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

Disgusting. A military that doesn't value combat experience. Guess all the deployment dodgers finally got a say.

Kind of makes me feel like the mid to late 90s are returning again.

It's people who will never deploy who will be made leaders over multiple deployment soldiers. I thought the main reason behind military was development and training to defend the country in times of need. I also posted this same link

This assumes there is no education achieved while engaged with the enemy. Short sighted; as usual.

Been a joe with no deployment experience, I think this is a mistake and would love to hear the thought process behind this new system. When we train and talk about how our job is different in theatre, we depend on the people that have deployed. Anyone can pay for training or education, but not deployment experience.

I completely agree with this. I know I am an officer but I was an NCO for a while. I have seen a drop in the quality of NCOs. I even shared a portion of this on FB.

“Being qualified at your skill level and military occupational specialty requires a complement of all three leadership development domains – institutional, operational and self-development,” Dailey said. “In the past we have allowed people to attain the rank, in some cases two ranks, above their institutional experience. That is not the case now.” SMA Dailey.

That is truth. So many just think because you can shoot a gun that you don't have to do any professional development. I hate to tell them but when you are a PSG shooting a guy is one of the last of your priorities. At that level you can really do some damage to your own soldiers if you don't know what you are doing. If you have ever seen a soldier that thinks all he has to do is fight write a NCO without help he will be damaging that younger NCOs career. It is a lack of institutional knowledge. The Army is an institution where we have to professional develop and improve. We just can't sit around and wait to deploy again.

I firmly believe that promotion points should be awarded for deployments. It sets you apart from your peers who dropped packets to drill or recruiting to hide from combat. It doesn't affect me anymore as I'm retired, but it should be looked at.

Having been an E-7, I can say something about this. The Army needs educated NCO, at the same time it should value its combat experienced soldiers. Priority for schools, IMHO should be given to those who have gone to the most tours, as they have had the least opportunities to move forward in their respective NCOES. That would seem to give an edge of fairness. Likewise, to sit back and say I did X amount of tours and haven't done anything else, is a cop out. You need to be balanced.

Alas, the Army does not recognize "Redneck" as a foreign language. :(

It's foolishness. While I agree that an educated Army is a better one no amount of schooling or training can substitute for real world experience. Any egg head can apply their craft in pristine conditions but lives are saved and wars won by men and women capable of doing business with a fraction of the required resources in the most austere conditions.

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.