Posted on Aug 12, 2024
Do these R and SR comments really paint the picture of someone who deserves ‘Met Standard’ and Q?
6.87K
26
20
4
4
0
This is my 3rd NCOER as a SSG. KD complete, DS time complete, this is my first NCOER with this unit. Rater gave me Met Standard but writes #2/3, consistent performer, consistent demonstration of dedication to mission.
SR gave me Q and writes 2/3 and top 30% of all NCOs in his career. Possesses growing potential and ready to take on positions of greater responsibility, send to SLC and promote…
Obviously we can see faults here, but to me, the comments paint a better picture of me than what the ratings would have you believe.
Also, like many other raters in the Army, they filled in dates on my counselings without actually giving me my quarterlies (the only one I received was an initial). I have not signed and will not until both of them and I sit down and go through this with a fine tooth comb.
Can anyone give me any other advice on how to approach this and any possible solutions?
P.S. Officer Courses (BOLC, CCC) really need to work OERs and NCOERs into their POI.
SR gave me Q and writes 2/3 and top 30% of all NCOs in his career. Possesses growing potential and ready to take on positions of greater responsibility, send to SLC and promote…
Obviously we can see faults here, but to me, the comments paint a better picture of me than what the ratings would have you believe.
Also, like many other raters in the Army, they filled in dates on my counselings without actually giving me my quarterlies (the only one I received was an initial). I have not signed and will not until both of them and I sit down and go through this with a fine tooth comb.
Can anyone give me any other advice on how to approach this and any possible solutions?
P.S. Officer Courses (BOLC, CCC) really need to work OERs and NCOERs into their POI.
Posted in these groups: 
NCOERStaff Sergeant
NCOERStaff Sergeant
Posted 4 mo ago
Responses: 4
5
5
0
Maybe BLC and ALC really need to work NCOERs into their POI.
Per AR 623-3 and the actual instructions in the rated NCO block of the NCOER:
RATED NCO: I understand my signature does not constitute agreement or disagreement with the assessments of the rater and senior rater. I further understand my signature verifies that the administrative data in Part I, the rating officials and counseling dates in Part II, the duty description in Part III, and the APFT and height/weight entries in Part IVa and IVb are correct. I have seen the completed report. I am aware of the appeals process of AR 623-3.
By all means, sit down with your rater and senior rater to discuss what you should have discussed 4 times this year. But regardless of the outcome, you need to sign that NCOER.
Otherwise, board members will be reading the added sr rater comments of "SM refused to sign" and know they are looking at an NCO who does not understand the basics of an NCOER. And the board is spending more time on the actual sr rater comments than they are on any other comments or checked boxes, unless there is a Character Did Not Meet Standard with a substantiated comment.
Per AR 623-3 and the actual instructions in the rated NCO block of the NCOER:
RATED NCO: I understand my signature does not constitute agreement or disagreement with the assessments of the rater and senior rater. I further understand my signature verifies that the administrative data in Part I, the rating officials and counseling dates in Part II, the duty description in Part III, and the APFT and height/weight entries in Part IVa and IVb are correct. I have seen the completed report. I am aware of the appeals process of AR 623-3.
By all means, sit down with your rater and senior rater to discuss what you should have discussed 4 times this year. But regardless of the outcome, you need to sign that NCOER.
Otherwise, board members will be reading the added sr rater comments of "SM refused to sign" and know they are looking at an NCO who does not understand the basics of an NCOER. And the board is spending more time on the actual sr rater comments than they are on any other comments or checked boxes, unless there is a Character Did Not Meet Standard with a substantiated comment.
(5)
(0)
SGM (Join to see)
SGT (Join to see) - I do it because I watched an NCO do it.
An NCO will do it because they saw you do it.
That's the very least we can do for our Soldiers.
An NCO will do it because they saw you do it.
That's the very least we can do for our Soldiers.
(0)
(0)
MSG Thomas Currie
SGM (Join to see) - That is obviously one of our systemic problems. It would have been simple enough for the form to have been designed to separate each of those unrelated statements, but instead the form requires everyone to say "Everyone always did everything correctly" and the only advice anyone can provide is "Don't make waves"
It is supposed to be the responsibility of both the rater and the rated soldier to ensure the counselings happen, but the reality is that it is the rater who is 100% in control of whether or not that happens. If the rater doesn't meet their obligation, anything the rated soldier might do to correct the problem is just making waves which will only come out badly for the rated soldier.
It is supposed to be the responsibility of both the rater and the rated soldier to ensure the counselings happen, but the reality is that it is the rater who is 100% in control of whether or not that happens. If the rater doesn't meet their obligation, anything the rated soldier might do to correct the problem is just making waves which will only come out badly for the rated soldier.
(1)
(0)
SGM (Join to see)
MSG Thomas Currie - That's one way to look at it.
In my own experience, every on-time NCOER and every support form was 100% me initiating the action with the rater.
It didn't make waves, and it didn't come out badly for me.
