Changes for NCOs: New requirements and promotion points. Have You Heard?

I remember when I came in before the war started, you didn't get points for deployment experience. Very few were still on active duty who had combat deployments as well. But as times change, criteria changes. During heavy deployments your experience was rewarded. Now that we are supposed to be transitioning back to a Garrison Army, they are going back to the old ways.

This isn't saying that your experience is not valid or needed, just that the focus of the Army is changing once again.

An Army that doesn't value combat experience? WTH...? Leaders with no combat experience leading Soldiers with it... It's a recipe for disaster. Lack of experienced seniority is a recipe for disaster. Just like the untimely downsizing, this almost feels like a coordinated effort to make our Army weaker.

I think this is a good think but with that said the combat experience should be recognized some how. Why not give them points in military education for the combat time this way they get the credit for them and we are not excluding the new Soldiers who may not get the option to get these points they will just have to earn them in a different way.

I think stopping deployment points would hurt those who are deployed. My reason for saying this is because while you are deployed you really can't go to any schools other than civilian education. Each of my 4 deployments have been different some you have access line you are at home other times you have to use community computers.

I like the new changes. I don't think meeting the requirements to be promotable to the next rank should give one points for it. WLC, ALC, and SLC should be just prerequisites before making the next rank. It should have always been that way. Combat experience should have no play in becoming an NCO. That's the job of a soldier to participate in combat if need be. I am losing promotion points due to the system but I think it's the right way to do it.

SGT Christopher Churilla, I see no issues with this. This is how it was prior to the changes made during OIF/OEF. Why punish Soldiers who don’t have the opportunity to deploy based off of their MOS and duty station. You shouldn’t devalue a Soldiers worth based off of whether or not they deployed before. Another question to consider is what is considered “combat experience”? What if you deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan, but never left the FOB, or better yet, what is you deployed to Saudi, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar or Turkey? Those Soldiers received combat SSI’s, does that count. The only way to keep it fair is to take the promotions points away that are tied to deployments.

I love these posts.
The NCO's Are becoming more educated then the officers and they have to pull back the reins a little.
Once upon a time Civilian education did count at all to be promoted.
If you are told there is no money for school is probably the money was spent elsewhere or the CSM does not know how to put the Budget together, yes I said CSM/first shirt.
Some of the argument's is the higher NCO's do not know their jobs as well as they should, but i will bet my bottom dollar they will not be taught budgets in ALC.
The military is very complex and it is up to the soldier to know how it works ask question from your own and other units. look up the regs!
Do not whine about being promoted unless you are ready to be.
I have spent a lot of time in every rank I held, not that I could not be promoted just wanted to make sure I was ready.
I see MSG and CSM promoted that do not have a clue how to be a senior NCO.
Most want the promotion for the money not the responsibility.
The troops that I had under me knew I had there back and would go to bat for them and I knew they had mine.

This will make my life difficult but I guess it's time for us all to step it up!

I guess I will be the one to stir the pot. Think back to your deployments, and remember how many less than stellar performers there were in your battalion. Do you think that they should have an advantage over someone who is a better Soldier without deployment experience? I am a few years removed from a promotion packet, but don't campaign medals and combat badges count for points?

What I am curious to see is how they are going to align the cut off scores to reflect the drop in opportunities for promotion points. Example being, for promotion to SGT it is supposed to be focused more on weapons and PT. However, you can shoot 40/40 and score 300's all day but that alone won't put you anywhere near the current cut off scores for some MOS's. Do I agree with the new promotion system? No, but I am very curious to see how it all plays out as far as what needs to be done to attain cut-off scores for your MOS.

Boy do we have short term memory. Just a few years ago you didn't get points for deployments. You got them for the board, PT, Civ ED, Mil ED, and marksmanship. This was just in 2010, in 5 years you can't tell me people don't remember this? If you want to get promoted I guess you better start hitting the books.

This is stupid. This is nonsense. WE are a military at war. So tell me how speaking Spanish and going to college helps you lead a squad.

The army is starting the transition back to the professional force. They want to see people actually perusing as opposed to receive credit. For the most part deployments and NCOES aren't things we volunteer for, we just kind of get told to do it. College education and special schools show the desire for promotion. "It is what it is".

Personally I think combat should still provide points because that does show that you can't maintain calm and still provide leadership, I've always looked up and respected leaders who have deployed because they have that experience that has made them better at what they do.

Here is what I am looking at. We are transitioning from an Army at War to an Army at Peace preparing for War. Yes we are still deploying troops to Afghanistan and Inherent Resolve, however in all reality, we are not that OIF Army. Therefore, the Army is actually putting more emphasis on what is going to be important to our troops when they LEAVE the Army. It makes sense. While I do not totally agree with them not giving ANY points to those that deploy, where is the line going to be drawn? Those troops that wen to Afghanistan? My roommate here at ARC was one of the first group of troops in Iraq for Inherent Resolve setting up communications in those COPs and FOBs. They were literally fighting ISIS so they should get credit too right? Ok so give them credit, what about those that are sitting on the border of Kuwait waiting to go North if the need be? They should get credit correct? What about the troops that go on rotations such as the Pacific Pathways? They deploy for months at a time so they should get credit as well?
It is not that I am trying to make a case for or against the points for Combat Experience. What I AM making a case for is making the Civilian Education MORE important, because THIS is what is going to count in the end. When the Soldier leaves the military service either in 4 years or 20 they NEED that education. They NEED that Bachelors degree. One of the classes that they were giving today was from a retired CSM and he told us of one of his fellow SGMs that was leaving the service, who was in charge of either a Brigade or Division, yet when he went to get a job with someone offering 6 figures a year they at the last minute pulled the offer. WHY? Because he only had an Associates Degree. It is CRITICAL that education be put on the pedestal that it deserves and if it means people losing out on promotion points because they are not taking advantage of what the military offers education wise then, they have to re-evaluate things. It is time to reshape our thinking folks, it is time to look at the new Army and the way forward.

What about awards? Any awards earned still are worth points right?

Im all for it. If you cant show initiative to improve beyond just doing the minimum, then you dont need to be promoted either.
Now before anyone blasts me, i earned 1.1. On my language qualification for Russian. Personally completed more college credits during a deployment than all other Soldiers in the battalion combined over a 15 month deployment all the while a battalion night battle nco. Busted my rear but stayed away from mwr and xbox/Playstation. Dedicated 3 off duty hours per day 4 days a week to studdies even if that meant only 3 hours of sleep.
I constantly did dime drills with my assigned weapon as well as making my soldiers do it too.
Always looking at maps and pace counting even if a gps device was in possession.
These are the things you need to do to be good. They should have implemented these rules years ago.
There are too many opportunities for Soldiers to succeed now days, they choose to play games and drink. Those ones will never be great leaders. Im sorry if that seems harsh but im not the only one that feels that way else these new rules would have never been presented much less adopted.
The best leaders i ever served with or under were always looking to improve themselves and their teams. We need that quality in these times where entitlement and minimulistic standards run amok

A deployment is important, but not for all MOS in my opinion. Take 42A for example, you think it is really necessary for them to have multiple deployments? Does that make them a better S1 Clerk, or NCO in general? They already will get an end of tour award for the deployment, if not a Combat Action badge. Just my two cents

Have we forgotten a time before they awarded promotion points for deploying?

I think there should be a bigger emphasis on civilian education.