Posted on Apr 17, 2018
Do you think the current approach and requirement for completion of the MLC in order to pin on MSG will keep up with force requirements?
117K
106
74
27
27
0
I am wondering what the communities thoughts are in regards to the requirement to graduate the Master Leaders Course (MLC) prior to pinning on Master Sergeant (MSG) and if the current approach will meet and keep up with force requirements.
I would like to preference this discussion by stating I am not a graduate of the course yet and do not have a projected date. With that said, I am not against the course and think a course that is MOS immaterial and focus on topics that Senior Leaders will encounter is a good idea. In my career I have comes across many Senior Leaders who are lacking in their ability to achieve that command presence. A few key topics covered in MLC that in my opinion are of great value are Mission Command, Organizational Management, and Military Briefing.
My analysis started when I was reviewing Army Career Tracker and it stated only 2% of my peers have completed MLC. This led me to do a pull of I did a pull of ATTARS for all MLC classes ever conducted or scheduled. For FY16 there was seven course; based on the names it looks like there was four pilots, one certification, and two standard for a potential of 142 graduates. For FY17 there were 16 courses conducted with a potential for 399 graduates. From October 2017 through April 2018, a potential 1,633 graduates have completed MLC. Based on ATTARS there are 36 available classes still in FY18 with a potential to graduate 1111 more students. Based on those numbers by the end of FY18 there will be a potential 3,285 MLC graduates.
If we look at just the Active component FY18 MSG list there was 3,278 selectees. At first glance, the numbers appear to add up; however, the numbers listed in ATTARS include National Guard and Reserve courses. According to the AGR/RC FY18 MSG list we need to add another 269 MSG selectees.
Based on the aggraded numbers there is 3,547 MSG selectees for FY18 with a potential to have 3,285 MLC graduates by the end of FY18. These numbers leave a delta of 262 MSG selectees without the opportunity to attend a required course to pin on their next rank.
Additionally, it would be flawed logic to think that all MLC graduates from FY16-FY18 will have all been on the FY18 MSG list. There is a potential that the MLC graduates from FY16-FY17 already pinned on MSG based on selection from the FY16 or FY17 list; those selectees would increase the delta of 262 by an unknown amount.
In conclusion my thought to the community is that by not conducting a phased in approach the delta of selectees to school dates will continue to grow unless more classes are offered or the a new approach is enacted. One potential course of action that could possible correct the delta would be to make MLC a pre-requisite for recommendation to SGM for the FY18 list, for the FY19 MSG list selectees have one year from pinning to complete the course, and for FY20 and beyond make it a requirement for pinning.
I look forward to everyone’s thought on this matter.
I would like to preference this discussion by stating I am not a graduate of the course yet and do not have a projected date. With that said, I am not against the course and think a course that is MOS immaterial and focus on topics that Senior Leaders will encounter is a good idea. In my career I have comes across many Senior Leaders who are lacking in their ability to achieve that command presence. A few key topics covered in MLC that in my opinion are of great value are Mission Command, Organizational Management, and Military Briefing.
My analysis started when I was reviewing Army Career Tracker and it stated only 2% of my peers have completed MLC. This led me to do a pull of I did a pull of ATTARS for all MLC classes ever conducted or scheduled. For FY16 there was seven course; based on the names it looks like there was four pilots, one certification, and two standard for a potential of 142 graduates. For FY17 there were 16 courses conducted with a potential for 399 graduates. From October 2017 through April 2018, a potential 1,633 graduates have completed MLC. Based on ATTARS there are 36 available classes still in FY18 with a potential to graduate 1111 more students. Based on those numbers by the end of FY18 there will be a potential 3,285 MLC graduates.
If we look at just the Active component FY18 MSG list there was 3,278 selectees. At first glance, the numbers appear to add up; however, the numbers listed in ATTARS include National Guard and Reserve courses. According to the AGR/RC FY18 MSG list we need to add another 269 MSG selectees.
Based on the aggraded numbers there is 3,547 MSG selectees for FY18 with a potential to have 3,285 MLC graduates by the end of FY18. These numbers leave a delta of 262 MSG selectees without the opportunity to attend a required course to pin on their next rank.
