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

If we really are using PT scores as a metric to 'attain qualifications for continued service' why not raise the requirements for attending NCOES to scores above the minimum? Since we are now STEPing and nobody gets promoted without NCOES, attaching higher standards to attend NCOES would allow those who go above and beyond to be recognized with promotion. Soldiers would still be allowed to serve at their current grade with the normal 180 if they so choose.

I do believe that Higher Ranked soldiers should be held to a higher standard, but PT should not be the main one. First of all most season NCOs or higher rank in the military have seen it all, they have been to places, they have broken physically and mentally the military style exercise alone broke them and now you want to hold a 35, 40, 50 years old to a higher physical standard than a 20 year old. Unless you come up with some bionic engineer higher ranked soldier this is anatomically unfair.

First off, there is talk that SMA Dailey wants to set a higher standard for NCOES attendance and maintaining P status. NCOs would have to score at least 75 points in each event. While the idea makes sense, in practice it doesn't. If the NCO Corps suddenly has to score higher on the APFT, then there will be a push to get junior enlisted soldiers to score higher on their APFT.

While it is always good to excel, and fitness is an important part of military service, requiring increasing minimum fitness standards for NCOs will essentially be requiring an increase in minimum fitness standards for the entire Force, because all junior enlisted soldiers are potential NCOs and will be pushed to meet the increased standard from day 1 in the Army.

You'll probably also see an increase in injuries, flags, and chapters.

I can see the idiotic reasoning behind this but I actually think minimum scores should only be based on age. Some folks don't hold up so well compared to others of the same age.

I see your point but I can tell you that at 46 years of age it is just about impossible for me to be in the same shape I was at 23. That being said, any of my troops that failed their PT test had to run with me until they passed. I made more than 1 kid half my age puke.

I think no. Physical fitness is about health and the ability to serve at a physical level that is safe for the body. I.e. the healthier you are the less physical tole your body will suffer. It's not about how well you lead. NCOs should strive to personally do more and set an example.

When I see these types of posts I think, here we go again.

Every op order I ever hear never once mentions that we need the guy with the 300 pt score to go over here and clear this room, or that we need the squad of 300 pt scores doing this task that everyone else can do.

Leadership isn't black and white that we end up making it, where PT automatically makes you a better leader. It just means you're better at PT.

As an NCO I agree that I should have a higher PT score, and that should be reflected on my NCOER if I don't meet the standard that my mentor thinks I should be, but if my leadership ability is unaffected by my ability to do PT then why is this a topic of discussion... Again.

I could see it working at a local level, but not army wide... We'd loose a lot of good people... And a lot of bad.

No, and here's why: Muscles don't make leaders. The APFT is there to make sure our soldiers meet am minimum level of fitness, so they are ready to perform and fight when needed. An NCO doesn't need to be faster or stronger or carry more crap than any other soldier. He should be a 'better soldier' than private Snuffy, which means he should know his stuff, live the Army values without question, inspire and mentor his soldiers. None of that requires him to be a fitness buff. My opinion might be tainted by passed fitness buff NCO's who were lacking in the leadership department.....

I don't believe NCO Standard should be raise. I believe the standard should be by MOS.
What do you Think???

Of course not. The 'minimum standard' exists due to decades of study. If they want more (physically) powerful leaders, then raise the standards across the board. With that said, anyone who wants to ascend will keep their PT score far above the minimum standard....and if they do not, then they don't need to be holding those dominant positions. One final thought....I've seen MANY units whose leadership gets their 205's pencil-whipped, usu ally through the 'buddy system'....and that is where the discussion should really begin -- with unit ACCOUNTABILITY.

I understand what you saying here SGM. I agree with it, someone wants to be a leader, their standards in certain areas should be higher.

They already do.

Higher standards no...i feel that is a slippery slope and as pointed out.. Will lead to a 300 being a requirement to reach the top which isn't right. I do however believe they should have STRICTER standards. Once you're in a leadership position I feel it should be unacceptable to fail an apft, but I've had leadership that failed on numerous occasions. That sets a very poor example and should not be tolerated

I think the NCOs should have to maintain at least an 80 in each event. I say this because NCOs are tasked with the responsibility of leading soldiers and motivating them. PT scores seem to take priority over a lot of other attributes in the Army, so as a leader,your PT score should be higher.

Just to add, in my experience we never promoted a Marine to Cpl who didnt run a first Class PFT.

I think that is a good idea. Most units already do this on an unofficial standard. If you were an NCO and got a low score you would be frowned upon. You are expected to set the example. This should be for leadership and PT. You have to lead to the front. How can you lead by example and you are just trying to pass.

With officers we are expected also to exceed in PT. But we also do this to so our soldiers have confidence in our to lead.

As some have already mentioned in their response, I too feel there's more to being a leader than just being able to excel at taking an APFT. This is just one dimension of being a great leader.

SGM Matthew Quick I already hold myself to a higher standard. I would be disappointed with any NCO that didn't.

I'm sure there already is. It's just not "written" in the Regs. Beware the troop, let alone the NCO that "barely" passes the test. I'm sure there will be a "heart to heart" with leadership regardless what the passing score is, and it will reflect in the evaluations, even if it does not say for that reason.

Sure, all leaders should. Up into a certain point though because our bodies all start breaking down.