If Officers fail at being a LT, should they be promoted to CPT?

I disagree, I look at General Washington, General Patton, and myself included. Development takes time, failure is a part of learning and a part of development.

I look back at the thirty years I have in the Military, and I will share with you, I was not brilliant, I did not play well with others.

I did however, have a tenacity to push through obstacles, and take correction. I call it Leadership sand paper, if the LT will not quit, who are we to give up on them.

I think it depends greatly on your definition of failure. The Army expects LTs to make some mistakes. After all, the only way to not make mistakes is to sit idle and not try anything new for fear of making mistakes. That being said, there are those LTs that are plain untrainable and really do not belong in the military. Graduates of USMA that don't cut it as officers should definitely have to serve out the remainder of your contracts as enlisted Soldiers, E-4.

To caveat I'm doing this not for a solution but just gather information for further down the road.  To speak candidly I have a field grade officer that just isn't cutting it, and from my gatherings he has not changed for many years.  I've viewed his record and everyone reported the same from his LT days to promote ahead.  He was slotted for ILE but has chosen to retire now after being steered that way.  My boss ( a very senior field grade ) asked what should be his next course, and I gave him my two ideas.  I just care to be able to impose earlier courses of action or avenues before I'm asked again or a similar situation presents itself.

It's not just officers.  It's system wide.  Leaders are afraid to give sub-par performers accurate reviews because it will 'hurt their career,' not realizing that in doing so the entire force is being hurt.

Why promote if they are not ready? Eh possibly endanger lives?

If you are not meeting the requirements to be "proficient" in your position, by no means should you be rewarded with more rank/pay. This isn't just my feeling towards officers or enlisted Soldiers, this is on the civilian side as well. I'll take this further and say that PV1's shouldn't be promoted based on their TIG. I know that some are not, but too often I saw that guys who were not "good at their job" were promoted because the attitude was they are just moving to the rank of PV2. Personally, I don't think there is any way that I should have been able to enter as a Specialist.

My opinion is that just because I have a bachelors degree does not mean I can now be placed in a leadership role by Army standards. I proved nothing by Army standards in an Army setting that indicated I was capable of leading. Pay off my student loans (thank you Army!) yes but start me at the bottom so I can learn everything and have an appreciation of those ranks that I am now leading. From my short time in the Military (only a three year enlistment) I could definitely tell the officers who had a Military background whether that was coming from a Military college or were enlisted first, those guys had an understanding/knowledge of the Army way. Those who didn't, not saying they were terrible people, but were not on the previously mentioned level. I should note that I'm not saying there are not a lot of officers who come directly from a public university to the Army world are not successful, respected leaders.

This isn't an issue unique to Officers. Instead of "decommissioning" I think we need to focus on giving accurate evaluations. I saw an E6 who was relieved in country pin on E7 the following year because his leadership didn't have the intestinal fortitude to give him a negative NCOER. If a Soldier at any pay grade is failing they need to be counseled and mentored. If they refuse to improve their OER/NCOER needs to reflect that. Too often leaders don't want to take the "hard right" and let substandard subordinates like you're describing slide through.

It has been my understanding for some time that promotion to CPT was as, not to use the word common, but expected for officers. On the outside, looking in, I don't know the specific time frame needed at the 01, 02 level before being considered for 03. I've not seen any officer NOT make 03 with in their first 4-5 years. I was under the impression that the scrutiny for promotion didn't really begin until you were being looked at for 04.

That being said, what kind of documentation is needed to prevent the promotion to 03? Who is the final approving authority? Is getting passed over once a career killer?

I have seen sub par officers get moved into staff positions. Even top notch officers move. It was my understanding that they needed to fill other positions. Spending time as the BN S4 can give you valuable insight when working as an XO, and vice versa. Understanding all these cogs prepares you to operate the whole machine.

Is there some administrative action, short of kicking the officer out, that can be applied to try to get the soldier to see the severity of their lack of performance? I don't suppose a bar to reenlist applies to officers, but is there an equivalent?

Your question is a very good one and possibly many may not answer.

The first question is, is there a paper trail of failures, documentation that shows the failures ?  To promote or not promote you would need to show documentation showing the pattern of good or bad behavior ?

Another question is when LT's have failures or mistakes, was there corrective action or was he/she thrown into the wind ?

A bad NCOER or OER in the hyper competitive arena of the military can hinder or stop the career of a soldier so you may not see a paper trail of mistakes unless it's a major one.

This in essence goes back to the NCO's, Captains, even the LTC to mentor and groom new LT's to be better soldiers. The bad LT's you see now, may be coal meant to be diamonds if developed properly.

Maybe I'm the "always optimist", but unless that LT is completely unresponsive to advise and corrective action, there is always hope for a soldier. This is where you as the SFC is tested.

IMO good platoon sergeants will want the best platoon leaders, but the exceptional SFC will want the challenge of having the "not so good one" because he/she accepts the challenge of grooming a coal into a diamond.

Such a challenge for the SFC also looks better on an NCOER, and as a CPT. I will see it, because you have displayed the ability to mentor, as well as give technical and practical expertise in your chosen field. It also strengthens the Army in general, because LT's who are thrown into the wind and then promoted become very resentful to NCO's who did not advise or help them when they needed it most and that can affect their decision making in the future when they go up in the ranks.

I had a 1LT PL during a training exercise SHOOT his PSG in the upper arm due to improper target identification, lack of attention and failure to listen to the enlisted/NCOs around him...

Not only did after the investigation get 'sealed' did he pick up another infantry platoon, when we returned from deployment he pinned captain. I feel this was a failure on multiple levels and an example of the good ole boy system that can occur in different units.