I can't guarantee the same results for everyone, but I can tell you that if you never try, you'll get out of it pretty much exactly what you put into it.
In my own experience, every on-time NCOER and every support form was 100% me initiating the action with the rater.
It didn't make waves, and it didn't come out badly for me.
I can't guarantee the same results for everyone, but I can tell you that if you never try, you'll get out of it pretty much exactly what you put into it.
(1)
(0)
MSG Thomas Currie
SGM (Join to see) - You can certainly initiate the action, but if the rater simply doesn't follow through, that is when it becomes a problem.
(1)
(0)
Without seeing what specifically the SR and R wrote for bullets, it is hard for me to decide if you had been given an NCOER that is warranted or not. You won't get Top Block because the SR doesn't have enough of your rank to make that happen. Best you could get is HQ, but it would appear that the other SSG they SR warranted the HQ
You can go ahead and not sign it, but your SR is on the hook for submitting the NCOER on time, and can mark the option to say that "Rated Soldier not available to sign," which will not really look good on your part.
Per your words, I'm tracking that you only received your Initial Counselling, but I have to ask if you asked your R and SR why the other counseling sessions didn't take place.
In order for me to make a better assessment of the issue at hand, I would literally have to see this NCOER.
You can go ahead and not sign it, but your SR is on the hook for submitting the NCOER on time, and can mark the option to say that "Rated Soldier not available to sign," which will not really look good on your part.
Per your words, I'm tracking that you only received your Initial Counselling, but I have to ask if you asked your R and SR why the other counseling sessions didn't take place.
In order for me to make a better assessment of the issue at hand, I would literally have to see this NCOER.
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
I have to agree. They merely pay lip service to discussing rating forms for both officers and NCOs. We all KNOW that these forms are critical for advancement, yet we rarely--if ever--get a good explanation of just what ratings mean to an individual.
Many raters will kill a rated officer or NCO with numbers while employing word salads that make the subordinate sound good as justification that they were being fair in the evaluation.
The advice I always gave my subordinates was to never accept a report without sitting down with the rater for a detailed explanation of what ratings were given including examples of why and recommendations for improvement. It's tougher when dealing with senior raters. When I was a cav platoon leader my senior rater said I was one of the two best lieutenants in the battalion. [We were a separate cav troop attached to a tank battalion in the 194th Armd. Bde. (Sep.) at Knox.] When I got my final report before transferring out of the brigade, the senior rater gave me a below-center-of-mass rating! I immediately scheduled an interview and asked what I had done differently to go from a top block to below-center-of-mass. He harrumphed and refused to look at me as he explained that my new troop CO did not rate me as highly as his predecessor had and that I should always understand that raters carry a lot of weight in the process.
I left with the knowledge that (1) we had a guy shot and killed in our barracks by a guy from my platoon. That guy had been drunk, he was older and hounded by a barracks clique, and the troop CO was pushing for the guy to be charged with murder. I told him that I thought he was making a mistake and I wound up working with the defense and helped get him off with negligent homicide. He did six years at Leavenworth, where he got an AA in computer systems and forever after thanked me for being there for him. My CO told me I was disloyal and he rated me as such! (2) Since I was leaving the unit the battalion CO saw me as a chance to clean up his senior rater profile.
Fortunately for me, I was top blocked by all my other senior raters and that one rating stuck out like a sore dick at a short-arm inspection and didn't affect me for selection to major below the zone. . . .
Many raters will kill a rated officer or NCO with numbers while employing word salads that make the subordinate sound good as justification that they were being fair in the evaluation.
The advice I always gave my subordinates was to never accept a report without sitting down with the rater for a detailed explanation of what ratings were given including examples of why and recommendations for improvement. It's tougher when dealing with senior raters. When I was a cav platoon leader my senior rater said I was one of the two best lieutenants in the battalion. [We were a separate cav troop attached to a tank battalion in the 194th Armd. Bde. (Sep.) at Knox.] When I got my final report before transferring out of the brigade, the senior rater gave me a below-center-of-mass rating! I immediately scheduled an interview and asked what I had done differently to go from a top block to below-center-of-mass. He harrumphed and refused to look at me as he explained that my new troop CO did not rate me as highly as his predecessor had and that I should always understand that raters carry a lot of weight in the process.
I left with the knowledge that (1) we had a guy shot and killed in our barracks by a guy from my platoon. That guy had been drunk, he was older and hounded by a barracks clique, and the troop CO was pushing for the guy to be charged with murder. I told him that I thought he was making a mistake and I wound up working with the defense and helped get him off with negligent homicide. He did six years at Leavenworth, where he got an AA in computer systems and forever after thanked me for being there for him. My CO told me I was disloyal and he rated me as such! (2) Since I was leaving the unit the battalion CO saw me as a chance to clean up his senior rater profile.
Fortunately for me, I was top blocked by all my other senior raters and that one rating stuck out like a sore dick at a short-arm inspection and didn't affect me for selection to major below the zone. . . .
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google