 minute ago, bennynova said:

What does this do for the lt Col boards in the future?

Same number will be promoted as historically has been, meaning lower promotion percentage?

 

increased or equal percentage will be promoted?

 

Depends.

By law, only so many officers can be on the rolls at each grade.  That percentage fluctuates depending on authorized force strength.

Big Blue saying 100% to O-4 means they literally don't have to cut anyone.  (Why that fact exists, of course, is the great unanswered by Air Staff question).

The number of total O-5s will also be set so the culling of the herd will occur then as well.  Assuming that the herd doesn't keep finding weak areas of the fence and escape into the wild.  If the numbers then are also below requirements, then the percentages for O-5 will increase.

 

Instead of the cliché of "Will the last one leaving the Air Force please turn out the lights?," it appears that USAF is working its way toward 100% selection to general officer.

[matmacwc]

So they are about to make a bunch of O-4 Warrant officers, isn't this what many wished?

[brickhistory]

How so?

Blue says it needs X number of majors to do all the jobs-staff, leadership, etc.- now.  To get that number of O-4s, everyone will make it on this board.

The flying warrant officer idea is for dudes to just fly.

I'm not arguing, I'm just not tracking.

[bennynova]

He's stating that there will be a number of majors who have no realistic chance to make O-5s.   

[matmacwc]

5 minutes ago, bennynova said:

He's stating that there will be a number of majors who have no realistic chance to make O-5s.   

ALOT more than usual.  

[brickhistory]

27 minutes ago, bennynova said:

He's stating that there will be a number of majors who have no realistic chance to make O-5s.   

Ok, understand now.

Don't think the math adds up, but at least I understand what he meant.

If 100 majors are promoted now and four years from now, 65 lt cols are needed, then 65% (or whatever the legal limit is at that time) of those 100 majors (discounting any variables like separation, etc) will be promoted.

None of this detracts from this very visible failure by the Air Force to retain enough people, never mind of a higher quality, to fill its quota of majors, hence it has to promote 100%.  Yet the beast doesn't seem to be questioning "why?"

 

 

[HeloDude]

If you were originally going to be passed over to O-4 your chances of making O-5 is pretty close to zero.  I would also like to add that only insecure people are against a higher promotion rate to Major.  

[brickhistory]

 It appears that this is a "forest and number of trees" situation.

The Air Force isn't promoting more people to major.  It will promote the same number of people.  

It is because people are bailing at what should be an alarming rate to the Air Staff that the percentage of those eligible is 100% on this board per the announcement.  Bigger percentage of a smaller pool = same total numbers promoting.  Not a net gain for anyone.

Not sure if the "insecurity" thing was directed specifically, but in two more weeks I can hit the cigs aisle and Class VI with my retirement check for the month, so my dog in this fight is exceedingly small.  Others do.  As stated above, this is an administrative stop-loss to some.  To others, it's a good thing.

USAF does not seem to be addressing the fundamental issues and instead is trying different sized band-aids to stop the bleeding.  

Edited September 18, 2017 by brickhistory

[dream big]

5 hours ago, HeloDude said:

If you were originally going to be passed over to O-4 your chances of making O-5 is pretty close to zero.  I would also like to add that only insecure people are against a higher promotion rate to Major.  

Exactly. JQP of course wrote an article about how he was against it, you should see some of the drama queen comments on there...

[tac airlifter]

6 hours ago, dream big said:

Exactly. JQP of course wrote an article about how he was against it, you should see some of the drama queen comments on there...

I think the JQP article was trying to make a very nuanced point that is over-simplified by saying that he is against this decision.  As brick said above, this decision results in the same number of people promoting, not more, but in a smaller pool the percentage must be higher.  The USAF needs that number of people to fill jobs that many people think don't need to be filled. 

Instead of promoting a higher percentage IOT achieve the same numbers to fill useless staff billets, why not promote less (or the same historical %) and cut the dumb jobs?  That was the point JQP was trying to make, but you're right that it's been drowned out by drama queens who are salty that making O-4 will no longer require whatever knob gobbling they did to make it.