Army APFT: Should NCOs have a higher minimum 'standard'?

PT is a small part of being a leader to me. If you have an NCO that scores 200 on the APFT, but knows his job and can lead and train Soldiers and an NCO that scores 330, but can't perform his job and instills no values, purpose and discipline in his subordinates, which do you take? I have no problem with senior leadership ensuring that the NCOs in their charge have and set high personal standards but if we are using an APFT score as a measure for continued service, we are missing the boat. The demands of the Army takes a different toll on each Soldier's body so while they may want to continue outperforming the "young bucks", it may not be possible. The senior leadership I had as mentors focused on what you ACCOMPLISHED and your potential to lead and continue to positively contribute to the Army, not your APFT score. That's what my Command Teams looked at for the Soldiers and what I was told senior promotion boards looked at. NCOs have so many other pressing issues to worry about than a PT score. The standard is the standard. As long as they can achieve, leave them alone.

I see where you're going with it, and part of me likes the idea, but I think the logic actually breaks down. If we make NCO standards higher than lower enlisted, then we should make senior NCO standards even higher than NCOs (can you imagine if they were not?). We should then make senior officer standards even higher than junior officers. If you follow this logic, the Chief of Staff and Sergeant Major of the Army would have the highest PT standards in the force, and I just don't think that makes any sense.

I understand the sentiment though. I don't think the way to do achieve the intent though is to increase minimums, but to promote more on people who reach higher levels of performance in their field (in both PT and other skills). Great topic.

I understand where you are coming from because NCOs ( Officers and SNCOs included) should be leading from the front, however, I disagree. Typically NCOs have been in longer and multiple deployments have taken a toll on their bodies. The standards should be tied to age not rank.

I already am.
The highest standard on the APFT is the one I hold myself to in order to run with the young bucks and lead from the front. The day I can't hang is the day I retire.

It is one of those thoughts that sound good. But, as one ages one's body simply does not always cooperate.

I recall my last PT test in the Reserves. My right leg had already had two of the five surgeries it has endured. I was wearing an elastic support and a brace. I passed, but, barely.

I felt bad about my performance until one of the troops told me he passed because he was inspired by my effort.

Yes, but self imposed as a professional leader desiring to lead the way. If it needs to be in a regulation, the intent and meaning is lost.

I don't believe NCOs specifically should have a different standard. There is enough division in the Army, let's not add to it. If there is a discussion about having ALL leaders (NCOs, WO, Officers) held to a higher standard, then you might get some traction with that discussion. But realistically, do we 'need' another reason to boot sub-par NCOs from the ranks? The new NCOER and the constant AAR Comments from DA-level boards to enumerate the actual APFT score will help to identify those that are not performing to standard. Besides, we should be more focused on the total Soldier concept, not just who has a higher APFT. I am a grandfather to 2, father of 6 and can still hang with over half of my platoon, and some of the ones I beat are young enough to be my kids! But seriously, I need Solders that are physically fit but also technically competent. I have had a SGT working for me that could smoke most people but I couldn't get him to grasp the concepts of his job. It took an intense amount of training to get him to where he needed to be. But the perception was that he was squared away cuz he do do great at PT. We need to move AWAY from that mentality because some MOS require more brain power than physical, hence why I embrace the total Soldier concept.

I feel CSM that every person in the military should be held to one standard, "The ARMY standard".

take a look around your unit. Many, if not most (or all), of the guys who have been in 15-20 years have either knee, back, shoulder problems/injuries or a combination of the three. There is much much more to being a good leader than doing PT. IMHO, waaaaay too much emphasis is put on PT. Seen way too many PT studs that were Soldier duds

I don't believe that NCO's should have a higher APFT standard, but I believe that NCO's should always try to do more than the minimum passing score

How about higher moral standards for all leaders, enlisted and officer. Bring back accountability and "old school" things that made us better. I look around I see unit history drifting into the background with traditions fading and standards not being enforced. Why increase standards if some cannot meet them or think that they do not apply to them? Who would enforce them? Some people do not enforce them as it is. So magically those who cannot pass a pt test who out of nowhere have a 240 will suddenly have a 270 when others were on leave. Fix the problems and try not to create more. Just my two cents.

I want to say yes, minimum 70 or 75 each events... However, being a PT studs does not make you a good leader. At the end of the day, what it matters when it comes to mission accomplishment is doing your job and taking care of the Soldiers. I always tell my NCOs that as long a they pass their APFT, do their job and take care of their Soldiers... I'm satisfied.

I would say no simply because if they required all NCOs to get higher scores on their APFT (lets say 300 for argument sake), 300 would no longer be an exceptional score. It would be a minimum to be met.
Plus, I have always hated the mentality that a high PT score means you are a good leader. "Okay, so you can bench press 300 lbs. How good are you at your actual job?"

