Army tightens tenure rules for senior NCOs. Is This A Good Move?

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 22 Aug 2015 18:42:45 -0400

The Army is toughening up its up-or-out rules for sergeants first class and master sergeants, effective Oct. 1.

Under a policy change that takes effect Oct. 1 for soldiers of the Regular Army and Active Guard and Reserve, the retention control point for promotable sergeants first class will be reduced from 29 years of active service to 26, and for promotable master sergeants from 32 to 29 years.
Check out this article from Army Times:

Army tightens tenure rules for senior NCOs

http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/careers/army/enlisted/2015/08/20/army-tightens-tenure-rules-senior-ncos/32005119/

Army tightens tenure rules for senior NCOs

The Army is toughening up its up-or-out rules for sergeants first class and master sergeants, effective Oct. 1.

Response by SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL made Aug 22 at 2015 6:48 PM

SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL — Sat, 22 Aug 2015 18:48:28 -0400

SGT Private RallyPoint Member this is part of sequestration in my opinion and with the Quality Management Program (QMP) its going to hit the senior ranks with lightning speed.

http://www.armyreenlistment.com/qmp.html

Qualitative Management Program (QMP)

NCOs whose performance, conduct, and/or potential for advancement do not meet Army standards, as determined by the approved recommendations of HQDA centralized selection boards responsible for QMP screening, will be denied continued service.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Aug 22 at 2015 6:50 PM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Sat, 22 Aug 2015 18:50:08 -0400

That seems high compared to the other services (anecdotally), by a few years. Seems like it would actually create a little stagnation overall.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 22 at 2015 6:51 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 22 Aug 2015 18:51:26 -0400

SGT Private RallyPoint Member, Keith, it's the sign of the times, although i don't remember it being this "bad" after Vietnam.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 22 at 2015 6:53 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 22 Aug 2015 18:53:50 -0400

I'm still amazed staff sergeants can serve a full 20 years before being cut out. I see too many who have grown stagnant. It's not so much a problem at the senior levels.

Response by CSM Michael J. Uhlig made Aug 22 at 2015 7:07 PM

CSM Michael J. Uhlig — Sat, 22 Aug 2015 19:07:59 -0400

This ensures we have our best and brightest continuing to move forward. This is not a bad thing, better to allow a competent and confident leader the opportunity to serve instead of allowing a ROAD Soldier to remain in service.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 22 at 2015 7:33 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 22 Aug 2015 19:33:51 -0400

Be relevant or be retired. Good reminder to always improve your fighting position (resume/evaluation) as there is always someone younger to replace you.

Response by CW4 Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 22 at 2015 8:52 PM

CW4 Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 22 Aug 2015 20:52:32 -0400

SGT Private RallyPoint Member, just going back to pre OIF/OEF standards. A lot of aspects of enlistment, retention and promotions were relaxed greatly during the surge and bulk of combat operations and now with the draw down, many things are going back to pre-war standards.

Response by TSgt Joshua Copeland made Aug 22 at 2015 11:32 PM

TSgt Joshua Copeland — Sat, 22 Aug 2015 23:32:30 -0400

Still high compared to the AF.

Rank HYT
E4 8 TIS
E5 15 TIS
E6 20 TIS
E7 24 TIS
E8 26 TIS
E9 30 TIS

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 22 at 2015 11:45 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 22 Aug 2015 23:45:12 -0400

My question is this, how many Soldiers will this effect. Is this in respect to the current draw down of Soldiers. I agree that this will allow for the best Soldiers to be retained. I just wonder how it will effect the Army in its current status

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 22 at 2015 11:48 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 22 Aug 2015 23:48:01 -0400

The real game changer would be to limit SSGs (non promotable) to 18 years.

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 22 at 2015 11:59 PM

LCDR Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 22 Aug 2015 23:59:49 -0400

To a certain extent yes it is. There are a ton of caveats to that so don't jump down my throat, I don't think we should be trying to get rid of everyone by any means, but we also do have people who are past their time to retire. With the system as it is this has to happen. The alternative (and potentially better one) is to change the system.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 23 at 2015 12:33 AM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 23 Aug 2015 00:33:09 -0400

I think this is a move in the right direction.

Response by PO1 William "Chip" Nagel made Aug 23 at 2015 4:21 AM

PO1 William "Chip" Nagel — Sun, 23 Aug 2015 04:21:11 -0400

They go up and down with the situation. More Wars or whatever we are involved in with the need for more personnel the more lax they are going to be. When we are in downsizing time they get tighter. Maybe if we had been involved in a war when I retired they wouldn't have HYTd my Ass but that is just the nature of the Beast.