Additionally, it would be flawed logic to think that all MLC graduates from FY16-FY18 will have all been on the FY18 MSG list. There is a potential that the MLC graduates from FY16-FY17 already pinned on MSG based on selection from the FY16 or FY17 list; those selectees would increase the delta of 262 by an unknown amount.
In conclusion my thought to the community is that by not conducting a phased in approach the delta of selectees to school dates will continue to grow unless more classes are offered or the a new approach is enacted. One potential course of action that could possible correct the delta would be to make MLC a pre-requisite for recommendation to SGM for the FY18 list, for the FY19 MSG list selectees have one year from pinning to complete the course, and for FY20 and beyond make it a requirement for pinning.
I look forward to everyone’s thought on this matter.
NCOES
Promotions
SFC
MSG
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 28
8
8
0
I graduated from everything the Army sent me to. Honors at B & ANOC. I think its all a pile of crap. A former MSG friend stated once the only thing he learned at ANCOC was putting 4-5 pennies under the coffee pot kept it from burning no matter how long it was on the heat.
(8)
(0)
MSG (Join to see)
Mike Manwaring - Very interesting! It appears that this course is very much laid out like a college course. All communications I have seen state that HRC will dictate where we go to complete MLC or if we are required to complete the distance learning version instead.
(1)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
And I believe you may be mistaken about this course. This is designed to take the senior NCO working in the operational portion of the force and train and educate them as they eventually make the transition into staff type assignments. I found the course to be quite demanding and learned quite a bit. This from a guy who joined in 1988 and is used to working at the tactical level. Give it a chance. It's worth the time and effort.
(0)
(0)
6
6
0
MLC should be a prerequisite for SGM. I believe the entire STEP program was initiated poorly. I had a SGT(P) wait almost a year to get to ALC so he could get promoted. My neighbor is a reservist being looked at for MSG and has been trying to get into SLC for over a year. He finally got a class date a year out. If our OPTEMPO ever increased to what it was my first ten years of service, the STEP program would have to be shelved or no one would get promoted. It is unsustainable in its current form.
(6)
(0)
MSG (Join to see)
Promotion is based on strength and NCOs are staying in a long time. This fact slows how fast Soldiers are being promoted. It all has to balance based on CMF.
(0)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
I think that explanation needs revision. NCOs are promoted based on points at E5/E6. They should not be waiting 10-12 months for ALC/SLC to get promoted if they make cutoff.
(4)
(0)
5
5
0
Without digging too deep, I believe we are making the right decision with adding the requirement of completing MLC prior to pinning MSG. I know I may sound like I am a representative from the school house but this course will improve Soldier awareness of operational functions and provide a baseline for successful writing and inter-organizational engagement. Moreover, MLC keeps operational functions fresh in our minds in preparation for the next level.
That said, I am one of the AGR MSG selectees and I look forward to attending MLC (Resident or Non-Resident). Do not be a stranger if we end up in the same class and best of luck to you! Have a good night.
That said, I am one of the AGR MSG selectees and I look forward to attending MLC (Resident or Non-Resident). Do not be a stranger if we end up in the same class and best of luck to you! Have a good night.
(5)
(0)
MSG (Join to see)
MSG Mark Million - Good point. That is why increasing the distance learning quota should be top priority. If people can acquire a college degree through distance learning en masse, there is no reason why the Army cannot implement it for leadership courses. Sure, some feel they are better suited for brick and mortar but the seats do not match the que.
(1)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
I'm going to resident MLC in Jan 2019 and cannot wait! ALC and SLC were kind of a waste of time but surely a check in the box. From what I'm reading this course is exactly what I have been looking for. I want to be challenged intellectually and I think this could be a great move for the Army, if administered properly. I'll be sure to update this when I come back from the resident course. A lot of good discussion in this post though, thanks!
(1)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
I had two MLC seats last year, but both were prior to my back surgery and I was on temp profile. Now that I have recovered from my surgery and have a permanent profile, I can't seem to get a seat. Im also AGR. I did do a short notice DA 4187 just in case someone else can't go.
I feel MLC will be a great help.
I feel MLC will be a great help.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google