The minimum score is the standard. End of story. Wait, no, that isn't the end of the story. We have already created a military that promotes muscle-headed retards over the 190 PTer who is great at his job. This is what the Army has asked for and is what they are getting. Luckily this attitude has not INFECTED the Warrant Officer ranks and I can still get promoted by meeting the standard and standing up after push-ups. Gotta save that extra for the run. LOL.

A LOT of water continues to boil over this issue, but there is only one locked-in-stone aspect of the APFT...one must obtain a minimum of 60 points in each to three events to be "physically qualified" for military duty. Note the regulation does NOT say: "Max the PT test" or "give me 10 more reps for the (place target person or event here)," or one's promotion rests solely on PT test performance. Yes, it is always personally rewarding to do well in such endeavors and I was always pleased with my own 'above average' performance. However, I witnessed too many young impressionable service members hit the test event position and do the reps all the way to muscle failure attempting to reach such questionable goals, then failing the full PT test having worn themselves out. Note that my reports to senior leadership concerning my Command's PT performance dealt only with the percentage PASSED and no other aspect. That reporting did not demand to know who maxed the test or any individual test scores...just the Command as a whole for MOSQ and deployable. I fully comprehend and understand that those MOS units requiring hard physical effort (Infantry, Combat Engineer, Ranger, for example) would of necessity practice a much higher physical standard...but the bottom line is the Regulation's standard of 180 points...and no one can be chastised or denigrated for meeting what the Regulation requires.

I do understand where this topic is going. Although some of this should be "yes, NCO's should have a higher standard, On the other hand NCO's should have a smaller standard. I agree with SSgt (Join to see) That most NCO's are battle worn, Deployments have taken there tolls on the body and mind. We want every solider to push themselves, no matter the rank But that is how we injure ourselves more.

I would say No. I would like one chart for every soldier regardless of age, gender or rank. However when we look at soldiers or NCO's that we want to promote. We should be looking at the soldiers that do well not the soldiers that just get the minimum.

There is a LOT of emotional hot water boiling over this issue, and I believe, unfortunately, that it will ever be so. I understand I'm about to catch high-holy hell for my comments, but at this point I really don't care. I'm going to speak for every soldier: Enlisted, Warrant, or Commissioned out there who has faced the subject of my thoughts: The following is a matter of record; NOT anyone's personal opinion.

Exactly WHAT is the U.S. Army Physical Fitness Standard (or at least what it was when I retired)??? ANS: Attainment of 60 points in EACH of THREE events totaling 180 points. THAT'S IT! The United State's Army Command has spoken - and stated that ANYONE obtaining that score is FULLY QUALIFIED to be a member of our organization...End of discussion, non-negotiable! Echelons far above all of our pay grades made this determination long, long ago. Yes, I understand the entire program is under review...but lets stay on task here. I've heard every "elitist" comment anyone can make concerning physical fitness and its "greater than thou" connotation throughout my 30 year career.

No report that I ever sent to higher command ever asked me how many MAXED a PT test...I was only tasked to report a percentage that PASSED! Come on, guys - there are and will always be those who attain the highest scores in any endeavor. Some are born that way while others struggle successfully to be so. But that's NO excuse for any of you out there to denigrate or condescend to those who battle to meet the standard; and for the record to anyone reading this - the word "MINIMUM' is NOT attached to that 180 point standard.

So at last (empowered by my retired status) I will give voice to every service member out there who wants to say: "I'M TELLING YOU - KNOCK IT OFF!" That you max the PT requirements is a personal achievement. We are all proud of you and proud to be associated with you. Bask in the accolade we freely give to shout to the world that "we have a champion" to look up to. Wear your PT patch with honor as an example that it can be done! A show to others that extraordinary personal effort has a reward!

And lastly, a friendly IG 'heads up.' Anyone of you out there, regardless of your rank or status, who attempts to punish in any manner a fellow soldier for NOT obtaining an artificially established PT score standard above that 180 points is opening themselves to UCMJ attention if the 'victim' chooses to pursue that issue.

I've been on the receiving end of far too many such IG complaints to not speak up about that practice (there's not enough room here to print all the reasons soldiers have given me for being mercilessly harangued to greater effort after having already passed the PT test).

Praise, cheer-lead, assist by example; these are the winning strategies. One small example: After crossing the run's finish line, I reversed and returned to the last 100 yards to run back with others, acting as a cheer leader for that 'extra effort' to cut seconds off their score. Think about that the next time anyone out there turns up their nose to sneer at someone not blessed at birth with similar genes to shine on PT day.

When I was in 1AD in Germany, the "unofficial" standard for leaders was 70% in each event. Without it you could not get on the OML for NCOES. I've had other Senior Leaders say 250 was minimum for PSG's and above. I agree with this - leading by example should not mean making the minimums!

SGM Quick,

I think that NCO's should hold themselves to a higher standard and not be content with simply meeting the standards. We are expected to lead from the front; meet, enforce and exceed standards; and look like Soldiers. I don't necessarily think that standards should be changed to reflect ones rank, but I think it should be a shared belief that NCO's should always try to exceed the minimum, no matter what they do.