Response by SCPO Joshua I made Aug 23 at 2015 4:33 AM

SCPO Joshua I — Sun, 23 Aug 2015 04:33:06 -0400

HYT for Navy is 24 for Chief (E7), 26 for Senior Chief (E8), and 30 for Master Chief, with the caveat that flag level Command Master Chiefs can stay a couple of years longer under some circumstances, seems like the Army's gates, even after this adjustment will still be higher than ours. Not really sure what that does or whether it's good or bad -- I think it really depends on force composition and it also tends to shape promotion opportunity for E6 and below.

Response by SGT Lawrence Corser made Aug 23 at 2015 10:51 AM

SGT Lawrence Corser — Sun, 23 Aug 2015 10:51:39 -0400

Depends if they have deployed to a combat zone, what their MOS is, and what if any they have for PT scores. if these things matter for promotion they should matter fro retention and not just keep those seniors who hid at TRADOC posts for 20 years,

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 23 at 2015 6:12 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 23 Aug 2015 18:12:00 -0400

I think every year past 20 there should be a real assessment of performance because there are some that are filling positions but not contributing to the quality of the personnel

Response by COL Charles Williams made Aug 24 at 2015 12:02 AM

COL Charles Williams — Mon, 24 Aug 2015 00:02:51 -0400

This is what happens... when the Army downsizes.

Response by SGM Mikel Dawson made Aug 24 at 2015 9:19 PM

SGM Mikel Dawson — Mon, 24 Aug 2015 21:19:52 -0400

A good deal. Some will advance so far then sit there taking up space. This way they will keep moving up the ladder - those who really care.

Response by SGM Eric Lobsinger made Aug 25 at 2015 10:31 PM

SGM Eric Lobsinger — Tue, 25 Aug 2015 22:31:32 -0400

In many ways, this is a return to what had once been perceived as the "normal" retention periods. In the 1990s, the RCP for a SFC was 24 years and 27 years for a SFC(P). During the drawdown, it changed to 22 years and 24 years respectively. Later, out of necessity, it changed to the current 26 years and 29 years. This is a management tool the Army has to ensure it has the ability to "right-size" the force. The unfortunate this is that "we have", "we do", and "we will" lose good soldiers in any personnel management system we use. It is up to leaders to ensure the Army retains the appropriate personnel. Quite a daunting task.

Response by TSgt Marco McDowell made Aug 26 at 2015 5:19 AM

TSgt Marco McDowell — Wed, 26 Aug 2015 05:19:08 -0400

I'm not that guy that's going to say "make way for others", but there's a point where someone just becomes that person who ultimately just sends out emails, holds formations or chairs meetings. I'm not sure if the discussion was here but a general just finished out 42 years of service. He served 1 more year than I've lived. Not sure what more can be accomplished and I completely understand the love of service...I felt the ache twice,but as I look back even my minor part had evolved into me really taking up space and so I punched. Maybe it'll weed out those folks in the same boat. They're not going to be happy but if you don't promote, and it's been 20+ years, time to move on and enjoy a well earned rest.

Response by MSG Reid Zohfeld made Aug 26 at 2015 4:22 PM

MSG Reid Zohfeld — Wed, 26 Aug 2015 16:22:25 -0400

As always there will be good and bad come out of this. I have seen the oxygen thieves just take up space, I have also seen some put their heart and sole into what they do. I passed my last PT test at 55 why I see others of similar rank never take a test! But I knew it was time to go and let a younger soldier take my place. It is one of our jobs to train our re-placements so we can leave with no regrets. I know I did!
Removing Senior NCO,s is done about every 10 to 15 years.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 27 at 2015 5:30 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 27 Aug 2015 17:30:03 -0400

I don't know about the RCP, but the new promotion criteria should take effect for the senior NCOs before the junior or with the same timeline. We are going to have a bunch of leaders not as qualified as junior Soldiers now.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 2 at 2015 9:22 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 02 Sep 2015 09:22:22 -0400

I think that this is a good thing if you have been in 26 years and have not made Master SGT it might be time to think about a career change.

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 17 at 2015 10:39 PM

SGM Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 17 Sep 2015 22:39:22 -0400

Used to be pretty restrictive....kind of what the changes to tenure are going to be. Cannot be a bad thing. I got tired of seeing a MSG who couldn't make SGM keep making it through retention boards. Holding up slots for younger Soldiers. Honestly, if a Soldier cannot make SFC before 20, and a SFC cannot make MSG before 24, they need to go. Most of the high tenured MSGs I dealt with couldn't make SGM due to HT/WT issues. They pass the tape, but their DA photos killed them on boards. With force reduction going the way it is going, there needs to be better retention criteria and policies that look at the whole Soldier.

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 21 at 2015 10:24 PM

SGM Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 21 Sep 2015 22:24:03 -0400

SGT Keith Bodine,
I am sorry to see this, but more of these types of cuts are on the horizon as the Army has to trim its ranks in order to meet congress mandated budget numbers.